Friday, September 29, 2017

I had an interesting discussion tonight with someone concerning the Oswald shooting. My position, of course, is that the garage shooting was a made-for-television ruse, that Oswald was not shot there. He was definitely shot afterwards but not in the garage.

But, I made a point that I want to share here, and that is that the burden is really on the other side, meaning those who claim that the televised spectacle was a real event. And that's because none of the features of a real shooting can be cited. For instance: 

1. There was a sound, but it's too soft, and nobody reacts to it. Not a single person in that garage reacted startled to the blast. Nobody jumped. Nobody made an involuntary startle sound. Nobody showed the shocked look that one would expect from such an unexpected happening.

2. The existence of a muzzle flash is in serious doubt, despite the French guy saying over and over and over: "I saw the flash against his sweater." Amy Joyce did an excellent job in showing that the muzzle flash which they finally showed us is fake. 

2. There was no blood. Not a drop. Nobody reported seeing any blood. Oswald left no blood on the ground even though he was lying there sprawled after he was shot. Eventually, we were shown what is claimed to be blood stains in the jail office, but even if those are genuine, and I doubt it, it's irrelevant because we are talking about what happened in the garage, and in the garage, there was no blood.

3. There is no sign of any violence to Oswald or his clothing. We never got to see any bullet hole in his sweater and clothing. And remember that from that close a range (practically a contact shot) the damage to the clothing should have been extensive.  In the Jackson photo, they have Oswald's left arm slapped over the area, and SUPPOSEDLY that is why we can't see any damage to him or his clothes. But, I have already demonstrated very well that that left arm is fake. And it makes no sense anyway. Who would respond to being shot in the abdomen by slapping his arm to his chest? Why would anyone do that? And when has anyone done it except for Lee Harvey Oswald? And, that's in the whole history of gunshot wounds since the invention of the first gun. 

4. Considering the damage that was instantaneously done to Oswald (again, supposedly) including the rupturing of all his major blood vessels, Oswald's response to that should have been to just go down; to just collapse. The fact that he started collapsing forward but then veered back and then went up on his toes like a ballerina, before going straight down like a freight elevator at the TSBD, tells you that he was not so injured. That's a lot of physical exertion for a guy whose circulatory system collapsed. 

5. If he was shot at 11:20, then he lived without blood for an awfully long time. We don't know exactly what time he arrived at the hospital and was put in medical hands. The first thing they presumably did in an attempt to help him was to administer massive blood transfusion. I understand they gave him 6 liters of blood, and the body only contains 5. So, they more than replaced all his blood. I don't presume that they knew his blood type, so I presume they gave him Type O blood, which is referred to as universal donor. Even with Typo O blood, doctors prefer to do a cross-match test before proceeding, but I'm thinking that in his case it was so dire, that they just gave it to him. But, the point is to ask: what time did blood start flowing in his vein? Remember, it's not as though Parkland had a team of professionals waiting for Oswald outside. So, at what time did blood start flowing into Oswald? I'm going to guess and say 11:40. So that would have been 20 minutes, and it doesn't seem possible that he could have been shot at 11:20 WITH THOSE INJURIES and survived for 20 minutes. It's just too damn long.

Now, that is a lot of basis for doubt that Oswald was shot in the garage. So, when people get brash and uppity at the very idea that anyone is doubting that Oswald was really shot in the garage, they need to, as Archie Bunker put it: stiffle it. Let them address all those issues, every single one of them, plausibly. But, I'll tell you: even if they do, when they're finished, there will still exist the alternative explanation: that the whole thing was a ruse. 



   

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.