• 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.
Robert Prey said:
There were actual gunman in the TSBD as well. And perhaps elsewhere. The team, originally set up to assassinate Castro, had as their strategy a triangular ambush to make sure the murder was successful.
Click to expand...

And how were they going to frame a patsy as "the lone gunman" doing all that?
 
And why can't we see the open exit wound on the back of the head of JFK in either the zfilm or polaroids?
 
Robert Prey said:
There were actual gunman in the TSBD as well. And perhaps elsewhere. The team, originally set up to assassinate Castro, had as their strategy a triangular ambush to make sure the murder was successful.
Click to expand...


So killing JFK (in public no less), no matter how it looked, was the main objective, but if due to blind luck it managed to look like it was all done by Oswald, then that's just the icing on the cake as far as the conspirators were concerned?

Whether you are consciously aware of it or not, you are dodging my primary question: why did the conspirators bother even attempting to forge the lone gunman narrative? After all a conspiracy doesn't have to equate to an inside job. Oswald could have conspired with one or more like-minded individuals who also happened to be sharpshooters. There's nothing inherently absurd in that premise.

The plan you obliquely hint at is no doubt an evil plan but is it in your opinion a smart plan?
 
JohnG said:
So killing JFK (in public no less), no matter how it looked, was the main objective, but if due to blind luck it managed to look like it was all done by Oswald, then that's just the icing on the cake as far as the conspirators were concerned?

Whether you are consciously aware of it or not, you are dodging my primary question: why did the conspirators bother even attempting to forge the lone gunman narrative? After all a conspiracy doesn't have to equate to an inside job. Oswald could have conspired with one or more like-minded individuals who also happened to be sharpshooters. There's nothing inherently absurd in that premise.

The plan you obliquely hint at is no doubt an evil plan but is it in your opinion a smart plan?
Click to expand...

The evils aren't smart, they're diabolically clever this means they always have to use the most convoluted, complex and clever ways to achieve their ends while being diabolical they will always leave loose ends for the gifted among us to tug on and unravel the whole plot.:duck:
 
Why is it that I and countless others can come up with literally hundreds of different ways to kill Kennedy that would be far easier than staging a shooting in full view of hundreds of witnesses?
 
tsig said:
The evils aren't smart, they're diabolically clever this means they always have to use the most convoluted, complex and clever ways to achieve their ends while being diabolical they will always leave loose ends for the gifted among us to tug on and unravel the whole plot.:duck:
Click to expand...

Exception: Scott Evil "Why don't you just shoot him?"
 
jargon buster said:
Why is it that I and countless others can come up with literally hundreds of different ways to kill Kennedy that would be far easier than staging a shooting in full view of hundreds of witnesses?
Click to expand...

Because we're not Eeee-Vil...only practical.
 
JohnG said:
So killing JFK (in public no less), no matter how it looked, was the main objective, but if due to blind luck it managed to look like it was all done by Oswald, then that's just the icing on the cake as far as the conspirators were concerned?

Whether you are consciously aware of it or not, you are dodging my primary question: why did the conspirators bother even attempting to forge the lone gunman narrative? After all a conspiracy doesn't have to equate to an inside job. Oswald could have conspired with one or more like-minded individuals who also happened to be sharpshooters. There's nothing inherently absurd in that premise.

The plan you obliquely hint at is no doubt an evil plan but is it in your opinion a smart plan?
Click to expand...

Oswald may have indeed been a part of the conspiracy, Yet no one on this board has been able to incriminate him as one of the shooters.
 
Last edited:
Noztradamus said:
And how were they going to frame a patsy as "the lone gunman" doing all that?
Click to expand...

In the long run, they didn't. IN the short run, they duped the American people with their assets in the media and the phony baloney stories of Oswald the loser, the Commie, the traitor, the nut, all of which was far from the truth, and then most of all those phoney but highly incriminating backyard photos.
 
RoboTimbo said:
Good boy! Yes, Oswald was in the 6th floor of the TSBD and fired the three shots from his MC rifle. You'll have to explain what you mean by "as well", though.


Yeah, you're going to need evidence for that one.


What team?

And why does the Zapruder film show the mass of ejecta coming out of the exit wound of the right front of JFK's head indicating a shot from, well, where we know it came from: Oswald.

Why do you continue to slink away from answering questions? Feet bothering you?
Click to expand...

It's a simple multiple choice 5 part question. The fact that you and your Amen Chorus of Lone Nutters refuse to give an answer speaks volumes as to the validity of your argument.
 
Robert Prey said:
It's a simple multiple choice 5 part question. The fact that you and your Amen Chorus of Lone Nutters refuse to give an answer speaks volumes as to the validity of your argument.
Click to expand...

Guess you missed this:

EventHorizon said:
Because it was a loaded question. You asked:

Why is there no visible exit wound in the Z film???
Click to expand...

There is no answer to this question because there IS a visible exit wound in the Zapruder film whether you choose to see it or not.
Click to expand...

The refusal to answer speaks volumes about your ability to frame a non-fallacious question. One might say it also speaks volumes about the validity of your argument.
 
jargon buster said:
again, why didn't they just smother him with a pillow?
Click to expand...
.
Chris Matthews has a book out on JFK.
JFK was given the last rites of the Catholic Church at least twice before his trip to Dallas. Maybe three or more...
.
http://www.doctorzebra.com/prez/g35.htm
.
"Kennedy received the last rites three times:

On the ocean liner Queen Mary in September 1947, bringing him home from London where he had received the diagnosis of Addison disease and been hospitalized [7w1]
A post-operative urinary tract infection in October 1954 put Kennedy into a coma [7z]
[Presumably after being shot. Still looking to see if there was an additional time.]"
 
Robert Prey said:
Oswald may have indeed been a part of the conspiracy, Yet no one on this board has been able to incriminate him as one of the shooters.
Click to expand...


Oswald had motive, means and the opportunity to commit the crime. He owned the rifle that actual ballistics experts say is the gun the fired the bullets that struck Kennedy. His subsequent behavior (fleeing the scene, killing Tippit, struggling with the police at the movie theater, his odd, evasive answers to reporters etc.) points to him being somehow implicated in the crime. It is intellectually dishonest to blithely hand-wave evidence as fake simply because it doesn't fit with your theory.

I don't know if it's stubbornness or some sort of cognitive dissonance on your part but you still haven't answered this question:

Why did the conspirators bother even attempting to forge the lone gunman narrative?.

Robert Prey said:
Naivete.
Click to expand...


I realize you meant that as some sort of zinger but like most of what you write here it doesn't stand up to close scrutiny. Why is it naive to suggest there are other easier ways to kill Kennedy?

Now I'm going to surprise you and agree with you for probably the first and last time ever. I can just about buy the idea that a group of corrupt members of the government might for whatever reason decide to murder their commander-in-chief and frame a lone patsy. What I can't buy is that they'd deliberately frame a lone patsy by using multiple shooters in multiple locations. Such a plan would be perversely stupid.

Kennedy was not only in poor health (something your shadowy all seeing cabal would know about). He also had several scandalous secrets that he could have been either blackmailed with or raked over the coals with if they had been made public, potentially affecting his chances at reelection.

Why was it so important for the conspirators to kill him?

In plain view of hundreds of witnesses?

By trying to frame one shooter yet using multiple shooters?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom