HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Why has the JFK anniversa...

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 09:39 PM

 

Why has the JFK anniversary meant a push to get total buy-in on the Warren Report?

Why are the powers-that-be so fixated, at this late date, with getting people to accept the official interpretation and shut up about it?

Does it really threaten anything important for those who have their doubts about what happened that day to keep asking questions?

Why this sudden, renewed push to get everybody to acquiesce?

I've never been that big a conspiracy buff, but this effort to get people to accept the status quo explanation seems waay too heavy-handed, given how little, at this point, is still at stake in discussing the matter.

164 replies, 24694 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 164 replies Author Time Post
Reply Why has the JFK anniversary meant a push to get total buy-in on the Warren Report? (Original post)
Ken Burch Nov 2013 OP
HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #1
RobertEarl Nov 2013 #2
HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #5
RobertEarl Nov 2013 #6
HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #10
RobertEarl Nov 2013 #13
Chan790 Nov 2013 #43
RobertEarl Nov 2013 #56
Chan790 Nov 2013 #64
rhett o rick Nov 2013 #16
HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #22
rhett o rick Nov 2013 #45
RKP5637 Nov 2013 #53
cpwm17 Nov 2013 #57
rhett o rick Nov 2013 #95
HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #80
rhett o rick Nov 2013 #82
stopbush Nov 2013 #88
rhett o rick Nov 2013 #98
stopbush Nov 2013 #99
rhett o rick Nov 2013 #105
stopbush Nov 2013 #111
jberryhill Nov 2013 #128
rhett o rick Nov 2013 #130
jberryhill Nov 2013 #137
rhett o rick Nov 2013 #139
Major Nikon Nov 2013 #42
HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #126
Major Nikon Nov 2013 #135
dflprincess Nov 2013 #4
Archae Nov 2013 #8
HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #12
socialist_n_TN Nov 2013 #29
dflprincess Nov 2013 #35
Ken Burch Nov 2013 #89
dflprincess Nov 2013 #106
nyquil_man Nov 2013 #124
dflprincess Nov 2013 #125
nyquil_man Nov 2013 #127
whistler162 Nov 2013 #18
HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #23
JimboBillyBubbaBob Nov 2013 #30
duffyduff Nov 2013 #55
Th1onein Nov 2013 #58
stopbush Nov 2013 #145
Th1onein Nov 2013 #153
stopbush Nov 2013 #155
Th1onein Nov 2013 #158
stopbush Nov 2013 #159
Th1onein Nov 2013 #160
stopbush Nov 2013 #161
Th1onein Nov 2013 #162
NYC_SKP Nov 2013 #3
Rex Nov 2013 #113
NYC_SKP Nov 2013 #116
stopbush Nov 2013 #147
meanit Nov 2013 #7
Th1onein Nov 2013 #152
GoneFishin Nov 2013 #9
Holly_Hobby Nov 2013 #11
The Second Stone Nov 2013 #14
whistler162 Nov 2013 #19
The Second Stone Nov 2013 #21
TomClash Nov 2013 #15
Va Lefty Nov 2013 #17
awoke_in_2003 Nov 2013 #77
woo me with science Nov 2013 #20
HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #24
woo me with science Nov 2013 #25
HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #27
woo me with science Nov 2013 #33
cpwm17 Nov 2013 #37
Spider Jerusalem Nov 2013 #50
HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #68
ScreamingMeemie Nov 2013 #114
Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #119
brooklynite Nov 2013 #26
HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #28
GoneFishin Nov 2013 #39
HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #67
GoneFishin Nov 2013 #70
HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #78
GoneFishin Nov 2013 #85
dflprincess Nov 2013 #31
HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #69
dflprincess Nov 2013 #107
HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #108
CanSocDem Nov 2013 #72
HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #79
Logical Nov 2013 #32
gristy Nov 2013 #34
Spider Jerusalem Nov 2013 #36
stopbush Nov 2013 #63
GoneFishin Nov 2013 #38
rhett o rick Nov 2013 #40
nyquil_man Nov 2013 #41
JVS Nov 2013 #48
nyquil_man Nov 2013 #60
zappaman Nov 2013 #44
stopbush Nov 2013 #112
ucrdem Nov 2013 #46
kickysnana Nov 2013 #47
GoneFishin Nov 2013 #73
arthritisR_US Nov 2013 #49
The Midway Rebel Nov 2013 #51
Samantha Nov 2013 #52
duffyduff Nov 2013 #54
PowerToThePeople Nov 2013 #59
stopbush Nov 2013 #61
Rex Nov 2013 #62
Nuclear Unicorn Nov 2013 #65
MinM Nov 2013 #66
reddread Nov 2013 #71
Name removed Nov 2013 #74
madokie Nov 2013 #75
WinkyDink Nov 2013 #76
JohnyCanuck Nov 2013 #81
mulsh Nov 2013 #83
GoneFishin Nov 2013 #86
Octafish Nov 2013 #84
PowerToThePeople Nov 2013 #87
Spider Jerusalem Nov 2013 #90
stopbush Nov 2013 #121
cpwm17 Nov 2013 #129
Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #133
struggle4progress Nov 2013 #91
Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #92
reddread Nov 2013 #93
Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #96
Boomerproud Nov 2013 #94
texanwitch Nov 2013 #97
Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #100
texanwitch Nov 2013 #101
Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #103
texanwitch Nov 2013 #104
stopbush Nov 2013 #148
texanwitch Nov 2013 #150
stopbush Nov 2013 #154
gopiscrap Nov 2013 #102
lonestarnot Nov 2013 #109
Rex Nov 2013 #115
lonestarnot Nov 2013 #117
Rex Nov 2013 #118
stopbush Nov 2013 #120
lonestarnot Nov 2013 #122
stopbush Nov 2013 #123
lonestarnot Nov 2013 #141
stopbush Nov 2013 #142
Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #132
lonestarnot Nov 2013 #140
Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #149
lonestarnot Nov 2013 #163
Rex Nov 2013 #143
stopbush Nov 2013 #146
MrMickeysMom Nov 2013 #110
Major Hogwash Nov 2013 #131
Blue_In_AK Nov 2013 #134
Major Nikon Nov 2013 #136
jberryhill Nov 2013 #138
polichick Nov 2013 #144
Th1onein Nov 2013 #151
The Midway Rebel Nov 2013 #156
eqfan592 Nov 2013 #157
Name removed Jan 2014 #164

Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 09:43 PM

1. There's no evidence to conclude they were wrong.

 

None. Just wishful thinking and faith. Maybe they got the essentials correct?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #1)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 09:48 PM

2. Lots of evidence of a cover up

 

In fact they are still holding secrets back. I guess so that people like you, Hoop, don't get scared and upset your little world?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #2)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 09:54 PM

5. What evidence of a cover up?

 

Theres the same evidence of a cover up as there is of a cover up of Obama being born a muslim Kenyan...iow, none.
No second gunman. No shells/bullets from a second gun. High improbability of a conspiracy being planned on short notice. No evidence Oswald was working with/for anyone...in fact, given his history no one would want to work with him. He was a lone nut with a $19 gun. End of story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #5)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 09:56 PM

6. Good gawd

 

Nothing you said is true. How can anyone after all these years think the way you do?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #6)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:02 PM

10. OK, present your evidence.

 

Or better yet, present it in court. Theres no statue of limitations on murder. Present your evidence to a DA. Don't say I didn't warn ya when you get laughed out of court.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #10)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:10 PM

13. How can anyone be so blind?

 

Last edited Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:43 PM - Edit history (1)

There is tons of evidence that shows your stuff to be junk. Really, why waste time with folks like you? Can you give me one good reason?

They killed the president and then they covered up any fact that made it look like they did kill him. And then they got their war.

Who are 'they'? The people who go around killing people, that's who. Of course you may not believe there are people who go around killing people, so that's where your basis for belief is incorrect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #13)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 11:56 PM

43. Actually I believe in people who go around killing people...

 

that's why I believe the Warren report.

I believe in the existence of people whose jobs sometimes include elimination of threats. I know there are foreign governments that have such people. I know there are mafia hitters too. I know there are private contractors that are professional killers.

I believe these people are professionals and do professional work. The assassination of JFK was as far from ideal in planning and execution as imaginable. There are better ways to kill someone, cleaner ways, ways that pass for natural causes, ways that don't injure bystanders, ways that had far higher chances of success and little-or-no chance of catastrophic failure, ways that don't leave witnesses and don't spawn conspiracy theories. If the Warren Report were wholly a falsehood; if it was an professional kill by operatives foreign or domestic or freelance, they would not have made such a dog's breakfast of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chan790 (Reply #43)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 01:07 AM

56. Hahaha

 

They did it, they got away with it, they even have you believing someone else did it, and you say they made a mess of it?

You are a comedian. Hahahaha

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #56)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 03:15 AM

64. Miracles happen, good sir.

 

Miracles happen. The plan as executed was Goldbergian. There were so many places where it could have gone wrong that none of them going wrong is the amazing part.

A good killer would have done it so none of those ways existed. A great killer would have done it in a way so there was never any question over who killed him because we'd be talking about the tragic plane crash or heart attack that killed JFK. The rank amateur who did it and only barely succeeded because he was an excellent shot was neither good nor great. It displays all the signs of a hail Mary.

The poor execution and plan are the surest proof of the accuracy of the Warren report. Yes, he absolutely made a mess of it...It was only the third shot that definitively insured Kennedy could not survive; at that point, factors beyond Oswald's control were the primary reality. If decisions LHO could not anticipate had been made differently, Kennedy survives. A pro kills on the first effort as it's the only effort he controls all the factors on. A pro on his worst day does it in two.

We can know thus "they" didn't do it. There was nothing to get away with. I [strike]believe[/strike] know the person that repeatedly demonstrably did it did not get away with it, unless your idea of getting away with it is being shot dead in a parking garage. So, yes the killer made a mess of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #10)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:14 PM

16. I must apologize for that other poster trying to upset your carefully crafted denial bubble.

 

He has no right to do that. We know the government will tell us what we need to know and that dipshit Oswald was capable of out foxing the spy agencies and showing unbelievable marksmanship with at piece of crap rifle. But our government knows what's best and we should respect that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #16)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:25 PM

22. People are gonna believe conspiracies.

 

They gonna believe Obama was born in Kenya, despite zero evidence. They gonna believe Benghazi was a conspiracy, despite no evidence. Sometimes people are gonna refuse all evidence, defy all logic and common sense, and believe on faith alone. All evidence points to Oswald a lone gunman. No evidence or logic points to a conspiracy. Yet people WANT to believe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #22)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 12:03 AM

45. Common sense? Common sense would tell you that dipshit Oswald couldnt

 

find his way home on his own. And yet the government wants us to believe that he somehow, single-handedly assassinated the president without one ounce of help. "All evidence points to Oswald a lone gunman." Yes all the evidence that your government shows you.

But why should I try to spoil your comfortable bubble of denial that makes you feel warm and safe. I am betting you think that Herr General Clapper's spying is only to make you safe.

Conspiracies are a part of life. You cannot deny them away. I bet at the time of JFK's assassination, there were multiple conspiracies to kill him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #45)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 12:50 AM

53. Well said! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #45)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 01:08 AM

57. How difficult is it to stick a rifle out a window and hit a nearby object?

 

not difficult at all.

What's difficult is to explain away the massive evidence that Oswald killed JFK. What's difficult is to explain how any of the various impossible Rube Goldberg JFK CT fantasies could have gone down in real life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cpwm17 (Reply #57)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 09:07 PM

95. I wont argue with you, you have your mind made up. But just want to say, that the massive

 

amount of evidence that you believe was presented by one side. When anyone tries to argue against that "evidence" they are derided as CT'ers. I do understand the desperate need for closure. The need to know that there arent conspirators out there. But with wealth and power comes conspiracies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #45)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 10:12 AM

80. Do you know what common sense is?

 

Is it common sense that the best gunman/co-conspirator the alleged conspiracy could come up with was Oswald?

Is is common sense that a key component of an assassination conspiracy (the gunman) would have only found out the day before? Oswald retrieved his rifle from Paine house the night before...he only visited on weekends, such as the prior weekend. Going to the Paine house meant he couldn't get his pistol and change of clothes from his rooming house that same night, he had to get them following the shooting. Thus it can be concluded Oswald didn't decide to kill Kennedy until the day before. What kind of conspiracy is that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #80)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 10:49 AM

82. I am glad you are comfortable with the "facts". nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #45)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 07:57 PM

88. Yep. Oswald DID do it alone. Those are the facts.

Even a dipshit gets it right once in a while.

Life is like that. You know, the Challenger exploded because it literally blew a gasket. That's what an "O-ring" is after all, a gasket. Sometimes monumental shit happens that has insignificant shit as its cause..

But let's put on our CT hat and talk conspiracies about the Challenger explosion: it happened when Reagan was president. Reagan was against funding public education. There was a school teacher on the flight. What better way to discourage school teachers from wanting to go into space and to hang a pall of disaster over the words "school teacher" than to blow up a school teacher on live TV. Brilliant!

Yep, it was all a huge CT. Or, you can be naive and think the space shuttle just blew a gasket.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #88)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 09:18 PM

98. It's hard to discuss something with someone that right off states that they

 

know the facts and if you dont agree then you are a CT crazy.

By the way your simple gasket story wasnt quite that simple. It even possibly could have involved a conspiracy. Yes conspiracies exist all around us. Karl Rove makes a good living conspiring. But back to the bad gasket. The engineers tried to tell everyone that the gasket might fail under the conditions expected, but management decided that it was worth the risk. Now what conversations were had, we will never know. Did financial considerations override the judgement of the engineers?

But again I recognize the disparate need for believing that all these assassinations like JFK, RFK, and MLK jr. were the acts of lone individuals. Some of us like to have things explainable. I blame religion, where everything has an explanation.

I think a liberal is skeptical, not gullible but skeptical.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #98)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 10:09 PM

99. Funny, because I see the conspiracy theories as engaging in the same magical thinking

that drives religion.

Both religion and the CTs are fact-bereft endeavors. Indeed, they are both conceits that need no factual basis to exist. Belief is all that's needed, and very often, belief in spite of evidence.

I had a discussion last week with a Christian on DU who believes in the virgin birth, even though they know the idea of the virgin birth of Jesus arises entirely on a mistranslation of a single verse in Isaiah. Yet that knowledge won't shake them off their "right" to believe in the virgin birth myth. For them, their belief overrides facts to the contrary, indeed, the very fact upon which they base their belief.

I see the same thing the JFK CTists, who - for instance - continue to cite the HSCA finding that the "evidence" contained on a Dictabelt recording proves a conspiracy in the JFK case, even though that evidence was falsified years ago and has been re-falsified countless times as new evidence has come to light that shows just how wrong the HSCA was.

But like you say, it's a religion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #99)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 11:12 PM

105. But you are defining CT as "fact-bereft", when that isnt necessarily so.

 

In the real world there are conspiracies. Lot's of them. At home, at school, at work, and lots in politics. In fact, IMO most big events that happen in politics involve conspiracies. Very few are random events. But some here dont like the idea that we might not know what happened. They want things tied in a nice bow so they dont have to think. It helps if an authoritarian body tells them what has happened and that everything is under control. The government has a great interest in making the populace believe that they are in control. Claiming over and over that you know the facts only undermines your objectivity. Of course there are bound to be wild ass crazy theories but why so quick to discount alternate theories?

Be open minded, be skeptical especially when it's your government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #105)

Tue Nov 19, 2013, 01:25 AM

111. You're right, conspiracies do exist. Some to kill world leaders, in fact.

We know Lincoln & Sadat were killed by conspirators because that's what the evidence shows in those cases.

The evidence in the JFK case doesn't show that.

I was opened minded about the JFK case. I, like you, didn't believe the WCR. Then, I decided to read it for myself, along with Bugliosi's Reclaiming History. Being open minded, I came to the conclusion that only an idiot would believe the JFK CTs, most of which pale in comparison to the WCR just in terms of being a good and interesting read.

My objectivity on the JFK assassination ended when I realized how CHEAPLY I had let myself be duped by a bunch of people who needed to lie about the evidence in the case to promote their fantasies. Most of them are crappy writers who can't even think objectively or logically.

You're welcome to their swill. I'm decades beyond it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #98)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 12:30 AM

128. Was Ted Kennedy gullible?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #128)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 01:45 AM

130. What?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #130)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 08:22 AM

137. Ted Kennedy. Was he gullible?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #137)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 10:30 AM

139. You must have responded to the wrong post. nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #16)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 11:55 PM

42. "unbelievable marksmanship"

Oswald's marksmanship was characterized as above average based on his military record.

It wasn't a piece of crap rifle. At 100 yards the FBI concluded it had a 3-5" spread with all shots going high meaning that with a moving target traveling away, Oswald wouldn't even have had to lead the target to get pinpoint accuracy.

The longest shot was 88 yards and he had a 4x scope. It would have been like shooting fish in a barrel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #42)

Wed Nov 20, 2013, 11:58 PM

126. Yes.

 

Oswald's markmanship was just above average for a Marine. That probably put him well above average for the population at large, but hardly "unbelievable".
His rifle was a cheap military surplus item, but fairly good quality and quite accurate at medium range. It's design and construction was roughly equivilent to other military rifles of the era...M1, Mauser, and Enfield. The Enfield is still in use today; they are considered family heirlooms by nomadic tribes, and passed down from generation to generation. They have recently been used in Afghanistan against the Soviets, and currently by rebels in Saharan Africa (Libya and Mali).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #126)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 04:01 AM

135. The "unbelievable" comment was sarcasm

The reality is all it took was mediocre skills at best to make the shots in question and the foil hatters who claim it was an impossible feat of marksmanship have no idea what they are talking about. I have an M93 military surplus Mauser fitted with a 3x9 scope which is perhaps a small step up in quality, ballistics, and optics from Oswald's rifle and a 100 yard shot with it on a person sized silhouette target from a stable position is just not that hard and neither is getting off 3 shots in 8 seconds. Numerous tv shows have reproduced Oswald's results with similar rifles consistently.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #1)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 09:51 PM

4. Three of the Commission members didn't agree with the conclusions

Hale Boggs, John Sherman Cooper and Richard Russell. Cooper and Sherman both said they did not believe Oswald acted alone. All of them complained with the way the Commission relied on the FBI. Boggs later said that J. Edgar Hoover "lied his eyes out" to the commission.

Witnesses, including Dave Powers and Kenneth O'Donnell (per Tip O'Neill) were pressured by the FBI to conform their testimony to what the commisison wanted to hear.

I would imagine any evidence that would prove the commission wrong was destroyed long ago. And, no doubt, it was all done in the "best interests" of the country - just like the plot to overthrow FDR was kept quiet for so long.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dflprincess (Reply #4)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 09:59 PM

8. The FBI had a special reason for their own cover-up.

CYA.

They had been following and spying on Oswald, but because Oswald was such a nobody, and kept screwing up, he became a "Do we gotta still follow him?" -type suspect.

The FBI completely blew it there, since Oswald had already tried (and failed) to kill a far-right general named Walker.

Had the FBI been actually on the ball instead of making dossiers about JFK's, RFK's and Martin Luther King's love lives, they would have known Oswald was planning something big.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Archae (Reply #8)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:07 PM

12. Exactly.

 

And the CIA were covering up plenty of crimes. None directly related to Kennedy's assassination though.

RFK was AG, he knew what FBI was doing. Hoover worked under him. And he was chin deep in what CIA was doing. If there was shit going on directly related to JFK, he would have brought it to the WC.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #12)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:36 PM

29. Do you really believe that RFK had any idea of EVERYTHING that Hoover.......

was doing? Hoover did what he wanted. He had his own little fiefdom and RFK was NOT a part of it. Or at least not a part of ALL of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #12)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:59 PM

35. RFK did ask McCone if the CIA had killed his brother

why he thought McCone would say anything but "no" is confusing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dflprincess (Reply #4)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 08:10 PM

89. And, less than a decade later, Hale Boggs was killed in a plane crash

 

(He was up here in Alaska, flying from Anchorage to Juneau in a small plane in what is normally considered a fairly routine flight).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #89)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 11:17 PM

106. And that happened not long after he made it clear that, if he became Speaker of the House

(as was expected), he was open to reinvestigating the case.

Just another coincidence, I'm sure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dflprincess (Reply #106)

Wed Nov 20, 2013, 07:38 AM

124. Carl Albert was Speaker of the House when Boggs died.

He was still Speaker of the House four years later when the House established the HSCA, which reinvestigated the case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nyquil_man (Reply #124)

Wed Nov 20, 2013, 10:47 PM

125. Boggs and Albert were on the outs

and it was expected that Boggs would challenge Albert - what his chances of defeating Albert were depends on what source you find. Supposedly there was a lot of tensions and dissent among the Democratic caucus at the time (when isn't there?)

One of the things that caused their falling out was Boggs criticisms of J.Edgar Hoover and his call for Hoover's resignation. Apparently even Hoover's death in May of '72 didn't smooth things over.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dflprincess (Reply #125)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 12:17 AM

127. The point is that the investigation was reopened even with Boggs' death. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #1)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:16 PM

18. Obviously by your posting there was no evidence

you are part of the group that is trying to cover it up!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to whistler162 (Reply #18)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:27 PM

23. Yes. My role was planned for me before I was born.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #23)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:36 PM

30. I hear you, and don't forget,

Oswald was born in Kenya!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #1)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 12:56 AM

55. Their conclusion has NEVER been disproven, and there has NEVER been any evidence

 

anybody other than that pathetic loser with a twenty-dollar rifle, Lee Harvey Oswald, did it.

It's just time to give up the nonsense, folks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to duffyduff (Reply #55)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 01:10 AM

58. Neither has most other conspiracy theorists conclusions. So what?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Th1onein (Reply #58)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 01:25 PM

145. I disagree.

Jim Marrs' Crossfire has certainly been disproved, at least in his book being based in large part on his discounting of the single bullet theory by relying on an erroneous assumption about the seating of JFK & Connally in the limo. Marrs isn't alone here. Oliver Stone and others knowingly make this obvious mistake to cast doubt on the SBT by averring the bullet had to drastically change direction in mid-flight.

Jim Garrison's ridiculous ego-driven fantasies about the killing have certainly been laughed out of the public square. Didn't stop Oliver Stone from treating him like a hero by basing JFK on Garrison's fiction, On The Trail of the Assassins.

Beyond that, it's difficult to entirely disprove 90% of the CTs when they are so nebulous and non-specific at their base. Trying to pin the typical CTist down on specifics quickly devolves into a game of whack-a-mole. Disprove one "fact" and they quickly move off to another tangent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #145)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 08:41 PM

153. I'm sorry, but the PTB decide what the narrative is; they decide what the "truth" is.

They decide when to investigate, which direction an investigation goes in, and just about everything else. You are a fool to buy into the bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Th1onein (Reply #153)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 10:30 PM

155. The day you can offer a scintilla of objective evidence to support your CT madness, I'll listen.

Until then, it's just lips flapping in the wind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #155)

Fri Nov 22, 2013, 02:09 AM

158. Do you really have to go there? CT madess? Lips flapping in the wind?

It does nothing for your argument to insult people. Really pointless.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Th1onein (Reply #158)

Fri Nov 22, 2013, 02:24 AM

159. LBJ plotted to kill JFK? JFK's limo driver turned around and shot him?

The Secret Service called their agents off the bumper of the limo to provide the assassins with a clear shot at JFK? George HW Bush, J Edgar Hoover, the mob, the Russians, the Cubans, the CIA, the FBI were all involved in the conspiracy to kill JFK? A bullet shot from the grassy knoll hit JFK in the head, stopped dead once in his head and eventually just evaporated into thin air?

It does nothing for the CT "arguments" to insult people's intelligence. Really pointless.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #159)

Fri Nov 22, 2013, 02:27 AM

160. I've said nothing about LBJ or anyone else. I'm saying that the "official" story is probably not

the truth. Most people know it's not the truth, or at least, they suspect it. And for good reasons, given the way our government has lied to us throughout the years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Th1onein (Reply #160)

Fri Nov 22, 2013, 02:35 AM

161. Most people think the official story isn't the truth, but they don't know that to be true.

Were the WCR less thorough than it is, I would agree that the government was lying to us. But having read the thing, that's just not the case.

There are too many moving parts in the WCR. A foundation of lies in such a vast endeavor would have crumbled over the years simply through advances in the science of forensics. Had evidence been falsified, modern science would be all over it. Yet to the contrary, the latest forensic techniques confirm the conclusions of the WCR.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #161)

Fri Nov 22, 2013, 02:39 AM

162. I'm glad you feel good about it, but most people don't. And when the files are still hidden, they

have good reason to be wary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 09:49 PM

3. Aren't additional articles of evidence related to the event expected to be release upon the 50th?

 

I don't follow these things too closely, or wouldn't have to ask, but if true then maybe that's a part of this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #3)

Tue Nov 19, 2013, 01:36 AM

113. Some were reclassified and sealed back up, Reagan made sure they got a 20 year extension.

 

Full transparency seems to be hard for certain people in the D.C. Beltway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #113)

Tue Nov 19, 2013, 01:39 AM

116. Well, nothing suspicious about that, right?

 

Sheesh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #113)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 01:32 PM

147. ??? The ARRA dates from 1992. Reagan had been out of office for 5 years

before the ARRA promised to release all of the documents by 2017.

Please provide a source for your remark about Reagan (I'm willing to learn).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 09:58 PM

7. Makes you wonder

if somebody is getting close to some new evidence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to meanit (Reply #7)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 08:38 PM

152. They were supposed to release it on the 50th Anniversary

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:01 PM

9. I have noticed a renewed push to accept the Warren report also. On TV and on-line.

I think it confirms that it is still relevant to today. And they are striking pre-emptively against renewed digging or whistleblowing that might be inspired by the 50th anniversary.

I think it is still relevant today because the power structure (and maybe actual players) involved in the murder and cover-up still exist, and are still up to the same evil bullshit.

If it were truly irrelevant to today they wouldn't be pushing so hard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:05 PM

11. Attempting to convince the next generation?

It's anybody's guess, but I've noticed the push too, wondering why myself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:11 PM

14. I might change my mind if the govt releases all the records without

 

any "redaction" from the FBI and CIA. The government cannot have my buy in until all the evidence is produced, and the fact that the government won't produce it is highly suspicious in my opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Second Stone (Reply #14)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:18 PM

19. Yeah right... no matter what they "release"

you would still believe they haven't released it all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to whistler162 (Reply #19)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:24 PM

21. And you wouldn't believe they are holding anything back,

 

even if it were proven to you.

http://www.salon.com/2012/06/14/national_archives_no_new_jfk_docs/

There really isn't any point in conducting an investigation into a matter if major areas of inquiry are off limits.

Oswald was a CIA asset. Whether he was an utterly worthless asset is something that the CIA would rather we not know with any certainty. But at this point, we are told to believe he was a worthless loon. He might have been, but in a murder investigation, we don't just accept someone's word for it. We examine the sources.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:14 PM

15. Acquiesce

Go shopping.

Occupy the malls only.

We have things under control.

Have a nice day.

Get it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:16 PM

17. A certain segment of our society is fond of rewriting history

we saw it when raygun died.. It's what they do. Wait til poppy or evil dick kicks off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Va Lefty (Reply #17)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 09:41 AM

77. I am. Anxiously. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:21 PM

20. Notably, those who are pushing this so fervently

are the very same group who reliably and fervently defend corporatist Democrats and attack any attempts to rein in the police/surveillance/corporate/warmongering state.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #20)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:29 PM

24. Wrong again.

 

The DUers saying there was np conspiracy are largely progressives. Nice try, though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #24)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:30 PM

25. Ha ha ha ha ha.

Actually, no.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #25)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:32 PM

27. Prove it.

 

Lets see it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #27)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:50 PM

33. The threads are right here.

No, I'm not going to name specific DUers and invite the alert-happy to start accusing me of a call-out. In your own words, "Nice try."

The threads are readily available, though, and the most prolific posters on that side include Assange and Greenwald and Snowden smearers, mockers of those concerned about the Chained CPI, and defenders of the things I mentioned. That's simply a fact. I'm not going to argue about it with you further, because anyone here who has followed the posting histories can see for themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #33)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 11:12 PM

37. I'm a fan of Assange and Greenwald and Snowden

 

I'm almost as anti-war as one can get. Nothing you wrote describes me. I accept the obvious fact that Oswald killed JFK and there is zero evidence that he had help.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #33)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 12:39 AM

50. Links?

I don't fit any of those categories, apart from having a distaste for Assange and thinking he should go to Sweden to answer the rape charges brought against him.

On the other hand, right-wing birther nutcase Jerome Corsi is a JFK conspiracist who thinks LBJ was behind it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #33)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 09:06 AM

68. You made the allegation in post #20.

 

And you won't back it up? A reasonable person would say that sounds like a typical CTist pulling shit out of their ass and flinging it against the wall.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #20)

Tue Nov 19, 2013, 01:37 AM

114. That is not true. I believe that Kennedy was killed by Oswald alone. I am not a

fan of our current "Democratic 'platform''... so....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #20)

Tue Nov 19, 2013, 02:00 AM

119. Shall we do a comparison of those pushing JFK CT so fervently here at DU

and their belief in 9/11 conspiracy theories?

That's certainly not to say that everyone who thinks something is wrong with "Oswald alone" is a 9/11 Truther. But I guarantee you that every 9/11 Truther I've ever spoken to on this forum has been here talking about JFK and making the same "why are you here pushing the government story" accusations.

Every last one of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:31 PM

26. Show me where "the powers that be" have spent a moment on JFK in the past 40 years...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #26)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:35 PM

28. The CIA and FBI are convienient boogymen.

 

They're guilty of so much...surely they're also guilty of assassinating the POTUS, right? Unless a nut with a gun did it....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #28)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 11:16 PM

39. Surely all of the dirty shit they are involved in exonerates them somehow of being involved in this.

????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoneFishin (Reply #39)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 08:55 AM

67. Why pile on false charges?

 

Theres zero evidence of a FBI CIA conspiracy to kill Kennedy. Making that false accusation merely distracts and diminishes from the crimes they really did.
Its like flailing about over Benghazi, when theres real concerns about NSA and no prosecution of bankers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #67)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 09:31 AM

70. You realize just saying there's zero evidence does not make it true. Right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoneFishin (Reply #70)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 09:48 AM

78. Then where is it?

 

Where are the shells and bullets that didn't come from Oswald's gun? Where is the chunk of cash Oswald pocketed? Where is the evidence that the best gunman the CIA/Mafia/ Texans could come up with was Oswald?
There is no question that several groups would have liked Kennedy killed, where is the evidence they actually did it? Where is the evidence Oswald was working for them?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #78)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 03:29 PM

85. 50 years worth of articles have been written. Do your own Googling. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #26)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:46 PM

31. Poppy Bush's defense of Gerald Ford and the Warren Commission at Ford's funeral was a bit odd.

Makes you wonder what he knew old Jerry had helped cover up - besides a lot of Watergate crimes, of course.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dflprincess (Reply #31)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 09:18 AM

69. Do you think Earl Warren was covering up?

 

He chaired the Commission. The justice behind Miranda, Brown vs Board, "one man, one vote", and many other decisions that empowered people over govt. I rather doubt he would have participated in a coverup of govt complicity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #69)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 11:24 PM

107. If he had been convinced it was "for the good of country", sure he would.

just like Dave Powers and Kenneth O'Donnel told Tip O'Neill they did (though they also thought going along with the FBI's version of events made it easier on the family as well).

And remember, "The justice behind Miranda, Brown vs Board, "one man, one vote", and many other decisions that empowered people over govt." while the Attorney General of California, was the driving force behind the internment of Japanese Americans. (Though to his credit, he eventually pubicly repented this).

Besides, who knows what Hoover had on him?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dflprincess (Reply #107)

Tue Nov 19, 2013, 12:15 AM

108. Chief Justice is appointed for life...

 

So of course Hoover had no power over Warren whatsoever. And if Hoover did overplay his hand, I imagine the SCOTUS would have made his life very unpleasant.
Moreso, Hoover was a suboedinate of RFK as AG, and of course JFK, and later LBJ. His power waned substantially during the sixties, compared to what he wielded in the 30s and 40s. Hoover wasn't involved in the assassination, and most likely his obsfurcation of the WC was simply a CYA...he was trying to keep secret illegal spying etc that he'd been conducting for decades. Anything related to assassination conspiracy would have been revealed by RFK, and he told the WC there was nothing more to add. Same with CIA...RFK was very involved in MONGOOSE and other secret CIA operations. He likely would have discovered any CIA involvement in JFK's assassination.

Sometimes, usually even, things ARE as they
appear. Occams Razor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dflprincess (Reply #31)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 09:33 AM

72. That's right.

 



It seems as though Gerald Ford has been getting a pass all these years. Little publicized is his interview, in the prison, with Jack Ruby who was dying and wanted to 'spill his guts'...

Ford was there to 'stonewall' and took nothing back to the Warren Commission.

This latest flood of 'lone gunman' theories and primetime media exposure is a well crafted attempt to stifle discussion of the real power structure in the USA.


.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CanSocDem (Reply #72)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 09:56 AM

79. Earl Warren and others were present...

 

when Ruby testified. And a transcript was made. So it was quite impossible for Ford to stonewall.
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/ruby_j1.htm
Why do CTs insist on lying?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:48 PM

32. LOL, this shit is really cracking me up. n-t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:57 PM

34. You might be mistaken.

Certainly you don't list any evidence or examples of a push to get total buy-in on the Warren Report.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:59 PM

36. What "powers that be"?

Anyone who objectively examines the actual evidence (not the distortions and omissions of the evidence presented by various conspiracy theorists) can only reach one conclusion; it was Oswald, and he was acting alone.

Fact: Multiple eyewitnesses saw a rifle protruding from the 6th floor window of the TSBD. Multiple eyewitnesses saw a man fitting the description of Lee Oswald in that window in the minutes just before the assassination; several people saw a man with a rifle in that window at the time of the assassination, one saw Oswald clearly enough that his description went out over the police radio.

Fact: Oswald's rifle was discovered on the 6th floor, along with three spent cartridges.

Fact: Oswald shot and killed Patrolman JD Tippit.

Fact: the revolver Oswald used to kill Tippit was in his possession when he was arrested.

Fact: Oswald's palmprint was found on the rifle, in such a location that it has to've occurred when the weapon was partly disassembled.

Fact: Bullet fragments from JFK's head wound, and the intact bullet from Connally's stretcher, match Oswald's rifle, to the exclusion of all other weapons. Cartridge cases recovered from the Tippit murder scene, and at least one of the bullets recovered from Tippit's body, match Oswald's pistol, to the exclusion of all other weapons.

Fact: Oswald had obtained the job working at the TSBD only seven weeks before, after being told they were hiring by Ruth Paine (the woman his wife Marina was teaching Russian to).

Fact: Kennedy's Dallas motorcade route wasn't chosen until 14 November and not finalised until 18 November (see here)

All of this very much points to Oswald as the only shooter, and also leads to the conclusion that chance and happenstance put him in a position to do it, not some sinister conspiracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #36)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 02:17 AM

63. Sadly, your list of facts about the assassination reads like a blur

to most people who believe in conspiracies. They don't consider the facts to be facts for even a second.

They don't know the facts and they don't want to know the facts. It's worse than kids being told Santa Claus doesn't exist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 11:13 PM

38. Yep. Nobody in this country could arrange for all that "iron clad" evidence to be

found just where and when it was needed.

I mean, even if some group were to kill JFK, they surely wouldn't be mean enough to throw poor Lee Harvey Oswald under the bus like that. Right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 11:36 PM

40. I dont trust my government. I am not a TeaBagger but I am very skeptical of

 

our government. History has proven that they do things they think are in our best interest and dont tell us.

What are the odds that a nitwit like Oswald could outwit our spy agencies and kill JFK with a piece of crap rifle with out conspiracy involved? But our government wants us to believe that Oswald acted alone, and Sirhan Sirhan acted alone, and that James Earl Ray acted alone, when all three had the same enemies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #40)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 11:47 PM

41. You're not skeptical enough.

The government's so bad at keeping secrets that a 29 year old with a thumb drive can expose them.

Yet they've kept this one under wraps for 50 years?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nyquil_man (Reply #41)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 12:28 AM

48. cleaning up paper is easier than digital docs

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JVS (Reply #48)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 01:15 AM

60. You mean, like the Pentagon Papers? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 11:57 PM

44. Becasue they don't want the truth to get out

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zappaman (Reply #44)

Tue Nov 19, 2013, 01:33 AM

112. I love how JFK's hair looks exactly as it did in 1963 in that picture, only whiter.

Authentic!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 12:07 AM

46. My guess is that the media have blood on their hands too.

Old story I guess. They all play along for whatever reasons, in big and little ways, and then they're invested in keeping the cover story going to keep their own dirty laundry socked away. All the cover stories, all the time. CNN didn't exist in 1960 but they're the last ones I'd expect to come clean on JFK or anything else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 12:11 AM

47. It truely makes me worry what they might be leading up to in the future

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kickysnana (Reply #47)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 09:36 AM

73. You could be right. For them it might not be about the past. It might be about the future.

Another JFK crime and cover-up will be very difficult to pull off if half the population is already onto them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 12:31 AM

49. Good questions and I'm not ready to buy into the

big push as of late.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 12:41 AM

51. Because its the 50 year anniversary of the event.

Of course it might the be CIA trying to create subterfuge.

I have to go.

A big black Lincoln just pulled down my drive.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 12:47 AM

52. A majority of the American people do not believe the Warren Commission report

When we observe a significant anniversary of the late President Kennedy's assassination, we see an accelerated appearance of more books, more specials and more articles on this very subject. Those overly protective of the United States' reputation, meaning those who work overtime to hide the truth in the interests of "national security", do not want the world to know the cause of the death of a beloved United States' president remains in question 50 years following that tragic event. The fact that the citizens of this Country are still questioning and still researching how this tragedy happened does not comport with the image the gatekeepers wish to project.

I have read many declaratory statements at this site these last few days that there is no evidence that a conspiracy existed to cause the death of the late President John F. Kennedy. I have written many posts on this subject but would simply ask this question at this time: has all of the literal evidence collected by the United States government and other key involved and/or interested parties on the Kennedy assassination been released to the public?

Sam

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 12:54 AM

54. There is no conspiracy to force you to believe anything. However,

 

it is a fact Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. Time to ditch the conspiracy nonsense.

Of course you are entitled to your opinion but not entitled to your own facts.

You can believe the earth is flat, but that doesn't change that it is otherwise.

Lee Harvey Oswald is the only person who killed JFK and Officer Tippit and wounded Governor Connolly.

It was true in 1963, it is true today, and it will be true forevermore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to duffyduff (Reply #54)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 01:13 AM

59. argumentum ad ignorantiam

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 02:10 AM

61. Well, it's been 50 years now, and the assassination belongs to history.

The media for the large part is presenting specials to mark the date by recounting the FACTS in the case. That's what people generally do when they present a HISTORIC account.

Sure, they could dive down the rabbit hole and present some of the hundreds of examples of CT conjecture about the case, but why bother? To do so simply spreads misinformation to an already gullible public.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 02:12 AM

62. Next generation might open up the sealed files some don't want Congress

 

ever to make public would be my guess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 05:06 AM

65. Is this what you'll be posting about the 50 yr anniversaries of the Challenger disaster and 9/11?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 06:39 AM

66. They need to reinforce the spin...

So you'll ignore the information disseminated before the narrative was agreed upon...

@TimothyS: AP story linking Lee Harvey Oswald with Jack Ruby, from a Tokyo newspaper, Nov. 24, 1963:
:large

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 09:33 AM

71. Because the National Security State is no longer a dirty little secret

 

and their will be done.
one drop of truth is poison to these traitors.
The murder of JFK and the numerous other political
control killings of the 60's brings the Big Lie dangerously
close to surpassing plausible deceit.
We have a new vocabulary these days.
One that doesnt use the following
freedom
privacy
justice
truth

not much mention of
FEAR either.
just constant utility.
that and character assassination,
where drones have yet to tread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 09:38 AM

75. One word, Poppy

Jeb presidenial candidacy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 09:41 AM

76. The WCR is a pathetic work of fiction, with no usable index, no thorough witness-briefings, and on

 

and on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #76)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 10:44 AM

81. Exactly!

The 50th Anniversary of the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy (Part One)

The Warren Commission

snip

On December 9, 1963, only four days after the Commission's first meeting, FBI Director Hoover sent its members a summary report concluding beyond any doubt that Lee Oswald acted alone when he killed the President and Jack Ruby acted alone when he killed Oswald. Nine months later, that same outcome, embroidered with thousands of pages full of smoke and mirrors, would become the Warren Commission's final word on the assassination. The whole exercise, all twenty-six windy volumes and the 800-page Warren Report, was just an overblown amplification of Hoover's original conclusion.

To make matters worse, Hoover leaked his report to the press, (a common practice for Hoover), which angered Warren and other Commissioners, and set the template for the public's understanding of the crime even before the "investigation" got off the ground.

Moreover, the Commissioners were totally dependent on whatever evidence the FBI and CIA wanted them to see or not to see. According to one of the staff lawyers assigned to look into Jack Ruby's background, Burt Griffin, staff director Rankin, "was fearful that our own investigation of the assassination could be interpreted by the FBI or CIA as an attempt to investigate them." (Kantor The Ruby Cover-Up 1978, 174)

snip

Meanwhile, a transcription of a January 27, 1964 meeting reveals Allen Dulles rather nonchalantly informing the Commissioners that both Hoover of the FBI and CIA Director John McCone "should be expected to lie to the Commission to protect the identity of their operations and undercover agents." (Kantor 1978, 187) Hence, the evidence would be fixed to fit the outcome that both Katzenbach and Hoover articulated before the Commission even called its first witness. The Warren Commission operated on the same old "trust us" level we've heard for decades whenever our government lies to us. (emphasis added /JC)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-a-palermo/the-50th-anniversary-of-t_2_b_4241520.html


"We Americans are the ultimate innocents. We are forever desperate to believe that this time the government is telling us the truth." US newspaper columnist Sydney Schanberg

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 11:03 AM

83. the endless conspiricy theories have convinced me to accept the Warren Commission also

I worked with a couple of forensic experts who had first hand exposure to JFK's body and evidence. All of these guys came to the same conclusion, bullets fired from one gun by a single shooter.

my favorite conspiracy theory is the one about LBJ killing Kennedy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mulsh (Reply #83)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 03:30 PM

86. What conclusions did they draw from the bullet fragments removed from his brain? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 11:08 AM

84. Good Practices in Propaganda

Keep telling the Big Lie often enough and a fraction of the populace will be sufficient to maintain the illusion. The 50th anniversary of Dallas is the last, best opportunity to shape beliefs in the lone gunman THEORY.

The Big Con at Dealey Plaza

Gotta keep plausible deniability alive. Wouldn't be prudent to have people wondering why things don't add up.

More wars for banksters, anyone?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #84)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 03:43 PM

87. He wouldn't want that

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 08:19 PM

90. Serious response to this question:

Because all of the evidence supports the conclusions of the Warren Commission.

All of the ballistics evidence supports it. The bullets were fired by Oswald's rifle, to the exclusion of all other weapons.

All of the forensic evidence supports it. The nature of the wounds clearly shows that the shots came from behind, from the TSBD.

All of the witness evidence and circumstantial evidence supports it. Multiple people saw a rifle in that sixth-floor window; several people saw the shooter. One gave a description to police that fit Oswald. Oswald's rifle and three spent cartridges were found on the sixth floor. Oswald was the only TSBD employee who went missing that afternoon. Oswald shot a police officer and was seen by multiple witnesses.

Reconstructions and analyses of the assassination using computer modelling and techniques unavailable in 1963 support it. The "magic bullet"? Not magic. Hypothesised locations of other shooters? Not possible. (A shot from the grassy knoll would have killed Jackie as well.)

On the other hand, there's no evidence whatever that contradicts the conclusions of the Warren Commission. For the Warren Commission to have gotten it wrong would require that there was another shooter--which, considering the forensic evidence of the wounds, the photographic evidence of the Zapruder film, the evidence of witnesses, is not possible; or would require that all of the evidence was fabricated or planted--would require, for instance, that the Zapruder film was altered, as has been asserted by some conspiracists; that the autopsy photos and X-rays were altered, would require that, as asserted by David Lifton, Kennedy's body was altered to disguise the nature of the wounds; would require that Oswald's rifle was planted, that the bullet fragments recovered from the limo, and the intact bullet recovered from Connally's stretcher, were planted, at a time when the Dallas Police had yet to recover Oswald's rifle from the place he'd hidden it, and therefore would further require that shadowy conspiracists seeking to frame Oswald had access to that rifle well in advance...or would require that Oswald had close contact with conspirators in the four days prior to the assassination, since the motorcade route wasn't finalised until 18 November, something for which there is, again, no evidence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #90)

Tue Nov 19, 2013, 01:40 PM

121. Here's a good note about the stretcher bullet

from McAdams:

Anybody who wants to posit that CE 399 was faked and planted by conspirators needs to supply plausible answers to all of the following questions. Why did the conspirators . . .

Plant it in a location where it could easily have been lost?

Plant a bullet that was only "slightly" damaged if its role was to have passed through at least the President? Why not shoot up some livestock and get a bullet a bit more mangled?

Plant it before it could have been known how many other bullets would be recovered? How could they have known that CE 399 would not be the "one bullet too many" that would blow the whole plot?

Plant the bullet so it was found before it was known how much lead was in JFK's neck/upper back? What if a big chunk of lead was found in JFK's neck or upper back, a chunk too big to have come from CE 399?

Source: Adopted from a post by John Canal on alt.assassination.jfk

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #121)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 12:49 AM

129. The conspirators worked in mysterious ways nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #121)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 03:22 AM

133. All excellent points. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 08:26 PM

91. Where's your evidence that vague and nameless PTB are fixated on getting folk to buy the WCR?

Most people just aren't going to spend much more time thinking about it

There's no coherent and compelling alternative theory -- and there's not even any real consensus among those who entirely disbelieve the WCR about what the alternative theory might be

Plus it happened fifty years ago: less than a third of the current US population had even been born when it happened; and probably less than a fifth of the population is old enough to remember a lot about it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 08:42 PM

92. Have you ever considered the possibility

that people are just interested in the topic on both sides of the issue and that it's natural for talk to escalate around an anniversary like the 50th?

Maybe everything isn't a conspiracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bolo Boffin (Reply #92)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 08:51 PM

93. do you guys do Handel's Messiah?

 

or any other works?
just requiems for murdered President's?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reddread (Reply #93)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 09:10 PM

96. Have you a point you'd like to make? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 09:02 PM

94. The MSM is convinced (and maybe they're correct for once) that this is their last chance

to re-write history. They've been pretty successful so far. An Op-Ed in my local paper used the word "flawed" in describing JFK three times and finished up with "deeply flawed". I was alive then, so I understand the audience they're targeting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 09:15 PM

97. I always found it funny how much information they had on the lone killer so fast.

That stuck me as odd even as a little kid.

I remember neighbors saying something wasn't right.

The cars were suppose to go down Houston street straight not make a right hand turn.

This thing smelled from the beginning.

There are lots of information out there.

We are just to suppose to shut up and believe what you are told.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to texanwitch (Reply #97)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 10:16 PM

100. The route could never have gone straight down the road.

I think you mean straight down Main, though. They did a right hand turn off of Main and then a left hand turn onto Elm. This is the best way to get to the highway and back to the Trade Mart. Going straight down Main, you could not turn right onto the highway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bolo Boffin (Reply #100)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 10:42 PM

101. I remember reading that the Secret Service had a thing about turns.

The car with the President was not to slow down past a certain speed.

Lets face it, the direction the car went sure set the President up as a handy target.

The President going straight would have been a harder target to hit.

No slowing down for two turns.

To many buildings where person or persons could be with a gun.

Also there were open windows, a big no no.

The President was set up.

I have been to Dallas lots of times, to the very spot.

The railroad yard and the fence.

This was no lone nut case.

Like I said they sure knew a lot about him very fast.

Maybe now with computers but back then, not so fast.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to texanwitch (Reply #101)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 10:46 PM

103. That's fine and true, but going straight down Main, they couldn't get to the Trade Mart.

That is how you go to get to the highway when you've come down Main. You have to turn right onto Houston and then left onto Elm. Unless the Dallas street planning commission was in on the plot, the two turns were just how it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bolo Boffin (Reply #103)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 10:57 PM

104. The President's safety was more important then a direct route to the Trade Mart.

The President's car can go anyplace it wants.

The freeways here are closed down when the President comes to Houston.

The exits are blocked off.

You don't get close to the car.

It doesn't slow down either.

The two turns slowed down the car so shots could be fired.

I think the lowest speed limit for the President's car is 35 mph.

The President was set up.

He had a lot of pissed off people who hated him.

We will never know the truth, it will be hid until those of us who were alive are dead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to texanwitch (Reply #104)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 01:58 PM

148. For someone who isn't even aware of the layout of Dealey Plaza

you've got some strong opinions.

You couldn't and still can't get to the Stemmons Fwy from Main Str unless you're willing to pass under the Stemmons, make a sharp right turn over a curb/island, then turn left onto the ramp. Not exactly the easiest, fastest route to the Fwy.

The turn from Houston onto Elm is a left turn, not a right turn, despite your opinion.

JFK's limo rarely if ever reached the speed of 35mph during the motorcade in Dallas. You made that up. It doesn't matter what the protocol is today. JFK wasn't killed today. he was killed in 1963.

We know the truth. You're just too ill-informed to know it and too closed-minded to accept it if you did know it.

As far as JFK being set up: the constant whining and speculating of the CT crowd has the effect of killing JFK over and over and over again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #148)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 08:24 PM

150. I will never understand the thinking about thinking one lone nut killed the President.

I have been to Dallas.

If you want to shoot someone you would want them to be going slow.

Those two turns did the job.

I will always wonder just how quickly they knew all about Oswald. That is right, we are not suppose to question anything.

He was part of it but not the killer, he was what he called a patsy.

Oswald was killed for a reason, to shut him up.

And look what happened to his killer.

Go ahead and live in your own little world.

I didn't make it up about 35 miles an hour.

I feel sorry for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to texanwitch (Reply #150)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 10:27 PM

154. "and look what happened to Oswald's killer."

yes, let's look: Ruby spent 3 years and 2 months in prison before dying of cancer. So what, exactly, "happened" to him?

How did they know about Oswald so quickly?:

1. the CIA & FBI had already had their eyes on him
2. he was the ONLY employee at the TSBD to go missing after the assassination. A roll call was taken and Oswald was gone.
3. Oswald fit the description of eyewitnesses who saw him shooting from the TSBD
4. He murderer a cop in broad daylight in front of multiple witnesses
5. he ducked into a theater without paying, was spotted by neighboring store employees doing so and the theater's ticket seller called the cops
6. when the cops show up, he resists arrest, pulls his revolver and tries to shoot at the arresting officers
7. within 12 hours, they had traced the Carcano rifle's serial number back to Klein's store in Chicago which identified Oswald as the person who purchased the rifle
8. they made a trip out to Ruth Paine's house where Marina confirmed that Oswald owned a rifle which he kept in the garage. A search of the garage found no rifle.
9. while in custody, Oswald told numerous provable lies to the police, like saying he didn't own a rifle
10. Oswald's palm print was found on the rifle in an area where it could only have been placed while the rifle was disassembled

I could go on and on, but doing so is throwing pearls to swine in the case of most CTists.

"You want to kill someone, you want them to be going slow."

How about, you want to kill someone, you:
1. buy a scoped rifle and a revolver
2. buy ammo for the weapons
3. go out to a firing range and practice your shooting
4. take a practice run shooting at Gen Walker
5. flee the scene of the crime after committing it
6. resist arrest when confronted by authorities
7. tell a bunch of provable lies to the police

Your apologizing for the bastard that killed JFK is disgusting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 10:42 PM

102. yeah I've been wondering that also

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Tue Nov 19, 2013, 12:19 AM

109. I don't know, but I think somebody is afraid further evidence may be discovered.

 

Even after 50 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lonestarnot (Reply #109)

Tue Nov 19, 2013, 01:37 AM

115. Full transparency.

 

They might have had their reasons for burying classified information and then keeping it that way, but that won't go on forever and I think that has some nervous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #115)

Tue Nov 19, 2013, 01:40 AM

117. Good. I'd like to know before I die. I don't know why they always leave out the video of SS being

 

waved off the car.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lonestarnot (Reply #117)

Tue Nov 19, 2013, 01:48 AM

118. If it was to keep us from going into WWIII with the USSR

 

I could see why it would be a secret kept, until some die of old age. We really don't know. People that want to believe the WC will always side with the official story.

IMO, no American goes to Russia and Cuba during the height of the Cold War, then comes back to America and kills the American POTUS in broad daylight. All while being monitored by the FBI, CIA and KGB.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lonestarnot (Reply #117)

Tue Nov 19, 2013, 02:30 AM

120. What does it matter if the SS was "waved off the car" at Love Field.

Last edited Tue Nov 19, 2013, 03:12 AM - Edit history (2)

The FACT is that SS agents did ride on the back and sides of JFK's limo at various points during the motorcade in Dallas. It's there in the video and photographic evidence. Look it up.

All of you JFK CTists make a big deal about this, as if it meant that the SS was off the limo for the entirety of the motorcade. They weren't. You're implying that someone got the SS off his limo so there would be an open shot at JFK. That wasn't true for many points along the motorcade route. Being waved off the limo at Love Field apparently had no effect on what the SS agents did during the motorcade - they WERE on the limo at various times during the motorcade.

Here's SS Agent Hill riding the back of the limo as it makes the turn onto - I believe - Main Street from Harwood, a mere 9 blocks away from the turn at Houston onto Elm:



They were off the limo when it turned onto Elm because that was the approach to the Stemmons Fwy. The limo would have been accelerating to freeway speed, and the SS never rode on the limo at high speed.

Even if the SS had ridden the limo from Love Field and for the length of the motorcade, they would still have hopped off once the limo turned onto Elm and headed for the Stemmons.

So what's the point of bringing up the SS being waved off the car at Love Field? Well, there is no point. It's just another ignorant red herring thrown out to the masses who don't have the intellectual wherewithal to ask the obvious follow-up questions.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #120)

Wed Nov 20, 2013, 12:04 AM

122. What a bunch of know-it-all-blow-hard insulting pile we have here. The man that was waved off

 

obviously knew something that things were not going according to the plan of the day. You have your stupid opinion, I have mine. Mine involves the agent's reaction to being waved off. And your bit about acceleration at that point. They are a long damn way from entering into acceleration onto the freeway. So you think my opinion blows. I think your's blows. There is a point. Watch the shrug. hmmmf.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lonestarnot (Reply #122)

Wed Nov 20, 2013, 01:22 AM

123. If that's the best you can do, why even bother?

Amazing that you can tell from a person's expression on a grainy video that a plot to kill JFK was afoot and that the SS was involved. But the "plot" failed in that the SS WASN'T kept off the limo.

Grasping at CT straws. One would think one would grow out of that around the time watching Dora the Explorer starts to lose its charm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #123)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 11:53 AM

141. No. You ignore details.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lonestarnot (Reply #141)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 01:12 PM

142. I ignore fictions. You're welcome to them,

but they're meaningless.

They say more about the people who believe them than the case at hand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lonestarnot (Reply #122)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 03:21 AM

132. And yet...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bolo Boffin (Reply #132)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 11:52 AM

140. So another guy is sitting down, not the guy waved off.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lonestarnot (Reply #140)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 03:28 PM

149. Was that man there as the limo left Love Field?

No, he wasn't. But he's there at this point in time. So I think you're exaggerating the importance of the wave off at Love Field.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bolo Boffin (Reply #149)

Fri Nov 22, 2013, 10:33 AM

163. Not the plan of the day. Your attempt at minimizing is not working.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #120)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 01:16 PM

143. Why don't you go hug the WC since that is all you believe in.

 

Gullible people always suffer from a lack of critical thinking skills, as you always show in your replies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #143)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 01:28 PM

146. Right. Then explain to all of us how those SAs ended up on JFK's limo

during the motorcade if they had been waved off it prior to the start of the motorcade.

Maybe you can answer these questions:

1. If the SS was in on the killing and ordered the SAs off the limo, why order them off the limo before the motorcade even started? Surely, if they were in on the plot, they knew that JFK was going to be killed in Dealey Plaza. Why not make a show of providing protection until a few blocks before Dealey Plaza?

2. If it was so unusual for SA agents to not ride on the limo, why didn't JFK order them onto his limo? After all, he was the leader of the free world. Surely, the SA agents would have had no option but to get back on the limo had JFK ordered them to do so. But JFK didn't order them onto the limo, even though he was well aware of the hatred being expressed towards him by certain factions in Dallas, which was a hotbed of RW zealotry at the time.

I'll wait.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Tue Nov 19, 2013, 12:30 AM

110. That's precisely why I've never stopped being interested...

They've not just been pushing that line of crap not he "50th". They want this to go the way of "But aside from that, didn't you enjoy the play, Mrs. Lincoln?"

And, just because a person growing up during the 60's keeps asking, do they have to be known as a "conspiracy buff"? Can't they be someone who wants after any and all years want the truth not to be suppressed anymore?

There are still documents that have not been released, and you can't take seriously the reasons they keep Oswald's under lock has anything to do with evidence he acted alone, can you?

That there is a renewed push to get everybody to line up with the official WR should raise a few more eyebrows, if you ask me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 03:09 AM

131. It's because of people like you, and me, and everyone that was alive at the time.

We know what we saw.
We know what happened.
We know because we were alive at the time when it went down.

So, they are trying to convince everyone else -- those people who are too young to remember what happened, or who weren't born yet -- that the official story is the real deal, that it went down exactly the way they say it went down.

After we are dead and are long gone, they will change the story, and they will claim that Oswald committed suicide, knowing that everyone that was alive at the time is dead.
They will try to eliminate Ruby from the story.
They will say that Ruby is not important to the story.
Yet, Ruby is the reason why we know that more than 1 man was involved.

The government story of the assassination being committed by only 1 man is not even believable, much less convincing, except to those who weren't alive at the time.

To us, it is not just cold hard facts out of a history book.
To us, it's a part of our lives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Hogwash (Reply #131)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 03:30 AM

134. The fact that Oswald was murdered

is exactly why I will always believe there was a conspiracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Hogwash (Reply #131)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 05:32 AM

136. My observation is pretty much the opposite

I was around at the time also and if anything the information age illuminates the whole story for all to see. It's the foil hatters who have been desperately trying to rewrite history from day one and in an age where all the information is freely available to anyone with online access simply makes it easier to debunk all the nutty theories out there. Wanting something to be true does not make it true. Belief is no substitute for facts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Hogwash (Reply #131)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 08:27 AM

138. "We know what we saw."

 

What did you see?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 01:17 PM

144. Because the takeover isn't quite complete.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 08:33 PM

151. I think this has something to do with it:

In 2010, deputy archivist Michael Kurtz announced that the secret records would be declassified by November 22, 2013.

http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/2012/06/jfk_assassination_docs_wont_be.php

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 11:02 PM

156. K&R

This thread needs exposure to openly display how many Americans have a shallow knowledge of the facts of the JFK assassination and how they share their ignorance like misinformed adolescents gossiping about sex.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 11:14 PM

157. Just like the massive effort scientists put into convincing people about....

...evolution. Or climate change. Must be a total conspiracy, right?

One thing this thread proves is there are no shortage of people intent on believing in woo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Reply to this thread