[morby]

To add to that. The author details how this new detail subsequently alters the version of events. Namely it suggests that the bullet that hit JFK in the back and hit Connally were two different bullets and that they could not have been fired at that rate (the rate suggested by the video evidence) with the weapon used by Oswald

[lucas_membrane]

> could not have been fired at that rate

The stories all say that the FBI reported the minimum time to fire that rifle was 2.25 seconds. How was that determined? How can a supposedly experimental result like that have no error bars? Was it determined by repeated firings of the gun found in the sniper's nest, or by another similar gun presumed to be an exact duplicate (of a 20-year old mail order gun?) for purposes of that measurement? It is known that Oswald spent some considerable time (maybe and hour or several, I don't remember) 'dry firing' the rifle the night before. Could he perhaps have developed speed superior to that of whomever the FBI asked to do that experiment? Has the 2.25 second minimum ever been replicated? How could the person trying to fire the gun as fast as possible for the FBI ever have as much adrenaline flowing as Oswald, the man who had previously tried and failed to kill General Walker must have had.

[TedDoesntTalk]

In other words, there can only have been more than one shooter. Not just Oswald.

[Obscurity4340]

Didn't the same thing happen to one of his relatives/descendants at a hotel in California? One guy went down for it but there were multiple firings from seperate angles and placements and witnesses reported hearing multiple shots from different orientations?

[Eisenstein]

So the shooter was working with Oswald, or it was a coincidence? I'd like to know who would sign up for anything with Oswald -- probably the most unreliable and untethered person you would have been able to find in the SW USA at the time.

All of these conspiracy theories would die if those taking them seriously would just sit down and read the Warren report. If you can then find something specific in the evidence or conclusions that is wrong or illogical or seems like it was covered up in the report, please point it out.