> I once herad a very simple point made by an expert
> military-trained sniper, and which is largely overlooked by
> most analysts of the Kennedy murder.
> It is actually very difficult, verging on impossible, to
> track a moving target with a telecopic gun-sight - anyone who
> owns even an air-rilfe with such a sight can confirm it. It
> has the effect of not only magnifying the target, but also
> any movement of the target, and of movement of the gun itself.
> It's a *fact* that at the range Oswald supposedly scored 2
> virtual bullseyes in 3 shots, using a a cheap hunting rifle
> with *telescopic* sight, he would have to had to 'lead'
> Kennedy's head by nearly 2 feet. Impossible, or a miracle.
> In fact 'Saul', the alleged trigger-man who got the final
> 'head-shot', confirmed to Hugh McDonald, writer of a
> definitve, now unobtainable (surprise!), book called
> "Appointment In Dallas", confirmed that the killers used open
> sights, as any competetent marksman would under the
> conditions they knew they would be operating.
I agree with you, as well as Steve's (lovejoy) comments. And isn't it true that the only evidence that links LHW to the shooting is one bullet? And isn't it weird that it was found on the stretcher? Isn't that quite impossible? Don't bullets get lodged in a body? And then, how is it virtually undamaged? We shot some guns at the FBI building once, into a water tank and they were damaged if I remember correctly. Isn't it true that the bullet would have had to be damaged?
I believe in the grassy knoll theory. And I will say to some others who have posted here that you can't just watch a documentary and expect to come to any kind of fair conclusion. This is a very complicated case and requires a great deal of reading and examining the known facts before you can expect to come to any theory. The lone gunman theory is impossible for me to believe. It requires ignoring too much detail. And you have to understand everything about all the players and the political situation. And you have to listen to all the reports from people involved. Its incredible how many important people turned up dead, who could have testified. That one girlfriend lady says she was with Jack Ruby a week or so before the assassination and says LHO sat at the table with them, was Ruby's guest. And she says she never told because too many people who talked got killed and she thought she would too. The other girlfriend at the table did tell reporters apparently and she turned up dead.
And the jailer said Ruby was sweating and terrified when they took him to his cell. And when they came back to tell him LHO was dead he immediately calmed down and stopped sweating and seemed fine. Was he blackmailed into killing LHO, threatened of torture perhaps? I don't know. But these are just a few of the thousands of bits and pieces you have to put in somewhere. It's just like 911 in the way that, the truth has to include all the known facts, and evidence has to reflect the theory on what happened. Again, the "official story" doesn't work.
That's what I think about it all anyway.