23-04-2014, 01:01 AM
Bob Prudhomme Wrote:Marc Ellis Wrote:Bob Prudhomme Wrote:Although I have nothing in the way of proof to back up my beliefs, I tend to think the people that brought us the assassination would have been very pleased if other conspirators beside LHO had turned up and they all could have been tied in to Cuba and Russia.
The reason the coverup looks so "thrown together" is that it may very well be just that; a last minute scramble to implicate a lone assassin and avoid a nuclear exchange with the USSR. LBJ and the WC, should the truth ever come out, may go down in History one day as patriotic heroes that saved the lives of 120 million Americans.
Yeah. There was no shortage of anti-Castro Cubans they could have turned up. But that wasn't the sort of Cuban they wanted.
BTW Robert, I'm just a student and reader - not a researcher. But I think your ballistics information are the most important and original research I've read this year. I wish more ballistics experts would get involved with it.
Thank you for those encouraging words, Marc. I wish more people would get involved in the ballistics discussion, too. As far as I know, some of the discrepancies I have pointed out in Robert Frazier's testimony have never been addressed in 50 years. However, a thread about Oswald's tonsils or how tall Marguerite Oswald was will generate pages of discussion.
FWIW, as I see it, you're using the state's evidence to disprove the state's case. It's easy enough for me to understand. The FBI made a simple math error. The official description of the ammo is larger than it actually was. The rifle allegedly used to kill JFK could be fired using that smaller ammo, but the accuracy would compromised and there would be no way to compensate for it.
Do I have that right?
Your work might have the potential to once and for all, eliminate the M/C as the weapon used to kill JFK. The conclusions need to be tested, verified. But what you're doing seems like important research to me.