Jump to content
The Education Forum

Houston Street/Elm Street


Recommended Posts

Charlie

As I understand it you believe that Oswald was not a shooter on November 22nd. I do not wish to attempt to convince anyone to change their strongly held position but will be happy to defend the research that I have done that has lead me to piece together what I believe is a plausible scenario of what happened leading up to and upon November 22.

Let me attempt to deal with your questions;

You ask, "You stated in reference to Walker's interview, that this was proof "... Oswald was willing to take a human life". Do you believe that an attempt on Walker's life, if it were "truly such an attempt and not a publicity stunt", was actually carried out by Oswald?

The information that ties Oswald to the Walker shooting and uses that attempted assassination as "proof ... Oswald was willing to take a human life comes from the Warren Commission Report (within the first 30 pages). When I first read the Warren Commission report (over a decade ago) I was unaware of the assassination attempt on General Walker's life. Reading that information has been a life changing event. For years I have researched the life of General Walker and believe that this research has led me to understand how and why the assassination of JFK was carried out as well as how and why the conspirators were able to cover-up pertinent facts about Lee Harvey Oswald and his connections to US Intelligence.

You continue with, "In the same reference, do you feel that a "marksman" with the ability to make the shots in Dealey Plaza, would have...in the quiet of the night, with unlimited time to fire at a seated target, in a well lit room, have missed?”

You ask a very interesting question here. On the one hand it seems that people who suggest that Oswald was not capable of making the shots attributed to him in Dealey Plaza want to prove this point by saying that Oswald missed when he shot at Walker "in the quiet of the night, with unlimited time to fire at a seated target, in a well lit room" or conversely that if Oswald was such a good shot in Dealey Plaza why did he miss Walker. According to the Warren Commission Report Oswald was not a very good shot, if you want to look at it that way. According to the commissioners Oswald fired four shots, two missed, one was a non fatal hit and one shot was fatal. That is a kill ratio of 1 for 4, which, while deadly could not be considered expert by any means.

"in the quiet of the night" a church service was ending in the immediate area, "with unlimited time to fire" as people were leaving the service, "have missed," according to the initial report the bullet glanced off a cross panel of a window pane and narrowly missed Walker's head (I believe actually passing through Walker's hair). In my opinion this would have been a major "trick shot" to be made in an attempt to create some sort of publicity buzz. From my understanding the Dallas PD was on the scene within 10 minutes of the shooting and examined both the window pane and wall where the bullet lodged. The recovered bullet, which would be compared to the bullets used in the assassination of JFK, would be collected by the FBI from the Dallas Police on the Friday after the assassination of JFK; one day after the story of the attempted assassination ran in the German publication.

"Are you stating that from a sniper / shooters point of view, that the so called "lair" was the perfect position to attempt an assassination?" What I am stating is that the "lair" was available to Oswald. Was it not available?

"This position was cramped, it forced the shooter against the wall, it provided a very limited time frame, a very difficult shooting angle and declination" Was it possible to accomplish the task from that position? Did that position allow a shooter the ability to "set it up," without being seen in the hours leading up to the passage of the motorcade? Was Oswald "in the area" of the "lair" at the time of the assassination? All question that can be answered yes, yet people want to discard this possibility because it was a poorly selected position.

"And provided poor escape potential." Yet Oswald was the only TSBD employee that left (or escaped) after the assassination.

Even if Oswald were not the person who set up the "lair" then it is obvious that who ever did set it up, whoever planted the rifle and the empty cartridges did escape as well. So while we may say that it "provided poor escape potential" whoever did set it up did in fact escape. It seems that we can categorically say that the "lair" in fact provided excellent escape potential!

"What was pe®fect about this position ?" According to the Warren Commission Report it is the position from which the assassination of JFK occurred. If you were a person attempting to assassinate the President and you accomplished your goal the position you had chosen could be considered "perfect' don't you think? Of course if you do not believe that that was the position used to fire from you would wish to argue from the contrary which leads to my question, why would the conspirators provide an imperfect "lair" while attempting to frame Oswald for the crime? Does it not seem more plausible that they (the conspirators) would have not overlooked this detail in THEIR planning? Or did the conspirators select a "lair" that was capable of accomplishing the goal and that could be plausibly tied to Oswald? If the later is true your previous questions should, perhaps, be reevaluated within the framework of the context in which it was asked. In other words were the conspirators who set up the "lair" as stupid as you suggest Oswald is portrayed by the Warren Commission to have been?

"Oswald could have had a firing position at ANY spot in Dealey Plaza, would not be absent from work, and also have had a much better pre-planned area to store/hide his weapon, and had a much better chance to escape." Ditto.

Charlie I appreciate the questions and do not want to sound condescending. I believe that WE are engaged in serious business as we discuss the assassination of JFK. I welcome the opportunity to have my interpretation of the events surrounding the assassination questioned and requestioned. That is the beauty of this forum, it provides those of us who do not accept the official conclusions of the events of that fateful day an avenue to examine various alternative theories.

In my case I have become convinced that there was in fact a conspiracy to assassinate JFK. I have also come to the conclusion that the "escape route" for those conspirators has been to convince the American public that Lee Harvey Oswald did not commit the crime. For me the assassination attempt on the life of Major General Edwin Anderson Walker has led me to a group of conspirators that first began coming together within US Military Intelligence as early as 1927 (General Maxwell Taylor, John J. McCloy and Edwin Walker). Their careers crises cross for the next 35 years, they have a motive (Limited Test Ban Treaty of 1963) and they all communicate before the assassination (June of 1963). These conspirators have the means to accomplish the task (including influencing the selection of the motorcade route) they have the access to the intelligence communities (Oswald's movements began being monitored by the FBI following the assassination attempt on the life of Walker and those movements were reported to the CIA including where Oswald worked) and they have the ability to cover up the details of the assassination (Warren Commissioner John J. McCloy) and they may have used Oswald previously (to sabotage the Paris Summit of 1960).

I could be wrong but I have only found information that continually supports the position that I have arrived at.

Jim Root

Edited by Jim Root
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hello Jim Root

I appreciate your well thought out reply, BUT, as you might have guessed, I disagree with most of the points made. In an effort not to place the forum in a position in which they will again have to wade thru arguments that I and others, have on too many ocassions previously posted, I will spare everyone.

My general disagreement lies within the context of my post to which you have just replied.

Charlie Black

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Charlie

As I understand it you believe that Oswald was not a shooter on November 22nd. I do not wish to attempt to convince anyone to change their strongly held position but will be happy to defend the research that I have done that has lead me to piece together what I believe is a plausible scenario of what happened leading up to and upon November 22.

Let me attempt to deal with your questions;

You ask, "You stated in reference to Walker's interview, that this was proof "... Oswald was willing to take a human life". Do you believe that an attempt on Walker's life, if it were "truly such an attempt and not a publicity stunt", was actually carried out by Oswald?

The information that ties Oswald to the Walker shooting and uses that attempted assassination as "proof ... Oswald was willing to take a human life comes from the Warren Commission Report (within the first 30 pages). When I first read the Warren Commission report (over a decade ago) I was unaware of the assassination attempt on General Walker's life. Reading that information has been a life changing event. For years I have researched the life of General Walker and believe that this research has led me to understand how and why the assassination of JFK was carried out as well as how and why the conspirators were able to cover-up pertinent facts about Lee Harvey Oswald and his connections to US Intelligence.

You continue with, "In the same reference, do you feel that a "marksman" with the ability to make the shots in Dealey Plaza, would have...in the quiet of the night, with unlimited time to fire at a seated target, in a well lit room, have missed?”

You ask a very interesting question here. On the one hand it seems that people who suggest that Oswald was not capable of making the shots attributed to him in Dealey Plaza want to prove this point by saying that Oswald missed when he shot at Walker "in the quiet of the night, with unlimited time to fire at a seated target, in a well lit room" or conversely that if Oswald was such a good shot in Dealey Plaza why did he miss Walker. According to the Warren Commission Report Oswald was not a very good shot, if you want to look at it that way. According to the commissioners Oswald fired four shots, two missed, one was a non fatal hit and one shot was fatal. That is a kill ratio of 1 for 4, which, while deadly could not be considered expert by any means.

"in the quiet of the night" a church service was ending in the immediate area, "with unlimited time to fire" as people were leaving the service, "have missed," according to the initial report the bullet glanced off a cross panel of a window pane and narrowly missed Walker's head (I believe actually passing through Walker's hair). In my opinion this would have been a major "trick shot" to be made in an attempt to create some sort of publicity buzz. From my understanding the Dallas PD was on the scene within 10 minutes of the shooting and examined both the window pane and wall where the bullet lodged. The recovered bullet, which would be compared to the bullets used in the assassination of JFK, would be collected by the FBI from the Dallas Police on the Friday after the assassination of JFK; one day after the story of the attempted assassination ran in the German publication.

"Are you stating that from a sniper / shooters point of view, that the so called "lair" was the perfect position to attempt an assassination?" What I am stating is that the "lair" was available to Oswald. Was it not available?

"This position was cramped, it forced the shooter against the wall, it provided a very limited time frame, a very difficult shooting angle and declination" Was it possible to accomplish the task from that position? Did that position allow a shooter the ability to "set it up," without being seen in the hours leading up to the passage of the motorcade? Was Oswald "in the area" of the "lair" at the time of the assassination? All question that can be answered yes, yet people want to discard this possibility because it was a poorly selected position.

"And provided poor escape potential." Yet Oswald was the only TSBD employee that left (or escaped) after the assassination.

Even if Oswald were not the person who set up the "lair" then it is obvious that who ever did set it up, whoever planted the rifle and the empty cartridges did escape as well. So while we may say that it "provided poor escape potential" whoever did set it up did in fact escape. It seems that we can categorically say that the "lair" in fact provided excellent escape potential!

"What was pe®fect about this position ?" According to the Warren Commission Report it is the position from which the assassination of JFK occurred. If you were a person attempting to assassinate the President and you accomplished your goal the position you had chosen could be considered "perfect' don't you think? Of course if you do not believe that that was the position used to fire from you would wish to argue from the contrary which leads to my question, why would the conspirators provide an imperfect "lair" while attempting to frame Oswald for the crime? Does it not seem more plausible that they (the conspirators) would have not overlooked this detail in THEIR planning? Or did the conspirators select a "lair" that was capable of accomplishing the goal and that could be plausibly tied to Oswald? If the later is true your previous questions should, perhaps, be reevaluated within the framework of the context in which it was asked. In other words were the conspirators who set up the "lair" as stupid as you suggest Oswald is portrayed by the Warren Commission to have been?

"Oswald could have had a firing position at ANY spot in Dealey Plaza, would not be absent from work, and also have had a much better pre-planned area to store/hide his weapon, and had a much better chance to escape." Ditto.

Charlie I appreciate the questions and do not want to sound condescending. I believe that WE are engaged in serious business as we discuss the assassination of JFK. I welcome the opportunity to have my interpretation of the events surrounding the assassination questioned and requestioned. That is the beauty of this forum, it provides those of us who do not accept the official conclusions of the events of that fateful day an avenue to examine various alternative theories.

In my case I have become convinced that there was in fact a conspiracy to assassinate JFK. I have also come to the conclusion that the "escape route" for those conspirators has been to convince the American public that Lee Harvey Oswald did not commit the crime. For me the assassination attempt on the life of Major General Edwin Anderson Walker has led me to a group of conspirators that first began coming together within US Military Intelligence as early as 1927 (General Maxwell Taylor, John J. McCloy and Edwin Walker). Their careers crises cross for the next 35 years, they have a motive (Limited Test Ban Treaty of 1963) and they all communicate before the assassination (June of 1963). These conspirators have the means to accomplish the task (including influencing the selection of the motorcade route) they have the access to the intelligence communities (Oswald's movements began being monitored by the FBI following the assassination attempt on the life of Walker and those movements were reported to the CIA including where Oswald worked) and they have the ability to cover up the details of the assassination (Warren Commissioner John J. McCloy) and they may have used Oswald previously (to sabotage the Paris Summit of 1960).

I could be wrong but I have only found information that continually supports the position that I have arrived at.

Jim Root

You continue with, "In the same reference, do you feel that a "marksman" with the ability to make the shots in Dealey Plaza, would have...in the quiet of the night, with unlimited time to fire at a seated target, in a well lit room, have missed?”

At short ranges, line-of-sight IS NOT line-of-flight for the bullet path. In fact, as previously pointed out, the line-of-flight is in fact, initially approximately 2-inches below the line-of-sight which one sees through the scope.

A fairly good reason for a bullet to ultimately strike either a portion of a window frame which is not in the sight picture, or for that matter, a tree limb.

Two similar occurences is almost sufficient to declare "common ground".

According to the Warren Commission Report Oswald was not a very good shot, if you want to look at it that way.

Most logical persons would not fall for "THE SHOT THAT MISSED", had the WC represented the facts regarding LHO's capabilities with a rifle when firing from a fixed position at targets of less 200 to 300 meters away.

So while we may say that it "provided poor escape potential" whoever did set it up did in fact escape. It seems that we can categorically say that the "lair" in fact provided excellent escape potential!

Yep! one of them oxymoron's I guess.

Poor potential for escape, yet the perpetrator merely walked out of the buliding with no interference by anyone.

In my case I have become convinced that there was in fact a conspiracy to assassinate JFK. I have also come to the conclusion that the "escape route" for those conspirators has been to convince the American public that Lee Harvey Oswald did not commit the crime.

One less rabbit hole that you will be entering into! Too bad that a few others have not noticed the cobwebs at this hole's entrance prior to diving in.

In my case I have become convinced that there was in fact a conspiracy to assassinate JFK

Which is of course most logical. However, it does not mean that one has to go around chasing multiple assassins and/or body kidnappers.

And, it does not mean that the WC's entire motive for obfuscation of the facts was related to the conspiracy issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom Purvis

I have spent far too many hours of endless debate with you, so I won't again fall into the trap !

I MUST call you however on two points, which are much worse than merely "not based on fact" !

Re the alledged Walker Shot: you stated that "the shot actually passed thru Walker's hair".

Wrong again Tom ! You cannot reference that !

Tom then stated "....poor potential for escape, yet the perpretator merely walked out of the building with no interference"

Tom how can you post something this unreasonable and expect ANYONE to take you seriously ?

What perpretrator?

What was his name?

Which door did he use?

How fast was he walking?

In which direction did he turn?

You know of course that I MUST ask you to reference this "apparently newly breaking news item" !

I have for the most part "stopped" replying to your posts, because statements such as these, which I think are meant to mislead newcomers to this subject, have FOR YEARS, run rampant in your posts.

Most of what you post, from your "TWIG THEORY" thru your comment on Walker's hair are completely unsubstantiated. Please don't tell me another time that the basis for the "TWIG THEORY", are those old land surveys to which you often refer !

What "good" information that may at times be derived from "a few" of your posts, becomes darkly shadowed by some of the utter unproveable and unreferenced, absurdities which are ALWAYS certain to follow.

Tom, I don't want to break your heart, but I am afraid that you have become a "legend in your own mind" !

Charlie Black

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I'm mostly inclined to agree with Tom Purvis...except for the whereabouts of Oswald at 12:30 pm on November 22, 1963.

Did I not somewhere see evidence that Billy Lovelady claimed he was wearing a striped shirt that day?...and yet the man on the steps of the TSBD in the Altgens pic is wearing, essentially, what Oswald wore to work that day...yet the "experts" claim that it's Lovelady on the steps, without a doubt.

For this detail to work, Lovelady and Oswald must've swapped clothes prior to the photo...and apparently swapped back by the time Baker encountered Oswald before/during/after [depending on whose account it is] Oswald's purchase of a Coke less than a minute later. Somehow, I just can't get my mind around that one. Either Lovelady is lying about what he wore to work that day...for no apparent reason...or...there's an element of deception in the photographic evidence.

I tend NOT to believe in wholesale photo alteration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Mark

I certainly respect your opinion but that is "one hell of a big EXCEPT" !

quote Mark> "..except for the whereabouts of Oswald at 12:30 PM on Nov. 22, 1963".

I wish that someone could "without a doubt" prove his whereabouts !

I do disagree with your theory of Oswald/Lovelady !

Although I cannot personally attest to the issue of the shirt, I will bet the farm that the face is Lovelady's .

But, as always in this case, there is another "catch" which I will refer to as catch ten thousand and twenty two. If you believed in photo alteration, which you do not, one might suppose that the government super imposed Lovelady's face on top of Oswald's shirt, to insure that no one could prove Oz not to have been on the 6th floor during the shooting. But then....you could no longer agree with Tom.

I have no "answers" Mark....just different speculations !

Charlie Black

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom Purvis

I have spent far too many hours of endless debate with you, so I won't again fall into the trap !

I MUST call you however on two points, which are much worse than merely "not based on fact" !

Re the alledged Walker Shot: you stated that "the shot actually passed thru Walker's hair".

Wrong again Tom ! You cannot reference that !

Tom then stated "....poor potential for escape, yet the perpretator merely walked out of the building with no interference"

Tom how can you post something this unreasonable and expect ANYONE to take you seriously ?

What perpretrator?

What was his name?

Which door did he use?

How fast was he walking?

In which direction did he turn?

You know of course that I MUST ask you to reference this "apparently newly breaking news item" !

I have for the most part "stopped" replying to your posts, because statements such as these, which I think are meant to mislead newcomers to this subject, have FOR YEARS, run rampant in your posts.

Most of what you post, from your "TWIG THEORY" thru your comment on Walker's hair are completely unsubstantiated. Please don't tell me another time that the basis for the "TWIG THEORY", are those old land surveys to which you often refer !

What "good" information that may at times be derived from "a few" of your posts, becomes darkly shadowed by some of the utter unproveable and unreferenced, absurdities which are ALWAYS certain to follow.

Tom, I don't want to break your heart, but I am afraid that you have become a "legend in your own mind" !

Charlie Black

Re the alledged Walker Shot: you stated that "the shot actually passed thru Walker's hair".

Wrong again Tom ! You cannot reference that !

Well! Since I personally have never said it, and it is most unlikely that you can find anyplace in which I said it, it merely demonstrate what those of us who deal with fact already know.

What you read and what you comprehend/understand, are two entirely seperate entities.

Tom then stated "....poor potential for escape, yet the perpretator merely walked out of the building with no interference"

Unless I have completely misunderstood, it is you who claims the "poor potential" for escape.

I merely pointed out that LHO walked out of the TSDB completely un-noticed, and walked to the bus stop.

Tom how can you post something this unreasonable and expect ANYONE to take you seriously ?

What perpretrator?

What was his name?

Which door did he use?

How fast was he walking?

In which direction did he turn?

You know of course that I MUST ask you to reference this "apparently newly breaking news item" !

I have for the most part "stopped" replying to your posts, because statements such as these, which I think are meant to mislead newcomers to this subject, have FOR YEARS, run rampant in your posts.

Yep, completely unreasonable that LHO took three shots at JFK from the sixth floor window of the TSDB, laid the rifle down and thereafter walked out of the building with no interference from anyone.

Certainly does not rank up there with all of those highly reasonable multiple assassins who were hiding in each and every available location within Dealy Plaza, and then the body snatchers to get ahold of JFk's body thereafter and alter the wounds to further the confusion.

Most of what you post, from your "TWIG THEORY" thru your comment on Walker's hair are completely unsubstantiated. Please don't tell me another time that the basis for the "TWIG THEORY", are those old land surveys to which you often refer

If any when you learn the difference between a small tree limb and a "twig", then you just may learn something about Carcano Bullets and their impact with such items.

Probably not though, since you can not seem to get this "Walker's hair" out of your mindset.

are those old land surveys to which you often refer [/b]

Perhaps in your somewhat erroneous understanding, the "old land surveys" have some bearing on the limbs of the Live Oak Tree which is located directly in front of the TSDB.

Other than being platted on the survey work, there is no mention of the "twigs" and/or limbs.

And, if you knew anything at all about the assassination, then you would also understand the critical importance of these surveys in establishment of the chain of how the "story" changed after the US Secret Service had accurately placed/located the impact point for each of the three shot fired.

Personally, it would be hoped that you would cease to clutter the airways with your completely unsupported theories and opinions. Especially since most of them contain virtually nothing new.

Why not suprise us with some original research on your part, which is supported with some sort of verifiable fact!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(vid-cap) recreation from south-WESTERN 6th floor window. From deleted scene of JFK movie.

(image)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(vid-cap) recreation from south-WESTERN 6th floor window. From deleted scene of JFK movie.

(image)

John;

Watch out, the woods will be crawling with another group of "Experts" if one begins to drag out the movie "JFK" again.

After all, it would appear that a great amount of the conducted research appears to have been watching this movie multiple times.

Oliver Stone was not allowed to film from the sixth floor window of the TSDB.

Actually, I do not recall if he was even allowed to film from the sixth floor.

The WC has what are considerably more accurate representations of the Houston St. motorcade in the U.S. Secret Service re-enactment photo's.

Unfortunately however, these photo' s were made utilizing the regular Lincoln convertible instead of the actual Presidential Limo.

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/w...Vol17_0450b.htm

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/w...Vol17_0451b.htm

Along with the fact that there was no JBC stand-in sitting directly in front of the Presidential Stand-in.

All that one has to do is study these SS photo's, and imagine the target moving into the line of fire, to understand the lead required in order to achieve a head shot. And, with JBC in the way, one would have to be aiming at some point on JBC in order to achieve a head shot to JFK as the vehicle moved forward into the alignment of fire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom

You are at it again....only higher and deeper !

Charlie Black

Well!

For someone who quite obviously must have believed:

1. That Z312/313 was the last shot fired in the assassination.

2. The WC claim as regards "THE SHOT THAT MISSED".

3. That LHO was a poor shot.

Let's just state that your level of research "don't impress me much"!

Rest assured that I personally expect nothing factual from your side of the aisle!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom "Oliver Stone was not allowed to film from the sixth floor window of the TSDB. Actually, I do not recall if he was even allowed to film from the sixth floor."

Ok, thank you Tom, I didn't know that. The deleted scene appeared to represent the views as being from the sixth floor and I thought the view from the opposite end (WEST) of the building from the 'snipers nest' was rather interesting.

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom "Oliver Stone was not allowed to film from the sixth floor window of the TSDB. Actually, I do not recall if he was even allowed to film from the sixth floor."

Ok, thank you Tom, I didn't know that. The deleted scene appeared to represent the views as being from the sixth floor and I thought the view from the opposite end (WEST) of the building from the 'snipers nest' was rather interesting.

Cerebral deteoriation/old age has eaten away the memories of when Stone made the movie and the controversy as to where he would be allowed to actually film from.

And, since it was not of much importance anyway, it was probably only stored in the "temporary file" folders anyway.

I am certain that Gary Mack could enlighten us as to these events and the circumstances surrounding exactly where Stone was in fact allowed to film from.

With a little imagination, one can visualize JBC sitting in front of the US Secret Service JFK stand-in, and thus recognize how JBC would have effectively blocked from view most of JFK. Especially since JBC sat slightly inboard in relationship to JFK's position.

JFK sat approximately 3-inches higher than did JBC at the time of the assassination, if that is of any help.

With your computer skills, you could no doubt make an extremely accurate representation of what one would have actually seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom, Oh dear, another thing to do, which in fact is the sort of thing I am VERY interested in doing.

I've promised to do other things and not delivered, so I will keep it in mind and I am interested in this thread and the things to learn from it, but my primary thing at the moment is finding avenues into the extreme far right and the people there like Elmore Douglass Greaves. So this one goes on the backburner (but kept in mind). I suspect you may be right about a Houston st. shot for this and other reasons is far from ideal.

How to get deeper into the Chamelias? Did you in those days hear of 88'ers?

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom, Oh dear, another thing to do, which in fact is the sort of thing I am VERY interested in doing.

I've promised to do other things and not delivered, so I will keep it in mind and I am interested in this thread and the things to learn from it, but my primary thing at the moment is finding avenues into the extreme far right and the people there like Elmore Douglass Greaves. So this one goes on the backburner (but kept in mind). I suspect you may be right about a Houston st. shot for this and other reasons is far from ideal.

How to get deeper into the Chamelias? Did you in those days hear of 88'ers?

LHO/the shooter, was observed in the far west window. However, this was at the time that Bonnie Ray Williams was eating his lunch at one of the east side windows, close to where the shots were actually fired from.

Therefore, the "JFK" photo is actually somewhat close to whoever was at the West side of the sixth floor would have seen.

However, by the time that the Presidential limo came into view on Houston St., Bonnie Ray Williams had gone down to the 5th floor to be with his friends, and the person observed on the west side of the sixth floor had disappeared from that location as well.

So, the assassin, apparantly had the capability of separate firing positions as well as two distinctive fireing lanes.

The East Window provided the best (lack of lateral tracking of target) position for either the approaching shot on Houston St. or the departing shot down Elm St.

And, the departing shot down Elm St. was the far better of the two, which it would not have been had a SS Agent actually have been riding on the right rear bumper of the Presidential Limo.

All of which appears to indicate that some thought and study was put into selection of the firing position.

As opposed to a "Lone Nut" who had nothing better to do on 11/22/63.

And, although repetetive, a study of the Presidential Motorcade through New Orleans, which was recorded on film and which is available for viewing at the New Orleans Public Library, provides an excellent reference for one who would desire to study how the motorcade actually operated.

There was a "Lone Assassin"!. However, one can rest assured that this was not the work of a "Lone Nut"!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...