JFK Assasination

[Hababi]

Most Americans think that there was a conspiracy involved in the assassination of JFK. What do you think?

[Egggo]

don't care i think there are more important things to worry about

[Slaapkamers]

http://panther1.last.fm/avatar/5c85a930a1a8b496d984cf9bd52291bb.gif

[Mr. Ron]

The fact that there was an exit wound on the back of his head alone rules out there being one shooter. There was also a bullet hole through the front of the windshield.

If he was shot from behind where Oswald was, his entire front part of his face/head would have been blown off, it wasn't.

[Der Übermensch]

Little known fact is that JFK was wearing a back brace when he was shot, which made his body act in a completly different way then one would normally expect.

[gregulus]

The most credible conspiracy theories have been proven false time and again. Most noteably the recording from the policeman's microphone.

Also, the movie JFK presented Jim Garrison as an American hero fighting for truth and justice. The real Garrison was so desperate to find a conspiracy theory, his entire case against Clay Shaw was based on a witness who later admitted that he was unsure if he actually saw Shaw with Oswald and Ferrie (who is perhaps one of the spookiest looking men ever). For those of you interested, http://www.mugshots.com/IMAGES/P__david-ferrie.jpg that is David Ferrie's mugshot.

[Mr. Ron]

Still, you can't explain away the exit wound being on the back of the head. There's also the fact that his head wound was surgically altered.

[griftadan]

The fact that there was an exit wound on the back of his head alone rule out there being one shooter. There was also a bullet hole through the front of the windshield.

If he was shot from behind where Oswald was, his entire front part of his face/head would have been blown off, it wasn't.

his skull was pretty much destroyed, haven't you seen the pictures? the video of the shooting convinces me he was shot form behind.

[Mr. Ron]

his skull was pretty much destroyed, haven't you seen the pictures? the video of the shooting convinces me he was shot form behind.

Warning, graphic pics:

http://sinoemedicalassociation.org/pathologylectures/JFK-autopsy.jpg

http://www.manuscriptservice.com/AutopsyRoom/figure-9.jpg

The direction of the blast from the shot and gaping wound suggest a backward movemnet, which is inconsistent with a shot from behind. If he was shot from the behind by the high powered rifle he was shot with, the entire front of his face would be gone.

[Mr. Ron]

Here's a few vids on his assassination...they are interesting and I think they should be watched. The doctors in this vid shed some interesting facts.


They are a little conspiracy-ish but they raise some questions we should consider.


http://youtube.com/watch?v=uGV8G03xMD4

http://youtube.com/watch?v=CHoYME2iOUs

http://youtube.com/watch?v=d81QvvPmIwY

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ICRW3X9OX-Y

http://youtube.com/watch?v=_eQI_ttav80

http://youtube.com/watch?v=i1Ttr_cAg3s

[gregulus]

Warning, graphic pics:

http://sinoemedicalassociation.org/pathologylectures/JFK-autopsy.jpg

http://www.manuscriptservice.com/AutopsyRoom/figure-9.jpg

The direction of the blast from the shot and gaping wound suggest a backward movemnet, which is inconsistent with a shot from behind. If he was shot from the behind by the high powered rifle he was shot with, the entire front of his face would be gone.

It's the upper, right side of his head that was blown apart. The exit wound in Kennedy's head was caused by a pressure cavity as a result of the gunshot.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/exploded.htm#pcavity

That's a great website, by the way, I suggest all of you look at it.

Also, the History Channel recently had a great documentary on the subject. You might try to find that.

[griftadan]

Warning, graphic pics:

http://sinoemedicalassociation.org/pathologylectures/JFK-autopsy.jpg

http://www.manuscriptservice.com/AutopsyRoom/figure-9.jpg

The direction of the blast from the shot and gaping wound suggest a backward movemnet, which is inconsistent with a shot from behind. If he was shot from the behind by the high powered rifle he was shot with, the entire front of his face would be gone.

well it wasn't strait through his head to my understanding, more of a grazing of the top which admitedly did do alot of damagage. if you get shot with a high power rifle, the penetration is such that the jet of goo coming out of your head is more forceful than the bullet entering your skull. they did a demonstration on the history channel i think

[Mr. Ron]

It's the upper, right side of his head that was blown apart. The exit wound in Kennedy's head was caused by a pressure cavity as a result of the gunshot.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/exploded.htm#pcavity

That's a great website, by the way, I suggest all of you look at it.

There is still no evidence of a entry wound in the back of the head whatsoever, yet there is evidence of one in the front. This website is interesting and I am considering it, but I also suggest you watch the vids I posted as well, various doctors comment ion his head wounds.

Also, if you watch the video closely, the blood spray goes UP and BACKWARD. This is evidence of a shot blowing his skull cap off from a frontal shot.

[Scythe404]

We'll never know for certain. But JFK was likely assassinated in a wider conspiracy because of the simple fact that he defied the cynical, self-sufficient powers that fund politics and keep it dishonest. In his case: the mafia, one of any million groups that fund certain interests to cover their asses. He refused to be morally compromised by his money, and he didn't last.

Not surprising when you think about it.

[Mr. Ron]

well it wasn't strait through his head to my understanding, more of a grazing of the top which admitedly did do alot of damagage. if you get shot with a high power rifle, the penetration is such that the jet of goo coming out of your head is more forceful than the bullet entering your skull. they did a demonstration on the history channel i think

Well, it went through the upper right part of his head, not the middle. If you look at the pics, you will see a "V" shape wound in the right upper part of the wound, this is the suggested entry wound that was surgically altered, which many doctors have examined and have concluded that this is the entry wound and it has in fact been surgically changed.

[gregulus]

There is still no evidence of a entry wound in the back of the head whatsoever, yet there is evidence of one in the front. This website is interesting and I am considering it, but I also suggest you watch the vids I posted as well, various doctors comment ion his head wounds.

Also, if you watch the video closely, the blood spray goes UP and BACKWARD. This is evidence of a shot blowing his skull cap off from a frontal shot.
I've seen most of the videos. As far as the splatter is concerned, you fail to take into account that the vehicle is still in motion, and when something explodes, debris tends to go in all directions. This is covered on that website.

[gregulus]

Also, whoever said he was completely framed, please post evidence.

[Mr. Ron]

I've seen most of the videos. As far as the splatter is concerned, you fail to take into account that the vehicle is still in motion, and when something explodes, debris tends to go in all directions. This is covered on that website.

The vehicle was going relatively slow (which is VERY odd since presidential motorcades even in that era had to keep at a constant speed for security reasons, yet the vehicle suspiciously slowed at the point where he was shot), so it's not like the wind was whipping the blood and brain around when his head exploded. The thing is, if you watch the video in slow motion, debris do not go in all directions. Most of the brain matter and blood go on a relatively singular direction, up and to the back.

[gregulus]

The vehicle was going relatively slow (which is VERY odd since presidential motorcades even in that era had to keep at a constant speed for security reasons, yet the vehicle suspiciously slowed at the point where he was shot), so it's not like the wind was whipping the blood and brain around when his head exploded. The thing is, if you watch the video in slow motion, debris do not go in all directions. Most of the brain matter and blood go on a relatively singular direction, up and to the back.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/nixetal.htm
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/hargis.htm

[Mr. Ron]

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/nixetal.htm
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/hargis.htm

The video still suggests a shot from the front. You ARE NOT thrown backward from a shot from behind. It would go against physics, even if he was wearing a back brace. Watch my videos, and listen to the several doctor's opinions.

[Egggo]

ron you do recognize that some doctors will say anything to make $$$ from conspiracy theory/right wing/left wing crazies

[Mr. Ron]

ron you do recognize that some doctors will say anything to make $$$ from conspiracy theory/right wing/left wing crazies

Absolutely, but I'm not about to throw out their opinions just on assumptions.



I drew a really crappy representation of the head wound, and the direction of the wound.

http://i15.tinypic.com/4klvbit.jpg

*Note that the direction arrows and red "spray" is not to suggest the direction of the blood spray, but the direction and shape of the head wound.*

Figure 1 is how the wound IS. The majority of the damage is spanning outward and to the back, this does not support a shot from behind. Figure 2 is how the wound would have to look if he WAS shot from behind. If he was shot from behind, the majority of the damage would have been shown to surge forward and there would have been more damage to the frontal cortex. This is not so going from the photographs.



I'm not going to throw out the possibility of there only being one shooter, but I just don't think the evidence suggests there was one.

[Der Übermensch]

The vehicle was going relatively slow (which is VERY odd since presidential motorcades even in that era had to keep at a constant speed for security reasons, yet the vehicle suspiciously slowed at the point where he was shot), so it's not like the wind was whipping the blood and brain around when his head exploded. The thing is, if you watch the video in slow motion, debris do not go in all directions. Most of the brain matter and blood go on a relatively singular direction, up and to the back.


It slowed because they had to take a rather sharp bend in the road. Oswald chose the spot for a reason.

[Mr. Ron]

It slowed because they had to take a rather sharp bend in the road. Oswald chose the spot for a reason.

I didn't take that into account, thanks.

[gregulus]

From an interview with rocket scientist (for real) Duncan McPherson:
Q. It is common knowledge that, as captured by Abraham Zapruder, President Kennedy's head and upper torso lurch energetically immediately following the explosion of his head. Could this movement have been caused by the directly transferred momentum of a bullet? That is, can a bullet "push" somebody like that?
A. No, and no. The movement of a body due to bullet momentum cannot be greater than the movement of the same body if it was holding the gun that fired the bullet. This is a result of elementary physics and is not disputed by anyone who understands physics. The major frustrating feature of the Kennedy assassination phenomenon is the willingness of people to pretend to talk authoritatively on subjects they know absolutely nothing about, especially things related to firearms. This body recoil is one favorite. . . .

Q. If the effects observed on the Zapruder film are not the result of a direct "push" by a bullet, what could account for JFK's movements?

A. In general, body movement in response to nervous system trauma is a result of contractions in body muscles. This is related to movements of your leg when a doctor raps you on the knee with his little mallet; your leg moves because a nerve induces a muscle contraction, not because it was driven into motion by the force of the tiny rap with the mallet. . . . In addition to this effect, simulations have shown that bullet strikes to the skull that result in blowing out a significant hole upon exit result in skull recoil towards the bullet entry direction.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/macpher.htm

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/dealey.htm
Specifically, go to the "Back and to the left" section. The title, of course, taken from the infamous scene in JFK where Jim Garrison repeats the phrase during the Shaw trial.

[Der Übermensch]

And also, the strange behavior of JFK's body was due to the back brace he was wearing from the intense pain caused by his Addison's disease.

[Mr. Ron]

Ok, lest say it WAS just Oswald. Did he just carry this out on his own accord, or did he have outside help in situating his plan?

[Der Übermensch]

There was definitely more than him. Ruby for one...

[LegionsofMarduk]

I don't think he acted alone. Whether or not he was the only shooter...I don't know. But he definately had help planning it.

Random thing for anyone that has never been to Dallas...The highway has a big "X" painted on it where he took the fatal shot and the window where Oswald was is still boarded shut. It's kind of weird.

[gregulus]

I don't think he acted alone. Whether or not he was the only shooter...I don't know. But he definately had help planning it.

Random thing for anyone that has never been to Dallas...The highway has a big "X" painted on it where he took the fatal shot and the window where Oswald was is still boarded shut. It's kind of weird.

if he wasn't the only shooter give me evidence there was more...

[Mr. Ron]

if he wasn't the only shooter give me evidence there was more...

Have you watch my vids? They give some theories. Like the various bullet holes in the car.

[gregulus]

Have you watch my vids? They give some theories. Like the various bullet holes in the car.

What bullet holes? Windshield? Thought by most to be a crack. Note that the review mirror was damaged as well.

[LegionsofMarduk]

if he wasn't the only shooter give me evidence there was more...

See previous post:

Whether or not he was the only shooter...I don't know.

[Mr. Ron]

What bullet holes? Windshield? Thought by most to be a crack. Note that the review mirror was damaged as well.

I believe they found one in the front grill of the car. I have to go back and check.

[The Stig]

JFK was shot by Oswald, who acted alone. There is no such thing as a magic bullet. It's quite a simple murder, actually.

[Reaganista]

don't care i think there are more important things to worry about

this.

JFK was shot by Oswald, who acted alone. There is no such thing as a magic bullet. It's quite a simple murder, actually.

huh

the magic bullet theory is an explanation of how it could've been possible for oswald to have acted alone
otherwise it seems sort of
impossible

[AlienEater]

He was framed damnit!

[Krabsworth]

There is only one way to find out...Play Jfk Reloaded.

Anyway...there are better things to worry about.

We had our president shot, we found someone to be punished for the crime, the American Justice system goes on. Hoorah!

[Slaapkamers]

Muslim terrorists did it, because they hate freedom and Irish Catholics.

[gregulus]

this.



huh

the magic bullet theory is an explanation of how it could've been possible for oswald to have acted alone
otherwise it seems sort of
impossible
You're confusing the "single bullet theory" and the "magic bullet." Conspiracy theorists use the term "magic bullet" because they don't think it was possible for a single bullet to hit both Kennedy and Connally.

[Krabsworth]

It is though, right?

[gregulus]

It is though, right?

It's what? Magic? No. It's entirely possible.

Also, I would like to ask again for people who said Oswald was framed to show evidence proving your claim.

[The Stig]

The 'magic' bullet's trajectory was actually perfectly straight. People ignore the fact that the governor was seated at a downward angle and to the side of the president. He was also turned towards him. When placed in his correct position, the trajectory isn't curved at all.

[Reaganista]

You're confusing the "single bullet theory" and the "magic bullet." Conspiracy theorists use the term "magic bullet" because they don't think it was possible for a single bullet to hit both Kennedy and Connally.
that's like saying pro-life people are actually anti-abortion its a meaningless distinction

[gregulus]

The 'magic' bullet's trajectory was actually perfectly straight. People ignore the fact that the governor was seated at a downward angle and to the side of the president. He was also turned towards him. When placed in his correct position, the trajectory isn't curved at all.

Not only lower than the President, but also towards the left shoulder of the President. This, along with the fact that he was turned towards Kennedy, holding his hat in his hand, make the shot perfectly plausible.

I'm still waiting on evidence from the "Oswald was framed" people...

[gregulus]

that's like saying pro-life people are actually anti-abortion its a meaningless distinction

Not really. The entire basis of the "magic bullet" was flawed. People who believe it was a "magic bullet" put the entry wound of the back to low, the exit wound in the neck to high, the governor in the wrong position, etc.

[YDload]

i think there's plenty of evidence to point to Oswald pulling the trigger, but i dont think he could have acted alone even if he wanted to. everyone wanted a piece of America's first Irish Catholic, Bay of Pigs-invading, Khrushchev-mocking, Presidential golden boy.

[SoulSeekerz]

After the Bay of Pigs threat, Kennedy became a liablity to his own government. He was a hothead with a loose trigger finger. Our own government made sure he was taken out immediately after that.

[MattyBlade]

The fact that there was an exit wound on the back of his head alone rules out there being one shooter. There was also a bullet hole through the front of the windshield.

If he was shot from behind where Oswald was, his entire front part of his face/head would have been blown off, it wasn't.


the animated gif in the picture before this makes it look as though he was shot from the front

[Der Übermensch]

Except a)Bay of Pigs was in Early 61, Kennedy was killed in Late '63... hardly "immediate".
And b) Bay of Pigs was hardly Kennedy's idea. It happened in April 61... he became President in Late January '61 (the 20th). The whole operation was started under Ike's watch, hhim agreeeing with the CIA to equip and train Cuban exiles. Kennedy just gave the final ok to a plan in motion for almost a year at that point.

[SoulSeekerz]

It was only a matter of time before the goverment would exterminate Kennedy. He was dangerous and becomming harder to control. In secret government documents, it was stated that Kennedy was fully prepared to fire nukes at Cuba.
When the CIA saw their window of opportunity in Dallas, they took him out.

[Reaganista]

Not really. The entire basis of the "magic bullet" was flawed. People who believe it was a "magic bullet" put the entry wound of the back to low, the exit wound in the neck to high, the governor in the wrong position, etc.
and people on either side of the abortion debate disagree about the fundamental circumstances of the event (when life begins, does jesus love fetuses, ect.)

when really their talking about the same thing
like people talking about the murder of jfk

[Der Übermensch]

It was only a matter of time before the goverment would exterminate Kennedy. He was dangerous and becomming harder to control. In secret government documents, it was stated that Kennedy was fully prepared to fire nukes at Cuba.
When the CIA saw their window of opportunity in Dallas, they took him out.

As was Curtis LeMay willing to drop nukes wholesale on the USSR... He practically was begging Presidents to let him.


Really though, the Cuban Missle Crisis was Kennedy's finest hour.... He stood toe to toe with the commies, and they backed down.
You are seriously a paranoid fool.

[griftadan]

the fundemental disagreements about abortion are atleast a little different than the events of the kennedy assasination. you can dispute values, not facts.

[SoulSeekerz]

As was Curtis LeMay willing to drop nukes wholesale on the USSR... He practically was begging Presidents to let him.


Really though, the Cuban Missle Crisis was Kennedy's finest hour.... He stood toe to toe with the commies, and they backed down.
You are seriously a paranoid fool.

I am not paranoid in the least, and you don't know me well enough to call me a fool. It was Kennedys finest hour and put the government on high alert of what he was cable of doing, which was plunging the world into a nuclear war.
No paranoia whatsoever. The government freaked out, and assasinated their own president.The risk of a nuclear confrontation became too great. It is possible the government became a paranoid fool.

[italic zero]

what the hell melissa

[griftadan]

wasn't the assissination... well after the missile crisis had been settled?

[gregulus]

After the Bay of Pigs threat, Kennedy became a liablity to his own government. He was a hothead with a loose trigger finger. Our own government made sure he was taken out immediately after that.

So you're saying that the government took out Kennedy? Prove it.

the animated gif in the picture before this makes it look as though he was shot from the front
No it doesn't.

[SoulSeekerz]

So you're saying that the government took out Kennedy? Prove it.


No it doesn't.


Prove they didn't


Jack Ruby knew too much, Marilyn Monroe knew too much. They were both taken out.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/context.htm

There is also another theory that Cuban Nationals were responsible for the assasination.
We will never really know the truth.

[gregulus]

Prove they didn't


Jack Ruby knew too much, Marilyn Monroe knew too much. They were both taken out.

Besides the fact that it's completely paranoid and illogical, there's not really much to disprove. Believing in crap like that is the equivilent of believing Bush planned 9/11.

I would like to point out that the overwhelming majority of government documents regarding the Kennedy assassination were released and there's absolutely nothing suggesting a cover-up of any kind.

[SoulSeekerz]

I didn't say I believed in anything. These are theories and suppositions and what if scenarios, all to be considered.
Can you prove who was behind the assassination of JFK, probably not. Neither can I, just theories.

[gregulus]

I didn't say I believed in anything. These are theories and suppositions and what if scenarios, all to be considered.
Can you prove who was behind the assassination of JFK, probably not. Neither can I, just theories.

If you actually read the link that you posted, he actually discredits all of the "theories" you want me to buy in to.

Yeah, I can prove who was behind the Kennedy assassination. Lee Oswald. He was in the School Book Depository, it was his rifle used in the assassination, he fled the scene on a bus, he shot a police officer with a pistol trying to escape, ran into a movie theater without paying, punched the police officer who arrested him in the theater (who then punched back), Oswald's wife testified that Oswald's rifle and pistol (that he was photographed with shortly after purchase) were missing, etc.

[Danger Bird]

Discrepancies in the official stories are continuing to be explained rationally.

[Der Übermensch]

I am not paranoid in the least, and you don't know me well enough to call me a fool. It was Kennedys finest hour and put the government on high alert of what he was cable of doing, which was plunging the world into a nuclear war.
No paranoia whatsoever. The government freaked out, and assasinated their own president.The risk of a nuclear confrontation became too great. It is possible the government became a paranoid fool.

You are paranoid, and your lack of knowledge about the possibilites of nuclear war seems to confirm your foolishness. During the 50's, going into the 60's, not only was there the possibility of the world plunging into nuclear war, but a good deal of american politicians WANTED US TO!!!! Curtis LeMay spent the 50's begging to be allowed to make a First Strike attack on the Soviets. The government would not have cared about how close we came during the CMC, and a good deal of officials were probably disapointed the Soviets backed down, because they would have liked nothing better then to see a coupld 1000 war heads streaking for moscow.

But regardless, what was Kennedy supposed to do, allow the Russians to keep nukes 90 miles off our shore? Kennedy did what any politician would do.... Ike would have stood up to them... Truman... FDR... Or Johnson... Nixon... Ford.... Carter... well, maybe not Carter... The point is, Kennedy did nothing out of charachter for what is expected of the American president.

[sexymuffin]

i don't believe it actually happened i think jfk was at home that day with the flu and the government said "oh man we gotta get someone to dress like jfk" so they did but then oswald shot the phony jfk and the real jfk got spooked and didn't want the public to know the government had decieved them so he fled to niger and has been living there ever since.

it's quite simple once you know the facts.

[Swill_Merchant]

It's what? Magic? No. It's entirely possible.

Also, I would like to ask again for people who said Oswald was framed to show evidence proving your claim.

Well, when certain files become un-classified we'll have a better understanding and maybe an ultimate resolution. Also, I know a kid who's mom was a CIA agent, she retired and had to sign a contract prohibiting her to speak about any intellegence for 70 years. Maybe there are more people like that, and will live long enough to say something.

[Swill_Merchant]

As was Curtis LeMay willing to drop nukes wholesale on the USSR... He practically was begging Presidents to let him.


Really though, the Cuban Missle Crisis was Kennedy's finest hour.... He stood toe to toe with the commies, and they backed down.
You are seriously a paranoid fool.


A little known fact is that we had nuclear missles in turkey at the time. The file just became de-classified. We (u.s.) agreed to take our nukes out of turkey if they took theirs (U.S.S.R.) out of Cuba. It was hardly a fine hour, just a fair agreement.

[sexymuffin]

where are these files?

[Iscariot]

LOL @ thinking our own government killed kennedy

[Swill_Merchant]

where are these files?

washington d.c.? library of congress?

[Iscariot]

A little known fact is that we had nuclear missles in turkey at the time. The file just became de-classified. We (u.s.) agreed to take our nukes out of turkey if they took theirs (U.S.S.R.) out of Cuba. It was hardly a fine hour, just a fair agreement.

that isn't a little known fact that's how we ended the cuban missile crisis

and those nukes we had in turkey were old and decommissioned but the ussr was too paranoid to allow them to stay there

[Reaganista]

the fundemental disagreements about abortion are atleast a little different than the events of the kennedy assasination. you can dispute values, not facts.
what?

of course you can...

[metalkingtiger]

don't care i think there are more important things to worry about

Actually I find this stuff very important because all the cover ups and half-truths in stuff like this means you can't trust your own government for ****.

[gregulus]

Actually I find this stuff very important because all the cover ups and half-truths in stuff like this means you can't trust your own government for ****.

Except for the fact that no one in this thread has produced viable evidence for any sort of cover-up.

Well, when certain files become un-classified we'll have a better understanding and maybe an ultimate resolution. Also, I know a kid who's mom was a CIA agent, she retired and had to sign a contract prohibiting her to speak about any intellegence for 70 years. Maybe there are more people like that, and will live long enough to say something.
The files regarding the Kennedy assassination are now open to the public and thousands of people have poured over them looking for evidence of potential foul-play and there is none.

Don't tell me you actually think there was a cover up?

[metalkingtiger]

The mere fact that some stuff is still classified and there seems to be no interest in discovering the truth finally points to SOME kind of covering up of info.

[gregulus]

The mere fact that some stuff is still classified and there seems to be no interest in discovering the truth finally points to SOME kind of covering up of info.

No interest in discovering the truth? What do you call the countless conspiracy theories, etc? You can't prove anything using baseless, illogical alligations. Get of the "the government did it because you can't trust the government with anything" bandwagon. The truth has already been discovered. Oswald pulled the trigger. The evidence pointing to Lee Oswald as the assassin is overly abundant...

[Der Übermensch]

A little known fact is that we had nuclear missles in turkey at the time. The file just became de-classified. We (u.s.) agreed to take our nukes out of turkey if they took theirs (U.S.S.R.) out of Cuba. It was hardly a fine hour, just a fair agreement.
It's hardly a "little known fact". And it most definitly didn't just become declassified...

[Swill_Merchant]

It's hardly a "little known fact". And it most definitly didn't just become declassified...


My sarcasm too subtle? I outlined it for you if it was.....

A little known fact is that we had nuclear missles in turkey at the time. The file just became de-classified. We (u.s.) agreed to take our nukes out of turkey if they took theirs (U.S.S.R.) out of Cuba. It was hardly a fine hour, just a fair agreement.

[Smokey D]

Actually, sarcasm doesn't come across very well on the internet. Congrats on sounding like a prick.

[Swill_Merchant]

No interest in discovering the truth? What do you call the countless conspiracy theories, etc? You can't prove anything using baseless, illogical alligations. Get of the "the government did it because you can't trust the government with anything" bandwagon. The truth has already been discovered. Oswald pulled the trigger. The evidence pointing to Lee Oswald as the assassin is overly abundant...

Yea, no government has ever done anything to even make people want to question it. Also, evidence pointing out that points to him not being the killer (still involved, but not the mastermind or the gunman that killed the president) is abundant. It's just bias on perception. If you refute everything that comes your way without any hard understanding because it is contradicting to your original belfief, then yes, there are no crooked politicicans, conspiracy theories and no reason to question anything any government does. Not because they are perfect, but because they say they are.

[Knifeboy]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=62gvoKyODu4

[gregulus]

Yea, no government has ever done anything to even make people want to question it.
I never said that, but thinking the United States government took out Kennedy without any overwhelming evidence is absurd.

Also, evidence pointing out that points to him not being the killer (still involved, but not the mastermind or the gunman that killed the president) is abundant. It's just bias on perception.
Show me the evidence, I'll be happy to prove you wrong. Lee Oswald shot Kennedy.
If you refute everything that comes your way without any hard understanding because it is contradicting to your original belfief, then yes, there are no crooked politicicans, conspiracy theories and no reason to question anything any government does. Not because they are perfect, but because they say they are.
No offense, but I've shown the most understanding of the events surrounding the Kennedy assassination in this thread. No one's presented viable evidence against mine.

Believe me, I think it'd be much more exciting if there was some sort of elaborate conspiracy regarding the Kennedy assassination. William Manchester summed it up nicely:
Those who desperately want to believe that President Kennedy was the victim of a conspiracy have my sympathy. I share their yearning. To employ what may seem an odd metaphor, there is an esthetic principle here. If you put six million dead Jews on one side of a scale and on the other side put the Nazi regime — the greatest gang of criminals ever to seize control of a modern state — you have a rough balance: greatest crime, greatest criminals.
But if you put the murdered President of the United States on one side of a scale and that wretched waif Oswald on the other side, it doesn't balance. You want to add something weightier to Oswald. It would invest the President's death with meaning, endowing him with martyrdom. He would have died for something.

A conspiracy would, of course, do the job nicely. Unfortunately, there is no evidence whatever that there was one. (New York Times, February 5, 1992)

[Shell]

I never said that, but thinking the United States government took out Kennedy without any overwhelming evidence is absurd.


Show me the evidence, I'll be happy to prove you wrong. Lee Oswald shot Kennedy.

No offense, but I've shown the most understanding of the events surrounding the Kennedy assassination in this thread. No one's presented viable evidence against mine.

Believe me, I think it'd be much more exciting if there was some sort of elaborate conspiracy regarding the Kennedy assassination. William Manchester summed it up nicely:

If the government did commit a crime such as supposedly assassinating a president... don't you think there wouldn't be much evidence?

[gregulus]

If the government did commit a crime such as supposedly assassinating a president... don't you think there wouldn't be much evidence?

There would be some kind of clues. Nothing that states "This was a CIA cover-up," but clues would exist that suggest, without a doubt, that foul-play was involved. There is none.

[Shell]

There would be some kind of clues. Nothing that states "This was a CIA cover-up," but clues would exist that suggest, without a doubt, that foul-play was involved. There is none.

I think if the gov't were going to kill someone, it would be the "perfect crime." It would be so finely orchestrated that no one would really suspect it was the goverment because they would cover all of their tracks.

[JohnXDoe]

proof Oswald didn't kill the pres: Jack Ruby

[gregulus]

I think if the gov't were going to kill someone, it would be the "perfect crime." It would be so finely orchestrated that no one would really suspect it was the goverment because they would cover all of their tracks.

I disagree. The government's been exposed for certain dealings many times in the past.

[gregulus]

proof Oswald didn't kill the pres: Jack Ruby
Care to elaborate?

[JohnXDoe]

Oswald was a guinea pig in CIA LSD experiments in the 50's. he was a trained sharp shooter. he may have been a part of it, but not the only part. it may have been a faction of the cia / fbi involved. it may have been some "rogue" agents. but Oswald if he acted at all did not act alone. and he knew a little something about a little something, so Ruby was dispatched to kill him. in the parking garage hours after the kill. how convenient.....

i'm not saying higher ups were involved, but they certainly must have looked the other way or at the very least were not doing their jobs, and intentionally so. same thing as being involved, imo

[Stevie]

Can someone name a tragic event that hasn't been bombarded with conspirasy theories? Can people just not accept what happened happened?

[gregulus]

Oswald was a guinea pig in CIA LSD experiments in the 50's. he was a trained sharp shooter. he may have been a part of it, but not the only part. it may have been a faction of the cia / fbi involved. it may have been some "rogue" agents. but Oswald if he acted at all did not act alone. and he knew a little something about a little something, so Ruby was dispatched to kill him. in the parking garage hours after the kill. how convenient.....

i'm not saying higher ups were involved, but they certainly must have looked the other way or at the very least were not doing their jobs, and intentionally so. same thing as being involved, imo

Ruby was, in no way, part of a conspiracy to kill Kennedy. In fact, Ruby was notorious for not being able to keep a secret. Regarding the idea of conspiracy, Ruby said this:
[S]ome persons are accusing me falsely of being part of the plot . . . a plot to silence Oswald. . . . [T]he people that have the power here . . . already have me as the accused assassin of our beloved President.(17) I tell you, gentlemen, my whole family is in jeopardy . . . as to their lives. . . . Naturally, I am a foregone conclusion. My sisters Eva, Eileen, and Mary, I lost my sisters. My brothers Sam, Earl, Hyman, and myself naturally -- my in-laws, Harold Kaminsky, Marge Ruby, the wife of Earl, and Phyllis, the wife of Sam Ruby, they are in jeopardy of loss of their lives . . . just because they are blood related to myself . . . Consequently, right at this moment I am being victimized [falsely portrayed] as a part of a plot in the world's worst tragedy and crime at this moment. . . . At this moment, Lee Harvey Oswald isn't [seen as being] guilty of committing the crime of assassinating President Kennedy. Jack Ruby is. How can I fight that, Chief Justice Warren?

To solidify his claims, he asked to be taken to Washington and be subjected to a polygraph test:
I would like to request that I go to Washington and take all the tests that I have to take. It is very important. . . . Because I have been over this for the longest time to get the lie detector test.
Without a lie detector test on my testimony, my verbal statements to you, how do you know if I am telling the truth? . . . I would like to be able to get a lie detector test or truth serum of what motivated me to do what I did at that particular time

Also, why on earth would anyone involved in a conspiracy so important take out the gunman in such a public way? Ruby loved Kennedy. In fact, he expected to be hailed a hero for taking out Oswald.
Well, you guys couldn't do it. Someone had to do it. That son of a bitch killed my President."
Actually, when the people outside the jail heard that Oswald had been shot, they applauded.

Ruby was also known as a hot head with a violent temper.

[JohnXDoe]

oswald was the perfect patsy. perhaps ruby was the odd man out. but the CIA and FBI had a file on oswald, he was a well known communist (omg red scare) and was an activist for the cause. so if you want to frame someone or at least look the other way and perhaps lend some help to a nut who has bad intentions, he would be the guy. put him up to his business, or simply let him do it, and then show the world that he was a freedom hating red and its all nice and tidy.

i'm not saying he didn't do it. although that is possible. and i'm not saying it was some high level government conspiracy. but...he was either helped or enabled by some with ties to our government and that is fairly obvious. the fbi had a line on this guy, as did the cia. but on that fateful day he managed to put himself in the position to kill the american president even though in the past he had been suspected of making an attempt on the life of an american military general? (if even that were true) i don't buy it hook, line, and sinker....and that says nothing of the mafia.

maybe it was oswald, maybe not? but whoever it was it wasn't someone who acted completely alone. maybe on that day, yes. but leading up to that day, no.

[The Stig]

The plans outlining the route Kennedy was traveling were not made public until four days before the event. You (collectively towards the conspiracy theorists) are trying to tell me that the CIA/Mafia/USSR/NAMBLA are going to find an emotionally unstable man who hated his government and recruit him for an assassination a mere four days before the event took place?

With his rifle, it was perfectly plausible that Oswald could have fired off the shots even more quickly than he did. His target was out in the open, and at the angle Kennedy's car was driving, there would have been very little movement of the target from his perspective. It was actually quite easy for him to have pulled off the assassination alone and without backing.

[JohnXDoe]

oshi....i forgot about NAMBLA! :eek:

[Iscariot]

ruby was a well known hot head who couldn't take even the slightest provocation without acting violently in turn

he also adored president kennedy so naturally he went after the man who killed the president and returned the favor

[gregulus]

oswald was the perfect patsy. perhaps ruby was the odd man out. but the CIA and FBI had a file on oswald, he was a well known communist (omg red scare) and was an activist for the cause. so if you want to frame someone or at least look the other way and perhaps lend some help to a nut who has bad intentions, he would be the guy. put him up to his business, or simply let him do it, and then show the world that he was a freedom hating red and its all nice and tidy.

i'm not saying he didn't do it. although that is possible. and i'm not saying it was some high level government conspiracy. but...he was either helped or enabled by some with ties to our government and that is fairly obvious. the fbi had a line on this guy, as did the cia. but on that fateful day he managed to put himself in the position to kill the american president even though in the past he had been suspected of making an attempt on the life of an american military general? (if even that were true) i don't buy it hook, line, and sinker....and that says nothing of the mafia.

maybe it was oswald, maybe not? but whoever it was it wasn't someone who acted completely alone. maybe on that day, yes. but leading up to that day, no.

Oswald's mental state was anything but stable (http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/organ1.htm). You're mistaken, though, when you claim that it's possible that Oswald didn't do it. Also, it's not fairly obvious at all. You've presented nothing but pure speculation. Of course the FBI and CIA had records pretaining to Oswald, he was already an attempted assassin (the attempt on General Walker) and he tried to defect to the USSR. Oswald's behavior after the assassination of Kennedy is even stronger evidence he acted alone. Why would he murder a police officer and attack the one who arrested him in the theater if he was "just a patsy?"

[JohnXDoe]

to prevent the truth from being known and continue the cover up! :eek:

no but seriously....if one incident in recent history (big incident, at least) deserves this attention, its this one. why would he deny what he did? i can understand not wanting to be caught if he were the shooter, but why deny it once caught? especially when people like this usually revel in the attention and publicity. maybe he killed the cop and attacked the one who arrested him because he knew the fix was in? maybe he did the killing and realized shortly after he was the fall guy. i just don't think he planned and acted alone. i think that is a fairly reasonable thought given the times and the circumstances and the person who allegedly did the killing.

[gregulus]

to prevent the truth from being known and continue the cover up! :eek:

no but seriously....if one incident in recent history (big incident, at least) deserves this attention, its this one. why would he deny what he did? i can understand not wanting to be caught if he were the shooter, but why deny it once caught? especially when people like this usually revel in the attention and publicity. maybe he killed the cop and attacked the one who arrested him because he knew the fix was in? maybe he did the killing and realized shortly after he was the fall guy. i just don't think he planned and acted alone. i think that is a fairly reasonable thought given the times and the circumstances and the person who allegedly did the killing.

I hate to burst your bubble, but minutes after his arrest, Oswald said, "They're taking me in because of the fact that I lived in the Soviet Union. I'm only a patsy." Unfortunately for him, there's no way the arresting officer knew Oswald had once lived in the Soviet Union. The police entered the theater because someone who saw Oswald acting suspiciously (might have something to do with shooting police officers) followed him to the theater and tipped the police. Oswald was already prepared for some grandious political trial.

[JohnXDoe]

what oswald said or didn't say isn't really relevant. especially a statement like that. that just goes to his state of mind, not the actual knowledge of the police who arrested him.

[gregulus]

what oswald said or didn't say isn't really relevant. especially a statement like that. that just goes to his state of mind, not the actual knowledge of the police who arrested him.

It's quite relevant. Lee was practically dying to do something for the Communist party. He tried to offer his Marine experience to the Russians but became disillusioned by the bureacracy there. Thus, he turned his sights to Cuba. He tried to infiltrate anti-Castro groups in New Orleans to send word back to Havana but got denied. He saw this as his oppurtunity to take out the President who wasn't willing to deny McCarthyism and who, in his mind, wasn't treating Cuba fairly.

[Eliminator]

What movie was it?

[gregulus]

What movie was it?

What?

[Give me Beer]

I sort of read the thread diagonally and all that, but I was just wondering if anybody explained:

a) Why the bullet was still in perfect condition, after making so many wounds.
b) How the governor being in a lower position explains everything... now, please do correct me if I'm wrong, I'm actually looking to be convinced here :) but wasn't the first entry wound in Kennedy's shoulder and the the exit wound in his throat? How can a bullet go from the shoulder to the throat?
c) The Penn & Teller clip, now I seem to notice that the major damage seems to be near the "exit wound" for the pumpkin, so how come the biggest wound is at the back of Kennedy's head?

Just wondering if you can all clear that up for me.

Now not to say I buy into the entire "it's a big conspiracy" deal, but Oswald acting completely alone and there being one gunman seems a bit strange to say the least.

[Shotti]

The plans outlining the route Kennedy was traveling were not made public until four days before the event. You (collectively towards the conspiracy theorists) are trying to tell me that the CIA/Mafia/USSR/NAMBLA are going to find an emotionally unstable man who hated his government and recruit him for an assassination a mere four days before the event took place?

With his rifle, it was perfectly plausible that Oswald could have fired off the shots even more quickly than he did. His target was out in the open, and at the angle Kennedy's car was driving, there would have been very little movement of the target from his perspective. It was actually quite easy for him to have pulled off the assassination alone and without backing.

This alone proves he didn't act alone. There is no way to plan such a high profile assassination in four days. If anyone can show an example where a such a high profile assassination was commited in four days or under, I will be convinced that he acted alone.

Also, there are a lot of compelling arguments, it is really interesting.

[gregulus]

a) Why the bullet was still in perfect condition, after making so many wounds.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ce399.gif
I'd hardly call that perfect condition...
b) How the governor being in a lower position explains everything... now, please do correct me if I'm wrong, I'm actually looking to be convinced here :) but wasn't the first entry wound in Kennedy's shoulder and the the exit wound in his throat? How can a bullet go from the shoulder to the throat?
First shot was a miss, second shot entered the top of Kennedy's back exited through the lower 1/3 of his neck, went though the governors shoulder and lodged in his wrist. When the bullet hit the governors wrist, it was traveling at the "slow" speed of approximately 1000 mps.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/sbt.htm
c) The Penn & Teller clip, now I seem to notice that the major damage seems to be near the "exit wound" for the pumpkin, so how come the biggest wound is at the back of Kennedy's head?
The major wound to Kennedy's head is on the top, right side. Such an explosion was caused because of immense pressure build up resulting from the impact of the bullet.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/medical.htm
*graphic images pretaining directly to the head wound*
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/exploded.htm
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/nixetal.htm

[gregulus]

This alone proves he didn't act alone. There is no way to plan such a high profile assassination in four days. If anyone can show an example where a such a high profile assassination was commited in four days or under, I will be convinced that he acted alone.

Also, there are a lot of compelling arguments, it is really interesting.
This post makes no sense...

What proves Oswald didn't act alone?

[Der Übermensch]

This alone proves he didn't act alone. There is no way to plan such a high profile assassination in four days. If anyone can show an example where a such a high profile assassination was commited in four days or under, I will be convinced that he acted alone.

Hinkley...
Czolgosz...
John Wilkes Boothe...

[I Am a Hat]

four days is plenty of time to plan to stand at a window and shoot a guy and then murder a cop in front of witnesses while you're half assing an escape from town

[Shotti]

Hinkley...
Czolgosz...
John Wilkes Boothe...

I was talking in the sense of him acting alone. Also your examples are wrong:

John Wilkes Boothe: Was planned of a span of a few months in advance. This includes a kidnap attempt March 17, 1865. Also Andrew Jackson and William Seward helped him planning it.


Hinkley: Wasn't a full assassination, anyways, it his plot technically started in 1976 when he saw the movie Taxi Driver 15 times and then developed obsession with Jodie Foster and other high profile candidates. A month prior he became obsessed with Reagan and started to idle-ize the pressumed assassn of JFK, and started doing his research.

Czolgosz: August 31, 1901 he moved to buffalo new york. He rented an apartment near the Pan-American Exposition where the president would be. On September 6th, he shot Mckinley who died on the 14th. But his ambitions started on July 29, 1900 when King Umberto I was assassinated, evidence of this points to the newspaper article found in his pocket.

[Shotti]

four days is plenty of time to plan to stand at a window and shoot a guy and then murder a cop in front of witnesses while you're half assing an escape from town


This isn't just any guy, this is the president of the united states of america. Killing a normal man, then yes four days in more than enough. But the distinction is WAY to extreme to say just four days, especially with the expamples given above. Hinckley came the closest the time limit (but failed miserably) , and Czolgsz next. John Wilkes Boothe had months and help from high level people. None of these were near as clean as the JFK assasination and as well excecuted.

[Der Übermensch]

I was talking in the sense of him acting alone. Also your examples are wrong:
All three carried out the plan on their own, and 2 of them had no known confederates what so ever.

John Wilkes Boothe: Was planned of a span of a few months in advance. This includes a kidnap attempt March 17, 1865. Also Andrew Jackson and William Seward helped him planning it.
The assassination plan only came to fruition on April 11th, when he heard Lee surrendered. The plan was enacted on the 14th. Regardless of others who were privy to it (Your examples are utter bullshit by the way... honestly stupider then anyone has had about the JFK thing) Booth carried it out on his own, and even managed to escape.

Hinkley: Wasn't a full assassination, anyways, it his plot technically started in 1976 when he saw the movie Taxi Driver 15 times and then developed obsession with Jodie Foster and other high profile candidates. A month prior he became obsessed with Reagan and started to idle-ize the pressumed assassn of JFK, and started doing his research.
It doesn't matter that it wasn't full... he hit his target. And there was absolutly no planning needed for that whatsoever. I could have done the same thing merely on a whim. Hinkley was a verified nutcase for a long time prior, but he didn't spend months on an intricate plan. He walked up and opened fire, which is the only point being made.

Czolgosz: August 31, 1901 he moved to buffalo new york. He rented an apartment near the Pan-American Exposition where the president would be. On September 6th, he shot Mckinley who died on the 14th.
I think for the purpose of what you wanted, thats good enough. It's less than a week.

[The Stig]

Oswald worked in the Texas School Book Depository Building. When he saw the parade route passed his building, it became a crime of perfect opportunity. Four days was plenty to carry that out alone, and Oswald was not a good candidate for being a hired gun.

[Shotti]

This post makes no sense...

What proves Oswald didn't act alone?

The time constraint. He had 4 days to do it, just four days. Also since the route was changed at the last minute, he must have made a very lucky "mistake". I doubt with something that clean and well excecuted that four days was even realistic.

[gregulus]

The time constraint. He had 4 days to do it, just four days. Also since the route was changed at the last minute, he must have made a very lucky "mistake". I doubt with something that clean and well excecuted that four days was even realistic.

The fact that the route was changed is, in reality, a factoid. The picture from the Dallas Morning News didn't show a turn onto Elm Street because the map was printed too small (http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/dmntot.gif the page with the map on it). In fact, the night before the now famous map of the Kennedy motorcade route was printed, another Dallas paper printed a much larger map that showed the turn on to Elm Street (http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/dthmap.gif here). Also, both papers describe the route and both descriptions mention a turn onto Houston and Elm Streets (http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/dthtue.gif here and http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/dmntue.gif here). The fact of the matter is, you HAVE to turn onto Houston then Elm to get from Main Street to the Stemmons Freeway. You're "changed motorcade" theory is nothing but a myth. Oswald had the perfect location to take out the president.

As I mentioned earlier, Oswald saw this as his oppurtunity to do something marvelous for Communist party. After all, he had tried and failed numerous times before.

[Shotti]

All three carried out the plan on their own, and 2 of them had no known confederates what so ever.


The assassination plan only came to fruition on April 11th, when he heard Lee surrendered. The plan was enacted on the 14th. Regardless of others who were privy to it (Your examples are utter bullpoop by the way... honestly stupider then anyone has had about the JFK thing) Booth carried it out on his own, and even managed to escape.


It doesn't matter that it wasn't full... he hit his target. And there was absolutly no planning needed for that whatsoever. I could have done the same thing merely on a whim. Hinkley was a verified nutcase for a long time prior, but he didn't spend months on an intricate plan. He walked up and opened fire, which is the only point being made.


I think for the purpose of what you wanted, thats good enough. It's less than a week.

I think it would be easier for me to explain calculus to a kindegartener.

[Iscariot]

as long as you aren't teaching them how to spell or convey a clear point

[gregulus]

I think it would be easier for me to explain calculus to a kindegartener.

No, he just proved the point that it doesn't take 4 days to execute a murder, regardless of how high profile it is.

[Der Übermensch]

I think it would be easier for me to explain calculus to a kindegartener.

Well, I already know calc, but I reeeally would like you to explain how Johnson and Seward planned Lincoln's assassination... Because thats the stupidest thing in this thread... and there are a LOT of stupid things in this thread...


But whats a difference of three days for Czolgosz? And Hinkley did something that would take no planning what soever, regardless of how much he brooded on the fact. And Booth DID THE ASSASSINATION ON HIS OWN, which is the point, whether someone else knew doesn't matter, because its a verified fact that he did the deed on his own, and he only had a few days to plan from when he found out how fortunate he was that Lincoln would be at a theater in which he had unrestrained access to.

[Bron-Yr-Aur]

Within hours of Kennedy's assassination the public at large was being told (not for the first and certainly not for the last time) that the perpetrator was a 'lone nut' with something to prove and a communist. How many lone nuts are there in politically-motivated killings?

As for Jack Ruby, he's a bit more mysterious, really. He was a hot-headed brothel owner with a violent temper, but he also had strong ties to the Dallas police department and the mob, so his correlation to it all could be argued for either side.

But whatever it doesn't really matter.

[GreyHam]

four days is plenty of time to plan to stand at a window and shoot a guy and then murder a cop in front of witnesses while you're half assing an escape from town

exactly

you need to plan an assasination properly if you want to get away with it...

but the killing bit, thats easy.

[gregulus]

Within hours of Kennedy's assassination the public at large was being told (not for the first and certainly not for the last time) that the perpetrator was a 'lone nut' with something to prove and a communist. How many lone nuts are there in politically-motivated killings?
I've already posted evidence as to Oswald's motives.

As for Jack Ruby, he's a bit more mysterious, really. He was a hot-headed brothel owner with a violent temper, but he also had strong ties to the Dallas police department and the mob, so his correlation to it all could be argued for either side.

But whatever it doesn't really matter.
I've also used quotes from Ruby himself claiming he was not, in anyway, involved in a conspiracy and even requested multiple times to be given a polygraph or injected with truth serum to verify his statements. Also, he loved Kennedy, and expected to be hailed a hero for his actions.

[Reaganista]

yeah but all that would be equally easy to say as an non-conspirator or a conspirator who'd been told to say all that and assured that it wouldn't happen

[gregulus]

yeah but all that would be equally easy to say as an non-conspirator or a conspirator who'd been told to say all that and assured that it wouldn't happen

Coupled with the fact that Ruby was notorious for running his mouth and not being able to keep the smallest of secrets, I think it's pretty safe to assume no one would trust him with such an important secret.

[Reaganista]

well you could always kill him off too

oh wait

anyway why would anyone believe him

[gregulus]

well you could always kill him off too

oh wait

anyway why would anyone believe him
Why wouldn't you believe him? There's absolutely no evidence to suggest there was a conspiracy.

[Reaganista]

because he's a notorious hot head and a mobster?

and what i meant is why would anyone believe him if he came forward with the conspiracy story like you suggested he would

had there been a conspiracy

[gregulus]

because he's a notorious hot head and a mobster?

and what i meant is why would anyone believe him if he came forward with the conspiracy story like you suggested he would

had there been a conspiracy

Because a conspiracy story would lead to an investigation. If Oswald or Ruby started name dropping and giving reasons as to why Kennedy was shot, those could be investigated.

If Oswald was shot to shut him up, why wouldn't they also take out Ruby?

[Rosca]

Because a conspiracy story would lead to an investigation. If Oswald or Ruby started name dropping and giving reasons as to why Kennedy was shot, those could be investigated.

If Oswald was shot to shut him up, why wouldn't they also take out Ruby?

123, never thought of that. I guess it is the same as this whole "911" conspiracy, if the conspiracy was real there would have been some "accidents". If the people in power had no problem killing JFK, they would definetley kill a lowly mobster.

[Reaganista]

Because a conspiracy story would lead to an investigation. If Oswald or Ruby started name dropping and giving reasons as to why Kennedy was shot, those could be investigated.

the government doesn't have much caues to worry about an investigation of themselves though


If Oswald was shot to shut him up, why wouldn't they also take out Ruby?
they did?

[Rosca]

the government doesn't have much caues to worry about an investigation of themselves though


they did?

Ruby actually died of pulmonary embolism and pneumonia(spelling?). I thought he was assassinated too.. If that was what you were thinking.

[gregulus]

the government doesn't have much caues to worry about an investigation of themselves though
so now we're assuming EVERYONE in the government was involved?


they did?
umm, ruby was tried, convicted, and died of a pulmonary embolism.

[Reaganista]

Ruby actually died of pulmonary embolism and pneumonia(spelling?). I thought he was assassinated too.. If that was what you were thinking.

yeah, in government custody

my point is basically you can't take the word of the accused as gospel just because they're the government

obviously i dont have any evidence that there was a conspiracy and dont care terribly either way i was more concerned with the general point of view than the substance of argument itt

[Reaganista]

so now we're assuming EVERYONE in the government was involved?
a few conviently placed individuals would wield the power to compel action from anyone involved in government even if they didnt grasp the ultimate point of that action

umm, ruby was tried, convicted, and died of a pulmonary embolism.
he died in jail

it doesn't really matter what the government says he died of their story alone isnt enough to get them off the hook

[Rosca]

yeah, in government custody

my point is basically you can't take the word of the accused as gospel just because they're the government

obviously i dont have any evidence that there was a conspiracy and dont care terribly either way i was more concerned with the general point of view than the substance of argument itt

Aye

[gregulus]

yeah, in government custody

my point is basically you can't take the word of the accused as gospel just because they're the government
So he suffered a blood clot in government custody? What the hell does that prove about a conspiracy? And Ruby (the accused) wasn't part of the government. You're not making sense.

obviously i dont have any evidence that there was a conspiracy and dont care terribly either way i was more concerned with the general point of view than the substance of argument itt
the point of view that's wrong? there was no conspiracy.

[gregulus]

a few conviently placed individuals would wield the power to compel action from anyone involved in government even if they didnt grasp the ultimate point of that action
And exactly what motive would these people have to assassinate the President? And what motive would other people have to go along?


he died in jail

it doesn't really matter what the government says he died of their story alone isnt enough to get them off the hook
So now you think that they forged Ruby's death? Stop buying into ridiculous theories. Why would they let him live 4 years after the president's death?

All of this conspiracy rhetoric is the most illogical crock i've ever heard.

[Reaganista]

So he suffered a blood clot in government custody? What the hell does that prove about a conspiracy? And Ruby (the accused) wasn't part of the government. You're not making sense.

no the accused itt is the government
ffs man

the point of view that's wrong? there was no conspiracy.
the point of view that government sources are valid for clearing accusations against the government

[Reaganista]

nd exactly what motive would these people have to assassinate the President? And what motive would other people have to go along?

who cares

So now you think that they forged Ruby's death? Stop buying into ridiculous theories. Why would they let him live 4 years after the president's death?

irrelevant

All of this conspiracy rhetoric is the most illogical crock i've ever heard.
and yet you're the one making all the circular arguments
the government didn't do it because the government says they didn't is not a valid or useful conclusion

[gregulus]

no the accused itt is the government
ffs man
I've presented more then ample evidence that it was Lee Oswald who acted and who acted alone. Quit with the speculation. Using your logic, George Bush was behind 9/11. We can't trust what they said about al-Qaeda.


the point of view that government sources are valid for clearing accusations against the government

Most of what I posted, especially regarding the actual killing, are from third parties.

[gregulus]

who cares
So now you won't even present to me a valid motive as to why they wanted to kill Kennedy? You're making your case really strong here, champ.


irrelevant
Not at all. Your vast conspiracy ideas don't make any sense.


and yet you're the one making all the circular arguments
the government didn't do it because the government says they didn't is not a valid or useful conclusion

Again, most of the information did not come from the government at all.

[Reaganista]

I've presented more then ample evidence that it was Lee Oswald who acted and who acted alone. Quit with the speculation. Using your logic, George Bush was behind 9/11. We can't trust what they said about al-Qaeda.

not really though nobody's ever tried to refute a 9/11 conspiracy by saying that George Bush said he didn't do it


Most of what I posted, especially regarding the actual killing, are from third parties.
and the point i contested was an accused conspirator saying he'd be glad to be questioned by fellow accused consprirators
we didn't do it because we say we didnt
that's a circular argument

So now you won't even present to me a valid motive as to why they wanted to kill Kennedy? You're making your case really strong here, champ.

no that doesn't matter at all

Not at all. Your vast conspiracy ideas don't make any sense.

actually the only idea i've had anything to do with itt that didnt make sense was your idea that the government can clear itself from allegations

Again, most of the information did not come from the government at all.
i don't care about that except to say

that it lends absolutely no creedance whatsoever to the government/conspirators telling you 'we didn't do it'
regardless of whether it were true or false that's the only possible answer you could expect from them

[gregulus]

not really though nobody's ever tried to refute a 9/11 conspiracy by saying that George Bush said he didn't do it
Are you dumb? I didn't base my opinion on anything because the "government said they didn't do it."



and the point i contested was an accused conspirator saying he'd be glad to be questioned by fellow accused consprirators
we didn't do it because we say we didnt
that's a circular argument
Actually, he didn't even want to be questioned. He just wanted to validify his "there was no conspiracy" statement.

no that doesn't matter at all
Why does it not matter? You're telling me there was a conspiracy, but not backing it up...

actually the only idea i've had anything to do with itt that didnt make sense was your idea that the government can clear itself from allegations
That'd be pretty valid, except that I didn't base any of my opinions on what the government said. Therefore, it's completely baseless.


i don't care about that except to say

that it lends absolutely no creedance whatsoever to the government/conspirators telling you 'we didn't do it'
regardless of whether it were true or false that's the only possible answer you could expect from them
So you're saying the government is guilty because they say they didn't do it? That's logical...oh wait..

I've based my opinion on neutral, third party sources. Unless you think the government paid them off too, you're wasting your time...

[AA-12]

The fact that there was an exit wound on the back of his head alone rules out there being one shooter. There was also a bullet hole through the front of the windshield.

If he was shot from behind where Oswald was, his entire front part of his face/head would have been blown off, it wasn't.

This.

That said/quoted,

Oswald was a or the shooter, but had help.

[gregulus]

This.

That said/quoted,

Oswald was a or the shooter, but had help.

The major wound to Kennedy's head is on the top, right side. Such an explosion was caused because of immense pressure build up resulting from the impact of the bullet.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/medical.htm
*graphic images pretaining directly to the head wound*
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/exploded.htm
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/nixetal.htm

The windshield was only cracked, not shot through.

[Reaganista]

Are you dumb? I didn't base my opinion on anything because the "government said they didn't do it."

yeah you did

Actually, he didn't even want to be questioned. He just wanted to validify his "there was no conspiracy" statement.

yeah that's circular seeing as the questioners would've been his coconspirators
it's a completely meaningless gesture

Why does it not matter? You're telling me there was a conspiracy
when

, but not backing it up...

That'd be pretty valid, except that I didn't base any of my opinions on what the government said. Therefore, it's completely baseless.

you based the conclusion in question on what an accused conspirator said

So you're saying the government is guilty because they say they didn't do it? That's logical...oh wait..
no all i ever said was that that reason you gave was completely illogical


I've based my opinion on neutral, third party sources. Unless you think the government paid them off too, you're wasting your time...
i do not care even a little bit about your opinion or your neutral sources

[gregulus]

yeah you did
when?


yeah that's circular seeing as the questioners would've been his coconspirators
it's a completely meaningless gesture
Unless everyone in the government or the bureacracies involved in the investigation were somehow in a vast conspiracy, you're wrong.

you based the conclusion in question on what an accused conspirator said
that no one was able to pin a conspiracy too. they just want there to be one.

no all i ever said was that that reason you gave was completely illogical
no, the reason i gave was completely logical. i based it on his personality, his adoration for his president, etc. the fact that he was willing to be polygraphed stands out. he specifically asked justice warren. unless you can show me that justice warren wanted kennedy dead, you fail.


i do not care even a little bit about your opinion or your neutral sources
then why are you arguing with me? i'm not basing anything on the government.

[Der Übermensch]

Everyone stop arguing... seriously... it was the reanimated corpse of Marilyn Monroe, come back to get her revenge for when Kennedy killed her.

Since Jack Rudy refused to say that, it obviously must be the case.

[Reaganista]

when?

when you said that ruby was willing to let the government test him


Unless everyone in the government or the bureacracies involved in the investigation were somehow in a vast conspiracy, you're wrong.

no it would be exceedingly easy for any number of high ranking government officials to influence the conclusion of the examination

that no one was able to pin a conspiracy too. they just want there to be one.
irrelevant

no, the reason i gave was completely logical. i based it on his personality, his adoration for his president, etc. the fact that he was willing to be polygraphed stands out.
no that's a completely circular argument

he specifically asked justice warren. unless you can show me that justice warren wanted kennedy dead, you fail.

i don't have to show anything of the sort and couldn't care less whether you want to prove or disprove it


then why are you arguing with me? i'm not basing anything on the government.
except you were and you did and continue going on like you didnt

[gregulus]

when you said that ruby was willing to let the government test him
Ruby wasn't part of the government...

no it would be exceedingly easy for any number of high ranking government officials to influence the conclusion of the examination
there would be some sort of clue somewhere that this happened. the amount of people that would have to be involved or some sort of suspicious behavior would exist.


irrelevant
not if you're actually trying to prove or disprove a conspiracy.


no that's a completely circular argument
this is going nowhere.


i don't have to show anything of the sort and couldn't care less whether you want to prove or disprove it


except you were and you did and continue going on like you didnt
except ruby wasn't in the government. them having him in jail for murdering someone isn't exactly out of the oridinary.

[Reaganista]

Ruby wasn't part of the government...

yeah if he was contracted to kill kennedy as part of a conspiracy he effectively was
this is very simple

there would be some sort of clue somewhere that this happened. the amount of people that would have to be involved or some sort of suspicious behavior would exist.

ok so there would be a clue


not if you're actually trying to prove or disprove a conspiracy.

that's your bag man


this is going nowhere.

it's going in circles imo

[gregulus]

yeah if he was contracted to kill kennedy as part of a conspiracy he effectively was
this is very simple

but he wasn't

ok so there would be a clue
and there's none

[JohnXDoe]

JFK wasn't assassinated, that nigga got shot!


Chris Rock++

[Der Übermensch]

Where'd shotty go... I really want to hear about Seward and Johnson... :(

[gregulus]

probably the same place the other 10 people went who said he was framed.

[italic zero]

Guantanamo?

[Der Übermensch]

Obviously

[Reaganista]

but he wasn't


and there's none

in order for you to make a hypothetical argument like the one you made about ruby's williness to be examined, (if he was guilty of conspiracy he wouldn't be eager to be tested) you have to pressupose that he actually was guilty

that's how hypotheticals work

ffs get with it

[Der Übermensch]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but are you saying that in order to assume he's not guilty [of conspiracy], we have to assume he is guilty [of conspiracy]? Cause thats what it looks like...

[gregulus]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but are you saying that in order to assume he's not guilty [of conspiracy], we have to assume he is guilty [of conspiracy]? Cause thats what it looks like...

That's what I got too.

[Reaganista]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but are you saying that in order to assume he's not guilty [of conspiracy], we have to assume he is guilty [of conspiracy]? Cause thats what it looks like...

no he isn't trying to assume that he's not guilty he's trying to prove that he's not guilty through logical hypotheticals

in order to do that you have to presuppose that he was guilty
this isnt complicated

[Der Übermensch]

So you're saying that if we are making hypothesis of "what if he isn't guilty", that means the starting assumption is that he is guilty?

Ok, I see what you're getting at, but intricacies of semantics aside, we are both well aware of what he meant.

[Rosca]

The major wound to Kennedy's head is on the top, right side. Such an explosion was caused because of immense pressure build up resulting from the impact of the bullet.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/medical.htm
*graphic images pretaining directly to the head wound*
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/exploded.htm
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/nixetal.htm

The windshield was only cracked, not shot through.

This is good reading. I like that wasn't bias to one side like the conspiracy videos, just the facts. Thanks for posting it. I was really conspiracy-crazed. I gues reading Jim Garrisons book does that......

[Reaganista]

So you're saying that if we are making hypothesis of "what if he isn't guilty", that means the starting assumption is that he is guilty?

Ok, I see what you're getting at, but intricacies of semantics aside, we are both well aware of what he meant.

all i was ever questioning was his using ruby's willingness to polygraphed as evidence that ruby wasnt in a conspiracy with the government

[JVC]

Oswald screamed "I am a patsy".

He was shot before the truth could be revealed.

On top of that it would have had to be a miracle bullet to inflict as many wounds as it did.

I smell conspiracy!

[gregulus]

Oswald screamed "I am a patsy".

He was shot before the truth could be revealed.

On top of that it would have had to be a miracle bullet to inflict as many wounds as it did.

I smell conspiracy!

You're an idiot. Congratulations on not reading anything I posted in the thread.