PDA

View Full Version : JFK Conspiracy? PROOF finally revealed!



Tylerdurden
12-13-2007, 02:29 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=veGk9Gj2sjU

canoes
12-13-2007, 02:57 PM
I see no proof there, just a agent shrugging his shoulders when he is told its not his day to ride on the bumper.

Now I need to borrow Joes tin foil hat.

Vince Brennan
12-13-2007, 03:06 PM
Awww, c'mon, Mark!

Tanbark Spanker
12-13-2007, 03:11 PM
The driver also shot Kennedy in the face with a pneumatic devise. It's kind of cool that the dollar is in the crap tank. HaHa.

Tylerdurden
12-13-2007, 03:13 PM
Awww, c'mon, Mark!

Just having fun Vince.

Cuyahoga Chuck
12-13-2007, 03:38 PM
Playing with youtube will rot your eyes! Or was that make you sterile? Whatever!

Tylerdurden
12-13-2007, 03:41 PM
Snow day, no service calls.............bored

Keith Wilson
12-13-2007, 04:33 PM
As usual, The Onion makes more sense than Tylerdurden


KENNEDY SLAIN BY CIA, MAFIA, CASTRO, LBJ, TEAMSTERS, FREEMASONS
President Shot 129 Times from 43 Different Angles
DALLAS, TEXAS

President Kennedy was assassinated Friday by operatives of the CIA, the Giancana crime syndicate, Fidel Castro, Vice President Johnson, the Freemasons and the Teamsters as he rode through downtown Dallas in a motorcade. According to eyewitnesses, Kennedy's limousine had just entered Dealey Plaza when the president was struck 129 times in the head, chest, abdomen, arms, legs, hands, feet, back and face by gunfire. The shooting began at 12:30 p.m. and lasted until 12:43 p.m. CST.

In all, 43 suspects have been taken into the custody of the Dallas police. Preliminary reports indicate that hitmen for the Giancana crime syndicate fired from a nearby grassy knoll, CIA agents fired from an office building slightly off the parade route, Cuban nationals fired from an overpass overlooking Dealey Plaza, an elite hit squad working for Teamsters President Jimmy Hoffa fired from perches atop an oak tree, a 'lone nut' fired from the Texas Book depository, a shadow-government sharp-shooting team fired from behind a wooden fence, a consortium of jealous husbands fired from an estimated 13 sites on the sidewalk along the route, a hitman working for Johnson fired from a sewer grate over which the limousine passed, and Texas Gov. John Connally lunged at the president from within the limousine itself, slitting the president's throat with a combat knife.

The mortally wounded president was sped to nearby Parland Hospital, where doctors with ties to Johnson's inner circle performed a staged autopsy. They pronounced him dead at 2:18 p.m. CST. The body was then chemically treated by J. Edgar Hoover and put in a decoy casket for transport to Roswell, New Mexico. There, space aliens using medical technology beyond the knowledge of man sealed Kennedy's 129 wounds. Kennedy's corpse was then reanimated and rushed to Germany for an emergency meeting with the frozen brain of Adolf Hitler. After the meeting, Kennedy aides announced plans for the two leaders' sperm cells to be atomically sustained, planted in the womb of aspiring actress Judith Campbell, and grown into a super-race of 21st-century conquerors.

According to investigators, the assassination appears to have been carefully planned and carried out in strict accordance with both the Skull-and-Bones Blood Rite and Masonic "Killing of the King" rituals. Officers found several hundred weapons within a four-block radius of the shooting site, including telescope-sighted Weatherby Magnum rifles, Italian bolt-action 6.5mm carbines, Thompson submachine guns, Russian Kalishnikov assault rifles, and one ray-gun.

The assembled killers were taken into police custody at Dallas City Hall. As they were being transferred to the county prison however, all 43 were shot and killed by Jack Ruby, 52, a Dallas-area nightclub owner.

Bruce Hooke
12-13-2007, 04:37 PM
Oh my that's good Keith...

:D :D :D :D :D

Tylerdurden
12-13-2007, 04:58 PM
As usual, The Onion makes more sense than Tylerdurden

Lighten up zippy.

Bob Adams
12-13-2007, 07:21 PM
The truth? Here it is, covered up for years:

http://www.jibjab.com/view/92287

Cuyahoga Chuck
12-13-2007, 08:18 PM
Abraham Lincoln- lone gunman
James Garfield-lone gunman
William Mckinley-lone gunman
Archduke Franz Ferdinand and wife-lone gunman
Martin Luther King-same
Robert Kennedy-same
George Lincoln Rockwell-same

Why does John Kennedy have to have been the target of 40 different assassins?

In the case of Gavrilo Princip there was a conspiracy to kill Franz Ferdinand with a bomb. The bomb wasn't even close and all the conspirators took off. Princip, by accident, chose to go down a side street where the royal couple just happened to be visiting and Princip just happened to have a pistol.

ishmael
12-13-2007, 08:51 PM
Oh lord. The fact that there is more than has met the eye in all the official stories is pretty obvious. Good forensic folk have looked, and the facts of the official stories don't add up.

RFK was supposedly killed by a mad loner with Israeli/Palestinian griefs, yet Sirhan never got closer than three feet in front(on film), and the kill shot was close from behind, with stippling to the head. Sirhan's revolver held eight shots, yet there were recorded many more, the evidence since dissappeared from the LA police archives.

Not paranoid, just observations of people who were actually there.

"How I stopped worrying, and learned to love the bomb."

As I've said before, anyone who can look at the Zapruder film and not see the obvious, that the kill shot came from the right front scattering poor John's brains all over the back of that limo, is living in the fantasy. The immediate Parkland Hospital docs read it right, the back of the man's head was blown off! A large defect in the back of the head, the occipital area. It doesn't take a ballistics expert to see that this wasn't "jetting from impact" as Posner et al propose. The man was shot from the front.

So, a conspiracy. Who, what? There's no need for it to be terribly complex or involved. A few people, with the new president and the FBI director backing and filling, pulled it off.

Cuyahoga Chuck
12-14-2007, 12:53 PM
I was around when this happened I had just gotten out of the army. Kennedy was a MUCH admired president. He had saved the country from the prospect of nulear war. He had initiated our first efforts in space. His wife was admired and the public couldn't get enough of his kids. The economy was on the upswing. The Soviets had been contained in Berlin and in Cuba without engaging in any big time military adventures.
But, if we are to believe conspiracy theorists, he had deadly enemies behind every bush. The Mafia, the CIA, Castro, the Soviets, unnamed plotters in the government's bureaucracy and a lot more that I don't recall. Of course neither numerous investigations nor time has come up with any suspect more likely than Lee Harvey Oswald.
Personally, I find it incomprehensible that such an admired leader could have been gunned down by such a insignificant nutcase but, I believe that is what happened.
The final nail in the conspiracy coffin is this. Conspiracy means mutiple players joining together to carry out a secret plan. Every one of those conspirators would have had knowledge of an occurance that could have been sold to the media for tens of millions of dollars. How high the price would have gone is anybody's guess. All it would have taken was for a conspirator to sell the secret when he was near enough to death that he wouldn't be around to suffer the consequqnces. The payoff would have enriched his family for the next five generations and the devulger would have his name in the history books forever more.
It hasn't happened and it won't because there is nothing to devulge. A lone sniper, either very good or very lucky, did the deed. History is full of such cases.

ishmael
12-14-2007, 01:07 PM
Chuck, Google E. Howard Hunt confession.

I don't think it took a large number of people. JFK was despised by many people, but all it took was a small band. From what I can gather the shooters were European mafia, in and out, slick as a whistle. Then all it took was the pressure of the presidency and of the FBI to cover the tracks.

No one has come forward and been truly definitive until Hunt's deathbed confession. It seals it for me.

Bruce Hooke
12-14-2007, 01:53 PM
Chuck, Google E. Howard Hunt confession.


I did just that and there seems to be considerable doubt about whether, in fact, his son was telling the truth with regard to the death bed confession he claimed his father made to him.

Tanbark Spanker
12-14-2007, 02:37 PM
Has anyone mentioned the reasons he was shot? I hear it was his policy toward including the Russians in the Space Program, dampening the Cold War cash flow. Then there was his intent to undermine the blood sucking Acient Sumerian Khazar's of the Federal Reserve Usury Scam. I hear J.Edgar Hoover dressed Kennedy's brain in a sailor suit and took it out on a date.

Was Hoover really the puke eveyone says he was?

ishmael
12-14-2007, 03:26 PM
"I did just that and there seems to be considerable doubt about whether, in fact, his son was telling the truth with regard to the death bed confession he claimed his father made to him."

Well, who knows for sure? Its part and parcel of the spook world to keep people guessing. All I know is that I heard the full confession on the radio(see what you easy sleepers miss!) and it sounded genuine to me. His son says it's genuine, and it sounded like a man getting ready to die. Not impossible to fake, but not easy, either. There are affidavits filed, also, if you can believe those.

What he said made sense; it was what I'd concluded ten years ago. A small band of uber patriots in the CIA and in business, with connections to the mob and to Cuban ex-pats, with the complicity of Johnson and Hoover, hired hit men from the Corsican mob and gunned the man down.

ishmael
12-14-2007, 03:35 PM
"and still nothing definitive"

Hunt's deathbed confession WAS definitive.

Bruce Hooke
12-14-2007, 03:37 PM
"and still nothing definitive"

Hunt's deathbed confession WAS definitive.

Only if you believe those who say it was authentic and ignore those who say it was faked by his son.

ishmael
12-14-2007, 03:39 PM
Bruce,

There must be a link where you can listen to it.

Bruce Hooke
12-14-2007, 03:42 PM
I'm sure their is, but it seems to me that it would be pretty easy to fake an audio track so I don't really see what good it would do for me to listen to it.

It also seems just a little too "convenient" that the way the story was related, it all neatly works out such that there is nobody who can corroborate the son's story. The whole thing of having to hide Hunt's confession from the other people who were around him at the time and the story not coming out until he was dead and so could not be asked directly by a third party.

ishmael
12-14-2007, 03:49 PM
If I hadn't studied this, granted a number of years ago, I'd say the same thing. It's just another huge grain of gold on the one side of the scale.

It didn't take a lot of people with Johnson and Hoover on board to put pressure here, withhold evidence there. Hunt's confession is icing on the cake. Anyone who's looked at and intuited the evidence sees it. It's simple as paint.

Bruce Hooke
12-14-2007, 04:01 PM
If I hadn't studied this, granted a number of years ago, I'd say the same thing. It's just another huge grain of gold on the one side of the scale.

It didn't take a lot of people with Johnson and Hoover on board to put pressure here, withhold evidence there. Hunt's confession is icing on the cake. Anyone who's looked at and intuited the evidence sees it. It's simple as paint.

Unfortunately, this is basically a self-selecting prophecy. Those who look at it and don't come to the same conclusion are excluded from the sample set and viewed as people who clearly are too blind to see the truth.

bob winter
12-14-2007, 04:06 PM
Its over 40 years since Kennedy was killed and I seriously doubt that we will ever know precisely what happened. I persoally am convinced that he was likely like a duck in a shooting gallery and that a number of individuals/groups were blasting at him. According to one book I read the bullet hit the front of his head and blew the back out of his skull. If that is the case, it sort of lets Oswald off the hook, at least partly. Nothing to say Oswald wasn't shooting to. But this "proof" Mark mentions amounts to nothing.

ishmael
12-14-2007, 04:11 PM
You want a unified theory, OK, here goes.

JFK stole the 1960 election through his mob connections in Chicago. Then he appointed that bulldog Bobby, and Bobby went after the mob. The Italians were pissed, and primed.

Johnson was an evil man. Murder in service to his political ambitions was like unzipping his pants to take a piss.

Hoover was an evil man, who despised RFK, his ostensive boss.

The Cuban ex-pats were primed, as were some CIA guys who felt betrayed by the lack of air cover at the Bay of Pigs. Realize, the Cubans, the CIA and the mob were difficult to distinguish between circa 1963.

JFK was holding back on a full commitment to Viet Nam, had signed an executive order drawing down our involvement.

That's the background. Watch the Zapruder film and get back to me.

bob winter
12-14-2007, 04:13 PM
Is the Zapruder film somewhere on the web? I have seen it but that was a long time ago. Stupid question, I just looked up on Google. If the bullet didn't hit from the front I will eat my socks.

Chris Ostlind
12-14-2007, 04:29 PM
All this just really cracks me up.

For the "there's no such thing as a government conspiracy" guys, whatever your reasoning... get over it. We kill, abduct and "harshly" question hundreds of individuals a year.. some of them very big time leaders. Some one falls ill and dies, changing the poilitcal course of events for another generation..

Get real, it happens and it happens more than you care to admit. And that is where I think this "show me the proof" thing really lives. By demanding these, so-called proofs, you are insulated from having to accept that man is a MoFo to other men and capable of extremely heinous gestures in the name of cash and prizes, pseudo elected power and royal entitlement.

This kind of crap has gone on for years and it isn't going to stop just because you don't want to address the surrounding issues.

How many unsolved crimes have there been in just your greater community alone? How many historical references do you need to see that humans are deceitful in order to facilitate their objectives?

Would you have been more at ease if a modern day Ghengis Khan had just surrounded the motorcade and lopped off the dudes head.. and then rode off to his waiting private jet, provided, of course, by a "concerned" corporation?

By now, on the Kennedy thing, there have been so many sidebar revelations of non-conspiracy origins, that nobody really knows anymore just where to start unfolding the pile of crap surrounding the event.

Just get over it... we do this **** and we do it whenever it suits our interests.

Pick your antagonist and they are guilty. Go ahead, how many axes were there to grind on JFK's head. They were all involved, one way or another, as they knew it was coming and they did nothing to prevent the scenario. The public remains lame to this day and you can see it in this entire, we need the proof, BS.

Light your pipes, gentlemen, this ought to be fun.

ishmael
12-14-2007, 04:37 PM
"If the bullet didn't hit from the front I will eat my socks."

Precisely so. It's horrific to watch, but it makes it obvious that the bullet that killed came from the front, which automatically rules out Oswald as the lone nut killer. When JFK's head explodes the kinetic energy of the shot snaps his head back, not forward.

Oswald. I don't know about that guy. Strange man, who had all kinds of connections in the shadow world. But I tend to believe what few words we have of his, "I'm a patsy."

ishmael
12-14-2007, 04:46 PM
Abracadabra. Watch the film. It's not that grainy.

Combine it with the testimony of the Parkland docs, of a large part of the back of his skull blasted out. An exit wound.

Bruce Hooke
12-14-2007, 04:50 PM
Get real, it happens and it happens more than you care to admit. And that is where I think this "show me the proof" thing really lives. By demanding these, so-called proofs, you are insulated from having to accept that man is a MoFo to other men and capable of extremely heinous gestures in the name of cash and prizes, pseudo elected power and royal entitlement.

Yes, governments sometimes do nasty things. This, however, does not mean that one particular government at one particular time did one particular nasty thing.

Chris Ostlind
12-14-2007, 04:55 PM
So, you apparently like one of the bullets, Norm.

How about the others?

Would eye witness observations be of value if they were of the Laymen or Professional category? You know, since not all proofs can always be found?

Governments have a great habit of finding the most simplistic explanation for anything that goes well outside their beurocratic authority. Do you really expect those with so much invested to announce otherwise?

And get this... I'm not a conspiracy nut. I do like interesting stories and typically enjoy them more when they have associated proofs to support their positions. This Kennedy thing, however, has just way too much in the way of sequel value to be taken at "proof", or "suggested laymen" value by anyone, especially those who lived through the event and the times.

Keith Wilson
12-14-2007, 04:58 PM
What about the consensus of the majority of experts... why are they wrong, and a minority is not?Note that nobody has tried to answer this.

Chris Ostlind
12-14-2007, 04:59 PM
Yes, governments sometimes do nasty things. This, however, does not mean that one particular government at one particular time did one particular nasty thing.


Yes, you are right, Bruce, but it also does not mean that the government, or one of their well connected associates of type, did NOT do it.

When one comfortably seals-off the process from anything other than their comfortable predisposition, one ceases to seek the truth as best they can.

ishmael
12-14-2007, 04:59 PM
"What about the consensus of the majority of experts"

Which consensus is that?

I don't need a degree in forensic pathology to see what my eyes see, or to understand the implication of what the attending physicians at Parkland saw. The back of the man's head was blown off! His brains scattered over the trunk of that Lincoln. Jackie is quoted that the reason she goes to the trunk right after the kill shot is because she, irrationally, wants to collect his brains. There's a part of the occipital bone found BEHIND. That doesn't, ever, come from a jacketed bullet arriving from the rear.

People have lost their good sense.

Tylerdurden
12-14-2007, 05:14 PM
Pearl Harbor = conspiracy government set up. Proven
Gulf of Tonkin
Use of biological agents against own populace
CIA MK ultra/ project phoenix etc. etc. etc.
Northwoods documents

The list goes on and on. Throughout history governments use these tools to control and over and over again years later the conspiracy theorists have been proven right.

The is something obviously wrong with the people that deny deny deny. Weak, mindless, or downright evil themselves they need to be rebuked when the truth comes out. Tell your children to remember who these people were and when the truth is revealed give them no quarter as they have given us none.

Bruce Hooke
12-14-2007, 05:18 PM
Yes, you are right, Bruce, but it also does not mean that the government, or one of their well connected associates of type, did NOT do it.

When one comfortably seals-off the process from anything other than their comfortable predisposition, one ceases to seek the truth as best they can.

The thing is, in my humble opinion, we already have the truth and have wasted way too much time looking for alternative explanations because apparently a lot of people don't like the truth, maybe because it is disturbing that one troubled individual could change the course of history.

ishmael
12-14-2007, 05:32 PM
Norm,

There was all kinds of hinky shyte in that autopsy. There were high ranking guys sticking their noses in, the brain wasn't sectioned(de rigeur for a gunshot wound to the head), the original autopsy notes were burned, the brain disappeared and hasn't been found to this day, the list goes on.

I trust more the testimony of the attending docs at Parkland, who saw the poor man fresh from the shooting. They testify that the back of his head was blown off! As to how a bullet from the right front could leave this sort of wound, a simple turn of head in there.

The whole thing is a bit macabre. I left it behind many years ago. But I remain convinced that it wasn't just a lone nut with a seven dollar rifle. Yeah, sure, that's why a low level mobster gunned HIM down.

Tylerdurden
12-14-2007, 05:48 PM
Norm,

There was all kinds of hinky shyte in that autopsy. There were high ranking guys sticking their noses in, the brain wasn't sectioned(de rigeur for a gunshot wound to the head), the original autopsy notes were burned, the brain disappeared and hasn't been found to this day, the list goes on.

I trust more the testimony of the attending docs at Parkland, who saw the poor man fresh from the shooting. They testify that the back of his head was blown off! As to how a bullet from the right front could leave this sort of wound, a simple turn of head in there.

The whole thing is a bit macabre. I left it behind many years ago. But I remain convinced that it wasn't just a lone nut with a seven dollar rifle. Yeah, sure, that's why a low level mobster gunned HIM down.

Give it up Ish, Norman and his gaggle of plugged in parrots will do anything to keep the status quo. Its in their best interests and all you others be damned. Thats the attitude that put most of them in the positions they have. Like reading the yellow pages you can see it in their posts. Instead of attacking a post with open minds they are right on the STFU we are right and your a flake.
Back them against the wall and they are the first to call the man to come to their rescue. I will continue to take a billy club hit now and again because of them, because someday the tables will turn.
Keep that in mind.

Chris Ostlind
12-14-2007, 05:49 PM
The thing is, in my humble opinion, we already have the truth and have wasted way too much time looking for alternative explanations because apparently a lot of people don't like the truth, maybe because it is disturbing that one troubled individual could change the course of history.

While I do respect your opinion, Bruce, it does not, (respectfully) necessarily mean that it is the truth. It is the given truth according to the generally accepted process, as we have had it presented.

Science according to political expedience.

But, then, that's the cool thing about science. It has many proven truths (as we know them) and whenever another set of proven truths comes along that augment, or even functionally change the previous proofs, the "truth" is then altered to reflect the new information. And so it goes.

How much info is still being withheld, how much connective tissue between governmental bodies of the time has not been revealed. Geez, if you want an example of that Elmer Fudd approach for info sharing within our Gov. just look at the process leading up to 911. Now, just wonder out loud about how much less sophisticated those agencies might have been in the early 60's when compared to our potential today... and yet we are still completely screwed-up.

Do get that smirk off your face when you recall, will you?

My bet is that this Kennedy issue will be revisited, again, in the future and that forensic capabilities will likely reveal a whole new understanding. This is more than likely when one considers that all the old axes left to grind will have long ago been dulled and tossed, allowing a more free degree of info discussion.

Chris Ostlind
12-14-2007, 06:07 PM
... I will continue to take a billy club hit now and again because of them, because someday the tables will turn.
Keep that in mind.


And out of the fifty tables built, what if only one of them actually turns?

Not after your fruit, just looking at the thing as a pragmatist would.

I hear that noble cause rendered a lot... "if only one person is saved from my efforts, then it will all be worth it"

If only one is your target, then stay home, pick out the most simplistic neighbor you've got and jack him around until he relents. There's your "one saved" and now you can move on to a productive, non-distracted life.

Don't kid yourself about this... this process is a mission to save the world and that is not really gonna happen unless one is like Robin Williams and have endless schtick to spew as stream of consciousness noise until everyone begs for a negotiated truce.

Still, hardly anyone is saved.... as a matter of fact.

There's a truth in what everyone says. It may not be "the truth" and "the truth" may not even be obtainable in the normal sense of the phrase. Still, it would be graceful to acknowledge the truth of others, as it doesn't have to mean that it's yours.

More than the pursuit of truth, humans just want to be acknowledged.

Tylerdurden
12-14-2007, 06:27 PM
More than the pursuit of truth, humans just want to be acknowledged.

The problem in that is only the loud and accepted are.
The rest are shouted down , marginalized and made out to be abnormal.

Bob Adams
12-14-2007, 06:32 PM
I know I posted a spoof video, disepectful of such a serious subject, but I have to admit, this is one of the few times I'm with Mark. Alot of funky stuff went on, although the value of rehashing it now I don't know.

Tylerdurden
12-14-2007, 06:44 PM
Thanks Bob, My argument in any of these conspiracies is that if you don't want us screaming conspiracy don't act like there is one.
This government was originally founded on principles of transparency.
The only secrets that need be kept are of a military nature and even then only on a limited basis.
Even the JFK thing files are being held against a court order and for what damned reason? I think we need a complete overhaul of what constitutes a secret. If this is a republic every individual has a right to know the truth no matter how horrible or how much jeopardy it puts the government in.
I always bring up the example of the Stasi and that was just the files that were discovered after the majority were destroyed or shipped to Moscow.
This crap that the government says it,so its the truth will not fly.
Its been shown to be an exceptionally weak premise to many times before.

Cuyahoga Chuck
12-14-2007, 06:59 PM
Some years ago the Cleveland City Club invited to it's Forum a speaker who had done a complete analyis of Lee Ozwald's life. The guy concluded that Ozwald was damaged goods from the time his mother dumped him in a New Orleans orphanage at about age 9. His life thereafter was one of chasing dreams to make himself whole. Nothing worked. Not the Marine Corps, not the defection to the USSR, not the "Fair Play for Cuba" pamphleteering in New Oeleans, not the attempt to get to Cuba by way of Mexico. All of it was a waste of time and none of it gave him the attention he craved.
His first adventure into assaination was the attempt to shoot a retired army general who was at the head of extreme right-wing politics in Dallas. It was all very amatuerish. He took a bus to the guy's house, he lingered in the alley waiting to get sight of his target, he got his chance and missed. So he wrapped up his rifle, walked to a bus stop and went home. He got away with it by dumb luck. The bullet wasn't connected to his rifle until long after he was dead.
The Forum speaker's judgement was that Ozwald had ALL the earmarks of a guy who was likely to turn to big time murder to justify his existence. Anf, once he was connected to a previous assasntion attempt the connection to Kennedy was secure.

carioca1232001
12-14-2007, 08:24 PM
I was responsible for reviving the subject of JFKs assassination on another thread that was addressing possible conspiracy theories in connection with 9/11.

Ishmaels candour in regard to the morals and ethics of both LBJ and J Edgar Hoover is pertinent to the motives that may have led to this dastardly act, and of course, the cover up that was to follow.

All in all, there certainly seems to be a certain stench in the air regarding JFKs murder and the official verdict.

I remember that on that day I was at Karachi Airport with my parents and my youngest sister, seeing off a cousin who was departing for Loureno Marques (Mozambique), when the tragic news was broken to us.

Cuyahoga Chuck
12-14-2007, 09:48 PM
I was responsible for reviving the subject of JFKs assassination on another thread that was addressing possible conspiracy theories in connection with 9/11.

Ishmaels candour in regard to the morals and ethics of both LBJ and J Edgar Hoover is pertinent to the motives that may have led to this dastardly act, and of course, the cover up that was to follow.

All in all, there certainly seems to be a certain stench in the air regarding JFKs murder and the official verdict.

I remember that on that day I was at Karachi Airport with my parents and my youngest sister, seeing off a cousin who was departing for Loureno Marques (Mozambique), when the tragic news was broken to us.

A little history.
J. Edger Hoover was a very powerful bureaucrat. That was because he had been the first and only head of the FBI up to that point. His power was derived from his practice of using his agents to keep dossiers on everyone of importance in Washington. Most politicians did not want to antagonize him because he knew where the dirt was.
But for all his power he had no abilty to murder anyone particularly a sitting president. He used his power to assure his personal domain. He wasn't likely to risk it for something as risky as political murder.
He more than anyone in government had enemies by the score. People who knew that their personal peccadillos were known to Hoover and, who would have been more than happy to see him disgraced, sent to jail or just pushed aside. They wanted him gone. But, Hoover hung on year after year because he was careful to do nothing to tarnish his image.
Hoover had been on the top of the heap for about 40 years and there was absolutly no reason for him to get involved in any assassination plot except those ordered by the president. And he would not have been inclined to get involved in official assassinations because so many in the past had been fiascos of one kind or another.

Tylerdurden
12-14-2007, 10:14 PM
A little history.
J. Edger Hoover was a very powerful bureaucrat. That was because he had been the first and only head of the FBI up to that point. His power was derived from his practice of using his agents to keep dossiers on everyone of importance in Washington. Most politicians did not want to antagonize him because he knew where the dirt was.
But for all his power he had no abilty to murder anyone particularly a sitting president. He used his power to assure his personal domain. He wasn't likely to risk it for something as risky as political murder.
He more than anyone in government had enemies by the score. People who knew that their personal peccadillos were known to Hoover and, who would have been more than happy to see him disgraced, sent to jail or just pushed aside. They wanted him gone. But, Hoover hung on year after year because he was careful to do nothing to tarnish his image.
Hoover had been on the top of the heap for about 40 years and there was absolutly no reason for him to get involved in any assassination plot except those ordered by the president. And he would not have been inclined to get involved in official assassinations because so many in the past had been fiascos of one kind or another.

Still waiting on the history part. Seems 99% incorrect assumption sprinkled with opinion.

S.V. Airlie
12-15-2007, 09:33 AM
In order for that to be plausible, Jamie, you have to believe the following:


1) You have to believe that the three doctors who performed the autopsy were all lying (why? Were they part of the conspiracy?


2) You have to believe that the four doctors who examined the autopsy photographs in 1988 at the National Archives were also lying


3) You have to believe that the evidence of the bullet fragments on the inside of the windshield was planted or was a lie....


4) you have to believe that the fiber analysis of Kennedy's clothing was a lie..


5) you have to believe that ALL of the other supporting evidence was either false, or a lie, or concoted by some conspiracy....In other words, in order to believe that Kennedy was hit from the front, you have to SIMULTANEOUSLY believe that all other documented evidence was false, and part of a conspiracy to cover up the truth.... which would include four doctors at Parkland Hospital (were they on duty that day because they were part of the conpiracy?) and perhpas a dozen or more other people involved in the processing of evidence... and that not a single one of these people, after 44 years (presuming any are still alive) EVER revealed thier part in this conspiracy, and kept absolute security on thier secret.

This is CLASSIC 'conspiracy cult' stuff... saying, over and over, that one doesn't believe the official story... without any cogent evidence to deny it, without solid contradictory evidence, and without an explanation for why so much existing evidence has to all be SIMULTANEOUSLY WRONG.

Norm, I think you mean Ish!:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

ishmael
12-15-2007, 09:50 AM
Just a note, Hoover represents the very worst of entrenched political appointees. He'd been digging, outside the law with unsanctioned wire taps etc, under the umbrella of the FBI, for dirt on every major political player, their neighbors, their lovers, their pets, for decades. He knew where all the bodies were buried. JFK had every intention of forcing him out after the 64 election, which was pretty much a lock if he'd lived.

Hoover was a bad man! Crossing him, as the Kennedy brothers did, was more than reason enough for him to falsify evidence in the investigation of John's assassination.

ishmael
12-15-2007, 09:56 AM
BTW, and I grow tired of the arguments, the docs at Parkland, to a man, said JFK's head showed a huge exit wound at the back, consistent with a shot from the front, not the rear.

Make of it what you will.

carioca1232001
12-15-2007, 09:58 AM
.........Hoover was a bad man! Crossing him, as the Kennedy brothers did, was more than reason enough for him to falsify evidence in the investigation of John's assassination .

The italics are mine....was more than reason enough for him to falsify evidence in the investigation of John's assassination

Tylerdurden
12-15-2007, 10:14 AM
Classic conspiracy theorist stuff.... when confronted by EVIDENCE, they continue to deny.

Of course only Normans evidence counts you know. Even if its from the website of the Amazing Randi. http://www.woodenboatvb.com/vbulletin/upload/images/icons/icon10.gif

Ross M
12-15-2007, 12:05 PM
...I trust more the testimony of the attending docs at Parkland, who saw the poor man fresh from the shooting. They testify that the back of his head was blown off!..

Ish, can this testimony be readily found?

Ross

Cuyahoga Chuck
12-15-2007, 01:28 PM
Still waiting on the history part. Seems 99% incorrect assumption sprinkled with opinion.

Most of my stuff is done from memory. I am old enough to have been an adult when all this happened and the newspapers and weekly magazines were full of the particulars. I can't guarantee that every thing I say is the god's own truth but, I was around and made a lot of efforts to be informed.
Hoover became FBI directer before I was born but, a lot was written and broadcast about him after he was gone. Hoover got where he did because he was a first class self-promoter. He developed an image of being the prime protector of America. He went before the newsreel cameras constantly. He made sure that he was present when his guys were about to close in on some big time fugitive because he knew the cameras would be there. One mobster,( I think it was "Legs" Diamond) was cornered in New Orleans and Hoover flew in to make the collar himself.
Notice that if I ever cite an outside source it is always one of known reputation and NEVER something from some unknown, on-line axe grinder.
Also, you may at any time take any point I make to task but, you won't win any ground if all you can do is take blanket swipes at me or my antiquated memory.

ishmael
12-15-2007, 01:50 PM
"Ish, can this testimony be readily found?"

Like Chuck, I usually work from memory. I'm sure it's out there, but can't point to it readily.

The thing that got me interested, golly, twenty years ago now, was a TV program where they interviewed the Parkland docs. Not all of them, there were probably a dozen of them in there by the time JFK was pronounced dead, but the guy in charge and a couple of his assistants. All of them put their hands to the back of their heads to show where the defect was. Put your hand on the back of your head. That lump you feel just above the connection to the neck is the occipital bone. These guys all indicated that the hole, about the size of a hand, was just above that bone and slightly skewed to the right side with the margin including the top of the occipital bone.

They were credible, and consistent in what they reported.

The entire thing really phissed me off at one time, because the more I read into it the more it became apparent that the Warren Commission report was a pack of lies.

I think JFK's assassination was THE turning point in our trust of our government-- a psychic wound I don't think we've ever fully recovered from.

FWIW, a major congressional investigation during the seventies under Frank Church concluded there was more than one shooter. At least one mobster who was scheduled to testify, Johnny Rosselli, ended up with concrete over shoes just days before his date in Congress. You add it up.

P.S. Bobby never bought the official story, and vowed in private that if elected he'd hunt down the real killers of his brother. As attorney general, with more than a finger in all the spooky stuff around Cuba, Castro and the CIA(he basically ran that show), he was probably in as good a place as anyone to know something was rotten about the investigation. He also suffered huge pangs of guilt about it, because he wondered if somehow an assassination team he'd put together to kill Castro hadn't turned rogue.

ishmael
12-15-2007, 03:02 PM
I can't help that the stories have changed over the years, Norm. I read what you posted, and all I can tell you is that in an early interview the attending docs told the same story of a large defect at the back of the skull.

I'm not making it up, it was my catalyst for looking into it further.

Over the years there has been a lot of manipulation and fear. Maybe these people were intimidated to change their story? Before you laugh that off, Rosselli, who was in the thick of the mob/CIA/Cuban connections, never made it to Congress to testify. He was murdered and found in an in an oil drum some months later. That might scare me enough to change my testimony.

carioca1232001
12-15-2007, 03:35 PM
I can't help that the stories have changed over the years, Norm. I read what you posted, and all I can tell you is that in an early interview the attending docs told the same story of a large defect at the back of the skull.

I'm not making it up, it was my catalyst for looking into it further.

Over the years there has been a lot of manipulation and fear. Maybe these people were intimidated to change their story? Before you laugh that off, Rosselli, who was in the thick of the mob/CIA/Cuban connections, never made it to Congress to testify. He was murdered and found in an in an oil drum some months later. That might scare me enough to change my testimony.

Just Roselli ? Most of the key witnesses were suddenly fraught with devastating illnesses and perished before they could testify, although Oswald left the scene overnight !

Tylerdurden
12-15-2007, 03:55 PM
Where is the Brain?

Sorry, I meant JFK's brain. not Normans.