Lee Harvey Oswald
Soooo did Oswald kill JFk or not. Was he set up, or???? I really liked this film but it left a lot of unanswered question.
shareI think he did kill JFK but Jack Ruby killed him so he wouldn't be able to rat on him.
share
MovieChat Forums > JFK (1991) Discussion > Lee Harvey Oswald
I'm pretty sure it was Oswald. The people saying the angle he took was impossible with the rifle he used are greatly exaggerating. It required a little luck, but the distance was still within reason and he did have enough time to fire those shots.
shareSo you know better than one of the greatest snipers of all time?
Here's a quote from Carlos Hathcock:
“Let me tell you what we did at Quantico,” Hathcock recalls. “We reconstructed the whole thing: the angle, the range, the moving target, the time limit, the obstacles, everything. I don’t know how many times we tried it, but we couldn’t duplicate what the Warren Commission said Oswald did. Now if I can’t do it, how in the world could a guy who was a non-qual on the rifle range and later only qualified 'marksman' do it?”
Also, Marine sniper Craig Roberts said:
“The reason I knew that Oswald could not have done it, was because I could not have done it.”
“First, I analyzed the scene as a sniper . . . I looked at the engagement angles. It was entirely wrong…Here, from what I could see, three problems arose that would influence my shots. First, the target was moving away at a drastic angle to the right from the window, meaning that I would have to position my body to compete with the wall and a set of vertical water pipes . . . This would be extremely difficult for a right-handed shooter. Second, I would have to be ready to fire exactly when the target emerged past some tree branches that obscured the kill zone. Finally, I would have to deal with two factors at the same time; the curve of the street, and the high-to-low angle formula—a law of physics Oswald would not have known.”
And in case you're wondering who Carlos Hathcock is:
Carlos Norman Hathcock II (May 20, 1942 – February 22, 1999) was a United States Marine Corps (USMC) sniper with a service record of 93 confirmed kills. Hathcock's record and the extraordinary details of the missions he undertook made him a legend in the U.S. Marine Corps. He was honored by having a rifle named after him: a variant of the M21 dubbed the Springfield Armory M25 White Feather, for the nickname "White Feather" given to Hathcock by the North Vietnamese Army (NVA).share
Talented snipers have changed their opinions over the years. I would argue the majority of them say it's possible with a little luck. Whereas only a few are saying it's too difficult to be taken as plausible.
This is the type of thing that would require a larger sample size.
"Talented snipers have changed their opinions over the years. I would argue the majority of them say it's possible with a little luck."
How many of them had 93 confirmed kills, and reconstructed the whole thing and actually tried it?
Why would you believe such an extraordinary claim without extraordinary evidence? Even if Oswald had been an accomplished sniper it would have been an extraordinary claim, because we know that one of the greatest snipers in history tried it and couldn't do it. However, Oswald wasn't an accomplished sniper, nor a sniper of any kind. He was known to be a poor shot (he failed to qualify on the rifle range in the Marines, sometimes missing the target entirely, and only later qualified "marksman", which is the lowest level of qualification) meaning he wasn't even in the same universe as a sniper, let alone an accomplished sniper. With Oswald being a poor shot, the claim is beyond extraordinary.
"This is the type of thing that would require a larger sample size."
The first thing that such an extraordinary claim requires is to show that someone, anyone, can do what Oswald supposedly did. I've seen some TV shows (like 60 Minutes, 20/20, or similar) where they ostensibly demonstrated that people could do it, but in reality, they didn't even come close to actually replicating the scenario. For example, in one of them the shooter was on top of an open tower, which eliminates the huge problem of the window / wall / water pipes / angle, and eliminates the tree branches as well.
It doesn't matter if a sniper has a million kills. It's too anecdotal to go by a few snipers, and does not qualify as scientific method.
Also the magic bullet theory was proven false. The magic bullet theory relied on placing Connelly's bucket seat in the wrong position and at the wrong height. When adjusted for accuracy, we see the bullet path from Oswald's window make a straight line through Kennedy's neck, Connelly and Connelly's wrist. So... since we know that shot was made from that window, all we need is one more that hits Kennedy in the head. It'll take a little bit of luck, but it is most definitely possible.
"It doesn't matter if a sniper has a million kills."
Yes, it does. It means he knows what he's talking about when it comes to shooting a rifle, obviously.
"It's too anecdotal to go by a few snipers, and does not qualify as scientific method."
Is that a joke? The burden of proof is on you / your side. You're proposing that a known poor shot made a shot that one of the greatest snipers in the world couldn't make, despite trying it so many times that he lost count of how many times he tried. As I said, that's a [beyond] extraordinary claim, and you don't even have any ordinary evidence showing that it can be done, let alone extraordinary evidence.
"Also the magic bullet theory was proven false. The magic bullet theory relied on placing Connelly's bucket seat in the wrong position and at the wrong height. When adjusted for accuracy, we see the bullet path from Oswald's window make a straight line through Kennedy's neck, Connelly and Connelly's wrist."
Connally said that he wasn't hit at the same time that Kennedy was. You can watch and listen to him say it on video here:
https://youtu.be/fJuKywBfOHY?t=1067
But regardless of all that, you need to show that someone, anyone, can make that shot before you can even have a legitimate foot in the door of the argument.
"It'll take a little bit of luck, but it is most definitely possible."
Is that another joke? I intend to win the next Wimbledon tennis tournament. Sure, I'm 45, have a bad right shoulder, haven't played tennis in a dozen years, and even at my best I wasn't even in the same universe as even the lowest ranked pro, but those things don't matter. It'll take a little bit of luck, but it is most definitely possible.
The burden of proof is on my side to prove it is possible. Snipers have done it with older rifles. It took something like a dozen shots to get one headshot. Oswald could've done it with luck.
Like I said, it doesn't matter if you have a sniper with a million kills because the act has already been proven to be possible.
"Snipers have done it with older rifles."
No, they haven't. No one has done it at all, with any rifle. And by "it" I mean making the shot with the full scenario recreated.
"Oswald could've done it with luck."
LOL
"Like I said, it doesn't matter if you have a sniper with a million kills because the act has already been proven to be possible."
No, it hasn't.
And what's your explanation for Connally not hearing the shot that hit him (as he stated in the video that I linked to)? That indicates that a silencer and subsonic ammunition was used in the gun that was used to shoot him. That throws a monkey wrench into the official story, doesn't it?
Everything points to him being the shooter. This film contains loads of BS. People just don't want to accept that some crazy fuck can make such an impact, and that the world is often simple yet chaotically unpredictable... but it's true.
That said, it's still a great fictional film.
Oswald may have been the shooter, but that doesn't mean it wasn't a conspiracy. It could very well be a conspiracy that involved Oswald.
Even the US House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded that there was most likely a conspiracy. That's because there's a lot of weird shit surrounding JFK's death.
> Soooo did Oswald kill JFk or not
That's not important. What is important is this question. Do you own a Lee Harvey Oswald bobblehead?
https://www.ebay.com/itm/RARE-LEE-HARVEY-OSWALD-BOBBLEHEAD-MARKING-THE-50TH-ANNIVERSARY-OF-TRAGIC-DAY-/114229035637
I have one. I couldn't pass up something this utterly lacking in good taste. It seems to be of good construction, as bobbleheads go. It's as it appears in the Ebay listing and is about 6+3/4 inches high. It even has Oswald's wedding ring on his right hand -- correct, as that's how Russian men do it and LHO adopted that style.