Article and video.http://existentialistcowboy.blogspot.com/2...-re-opened.html
Maybe we can set the record straight, now. Then we go to work on who killed his kid.
Interesting article. What part was the most significant to you?
I thought "While they do not claim evidence to prove a second gunman participated, they say the original fragments of the bullets recovered from the scene of the shooting should be re-examined." and "hits upon one reason why people cannot accept that Oswald, armed with a $12 rifle, could be responsible for such an epic event."
They still have much work left to do. I wonder why people have a hard time believing a person could have shot someone from the TSBD? The rifle had the power and accuracy required. The target was moving slowly away at a small angle and was less than 100 yards away.
|The rifle had the power and accuracy required|
But the shooter did not - and it was impossible to reload and shoot again with such speed!
The only thing even relatively new there is last year's announcement about the lead analysis, and that simply says that you can't be as certain that the bullet fragments came from that one bullet as we once thought. So what? There's still a mountain of other evidence even if you throw that completely out.
|But the shooter did not - and it was impossible to reload and shoot again with such speed!|
He had between 8 and 9 seconds to work the bolt, aim, and fire twice. That's easily done.
You guys should check out this guys website. He has been researching the assassination for many years and offers some good insight.http://www.patspeer.com/
I would also recommend watching Evidence of Revision on Google video. It is long and in 5 parts but well worth the watch.