HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » NBC News: RFK Jr: 'Very c...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 04:11 AM

NBC News: RFK Jr: 'Very convincing' evidence that JFK wasn't killed by lone gunman

Good for him to go public with this. Kudos and hats off to you sir! This is a topic that I know is near and dear to my heart even though I was not alive at the time of the assassinations as it is to so many others here on DU:

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/12/16474762-rfk-jr-very-convincing-evidence-that-jfk-wasnt-killed-by-lone-gunman?lite

By Jamie Stengle, The Associated Press

DALLAS -- Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is convinced that a lone gunman wasn't solely responsible for the assassination of his uncle, President John F. Kennedy, and said his father believed the Warren Commission report was a "shoddy piece of craftsmanship."

Kennedy and his sister, Rory, spoke about their family Friday night while being interviewed in front of an audience by Charlie Rose at the Winspear Opera House in Dallas. The event comes as a year of observances begins for the 50th anniversary of the president's death.

Their uncle was killed on Nov. 22, 1963, while riding in a motorcade through Dallas. Five years later, their father was assassinated in a Los Angeles hotel while celebrating his win in the California Democratic presidential primary.


Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said his father spent a year trying to come to grips with his brother's death, reading the work of Greek philosophers, Catholic scholars, Henry David Thoreau, poets and others "trying to figure out kind of the existential implications of why a just God would allow injustice to happen of the magnitude he was seeing."

He said his father thought the Warren Commission, which concluded Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in killing the president, was a "shoddy piece of craftsmanship." He said that he, too, questioned the report.

"The evidence at this point I think is very, very convincing that it was not a lone gunman," he said, but he didn't say what he believed may have happened.

Rose asked if he believed his father, the U.S. attorney general at the time of his brother's death, felt "some sense of guilt because he thought there might have been a link between his very aggressive efforts against organized crime."

Kennedy replied: "I think that's true. He talked about that. He publicly supported the Warren Commission report but privately he was dismissive of it."

147 replies, 10866 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 147 replies Author Time Post
Reply NBC News: RFK Jr: 'Very convincing' evidence that JFK wasn't killed by lone gunman (Original post)
NewsCenter28 Jan 2013 OP
HiPointDem Jan 2013 #1
Sherman A1 Jan 2013 #3
MADem Jan 2013 #76
HiPointDem Jan 2013 #99
MADem Jan 2013 #106
SheilaT Jan 2013 #2
truth2power Jan 2013 #4
Speed8098 Jan 2013 #7
sharp_stick Jan 2013 #13
Bjorn Against Jan 2013 #21
sharp_stick Jan 2013 #33
Bjorn Against Jan 2013 #40
cpwm17 Jan 2013 #80
Bjorn Against Jan 2013 #81
cpwm17 Jan 2013 #82
Eddie Haskell Jan 2013 #30
sharp_stick Jan 2013 #31
MADem Jan 2013 #78
arthritisR_US Jan 2013 #97
MADem Jan 2013 #107
arthritisR_US Jan 2013 #108
MADem Jan 2013 #111
Cetacea Jan 2013 #8
EOTE Jan 2013 #9
Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #15
Octafish Jan 2013 #22
Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #23
Octafish Jan 2013 #26
Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #27
Octafish Jan 2013 #35
Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #36
Octafish Jan 2013 #39
Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #42
Octafish Jan 2013 #44
William Seger Jan 2013 #135
Octafish Jan 2013 #137
William Seger Jan 2013 #145
cthulu2016 Jan 2013 #49
Octafish Jan 2013 #50
zappaman Jan 2013 #88
Octafish Jan 2013 #100
zappaman Jan 2013 #113
Octafish Jan 2013 #114
zappaman Jan 2013 #115
Octafish Jan 2013 #116
zappaman Jan 2013 #117
Octafish Jan 2013 #121
JDPriestly Jan 2013 #105
Logical Jan 2013 #58
EOTE Jan 2013 #75
johnsolaris Jan 2013 #102
EOTE Jan 2013 #142
AnotherMother4Peace Jan 2013 #17
arthritisR_US Jan 2013 #98
proud2BlibKansan Jan 2013 #19
Bobcat Jan 2013 #51
proud2BlibKansan Jan 2013 #52
creeksneakers2 Jan 2013 #55
Logical Jan 2013 #59
proud2BlibKansan Jan 2013 #63
Major Nikon Jan 2013 #77
Logical Jan 2013 #84
zappaman Jan 2013 #89
CrawlingChaos Jan 2013 #110
BeyondGeography Jan 2013 #46
alberg Jan 2013 #56
Logical Jan 2013 #57
PCIntern Jan 2013 #64
DevonRex Jan 2013 #92
robbob Jan 2013 #125
KurtNYC Jan 2013 #140
Berlum Jan 2013 #5
boomerbust Jan 2013 #6
Welcome_hubby Jan 2013 #10
CanonRay Jan 2013 #11
mfcorey1 Jan 2013 #12
Octafish Jan 2013 #14
Mc Mike Jan 2013 #16
spanone Jan 2013 #18
karpool Jan 2013 #20
arthritisR_US Jan 2013 #28
Gregorian Jan 2013 #43
Logical Jan 2013 #60
laundry_queen Jan 2013 #66
Catherina Jan 2013 #83
cpwm17 Jan 2013 #85
Major Nikon Jan 2013 #94
KakistocracyHater Jan 2013 #104
duffyduff Jan 2013 #24
arthritisR_US Jan 2013 #29
alberg Jan 2013 #61
FarCenter Jan 2013 #25
Ron Green Jan 2013 #32
budkin Jan 2013 #34
backscatter712 Jan 2013 #37
Comrade_McKenzie Jan 2013 #38
Octafish Jan 2013 #41
sagesnow Jan 2013 #45
cthulu2016 Jan 2013 #47
proud2BlibKansan Jan 2013 #53
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #48
laundry_queen Jan 2013 #67
Odin2005 Jan 2013 #54
laundry_queen Jan 2013 #65
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #68
laundry_queen Jan 2013 #69
LineLineLineLineLineReply .
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #70
laundry_queen Jan 2013 #71
RomneyLies Jan 2013 #72
laundry_queen Jan 2013 #73
zappaman Jan 2013 #90
Octafish Jan 2013 #62
Freddie Stubbs Jan 2013 #74
H2O Man Jan 2013 #86
Kingofalldems Jan 2013 #122
H2O Man Jan 2013 #124
Drunken Irishman Jan 2013 #79
H2O Man Jan 2013 #87
zappaman Jan 2013 #91
H2O Man Jan 2013 #95
zappaman Jan 2013 #112
H2O Man Jan 2013 #119
zappaman Jan 2013 #120
H2O Man Jan 2013 #123
cpwm17 Jan 2013 #128
H2O Man Jan 2013 #129
DevonRex Jan 2013 #93
freshwest Jan 2013 #96
Rosco T. Jan 2013 #101
ailsagirl Jan 2013 #143
PufPuf23 Jan 2013 #103
Hosnon Jan 2013 #109
IWelcome TheirHatred Jan 2013 #118
Warpy Jan 2013 #126
fascisthunter Jan 2013 #127
H2O Man Jan 2013 #130
fascisthunter Jan 2013 #147
cpwm17 Jan 2013 #136
fascisthunter Jan 2013 #146
Berlum Jan 2013 #131
sikofit3 Jan 2013 #132
Berlum Jan 2013 #133
WI_DEM Jan 2013 #134
IWelcome TheirHatred Jan 2013 #138
WooWooWoo Jan 2013 #139
IWelcome TheirHatred Jan 2013 #141
Taverner Jan 2013 #144

Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 04:19 AM

1. I wonder why he supported the warren commission publicly.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #1)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 05:44 AM

3. I suspect

he did what he thought necessary at the time. I am sure that he was devastated by the loss of his brother.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sherman A1 (Reply #3)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 04:34 PM

76. This is RFK JUNIOR talking--not Bobby. Junior was a kid at the time.

He's only fifty eight, he would have been nine when JFK was shot and when the Warren commission was seated. He would have been, what, fourteen when his dad was killed?

I wonder how much of this is actual memory, or stuff he heard from his mother?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #76)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 10:47 PM

99. and if he'd heard it from his mother, the significance would be....?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #99)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 02:09 AM

106. She didn't know everything....she was out of the loop on occasion. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 04:22 AM

2. Here's the thing.

In all these years there has never been convincing evidence of anyone other than Lee Harvey Oswald as the actual lone assassin. Never. No confessions, no proof. Just wishful thinking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 06:08 AM

4. Wow! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 06:39 AM

7. Just wishful thinking.????

Care to explain that statement? Wishful for what?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Speed8098 (Reply #7)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 09:47 AM

13. Every conspiracy wacko

on Earth is begging for just one of their wacko fantasies to come true so that they can move on to find another wacko fantasy.

It's gotta get boring trying to convince everyone that Oswald was a CIA setup when they could be spending their time trying to convince everyone that Neil Armstrong stepped out of a landing capsule onto a sound stage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sharp_stick (Reply #13)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 10:36 AM

21. So do you consider RFK Jr. to be a conspiracy wacko?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bjorn Against (Reply #21)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 11:48 AM

33. Based on this

and his just as weird vaccine causing autism idiocy... I'd have to say most likely yup.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sharp_stick (Reply #33)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 12:12 PM

40. I think there are conspiracy wackos, but the people who deny all conspiracies are even more wacko

Last edited Sat Jan 12, 2013, 01:24 PM - Edit history (1)

I am open minded on the JFK case, I was not there and do not know what happened. There are multiple accounts of what may have happened and I don't pretend to know the real truth. I don't think anyone who claims to know the whole truth has any credibility whatsoever whether they believe in a single shooter or multiple shooters.

Whether the lone gunman theory is accurate or not however I will say this, people who automatically dismiss all allegations of government conspiracy are even more nuts than the crazies who wear tin foil hats.

A conspiracy is defined as a crime with the collaberation of two or more people, that is it. I can assure you our government is not filled entirely with innocent people who would never commit crimes. Yes there are nutty conspiracy theories out there, but it defies all logical sense to say that because there are some wacky conspiracy theories out there that all conspiracies should automatically be dismissed. Watergate was a conspiracy, Iran Contra was a conspiracy, conspiracies do happen and the fact that there are some crazy people out there who put out ridiculous explanations for "what really happened" does not mean we should not question the official story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bjorn Against (Reply #40)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 04:54 PM

80. There are conspiracies

and there are conspiracy theories. CT's are faith-based conspiracies with little or no evidence to support the accusations, and usually much evidence to the contrary. That's why Birthers, Truthers, and Kennedy assassination conspiracy supporters are CT'ers. All evidence contradicts their accusations.

Neocons are CT'ers,and before the Iraq War they conspired to fabricate false evidence against Iraq. Neocons believe Muslims are conspiring against US and Israel, and are a threat to the West. Neocons are an example of why CT'ers should have no power in our government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cpwm17 (Reply #80)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 05:06 PM

81. The neo-cons you cite...

Were not conspiracy theorists, they were conspirators. Fabricating evidence to fool the country into going to war is a crime.

Some of the people who come up with elaborate theories on who killed JFK and why they did it are crazy no doubt about it. Simply questioning the official story and being open minded to the idea that Oswald did not act alone does not make someone crazy however, there are questions that need to be asked and there is no reason the Warren report should not be held up to scrutiny.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bjorn Against (Reply #81)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 05:28 PM

82. As I said, neocons are both conspirators and CT'ers

Nobody claims that there are no conspiracies.

It is a true that the neocons conspired to fabricate false evidence, and it was obvious to anybody that is familiar the methods of the CT'er that they were full of crap. Leaders of CT movements typically fabricate evidence.

Neocons are like CT'ers because they are CT'ers. Unlike many CT'ers, they have managed to get power in our government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sharp_stick (Reply #13)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 11:31 AM

30. sharp stick

Duller than a rotting stump.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eddie Haskell (Reply #30)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 11:44 AM

31. Nice try Eddie

but if you throw in with the nutjobs guess what it makes you?

Go find the beav...maybe he'll let you watch Mrs. Cleaver get dressed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eddie Haskell (Reply #30)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 04:40 PM

78. You can disagree with someone without being shitty, you know--calling the poster a "rotting stump"

is disagreeing AND being very disagreeable.

If you had faith in your argument you wouldn't need to be so damn derisive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #78)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 08:55 PM

97. Nut jobs vs rotting stump.... pot meet kettle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arthritisR_US (Reply #97)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 02:11 AM

107. Because two wrongs make a right?

Again--it is possible to disagree without being disagreeable; and it's not hard to do, either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #107)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 02:52 AM

108. If you are going to call out one be fecking consistent

and call out the other in your desire to be disagreeable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arthritisR_US (Reply #108)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 06:54 AM

111. I desire that you NOT be disagreeable--plainly I won't get my wish. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 07:01 AM

8. Here's the thing

Americans have never been satisfied with the original investigation or it's conclusion. Europeans have had many laughs over it. And Sen. Kennedy did say that if he was elected president that one of the first things he would do is "find the bastards who killed my brother". I am willing to wager that he knew a bit more about the facts than either you or I.
Heres the thing: one cannot prove a successful conspiracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 07:43 AM

9. Here's the thing...

In all these years there has never been convincing evidence that Lee Harvey Oswald was a lone assassin. Never. He was there at the time, sure, but there's MUCH evidence to suggest that he wasn't the lone gunman, there's also much evidence to suggest that he never fired a shot that hit JFK.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #9)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 10:09 AM

15. There's been plenty

bullet fragments recovered from Connally that match those fired from Oswald's rifle (and no others) and match CE399, the so-called "magic bullet" (which wasn't magic at all but behaved precisely as one would expect a full-metal-jacketed military round to behave). So you have Oswald, who owned the rifle that fired the bullets that struck Kennedy and Connally, and the handgun that killed Patrolman JD Tippit. Who was photographed with those weapons by his wife, in his back yard. Who had a history of unstable and violent behaviour, and who had shot at General Edwin Walker not too long before this. There's physical evidence linking Oswald to the crime through his weapons; circumstantial evidence in his transporting "curtain rods", in his leaving the book depository, in his shooting a policeman. And on the other side? There's no physical evidence linking anyone else, or any other weapons, to the assassination; nothing but a lot of speculation involving Cubans, the Mafia, Lyndon Johnson, the CIA, the FBI, white supremacists, Birchers, and a cast of thousands. (None of which stands up to any serious scrutiny.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #15)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 11:09 AM

22. I'll take RFK's word over yours, Spider Jerusalem.

No offense.

The fragments removed from Gov. Connally's wrist amount to more than the mass missing from the Magic Bullet, which shows no blood or tissue or any evidence of having passed through a human being.

http://www.ctka.net/2010/journeyCE399.html




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #22)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 11:10 AM

23. No, they don't, and RFK Jr is an ex-smackhead who also believes that vaccines cause autism

which has been extensively disproven by multiple studies. I don't think he has much credibility or standing on anything that requires evidence.

And: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/wound3.txt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #23)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 11:19 AM

26. I didn't get that impression of him when he came to WSU to talk in 2007.

He was very coherent. The only person he called a name was Anthony Scalia, whom he termed the son of a Nazi to an auditorium filled with 2,000 people.

So, yeah. I'll take The word of a man who tells the truth in public over yours.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #27)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 11:50 AM

35. Wow. The guy you called 'Smackhead' puts together a controversial report on vaccines...

...and all you can do is try to discredit him when he talks about his father's thoughts on the assassination of JFK really says a lot about you.

BTW: Your source McAdams is exposed as a professional debunker.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=302044&mesg_id=302099

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #35)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 11:53 AM

36. Because Fletcher Prouty is a reliable source.

And it's not just McAdams, or Posner, or Ken Rahn, or any of the dozens of other people who've collated the evidence and presented it; it's the evidence itself, which does not support the conclusion that anyone other than Lee Harvey Oswald was involved in the assassination, does not support the conclusion that any weapon other than Oswald's was used, and does not support any of the variously mooted conspiracy theories.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #36)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 12:11 PM

39. Like I wrote, I'll take RFK Jr.'s word over yours, Spider Jerusalem.

Same goes for "McAdams, or Posner, or Ken Rahn, or any of the dozens of other people who've collated the evidence and presented it." They have an agenda that is eerily the same as yours, that is to say: "Case closed, Oswald did it, now stop discussion of conspiracy."

Careful readers of their "work" will discover recurring themes and verbiage, found here:

CIA Instructions to Media Assets re: Assassination of President Kennedy

Just a coincidence, as McAdams is wont to say.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #39)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 12:22 PM

42. Address the results of neutron activation analysis and trajectory reconstruction then.

Actual physical evidence. Which is pretty conclusive in establishing that a) the so-called "magic bullet" trajectory works, b) the bullet fragments recovered from Connally can be conclusively matched to Oswald's gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #42)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 12:31 PM

44. Advances in forensic science have revealed both of your contentions to be wrong.

NAA:



Challenge to lone gunman theory

By Betsy Mason

LIVERMORE - More than four decades after his death, John F. Kennedy's assassination remains the hottest cold case in U.S. history, and the clues continue to trickle in. Now Lawrence Livermore Laboratory scientists say a key piece of evidence supporting the lone gunman theory should be thrown out.

A new look at clues gleaned from studies of crime-scene bullet fragments shows they may have been misinterpreted.

"It basically shatters what some people call the best physical evidence around," said chemist Pat Grant, director of the lab's Forensic Science Center.

Grant and Livermore Lab metallurgist Erik Randich found that the chemical "fingerprints" used to identify which bullets the fragments came from are actually more like run-of-the-mill tire tracks than one-of-a-kind fingerprints.

CONTINUED...

http://www.ctka.net/naa_2.html



Trajectory reconstruction is bogus, too:



The JFK CASE:What Does the Blood Tell Us?

By Sherry Pool Gutierrez

In the years since President Kennedy's death, great strides have been made in various technical fields. Many interested parties have applied their time, education, abilities, and efforts to determine what really happened on that dismal November day. Laymen who dedicate their lives to putting pieces of seemingly unrelated information together, scientists and criminologists who apply the latest technical knowledge to arrive at new pieces of the puzzle, and researchers who look to what may have been at that time an insignificant bit of information to develop a comprehensive or new insight surrounding his death. But despite all of these gains, disputes about basic evidence still trouble us.

One area of dispute has been the shot to the head of President Kennedy. Was the shot from the back or from the front? Was there more than one gunshot wound to the head? Is it possible there were two simultaneous shots from the front and back? And most importantly, is there physical scientific evidence which can undisputable satisfy these questions? There is one field of study which can address those questions, and perhaps more importantly, answer them in a manner in which the average person can understand and reach the same conclusions as the experienced analyst.

EXCERPT...

Yes. Analysis of bloodstain patterns on crime scenes is routinely used in law enforcement. Both international and U.S. based professional organizations recognize bloodstain evidence analysis techniques as valid investigative tools. This type of information is based on the study of research performed by many criminalists, with the initial research performed by Herbert MacDonell. Law enforcement agencies internationally provide professional training and education in this field, with hands on reconstruction of bloodstain patterns. Based upon specialized training and field experience obtained by using this technique on actual crime scenes with gunshot injuries, the findings presented are consistent with analytic conclusions which would be reached if President Kennedy's death were being investigated today.

Therefore, supported by the statements by witnesses in the death of President Kennedy describing the bloodspatter they observed; blood, tissue and bone deposited on persons and surfaces located behind the President; and the documentation of blood spatter in front of the President in the Zapruder film, I am convinced the head injury to President Kennedy was the result of a single gunshot fired from the right front of the President.

CONTINUED...

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/Marsh/Ballistics/BloodEvidence.html



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #44)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 10:11 AM

135. Here we go again.

Seems like I've been waiting a couple of years for you to come up with a good reason for ignoring this:



Seems like you don't need a good reason.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to William Seger (Reply #135)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 11:15 AM

137. So you have to wait ''years'' for me to explain that fraction of the Zapruder film, William Seger?

Sorry. I didn't know you were waiting.

Please, explain yourself, William Seger: Why do you think I have to come up with a good reason for ignoring the slight forward movement, before the President's head explodes?

Here's what Prof. David Wrone found:

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/4210331

The Mary Ferrell Foundation has details and the other known films online: http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/Video_Clips_-_Motorcade_Films

PS: It's not my job to tell you what to think. That's your problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #137)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 11:41 PM

145. LOL, I was being facetious, of course

Of course I'm not really waiting for any explanations from you. I'm pretty sure I already know why you tout imaginary "evidence" about bullet fragment weights and blood-spatter patterns, while ignoring what the Zapruder film clearly shows.

Beyond any reasonable doubt, what the Zapruder film clearly shows is that the hit was from behind. If you and David Wrone can't come up with a conspiracy theory that agrees with that credible evidence, then you are the ones with a problem, but it's not one I'm worried about. Everyone needs a hobby, and if you guys want to spend decades trying to chase down imaginary grassy knoll shooters, suit yourself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #35)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 12:51 PM

49. Don't you get it? Conspiracy nuts seldom stop with one conspiracy.

RFK jr. has no credibility on any topic. That's the downside of being a conspiracy kook.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Reply #49)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 01:10 PM

50. So a fellow Democrat-one whose family has sacrificed so much for this nation-is a 'conspiracy kook'?

Your post says a lot about what kind of Democrat you are, cthulu2016.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #50)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 07:29 PM

88. Once again, you insult instead of debating.

Guess you got nothing...still...after all these years....sad.

Have you read this, my friend?

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ayton2.htm


Would love your opinion. See if you can do it without posting a link to something that has nothing to do with it.
Hope you are enjoying the playoffs!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zappaman (Reply #88)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 11:13 PM

100. So what? Like you, Mel Ayton is fixed on the lone nut hypothesis.

Here's info on the physical evidence:

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v1n2/physical.html

So, you have nothing to add about what RFK, Jr. said, zappaman?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #100)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 12:04 PM

113. Like you, Mark Lane is fixed on the multiple shooter hypothesis.

Here's info on the physical evidence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing


RFK was killed by Sirhan Sirhan.
I'm surprised you didn't know that!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zappaman (Reply #113)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 01:57 PM

114. Mark Lane is correct. Which is why I support his work.

As for the assassin of Sen. Kennedy, coroner Thomas Noguchi found the fatal wound was fired from an inch behind the right ear. Eyewitnesses and photographs showed Sirhan was at least a yard away and in front of the Senator.

http://www.jfklancer.com/hunt/rfk_pt1.htm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #114)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 02:13 PM

115. You support his work?

Oh my...such shoddy work.

http://legendofpineridge.blogspot.com/2008/02/more-mark-lane-conspiracy-theories.html

" In Rush to Judgment, Lane abused the Warren Commission testimony of Jack Ruby, Oswald’s killer, and others like Charles Brehm, an alleged “grassy knoll” witness, who said Lane took his statements out of context and added a different meaning to them. Lane also omitted the statements of key witnesses like Johnny C Brewer, who observed a nervous Oswald avoid police patrols after the shooting of Officer Tippit.

Lane also demonstrates his technique of sowing doubt where none exists when he carefully places suspicion in the mind of the reader by making reference to the alleged sinister circumstances of the Robert Kennedy assassination. Lane describes how Bobby Kennedy was led out of the Ambassador Hotel pantry by his bodyguard “FBI agent . . . William Barry.” Barry, according to Lane, “changed the route at the last minute.” Lane goes on to state that Barry told an onlooker, “No, it’s been changed. We’re going this way.” At the time of the RFK assassination Bill Barry was a former FBI agent and the decision to change the route out of the Embassy Room was made by Bill Barry and RFK aide Fred Dutton to accommodate the realities of running for president—RFK had promised to meet with the print press who were in the Colonial Room and the simplest route was through the pantry, the scene of the assassination. Additionally, RFK had asked to go the “back way” to the Colonial Room instead of through the crowds in the Embassy Ballroom. Yet via Lane’s transparent innuendo readers will inevitably be left to wonder if a federal agency was responsible for the assassination of JFK’s brother Bobby. It is therefore ironic that Lane has the gall to criticize Vincent Bugliosi for getting an address wrong in his book Reclaiming History. Lane sarcastically wrote, “Did the publisher never hear of the term shared by the entire industry: fact checker?

http://www.washingtondecoded.com/site/2012/05/lane.html

I'll leave out the fact that he is associated with the anti-Semitic Liberty Lobby.
You're welcome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zappaman (Reply #115)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 02:35 PM

116. Nice smear, zappaman. Lane, as an attorney, defended Liberty Lobby.

Lane proved to a jury that E Howard Hunt was in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963 as part of a CIA operation to kill President Kennedy.

He detailed his reasoning in "Plausible Denial," published in 1992. E Howard Hunt filed a defamation suit against a right wing mag that had named him as being in Dallas on company business. Victor Marchetti, then an assistant to Richard Helms, reported the agency was concerned the public would learn the truth. He confessed later to participating in the assassination on his deathbed.

What Mark Lane may best be known is "Rush to Judgement," a critique of the Warren Commission, published in 1966.

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/319138.Rush_to_Judgment


I'm not surprised you don't seem to know any of that, zappaman.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #116)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 02:45 PM

117. Knew all that my friend

And RUSH TO JUDGEMENT may be the worst book ever written about JFK.

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

Thought you knew that, my friend!


Liberty Lobby is a hate group. Thought you knew that, my friend!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_Lobby

http://www.adl.org/resistance_records/new_owner.asp

Tell me, Octafish, do you support or defend the Liberty Lobby?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zappaman (Reply #117)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 03:02 PM

121. Again you smear Mark Lane, zappaman, meaning you were only feigning ignorance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #15)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 01:31 AM

105. The lack of physical evidence contradicting the conclusions of the Warren Report is not surprising

and does not prove that such evidence did not exist. Why? Because the Johnson entourage, the Dallas police and the Secret Service controlled the evidence from the moment Kennedy's car was shot at through the funeral.

At any point in that period, the chain of evidence could have been and does appear to have been broken. The local police were so sloppy in handling the evidence and the situation in the Dallas police station where Oswald was held that Jack Ruby managed to kill Oswald and silence him.

Even at that time, police officers were not that inept or stupid. It's just unbelievable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #9)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 03:04 PM

58. Bull shit. The proof is on the shoulders of the conspiracy fools.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #58)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 04:28 PM

75. It's so clear that JFK's autopsy was on the up and up.

Orders of silence accompany autopsies all the time. The Warren Commission was a joke. If things were so clear cut, people who witnessed the autopsy should have been able to speak about it.
http://whokilledjfk.net/orders_of_silence.htm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #9)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 12:14 AM

102. Oswald's Alibi

Hi,

When the Police entered the Book Depository building minutes after the shooting, they found Oswald & identified him in the 2nd floor
Lunchroom drinking a coke. There were a couple of Witnesses to verify it. To make it down from the 6th to the 2nd floor in that amount of time, He would have had to run very fast down 4 flights of stairs.

Supposedly he was not out of breath when they found him and his alibi was that he had lunch on the first floor room where the staff played dominoes during the shooting & went up to the 2nd floor to buy a coke.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to johnsolaris (Reply #102)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 02:54 PM

142. Thanks for this.

That bit of information you posted, along with the orders of silence given to everyone present at Bethesda that day, pretty much make it a certainty that a coverup was involved.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 10:29 AM

17. "wishful thinking" that the "magic bullet" explanation would be believed - a convoluted theory. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMother4Peace (Reply #17)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 08:57 PM

98. An amazing bullet... And Santa's real don't ya know

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 10:31 AM

19. Have you ever been to the site in Dallas?

I went there and stood at the window in that building where Oswald fired the gun and shot JFK. It's painfully obvious there was more than one shooter. They've turned that building into a museum and I stood at that window for a LONG time. I was so stunned. And everyone in that museum who came to the window said what I was thinking. Everyone.

I still get goose bumps remembering it.

There is absolutely no way Oswald acted alone. No way in hell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Reply #19)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 02:16 PM

51. 6th Floor Window?

I too have stood in that window. It would have been a long, difficult shot at a target that was descending as it moved away I also went and stood on the grassy knoll behind the picket fence just to gain a different perspective. Photos of that area are quite deceiving. There was a big "X" painted on the street to signify where the presidential limo was when the shots rang out. It is a very short distance from where I was standing to the "X" and a much, much easier shot. A common sense approach would have placed the shooter on the grassy knoll not in the Texas School Book Depository on the 6th floor. Why would they pass up a sure thing and choose the much more difficult alternative?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobcat (Reply #51)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 02:19 PM

52. Exactly.

It was just a mind blower.

I stood there at that window for a long time. Everyone who came to the window said something. From "Oh my God!" to "No way!" to "See, honey, what did I tell you?" to "Well I'll be damned!" - I heard it all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobcat (Reply #51)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 03:00 PM

55. Because Oswald worked at the book depository

Standing out in the crowd would have exposed him to security.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Reply #19)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 03:06 PM

59. BULLSHIT.....I was there and about 5 people from work.....

said the shot looks a lot harder in photos than it does standing there.

The photos make it look much harder than really looking out the window.

Remember, the motorcade had slowed down to turn the corner.

Oswald did it. No doubt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #59)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 03:54 PM

63. One shot. Not two.

No way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #59)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 04:37 PM

77. I live near there and have been to the museum several times

It wouldn't have been that hard of a shot. The first shot was from 60 yards and the 2nd was from 90 yards. Kennedy's Lincoln was moving slowly and almost directly in line with Oswald's rifle which would have made the shot much easier than if the limo had been moving perpendicular to him. In the Marines, Oswald shot 48 out of 50 and 49 out of 50 at 200 yards with open sights. So with open sights and 2-3 times the distance, Oswald hit the target 96-98% of the time, yet people want to claim he couldn't have done it at a much shorter distance with a scoped rifle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #77)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 05:59 PM

84. Good information, thanks!! n-t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #77)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 07:31 PM

89. I was there as well.

As you point out, it was an easy shot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Reply #19)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 04:53 AM

110. The late great Bill Hicks echoes your observations

In particular, at about the 1:30 mark ...



I sure do miss Bill

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 12:45 PM

46. I agree with you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 03:01 PM

56. Not true. There have been multiple confessions and a growing mountain of evidence.

Sam Giancana, Santos Trafficante and E. Howard Hunt all acknowledged their involvement before their deaths.

Do some open minded research. The Oswald scenario doesn't hold up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 03:03 PM

57. People love the fun of thinking it was a huge cover up. More fun than the truth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #2)


Response to SheilaT (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 07:56 PM

92. The evidence presented is what they want

to present in every case. Every case. Only the investigating agents see all the evidence. But here's the thing: they gather it independently of each other. They fan out far and wide initially and then come together to combine their information.

That phase is the weakest point and the best opportunity for an outside force to influence the course of the investigation. Investigators will have gathered great leads only to find that it has already been decided that someone else is the suspect. They just file all their notes away. And sometimes, mysteriously, those notes disappear from the case files.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #2)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 09:27 PM

125. Well there was a thread here on DU

About a month ago, regarding Howard Hunts deathbed confession that he knew of (and was part of?) the conspiracy to kill JFK.

Now, after all the back-and-forth and insults of varying degrees being flung back and forth I just had to put a post in, and I said, in effect; "Ok, whatever you believe about CT and lone gunman and the Warren commission, this thread is SUPPOSED to be about Howard Hunt and a deathbed confession. How do you explain that?"

I don't think anyone replied to my post...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #2)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 12:22 PM

140. Try this -- How is JFK hit from the front as they drive AWAY from the book depository ?



The top of JFK's head is what Jackie grabs off the trunk of the car.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 06:10 AM

5. ...and it's not the only suspect tragedy & pack of lies America has experienced

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 06:30 AM

6. Right wing hit job.

The same crew that is bent on a fascist take over of this country today.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 08:02 AM

10. This means RFK would have conducted a different investigation if he had become President

 

But surprise surprise. He was shot as well under suspicious circumstances. More bullets were found than those allegedly shot by Sirhan Sirhan, whose diary resembles the diary of a hypnotized person.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 08:08 AM

11. I will never, ever believe that Oswald acted alone

He was an incompetent fool.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CanonRay (Reply #11)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 08:18 AM

12. Amen to that. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 09:58 AM

14. The nation has not been the same since Nov.22, 1963.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 10:22 AM

16. Thanks NC. +1, no text.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 10:30 AM

18. one man's opinion. nothing more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 10:36 AM

20. It's all gumdrops and rainbows for the Lone Gunman theorists.

 

They live in a perfect world where every single assassination attempt is the act of a lone kook. Where world events aren't guided by power hungry moneyed interests. Where everything has a perfect explanation wrapped in a bow and where our government can be trusted because they have our best interests at heart. Nothing nefarious or illegal happens in their rainbow land inhabited by unicorns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karpool (Reply #20)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 11:22 AM

28. +100!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karpool (Reply #20)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 12:22 PM

43. The Wizard of Oz's curtains are made of dollar bills.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karpool (Reply #20)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 03:07 PM

60. And the nuts love thinking it was a a cover up. Like 911, etc. People love stories. Not the truth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karpool (Reply #20)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 04:05 PM

66. You forgot to mention the trusted corporations!

Who also always have our best interests at heart. Really. They do. Cross my heart.






for the impaired.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karpool (Reply #20)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 05:40 PM

83. +1000 n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karpool (Reply #20)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 06:01 PM

85. That's one big straw man

Nobody claims there are no conspiracies. All claims must stand on the evidence.

Some people are more gullible than others. Some people believe that 9-11 was an inside job; Iraq had WMD's; and that Kennedy was killed by LBJ, HW Bush, mafia, Nixon, Mossad, CIA, Castro... Other people are skeptical of such claims.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karpool (Reply #20)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 08:09 PM

94. False dichotomy

Not even a good one at that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karpool (Reply #20)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 12:47 AM

104. yeah, they would not like the list at this site

http://www.ranker.com/list/the-13-most-evil-u-s-government-experiments-on-humans/robert-wabash?page=1

#2Mustard Gas Tested on Soldiers via Involuntary Gas Chambers
#4Deadly Chemical Sprays on American Cities
#10Pentagon Treats Black Cancer Patients with Extreme Radiation

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 11:14 AM

24. He's as wrong as anybody else who thinks this

People have been so easily conned by these conspiracy nuts who try to attach more significance on the assassination than there actually was.

The fact remains Oswald and Oswald alone killed JFK. Jack Ruby did the world no favors by killing Oswald.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to duffyduff (Reply #24)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 11:28 AM

29. "People have been so easily conned by" the

Warren Report!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to duffyduff (Reply #24)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 03:09 PM

61. There's significantly more evidence supporting Rober Kennedy Jr's viewpoint

than supports the Warren Commission's findings.

The vast majority of people who have done their own research have come to the same conclusion - Oswald was not the "lone gunman". The Warren Commission report was one of the most elaborate "conspiracy theories" ever created.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 11:18 AM

25. The level of competition between organized elites is much higher than generally believed

But not every conspiracy theory is correct.

Disinformation is also a tactic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 11:48 AM

32. I love DU3.

It's much more sloppy and fun than the old dungeon days. I even think I'll start donating again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 11:49 AM

34. You have to be pretty brain dead to think that there was just one gunman

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 11:58 AM

37. Take the investigation to its full extent...

and I'll bet you'll see a certain George Herbert Walker Bush involved... I'm speculating that the actual lethal shots were fired from the County Records or County Criminal Courts building - of course, those buildings were likely full of cops, so the assassin would probably have been carrying a badge himself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 12:06 PM

38. Where's new evidence that hasn't been thoroughly debunked? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade_McKenzie (Reply #38)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 12:21 PM

41. Well, we get to hear from an eyewitness what Attorney General Kennedy thought.

We learned what his father said he really thought about the Warren Commission, a "shoddy piece of craftsmanship."

We also learned his father connected Ruby's telephone calls to organized crime leaders, many of whom were targets of FBI investigators and wondered if his work leading the Department of Justice may've led to the assassination of his brother.

Here's some Old News most Americans, including DUers, don't know: The CIA was doing business with organized crime in order to kill Fidel Castro and who knows what else -- a secret association that began in 1960, when Dulles was DCI and Nixon VP.



How the CIA Enlisted the Chicago Mob to Put a Hit on Castro

Ever wonder about the sanity of America's leaders? Take a close look at perhaps the most bizarre plot in U.S. intelligence history


By Bryan Smith
Chicago Magazine
November 2007
(page 4 of 6)

EXCERPT...

By September 1960, the project was proceeding apace. Roselli would report directly to Maheu. The first step was a meeting in New York. There, at the Plaza Hotel, Maheu introduced Roselli to O'Connell. The agent wanted to cover up the participation of the CIA, so he pretended to be a man named Jim Olds who represented a group of wealthy industrialists eager to get rid of Castro so they could get back in business.

"We may know some people," Roselli said. Several weeks later, they all met at the Fontainebleau Hotel in Miami. For years, the luxurious facility had served as the unofficial headquarters for Mafioso leaders seeking a base close to their gambling interests in Cuba. Now, it would be the staging area for the assassination plots.

At a meeting in one of the suites, Roselli introduced Maheu to two men: Sam Gold and a man Roselli referred to as Joe, who could serve as a courier to Cuba. By this time, Roselli was on to O'Connell. "I'm not kidding," Roselli told the agent one day. "I know who you work for. But I'm not going to ask you to confirm it."

Roselli may have figured out that he was dealing with the CIA, but neither Maheu nor O'Connell realized the rank of mobsters with whom they were dealing. That changed when Maheu picked up a copy of the Sunday newspaper supplement Parade, which carried an article laying out the FBI's ten most wanted criminals. Leading the list was Sam Giancana, a.k.a. "Mooney," a.k.a. "Momo," a.k.a. "Sam the Cigar," a Chicago godfather who was one of the most feared dons in the country—and the man who called himself Sam Gold. "Joe" was also on the list. His real name, however, was Santos Trafficante—the outfit's Florida and Cuba chieftain.

Maheu alerted O'Connell. "My God, look what we're involved with," Maheu said. O'Connell told his superiors. Questioned later before the 1975 U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (later nicknamed the Church Committee after its chairman, Frank Church, the Democratic senator from Idaho), O'Connell was asked whether there had ever been any discussion about asking two men on the FBI's most wanted list to carry out a hit on a foreign leader.

"Not with me there wasn't," O'Connell answered.

"And obviously no one said stop—and you went ahead."

"Yes."

"Did it bother you at all?"

"No," O'Connell answered, "it didn't."

CONTINUED...

http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/November-2007/How-the-CIA-Enlisted-the-Chicago-Mob-to-Put-a-Hit-on-Castro/index.php?cparticle=4&siarticle=3



Gee. Organized crime in bed with the nation's spy agency for a secret assassination program. What could go wrong?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 12:33 PM

45. The Madeleine Duncan Brown interview and

the E Howard Hunt deathbed confession pretty much gets you as close to the truth as you can get.








I know Alex Jones is persona non-grata(sp?) but he does put info out there that the MSM will not even consider.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 12:48 PM

47. RFK jr. is a conspiracy nut, so this is consistent

The man's credibility ended on the topic of vaccines, so who really cares what other theories he has?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Reply #47)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 02:21 PM

53. I agree with you about the vaccines but he's right on this topic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 12:51 PM

48. WOO!

 

WOO WOO!

Next thing you know he'll be claiming there's convincing evidence that vaccines cause autism or something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #48)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 04:08 PM

67. OH NOES! He said WOO! Quick, shut down the DISCUSSION!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 02:21 PM

54. This is the same idiot who thinks vaccines cause autism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Odin2005 (Reply #54)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 04:02 PM

65. Therefore everything he's ever said or will say is disqualified?

By that measure, the fact that Hilary Clinton was wrong on Iraq means she never should've been SOS. Instead she should've been relegated to the dustbin of history because she was too stupid to realize the whole WMD thing was a fabrication. By your measure, that is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laundry_queen (Reply #65)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 04:10 PM

68. It swhows he's into woo. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #68)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 04:11 PM

69. Say woo again. Please. It cracks me up. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laundry_queen (Reply #69)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 04:11 PM

70. .

 



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #70)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 04:13 PM

71. Well, you're bright enough to find the smilies.

Good for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laundry_queen (Reply #71)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 04:14 PM

72. I was given explicit instructions on how to do so by the Illuminati

 

They delivered the instructions via black helicopter piloted by the Bildebergers.

Fortunately, the Masons wrote the instructions.

The powers that be will reward me for my efforts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #72)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 04:16 PM

73. Well you done gone lost me now. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laundry_queen (Reply #73)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 07:33 PM

90. Here's some more

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 03:36 PM

62. Attorney General Kennedy recognized the Ruby-Mafia ties.

He also recognized the Mafia-CIA ties, forged by DCI Dulles and VP Nixon to assassinate Castro.

What has been troubling to me, looking back: The continuing efforts to paint RFK as a guy responsible for trying to assassinate Fidel Castro. The facts show it was CIA-FBI cuttout Robert Maheu who approached the Mafia in 1960, at the behest of Alan Dulles and the Eisenhower administration. The record also shows the Republicans in CIA, specifically Richard Helms and Desmond Fitzgerald, misrepresented their emissary to Rolando Cubela, the Cuban "defector" chosen to kill Castro, as being there in an official capacity on behalf of RFK. This examples aren't just disgusting examples of conservatives being conservative at the expense of liberals and the People; they are evidence of crimes on the part of the high priests of the secret, national security state.

RFK would certainly have recognized that, as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)


Response to Freddie Stubbs (Reply #74)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 07:22 PM

86. you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Reply #86)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 03:11 PM

122. I have seen that exact same post from him before re Kennedy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kingofalldems (Reply #122)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 03:49 PM

124. In general, I avoid

reading anything by the speciman in question. When in the past, I engaged in a conversation with it, I found nothing of interest, much less value.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 04:41 PM

79. Eh.

Conspiracies are a tricky thing because they require a lot of silent people and inherently, people generally aren't silent creatures. It's a big reason Watergate collapsed into the type of scandal it turned out to be so fast - because someone, Mark Felt, stepped up and pushed Woodward and Bernstein toward something bigger than anyone could have realized.

The assassination of a president, the ensuing coverup, and everything since has got to be either the greatest kept secret in American history ... or just the delusions of a group of people.

It's too easy, don't you think? Where is the smoking gun - outside supposed confessions and a misunderstanding of physics?

Let's be honest, the conspiracy theorists can't even agree on why or who killed Kennedy.

It was Bush! No, LBJ! No, the CIA! Nope...it was the mafia! Uh-uh, Richard Nixon killed Kennedy! Maybe it was the FBI ... or the Illuminati!

Or maybe it was just ol' Lee Harvey Oswald.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 07:28 PM

87. The family did

have a "private" investigation of events in Dallas conducted. The person who was tasked with overseeing it was Daniel Patrick Moynihan. A number of retired intelligence officers were involved. The investigation concluded that the murder was ordered and paid for by Texas oil, and conducted by people associated with the CIA-Cuban-mob group that had been put together under VP Nixon. (This does not suggest that Nixon was involved in Dallas. But, like LBJ, he wasn't stupid -- he understood what happened, and why.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Reply #87)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 07:35 PM

91. Wow!

That must be a lot of people.
Especially when you add in the FBI, Secret Service, physicians, and Dallas PD, who all had to help cover it up!
You have that evidence?
Would love to see it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zappaman (Reply #91)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 08:09 PM

95. The chihuahua is a

silly little dog, don't you think? They are known for sitting in front of screens .....television screens, and now even computer screens, and yapping bravely at the image of a great lion. But they are, of course, merely annoying little pups.

In answer to your silly question: yes, in fact I do have parts of the Moynihan report. I will safely venture that you have never seen any of it.

I'll also note that, on another current thread on this topic, you ask several times if people have read -- or know anyone who has read -- the entire Warren Report? I'd ask if you have, but I do not think any answer that you might give is of any more value than it actually would be of interest.

The complete report is among numerous other books -- some rather good, some not -- in my library. I'm fully confident that I've read more about Dallas than you (since there is no way that you've read the Moynihan report, for example). That includes some good books by some who believe the Warren Commission was correct in its conclusion, but who recognize that the report itself has flaws.

Perhaps you would fare better in lipping off to someone as dull-witted as yourself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Reply #95)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 12:00 PM

112. LOL!

Thanks for the laughs.
You got me, super sleuth.
Now, wrap your jaws around this mystery, solve it and be a hero to the world!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zappaman (Reply #112)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 02:46 PM

119. Is that all you got?

Seriously, besides using Vincent B's question -- in several places on two threads, and without giving credit to who you are quoting --is that really the best you got? Pitiful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Reply #119)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 02:50 PM

120. "Have you read all 26 volumes of the WCR" is a Bugliosi quote?

Hmmmm....I guess "what's for dinner" is a Bugliosi quote as well!
is that really the best you got? Pitiful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zappaman (Reply #120)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 03:47 PM

123. Considering that

literally thousands of pages of previously withheld intelligence documents have come out after the WCR, only someone of remarkable limited insight -- limited by the most concrete of thinking -- would seriously take the position that it represents the final word on Dallas. I'd note that even Vince B has gone on the record as saying

Your stealing VB's line brings to mind perhaps the most glaring error in his 2007 book (which I still think is of great value .... one can start with the top footnote on page 1586, and find where he resorts to the same weak question, in regard to Tip O'Neill. Then go to Tip's autobiography, to check how Bugliosi absolutely twists what The Speaker wrote about.

Two of JFK's top aides, who were a couple of cars back from the President, both heard and saw the last shot being taken .... and not by Oswald. Both were told by FBI investigators that they needed to lie about what they heard and saw, "for the good of the country." Perhaps you can simply write them off as kooky conspiracy theorists. O'Neill did not.

Speaking of conspiracy theorists, Vince B. was (post-prosecutor) one of the attorneys on a civil case that focused upon one part of the conspiracy to murder RFK. Being uninformed, I'm sure that you didn't know this, though it is likely easier for you to dismiss this fact, than to write off Bugliosi.

I would like to thank you for providing me with the answer to a question that I've never thought about before ......and am unlikely to ever really consider in the future: how might a tiny, quivering chihuahua see itself in a fun-house mirror?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Reply #123)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 11:34 PM

128. You're searching for reasons to not believe the evidence

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Select_Committee_on_Assassinations

A majority of witnesses who testified on the source of the shots said they came from the direction of the Depository. However, many witnesses thought the shots came from the direction of the Knoll. Only five witnesses, from a total of over one hundred, thought the shots came from two directions simultaneously.


As normal in these types of events, one can find individual witnesses that contradict what the majority thought happened that day. You should follow the evidence where it leads, rather than where you want it to go. The great majority of witnesses thought that all shots came from the same location, and most thought the three shots came from Oswald's location. The kill shot came from Kennedy back, as show in the assassination video:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022179429#post76

The fatal shot came from Oswald's location.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cpwm17 (Reply #128)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 05:03 AM

129. "A majority of witnesses

who testified" does not equal "a majority of witnesses." Again, one need only consider the example of the two people who -- other than his brother -- had the closest personal relationships with JFK. The FBI investigators pressured them to knowingly and purposely lie about what they both saw and heard. The "majority" of these two did not testify to the WC. Considering that they saw and heard the same thing, I have neither "searched for," or as you are doing, stubbornly refused to take their stories into account.

Indeed, there is no person on this forum who has read more of the documentation and interpretations of evidence that the shots came from the TBD (and that LHO was or may have pulled the trigger) than I. That I find it unconvincing does not mean that I haven't approached the topic with an open mind. The refusal to address what two eye- and ear-witnesses saw and heard, and were instructed to lie about by federal investigators "for the good of the country," suggests something distinct from an open mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Reply #87)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 08:06 PM

93. And later on

there was an event having to do with Teddy while Nixon was president. Nixon talked about Teddy just before it happened, although he was smart enough not to spell it out. But it was very clear from the tapes that Nixon expected Teddy's political aspirations to be severely damaged if not completely over.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 08:15 PM

96. I was quite young when Evers, JFK, MLK, RFK and others were murdered. This is a painful subject.

Medgar Evers' widow speaks at Obama's Inauguration this month, on the federally observed day of the birth of MLK.

So many things are coming full circle. If this gets resolved, I will be glad to put this behind us with all the other mysteries, wars and murders that colored my years as a teenager and my whole life.

I can't believe we'll be that lucky, though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 11:52 PM

101. Go rent the movie "Executive Action"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Action_%28film%29

Fiction. Based on the known elements of the assassination and many of the 'theories' that abound. Facts are labeled as facts, supposition is labeled as such. It's nicely written. A note from the wiki entry -

"Despite many similarities of the plotline to JFK, Executive Action presents a far more direct and unemotional account of the Kennedy assassination than Stone's film. The film is presented in an almost-documentary style and was filmed on a small budget despite the presence of two big Hollywood names, Robert Ryan and Burt Lancaster. Another unique attribute is that the story is told entirely from the perspective of the conspirators. This film was also the last movie for Ryan, who died of cancer five months before the film's release."

Fiction.

Maybe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rosco T. (Reply #101)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 03:08 PM

143. EXCELLENT film

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 12:21 AM

103. Best put RFK Jr and the Church Committee into Creative Speculation.

That was sarcasm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 03:49 AM

109. It's admirable that, when faced with an unimaginable crisis,

he turned to formal theory and was interested in reason.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 02:46 PM

118. JFK was killed by the mafia

 

Thom Hartmann and Lamar Waldron wrote a book Ultimate Sacrifice.

It's in production stage of becoming a movie starring Robert DeNiro and Leonardo DeCaprio

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 09:35 PM

126. Just about everybody knows there are huge questions about both murders

It's the people who claim to know the answers that you need to be wary of.

Were there conspiracies? Almost certainly. Who did they involve? No one knows the specifics or they're not talking yet.

Will it happen again? You bet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 09:52 PM

127. if there was no there there, I doubt so many Chihuahuas would be here

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fascisthunter (Reply #127)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 05:06 AM

130. True, that.

The chihuahua often hunts in packs. In the limited brain capacity allowed by their tiny skull caps, they fantasize that their combined quivering bug-eyes will intimidate their fantasy victims into submission. The chihuahua pack is defined by shared fantasies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Reply #130)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 08:02 PM

147. reminds me of this one

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fascisthunter (Reply #127)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 10:33 AM

136. The existence of posters that disagree with the OP is evidence that the conspiracy is correct?

Now that's CT'er logic if I've ever heard any.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cpwm17 (Reply #136)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 07:58 PM

146. try harder

I didn't that, but you did, which is somewhat interesting as far as chihuahuas go.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 05:46 AM

131. GULITY = Rightwingnuts

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Berlum (Reply #131)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 09:32 AM

132. The timing of this

I think the timing of this is perfect, with poppy's health not being so good this could be the trickle of truth that could actually be followed with some confessions.... hopefully....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sikofit3 (Reply #132)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 09:38 AM

133. "As the hour of my demise closes in, I must at last reveal all." - Poppy 'Skull & Boner Bush (R)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 09:40 AM

134. I have always felt JFK was a mafia hit because they felt betrayed by him

he took millions of mafia dollars in 1960 and then unleashed Bobby on them once he was in the White House. He also was sleeping with the girlfriend of one of the mafia kingpins. Not really what you would want to do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WI_DEM (Reply #134)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 11:29 AM

138. JFK killed by mafia because of Bobby's tenacious pursuit.

 

Bobby knew this. Mafia got wind of the Kennedy plan for a coup in Cuba and used it as leverage against Bobby to aid in the cover-up of the assassination.

Otherwise, WW III hung in the balance if it were exposed that the Kennedy's were double-crossing Kruschev regarding the issue of Cuba.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IWelcome TheirHatred (Reply #138)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 11:32 AM

139. why would the government cover up a mob hit?

or at least, continue to cover it up 50 years later?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WooWooWoo (Reply #139)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 12:27 PM

141. Hartmann and Waldron...

 

cover this topic in-depth in their book Ultimate Sacrifice.

Along with the reasons I stated above-

"The government" would cover it up because "the government" has/had a working relationship with organized crime.

That kind of factual information doesn't square nicely with the myth of US history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewsCenter28 (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 03:10 PM

144. It's called the fourth bullet

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread