Conspiracy JFK Forum Site

Patrick C wrote:

I think this analysis has been made using the Altgens location on Elm St, the position of the limo and the DPD guys and factoring in the 135mm telephoto ....I cannot recall where however.



Maybe Mike Majerus would know - he seems to know pretty much everything about the case - which could be why he rightly concludes that Oswald acted alone.....

Once again, sheer speculation and un-citable mysterious evidence...



Surely you can do better than this, right Patrick?

Statistics: Posted by Ben Holmes — Thu Jul 21, 2016 5:50 pm

---

via ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=96&p=879#p879

Patrick C wrote:

I have no doubt you know what you are talking about when it comes to defining expert shots and crack shots....though without any direction on scoring for the level of "crack" shot it remains a somewhat subjective description.

When it comes to Lee Harvey Oswald - it's not "subjective" at all.



There is NO POSSIBLE WAY you can describe a marksman who actually missed the target from time to time as a 'crack shot'.



Nothing "subjective" about that at all.



Bill O'Reilly flat lied when he made that claim.

Patrick C wrote:

A crack shot might be someone who was certainly an expert, but maybe about as good as you can get.



You do though seem to be overlooking something......you don't have to be a crack shot to hit a slowly moving target with 2 shots just over 5 seconds apart at 65 and 90 yards do you......from 6 floors up....?

Ah! The invariable change of topic.



However, you cannot avoid the fact that the REAL 'crack shots' were unable to do so. So how can I be "overlooking" what is not true? Nothing you can do is going to get around the fact that the Warren Commission had three NRA rated "Masters" - certainly "crack shots" by any definition - who failed to do what Oswald is alleged to have done using that same rifle.

Patrick C wrote:

I mean even I got off 3 shots in 7 seconds firing an old bolt action rifle for I think only the second time in my life. And I hit the targets at approx those distances.



Mike Yardley ...."its possible"....."it can be done"....."its doable"..........



So never mind being a crack shot - you did not need to be......

And yet, those three NRA rated "Masters" results are still unexplained...

Statistics: Posted by Ben Holmes — Thu Jul 21, 2016 5:49 pm

---

via ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=98&p=878#p878

"Marina took the pics. And as I stated before - if you were plotting to frame Oswald ....why ON EARTH would you fake a photo.....it is just nuts and it is a silly theory. It just another red herring among dozens of others that make up this conspiracy nonsense."

"Nonsense"----from guy who believes the single bullet theory?







Without the photos, they have nothing to link Oswald to the rifle.

Statistics: Posted by Ray Mitcham — Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:59 pm

---

via ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=43&p=877#p877

"Once again Patrick refuses to defend the false McAdams tabulation he keeps using.



My crystal ball was, as usual; absolutely correct."



McAdams tabulation is spot on correct Holmes.



Anyway, even if it were a rough TSBD 50:50 Knoll split ref the source of ALL shots....they (Knoll) are still wrong because we know TWO shots came from the REAR.........

Statistics: Posted by Patrick C — Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:44 pm

---

via ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=97&p=876#p876

I am not sure how the yellow line shows that.....



But no doubt Chaney appears to be bigger and therefore closer - based on the hat - by around 10%, but my view is that if he were indeed where Ben Holmes wants him to be, he would even larger.



Anyway, he is not in the Z film during the shooting and therefore he was not foreword of the limo bumper. He is not even in the sprocket holes.....

Statistics: Posted by Patrick C — Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:39 pm

---

via ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=95&p=875#p875

Does not matter, that she remembered taking a photo is enough. That she got the camera confused or that she thought she only took one is largely irrelevant



Here is what author Mike Majerus has to say about the postal workers.....you could easily say the same about Marina...people make mistakes, don't remember, forget etc etc....



"I think it is all too easy to second-guess these guys and why they did what they did, or did not do what we would have hoped they would have done. They are just typical workers, and like the rest of us, they make mistakes and are not always as conscientious as we would hope they would be. You could say the same thing about Buell Frazier seeing Oswald carrying a long paper sack into the Depository on the day the president was going to go right by the building. I would hope that I would have at least wondered if there was a weapon in there. The same thing happens every day in America. That's why nut cases like the shooter in Dallas this week slipped through the cracks, as did 19 hijackers on 9/11. People are too busy with their everyday lives to pay attention to this kind of stuff. Just my two cents worth. But it seems that the conspiracy people always take something like this and twist it into some vast conspiracy. Life is full of nutty things. Our entire book is about those odd happenstances."



Marina took the pics. And as I stated before - if you were plotting to frame Oswald ....why ON EARTH would you fake a photo.....it is just nuts and it is a silly theory. It just another red herring among dozens of others that make up this conspiracy nonsense.

Statistics: Posted by Patrick C — Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:34 pm

---

via ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=43&p=874#p874

The yellow line through the cops windscreens appears to show that Cheney on the left is well ahead of the the two cops the right.

Statistics: Posted by Ray Mitcham — Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:11 pm

---

via ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=95&p=873#p873

8 to 11

Statistics: Posted by Ray Mitcham — Thu Jul 21, 2016 3:54 pm

---

via ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=97&p=872#p872

But Marina remembered taking the photo right....?



That sort of makes the whole "issue" disappear.......

She remembered taking one photo, oh no, then she remembered taking two, oh no, then it turned out she had taken three.



She remembered taking them with a black camera holding it up to her eye,when it was a grey camera which is held at waist level.



You were saying?

Statistics: Posted by Ray Mitcham — Thu Jul 21, 2016 3:45 pm

---

via ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=43&p=871#p871

I have no doubt you know what you are talking about when it comes to defining expert shots and crack shots....though without any direction on scoring for the level of "crack" shot it remains a somewhat subjective description.



A crack shot might be someone who was certainly an expert, but maybe about as good as you can get.



You do though seem to be overlooking something......you don't have to be a crack shot to hit a slowly moving target with 2 shots just over 5 seconds apart at 65 and 90 yards do you......from 6 floors up....?



I mean even I got off 3 shots in 7 seconds firing an old bolt action rifle for I think only the second time in my life. And I hit the targets at approx those distances.



Mike Yardley ...."its possible"....."it can be done"....."its doable"..........



So never mind being a crack shot - you did not need to be......

Statistics: Posted by Patrick C — Thu Jul 21, 2016 3:38 pm

---

via ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=98&p=870#p870