Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

JFK Assassination Autopsy Details Revealed After 55 Years

Options
1…3334363839…70

Comments

  • Options
    #1052
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    King Mob wrote: »
    That was the one.
    The one where you claimed there was a giant mirror because you embarrassed yourself and got desperate and literally everyone realised what a joke you are.
    Yup.

    Either you don't understand perspective, which is likely.
    Or you live in your own reality and literally see things that aren't real and decide that anyone who doesn't agree is part of the conspiracy. Which is a mental illness and also likely.

    I could see it was overexposure or a reflection of light. There no men there. You can believe whatever you like.

    The image between the columns is a reflection of the fireman on the left. Hand position and body position is the same Fireman on the right, is in the yellow liquid. You can see the head position and position of the arm is the same. Wreckage is blurred by the resolution of the photo marked by the pink/purple dots.

    470793.png


  • Options
    #1053
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,236 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    I could see it was overexposure or a reflection of light. There no men there. You can believe whatever you like.
    ]
    Lol, yup a childish mspaint picture will help.
    It will make you look way more credible and much less like a parody that other conspiracy theorists are ashamed of.


  • Options
    #1054
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,841 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Objects are set at a fixed point they should not move or expand or change shape. The sign is expanding with the pan of the camera. Where the motion blur in the Zapruder film?. The car and other objects in the scene are not blurring when the car emerges from the front of the sign. The sign clearly not in the right position. It does not align correctly. You can see from the first picture I posted the position of the sign to the road and its angle. The waving man is also in the wrong area, he should be positioned closer to the curvature of the sign.

    No, the sign was placed in a different position so we could not see when Kennedy was hit in the back and throat.

    Nope its called "perspective".

    Tens of thousands of people have studied these pictures in incredible detail over the course of 55 years.

    So do you think "they" altered the Zapruder film and left "Black Dog Man" in the Willis photo? Why would they do that?!
    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    You claimed Zapruder stopped filming when the car turned to head down Elm Street. Yet you provide no evidence for this claim.

    Its your stupid theory. You do the research to back it up.
    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Or could it Zapruder recorded something happening during the turn near the TSBD and this was removed from the film?

    Well you'll be able to tell us won't you? After you do your research on it.
    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Yep, Zapruder business Edward Schwartz also described details not seen in the Zapruder film. He saw blood and brain tissue flying off to the left side. Do you claim 20 people, then post their descriptions of the headshot then?

    His name was Erwin Schwartz. Dan Rather was the first newsman to describe the movie to the public and incorrectly said JFKs head was thrown forward. Either hes in on it too or people make mistakes when viewing footage like that.

    Amazing to me that Zapruder didn't go into Kodak until the late afternoon - after first going to a news station to try develop it - and had the original back by 8pm yet you think "they" managed to manipulate the movie, using 1963 technology, in that time. This is before the autopsy aswell so "they" wouldn't have even known what to alter yet.
    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    By the way, if you believe 225 and 226 was the time of the magic bullet shot. Why was Kennedy hit in the head at frame 313?

    90 frames at roughly 18 frames a second. Is close to 5 seconds. Why the delay between shots?

    Because Oswald was working the bolt and then aiming.
    King Mob wrote: »
    Lol, yup a childish mspaint picture will help.
    It will make you look way more credible and much less like a parody that other conspiracy theorists are ashamed of.

    His childish MS Paint pictures are one of my favourite things. Obviously I'm mortified for him but they're also funny at the same time.


  • Options
    #1055
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 18,039 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    I could see it was overexposure or a reflection of light. There no men there.

    According to you. You've demonstrated it will be whatever you've decided it is, reflections, refractions from swamp gas, whatever. You have also demonstrated you will lie, distort - go to whatever lengths necessary to support a vague hunch you have, and then just as easily discard that hunch later.

    Again, the truth is entirely subjective to you

    Whatever you can make up in your head becomes the "truth", and instead of expressing it as personal opinion (which it is) you present it as fact by "dressing it up" in assertive wording


  • Options
    #1056
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,841 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    According to you. You've demonstrated it will be whatever you've decided it is, reflections, refractions from swamp gas, whatever. You have also demonstrated you will lie, distort - go to whatever lengths necessary to support a vague hunch you have, and then just as easily discard that hunch later.

    Again, the truth is entirely subjective to you

    Whatever you can make up in your head becomes the "truth", and instead of expressing it as personal opinion (which it is) you present it as fact by "dressing it up" in assertive wording

    Below is one of my favourite posts. Ever. Not just on this thread. Any thread, anywhere, ever. In the history of the internet.
    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Could this be Jack Ruby outside of the TSBD.

    Took this image from the Hughes film, seems to be/ the right location.

    470587.png


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1057
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    The Nal wrote: »
    Below is one of my favourite posts. Ever. Not just on this thread. Any thread, anywhere, ever. In the history of the internet.

    Nice try but please post in context. I used another image to highlight was it Ruby.

    470814.png


  • Options
    #1058
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,236 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Nice try but please post in context. I used another image to highlight was it Ruby.

    470814.png

    Lol. Hilarious.
    Why do you think that that is Jack Ruby?
    Other than your inability to tell the difference between your fantasies and real life I mean?

    "posting in context" just makes it even more of a joke.


  • Options
    #1059
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    King Mob wrote: »
    Lol, yup a childish mspaint picture will help.
    It will make you look way more credible and much less like a parody that other conspiracy theorists are ashamed of.

    I had to show you guys as you still believe a man with half a body, no legs and arms is standing in a yellow liquid near the steel columns.

    I embarrassed for you guys you still believe that two men:) It clearly just an overexposure of the camera or trick of light causing the reflections. You guys make fools of yourself constantly denying evidence anyhow, nothing new.


  • Options
    #1060
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,236 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    I had to show you guys as you still believe a man with half a body, no legs and arms is standing in a yellow liquid near the steel columns.

    I embarrassed for you guys you still believe that two men:) It clearly just an overexposure of the camera or trick of light causing the reflections. You guys make fools of yourself constantly denying evidence anyhow, nothing new.
    Lol.
    Sure you did. I'm sure that's what you think happened. But I assure you, it's not.
    You are delusional.

    The only reason people engage with you is to see what ridiculous crap you come up with next. And to watch you squirm and bladder when confronted with reality.

    You are a joke who is making conspiracy theorists look like the cranks you guys always deny being.


  • Options
    #1061
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    King Mob wrote: »
    Lol. Hilarious.
    Why do you think that that is Jack Ruby?
    Other than your inability to tell the difference between your fantasies and real life I mean?

    "posting in context" just makes it even more of a joke.

    It looks like Jack Ruby otherwise it is a look a like. The facial feature is the same, and jack wore glasses.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1062
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,841 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    King Mob wrote: »
    Lol. Hilarious.
    Why do you think that that is Jack Ruby?
    Other than your inability to tell the difference between your fantasies and real life I mean?

    "posting in context" just makes it even more of a joke.

    Its great stuff.

    Just as an FYI at the time of the shooting Ruby was in the Dallas Morning News offices placing ads for his clubs. Loads of alibis, phone calls made from the office etc.

    And even if he wasn't (which he was, but lets say he wasn't), so what? He lived in Dallas and the president was visiting. What would be odd about him being out on the street to see Kennedy?


  • Options
    #1063
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,236 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    It looks like Jack Ruby otherwise it is a look a like. The facial feature is the same, and jack wore glasses.
    lol what facial features?
    Please, break out the crayons and draw out the diagram.
    Should be a laugh.


  • Options
    #1064
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    The Nal wrote: »
    Its great stuff.

    Just as an FYI at the time of the shooting Ruby was in the Dallas Morning News offices placing ads for his clubs. Loads of alibis, phone calls made from the office etc.

    And even if he wasn't (which he was, but lets say he wasn't), so what? He lived in Dallas and the president was visiting. What would be odd about him being out on the street to see Kennedy?

    It was only a few blocks from TSBD, can easily get there in 7 to 10 minutes.

    Ruby murdered the alleged killer of JFK on live TV. He was involved in the conspiracy. You can claim there no conspiracy, but the majority of people don't believe. This site is an outliner , for some reason.


  • Options
    #1065
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,236 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    The Nal wrote: »
    And even if he wasn't (which he was, but lets say he wasn't), so what? He lived in Dallas and the president was visiting. What would be odd about him being out on the street to see Kennedy?
    We could ask why he was there? What was he doing in aid of the conspiracy?
    Was he told to be there or was it just a random coincidence?
    Why would THEY send him/let him go there?
    Why was he photographed and why, if any one could make out his facial features, was the photograph not destroyed or altered.

    But we will never get an answer.
    We're still waiting for one for why THEY didn't just have one gun man.


  • Options
    #1066
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,236 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    You can claim there no conspiracy, but the majority of people don't believe. This site is an outliner , for some reason.
    The majority of people don't believe in that conspiracy.
    The majority of people who do believe in the conspiracy would be embarassed by you and your version of the theory.
    They would pretend no-one would believe something so outlandish and silly and that anyone who says they do is a disinfo agent.
    (ie. what you do for cranks who believe the space laser theory for 9/11)


  • Options
    #1067
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    King Mob wrote: »
    The majority of people don't believe in that conspiracy.
    The majority of people who do believe in the conspiracy would be embarassed by you and your version of the theory.
    They would pretend no-one would believe something so outlandish and silly and that anyone who says they do is a disinfo agent.
    (ie. what you do for cranks who believe the space laser theory for 9/11)

    Yes they do the last poll 80 per cent of Americans believe there was a conspiracy to kill JFK

    With 9/11 its 56 per cent.

    This site just has abnormal number of Skeptics, i not sure why that is?

    Let you in on a secret, people have connected me and said they don't post here because of you. You not liked, you should work on your personality?


  • Options
    #1068
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,841 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    It was only a few blocks from TSBD, can easily get there in 7 to 10 minutes.

    He could have but didn't. Was in the offices well after the assassiation. 45 minutes at least. Maybe an hour.

    But even if he wasnt, so what?
    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Yes they do the last poll 80 per cent of Americans believe there was a conspiracy to kill JFK

    Yes and 80% didn't know Oswald had tried to kill Walker.
    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Ruby murdered the alleged killer of JFK on live TV. He was involved in the conspiracy. You can claim there no conspiracy, but the majority of people don't believe.

    But theres no evidence! No one can explain Ruby shooting Oswald in the stomach. That just does not happen with assassinations. Mob or otherwise.

    The opinion of the majority of people is irrelevant. This is not an election.

    Whats amazing to me is despite having huge black hole sized knowledge gaps, as above proves, you persist with spending your time scanning over photos and drawing silly little squiggles with Microsoft Paint.

    Keep it up though, gives us a good laugh.

    Edit. As above, you still don't even know what a sceptic is.


  • Options
    #1069
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Nevertheless, according to a 2009 CBS News poll, between 60 and 80 percent of Americans believe that President Kennedy was the victim of a conspiracy; that is, that there was more than one shooter in Dealy Plaza that November day in 1963.

    http://time.com/3422083/jfk-conspiracy-theories/


  • Options
    #1070
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,236 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Yes they do the last poll 80 per cent of Americans believe there was a conspiracy to kill JFK

    With 9/11 its 56 per cent.

    This site just has abnormal number of Skeptics, i not sure why that is?
    No source, so this is a lie.

    Any progress on that mspaint masterpiece showing Jack Ruby.
    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Let you in on a secret, people have connected me and said they don't post here because of you. You not liked, you should work on your personality?
    Oh no...
    Cranks and holocaust deniers don't like me?
    :(


  • Options
    #1071
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,841 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Nevertheless, according to a 2009 CBS News poll, between 60 and 80 percent of Americans believe that President Kennedy was the victim of a conspiracy; that is, that there was more than one shooter in Dealy Plaza that November day in 1963.

    http://time.com/3422083/jfk-conspiracy-theories/

    200.gif


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1072
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    The Nal wrote: »
    He could have but didn't. Was in the offices well after the assassiation. 45 minutes at least. Maybe an hour.

    But even if he wasnt, so what?



    Yes and 80% didn't know Oswald had tried to kill Walker.



    But theres no evidence! No one can explain Ruby shooting Oswald in the stomach. That just does not happen with assassinations. Mob or otherwise.

    The opinion of the majority of people is irrelevant. This is not an election.

    Whats amazing to me is despite having huge black hole sized knowledge gaps, as above proves, you persist with spending your time scanning over photos and drawing silly little squiggles with Microsoft Paint.

    Keep it up though, gives us a good laugh.

    Edit. As above, you still don't even know what a sceptic is.

    Nal you only looking at one area of Oswald life story. There was two sides to Oswald. If you only believe some of the information is correct, it lead you in one direction Oswald was a loner, a crazy loon who believed in Marxist ideals.

    The background of Oswald in entirety has to be looked at. You can not ignore Oswald had an obvious intelligence background while stationed in Japan. He was trained to use radios, radar and used state of the art equipment to navigate U2 spy flights over the Soviet Union. Oswald was a security risk. He was allowed to leave for the Soviet Union is really strange. Oswald had secrets that would damage US national security. It obvious to me he was a spy send there for a nefarious purpose. The Soviet did not fall for it, and then Oswald overreacted. Oswald had a odd personality, the CIA likely knew that it was a risk to use him as he prone to overreaction.He was intelligent enough to keep the lies going he was a defector.

    Officer Jim Leavelle claimed when Ruby approached he pulled on Oswald handcuffs towards him. He moved slightly to the left. Ruby was looking for a way out killing Oswald if he was the guy who phoned the Dallas police station asked to increase security? Did Ruby intentionally aim for Oswald stomach to not kill him, its possible?

    I am skeptical of the official story. You are skeptic of the conspiracy.


  • Options
    #1073
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    King Mob wrote: »
    Oh no...
    Cranks and holocaust deniers don't like me?
    :(

    No i got lot of private message why people don't post here and its because of people like you. They can't be bothered. I can handle you and just put up with your nonsense :D


  • Options
    #1074
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,236 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    No i got lot of private message why people don't post here and its because of people like you. They can't be bothered. I can handle you and just put up with your nonsense :D
    If you say so.
    It makes me very sad that people don't like me.
    :'(

    So that crayon drawing where you show the facial features of Jack Ruby?
    Gonna produce that any time soon.

    It will be really funny to see you try and bull**** your way through it.

    Oh, and "ignoring and dodging questions" is not handling me.
    It's proving my position that conspiracy theories and conspiracy theorists in general can't deal with basic questions.


  • Options
    #1075
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    King Mob wrote: »
    If you say so.
    It makes me very sad that people don't like me.
    :'(

    So that crayon drawing where you show the facial features of Jack Ruby?
    Gonna produce that any time soon.

    It will be really funny to see you try and bull**** your way through it.

    Oh, and "ignoring and dodging questions" is not handling me.
    It's proving my position that conspiracy theories and conspiracy theorists in general can't deal with basic questions.

    You funny guy :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #1076
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,236 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    You funny guy :rolleyes:
    Yup.

    So that picture of Jack Ruby.
    Please show us the facial features you see.

    Or can we just add that to the pile of bull**** you've realised is too embarrassing now?


  • Options
    #1077
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,841 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Nal you only looking at one area of Oswald life story. There was two sides to Oswald. If you only believe some of the information is correct, it lead you in one direction Oswald was a loner, a crazy loon who believed in Marxist ideals.

    Because thats the only evidence there is.
    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    The background of Oswald in entirety has to be looked at. You can not ignore Oswald had an obvious intelligence background while stationed in Japan. He was trained to use radios, radar and used state of the art equipment to navigate U2 spy flights over the Soviet Union. Oswald was a security risk. He was allowed to leave for the Soviet Union is really strange. Oswald had secrets that would damage US national security.

    He knew nothing the Soviets didnt already know. He wasnt the only person to defect by the way.
    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    It obvious to me he was a spy send there for a nefarious purpose.

    Yep, see thats where the theory fails. Theres no evidence for that. Zero.
    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    The Soviet did not fall for it, and then Oswald overreacted. Oswald had a odd personality, the CIA likely knew that it was a risk to use him as he prone to overreaction.He was intelligent enough to keep the lies going he was a defector.

    Theres that bullshít word again. "Likely". Used with no evidence.
    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Officer Jim Leavelle claimed when Ruby approached he pulled on Oswald handcuffs towards him. He moved slightly to the left. Ruby was looking for a way out killing Oswald if he was the guy who phoned the Dallas police station asked to increase security?

    Even the officer who claimed that said he didnt know if it was Ruby. Dallas Police were inundated with calls saying people were going to kill Oswald. Tens of millions of people wanted him dead.
    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Did Ruby intentionally aim for Oswald stomach to not kill him, its possible?

    No. Its a guaranteed hit. If he aimed for his head he could've missed and hit a cop. Same reason he said he didnt shoot Oswald at the press conference.

    1/10 chance Oswald would've survived. That doesn't happen in mob hits. James Garfield for example. Shot twice, in the arm and back, and took 11 weeks to die.

    William McKinley, shot twice in the stomach, took 7 days to die and was conscious and speaking the whole time.

    Which all leads to the question as to why "they" didn't shoot Oswald when he left the TSBD. Or when he left his rooming house. Or when he was on the street. Or in the cinema when they had ample excuse to do so when he pulled a gun.

    But that aside, theres still no need for a conspiracy this big. "They" could've killed Kennedy at Love Field, or Main St, or at the Trade Mart. No one can explain to me why theres actually a need for a plot this recklessly big involving so many people. Its simply, stupid.


  • Options
    #1078
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    King Mob wrote: »
    Yup.

    So that picture of Jack Ruby.
    Please show us the facial features you see.

    Or can we just add that to the pile of bull**** you've realised is too embarrassing now?

    You see the man can't you. The side profile looks like Ruby. Go look at pictures online of Ruby with glasses you see the resemblance.


  • Options
    #1079
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,236 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    You see the man can't you. The side profile looks like Ruby. Go look at pictures online of Ruby with glasses you see the resemblance.
    I can see the picture.
    I can see that it's far too blurry to make out any details that would allow you to positively identify who it is.
    It's so blurry and small and very clearly impossible to tell who it is, that everyone is laughing at your claim that it is Ruby.
    It's another example of what a joke you and your theory are.

    So I'm asking you to show how you identified him as Ruby.
    Please use your mspaint/crayon skills to illustrate the similar features.
    It will be really funny to watch you try that.

    Or we can assume that you can't do that, you know that your claim is bull**** and now you're trying to backpedal because you think you have some credibility to save.
    But I assure you, you have no credibility to worry about.


  • Options
    #1080
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 18,039 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Yes they do the last poll 80 per cent of Americans believe there was a conspiracy to kill JFK

    With 9/11 its 56 per cent.

    53% of Americans thought Saddam had something to do with 911. 52% of people in the UK think that the moon landings were faked. Half of Americans believe in ghosts, a third of Russians believe the sun goes around the earth. I know two people with PhD's who strongly believe in astrology

    There's a lot of casual ignorance. It's still no excuse for you writing stupid and illogical stuff on a public forum.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1081
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    The Nal wrote: »
    Because thats the only evidence there is.



    He knew nothing the Soviets didnt already know. He wasnt the only person to defect by the way.



    Yep, see thats where the theory fails. Theres no evidence for that. Zero.



    Theres that bullshít word again. "Likely". Used with no evidence.



    Even the officer who claimed that said he didnt know if it was Ruby. Dallas Police were inundated with calls saying people were going to kill Oswald. Tens of millions of people wanted him dead.



    No. Its a guaranteed hit. If he aimed for his head he could've missed and hit a cop. Same reason he said he didnt shoot Oswald at the press conference.

    1/10 chance Oswald would've survived. That doesn't happen in mob hits. James Garfield for example. Shot twice, in the arm and back, and took 11 weeks to die.

    William McKinley, shot twice in the stomach, took 7 days to die and was conscious and speaking the whole time.

    Which all leads to the question as to why "they" didn't shoot Oswald when he left the TSBD. Or when he left his rooming house. Or when he was on the street. Or in the cinema when they had ample excuse to do so when he pulled a gun.

    But that aside, theres still no need for a conspiracy this big. "They" could've killed Kennedy at Love Field, or Main St, or at the Trade Mart. No one can explain to me why theres actually a need for a plot this recklessly big involving so many people. Its simply, stupid.

    It not. You have ignored evidence i provided. James Wilcox was a CIA agent stationed in Japan CIA station. He saw the Oswald crypto file and was a file on record dated from the late 50s. He talked with people involved in CIA and was well known in the CIA Oswald was a spy send to Russia as a defector. We also know George De Mohrenschildt was told to babysit Oswald when he returned to America. George even admitted to this and was reason he approached Oswald in 1962. It no coincidence Maria ended up in Ruth Paine house and Paine family had connections to US intelligence ie CIA.

    I would not be surprised if Maria was a spy of some sort or an asset of US intelligence. Maria even said at HSCA she believed or crossed her mind at times Lee was a spy when she first met him in Russia. And we know from Lee time in New Orleans he played a double game with anti Castro Cubans and Pro Castro side. David Ferrie denied he ever met Oswald or knew him in the 60s, then a picture emerges in the 90s showing both men in same location in the 50s. Oswald phoning an intelligence officer in Jail, why?There lot of evidence to believe Oswald worked undercover for US intelligence

    Wrong the police officer on video claiming it was Ruby and does make sense he would be the guy warning if he was the, trigger man told to take Oswald out. End of the day it was a guy with Mob connections who took Oswald life, and when the mob is accused of being involved in the murder of JFK, you can't ignore the implications.

    You should ask why did he go the Cinema and not try to leave town? Was he going there to meet someone a contact?

    They scouted the place to kill him and they set up there it was a perfect spot to Kill Kennedy.


Advertisement