JFK's assassination: your thoughts

[SUSpilot]

I voted CIA because it comes closest to defining the array of right-wing forces involved in the conspiracy. Allen Dulles was key.

Read 'JFK And The Unspeakable' and DiEugenio's 'Destiny Betrayed'.

Ummmmmm....

No.

 

[BStrong]

Oswald was a patsy. It is incomprehensible that anyone would have their photograph taken holding a newspaper and a rifle!

All kidding aside, that's why many legitimate professional shooters aren't keen on being photographed holding a firearm.

It's one thing if you're a recreational or competitive shooter, you may even have endorsement deals from a firearms manufacturer, but it's best for cops and operators not to have pics floating around showing them posing or profiling with firearms.

 

[Mister Earl]

Poll needs a new option.

"On Planet X, Kennedy assassinated Oswald."

 

[catsmate]

I'm curious. Are people still discussing the 'assassination' of Napoleon's son, the Prince Imperial? Is there anyone out there still interested in Kasper Hauser? Closer to home, does anyone care about McKinley or Garfield or William Henry Harrison (One of these names is not like the others...). I ask, because to me it sometimes feels like the JFK assassination has been gone over and over and over again, to the point where it feels like there is literally no fresh ground to dig up, but people still come after it, hoping against hope they'll prove this somewhat mediocre president and apparently quite mediocre human being was... what, murdered as some sort of grandiose scheme involving a mafia no longer at its height, a vice president with what was probably serious contempt for the man, and a Cuban government and its right wing opponents?

Why? Are we going to be discussing this forever? It's over, man. Let it go. Kennedy's dead. He's not coming back.

I have my doubts about the death of Rudolf of Austria.

I voted CIA because it comes closest to defining the array of right-wing forces involved in the conspiracy. Allen Dulles was key.

Read 'JFK And The Unspeakable' and DiEugenio's 'Destiny Betrayed'.

I suppose you'll be providing some evidence for this claim, like you did for your TWA 800 claims?

 

[Robrob]

I voted CIA because it comes closest to defining the array of right-wing forces involved in the conspiracy. Allen Dulles was key.

Read 'JFK And The Unspeakable' and DiEugenio's 'Destiny Betrayed'.

So you gave up on imaginary missiles and moved on to imaginary assassins?

 

[Hans]

I voted CIA because it comes closest to defining the array of right-wing forces involved in the conspiracy. Allen Dulles was key.

Read 'JFK And The Unspeakable' and DiEugenio's 'Destiny Betrayed'.

STILL trying to troll eh? Here is a challenge for you start a thread on the subject above and try to:

Provide evidence

Try to sound sane

Try really hard not to troll....

lol

 

[JayUtah]

I voted CIA because it comes closest to defining the array of right-wing forces involved in the conspiracy.

Do you have the name of the person who actually killed Kennedy, and evidence of that action? Or is this just going to be yet another song-and-dance through what else was going on at the time, with no ability to connect it to any of the evidence associated with the actual events in Dealey Plaza?

Allen Dulles was key.

I assume you're trying to resurrect the Dulles/Bankcroft argument. That should be entertaining.

Read 'JFK And The Unspeakable' and DiEugenio's 'Destiny Betrayed'.

Well, at least we've gotten you as far as actually naming your sources instead of just plagiarizing them and trying to hide them. But since you have been notorious for just throwing out vague claims and being unable or unwilling to defend them, I'll have to ask whether you actually read these books. And more importantly, whether you're willing to defend the claims and research of their authors yourself. Your pattern of meeting any and all criticism with bluster-and-proxy arguments, then turning tail, does not bode well for your engagement on this topic.

 

[jhunter1163]

I have a confession to make. I was born on November 2, 1963. I was twenty days old when JFK was killed. I don't have an alibi for that day. I also have no recollection of the time before or after the assassination... just sayin'...

I was even closer birthdate-wise: November 19, 1963. I do have an alibi though; my parents were bringing me home from the hospital when they heard the news over their car radio. I'm not the closest on the forum in terms of birth though; my Mod Twin, Locknar, is about three hours younger than I am.

 

[BStrong]

I voted CIA because it comes closest to defining the array of right-wing forces involved in the conspiracy. Allen Dulles was key.

Read 'JFK And The Unspeakable' and DiEugenio's 'Destiny Betrayed'.

If you want to read JFK fiction, just go to the best and read James Ellroy's American Tabloid and The Cold Six Thousand.

 

[Hans]

I was even closer birthdate-wise: November 19, 1963. I do have an alibi though; my parents were bringing me home from the hospital when they heard the news over their car radio. I'm not the closest on the forum in terms of birth though; my Mod Twin, Locknar, is about three hours younger than I am.

I have to confess that not only did I own a rifle but was an excellent shot but I was in grade school!

 

[dudalb]

I am expecting a upsurge in JKF Conspiracy thoery activity with the upcoming film "Parkland" opening in November. Looks like a good film that is not promoting crackpot conspiracy theories,but that won't keep the Conspiracy Loons from trying to exploit it.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

I am expecting a upsurge in JKF Conspiracy thoery activity with the upcoming film "Parkland" opening in November. Looks like a good film that is not promoting crackpot conspiracy theories,but that won't keep the Conspiracy Loons from trying to exploit it.

"Parkland" stars Zac Efron, who also starred in "Hairspray", the creation of John Waters, a noted homosexual, just like Clay Shaw, played by Tommy Lee Jones in "JFK", who was also in "The Fugitive" (Oswald's status!) with Harrison Ford, who is set to co-star in Rob Reiner's "You Belong to Me" with...

Zac Efron!!!

 

[sackett]

Well hell, what about Warren Harding? He just happened to die suddenly when all the fecal matter was hitting the fan. Sure. Uh huh.

JetBlast and me, we came to town a lit-tle too long ago to buy that one.

And how about all those l's in Allen Dulles's name? Coincidence, right? Riiiiight!

 

[ArmillarySphere]

And what about Lister? Did he ever get his Vindaloo?

 

[ladmo]

Posters who say there is no new evidence completely fail in explaining why the current theory of Lee Harvey Oswald is valid. The Warren Commission was not a court of law, the members were politically appointed, critical forensic evidence is not available to the public therefore a thorough and complete investigation will never be conducted (at least not until all is declassified).

What the Lone Gunman Theorists fail to explain is: "if Oswald was the single individual responsible for killing the President, then why is any of the evidence that is held in protective custody of the Government considered unavailable because of risk to our National Security?"

Lone Gunman Theorists totally ignore the HSCA findings of "probable conspiracy" in the JFK case. They completely rely on a committee that has, time and again, been shown to have been selective on what evidence they used and disclosed. There have been subsequent congressional committees that had previously classified information... declassified.

If any of the Lone Gunman supporters care to expand their knowledge base, they need to read the released documents due to the ARRB, the AARC, and the JFK Records Act. Although there are over 1 million pages that have been released since the early 70's, these additional documents prove that many files were destroyed due to the gaps in various timelines.

Bottom line: there was more than just a crazy lone gunman. Who was behind the assassination is not perfectly clear but it is crystal clear that one deranged, non-aligned individual could not have over 5 million pages still classified for reasons of National Security.

 

[LSSBB]

Posters who say there is no new evidence completely fail in explaining why the current theory of Lee Harvey Oswald is valid. The Warren Commission was not a court of law, the members were politically appointed, critical forensic evidence is not available to the public therefore a thorough and complete investigation will never be conducted (at least not until all is declassified).

What the Lone Gunman Theorists fail to explain is: "if Oswald was the single individual responsible for killing the President, then why is any of the evidence that is held in protective custody of the Government considered unavailable because of risk to our National Security?"

Lone Gunman Theorists totally ignore the HSCA findings of "probable conspiracy" in the JFK case. They completely rely on a committee that has, time and again, been shown to have been selective on what evidence they used and disclosed. There have been subsequent congressional committees that had previously classified information... declassified.

If any of the Lone Gunman supporters care to expand their knowledge base, they need to read the released documents due to the ARRB, the AARC, and the JFK Records Act. Although there are over 1 million pages that have been released since the early 70's, these additional documents prove that many files were destroyed due to the gaps in various timelines.

Bottom line: there was more than just a crazy lone gunman. Who was behind the assassination is not perfectly clear but it is crystal clear that one deranged, non-aligned individual could not have over 5 million pages still classified for reasons of National Security.

I don't understand. Are you saying records are missing, therefore there had to be a second shooter? I don't see how you get that conclusion from that evidence.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Posters who say there is no new evidence completely fail in explaining why the current theory of Lee Harvey Oswald is valid. The Warren Commission was not a court of law, the members were politically appointed, critical forensic evidence is not available to the public therefore a thorough and complete investigation will never be conducted (at least not until all is declassified).

What the Lone Gunman Theorists fail to explain is: "if Oswald was the single individual responsible for killing the President, then why is any of the evidence that is held in protective custody of the Government considered unavailable because of risk to our National Security?"

Lone Gunman Theorists totally ignore the HSCA findings of "probable conspiracy" in the JFK case. They completely rely on a committee that has, time and again, been shown to have been selective on what evidence they used and disclosed. There have been subsequent congressional committees that had previously classified information... declassified.

If any of the Lone Gunman supporters care to expand their knowledge base, they need to read the released documents due to the ARRB, the AARC, and the JFK Records Act. Although there are over 1 million pages that have been released since the early 70's, these additional documents prove that many files were destroyed due to the gaps in various timelines.

Bottom line: there was more than just a crazy lone gunman. Who was behind the assassination is not perfectly clear but it is crystal clear that one deranged, non-aligned individual could not have over 5 million pages still classified for reasons of National Security.

So, argument from ignorance then?

 

[JayUtah]

Posters who say there is no new evidence completely fail in explaining why the current theory of Lee Harvey Oswald is valid.

Define "valid."

...a thorough and complete investigation will never be conducted (at least not until all is declassified).

Translation: The reason conspiracy theorists cannot name a better suspect is because the Powers That Be are keeping key information away from them, not because they're inept investigators. Same old tired rhetoric that besets all conspiracy theories -- the reason they remain non-credible, according to their proponents, is inevitably someone else's fault.

What the Lone Gunman Theorists fail to explain is: "if Oswald was the single individual responsible for killing the President, then why is any of the evidence that is held in protective custody of the Government considered unavailable because of risk to our National Security?"

Begging the question. Name some information you know exists, show us how you know it exists, and show that it's unavailable for the reasons you state. Also show us how and why those stated reasons should not be believed. Unless you have concrete cases, your just handwaving through generalities.

Lone Gunman Theorists totally ignore the HSCA findings of "probable conspiracy" in the JFK case.

No we don't. We note correctly that it was based on findings that were explained after the HSCA disbanded. While the HSCA was not able to resolve that evidence, we later did.

They completely rely on a committee that has, time and again, been shown to have been selective on what evidence they used and disclosed.

Standard JFK rhetoric: If you don't accept some wacky conspiracy theory, then you're just a naive believer in the "official story." We dispute conspiracy theories because they're poorly reasoned and poorly supported, not out of devotion to some government entity. This is the same straw-man claim that dooms all serious efforts to test a conspiracy theory.

If any of the Lone Gunman supporters care to expand their knowledge base...

And again the same tired JFK conspiracy rhetoric: All the critics are so much less informed than conspiracy theorists. I daresay you haven't read here the epic threads on this subject that preceded your offering, nor the participation of your present critics. When you begin with the assumption that you're the smartest guy in the room, you're frequently in for a nasty surprise.

...they need to read the released documents...

And on what basis do you assume your critics haven't done this?

Bottom line: there was more than just a crazy lone gunman.

No evidence of any other gunman has been shown. The conspiracy theories are all invariably based on the failure of the evidence to "line up" to the ad hoc expectations of people who suddenly decide they're criminal investigators. And based on that failure to satisfy ad hoc criteria, the presence of additional assassins is inferred. That never has, and never will, amount to evidence for an affirmative case. Learn the difference between inference and evidence.

Who was behind the assassination is not perfectly clear...

Translation: None of this self-indulgent handwaving has the slightest value in determining to a higher degree of confidence who actually killed Kennedy. This, not some stubborn devotion to the Warren Commission, is why JFK conspiracy theorists have no credibility. For all their bluster and condescension, they have nothing to show.

...but it is crystal clear that one deranged, non-aligned individual could not have over 5 million pages still classified for reasons of National Security.

No, it isn't "crystal clear" at all. It's a straightforward argument from ignorance. You merely beg the question that all this claimed secrecy must have the explanation that more than one person fired at Kennedy. That's not a defensible line of reasoning at all.

Again, none of these self-proclaimed Kennedy investigators seems to have the slightest idea what separates inference from evidence and how one is persuasive while the other is not. When you learn that basic principle of reasoning, then perhaps you can talk down to us.

 

[Robrob]

Bottom line: there was more than just a crazy lone gunman. Who was behind the assassination is not perfectly clear but it is crystal clear that one deranged, non-aligned individual could not have over 5 million pages still classified for reasons of National Security.

-- So, no evidence but because there are documents still awaiting their declassification date, conspiracy?

 

[BStrong]

Posters who say there is no new evidence completely fail in explaining why the current theory of Lee Harvey Oswald is valid. The Warren Commission was not a court of law, the members were politically appointed, critical forensic evidence is not available to the public therefore a thorough and complete investigation will never be conducted (at least not until all is declassified).

What the Lone Gunman Theorists fail to explain is: "if Oswald was the single individual responsible for killing the President, then why is any of the evidence that is held in protective custody of the Government considered unavailable because of risk to our National Security?"

Lone Gunman Theorists totally ignore the HSCA findings of "probable conspiracy" in the JFK case. They completely rely on a committee that has, time and again, been shown to have been selective on what evidence they used and disclosed. There have been subsequent congressional committees that had previously classified information... declassified.

If any of the Lone Gunman supporters care to expand their knowledge base, they need to read the released documents due to the ARRB, the AARC, and the JFK Records Act. Although there are over 1 million pages that have been released since the early 70's, these additional documents prove that many files were destroyed due to the gaps in various timelines.

Bottom line: there was more than just a crazy lone gunman. Who was behind the assassination is not perfectly clear but it is crystal clear that one deranged, non-aligned individual could not have over 5 million pages still classified for reasons of National Security.

First of all, LHO's role and guilt in the JFK assassination are at this stage more than "theory."

If you want to beat dead horses, the continuing JFK discussion is still open, you can find plenty of fail on the part of our late, not-so-great now-banned member striving to clear the good name of LHO.

I don't know how you arrived at your conclusion in the second bolded, but a Marine that defected, came back to the US and made the big time in murdering the POTUS might have engendered a little bit of investigation involving sources and methods that the Gov.org wouldn't disclose no matter who the subject was.

And as far as being part of a conspiracy, I don't believe LHO had enough going on intellectually to be anything other than what he was - a inadequate personality with a firearm.

BTW, if you want a more detailed answer on my part, just go up thread and read my post that goes back to 2012.