Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: RIP to the Single-bullet theory?  (Read 47637 times)

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3849
Re: RIP to the Single-bullet theory?
« Reply #152 on: September 14, 2023, 05:50:20 PM »
Advertisement
   Does your, "EVALUATE all the available evidence...", include moving a back wound UP to the neck? It's difficult to rely on WC "evidence" when it has been manipulated.


Even the HSCA, which tried very hard (too hard actually) to find a conspiracy, confirmed the SBT.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: RIP to the Single-bullet theory?
« Reply #152 on: September 14, 2023, 05:50:20 PM »


Offline Michael Capasse

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 101
Re: RIP to the Single-bullet theory?
« Reply #153 on: September 14, 2023, 05:54:29 PM »

Your “conclusions” are not supported by anything at all. Regardless of what was opined in an executive session of the commission, here are some facts:

"...that our reliance on an FBI..."

Do you read what you post?

 
« Last Edit: September 14, 2023, 05:56:24 PM by Michael Capasse »

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10850
Re: RIP to the Single-bullet theory?
« Reply #154 on: September 14, 2023, 06:28:41 PM »
Charles prefers an account published by a single person 50 years later to contemporaneous executive session transcripts, because of course he does.

Why is it that the LN-faithful never accuse people like Willens of making up stuff to sell books on anniversaries?
« Last Edit: September 14, 2023, 06:33:04 PM by John Iacoletti »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: RIP to the Single-bullet theory?
« Reply #154 on: September 14, 2023, 06:28:41 PM »


Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3849
Re: RIP to the Single-bullet theory?
« Reply #155 on: September 14, 2023, 06:46:42 PM »
Do you read what you post?

Taking a few words out of the context and implying that they mean something sinister (AKA distortion by omission) is the MO of the CT.  ::)

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3849
Re: RIP to the Single-bullet theory?
« Reply #156 on: September 14, 2023, 06:49:58 PM »
Charles prefers an account published by a single person 50 years later to contemporaneous executive session transcripts, because of course he does.

Why is it that the LN-faithful never accuse people like Willens of making up stuff to sell books on anniversaries?

I stated earlier that Willens’ book is based upon his journal which was kept contemporaneously with the progress of the WC. It is freely available online through the Sixth Floor Museum. And there is also a series of interviews with Willens done by the SFM that are also freely available online. That’’s one of the reasons why…

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: RIP to the Single-bullet theory?
« Reply #156 on: September 14, 2023, 06:49:58 PM »


Offline Michael Capasse

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 101
Re: RIP to the Single-bullet theory?
« Reply #157 on: September 14, 2023, 06:51:12 PM »
Taking a few words out of the context and implying that they mean something sinister (AKA distortion by omission) is the MO of the CT.  ::)

what are you babbling now?

The WC had to rely on the FBI for it's "investigation"- even when they needed an 'independent expert" they called on the FBI to get it.
Is there something WC did that Hoover was not aware of, or more importantly, didn't approve of?

...please name it.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2023, 06:51:58 PM by Michael Capasse »

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3849
Re: RIP to the Single-bullet theory?
« Reply #158 on: September 14, 2023, 06:57:35 PM »
what are you babbling now?

The WC had to rely on the FBI for it's "investigation"- even when they needed an 'independent expert" they called on the FBI to get it.
Is there something WC did that Hoover was not aware of, or more importantly, didn't approve of?

...please name it.


The SBT comes to mind…

Online Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5333
Re: RIP to the Single-bullet theory?
« Reply #159 on: September 14, 2023, 06:59:40 PM »
      The SBT aside, there's no getting around the "time spacing" between the 3 shots. The quickness cited by ear witnesses between the 2nd and 3rd shots rules out the bolt action Carcano being responsible for both of those shots.

You are conflating issues.  The claim being addressed was that there were many shots.  More than three.  The witness testimony is compelling that there was a maximum of three shots.  If you add in those who heard only two, that's almost every witness to the event.  Very compelling that there was a maximum of three shots.  And, of course, that matches the number of recovered shell casings from Oswald's rifle. To suggest that bullets were flying everywhere in DP is false. 

In terms of what you are suggesting, many witnesses did claim the shots were not equally spaced out in time.  They didn't have a stopwatch timing the shots, however.  So any conclusion that a shorter time span between the 2nd and 3rd shots precludes Oswald from firing those shots can't be drawn from the evidence. 

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: RIP to the Single-bullet theory?
« Reply #159 on: September 14, 2023, 06:59:40 PM »