Conspiracy advocates keep the subject hot because it makes many of them money in magazines, books and documentaries. I've always said that the majority of the biggest name advocates don't even believe themselves what they write. Mark Lane made a good living starting in the mid 1960s with conspiracy books and lectures. He had a con game going and knew it.

 

As for Garrison, there's no doubt in my mind that the man had a mental illness. He was delusional. Johnny Carson made him look like a fool during one of his appearances on the show. In the long run his prosecution of Clay Shaw failed and he was humiliated, yet Oliver Stone decided years later to base his error filled movie on this sad man's work. Vincent Bugliosi said Oliver Stone got only two things right in his movie: (1)the date that the assassination occurred and (2)the fact that JFK died. Therefore, I suppose we can add another name to the conspiracy con list: Oliver Stone. The sad thing, though, is that a generation of kids took that movie as gospel, as historic fact, when it was anything but that.

 

Excellent summation of the conspiracy nonsense.

The testimony that you mention was based on faulty technology that was presented to the committee and has long since been ruled invalid and inaccurate. Dale Myers' recreated computer animation of the assassination that day proves this. The motorcycle cop and dictabelt were not in an area that could have recorded the shots that day. Even the cop on the motorcycle admits this, and film of the motorcade prove it.

Research Dale Myers work. Also, Google the website of JFK researcher John McAdams. He has a huge amount of research on the subject. And read Bugliosi and Posner's books.

 

And if one doesn't want to read the 2003 TV show "Beyond Conspiracy", hosted by Peter Jennings has Bugliosi, Posner, and Myers in it.

Not a shred of evidence.

 

No credible shred of evidence of a second shooter...

 

Three shots, one shooter. The second and third shots hit the President. The third shot killed him. Case closed , except for conspiracy theorists who want to keep it open for discussion and probably will so for another century.

 

Sorry, we all have opinions and mine doesn't jive with yours. I've been interested in this part of history ever since a kid when it happened. You'll never convince me that the third shot came from behind.

Conspiracy advocates keep the subject hot because it makes many of them money in magazines, books and documentaries. I've always said that the majority of the biggest name advocates don't even believe themselves what they write. Mark Lane made a good living starting in the mid 1960s with conspiracy books and lectures. He had a con game going and knew it.

 

As for Garrison, there's no doubt in my mind that the man had a mental illness. He was delusional. Johnny Carson made him look like a fool during one of his appearances on the show. In the long run his prosecution of Clay Shaw failed and he was humiliated, yet Oliver Stone decided years later to base his error filled movie on this sad man's work. Vincent Bugliosi said Oliver Stone got only two things right in his movie: (1)the date that the assassination occurred and (2)the fact that JFK died. Therefore, I suppose we can add another name to the conspiracy con list: Oliver Stone. The sad thing, though, is that a generation of kids took that movie as gospel, as historic fact, when it was anything but that.

 

Even though I believe Oswald acted alone, I also think Stone's "JFK" is a brilliant piece of filmmaking.

That is his vision of what might have happened. Movies don't have to be true to be great. I would say almost every historical film has the facts twisted.

I'm so glad I can believe what I want and not just have to take the governments word for it. If that's the case then Benghazi was started because of a film.

Sorry, we all have opinions and mine doesn't jive with yours. I've been interested in this part of history ever since a kid when it happened. You'll never convince me that the third shot came from behind.

 

Zapruder film at moment of impact(between frames 312 and 313, I believe) --- the President's head moves forward(in the direction of the bullet ) about two inches. Newtonian physics closes the case. Conspiracy theorists don't like Newton.

Zapruder film at moment of impact(between frames 312 and 313, I believe) --- the President's head moves forward(in the direction of the bullet ) about two inches. Newtonian physics closes the case. Conspiracy theorists don't like Newton.

 

But the shot that bucks him backwards as the front side of his head explodes has convinced me of another shot from a different angle. I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I watched the films, commentary off, and came to my own conclusions.

 

I also don't think Oswald was that good with an older bolt action rifle. Again, those are my opinions and there are a million of them. Gotta be able to sell those books.

I hear sheep.

Zapruder film at moment of impact(between frames 312 and 313, I believe) --- the President's head moves forward(in the direction of the bullet ) about two inches. Newtonian physics closes the case. Conspiracy theorists don't like Newton.

Conspiracy theorists take the position, "I've already made up my mind, don't confuse me with the facts."

The sad thing is that there has been a closet industry of people getting rich from both points of view.

 

One guy can't be right because he wrote books and lectured which earned him money...profiting from this proves he's a fraud.

 

However some other guy also making money from a book is right, "Just read his book". This guy makes a ton of money from his book and speaking engagements but he is telling the truth.

 

Whichever way you lean on this, realize that you are being influenced by people making money and trying to sell a story to you.

K

The sad thing is that there has been a closet industry of people getting rich from both points of view.

 

One guy can't be right because he wrote books and lectured which earned him money...profiting from this proves he's a fraud.

 

However some other guy also making money from a book is right, "Just read his book". This guy makes a ton of money from his book and speaking engagements but he is telling the truth.

 

Whichever way you lean on this, realize that you are being influenced by people making money and trying to sell a story to you.

 

You make some good points. However, I really don't believe Vincent Bugliosi was inspired to write his book by money opportunities. For one reason he already had money and a comfortable living. Another reason is the length of time it took him to complete his work on the project. His research took him 20 years to complete and finish his 1600 page book (and small print at that). He hand wrote the entire material and his secretary typed it into print form for him.

 

Bugliosi, as everyone probably knows, was a famous attorney who successfully prosecuted Charles Manson. He successfully prosecuted 105 out of 106 felony cases as Los Angeles district attorney . He was of the mind frame to get to the truth of whatever he was working on at the time and he was meticulous in doing it. He had already written several successful books, most notably one about the OJ case called "Outrage". I don't think money was an issue with him, especially with his long and well researched book about the JFK assassination.

I believe there was one shooter but I don't believe he acted alone. The mob was behind atleast one of the Kennedy brothers death if not both.

 

We will never know for sure but there is enough circumstanial evidence to intrigue me and if you take into account how Joe Kennedy became rich and the JFK election it seems very plausible.

 

This is literally the only conspiracy I buy into.

There were no "others".

Only 3 shot were fired, which Oswald had 8.5 seconds to get off, with the first shot not counting in the time laspe.

To remove all doubts that Oswald acted alone and no conspiracy read Vincent Bugliosi's 1600 page book, that took over 20 years to research and complete, titled "Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F Kennedy".

Another well researched book that is also shorter and easier to read than Bugliosi's tome is Gerald Posner's "Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK".

 

Any talk of conspiracy ends with this book. Fantastic read, and puts any conspiracy theory to bed. Bugliosi debunks every last one, including multiple shooters.

 

If you're still doubtful, get the book, and read it. Every page. It's a challenge; a hefty tome. But if you do, you'll never discuss conspiracy again.

K

 

You make some good points. However, I really don't believe Vincent Bugliosi was inspired to write his book by money opportunities. For one reason he already had money and a comfortable living. Another reason is the length of time it took him to complete his work on the project. His research took him 20 years to complete and finish his 1600 page book (and small print at that). He hand wrote the entire material and his secretary typed it into print form for him.

 

Bugliosi, as everyone probably knows, was a famous attorney who successfully prosecuted Charles Manson. He successfully prosecuted 105 out of 106 felony cases as Los Angeles district attorney . He was of the mind frame to get to the truth of whatever he was working on at the time and he was meticulous in doing it. He had already written several successful books, most notably one about the OJ case called "Outrage". I don't think money was an issue with him, especially with his long and well researched book about the JFK assassination.

 

Bugliosi once said, "if you want to make money, you don't put out a book that weighs 7 1/2 pounds and costs $57 and has over 10,000 citations and over a million and a half words".

Okay we all know an autopsy on the brain will prove if shot from front or back

 

So what happened to the brain