Evidence of Second Shooter in Kennedy Assassination

cliffs please

 

fixed for shorter version.

 

Obama killed RFK.

 

what was FBI's motivation to obscure a 2nd shooter?

 

I watched Bobby Kennedy give his victory speech, and was following the coverage when he was shot. It was so chaotic that I can't recall what I heard, except that "Robert Kennedy has been shot!" and the camera coming in with the closeup of the Senator lying on the floor, blood pooling around his head. His eyes were open, and he was still living, but I immediately thought that he wouldn't survive. I'm shocked that there weren't more audio recordings of the murder. He was being filmed when he was gunned down. I was sitting there at 3am watching, and went from an incredible high, to a unbelievable low. I'm not at all shy about saying that I sat there and cried.

 

Any word where Seal Team 6 was in all this?

 

Ask Rosie Grier how many shots there were, he was standing 2 feet from it.

I saw all the coverage live too, there was never any question about how it went down.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ilZuAnBXeM8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

Did you read The Last Campaign? Pretty good book.

 

man. powerful.

 

Must be tough being brothers.

 

Lonely, sad old lady clinging to her one interesting experience. Not as disappointed in her as in a lazy news media.

 

Supposition much?

maybe she recalls the echos, it was in a hard surface kitchen. And she might be very happy and had many interesting experiences in her life.

oddly the gunshots at 1:09 in the video sound like they were added to the clip

 

Reporters are now just another division of the corporate w**** army.

 

True journalism, especially investigative journalism, is on it's death bed.

 

That was what I was thinking that in a kitchen it would be very easy to hear gun shots echoing to make it sound like more than the number of shots fired.

I am not a conspiracy guy and has Deckard knows not much of a fan of the Kennedys but I would be interested in seeing if more turns up about this.

 

Hmm, it ebbs and flows. We know enough to lament corporate broadcasting's limitations and influence, but "investigative journalism" at least the consistent and progressive kind, is fairly new invention that's even younger than the Kennedy assassinations.

I think the main difference between now and then is that we do have a choice in what we read and believe rather than the monopolistic print and tv sources of the past.

I can still get my depressing reads domestically, like the articles found in Mother Jones or Pro Publica. I have no qualms watching Al Jazeera to get WORLD (and sometimes domestic) news.

Investigative journalists aren't dead. Rather its the audience who value convenience and simplicity abstracted from a shrinking and complex world that just don't ****ing care and don't want their bubbles popped.

I'm part of that audience. I like my toys and comforts. It's an uphill battle to own up and do something about it.