|Quoting TristarAtLCA (Reply 56):|
It is noteworthy that you have completely avoided discussing the 1979 commissions conclusions nor answered which of their 'findings' were discounted beyond doubt. The three dozen plus witnesses who can be given a name (there were many more) who provided police statements as to the direction of gunfire have never had their evidence debunked. After all, how could it? To simply dismiss over three dozen statements with 'eye witness reports are often unreliable' is weak beyond belief when it is apparent the '79 commission accepted this evidence.
That investigation had partial information, it's ironic when those who called for that investigation were OK
with it not considering everything but accused the Warren Commission report of the same thing1
(Both were flawed).
In a built up area it's very hard with gauge accurately where gunfire is coming from, unless a round whizzes by or hits you.
If you don't see a flash or smoke.
In the 1970's, the British Army developed a device, portable in vehicles down to Land Rover size, to indicate the direction of bullets, a basic display with illuminated arrows to show general direction.
This is because the experience in Northern Ireland had found that the troops, if they did not see a flash, were finding it very hard to to tell where they were being fired from.
Sound bouncing off building, richchets, these were well trained professional soldiers, some with prior N.I. deployments, all given extensive refresher training in urban warfare prior to each tour.
About a decade after that Commission, Granada TV
used it as the basis of an investigation to put flesh on the bones, to prove a second gunman.
Photos taken that day, film footage, was put through the then state of the art computer enhancements.
They seemed to find, a very blotchy image of a figure, wearing a policman's cap, complete with badge, with what looked like a gun flash from an unclear weapon fired from the shoulder.
On the grassy Knoll.
What happened after that? The technology to do this sort of enhancement kept rapidly getting better, it was not what it seemed, more like one of those ink blotch tests, with the additional enhancement of the power of suggestion.
I used to also believe there was more to JFK
But common sense says otherwise, when you really think about it. Looking at just how bad the US (for all it's faults, still about the most open society in the world), is at keeping any secrets. Watergate to Wikileaks.
Lies told to cover the somewhat deceptive terms used to commit US troops to Vietnam, lasted until the Pentagon Papers were leaked in 1971.
With all this leaking, spying for money or for other reasons, it's very hard to see how for 50 years such a monumental secret such as either any kind of US Government complicity in the killing, or them wilfully, for whatever reasons, covering up a conspiracy by others, be it Russia, Cuba, the Mob, staying so secret for so long.
Towards the end of his life, writer Norman Mailer, who had been an early and passionate believer in a conspiracy, came to the same conclusion.
Anyway, enough about JFK
, we've annoyed other members enough with this perhaps, so here is an offbeat look at the source of this latest Diana nonsense;
The name might be unknown, but Walter Mitty is a good fit.
[Edited 2013-08-20 12:08:49]