• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

JFK Conspiracy Theories: It Never Ends

Status
Not open for further replies.
That is why it had to have been a conspiracy. Because at least one of the shots was not fired from the TSBD, but from the front. Most likely, the Grassy Knoll. The idea was to get Kennedy dead and the cover-uppers in positions of power would take care of the aftermath with some kind of cacamammy story that the public would swallow.

Even if you had a scrap of proof for that statement, even if you could explain the lack of exit wound visible on the back of JFKs head, or how what you claim is an entry wound disobeys the laws of physics, you still havent answered the question. At no point do you explain WHY.
 
The idea was to get Kennedy dead and the cover-uppers in positions of power would take care of the aftermath with some kind of cacamammy story that the public would swallow.

why didnt they pick off Marilyn with a high powered rifle?
That would certainly have given CTrs something to talk about.
 
That is why it had to have been a conspiracy. Because at least one of the shots was not fired from the TSBD, but from the front. Most likely, the Grassy Knoll. The idea was to get Kennedy dead and the cover-uppers in positions of power would take care of the aftermath with some kind of cacamammy story that the public would swallow.

Does the shot from the Grassy Knoll come after the end of the Zapruder film so that we don't see it? We do see the shot from the rear because we can see the exit wound created in the right front of his head.

Will you be posting some evidence for a shot from the Grassy Knoll anytime?

These are questions that you've been an utter failure at answering.
 
Even if you had a scrap of proof for that statement, even if you could explain the lack of exit wound visible on the back of JFKs head, or how what you claim is an entry wound disobeys the laws of physics, you still havent answered the question. At no point do you explain WHY.

Why what?
 
Why what?

Well, the question asked why they would vastly increase the risk of discovery for no reasonable benefit. You just said it had happened, which does not answer why they would make the plan far more risky and complex for neglible benefit. Now I want to know what you thought the question asked and why you did not answer the one actually being asked.
 
Well, the question asked why they would vastly increase the risk of discovery for no reasonable benefit. You just said it had happened, which does not answer why they would make the plan far more risky and complex for neglible benefit. Now I want to know what you thought the question asked and why you did not answer the one actually being asked.

The way a good conspiracy would do it would be to frame a patsy. How risky was it as it happened? Well, most of the public was fooled by the official accounts until private investigator/authors uncovered the cover-up. But in time, the public realized that it had been fooled. According to a 2004 CBS poll 72% of the American people believe the murder to have been the result of a conspiracy. That leaves a few like McAdams, Posner, The Bug Man and the deep thinkers on this board in the decided minority. But time has passed. Many of those involved are dead, from natural causes and otherwise. But supposing there was incontrovertible evidence from Day One of shots from more than one direction. Why not two patsies? And then have both of them quickly murdered like Oswald to keep them from talking? These were highly professional assassins who had plenty of practice in their preparations to kill Castro and to set up Patsies. All this group of CIA/MAFIA assassins had to do was to switch their target from Castro to JFK.
 
Last edited:
The way a good conspiracy would do it would be to frame a patsy. How risky was it as it happened? Well, most of the public was fooled by the official accounts until private investigator/authors uncovered the cover-up. But in time, the public realized that it had been fooled. According to a 2004 CBS poll 72% of the American people believe the murder to have been the result of a conspiracy. That leaves a few like McAdams, Posner, The Bug Man and the deep thinkers on this board in the decided minority. But time has passed. Many of those involved are dead, from natural causes and otherwise. But supposing there was incontrovertible evidence from Day One of shots from more than one direction. Why not two patsies? And then have both of them quickly murdered like Oswald to keep them from talking? These were highly professional assassins who had plenty of practice in their preparations to kill Castro and to set up Patsies. All this group of CIA/MAFIA assassins had to do was to switch their target from Castro to JFK.

Why do we only have evidence for shots coming from Oswald and his rifle from the TSBD? Have you seen the Zapruder film? It shows the exit wound in the right front of Kennedy's head. Why don't you address reality?
 
You seem to have mistaken result for risk.

The risk at the time would be that a second gunman would be seen. The risk of being caught increases exponentially for each and eveery conspiritor on site. And you have yet to explain why they wouldn't just frame a patsy by leaving false evidence at the place the shot was taken from. Why would anybody add the need to falsify medical evidence and autopsies?

Then again you have yet to explain the invisible exit wound on the back of JFKs head, or reconcile the small entry wound you insist was present with a fragmenting bullet exploding on impact with mass ejecta visible. Which was it? The small wound you spent ages claiming was there or the explosion your own source claims is not compatible with a small entry wound?
 
According to a 2004 CBS poll 72% of the American people believe the murder to have been the result of a conspiracy.

I'm fairly certain alot of those people have never been exposed to any of the actual facts of the case but they have seen Oliver Stone's "JFK".
 
You seem to have mistaken result for risk.

The risk at the time would be that a second gunman would be seen. The risk of being caught increases exponentially for each and eveery conspiritor on site. And you have yet to explain why they wouldn't just frame a patsy by leaving false evidence at the place the shot was taken from. Why would anybody add the need to falsify medical evidence and autopsies?

Then again you have yet to explain the invisible exit wound on the back of JFKs head, or reconcile the small entry wound you insist was present with a fragmenting bullet exploding on impact with mass ejecta visible. Which was it? The small wound you spent ages claiming was there or the explosion your own source claims is not compatible with a small entry wound?


Zzzzzzzzz. May the bird of paradise lite on your ejecta.
 
The way a good conspiracy would do it would be to frame a patsy. How risky was it as it happened? Well, most of the public was fooled by the official accounts until private investigator/authors uncovered the cover-up. But in time, the public realized that it had been fooled. According to a 2004 CBS poll 72% of the American people believe the murder to have been the result of a conspiracy. That leaves a few like McAdams, Posner, The Bug Man and the deep thinkers on this board in the decided minority. But time has passed. Many of those involved are dead, from natural causes and otherwise. But supposing there was incontrovertible evidence from Day One of shots from more than one direction. Why not two patsies? And then have both of them quickly murdered like Oswald to keep them from talking? These were highly professional assassins who had plenty of practice in their preparations to kill Castro and to set up Patsies. All this group of CIA/MAFIA assassins had to do was to switch their target from Castro to JFK.


Sounds unwieldy.

As far as the poll goes, I wouldn't trust the average man in the street to tell me the correct time, let alone to have a well informed, dispassionate opinion on such an infamous, nationally traumatizing event. An event around which there has accumulated so much folklore and misinformation over the past 48 years.
 
The Majority Always Rules

The way a good conspiracy would do it would be to frame a patsy. How risky was it as it happened? Well, most of the public was fooled by the official accounts until private investigator/authors uncovered the cover-up. But in time, the public realized that it had been fooled. According to a 2004 CBS poll 72% of the American people believe the murder to have been the result of a conspiracy. That leaves a few like McAdams, Posner, The Bug Man and the deep thinkers on this board in the decided minority.

Argumentum ad populum. If many believe so, it is so. Polls also consistently show something like 95% of Americans believe in a Supreme Being, so I suppose you'd have to be a fool or some sort of subversive to be an atheist or an agnostic in the good old U.S. of A.

Robert is also ignorant of the social history of the U.S. post the JFK assassination. Within a month of November 22, 1963 , a majority (52%) of Americans believed Kennedy died as the result of a conspiracy. So it was not Robert's beloved conspiracy authors who convinced a majority of the brainwashed "sheeple" that the "official accounts" were wrong, they belived it before the conspiracy industry even tooled up.

(Interestingly, belief in conspiracies rise if conspiracy is in the news. A national Harris poll in early 1967, before Jim Garrison's "investigations" in New Orleans became widely known to the public, showed 44% of Americans believed in a conspiracy to kill JFK. After three months of media saturation about Garrison's activities, that number rose to 66%. I'm sure there was a similar spike after the release of Oliver Stone's faux docudrama JFK in 1991.)

The continuing rise in conspiracy belief since 1964 has to do in part with the flood of popular conspiracy books in the late 60's and afterwards (beginning with Mark Lane's Rush to Judgement in 1967), the escalation of the Vietnam War, the RFK and MLK assassinations in 1968, and in the 1970's, Watergate and the Church Senate Committee revelations of CIA sponsored foreign assassinations and assassination attempts (Diem, Castro, et al).

The main reason for the public suspicion of a conspiracy in the JFK case at the beginning was fairly obvious: Jack Ruby's "silencing" of Oswald less than 48 hours after Oswald killed Kennedy. If Oswald had lived and the overwhelming evidence of his guilt had been presented to a jury at a trial and to the public by the media coverage of the trial and he was convicted, the number of conspiracy believers would have been fewer IMO.

Robert's ad populum reasoning, if we may generously call it reasoning, is also amusing in that he limits the hold-outs on giving in to conspiracy belief to "a few" including his bête noire gang of three of McAdams, Posner and "The Bug Man" and the skeptical brainwashed boneheads on this forum who refuse to be swayed by his impeccable logic and evidence.

That 2004 71% poll number quoted by Robert has stayed fairly consistent. The 2010 Census gives the U.S. population as over 308 million. Let's be generous give and Robert 75% of the population as JFK conspiracy believers. That would leave 77 million non-conspiracy believers, which is a hell of a lot of people.

Let's be more generous and reduce that 77 million to only the adults in that number, eliminating the foolish kids (like Robert?). That's still a hell of a lot of people (Although, as Robert will no doubt point out, a "decided minority.")

But then, as in all democracies, the majority must rule. ;)
 
Last edited:
Well, the question asked why they would vastly increase the risk of discovery for no reasonable benefit. You just said it had happened, which does not answer why they would make the plan far more risky and complex for neglible benefit. Now I want to know what you thought the question asked and why you did not answer the one actually being asked.
All CT are the same, they require absolute suspension of disbelief and a complex operation involving thousands, and always much more complex than needed.

It's almost as if they are making it up as they go.
 
Zzzzzzzzz. May the bird of paradise lite on your ejecta.

So you cant explain the conflict between two parts of your theory?

1) there was a neat entry wound and vast exit wound.
2) the bullet exploded on impact causing mass ejecta not consistant with a small hole.

How can both be true?
 
The Final Nail​

Sources
Including planners, shooters and associates according to various sources, most independently corroborated including but not limited to...:HSCA Investigator, Gaeton Fonzi in "The Last Investigation"; Sam Mooney Giancana as told to brother Chuck in "Double Cross," "ZR RIFLE - The Plot To Kill Kennedy and Castro", (subtitled: "Cuba Opens it's Secret Files"), Author: Claudia Furiati; Ocean Press 1994; John Elrod, Oswald's cell mate in "Oswald Talked" by Ray and Mary LaFontaine; Marita Lorenz -- sworn testimony in the civil trial of E. Howard Hunt V. Liberty Lobby, 'Ultimate Sacrifice" by Lamar Waldron; and the Death Bed Confession of conspirator E. Howard Hunt.

Conspirators, Shooters and Associates As Follows:​

Guy Bannister, Santos Trafficante, Carlos Marcello, Sam Moony Giancana, Richard Helms (CIA), Gary Hemmings, Orlando Bosch, Carlos Prio, John Roselli, Cord Meyer: CIA, David Atlee Philips: CIA and Bay of Pigs veteran; William Harvey (CIA, William Harvey: CIA and Bay of Pigs veteran. Antonio Veciana: Cuban exile, founder of CIA-backed Alpha 66.; Frank Fiorini alias Frank Sturgis: CIA; David Morales: Jack Ruby, Director of the Dallas operation; Ricardo Scalezetti, alias Richard Cain implicated as one of the real 6th floor shooters by Chuck Gianacana, "ZR Rifle..." and of one of the Dillard Photos of the 6th floor window; David Yaras, Lenny Patrick; General Charles Cabell; Officer J.D. Tippit, Roscoe White, Chuck Nicoletti, Milwaukee Phil Alderiso, Robert Mahue; Herminio Diaz Garcia; Eladio del Valle and LBJ, chief beneficiary of the coup and master of the cover-up.

Witnesses Exculpatory to the Lone Nutter Theory

Grassy Knoll​

Early in the day on Nov. 22nd Julia Ann Mercer steered her car west on elm Street toward the triple underpass and saw a truck parked on the right side of the road. She observed two men, one of which reached out from the truck what appeared to be a gun case. He proceeded to carry it up the grassy hill. On Nov. 22nd, Mercer signed an affidavit for the Dallas Sheriff's office which was published in the volumes of the Warren Commission, but the Warren Commission declined to call her as a witness. -- Vol. XIX, P 483-484 as cited in Lane's "Rush to Judgement, P 29-30.

Of the 90 witnesses who were asked where they heard the shots from, 58 of them said from the direction of the Grassy Knoll. -- Ibid, page 37.

* David Francis Powers and Kenneth O'Donnell were both members of what became known as the Irish Mafia. O'Donnell met JFK via Robert Kennedy. Power and O'Donnell were in the car just behind the Presidential Limo.

The most important thing about Powers and O'Donnell is what they did not tell the Warren Commission. Here is a passage from Tip O'Neill's Man of the House (1987 - page 178):

Tip O'Neil: I was never one of the use people who had doubts or suspicions about the Warren Commission's report on the president's death. But five years after Jack died, I was having dinner with Kenny O'Donnell and a few other people at Jimmy's Harborside Restaurant in Boston, and we got to talking about the assassination.

I was surprised to hear O'Donnell say that he was sure he had heard two shots that came from behind the fence.

O'Neil: "That's not what you told the Warren Commission," I said.

"You're right," he replied. "I told the FBI what I had heard, but they said it couldn't have happened that way and that I must have been imagining things. So I testified the way they wanted me to. I just didn't want to stir up any more pain and trouble for the family."

"I can't believe it," I said. "I wouldn't have done that in a million years. I would have told the truth."

"Tip, you have to understand. The family-everybody wanted this thing behind them."

"Dave Powers was with us at dinner that night, and his recollection of the shots was the same as O'Donnell's. Kenny O'Donnell is no longer alive, but during the writing of this book I checked with Dave Powers. As they say in the news business, he stands by his story."

"And so there will always be some skepticism in my mind about the cause of Jack's death. I used to think that the only people who doubted the conclusions of the Warren Commission were crackpots. Now, however, I'm not so sure."
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=7330

The Cover-Up

"Memorandum for Mr. Moyers," Katzenbach lays out the need for a public statement on the assassination. Katzenbach states that "The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial." Nov. 25, 1963
Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach --
http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/Walkthrough_-_Formation_of_the_Warren_Commission

* * *​

Warren Counsel Wesley Liebeler --:
“Well, you know if we do find out that this is a conspiracy you know that we have orders from Chief Justice Warren to cover this thing up.”
http://www.ctka.net/pr996-odio.html

* * *​

From: "JFK Conspiracy of Silence" by Charles A. Crenshaw, M.D.

"Part of his brain, the cerebellum was dangling from the back of his head...The hundreds of trauma cases involving gunshots that I have seen and treated since 1963 further convince me that my conclusions about President Kennedy's wouinds were correct....The men on the Commission heard exactly what they wanted to hear, or what they were instructed to hear and then reported what they wanted to report or what they were instructed to report.... the Warren Report (is) a fable, a virtual insult to the intellilgence of the American People."

Dr. Robt. McClelland:
"I was in such a position that I could closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been blasted."

* * *

Paul O'Connor, the man whose job it was to extract the brain of the President at Bethesda prior to the autopsy: "My job was to remove the brain... there was no brain to remove. There was no brain."

* * *​

"I am 90 to 95 percent certain that the photographs in the Archives are not of President Kennedy's brain," Douglas Horne, a former naval officer, said in an interview. "If they aren't, that can mean only one thing -- that there has been a coverup of the medical evidence." Horne contends that the damage to the second brain reflected a shot from behind. He says the first brain was Kennedy's and reflected a shot from the front." --
Doug Horne of the Assassination Records Review Board
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/jfk/jfk1110.htm

* * *​

A sworn interview with Saundra Kay Spencer, who developed the JFK autopsy photos, in which she declared that the photos in the Archives are not the ones she developed. Autopsy photographer John Stringer similarly disavowed the supplemental autopsy brain photographs.
http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/JFK_Assassination

* * *​

Pre-Assassination Threats​

Mrs. Kennedy then reached out onto the rear trunk lid. After she crawled back into her limousine seat, both Governor Connally and Mrs. Connally heard her say more than once, "They have killed my husband," and "I have his brains in my hand."[24][25] -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_John_F._Kennedy

* * *​

Charles Milteer pre-assassination prediction: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdbVyhzCcq4

* * *​

The Trafficante Threat
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Di6M37UOx4k

* * *

Doubts​

From:
The JFK Assassination
By David Giamarco

"I no longer feel we simply had no credible evidence or reliable evidence in proof of a conspiracy," former Warren commissioner John J. McCloy admitted in 1978...
William Sullivan, Domestic Intelligence Chief, also doubted the findings saying, "there were huge gaps in the case, gaps we never did close." And Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry later stated he believed that two gunmen were involved...
"We don't have any proof that Oswald fired the rifle," Curry said in 1969.

'That's what you do in a coup d'etat: you try to lead people over here while you go over there," Prouty says, "JFK was killed by two or three professionals. Probably seven or eight bullets fired in all, if that many. And then the professionals just faded. Because when it's done by a hit team that are pros, you'll never know who they are. When they kill the President, there is a change of government and that is a coup d'etat and anybody involved will never be tried because the coup d'etat worked. "Anybody that doesn't realize that isn't using his head."
http://www.prouty.org/giamarco.html


Admissions​


* Madeleine Duncan Brown, Texas in the Morning. The Love Story of Madeleine Brown & President Lyndon Johnson, Baltimore: The Conservatory Press, 1997, p. 166
Madeleine Duncan Brown (July 5, 1925 – June 22, 2002) was a Texas woman who claimed she had been the mistress of U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson for more than two decades. She went public with the claim years after Johnson's death, a relationship that was considered "an open secret" in Texas. She also claimed that her son, Steven Mark Brown, was fathered by Johnson. Steven Mark Brown was born December 27, 1950, and died September 28, 1990.

She claimed that the night before the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Johnson said: "After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again".[1] Brown also claimed to have seen Lee Harvey Oswald with Jack Ruby in the latter's Carousel Club prior to the assassination. In addition, Brown said that on New Years Eve 1963 LBJ confirmed the conspiracy to kill Kennedy, insisting that "the CIA and the oil people of Texas" had been responsible.

* * *​

Jack Ruby admission:
"Everything pertaining to what's happening has never come to the surface. The world will never know the true facts, of what occurred -- my motives. The people that had so much to gain and had such an ulterior motive for putting me in the position I'm in, will never let the true facts come above board to the world."

Reporter : Are these people in very high positions Jack ??

Jack : Yes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDDxYOqyqlc&NR=1

* * *​

From: Rollin Stone
"The Last Confessions of E. Howard Hunt"

"E. Howard also gave Saint two sheets of paper that contained a fuller narrative. It starts out with LBJ again, connecting him to Cord Meyer, then goes on: "Cord Meyer discusses a plot with [David Atlee] Phillips who brings in Wm. Harvey and Antonio Veciana. He meets with Oswald in Mexico City. . . . Then Veciana meets w/ Frank Sturgis in Miami and enlists David Morales in anticipation of killing JFK there. But LBJ changes itinerary to Dallas, citing personal "reasons."

* * *

Confession​

Death Bed Confession of Conspirator E. Howard Hunt:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bknUDgKdEJQ

* * *​

Oswald: "I'm just a patsy"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ofl-CfrxUkM
 
Last edited:
In fact that seems to be entirely constructed of annectdotes. No material evidence. Just supposition and hearsay.

How nice. So how can we be sure 58 people were more honest than 32 who said the shot did not come from the grassy knoll? A guy is claiming he lied under oath, so why do we assume honesty now?

Why believe any stories of who would or would not have liked to shoot JFK whenwe have footage of him being shot from behind. We do see an entry wound behind the ear, we doseethe exit wound exploding out the front of the head. We see NO exit wound to the back of the head. At all. No ejecta. No brains for Jackie to pick up.

If there was a man with a rifle on the grassy knoll all he did was watch LHO shoot JFK in the back of the head.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom