Enter your e-mail to join other freedom seekers who choose to see the world as it really is... and get a free report that explains explains how to live on your own terms.

We respect your privacy,plain and simple. You will also start receiving our free weekly ezine.

Demolishing the Warren Report with two Images from CBS News

One of my entertainments, from time to time, has been the Kennedy assassination… John Kennedy’s, that is. I’m not particularly a fan of mysteries, but occasionally one of them intrigues me, as this one did.

What I’m going to show you today are two images from a CBS News special report from 1967, created because so many people failed to believe the Warren Commission Report. CBS’s images make the Warren Report ridiculous, though I’m quite sure they didn’t realize it. So, let’s take a look.

The View They Showed You

Most of us are familiar with the shots Oswald was supposed to have fired at Kennedy as he drove away from the School Book Depository on Elm Street. It was a difficult angle, the best parts of it through trees, requiring an especially difficult shooting posture… and with a bad rifle.

Here’s an image from the CBS report, showing a marksman attempting to hit a target representing Kennedy as it moved away from him. This was said to be a precise recreation of the scene. This image is from just before what would be “the fatal shot.”

WarrenReport1

Obviously these were difficult shots… and Oswald was not an expert marksman.

The View They Didn’t Show You…

Or at least the view they didn’t show you intentionally.

Here, also from the 1967 CBS report, is Dan Rather in Oswald’s spot at the School Book Depository. I’d like you to look at the left side of the photo, over Rather’s right hip. What you’re seeing is Houston Street, the street Kennedy’s motorcade came down literally seconds before he was shot and killed. It was a straight one-block run, headed directly into Oswald’s line of fire. The motorcade drove very slowly down Houston Street (they had to take a hard left turn onto Elm), and there were no obstructions whatsoever, providing a perfect downward angle at JFK. It would have been like shooting fish in a barrel.

WarrenReport2

Take a look at the two photos again. Forget about killing anyone; which of these two shooting angles would you choose? Which of those two choices would anyone pick?

I should add that Rather’s angle is much better for a right-handed shooter like Oswald.

What Does This Mean?

This means that if we want to believe the Warren Commission, we must say that Oswald consciously rejected the perfect angle for his shots – an angle that was literally staring him in the face – and instead chose a terrible angle, with a faster-moving car going away from him rather than toward him, with more obstructions, and from an uncomfortable position.

Again, please look at the photos and ask yourself, “Which angle would someone in that window pick?” I think the answer is obvious… painfully obvious. And if so, it’s the Warren Report that gets blown away.

What I’m Not Saying

Please notice that I’m not saying who the shooter or shooters were, who may or may not have put them up to it, or anything of the sort. I’m saying one thing only: that the Warren Commission’s story makes no sense. It utterly ignores the perfect shot that anyone in that sixth floor window would have taken.

There is no way Oswald would ignore the perfect angle for this deed – one that would have nearly guaranteed success – and instead choose an extremely difficult angle with a poor chance of success.

Whatever Lee Oswald was, he wasn’t a mental defective. Look at the footage of him talking to reporters after the assassination: In the midst of an utterly bizarre and existentially threatening situation, he speaks clearly and coherently.

I think it has been a serious error for people to jump to conclusions on this subject. It’s necessary first to deal with the facts we have at hand. Once we’re clear on those, we can begin to address the question of “Who did it?”

Along this line, I very much appreciated one of the very first books on the subject, Harold Weisberg’s Whitewash, written precisely because the Warren Report was so very bad, and sticking to that subject. First we need to establish that the Warren Commission’s Report is malarkey. Then we can have fun finding the villains.

And so, once more, please look at the two photos and ask yourself which angle a functional human being would choose.

* * * * *

TheBreakingDawn

A book that generates comments like these, from actual readers, might be worth your time:

  • I just finished reading The Breaking Dawn and found it to be one of the most thought-provoking, amazing books I have ever read… It will be hard to read another book now that I’ve read this book… I want everyone to read it.

  • Such a tour de force, so many ideas. And I am amazed at the courage to write such a book, that challenges so many people’s conceptions.

  • There were so many points where it was hard to read, I was so choked up.

  • Holy moly! I was familiar with most of the themes presented in A Lodging of Wayfaring Men, but I am still trying to wrap my head around the concepts you presented at the end of this one.

  • Get it at Amazon or on Kindle.

* * * * *

Paul Rosenberg
www.freemansperspective.com

See the world as it really is and find freedom. Free updates.

We respect your privacy,
plain and simple.

Next Post:
Previous Post:
  • http://fexl.com Patrick Chkoreff

    Is the first image looking out the exact same window as the second image? If they’re the same window, I don’t see how one shot could be difficult and the other shot be relatively easy. There’s something I don’t understand here.

    • Paul Rosenberg

      Patrick,

      The first photo is a precise reconstruction of the official story. The shot is several times farther, at a much smaller target (full torso versus head/neck), moving away and at a higher rate of speed, etc.

      If you watch the CBS report you’ll see other images of Houston Street, taken from “Oswald’s window.” Like shooting fish in a barrel.

      The shots on Elm Street? Highly challenging to the best of marksmen.

      The Warren Report did briefly mention the other angle, but J. Edgar Hoover assured them that “the view was obstructed.” A 100% lie.

      Whatever happened, it was NOT the official story.

    • Capn_Mike

      Having been to the sixth floor, the difference is obvious.
      The motorcade was coming straight at the window for quite some time, offering a clean relaxed shot opportunity. However, when the motorcade turned to the left under the window, it sped up and traveled AWAY from the window, and forced the shooter to squeeze over and force the shot at an extreme angle against the widow frame. simple.

      • Paul Rosenberg

        Ah, how nice to hear from someone who’s actually been in that window! Thanks, Capn!

        • http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/political_reading_room/ disqus_3BrONUAJno

          Being to the floor doesn’t indicate having seen the window, let alone having been in it.

          • Paul Rosenberg

            You’re being difficult on purpose. Stop.

          • http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/political_reading_room/ disqus_3BrONUAJno

            I’m playing follow the leader.

      • http://fexl.com Patrick Chkoreff

        OK, so it sounds like Oswald shot Kennedy from that window as Kennedy approached, and the shot was fairly easy even with the crappy rifle.

        • Paul Rosenberg

          That’s what the commission said did NOT happen.

        • Capn_Mike

          How can you be so obtuse? (Shawshank reference). He DID NOT TAKE THE EASY SHOT DOWN HOUSTON ST. He waited until he had to attempt the HARD SHOT when the motorcade was headed away down Elm. This is all stipulating that it was LOH and out the window yadda yadda.

          • http://fexl.com Patrick Chkoreff

            Yes I get it. I first thought the point of the essay was that there is NO WAY Oswald would have attempted the hard shot when such an easy shot was available. So I naturally thought, OK, then he took the easy shot. I don’t know of course, I just wanted to see where that would lead. Of course I don’t know. I tend to think Oswald was eating lunch on another floor and someone else took the shot anyway.

          • Capn_Mike

            OK, then. BTW, I’m with you on the sandwich thang. LOH was right, he WAS a patsy.

  • ZorroFLL
    • Paul Rosenberg

      Great image, Zorro. Thanks.

    • http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/political_reading_room/ disqus_3BrONUAJno

      If the graphic is accurate, the target would have been in a shadow on Houston St.

      • Paul Rosenberg

        The killing took place at 12:30 PM. Broad daylight. A shadow, if there was one, would make approximately zero difference to a scoped rifle.

        • http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/political_reading_room/ disqus_3BrONUAJno

          In other words, the graphic is deceptive.
          Was a scoped rifle used?

          • Paul Rosenberg

            Deceptive? It’s just an annotated photo of the scene. It doesn’t claim to be of the precise moment.

            Scoped rifle used? Yes.

          • http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/political_reading_room/ disqus_3BrONUAJno

            I missed the certified forensics report that Kennedy was killed by a round from the rifle found at the alleged firing position. It must have been the same report that certified a bullet changing direction in midair.
            If the shadow was different, the other details are irrelevant.

  • http://fexl.com Patrick Chkoreff

    I asked a simple Yes or No question. Is the window pictured in the first image above the same window as the one pictured in the second image above?

    • Paul Rosenberg

      Sorry Patrick, I was trying to help with the understanding part. It’s a mockup of the window, minus the side and top frame members.

      • http://fexl.com Patrick Chkoreff

        OK so to be clear, the window pictured in the first image (the one with the guy pointing the rifle) is NOT the real window of the 6th floor of the Book Depository pictured in the second image (the one with Dan Rather).

        Ah that’s right, I now remember that they constructed a platform for taking actual test shots. So in that test, CBS made the shot look more difficult than it should have been. If you just look out the real damn window, you can see that Oswald would have had a very easy shot at Kennedy as his car approached the building. The whole idea of taking a difficult shot as the car went AWAY from the building is a canard. When they built the shooting platform, they should have modeled the test on the simple fact that Kennedy was approaching, not receding, from the vantage point.

        Why would CBS want to make the shot look as difficult as possible? Were they trying to discredit the idea that Oswald could have made that shot? It seems like, based on the vantage point behind Dan Rather there, that Oswald could have EASILY made the shot. If that is so, how does Paul’s analysis discredit the official Warren Report? It seems to support it.

        • Paul Rosenberg

          Perhaps we’re talking at cross purposes:

          The official report says that Oswald took the (difficult) going away shot and rejected the (easy) approach shot. CBS supports that belief overtly, while accidentally demolishing it by showing the view onto Houston street.

          • http://fexl.com Patrick Chkoreff

            OK, so the Warren Report is all wet — it turns out that Oswald shooting Kennedy from that window was *far* easier than the report says. Next time someone says “no way Oswald shot Kennedy, he couldn’t have made that shot,” I’ll say “are you kidding, it was an EASY shot, you need to stop believing the official report!”

          • http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/political_reading_room/ disqus_3BrONUAJno

            Oswald must have been trained by Schrodinger’s cat, since he was simultaneously on an upper floor and standing in a doorway at street level, at the time that shots rang out.

          • Paul Rosenberg

            See what I said above, Patrick. The official story is that Oswald ignored the easy shot and made the impossible shot.

          • http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/political_reading_room/ disqus_3BrONUAJno

            Mock ups are easy to muck up.

          • http://fexl.com Patrick Chkoreff

            Paul, I thought I was *agreeing* with you already. :) Agreed: the official story says that Oswald could have made an easy shot, but he instead chose to make an impossible shot.

            But here’s my conclusion from that. The official report is wrong. The truth is, Oswald DID take the easy shot, and that’s how he successfully blew Kennedy’s brains out.

          • Paul Rosenberg

            “Paul, I thought I was *agreeing* with you already. :)”

            LOL. Ah well… sometimes communicating is tough. :)

          • http://fexl.com Patrick Chkoreff

            Let me ask you a simple question. Do you think Oswald actually took that simple shot you’re talking about? Never mind official stories and all that: do you think Oswald IN FACT took that simple shot?

          • Paul Rosenberg

            No, I don’t.

          • http://fexl.com Patrick Chkoreff

            Understood. That was what threw me off about your essay: the Dan Rather photo made it seem all the more plausible that Oswald shot Kennedy from that window.

            One alternative theory I saw in an article on Lew Rockwell about a year ago is that Oswald wasn’t even on the 6th floor, he was eating lunch in a cafeteria far below. There’s a photo of another guy standing in the outside doorway of the building who is dressed just like Oswald, and the author says that’s the guy who took the shot. I don’t remember all the details, but basically when Oswald said “I’m a patsy,” he was telling the truth.

  • Charles Brumbelow

    JFK shot… I have read somewhere that Oswald did not take the head on shot because he was afflicted with “buck fever”…

  • Joseph Zadeh

    I see what you are saying, Paul, but the pictures aren’t clear. When I went to the book depository window, I thought that I could have made the shot with a little practice, and I have shot a gun like twice in my life, but that was if the limo would have been at the closest range (the second pic). The first pic is the much harder shot. That would have taken a long time to do with an expert marksman.

    Robert Caro has written four books on LBJ. He was asked if he thought LBJ was in on the assassination. He didn’t come out and say give an opinion. What he did show was Bobby Baker was before Congress on the day JFK was shot. LBJ said in front of a lobbyist, “If that cocksucker (Bobby Baker) talks, I am going to jail.” Caro went between what was going on with Baker in Congress and what JFK was doing in Dallas that same day. On reflection, I saw what Caro was doing. LBJ had to have JFK killed because of that Bobby Baker hearing. Caro was saying LBJ was behind the assassination without saying it.

    Jerry Kroth’s books were the best on JFK I have read. He even showed the guy who killed JFK on tape, James Files, and I found both Kroth and Files credible. Their version of events is much more believable than the official Warren report.

    LBJ was paying off Brown and Root later Halliburton with the Vietnam war. I thought it was all about corporate America being paid off with a war, but I read the book, Chasing Shadows by Fred Burton. I had always thought the U.S. had superior air power in Vietnam and Korea, but Burton made the opposite case. In the early 60s, at the height of the Cold War, the USSR actually had better planes than the U.S. did.

    Given that fact and Sputnik and the feeling the U.S. was “falling behind”, there certainly were those in the military who would have felt JFK had to go or the U.S. would lose a war to the USSR. I still cannot believe the sheer paranoia that griped the U.S. in the early 1960s, and the sociopaths this country save for the Kennedys this country had as leaders.

    • Paul Rosenberg

      “… I thought that I could have
      made the shot with a little practice… if the limo would have been at the closest
      range (the second pic). The first pic is the much harder shot… That shot
      would have required an expert marksman.”

      Precisely, Joseph. Precisely.

  • olde reb

    Do we really still stick with the LHO story ? Try the testimony given to the congressional rehearing of the Warren commission given by John Groden in HIGH TREASON on the digital analysis of the open police microphone (the shots did not come from the book depository) or the testimony/evidence submitted to the Federal court case in Miami from CIA witnesses by Mark Lane in PLAUSIBLE DENIAL. The CIA did it.

    LHO was set up for death (?) in the basement of the police station. Did you see any blood ? NO. He was rushed out of view. How about blanks ?

    The FBI involvement is written by Mark North in ACT OF TREASON.

    • Paul Rosenberg

      “Do we really still stick with the LHO story?”

      We definitely reject the Warren Report. More than that is a second question, and not one I want to address. I want to make my point without complications.

  • LoadDrive

    A Question to ask : IF You were do something like Assassinated President Kennedy, would you buy the BEST Rifle & Scope made or would you use an Old junk rifle like the 6.5 Italian Carbine ? My Dad did buy one of these 6.5 carbine rifles from K-marts about 2 months before Kennedy was shot “at a cost of $16.00 ” , that’s right $16.00 !! They had to be someone else shooting with Good Equipment !

    • Paul Rosenberg

      Perhaps so, but that’s not what I want to examine now. I want to get rid of the Warren Report and no more.

  • Martin Bedick

    Very interesting view that I had never seen before. For those interested, Jacob Hornberger of The Future of Freedom Foundation has some great information about the JFK assassination. It is well worth reading if you want to learn his views about the conspiracy.

Read more:
HaveFun
ROSC 13: Time to Have Fun Again

Last Wednesday was my day to reorient myself. I end up doing that from time to time, and I think...

Close