General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Kennedy's assassination: Conspiracy or lone killer, I think the fact that we even ask the question [View all]Zen Democrat
(5,901 posts)That wouldn't have kept him upright. And certainly didn't stop that bullet in his back just below the shoulder blades. Kennedy and Connally had ten bullet holes in them from two bullets. The third one hit the curb and injured James Tague's cheek.
Nobody but Conspiracy Deniers believe that's even possible. Because it isn't. Exhibit 399, the stretcher bullet, has less metal missing from it than was removed from Connally's wrist. He had bullet fragments remaining in his arm and leg that he took to the grave.
None of it adds up. None of it. Nothing. Zero. Nada.
I'm interested to know why a small minority of people refuse to face reality about the murder of our President. He was murdered by right-wing Republicans.
Let's say something unspeakable happened to a Democratic President in some unnamed city in the South. And they told you the deed was done by a Commie. No crazy Bircher types, or gun nuts or racists (the people making threats against said President), but a leftie, with a strange background that didn't make sense. Would you buy that story upfront? What if the investigation was ended two days after the murder when the accused was killed in the police station of the most right-wing city in America. And there was no further investigation. Instead a blue-ribbon commission was appointed to write a report, and the members are Chief Justice John Roberts, General Petraeus, Jamie Dimond, Sen. Bill Nelson, Sen. Orrin Hatch, Rep. Marsha Blackburn and Rep. Steny Hoyer. And a few years later, after the truth has been murdered, Nelson and Hatch and Hoyer admitted they had never believed the cockamamie theories of the case, but had been forced to sign the report with the understanding that their concerns would be addressed in the final printed document. Only they weren't addressed at all.
Well, would you defend that dog of a Report? Would you wonder why anybody still wanted to get to the truth after 50 years? Or would you suspect the people who really wanted him dead and said so, and to whom tons of circumstantial evidence pointed directly? Or would you swallow the random little commie story, hook, line and sinker.
On the morning of November 23, 1963, J Edgar Hoover telephoned LBJ to report a problem with the Mexico City evidence because the CIA had pictures of the man visiting the Cuban and Russian embassies in Mexico City identifying himself as Oswald. And they had voice tapes too. Neither the pictures or voice tapes matched the man in jail in Dallas. Hoover was concerned about this not only because they couldn't offer proof that Oswald had been in Mexico City, but they could prove that someone was using Oswald's name at the two embassies about 7 weeks before the murder. LBJ changed the subject. But then, he knew he was taping himself.
Oops.