Rule One. Additional evidence: Recent forensic evidence examining a reporter's tape of the assassination with equipment we didn't have back then has found there were 13 shots fired. Several of those shots came too close together to be from the same gun. Also, the auditory footprint was not that of the gun Lee Harvey used, but that of a rifle revolver of a different type. The only way Lee Harvey could have made those gunshot sounds is if he were firing using two rifles at the same time. You can't sight accurately down two different rifles.
There is the additional problem of the bouncing bullet explanation. JFK had wounds coming from different trajectories. The official explanation for the wounds JFK had was that one bullet, fired into his body, bounced and ricocheted five times.
That's one, very unlikely, explanation. To have a bullet ricochet multiple times would be a singular event in medical history.
Applying Occam's Razor, the other more likely explanation is that he was hit with bullets from more than one trajectory.
Add that to the 13 shots, and the shots fired too close together to be from the same gun, and the gun shots being a different weapon that Lee Harvey's: there was more than one shooter.
Why not admit that? I don't know. But the physical evidence is clear.
I'm not cherry-picking. I do not say that Lee Harvey wasn't a shooter. I'm not disregarding the government. There is just more evidence now, and there is a simpler explanation for the evidence we have.
Rule Two. No Super-Geniuses: There were many trained sharpshooters in the US at the time, and, JFK had a lot of enemies. He was standing up in his car, waving, not even running away like a military target would. For more than one shooter this did not require remarkable skill. What would be remarkable is if Lee Harvey was able to use two rifles at the same time.
Rule Three. No Crystal Balls: The predictable result of killing JFK is that you get a different president--specifically, vice president Lyndon Johnson. It's right there in the constitution. If you hate all of JFK's decisions and Johnson is radically different (which he was) on JFK's least popular choices, this is a simple solution.
What was the biggest difference between Johnson, Eisenhower, and JFK? JFK was abandoning Ike's cold war policies--even in small scale wars we don't know much about, like Tibet. Ike had supplied the Tibetan rebels to fight "Red China" and JFK cut them off, resulting in the deaths of 30,000 Tibetan fighters. Was the cold war and "fighting communism" and the "domino theory" important to many people, civilian and military, in the early 60s? Oh, hell yeah.
no subject
There is the additional problem of the bouncing bullet explanation. JFK had wounds coming from different trajectories. The official explanation for the wounds JFK had was that one bullet, fired into his body, bounced and ricocheted five times.
That's one, very unlikely, explanation. To have a bullet ricochet multiple times would be a singular event in medical history.
Applying Occam's Razor, the other more likely explanation is that he was hit with bullets from more than one trajectory.
Add that to the 13 shots, and the shots fired too close together to be from the same gun, and the gun shots being a different weapon that Lee Harvey's: there was more than one shooter.
Why not admit that? I don't know. But the physical evidence is clear.
I'm not cherry-picking. I do not say that Lee Harvey wasn't a shooter. I'm not disregarding the government. There is just more evidence now, and there is a simpler explanation for the evidence we have.
Rule Two. No Super-Geniuses: There were many trained sharpshooters in the US at the time, and, JFK had a lot of enemies. He was standing up in his car, waving, not even running away like a military target would. For more than one shooter this did not require remarkable skill. What would be remarkable is if Lee Harvey was able to use two rifles at the same time.
Rule Three. No Crystal Balls: The predictable result of killing JFK is that you get a different president--specifically, vice president Lyndon Johnson. It's right there in the constitution. If you hate all of JFK's decisions and Johnson is radically different (which he was) on JFK's least popular choices, this is a simple solution.
What was the biggest difference between Johnson, Eisenhower, and JFK? JFK was abandoning Ike's cold war policies--even in small scale wars we don't know much about, like Tibet. Ike had supplied the Tibetan rebels to fight "Red China" and JFK cut them off, resulting in the deaths of 30,000 Tibetan fighters. Was the cold war and "fighting communism" and the "domino theory" important to many people, civilian and military, in the early 60s? Oh, hell yeah.