Arguably the most widely disputed set of circumstances and alleged facts in US history, yet you find nothing mysterious in the theory that is was one man, acting alone?  

 

What is so mysterious about one guy killing a President? You act like it's never happened before.

 

And a lot, a whole lot, of "the most widely disputed set of circumstances" were created by people seeking fame or fortune, not truth.

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

What is so mysterious about one guy killing a President? You act like it's never happened before.


And a lot, a whole lot, of "the most widely disputed set of circumstances" were created by people seeking fame or fortune, not truth.

Bingo. Even Lincoln's assassination, a group conspiracy, had only one lone gunman.


I recommend Mark Furhrman's book on the subject, A Simple Act of Murder. Feelings on his character nonwithstanding, he presents a solid and logical argument on why it was only Oswals, as examines a crucial piece of evidence multiple-gunman theorists too often ignore

---

What is so mysterious about one guy killing a President? You act like it's never happened before.

 

And a lot, a whole lot, of "the most widely disputed set of circumstances" were created by people seeking fame or fortune, not truth.

 

The mystery is whether one man or two men fired shots at him. Everyone knows only one man shot at Abraham Lincoln, who was at a play in the Ford Theater. It is a different story when the bullets are coming from a window to the street.

---

Thank you for showing a fundamental minsunderstanding of how momentum and force works and specifically what Newton's third law of motion actually means in the real world. 

 

Since you clearly have no idea what the hell you're talking about, let me break down the math for you.

 

A bullet travels at a very high velocity so people thnks it has a very high momentum. That's wrong because momentum is the product of mass and velocity (p = m * v). A bullet's mass is tiny so it's momentum is a lot smaller than people think. The 6.5 Carcano (or 6.5 Italian) round used by Oswald has a mass of 10.5 grams and a velocity of 700 m/s. Let's assume the positive effect of gravity cancels out the negative effect of wind drag (this is to the benefit of your hypothesis) and say the bullet struck Kennedy at 700 m/s. That gives a momentum of 10.5 x 700 = 7,350 g * m/s.

 

Now assuming Kennedy's head absorbs the full momentum of the bullet and no energy was wasted (both benefiting your hypothesis) we can calculate the speed at which Kennedy's head should have gone forward. An average human head weighs about 4.5 to 5 kg. Assuming the lower end (again to your benefit) that gives 7,350 / 4,500 = 1.64 m/s. That's just shy of 3.7 mph or a brisk walking pace.

 

So why did his head move backwards? Simple answer; because when the bullet struck the back of his skull it didn't move the entire head forward but instead it blew brain matter and skull fragments to the front and right. This is where Newton's third law of motion comes in. Briefly summarized; Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. This is what makes rockets work in space when there is nothing to "push of from." The rocket expels rapidly expanding gases from the combustion out the back and as a result the rocket goes forwards. In this case the expelled brain matter and skull fragments went to the front and right (the action); Kennedy's head went back and left (the reaction).

---

Thank you for showing a fundamental minsunderstanding of how momentum and force works and specifically what Newton's third law of motion actually means in the real world. 

 

Since you clearly have no idea what the hell you're talking about, let me break down the math for you.

 

A bullet travels at a very high velocity so people thnks it has a very high momentum. That's wrong because momentum is the product of mass and velocity (p = m * v). A bullet's mass is tiny so it's momentum is a lot smaller than people think. The 6.5 Carcano (or 6.5 Italian) round used by Oswald has a mass of 10.5 grams and a velocity of 700 m/s. Let's assume the positive effect of gravity cancels out the negative effect of wind drag (this is to the benefit of your hypothesis) and say the bullet struck Kennedy at 700 m/s. That gives a momentum of 10.5 x 700 = 7,350 g * m/s.

 

Now assuming Kennedy's head absorbs the full momentum of the bullet and no energy was wasted (both benefiting your hypothesis) we can calculate the speed at which Kennedy's head should have gone forward. An average human head weighs about 4.5 to 5 kg. Assuming the lower end (again to your benefit) that gives 7,350 / 4,500 = 1.64 m/s. That's just shy of 3.7 mph or a brisk walking pace.

 

So why did his head move backwards? Simple answer; because when the bullet struck the back of his skull it didn't move the entire head forward but instead it blew brain matter and skull fragments to the front and right. This is where Newton's third law of motion comes in. Briefly summarized; Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. This is what makes rockets work in space when there is nothing to "push of from." The rocket expels rapidly expanding gases from the combustion out the back and as a result the rocket goes forwards. In this case the expelled brain matter and skull fragments went to the front and right (the action); Kennedy's head went back and left (the reaction).

I want so badly to get in a physics debate with you, but i'll resist.  I will say you are misinterpreting and over simplifying equal and opposite reaction in your scenario.  There are many dynamics at play, not just a simple hit and rebound. 

---

The fact that jack ruby assassinated Oswald before anyone had a chance to get the facts straight (2 days after the murder, well before a trial) is the most compelling pc of evidence to me that this was a conspiracy.


Then ruby had a 'pulmonary embolism' before he could go to trial.


Lbj was behind it. The guy was a megalomaniac.

---

The fact that jack ruby assassinated Oswald before anyone had a chance to get the facts straight (2 days after the murder, well before a trial) is the most compelling pc of evidence to me that this was a conspiracy.


Then ruby had a 'pulmonary embolism' before he could go to trial.


Lbj was behind it. The guy was a megalomaniac.

Certaintly makes conspirarists happy! 

---

.

---

I want so badly to get in a physics debate with you, but i'll resist.  I will say you are misinterpreting and over simplifying equal and opposite reaction in your scenario.  There are many dynamics at play, not just a simple hit and rebound. 

 

Called out! DF, you gonna skin that smoke wagon or just stand there and bleed?

---

The fact that jack ruby assassinated Oswald before anyone had a chance to get the facts straight (2 days after the murder, well before a trial) is the most compelling pc of evidence to me that this was a conspiracy.


Then ruby had a 'pulmonary embolism' before he could go to trial.


Lbj was behind it. The guy was a megalomaniac.

 

LBJ: "the guy was a megalomaniac." As opposed to the normal, well adjusted types who tend to run for president.

 

"Ruby had a 'pulmonary embolism' before he could go to trial." As a result of lung cancer. A lot o people die of cancer you know. Is that mysterious? Unless  - you buy into the theory that he was injected with cancer (by the Mafia?)? And yes, there are people trying to push that theory.

 

Read up on Ruby. His part in killing Oswald is the most clear cut (in my opinion) situation which is not mysterious at all. 

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

The fact that Jack Ruby assassinated Oswald before anyone had a chance to get the facts straight (2 days after the murder, well before a trial) is the most compelling piece of evidence to me that this was a conspiracy.


Then Ruby had a 'pulmonary embolism' before he could go to trial.


LBJ was behind it. The guy was a megalomaniac.

 

If that is true, Jack Ruby obviously was the other person involved, not this mafia guy who claims he killed Kennedy. But why would Ruby wait two days to murder Oswald?

---

They tried to hit Oswald with a fake Police officer, but Oswald shot him first. Coming out of the Jail basement was the next moment of Opportunity to get to Oswald

---

They tried to hit Oswald with a fake police officer, but Oswald shot him first. Coming out of the Jail basement was the next moment of Opportunity to get to Oswald

 

Fake police officer? That sounds impossible 

---

OK, my Bad, it was a real cop......

 

The Warren Report claimed that Lee Harvey Oswald was responsible not only for the assassination of President Kennedy, but also for that of a Dallas policeman, J.D. Tippit, who was shot dead on a suburban street around 40 minutes after Kennedy had been shot in Dealey Plaza.

Although Oswald was blamed for Tippit’s murder, the timing of the incident alone exonerates him, at least as the lone assassin.

 

http://22november1963.org.uk/did-lee-har...-jd-tippit

---

LBJ: "the guy was a megalomaniac." As opposed to the normal, well adjusted types who tend to run for president.


"Ruby had a 'pulmonary embolism' before he could go to trial." As a result of lung cancer. A lot o people die of cancer you know. Is that mysterious? Unless - you buy into the theory that he was injected with cancer (by the Mafia?)? And yes, there are people trying to push that theory.


Read up on Ruby. His part in killing Oswald is the most clear cut (in my opinion) situation which is not mysterious at all.

<a class="bbc_url" href='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Ruby'>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Ruby</a>


I've read up on jack ruby.


The purported reason he killed Oswald was to spare the fragile Jackie Kennedy, who sat next to her husband whilst he was shot and killed through the head, who wore her blood-stained coat the rest of that day to "show them what they did to my Jack, " from a trial.


Like, really? And then he's dead before his trial? Are you kidding?


Edit: lbj is the only prez I've heard of who had a penchant for swinging his 'Johnson' around and asking woman if they had ever seen sonething so big. Or peeling on a secret serviceman's leg and saying it's "his prerogative." Or outdoing JFK on the "private secretary" thing.


The obvious motive is becoming the most powerful man in the world and ramping up nam for his military industrial complex buddies.

---

<a class="bbc_url" href='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Ruby'>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Ruby</a>


I've read up on jack ruby.


The purported reason he killed Oswald was to spare the fragile Jackie Kennedy, who sat next to her husband whilst he was shot and killed through the head, who wore her blood-stained coat the rest of that day to "show them what they did to my Jack, " from a trial.


Like, really? And then he's dead before his trial? Are you kidding?


Edit: lbj is the only prez I've heard of who had a penchant for swinging his 'Johnson' around and asking woman if they had ever seen sonething so big. Or peeling on a secret serviceman's leg and saying it's "his prerogative." Or outdoing JFK on the "private secretary" thing.


The obvious motive is becoming the most powerful man in the world and ramping up nam for his military industrial complex buddies.

 

Let me debunk another myth here.  Ruby was actually convicted and sentenced to death.  He filed for a re-trial and it was granted but he died from an embolism due to lung cancer before it could take place.  I guess you could make the argument that the CIA or [insert your favorite Illuminati here] gave him cancer but on balance that's very unlikely.  Most conspiracy theories are rooted in the circumstances that seem difficult to explain on the surface but once understood (i.e. "magic bullet", "Oswald's rifle inaccuracy", "Oswald spying for the CIA") like the magician's trick, they evaporate.

 

Because there are odd things that we may never have a rational explanation for, human nature latches on to the idea of the grand conspiracy.  It's a fairly well understood psychological phenomena.  Same thing with alien abduction scenarios, the existence of Atlantis, et al.  The idea that the president of the US could have been taken down by a single nut, acting alone is too difficult emotionally for many people to accept and so the search for "secret shadow groups" and "conspiracies within the military industrial complex" continues unabated.

---

I'm condescending. That means I talk down to you. 
Check out the Jag's Forum Alternative: Duval Football Fans.

Let me debunk another myth here. Ruby was actually convicted and sentenced to death. He filed for a re-trial and it was granted but he died from an embolism due to lung cancer before it could take place. I guess you could make the argument that the CIA or [insert your favorite Illuminati here] gave him cancer but on balance that's very unlikely. Most conspiracy theories are rooted in the circumstances that seem difficult to explain on the surface but once understood (i.e. "magic bullet", "Oswald's rifle inaccuracy", "Oswald spying for the CIA") like the magician's trick, they evaporate.


Because there are odd things that we may never have a rational explanation for, human nature latches on to the idea of the grand conspiracy. It's a fairly well understood psychological phenomena. Same thing with alien abduction scenarios, the existence of Atlantis, et al. The idea that the president of the US could have been taken down by a single nut, acting alone is too difficult emotionally for many people to accept and so the search for "secret shadow groups" and "conspiracies within the military industrial complex" continues unabated.

Actually, I would find it exceedingly more believable that a single nutjob pulled the trigger.


But the facts don't line up that way.


Anyways, on the other hand, I'd argue there is a social phenomenon which precludes certain types of people from even considering the possibility of any 'conspiracies' being true. We have been conditioned to think 'conspiracy nuts' are afraid of boogeymen.


Please explain jack ruby's motive for killing Oswald.

---

Actually, I would find it exceedingly more believable that a single nutjob pulled the trigger.


But the facts don't line up that way.


Anyways, on the other hand, I'd argue there is a social phenomenon which precludes certain types of people from even considering the possibility of any 'conspiracies' being true. We have been conditioned to think 'conspiracy nuts' are afraid of boogeymen.


Please explain jack ruby's motive for killing Oswald.

 

As far as Ruby's motivations, the generally accepted one is that he *might* have known he was terminal, he was abusing a stimulant at the time the two conditions which may have led to him not functioning rationally  In this state of mind he had the idea that he would redeem Dallas in the eyes of the nation and spare Mrs. Kennedy the trauma of a trial.  Is that so far fetched?  When Oswald was arrested at the Texas Theater a mob nearly lynched him on the spot thinking just on the hint that he might be the assassin.  

 

To further understand Ruby's motivations, you also have to go back to the climate of the time just after the assassination. Think of if Osama Bin Laden had been known and seen in the streets of New York City immediately after 9/11.  How many people do you think would have been trying to take him out?  The only wonder with Oswald is that *more* people weren't trying to get at him.

---

I'm condescending. That means I talk down to you. 
Check out the Jag's Forum Alternative: Duval Football Fans.

I feel like I am reading made-up stories here. It is amazing how many myths are floating around about Ruby and Oswald.

 

Where was Jack Ruby when Lee Harvey Oswald was in the Book Depository? How did they know each other? Did they meet on November 21 to make a plan for the next day?

---

I feel like I am reading made-up stories here. It is amazing how many myths are floating around about Ruby and Oswald.

 

Where was Jack Ruby when Lee Harvey Oswald was in the Book Depository? How did they know each other? Did they meet on November 21 to make a plan for the next day?

 

I usually don't consider the conspiracy people "nuts".  I think it's a very natural and human reaction to want to believe that unanswered questions or grey areas must indicate some sort of deeper conspiracy.  I used to fall into that trap myself on certain topics but with an open mind you begin to understand that unanswered questions are just that...unanswered questions.  They usually don't indicate any deeper conspiracy unless the preponderance of the evidence proves it definitively.

---

I'm condescending. That means I talk down to you. 
Check out the Jag's Forum Alternative: Duval Football Fans.