Do you know who killed Kennedy?

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Krumple
 
Reply Mon 1 Mar, 2010 05:34 pm
@hue-man,
Isn't a better question, who killed kenny?
 
hue-man
 
Reply Mon 1 Mar, 2010 09:43 pm
@Krumple,
Krumple;134225 wrote:
Isn't a better question, who killed kenny?


You bastard! lol
 
HexHammer
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 07:10 am
@Theaetetus,
Theaetetus;134204 wrote:
That is not an argument. It is a series of statement of "facts." Your argument would attempt to persuade the reader by offering reasonable evidence that supports your argument, which then we would either accept or formulate a counterargument.
Then allow me to ask, doest official evidence count, because we all know that goverments would NEVER lie, or doest evidence which proves beyond resoanable doubt, count?
 
xris
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 07:25 am
@HexHammer,
I don't think his dead ,I think his living in Martinique with Marilyn. If Elvis can turn up every week at my local and sing hound dog, anythings possible.
 
William
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 08:21 am
@hue-man,
I thought this article intriguing.

Conspiracy?
"Ask not what your country can do for you--ask what you can do for your country." -John Fitzgerald Kennedy. As President, John Fitzgerald Kennedy set out to redeem his campaign pledge to get America moving again he had no idea that he would soon be stopped. He was one on the nation's most effective presidents since Franklin Delano Roosevelt; however he would never get to finish his term in office. On November 22, 1963 at approximately 12:00 pm President Kennedy arrived in Dallas, Texas on board Air Force One. Less than two hours later, at 1:00 pm, JFK was declared dead at Parkland Hospital in Dallas Texas. Lee Harvey Oswald was arrested at approximately 1:45 pm at a theater in Dallas. America had many questions such as why Oswald had done it and if he had, had he been a lone assassin or was it a conspiracy to remove President Kennedy from office. Theories began surface very quickly especially after what occurred on November 24, 1963. While Oswald was being transferred to the Dallas County Jail a man by the name of Jack Ruby shot and killed him.

Forty three years later many Americans are still wondering what exactly occurred on that November afternoon. In the days following the tragedy the newly sworn in president, Lyndon Johnson quickly put together what is now know as the "Warren Commission," and hoped that every theory that was created after the death of JFK would quickly be eliminated. The theory that the country has been led to believe is the "Magic/Single Bullet Theory," which proposes that the bodies of JFK and John Connally were injured by the same bullet, that had been fired from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository by Lee Harvey Oswald. "The Single Bullet Theory," is important because if true, it removed the need for another shooter from the back to account for the fact that Kennedy and Connally responded to the shots in less than the minimum re-firing time of 2.3 seconds. It was officially concluded by the Warren Commission that Lee Harvey Oswald was a crazy, lone gunman, who shot the President three times, had no ties to the CIA or the government. Through the years, however, hundreds of conspiracy theories have developed, and with good reason.


Many had motives to kill the JFK, including the CIA, the mafia, extremists, and even JFK's vice president, Lyndon Johnson. I believe that the United States government is covering up a lot of information that is key to finding out what really occurred that day in Dallas. It is hard for me to believe a conspiracy didn't take place in Dallas. The events that took place on the day following the murder of JFK were the biggest problems with the investigation. The suspect, Lee Harvey Oswald was killed while he was being transferred to the Dallas County Jail, by a local bar owner, Jack Ruby. What does not make any sense to me is the fact that reporters and other people were allowed to be around Oswald as he was escorted out of the Dallas station shows plain irresponsibility on the part of the Dallas police. Under no circumstance should public access to Oswald have been permitted. A lot of people believe that Jack Ruby killed Oswald to keep him from talking and that the Dallas Police was ordered to let it happened. I believe the theory the CIA had a role in the murder of JFK.


Despite many inconsistencies for many years the American public has been led to believe the Warren Commission's verdict that "Lee Harvey Oswald had been the sole assassin in the murder of John Kennedy who died as result of three shots being fired from the Texas school depository building." Evidence keeps coming up, as does inconsistencies on the Warren Commissions part.


I believe that the Warren Commission disregarded evidence if it contradicted or disproved their conclusion. The Warren commission was under a lot of pressure because of the public. At the time Oswald had seemed like the perfect person to blame because he was an extremist man with a grudge. Many people in America were startled that the Warren Commission did not make any attempt to investigate other possible theories and that they hadn't followed a number of promising leads. The commission's biggest mistake was disregarding key eyewitnesses whom they considered to be conflicting and opposing to their lone gunman theory. Nobody in the commission had heard one of the witnesses who saw or heard something else that afternoon. These people were crucial witnesses such as Abraham Zapruder, J.C Price a man who was at the motorcade that said he saw a man with a rifle running behind the fence on the grassy knoll. There was also was women who stated," I heard four to six shots and I'm pretty used to guns. They weren't echoes. They were different guns that were being fired."


JFK's autopsy contained many discrepancies and contradictions. Two autopsies were performed on Kennedy. The purpose of doing two autopsies was that it would reveal the angles and where the assassin or assassins were at. However the autopsies created even more confusion because there were many apparent changes. The first autopsy was conducted in Parkland Hospital and the second at the naval base in Maryland. When the two examinations were compared, disturbing differences showed up. The main differences were that the wounds were different. In Dallas, doctors claimed that the bullet entered Kennedy's body at the front of the neck.. When Kennedy was brought into Parkland Hospital, Dr. Perry said that he noticed a hole of about 5mm just below Kennedy's adams apple, where he believed the bullet had entered. In the autopsy done in Washington they wrote that the bullet exited from the neck. Their report confirmed the 'single bullet theory' addressed by the Warren Commission whose conclusion was highly dependent on this theory. Even Governor Connally believed that the bullet that wounded Kennedy wasn't the same one that responsible for his wounds. There are facts that change this theory such as the fact that the bullet was mysteriously found on a hospital stretcher in mint condition. Yet the bullet should have been out of shape and showing signs of severe impact, considering that it had gone through two major bones and had torn out a great deal of muscle. I believe that the bullet was planted on the stretcher by the FBI or CIA so that they could pin the assassination on Oswald, again indicating the involvement of a conspiracy.


The differences as you can see are very evident and have a great influence on the theory of the second gunman. The autopsy in Dallas seems to point towards two gunmen, while the autopsy in Washington points towards a single gunman. Although we will not know until the autopsy reports are declassified I believe that soon the truth about what happened that November day will be revealed. It has recently also come to light that much of the reports have been destroyed. If this is true I believe that the government is hiding something that is important to finding out what really occurred. Lee Harvey Oswald's words, "I'm at patsy," had big of impact on my opinion that he was not alone.
"

William
 
HexHammer
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 08:29 am
@hue-man,
Theaetetus

Dear mod, I don't expect you to appologize, mods never does such things, but I belive William presented undermining evidence for Oswald being the only killer, if killer at all.

1) why would the reports be classifyed?

2) why would Oswald be silenced?
 
xris
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 08:40 am
@HexHammer,
Yes and you can read another report that answers all those questions and so it goes on and on . What you have to consider is how many might have been involved in this assassination. If one in the CIA was involved then a hundred knew, if anyone in the administration of the inquest was involved then you can say sixty more knew and so you go on. Who decided to assassinate a president? who planned it ? how many?..Now after so many years not one death bed confession not one rogue CIA officer prepared to break cover...Conspiracies need scores of collaborators to keep their mouths shut forever and ever and it aint possible.
 
Zetherin
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 08:45 am
@HexHammer,
HexHammer;134568 wrote:
Theaetetus

Dear mod, I don't expect you to appologize, mods never does such things, but I belive William presented undermining evidence for Oswald being the only killer, if killer at all.

1) why would the reports be classifyed?

2) why would Oswald be silenced?


Where's this undermining evidence at?

The article is speculation and hearsay. I can't believe you can't see that. The guy quotes a few supposed witnesses and says things like, "I believe that the bullet was planted on the stretcher by the FBI or CIA so that they could pin the assassination on Oswald, again indicating the involvement of a conspiracy.", and you eat it up like a fat kid.

You guys really can't be this gullible. Please. Please.
 
William
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 08:52 am
@hue-man,
Let me offer this observation and the similarities of each.

It is striking the speed in which Oswald was "found" in the Texas theater so soon after the shooting as if it were known by someone that he would "be there" and..........

The same speed in which Timothy McVeigh was caught after the Oklahoma bombing.

I think there is reason to believe both were dupes and pawns and used to divert attention to any truth that might be investigated to finding out who was indeed responsible for putting such diabolical schemes together.

The value of information. Damn what a double edged sword that is. It is as though there are powers that have the where with all in the information they have to make anyone do anything they want, anytime they want without the first hint of any evidence leading to them.

The only way is to strive to ascertain who would "profit" the most from these atrocities, such as can be said "they" could be the instigator of all atrocities. Is there anyone so smart to forever get away with such stuff? Could that be what is known as "consummate evil"?

William
 
hue-man
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 09:00 am
@William,
I'm almost ashamed that I started this thread. I should of known that it would turn into a debate about JFK conspiracy theories even though that's wasn't the point of posting the thread.
 
Zetherin
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 09:00 am
@William,
William;134578 wrote:
Let me offer this observation and the similarities of each.

It it striking the speed in which Oswald was "found" in the Texas theater so soon after the shooting as if it were known by someone that he would "be there" and..........

The same speed in which Timothy McVeigh was caught after the Oklahoma bombing.

I think there is reason to believe both were dupes and pawns and used to divert attention to any truth that might be investigated to finding out who was indeed responsible for putting such diabolical schemes together.

The value of information. Damn what a double edged sword that is. It is as though there are powers that have the where with all in the information they have to make anyone do anything they want, anytime they want without the first hint of any evidence leading to them.

The only way is to strive to ascertain who would "profit" the most from these atrocities, such as can be said "they" could be the instigator of all atrocities. Is there anyone so smart to forever get away with such stuff? Could that be what is known as "consummate evil"?

William


Groovy.

So, anyway, back to the reasonable question: where's the evidence again?

---------- Post added 03-02-2010 at 10:01 AM ----------

hue-man wrote:

I'm almost ashamed that I started this post. I should of known that it would turn into a debate about JFK conspiracy theories even though that's wasn't the point of the post.


Yes, this was an epistemological conversation. It has now sidetracked. I apologize for that.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 09:04 am
@hue-man,
It is often true that the higher the stakes of what you claim to know, the higher the standards are of what you claim to know. Knowing that the accused committed murder requires a higher standard of justification than does knowing that he committed only a parking offense. I imagine the same is true about killing a president.
 
xris
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 09:07 am
@hue-man,
hue-man;134583 wrote:
I'm almost ashamed that I started this thread. I should of known that it would turn into a debate about JFK conspiracy theories even though that's wasn't the point of posting the thread.
Sorry but it was inevitable. Someone shot my cat ,would that do?
 
Theaetetus
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 10:02 am
@hue-man,
hue-man;134583 wrote:
I'm almost ashamed that I started this thread. I should of known that it would turn into a debate about JFK conspiracy theories even though that's wasn't the point of posting the thread.


I was just making the point that Hex was not forming an argument that appeals to knowing or not knowing. Only stupid people blame their ignorance or knowledge on hearsay and coincidence, and thus, that is what is currently being attempted.

In the cases of "who killed JFK" and the like, most people claim to know who killed JFK by just accepting the historical conclusion. It is not an issue that affects many people's direct lives, and thus, they do not need to go through the evidence to form their conclusions. Most people with half a brain just do not care to waste mental resources to tether their claimed knowledge to much else. The insignificance of the issue allows individuals to know the fact that "Kennedy was assassinated by Oswald" with much weaker evidence than say the conclusion to the question, "who killed your best friend in a hit and run accident?"
 
William
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 10:46 am
@hue-man,
Hue-man,
What did you expect? If you knew the answer to the question, they why bring the subject up. There is much to be said about all such atrocities that lead to those "conspiracy theories' to the point that make one believe there is no such thing. Ingenious, I think. That gets one to think conspiracies don't exist. That's a bit naive, isn't it?

It could also be said that John Wilkes Booth was a pawn as were the radical feminist,
and all those so called "takers of life" with no fingerprints whatsoever of the one who actually did the killing. A person doesn't have to pull the trigger to kill. If they have the means they can always get some else to do it for them.

Yes even 911. Yes it can be assumed bin laden complicit and his religious beliefs could be just what the doctor ordered to get the job done. When 2 + 2 don't add up, the mind will never sleep until it does. In this day and age it is easy to link two zealots up to accomplish a task. All one needs is the right "carrot".

Now, thanks to the internet opinions are being offered that previous to it's inception, never had a voice. Myself included. I have always wanted to share my thoughts but never had a venue to do such and now that makes me a conspiracy theorist, ha! Along with a bigot, anti-semite and homophobe. Ha!. I have offered too much for those labels to apply to me and there are many who hear what I have to say who are now beginning to understand the nature of the person who cast such dispersions.

Eventually, such efforts will appear obscene as defenses will be strong enough to withstand such name calling and recognize them for what they are.

So Z, if you wish, close the thread. It makes not matter to me. I've had my say. Sorry if it did not agree with what the author wanted to hear. That does happen from time to time. To answer the question, I must assume Oswald did it. Now is that what they wanted to hear? Until more evidence comes otherwise, I am ok with that. I have never been one to believe everything deem credible that is offered just because someone say it is so. I really amazes me how many there are that do.

William
 
HexHammer
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 05:13 pm
@hue-man,
...actually ..I TAKE IT ALL BACK!! ../walks to the noose which the forum provided. I'v before been involved in discussions like these before about 9/11, it can take months, I talk for deaf ears, it takes too freggin much to convince the angry mob! ..you'll have your way!!

..spread my ashes for the wind!
 
Krumple
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 05:47 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;134574 wrote:
Where's this undermining evidence at?

The article is speculation and hearsay. I can't believe you can't see that. The guy quotes a few supposed witnesses and says things like, "I believe that the bullet was planted on the stretcher by the FBI or CIA so that they could pin the assassination on Oswald, again indicating the involvement of a conspiracy.", and you eat it up like a fat kid.

You guys really can't be this gullible. Please. Please.


You do have to admit the bullet found on the stretcher is a little bit questionable. Why was it there in such relative good condition? It seems like no bullet fired from a gun that hit something would ever been in that good of condition unless it was fired into ballistics jell or something equivalent. It definitely could not be the bullet that passed through any material like a human body, bone, seats, metal rails or springs and remain in the condition it was found in.

One of the pieces of evidence that I find oddly "covered up" is the cement chip from a stray bullet that hit the man standing under the triple overpass. That chuck of ground could have been used to trace back the trajectory of the bullet to it's origin to get the angle the bullet was traveling. It would be a very key piece of evidence but not more than a day after the event occurred the chunk of concrete was dug up and replaced. Then the piece of concrete was "conveniently" lost.

Doesn't it seem strange in the first place to dig up a piece of evidence like that? No other murders ever require that concrete get dug up if they contain bullet impact sites. They are left in place to help determine where the bullets originate from, and how much energy they had before they hit the material.

There is just too many mess ups, too many odd happenings for it to be a one man show.
 
Theaetetus
 
Reply Wed 3 Mar, 2010 10:18 am
@HexHammer,
HexHammer;134883 wrote:
...actually ..I TAKE IT ALL BACK!! ../walks to the noose which the forum provided. I'v before been involved in discussions like these before about 9/11, it can take months, I talk for deaf ears, it takes too freggin much to convince the angry mob! ..you'll have your way!!

..spread my ashes for the wind!


Its not an angry mob. Some of us have far more important things to worry about than JFK or 9/11. If people that spend their time worrying about conspiracy theories would take all of that energy and put it towards something like ending the abuse of military power, relaxing the stranglehold that the military industrial complex has on the world, and putting an end to the militarization of police forces, then maybe, maybe, these types of conspiracies could be put to an end since the are the result industrial militarization.

Sure, there are all kinds of funny happenings surrounding these conspiracy theories, but it is all irrelevant because they are symptoms of a much greater problem.
 
pinfall
 
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2010 11:04 am
@hue-man,
I refer to the divine wisdom of Red Dwarf when I tell you that JFK from the future killed himself. As I see no proof against this theory I shall throw this into the mix as it is as likely as many well-documneted theories.
 
pondfish
 
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2010 11:40 am
@hue-man,
Mossad and jews in America. FBI/CIA all are jews. They rule america and world.
 
 

 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.02 seconds on 10/22/2021 at 04:14:18