JFK Conference: James DiEugenio made clear how Foreign Policy changed after November 22, 1963

[stopbush]

175. I'm not claiming there were "not conspiracies in any of the assassinations." Just in JFK's case.

Last edited Tue Nov 5, 2013, 01:55 PM - Edit history (1)

A much sounder claim for conspiracy can be made in both the RFK & King assassinations. In RFK's case, the forensic evidence of bullets sprayed about the room seem to indicate more than one shooter. In King's case, the assassin James Earl Ray had an MO much closer to what one would expect from a hired gun, including a weapon one would expect (as opposed to the cheap rifle used by Oswald) and the fact that he was able to go on the lam and evade law enforcement for an extended period.

Your thought that there may be groups around today conspiring to kill the president may well be true. The point is that conspiring and pulling it off are two different things. It's a huge and unfounded leap of faith to believe that just because the mob/Cubans/Russians wanted JFK dead that they were the ones that pulled it off.

And it's not a mater of trusting government. It's a matter of believing evidence. No one in the past 50 years has produced a shred of real evidence to prove a conspiracy in the JFK case. Quite the contrary.

BTW - you do know, do you not, that the Warren Commission investigated every conspiracy theory that was current at the time, and even though they found all of them unfounded, they still stipulated in their report that their findings did not preclude evidence coming forth at a later date that would prove a conspiracy. 99.999% of JFK CT nuts don't know that, don't want others to know it and will never admit it.