Paul Troglia

Hi Dawn, The single-bullet theory has been proven to be correct a number of times, including when it was tested by the House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1976. Since then, a new ballistic/forensic technology, not available in 1964 or 1976, called "neutron analysis" confirmed that the metal missing from Commission Exhibit 399 (the single bullet) matched the fragments found in Kennedy's neck and Connolly's wrist to the exclusion of all other bullets and all weapons other than Oswald's. I know you have heard that the single bullet is pristine, that it's like a new bullet, but Dawn, it isn't. That is one more of the distortions caused by the less-than-honest researchers who desperately want a conspiracy. By the way, I don't know where you live, but if you ever get a chance, go to Dallas and visit the Sixth Floor--the museum about the assassination at the Texas Schoobook Depository. Look out the window in the corner. Let the scene engulf you. Watch the motorcade, watch it turn left onto Elm St. Listen to the crowd. Look at all the people waving. Look how close that open-top limo is. My gosh, I'll bet he could hear me if I yelled loud enough. He's so close. You are standing where the assassin stood, where Commission Exhibit 399 was about to leave the Manlicher-Carcano rifle and enter history. He did it, Dawn, he did it.

Jim, I have a feeling, after reading much (but not all) of the JFK Assassination posts on this site, that many people (perhaps not yourself) don't realize the Warren Report was a conclusion based on 26 volumes of testimony taken during the investigation in 1964. Oswald's connections to the CIA, Hosty's name in his notebook, the Moorman photo, the Umbrella Man, the tramps, Sylvia Odio, and all the other "smoking guns" are discussed at length in those 26 volumes. They were and are not secrets. The Report is a "best guess" but has, after forty years, proved to be a solid one, surviving congressional investigations, committees, and countless scientific, accoustical and ballistic reenactments. The Freedom of Information Act has even made the lone assassin conclusion stronger. Harold Weisberg, Mark Lane, Richard Popkin (his "The Second Oswald" was written in 1964, I think;so much for the "new" theory being bandied about) all made names for themselves as whistle blowers of the "dark side" by using the information freely available in those volumes. A government with something to hide doesn't let people check its books, or, for that matter, let them publish expose's that bring the plot to light. I understand now what you meant by the coin toss. But I disagree with your point that we can choose how we feel about Oswald. That would not be intellectually honest when you face, pardon me, but this metaphor is appropriate if insensitive, the tsunami of facts that overwhelmingly convicts him and him alone. There is an old saying, A lie has speed, but truth has staying power. The lone assassin conclusion has held up a mighty long time.

The crime is solved in my mind, but the title of this topic is "JFK Assassination Debate. To me, that means somebody takes one side and somebody else the other. I know I am pretty much the only guy on the Oswald Did It side, but, hey, I can take it.

Lee Harvey Oswald did it. He did it alone. There are no doubles. no grassy knoll shooters, no star chamber, nothing. A District Attorney with a degree from Lawyers-R-Us could have proved him guilty in 5 minutes. A sampling of the facts: the bullets came from his gun to the exclusion of all others;his fingerprints were on the gun found in the TSBD;he ran away from the scene of the crime;he was seen in the 6th floor window with the rifle;he went home and got a pistol after the assassination;he killed a cop who stopped him after the APB went out;he tried to kill the arresting officer in the theater but the gun jammed; he shot at Edwin Walkers house trying to kill him; he was a wife beater and on and on and on. He is not a fascinating person. Ironically enough, the reason he did it, to become someone, has worked. Millions of people believe the little twerp was more than the nothing he was, and pass on their view of him as The Jackal. If Oswald is fascinating, Mark Chapman is awesome and John Hinckley a Man for All Seasons.

Jim, your posts are not meaningless. In fact, they are provocative. However, the heads/tails thing escapes me. I guess I take too simple a view. The "raging" debate, really doesn't rage too much. A lot of people who weren't alive in 1963 now think Kennedy was killed by some elaborate conspiracy. They don't debate it, don't really know anything about it except to believe what everybody else believes. Certainly they have no passion, as those who write for this forum do. That's too bad, because in the end, the memory of a very vibrant leader who might have risen above the messy legend we read about today, gets bantered about in the same breath with Santos Traficante, Fidel Castro, et.al. Anyhow, Oswald, that two-bit creep, is given credit, if that's the word, for brains, power, and strategy worthy of Boris Spassky, when, in fact, he was a nothing. Look at his grin in the Dallas jail. It speaks volumes.

Wow, now That's a plot, Jim. Oswald knows about the worldwide conspiracy and has to shoot the president to reveal it. Still think the guy wasn't nuts?

Why would a plot to kill JFK be necessary if the conspiracy was as all powerful as described throughout this forum? Why not let the masses believe in the power of the president, while they (the conspiracy) pull the strings, you know, like the Wizard of Oz, "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!"

I am amazed that so many people, especially those from academia, still believe there is more to the John Kennedy assassination than Lee Harvey Oswald acting alone. In the 40 years since, there has not been a shred of evidence to support other conclusions. All the ballistic, eyewitness, motivational and biographical evidence points to nothing but that demented loser getting to the 6th floor--the highest station he reached in life--and killing the President. I think educators should be dedicated to passing on truth, and leave conjecture to something unexplainable--like how the Pyramids were built. You'll be doing history a favor.

I always liked Will Rogers' quote, "We're all ignorant, but about different things."

My name is Paul Troglia. I am 58 years old, married and have one son. I am currently employed as a corporate trainer for a lead-acid battery manufacturer. I served in the US Army as a drill sergeant during Vietnam. I have been a professional, semi-professional and amateur actor for 30 years. I am a Conservative, voted for Bush and think we are doing the right thing in Iraq.

My name is Paul Troglia. I am 58 years old, married and have one son. I am currently employed as a corporate trainer for a lead-acid battery manufacturer. I served in the US Army as a drill sergeant during Vietnam. I have been a professional, semi-professional and amateur actor for 30 years. I am a Conservative, voted for Bush and think we are doing the right thing in Iraq.