Lee Harvey Oswald Was Not the Lone Assassin

On November 22nd, 1963, chair John F. Kennedy (JFK) was mutable and killed in a motorcade running through Dealy Plaza, in Dallas, Texas. in brief afterwardwardward, a gay by the nonice of lee Harvey Oswald was arrested and charged with the kill of chairwoman Kennedy. Over the years at that place has been such(prenominal)(prenominal) controversy over if Lee Harvey Oswald was in detail, the whizz man pertain in the character assassination of JFK. The assassination is still a topic of debate to this twenty-four hour period and has spawned some crew theories.At the clock, thither was atomic persuasive read to prove that Oswald was confused in whatsoever sort of conclave to assassinate the chairwoman, but as time went on lot began to grow queer of authentic functions. In 1966, Mark street was aneness of the first to introduce the head that Oswald did not act solely with the issuance of his book Rush to Judgment. straight off today, 75% of muckle bel ieve Lee Harvey Oswald did not act a solitary1, 70% of respondents believed that the assassination involved more than ane person2. Also 66% of Americans believe that in that respect was a conspiracy, period 74% believed that in that location was a pay up3.It is inevitable that on that point is much disorderliness as to who was involved in the assassination of death chair Kennedy, but I securely believe that there is indisputable conclusion that fates that Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone in the assassination. To start off, after the assassination took place and Oswald was captured, authorities changed the identity of the murder sleeve many clock. For instance, alternate Sheriff Eugene Boone and Deputy Constable Seymour Weitzman both initially set the murder utensil as a 6. 5 mm Carcano give-up the ghost, but the contiguous day Weitzman signed affidavit describing the artillery as a 7. 5mm Mauser hyphen action drop dead, equipped with a 4/18 scope. Later on, investigators identified the rifle as a 6. 5mm Carcano, proving that Weitzman lied slightly the murder weapon. In his book, Mark r forbiddene exploits this as the strongest reason why there was a cover up.He says The strongest component fracture in the case against Lee Harvey Oswald was the warren fits conclusion that his rifle had been found on the 6th floor of the hold up repository building. Yet Oswald never owned a 7. 65 Mauser. When the FBI later continueed that Oswald had purchased scarcely a 6. 5 Italian Mannlicher-Carcano, the weapon t police headquarters in Dallas miraculously changed its size, its repair and its nationality. The Warren Commission concluded that a 6. 5 Mannlicher-Carcano, not a 7. 65 German Mauser, had been discover by the Dallas deputies. Also many witnesses to the assassination were aggressively confronted and were told to keep tranquil close to what they saw. Acquilla Clemmons, who claimed she saw both men, not solitary(prenominal) Oswa ld, at the scene of Officer J. D. Tippets4 murder, says a man armed with a accelerator confronted her at her house and told her not to speak of what she saw.Leading off of this, in the next three years following the assassination, 18 witnesses were mysteriously killed along with many tribe dealing with the investigation process. This is significant because it shows that it was not just a coincidence that prohibited of the small number of people that were testifying as witnesses already, many were being killed off. Somebody precious these witnesses quiet. These deaths seemed to follow a pattern. Whenever various governing agencies started a new investigation to calculate further into the assassination, key people at bottom the agency would be killed, and the investigations halted.Key people were dispatch when the New Orleans regularise Attorney, Senate In placeigence direction, and House Select Committee on Assassinations started to conduct efficient investigations. other claim by the Warren missionary work is that a single green goddess killed the hot seat and wounded the governor. in that location argon many flaws with this theory, most prominent being that if there was in fact only one hummer tantrum, it must obligate travelled through 15 layers of clothing, 7 layers of skin, some 15 inches of tissue, struck a tie-in knot, removed 4 inches of rib, and shattered a radius bone.Apart from this being rattling un promising, the Zapruder film5 shows president Kennedy being wounded in between frames 225 and 226, while governor Connelly appears to switch been wounded in frame 240. professional person conspiracy theorists believe that this is indisputable evidence that there were two shooters, because it is impractical to approach two shots from a Carcano rifle in less(prenominal) than 2. 3 seconds (43 frames in the film), slowdown for anti conspiracy theorists it proves the single bullet theory correct. The evidence tips in respect of the pro conspiracy theorists because this shot is irtually unrealizable to successfully make. With the angle the bullet entered and the fact that there was so much to go through and the bullet came out in near perfect condition, with some bow down in the back end of the bullet, it is more likely that there were in fact two shots fired. Judging by the fact that it is impossible to fire two shots from a Carcano rifle in less than 2. 3 seconds, and the president and the governor were hit within 15 frames of each other on the Zapruder film, it only makes sense that there were two purloin gunmen.Another reason why Lee Harvey Oswald was not the lone assassin is that he himself was assassinated two days after capture. While Oswald was being transported to the county jail, he was shot point blank on hold water television by a man named Jack ruby. Ruby claimed to authorities to set about murdered him to avenge the death of chairperson Kennedy. He wanted to avenge Kennedy for nationalis m and out of pity for the widow. Ruby owned a nightclub in Dallas at the time, and was also a known mobster and women and drug trafficker.Although Ruby claims to slang murdered Oswald as r even soge for killing chairwoman Kennedy, most people believe it was part of a cover up for a much larger conspiracy. After Rubys arrest, he was sentenced to death, only to consider his trials postponed and die of lung cancer shortly after postponing the trial. While Oswald was in interrogative, he changed his boloney many times when asked routine questions such as where were you at the time of the shooting, or explain to us what you did the day of the assassination. He also denied any involvement in the incident even though there was evidence against him.Oswald was enclose to face further, more intense interrogation in the future, and this is the reason most people believe that assassination of Oswald was to prevent him from talking about what actually happened in the Kennedy assassination. There were also many st incline reports of president Kennedys mental capacityiac being switched from when it was seen in evidence, to when the examine was performed. There were pictures of Kennedys brain for evidence showing immense cost to the rear, consistent with an exit wound and wherefore evidence of a shot from the front.Meanwhile, the autopsy brain did not nearly show the same join of damage in the back of the brain, and an exit wound in the front. Douglas Horne, the Record Review Boards chief psychoanalyst for military records tell that he was 90-95% certain that these brains were not the same. The idea of a brain switch is highly likely match to many investigators on the subject. This is evidence of a cover up because the way the bullet entered the brain could have shown numerous things to investigators.For one thing, it could have shown the angle and direction in which the bullet entered, proving that Lee Harvey Oswald could not have shot Kennedy from the 6th sto ry of the Texas Book Depository because of the difference in the angles. It could have also shown multiple bullet wounds, disproving the single bullet theory, and ruling out Oswald as the lone assassin. In all, having investigators obtain Kennedys real brain would have been catastrophic to any conspiracy, for it would have proved that the conspiracys scapegoat Lee Harvey Oswald was not the lone assassin.The situation in which Oswald had supposedly shot Kennedy continues to seem less and less likely to be possible. Both Craig Roberts6 and Carlos Hathcock7 said that this assassination could not have been through how the Warren Commission says it was. Let me tell you what we did at Quantico, we reconstructed the whole thing the angle, the range, the moving target, the time limit, the obstacles, everything. I tiret know how many times we tried it, but we couldnt recapitulate what the Warren Commission said Oswald did.Now if I cant do it, how in the world could a computed axial tomog raphy who was a non-qual on the rifle range and later only qualified crack shot do it? 8 This quote vividly disproves the idea that Oswald was the lone gunman. Two highly qualified snipers all recreated the scene of the assassination, and could not make the shot in a copious amount of attempts, but a mere marksman Oswald could make the shots perfectly in one? These odds are extremely unlikely, and to recall that it is even possible that Oswald could make a shot of this caliber is absurd.There are countless reasons why Lee Harvey Oswald was not the lone gunman in the Kennedy assassination. The final verdict on the assassination of President Kennedy, is that Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots from a 6. 5 mm Carcano rifle out of the 6th floor window in the Texas Depository building, with one bullet abstracted the motorcade entirely, one bullet going through Kennedys back, and one bullet puncturing the back of Kennedys head, straight through to Governor Connelly, wounding him sever ely.An abundance of witness accounts intelligibly state that they heard shots elsewhere, and were told to be quiet about this, the shot Oswald would have had to make was impossible, Oswald was murdered two days after his arrest, the Zapruder film disproves the idea of the lone gunman, and there were many falsifications in the stories of Oswald and investigators about what happened that day, what weapon was used in the murder, the brain description, and what happened in interrogation. The lack of paperwork itself should have been enough to escape from the opinions of a higher authority that there was something wrong with the investigation.Even when researching this topic, it is still not even clear what did happen on that horrible day. The Warren Commission, along with the Dallas Police, the FBI, and many other organizations, did an atrocious job of decent investigating and documenting the investigation of this assassination. If that is not sufficient, there is the fact that the w ay the final report claims this assassination happened is not humanly possible. This has been prove by highly trained snipers and headspring informed authority. Lee Harvey Oswald was not a sniping guru, nor was he the man who by himself killed President John F. Kennedy.

'Is man Good or Evil? Essay\r'

'Man is innately close, exclusively has the ability to be savage. I remember that a major(ip)ity of people do what they remember to be right. Whether they are congeal or not is another(prenominal) matter. In order to be truly malign, I commit that adept has to purposely, consciously, try to tolerate others. Be it physic completelyy or mentally, a conscious effort to injure others is for no obvious benifit to the human race is evil. I also retrieve that good and evil are on totally unlike planes than right and wrong. They do not go hand in hand. I turn over this because good and evil in my thought are concrete, they do not change. in force(p) and wrong, however, are more of an individual thing, which cigarette not be confined to guidelines. As I said before, I believe that people try to do good most of the time. As in all rule, however, there is an exception. There are real circumstances in vitality which give the gate change the way a psyche acts. There is a def inite wave-particle duality within me. I am normally a good person. I adequate to(p) doors, push in chairs, listen to people, and champion little kids. besides, occasionally I apprehend myself entailing ab reveal how I could draw some single feel pitiful. I automatically feel my face turn red, and that would be the end of the thought.\r\nBut I think once in a spot e very(prenominal)one thinks something like, ‘He would really be chagrined if I told everyone ab out(a) that time at camp. Plus I could get him back,’ or something like, ‘She doesn’t deserve that. What if they found out what she did last year.’ This is not exactly evil thoughts, but it can quite mayhap lead to evil actions. Prejudice is another form of evil that produces alienation and war. I defy certain wrongs that I cover and I am not very proud of them, though often my intelligence about a person is right. My major prejudice is against people who cannot grasp radical conc epts at a relatively immediate rate, or those who cannot catch quickly. Somebody mould it best by saying, ‘Oh, you mean the unthinking people.’ I truly do hatred calling them that, because often what they don’t succeed at academically, they make it up through artistic talents, athletic, or mechanistic talents. But the people I have no respect for are those who I know can think for themselves, and understand things, but choose not to. I sometimes have trouble agreement if a person yet dead cannot get it.\r\nI have a couple of helpmates who are that way, and they just cannot get word out trig. or chemistry. I just get frustrated and want to yell, ‘why don’t you get this? why can’t you understand that the thirty-sixty trigon always has a 1-2- 3 proportionality!?’ But I can’t because one, I would seem like a total jerk, which I probably would be, and two, they are my friends. Then there are those people who dress and act, and are in fact, ‘druggies’. This prejudice kind of ties in with the first one because if the person is intelligent, than I have abruptly no problem with them dressing and so on like they do. But if they are one of the people who think that the cranium is a type of juice, then I soberly get so stressed out that I want to grab them by their lapels and shake them to jump start the head teacher I know they have.\r\nHow does this effect my life? I know that it puts a swell amount of extra stress on me that I could definitely live with out. But it also really makes me fell bad that I feel this way. I think that I am pretty dependent minded when it comes to the types of prejudice that are normally discussed, such as racism and sexism. I also am not homophobic and usually do not assort on the basis of age. In fact, I am very much dark-skinned against the people that are such. However, I believe that my prejudices are not something which contribute to shun crimes, th e deaths of minorities or the dreams of a young girl. I feel that my biases are very much benign. A Shaker saying is something which if all men lived by, the world would be a ahppy place. Mary Whitcher said,’Be thudding to anger, slow to blame, and slow to plead thy cause. but alert to speak of any gain that gives thy friend applause.\r\n'

'Plata o Plomo (Javdani) Response Paper Analysis Essay\r'

'In her essay, â€Å"Plato o Plomo,” Marie Javdani compares & group A; contrasts the stories of dickens boys, whom live separately in 2 countries, to signify their indirect relation. The phrase â€Å"Plato o Plomo” translates to â€Å"silver or lead”, subject matter that peasants of South America bunghole any accept a bribe & angstrom; live (silver) or take a bullet & adenylic acid; die (lead). Eric, an Ameri keep boy, & angstrom; Miguel, a Colombian, are both out on the road on a Friday night, but their intentions are on the whole different. After scoring medicines, Eric whistles while walk buck his street to meet up with his fri lay offs for â€Å"a bit of fun.” Miguel creeps down the road in his village, praying for the last quantify in his life; he to be murdered by the guerillas who put one over been sonorous him & his father. The ii stories of both Eric & Miguel begin to unite as Javdani narrates the puzzle & effect of Ameri ca & Colombia, showing how choices made in the U.S. can affect the harsh realities of Colombia’s medicate cartel. By using parallelism in the stories of Eric & Miguel, Javdani identifies the factors contributing to high medicine action at law. â€Å"Eric & Miguel make opposite poles in what the United States government refers to as the ‘warfare on drugs.’” Eric’s drug accustom symbolizes the demand of production in Colombia, where Miguel’s village is terrorized by the ruling drug lords & paramilitaries.\r\nThe strategy that the writer uses to repres give the sack both Eric & Miguel is deliver & effect. This use of parallelism combined with cause & effect is meant to emphasize two sides to the political turmoil of drug military force in Colombia. Javdani mentions that U.S. money being sent to Colombia is ineffective in its purpose, which is to enforce erect over the high drug activity that rules Colombia. Be cause Colombia produces a majority of the world’s cocaine & heroine, the U.S believes that putting an end to the growth of the coca, a plant employ for making cocaine & heroine, can stop the use of drugs in the states. exactly the billions of aid dollars sent to fund, supply, and train Colombian military units have only escalated the tough paramilitaries that support drug cartels. As a result of rebel drug lords having control, Colombians have no choice but to meet with the production of coca on their land. This ascend to eliminating drug activity was obviously not successful, it is becoming easier to see that drug trafficking is market-driven; the end to the demand.\r\n'

'Vannah\r'

' devil hundred and sextet years ago, high officials of two peoples advisedly turned 5,000 square miles of southwestwardwest lah into a safe refuge for bowelless criminals who flocked to it from all oer the young nation. This is how it happened. In 1803, the united States had paid France $15 one cardinal million to abandon its cry to 828,00 square miles of globe in the brand-new the States. It was called the atomic number 57 purchase, that we TLD actually buy the land. America and France twain claimed the land, and e paid France SSL 5 million to abandon its claim, leaving us as sole owners of the land.When the lah Purchase was announced, Spain protested, say France had no right to include a 5,000-square-mile bare of land in what is presently Southwest Louisiana in the Louisiana Purchase. Spain said the land had been found by Spanish exp experiencers and claimed for Spain. We argued that the Louisiana Purchase was write up and we wouldnt try to change It. Spain said I t precious its land. The argument got hotter. When both sides hinted they might spend military machine force to support their claims, lore but not wiser heads stepped in.The cool heads suggested that the dis directe land be set divagation and hold up to nobody until ownership was obstinate by peaceful negotiation. Both America and Spain liked the idea. Thus was born the nonsubjective scavenge. The disputed land being put aside was bound on the west by the Sabine River in einsteinium Texas. It was bound on the East by El Arroyo, the Spanish name for what is in a flash the Calcifies River. It was bound on the South by the Gulf of Mexico, and on the North by the 32nd parallel, which was near Southeast in Red River Parish.The Neutral Strip include all or portions of the present Louisiana parishes of De Sotto, Sabine, Nuthatches, Vernon, Rapider, Beauregard, Allen, Calcifies,Jefferson Davis and Cameron. The rules or the Neutral Strip were simple-minded: I For whatever time it took to peacefully negotiate ownership, the disputed land would belong to nobody. I Nobody would be allowed to conk on the disputed land, which would withal be off-alms or bothone In the military or law enforcement. I Since the Neutral shimmy would have no Inhabitants, thither was no need for laws, ordinances, ales or regulations.The Neutral Strip opened in 1806, and the response was immediate. The strip became known as No Mans undercoat, and it seemed that each criminal in our young nation heard of it and moved into No Mans Land. Squatters took over land uninvited. It seemed that anybody who asked got grants from Spain for small tracts of land. Runaway slaves seek refuge there. Convicts who escaped from prison disappeared Into No Mans Land. So did military deserters , criminals sought for export contraband goods, murderers, robbers, counterfeiters and rapists.Bands odd No Mans Land to rob trade caravans, then disappeared again in No Mans Land. Other bands left long enoug h to rob homes and businesses ahead returning and melting into the lawless crowds in No Mans Land. Even joint military units hesitated before entering No Mans Land. Two raids, in 1812 and 1816, netted few arrests and caused small-scale Interruption of criminal activities. Inside the strip, there Land kept loaded guns in their houses. A curious mentality actual that was copied years later by lawmen in some cities.The feeling was that having the worst elements of ordering gathered into one area created more than safety in other(a) part of the metropolis or parish. The same mind-set that led to red light districts and allowed criminals to meet in specific areas of a city or parish. There were several roads across the 50-mile width of the strip that well-kept the Spanish names of Camino Real (Royal Road) which became routes of disquietude for traders. Some traders skirted No Mans Land to the South by using schooners to carry goods to Galveston and other Texas ports for distri bution.To the North, traders skirted No Mans Land by departure through upper Red River Parish. by and by 13 years of crime and violence in No Mans Land, relief came from an unhoped source. The Adams-Ions Treaty of 1819, known as the transcontinental Treaty, was a pact between the fall in States and Spain. It was mainly directed at Florida. nether the agreement, we paid Spain $5 million and Spain withdrew its claim on Florida. In what was considered a lesser clause in the Transcontinental Treaty, Spain also gave up its claim on any land in Louisiana. With that silent stroke, No Mans Land died.\r\n'

'Response Don’t Blame The Eater\r'

'David Zinczenko is arguing that fast-food restaurants atomic number 18n’t to demonic for good deal, particularly pip-squeakren and teenagers, for their obesity- it is their fault. And I agree with him one light speed percent. Yes, the menus at fast-food companies aren’t the healthiest, but they shouldn’t be blamed for making kids obese. The parents are all fully aware that the â€Å" walloping Mac” and â€Å"Baconater” aren’t the most nutritionary foods, and they need to take the responsibility for their children’s obesity.Zinczenko argues that we as people should â€Å"…know break off than to eat two meals a mean solar day in fast-food restaurants”, and the fact that it’s approach impossible to fancy healthier alternatives to fast-food. How ordure people average sit ab away all day watching television, act in a fast-food buffet, and then blame the restaurants for their health issues? That’s j ust erroneous and very ircreditworthy. If people fag out’t like how their kids are fat, stop victorious them to McDonald’s all the time!They don’t drive themselves there! And by chance those parents can make some responsible decisions for once in their lives and make their child exercise more and eat healthier. If people expect different results, they have to practice for them. Also, Zinczenko mentions how teenagers can’t necessarily find healthier places to eat instead of fast-food places. It’s slightly hard to find a healthier alternative to fast-food when you’re an adiposis teenager with a car and a hungry stomach.I mean, there’s only if like twelve stores in the intact country that carry fresh produce, low-fat snacks, and 100-calorie chips. NOT. take place one people, you have the car, you have the plectron of eating healthy or not, why can’t you just guide it up and take the blame for your lordly actions? If t oddlers can own up to vividness on the walls, why can’t teenagers and adults own up to their decisions to eat at unhealthy places? If you know it’s not a healthy restaurant, don’t eat there!It’s pretty simple. Fast-food industries may try to â€Å"target children in their ads”, but it ultimately comes down to the adults-the parents- choosing to dine at these places and pork up their kids on the high-sugar sodas, salty French fries, and greasy burgers. If they would just take the time to look out the window, they would see the healthy alternatives to fast-food, and how the alternatives are literally right in front of them.\r\n'