New JFK assassination book

This is hardly a new theory. I read this theory several years ago in Bonar Menninger's book Mortal Error. If I recall he went so far as to produce an return inventory from the Secret Service that was proof an agent had discharged his weapon, firing on round.

It was an intriguing idea and would explain some of the sealed stuff related to the assassination ... would you want to be known as the guy who accidentally shot JFK?



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2380691/President-JFK-documentary-alleges-WAS-second-shooter-assassination--Secret-Service-agent.html

 

All those people standing on both sides of the street and not one person noticed the guy in the next car behind the president firing a rifle. The theories get wackier and wackier.

 

This one doesn't strike me as particularly wacky in that sense. Hell, according to this line of thinking, the guy who shot didn't even know who did it, so would it be so far-fetched to believe others didn't realize it as they were running for their lives in the most chaotic circumstances they've ever seen?

 

My understanding of the shooting is that most bystanders didn't realize that was gunfire until it was done. Most didn't start running until seconds after the final shot was fired.

 

OK, point being that I don't think it would be that unusual for bystanders not to see an accidental discharge, if we accept the premise that the shooter didn't even know he did it.

 

I don't think that he didn't realize. It's pretty hard not to notice you squeezed off a round from a .22, muchless a high-powered rifle.
After the first or second shot there's a lot confusion .. all hell has broken loose.
Menniger speculated the shot was fired as the guard stood up in the car and driver - in a panic - either hits the brake or jams on the gas (I forget which).

The idea of guard accidentally squeezing off a round doesn't sound too far fetched. Striking the JFK in the head? That's pretty astronomical.

 

I'm just thinking that an AR-15 going off is going to be well-noticed by a fair amount of people, particularly the others in that car. And I see absolutely no way that had it happened it would have been kept quiet for 50 years.

 

Maybe this isn't worthy even of Assassination 101 class, but when did Oswald learn that the bubble top on the Presidential limo would not be in place? Was that decision made that morning, based on how the motorcade rolled in Fort Worth? And then, presumably, blabbed about on broadcasts about the visit?

With the bubble top in place, I'm thinking either angle -- coming toward him or after the turn -- would make the shots much trickier.

 

There is no way a .22 cal bullet causes that much damage.

 

I just read a great book on this very topic and it's all about the Secret Service agents on the Kennedy Detail ... written by one of the agents on the detail. I don't know if it's been talked about on here but it pretty much kills any of the conspiracy theories out there, at least in my opinion.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Kennedy-Detail-Service-Silence/dp/1439192995/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1375159190&sr=8-1&keywords=the+kennedy+detail

As for the "Secret Service guy shot Kennedy with the rifle" theory, the author of the above-mentioned book describes how the agent would have had to have fired from inside the follow-up vehicle and would have taken the windshield out had he done that.
I hope we don't have to tolerate too many of these ridiculous theories as the anniversary comes closer.

 

The biggest book with an agenda was the Warren Commission report. You had LBJ appoint Warren to head a commission, and it was supposed to come out that it was a lone assassin. There were only about 16 sessions where all of the Warren Commission were present. Read the summary of the Warren Commission report (I have). It is a lot of crap. When the first books suggesting conspiracy theories came out - Mark Lane's Rush to Judgment was one of the early ones - they used the commission's own evidence in the exhibits. I went to a garage sale within the last month, and purchased five books about the assassination.

I read the book by the Secret Service agent and it was a good read although I disagreed with what they said.

In the first place, they didn't really mention that the FBI threw the Secret Service under the bus. The detail was really worn out.

J. Edgar Hoover released information to make the bureau look good and they tried to take over protection of the president from the Secret Service in the year after the assassination. When people rant and rave about federal government bureaucrats, they usually don't think of J. Edgar Hoover. If you think of it, J. Edgar Hoover was the ultimate bureaucrat. J. Edgar Hoover said there was no organized crime until the mid-1960s, when the FBI became responsible for it.

Oliver Stone's movie, JFK, raised some interesting points. When somebody asked me what I thought of it, I said, "There was a conspiracy, but not that conspiracy".

My opinion is that it was a Mafia hit which had the help of the CIA. It may have been rogue agents of the CIA, but the rest of the CIA covered their tracks. The best investigation was done in the 1970s by the special committee on assassinations.

Some younger folks may wonder why it matters 50 years later. Well, from the end of World War II until several years into the Viet Nam War, people generally had trust in the government. Not necessarily trust in the politicians, but a general belief that the government wouldn't lie like this. The Warren Commission and the Viet Nam War proved this untrue.

I have read at least 50 books on this. Gerald Posner was one of the worst; he took the Warren Commission report and tried to prove it with updated techniques. Ridiculous.

The Dallas Police Department was proposing the lone-nut theory. Would you trust a police department which did such a poor job of securing the area and allowing Jack Ruby to walk in and shoot Oswald at point-blank range. Ruby had mob connections and knew a lot of police officers. When Oswald was shot, one of the police detectives said, "Jack, you son-of-a-bitch". For crying out loud, the person who performed the autopsy was subpar. Cyril Wecht and Michael Baden have written about the assassination. The autopsy should have been conducted in Dallas, because that was where the crime took place. I think in the book by the Secret Service person, they mentioned the dispute between the Dallas coroner and federal people.

I know I've gone on too long, but this a subject that drives me crazy.

 

I can't argue that there wasn't a lot of DPD and SS and FBI incompetence, but I can't get past the fact that there were only three shots fired. No one heard more than three. They tried to claim that an open radio caught a fourth shot, but that was bullshit. If there was more than one shooter, there would have been evidence somewhere between 5 (assuming a second shooter) and 10 (assuming a third and/or fourth shooter) shots. Oswald fired three shots. Those are the only shots that were fired. There would have been more bullet holes in the limo if there were more shots.