Total Posts:42|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The John F. Kennedy Assassination *

inferno
Posts: 10,689
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2013 1:46:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The 50th anniversary of the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy is coming up on the 22nd day of November. I want to ask you guys here at DDO, what are your thoughts about this great man. And what do you think really happened on that horrible day. Did Oswald act alone, or did he have some associates. See video below for more information. There is much more to this story than you know. =)
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2013 2:19:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Howard Hunt's confession convinced me it was more than one man.

Actually, what swayed wasn't what he said, but specifically what he LIED about.

Say you want to make up a JFK conspiracy and want maximum credibility. Being CIA is nice, but what if you could prove WITH A PHOTOGRAPH that you were in Dallas the day of the shooting?

Yet he denied until the end that he was ever in Dallas on the day of the assassination.

It makes absolutely no sense unless he was trying to deny his own involvement.

http://web.archive.org...
inferno
Posts: 10,689
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2013 2:29:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/13/2013 2:19:20 PM, Wnope wrote:
Howard Hunt's confession convinced me it was more than one man.

Actually, what swayed wasn't what he said, but specifically what he LIED about.

Say you want to make up a JFK conspiracy and want maximum credibility. Being CIA is nice, but what if you could prove WITH A PHOTOGRAPH that you were in Dallas the day of the shooting?

Yet he denied until the end that he was ever in Dallas on the day of the assassination.

It makes absolutely no sense unless he was trying to deny his own involvement.

http://web.archive.org...

Because he didnt wanna be under any threats himself. You do understand that when an oath is broken you are usually as good as dead afterwards.
kimmi
Posts: 17
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2013 2:58:11 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I didnt mean that i mean that everyone who liked jkf was very said and to those people it was a very bad day even for his wife
Kimmi loves u
inferno
Posts: 10,689
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2013 3:05:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/13/2013 2:58:11 PM, kimmi wrote:
I didnt mean that i mean that everyone who liked jkf was very said and to those people it was a very bad day even for his wife

Oh yes. I agree with you very much. Thanks.
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2013 6:17:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/13/2013 1:46:17 PM, inferno wrote:
The 50th anniversary of the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy is coming up on the 22nd day of November. I want to ask you guys here at DDO, what are your thoughts about this great man. And what do you think really happened on that horrible day. Did Oswald act alone, or did he have some associates. See video below for more information. There is much more to this story than you know. =)



I think JFK was the greatest President of my lifetime and I'm old as dirt. He was a true leader, and there haven't been many (or any) since. I also think Bobbie would have been an even greater President.

I'm certain there is much more to the story than we know, and no, I don't see how anyone can think Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2013 6:44:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/13/2013 2:29:00 PM, inferno wrote:
At 11/13/2013 2:19:20 PM, Wnope wrote:
Howard Hunt's confession convinced me it was more than one man.

Actually, what swayed wasn't what he said, but specifically what he LIED about.

Say you want to make up a JFK conspiracy and want maximum credibility. Being CIA is nice, but what if you could prove WITH A PHOTOGRAPH that you were in Dallas the day of the shooting?

Yet he denied until the end that he was ever in Dallas on the day of the assassination.

It makes absolutely no sense unless he was trying to deny his own involvement.

http://web.archive.org...

Because he didnt wanna be under any threats himself. You do understand that when an oath is broken you are usually as good as dead afterwards.

You ignore the fact that he testified earlier and nearly everything he said was a blatant lie.

This entire story is "breaking the oath." The photo is just the clincher.
Adam2
Posts: 1,024
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2013 7:45:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Well I don't know Kennedy completely to say everything about him, but I can say that he was a great president and wanted great things for this country, such as a civil rights bill that would have given liberty to blacks, only to be twisted and bastardized by Johnson's Great Society program. I think LBJ had a hand in killing Kennedy.
1Devilsadvocate
Posts: 1,518
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2013 11:37:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/13/2013 2:19:20 PM, Wnope wrote:
Howard Hunt's confession convinced me it was more than one man.

Actually, what swayed wasn't what he said, but specifically what he LIED about.

Say you want to make up a JFK conspiracy and want maximum credibility. Being CIA is nice, but what if you could prove WITH A PHOTOGRAPH that you were in Dallas the day of the shooting?

Yet he denied until the end that he was ever in Dallas on the day of the assassination.

It makes absolutely no sense unless he was trying to deny his own involvement.

http://web.archive.org...

Perhaps he said that to reduce suspicion. Innocent people sometimes lie about such things because they are afraid it will be used against them even though they are innocent.
I cannot write in English, because of the treacherous spelling. When I am reading, I only hear it and am unable to remember what the written word looks like."
"Albert Einstein

http://www.twainquotes.com... , http://thewritecorner.wordpress.com... , http://www.onlinecollegecourses.com...
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2013 5:30:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/13/2013 11:37:08 PM, 1Devilsadvocate wrote:
At 11/13/2013 2:19:20 PM, Wnope wrote:
Howard Hunt's confession convinced me it was more than one man.

Actually, what swayed wasn't what he said, but specifically what he LIED about.

Say you want to make up a JFK conspiracy and want maximum credibility. Being CIA is nice, but what if you could prove WITH A PHOTOGRAPH that you were in Dallas the day of the shooting?

Yet he denied until the end that he was ever in Dallas on the day of the assassination.

It makes absolutely no sense unless he was trying to deny his own involvement.

http://web.archive.org...

Perhaps he said that to reduce suspicion. Innocent people sometimes lie about such things because they are afraid it will be used against them even though they are innocent.

Except he previously lied about all this in court. If he wanted to keep himself safe, he would have died without saying a word.

The man was involved in Watergate. Him being hated and losing his reputation was not at issue on his deathbed (and this was a deathbed confession).

Being in Dallas on a particular day is not illegal. If there's no conspiracy, there is no possible way the photo could blow back on him.
inferno
Posts: 10,689
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2013 10:46:51 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/13/2013 6:44:48 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/13/2013 2:29:00 PM, inferno wrote:
At 11/13/2013 2:19:20 PM, Wnope wrote:
Howard Hunt's confession convinced me it was more than one man.

Actually, what swayed wasn't what he said, but specifically what he LIED about.

Say you want to make up a JFK conspiracy and want maximum credibility. Being CIA is nice, but what if you could prove WITH A PHOTOGRAPH that you were in Dallas the day of the shooting?

Yet he denied until the end that he was ever in Dallas on the day of the assassination.

It makes absolutely no sense unless he was trying to deny his own involvement.

http://web.archive.org...

Because he didnt wanna be under any threats himself. You do understand that when an oath is broken you are usually as good as dead afterwards.

You ignore the fact that he testified earlier and nearly everything he said was a blatant lie.

This entire story is "breaking the oath." The photo is just the clincher.

I know. But there are also others who lied and then changed their stories later as the years went by.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2013 12:03:51 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/13/2013 6:44:48 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/13/2013 2:29:00 PM, inferno wrote:
At 11/13/2013 2:19:20 PM, Wnope wrote:
Howard Hunt's confession convinced me it was more than one man.

Actually, what swayed wasn't what he said, but specifically what he LIED about.

Say you want to make up a JFK conspiracy and want maximum credibility. Being CIA is nice, but what if you could prove WITH A PHOTOGRAPH that you were in Dallas the day of the shooting?

Yet he denied until the end that he was ever in Dallas on the day of the assassination.

It makes absolutely no sense unless he was trying to deny his own involvement.

http://web.archive.org...

Because he didnt wanna be under any threats himself. You do understand that when an oath is broken you are usually as good as dead afterwards.

You ignore the fact that he testified earlier and nearly everything he said was a blatant lie.

This entire story is "breaking the oath." The photo is just the clincher.

Out of curiosity, have you seen the Oliver Stone movie?
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2013 3:53:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/15/2013 12:03:51 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 11/13/2013 6:44:48 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/13/2013 2:29:00 PM, inferno wrote:
At 11/13/2013 2:19:20 PM, Wnope wrote:
Howard Hunt's confession convinced me it was more than one man.

Actually, what swayed wasn't what he said, but specifically what he LIED about.

Say you want to make up a JFK conspiracy and want maximum credibility. Being CIA is nice, but what if you could prove WITH A PHOTOGRAPH that you were in Dallas the day of the shooting?

Yet he denied until the end that he was ever in Dallas on the day of the assassination.

It makes absolutely no sense unless he was trying to deny his own involvement.

http://web.archive.org...

Because he didnt wanna be under any threats himself. You do understand that when an oath is broken you are usually as good as dead afterwards.

You ignore the fact that he testified earlier and nearly everything he said was a blatant lie.

This entire story is "breaking the oath." The photo is just the clincher.

Out of curiosity, have you seen the Oliver Stone movie?

Yes, it's fictional.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2013 3:54:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/15/2013 10:46:51 AM, inferno wrote:
At 11/13/2013 6:44:48 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/13/2013 2:29:00 PM, inferno wrote:
At 11/13/2013 2:19:20 PM, Wnope wrote:
Howard Hunt's confession convinced me it was more than one man.

Actually, what swayed wasn't what he said, but specifically what he LIED about.

Say you want to make up a JFK conspiracy and want maximum credibility. Being CIA is nice, but what if you could prove WITH A PHOTOGRAPH that you were in Dallas the day of the shooting?

Yet he denied until the end that he was ever in Dallas on the day of the assassination.

It makes absolutely no sense unless he was trying to deny his own involvement.

http://web.archive.org...

Because he didnt wanna be under any threats himself. You do understand that when an oath is broken you are usually as good as dead afterwards.

You ignore the fact that he testified earlier and nearly everything he said was a blatant lie.

This entire story is "breaking the oath." The photo is just the clincher.

I know. But there are also others who lied and then changed their stories later as the years went by.

So... why aren't all those people dead for "breaking the oath?"
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2013 4:16:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/15/2013 3:53:41 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/15/2013 12:03:51 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 11/13/2013 6:44:48 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/13/2013 2:29:00 PM, inferno wrote:
At 11/13/2013 2:19:20 PM, Wnope wrote:
Howard Hunt's confession convinced me it was more than one man.

Actually, what swayed wasn't what he said, but specifically what he LIED about.

Say you want to make up a JFK conspiracy and want maximum credibility. Being CIA is nice, but what if you could prove WITH A PHOTOGRAPH that you were in Dallas the day of the shooting?

Yet he denied until the end that he was ever in Dallas on the day of the assassination.

It makes absolutely no sense unless he was trying to deny his own involvement.

http://web.archive.org...

Because he didnt wanna be under any threats himself. You do understand that when an oath is broken you are usually as good as dead afterwards.

You ignore the fact that he testified earlier and nearly everything he said was a blatant lie.

This entire story is "breaking the oath." The photo is just the clincher.

Out of curiosity, have you seen the Oliver Stone movie?

Yes, it's fictional.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu...

Ok, I was just curious, because I don't remember if he made the insinuation in JFK, but in Nixon, he gets James Woods (Haldeman in the movie, I think) to imply a connection between Howard Hunt and the JFK assassination. To Stone, the Watergate cover-up may have originated from protecting Hunt, in case word got out somehow about his involvement in the assassination. That would have been more serious than the LBJ implications, I think.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2013 4:24:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Oswald shot Kennedy by himself. This is scientifically proven.

Beyond that, I have no clue. He could have acted alone, he could have been ordered to by someone - be it communists, the government, the mob, or whatever else you want. I lean towards the belief that he acted alone entirely but honestly there's no proof either way.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2013 7:11:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/15/2013 4:16:31 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 11/15/2013 3:53:41 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/15/2013 12:03:51 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 11/13/2013 6:44:48 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/13/2013 2:29:00 PM, inferno wrote:
At 11/13/2013 2:19:20 PM, Wnope wrote:
Howard Hunt's confession convinced me it was more than one man.

Actually, what swayed wasn't what he said, but specifically what he LIED about.

Say you want to make up a JFK conspiracy and want maximum credibility. Being CIA is nice, but what if you could prove WITH A PHOTOGRAPH that you were in Dallas the day of the shooting?

Yet he denied until the end that he was ever in Dallas on the day of the assassination.

It makes absolutely no sense unless he was trying to deny his own involvement.

http://web.archive.org...

Because he didnt wanna be under any threats himself. You do understand that when an oath is broken you are usually as good as dead afterwards.

You ignore the fact that he testified earlier and nearly everything he said was a blatant lie.

This entire story is "breaking the oath." The photo is just the clincher.

Out of curiosity, have you seen the Oliver Stone movie?

Yes, it's fictional.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu...

Ok, I was just curious, because I don't remember if he made the insinuation in JFK, but in Nixon, he gets James Woods (Haldeman in the movie, I think) to imply a connection between Howard Hunt and the JFK assassination. To Stone, the Watergate cover-up may have originated from protecting Hunt, in case word got out somehow about his involvement in the assassination. That would have been more serious than the LBJ implications, I think.

I'm not 100% sold on the LBJ angle, but the CIA and mafia involvement all corroborates with the historians who argued for a conspiracy.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2013 7:21:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/15/2013 4:24:07 PM, TN05 wrote:
Oswald shot Kennedy by himself. This is scientifically proven.

Beyond that, I have no clue. He could have acted alone, he could have been ordered to by someone - be it communists, the government, the mob, or whatever else you want. I lean towards the belief that he acted alone entirely but honestly there's no proof either way.

Oswald's either one hellova shooter, or some of the laws of science haven't been behaving very well:

http://en.wikipedia.org...
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2013 7:38:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/15/2013 7:21:20 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 11/15/2013 4:24:07 PM, TN05 wrote:
Oswald shot Kennedy by himself. This is scientifically proven.

Beyond that, I have no clue. He could have acted alone, he could have been ordered to by someone - be it communists, the government, the mob, or whatever else you want. I lean towards the belief that he acted alone entirely but honestly there's no proof either way.

Oswald's either one hellova shooter, or some of the laws of science haven't been behaving very well:

http://en.wikipedia.org...

There have been more than enough demonstrations to prove it can be done alone; to say otherwise is ignorant of actual facts to jump-start to a faulty conclusion. I'm not ruling out outside influence that caused the shooting, but did someone else shoot him? No. Computer models and live demonstrations prove the trajectory to be possible.
inferno
Posts: 10,689
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2013 10:12:25 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/15/2013 7:38:57 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 11/15/2013 7:21:20 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 11/15/2013 4:24:07 PM, TN05 wrote:
Oswald shot Kennedy by himself. This is scientifically proven.

Beyond that, I have no clue. He could have acted alone, he could have been ordered to by someone - be it communists, the government, the mob, or whatever else you want. I lean towards the belief that he acted alone entirely but honestly there's no proof either way.

Oswald's either one hellova shooter, or some of the laws of science haven't been behaving very well:

http://en.wikipedia.org...



There have been more than enough demonstrations to prove it can be done alone; to say otherwise is ignorant of actual facts to jump-start to a faulty conclusion. I'm not ruling out outside influence that caused the shooting, but did someone else shoot him? No. Computer models and live demonstrations prove the trajectory to be possible.

Interesting. But there were real life witnesses who saw everything and would debunk every scientific report you can muster my friend.
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2013 2:33:34 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The Magic bullet will always give me pause.
A single bullet "traversed 15 layers of clothing, 7 layers of skin, and approximately 15 inches of tissue, struck a necktie knot, removed 4 inches of rib, and shattered a radius bone" and was "found on a gurney in the corridor at the Parkland Memorial Hospital, in Dallas, after the assassination"
Looked like this afterwards:
http://upload.wikimedia.org...
http://upload.wikimedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
inferno
Posts: 10,689
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2013 12:32:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/15/2013 3:54:59 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/15/2013 10:46:51 AM, inferno wrote:
At 11/13/2013 6:44:48 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/13/2013 2:29:00 PM, inferno wrote:
At 11/13/2013 2:19:20 PM, Wnope wrote:
Howard Hunt's confession convinced me it was more than one man.

Actually, what swayed wasn't what he said, but specifically what he LIED about.

Say you want to make up a JFK conspiracy and want maximum credibility. Being CIA is nice, but what if you could prove WITH A PHOTOGRAPH that you were in Dallas the day of the shooting?

Yet he denied until the end that he was ever in Dallas on the day of the assassination.

It makes absolutely no sense unless he was trying to deny his own involvement.

http://web.archive.org...

Because he didnt wanna be under any threats himself. You do understand that when an oath is broken you are usually as good as dead afterwards.

You ignore the fact that he testified earlier and nearly everything he said was a blatant lie.

This entire story is "breaking the oath." The photo is just the clincher.

I know. But there are also others who lied and then changed their stories later as the years went by.

So... why aren't all those people dead for "breaking the oath?"

Because they didnt break the oath. They just gave speculation according to the critics.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2013 2:39:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/20/2013 12:32:26 PM, inferno wrote:
At 11/15/2013 3:54:59 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/15/2013 10:46:51 AM, inferno wrote:
At 11/13/2013 6:44:48 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/13/2013 2:29:00 PM, inferno wrote:
At 11/13/2013 2:19:20 PM, Wnope wrote:
Howard Hunt's confession convinced me it was more than one man.

Actually, what swayed wasn't what he said, but specifically what he LIED about.

Say you want to make up a JFK conspiracy and want maximum credibility. Being CIA is nice, but what if you could prove WITH A PHOTOGRAPH that you were in Dallas the day of the shooting?

Yet he denied until the end that he was ever in Dallas on the day of the assassination.

It makes absolutely no sense unless he was trying to deny his own involvement.

http://web.archive.org...

Because he didnt wanna be under any threats himself. You do understand that when an oath is broken you are usually as good as dead afterwards.

You ignore the fact that he testified earlier and nearly everything he said was a blatant lie.

This entire story is "breaking the oath." The photo is just the clincher.

I know. But there are also others who lied and then changed their stories later as the years went by.

So... why aren't all those people dead for "breaking the oath?"

Because they didnt break the oath. They just gave speculation according to the critics.

But.... then why does Hunt's words not count as "speculation according to the critics?"

You can't say "anyone who breaks the oath dies" and then claim no one has ever broken the oath other than Hunt.
inferno
Posts: 10,689
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2013 2:49:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/20/2013 2:39:06 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/20/2013 12:32:26 PM, inferno wrote:
At 11/15/2013 3:54:59 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/15/2013 10:46:51 AM, inferno wrote:
At 11/13/2013 6:44:48 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 11/13/2013 2:29:00 PM, inferno wrote:
At 11/13/2013 2:19:20 PM, Wnope wrote:
Howard Hunt's confession convinced me it was more than one man.

Actually, what swayed wasn't what he said, but specifically what he LIED about.

Say you want to make up a JFK conspiracy and want maximum credibility. Being CIA is nice, but what if you could prove WITH A PHOTOGRAPH that you were in Dallas the day of the shooting?

Yet he denied until the end that he was ever in Dallas on the day of the assassination.

It makes absolutely no sense unless he was trying to deny his own involvement.

http://web.archive.org...

Because he didnt wanna be under any threats himself. You do understand that when an oath is broken you are usually as good as dead afterwards.

You ignore the fact that he testified earlier and nearly everything he said was a blatant lie.

This entire story is "breaking the oath." The photo is just the clincher.

I know. But there are also others who lied and then changed their stories later as the years went by.

So... why aren't all those people dead for "breaking the oath?"

Because they didnt break the oath. They just gave speculation according to the critics.

But.... then why does Hunt's words not count as "speculation according to the critics?"

You can't say "anyone who breaks the oath dies" and then claim no one has ever broken the oath other than Hunt.

Actually there are some who do but are virtually people unknown, or not in a certain position of power. So they are dismissed accordingly. Now if you are in that circle, and must follow the codes of ethic based on their ideologies. Then yes that would be considered breaking the oath.
inferno
Posts: 10,689
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2013 2:56:30 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/19/2013 2:33:34 PM, lewis20 wrote:
The Magic bullet will always give me pause.
A single bullet "traversed 15 layers of clothing, 7 layers of skin, and approximately 15 inches of tissue, struck a necktie knot, removed 4 inches of rib, and shattered a radius bone" and was "found on a gurney in the corridor at the Parkland Memorial Hospital, in Dallas, after the assassination"
Looked like this afterwards:
http://upload.wikimedia.org...
http://upload.wikimedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...

Are you saying that you believe there were other killers on sight there in Dallas.