Create new account | My Profile | My Account | My Bookmarks | My Inbox | Help | Log in

Google search

Advanced search

HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Attorney General Robert F...

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 10:36 AM

Octafish (55,745 posts)

Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy believed President Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy.

That's what his son and daughter, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Rory Kennedy, reported in an interview with Charlie Rose last weekend in Dallas.



It's also what author and Salon founder David Talbot reported, when he called Robert F. Kennedy the "first conspiracy theorist" in 2007.

Here's why the news from Robert and Rory is so important:

The important issue is that he and his sister reported their father -- the president's principal counselor and the nation's chief law enforcement officer -- privately thought a conspiracy was behind the assassination of President Kennedy.

RFK called the Warren Commission report "shoddy workmanship."

Attorney General Kennedy knew about the Ruby-Mafia connections immediately, which is vital when considering the Mafia were hired by Allen Dulles and the CIA during Eisenhower's administration to murder Fidel Castro -- an operation which the CIA failed to inform the president and attorney general.

The interview with Charlie Rose marked the first time members of the immediate Kennedy family have voiced the attorney general's doubts about the Warren Commission and its lone gunman theory.


Those are the facts we learned Friday, Jan. 11, 2013. It's called history.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

845 replies, 346456 views

Thread infoBookmark this threadTrash this thread

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 845 replies Author Time Post
Reply Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy believed President Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy. (Original post)
 Octafish Jan 2013 OP
LineReply Cue the 'coincidence theorists' to target their attacks on RFK.
 blm Jan 2013 #1
LineLineReply Please, tell me why they would call themselves "Democrats"?
 Octafish Jan 2013 #10
LineLineLineReply Great smear!
 zappaman Jan 2013 #13
LineLineLineLineReply Project much?
 Octafish Jan 2013 #14
LineLineLineLineLineReply Nope.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #15
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply Laugh all you want, zappaman, as it reveals what kind of person you are.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #17
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Look up Lee Harvey Oswald
 zappaman Jan 2013 #20
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Agreed again! They excuse the little shit that did the killing!
 stopbush Jan 2013 #36
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply That's incorrect. The CIA and Curtis LeMay did him in. The Mafia cleaned up the "problems"
 Zen Democrat Jan 2013 #53
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Unraveling since Day One? Yet here were are, 50 years later,
 stopbush Jan 2013 #57
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Well stated, Zen Democrat.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #66
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply What a laugh!
 stopbush Jan 2013 #79
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply MAJOR woo.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #131
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Kicking. n/t
 Hotler Jan 2013 #147
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply ‘One-man truth squad’ still debunking JFK conspiracy theories
 zappaman Jan 2013 #153
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Crapola at its deepest.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #195
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply What an ignorant comment.
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #161
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Back what up?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #163
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply No you wouldn't...
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #188
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Seems the Attorney General of the US & the President's closest advisor was the one doing that.
 HiPointDem Jan 2013 #189
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply CT paranoia.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #80
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Rather be called 'paranoid' than side with liars and the traitors they protect.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #84
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Once again, Octafish posts that picture of nobody in particular.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #86
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Please, keep up with the smears and name calling, stopbush.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #87
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply But there is no "issue," Octafish. That's what you don't seem to understand.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #89
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Gee. Comparing me to Sandy Hook deniers might be a clue.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #91
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Gee. You have no problem calling people "liars" and enablers of traitors,
 stopbush Jan 2013 #94
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply And you have no problem putting words into other people's mouths.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #127
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply In this case, the technical term is "presenting the evidence."
 stopbush Jan 2013 #205
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Speaking of smears...
 zappaman Jan 2013 #99
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply It looks like Ed O'Neil playing angry birds on an iPhone n/t
 RZM Jan 2013 #90
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Your the one who's in the "rarefied club" - the club that includes
 alberg Jan 2013 #452
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Check your Websters for the definition of "evidence." Then, get back to us.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #459
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Your either ignorant of the evidence, genuinely confused about a topic that is
 alberg Jan 2013 #485
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply How would you know what the WCR says? You've never read it.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #491
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply "Sprague... wanted complete information about the CIA's operation in Mexico City..."
 MinM Jan 2013 #193
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply If, as I suspect the CIA knew what went on in Mexico City, I can see why the CIA demanded
 happyslug Jan 2013 #232
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Thanks for the background on Sprague's removal, MM.
 Mc Mike Jan 2013 #237
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply CIA assigned 1963 Oswald minder George Joannides the 1977 job of liaison with HSCA.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #250
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply One of the Problems with the JFK assassination is the sheer number of people CYAing themselves
 happyslug Jan 2013 #229
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I'm curious...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #255
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply And one of the problems with the JFK CTists is that they feel it necessary
 stopbush Jan 2013 #321
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I Don't Believe in Magic…
 AndyTiedye Jan 2013 #651
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Ignorance of the evidence on display for all to see.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #652
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply the kennedys are conspiracy theorists now? seems like rfk, both as us AG & kennedy admin
 HiPointDem Jan 2013 #190
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Talk about contradicting yourself!
 stopbush Jan 2013 #293
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Uhhh, what?
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #302
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You wrote:
 stopbush Jan 2013 #306
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply From one point of view...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #318
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply there's no contradiction at all. sorry you don't see it. rfk had connections he could work after
 HiPointDem Jan 2013 #324
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply Muahahahahaha!!!!
 greytdemocrat Jan 2013 #170
LineLineLineLineReply Agreed.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #29
LineLineLineLineReply This sure is another reason to point to the pointless....
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #159
LineLineLineLineLineReply Cool!
 zappaman Jan 2013 #162
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply Divert much?
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #176
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply 'You can't be a Democrat and you can't be a liberal if you don't believe there was a conspiracy"
 zappaman Jan 2013 #441
LineLineLineLineLineReply You are pointless. What is the point of this post? Back up you own crap before you ask anyone else
 lonestarnot Jan 2013 #180
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply already have...
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #184
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Then explain why the secret service was waived off the car.
 lonestarnot Jan 2013 #192
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply People don't like to talk about the real reason for this...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #206
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply JFK never ordered the bubble top off.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #220
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I'm not that familiar with the secret service point of view...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #230
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The Bubble Top Wasn't Bulletproof. So what does it matter if JFK or someone else
 stopbush Jan 2013 #290
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Wrong...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #301
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply uh huh
 zappaman Jan 2013 #304
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Sorry, I assumed the SS agent knew what he was talking about...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #375
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Wow.You're easily pleased...or deluded. Take your pick.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #388
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply In this case just being logical....
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #390
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You wrote:
 stopbush Jan 2013 #309
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The bubble top was ordered off the limo by Kenneth O'Donnell, one of JFK's top aides
 stopbush Jan 2013 #475
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply That picture means absolutely nothing when it comes to protecting JFK that day.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #668
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply ...
 doublethink Jan 2013 #676
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Sorry, but putting nothing in your title line but an ellipse
 stopbush Jan 2013 #680
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply ...
 doublethink Jan 2013 #682
LineLineLineLineReply You have handily diminished your credibility.
 lonestarnot Jan 2013 #179
LineLineLineLineReply Their weren't "hundreds", only a small core group of experienced assassins
 alberg Jan 2013 #437
LineLineLineLineLineReply 'Their weren't "hundreds", only a small core group of experienced assassins"
 zappaman Jan 2013 #439
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply How long was the "Ultra Secret" covered up? How many people were in on it?
 alberg Jan 2013 #487
LineLineLineLineReply Post removed
 Post removed Jan 2013 #621
LineLineLineLineLineReply I like busting you when you make things up
 zappaman Jan 2013 #622
LineLineLineReply I didn't know registering as a Democrat required me to join Lee Harvey's defense team.
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #608
LineLineLineLineReply Where did I write that?
 Octafish Jan 2013 #619
LineLineLineLineLineReply You didn't write it.
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #625
LineLineReply RFK was not interested in reopening the investigation into his brother's death.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #350
LineLineLineReply For public consumption and to throw off conspirators still at large...
 Octafish Jan 2013 #535
LineLineLineLineReply "In private, there are reports."
 stopbush Jan 2013 #536
LineLineLineLineLineReply Sen. Kennedy's children went public with their father's conclusion of conspiracy.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #538
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply Is that why you are now talking about nazis?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #545
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply NAZIs played a MAJOR role in the United States after the war.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #578
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You can post whatever you want
 zappaman Jan 2013 #579
LineLineLineLineReply And yet, RFK conducted his own INDEPENDENT investigation of the numerous JFK CTs AT THE TIME
 stopbush Jan 2013 #547
LineLineLineLineLineReply As I've pointed out in my posts on this issue...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #647
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply That might be plausible if RFK was a coward. Or a political opportunist.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #648
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply In the course of this thread...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #656
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply "It demonstrates that RFK?" You know, these aren't FACTS that we're talking about here.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #658
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Contemptible?
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #659
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Now, I'm forced to give history lessons.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #662
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply It could also imply...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #664
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply It implies no such thing. The fact that the Washington Post called these aides the Irish Mafia
 stopbush Jan 2013 #667
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I only assume that there are a lot of young people viewing this forum...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #669
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply So, you're suggesting that people who DO know their history should walk on eggs
 stopbush Jan 2013 #670
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Nonsense aside...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #674
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Do you have comprehension problems?
 stopbush Jan 2013 #681
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I'm complaining about the use of the word "mafia" not the use of "Irish"...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #684
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply What you're doing is over reaching to make a point that doesn't exist
 stopbush Jan 2013 #686
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply All you have to do is google and you will find...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #688
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Those are not the words she claimed he used...
 zappaman Jan 2013 #689
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You guys are so predictable...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #690
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You said...
 zappaman Jan 2013 #691
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You are clearly the expert on precisely what Madelaine Brown said...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #693
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I wouldn't say I'm an expert on what she said...
 zappaman Jan 2013 #694
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply "protect the children"...what an understatement n/t
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #695
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Are you effing kidding us? Madeline Brown? You're actually putting that NUT forward
 stopbush Jan 2013 #696
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Once again you misconstrue what I have said, and then elaborate endlessly on your own...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #697
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You may not care about my blabbering on about Madeline Brown,
 stopbush Jan 2013 #700
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Doing a little more searching on the matter...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #702
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply What does any of that matter? LBJ wasn't at that party to say what he didn't say
 stopbush Jan 2013 #703
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You are confusing two different issues....
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #705
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The only "issue" about Murchison is whether M Brown was lying about the party.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #706
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I would refer back to the book "Farewell America"...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #707
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Fiction makes up a very small percentage of my reading list these days.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #708
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Fine...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #698
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Why you'd waste your time worrying abut RW drivel is beyond me. It's drivel!
 stopbush Jan 2013 #699
LineReply I have no clue what really happened, but never bought the official story.
 Scuba Jan 2013 #2
LineLineReply 'Breach of Trust' by Gerald D. McKnight spells out how the Warren Commission failed the nation.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #16
LineLineLineReply Reclaiming History by Vincent Bugliosi spells out how the Warren Commission got it right.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #19
LineLineLineLineReply Agreed again. But don't expect the CTists to read Bugliosi when 99% of them
 stopbush Jan 2013 #30
LineLineLineLineLineReply That is your recurrent theme, encouraging DUers to read the WCR, stopbush.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #43
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply Why not show the other pictures, my friend?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #45
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Because that picture shows the base of a bullet, zappaman, and adds nothing to understanding.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #49
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply This is the bullet that left significantmetal in Connally's body that was never removed? Yeah right.
 Zen Democrat Jan 2013 #60
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Depends on your definition of "significant," does it not?
 stopbush Jan 2013 #132
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply 'Significant' as the mass of material in Connally's wrist is greater than what's missing from CE399.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #196
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Those "details" you link to prove nothing.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #197
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply That is what McAdams, a proven disinformationist, says.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #200
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply No, that is what John Lattimer - a person who examined the evidence - says.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #202
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply +1000
 zappaman Jan 2013 #203
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Trajectory of a Lie
 Octafish Jan 2013 #215
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply 'You really are a sucker for this shit, aren't you?'
 Octafish Jan 2013 #314
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Since you continually cite evidence related to Neutron Activation analysis...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #376
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply For the sake of your argument, I'll stipulate that we set aside the NAA done to CE399.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #391
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Oh, I don't know....
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #393
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply No, it isn't
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #256
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Say it isn't so!
 zappaman Jan 2013 #260
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Funny thing...
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #263
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I agree with your entire post
 zappaman Jan 2013 #265
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Yeah...
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #267
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The weight of fragments removed from Gov. Connally are not known, Spider Jerusalem.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #272
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply They are known.
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #273
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Got a link or source that documents the weight of the fragments from Gov. Connally?
 Octafish Jan 2013 #274
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply HSCA:
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #275
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Thanks. Still is only an estimate of what was removed, not a measurement.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #276
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply More misleading hogwash from you, as expected
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #277
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The Lie in Connally's Thigh
 Octafish Jan 2013 #284
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Limit discussion?
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #294
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Drs. Finck, Humes & Shaw testified more fragments found in Connally’s wrist than missing from CE 399
 Octafish Jan 2013 #378
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply With all due respect, they were evidently mistaken
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #383
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply here ya go
 zappaman Jan 2013 #62
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply That's an excellent read.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #88
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply No, it's not. Here's what that fellow is all about.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #113
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Yes, isn't it?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #120
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply You are SO far behind the curve in the evidence that has been added over the decades
 stopbush Jan 2013 #52
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply For information, read James DOUGLASS. You write about allegation paraded as reality, stopbush.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #63
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Unlike you refusing to read Bugliosi or the WCR, I've actually read most of "JFK&TU" by Douglass.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #73
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Don't worry!
 zappaman Jan 2013 #74
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply That is simply WRONG
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #183
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply +++++++++++++
 librechik Jan 2013 #166
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The only reason to keep on trying is in order for those of us who care about Democracy win.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #172
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply what do you make of
 librechik Jan 2013 #173
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply How does one care about American democracy
 stopbush Jan 2013 #198
LineLineLineLineLineReply I generally avoid reading fiction
 Ian Iam Jan 2013 #340
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply How would you know?
 stopbush Jan 2013 #348
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Thank you for the welcome
 Ian Iam Jan 2013 #354
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply RFK publicly stood up and embraced the WCR.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #356
LineLineLineLineReply The Bugliosi book is wrong on SO many counts.
 Zen Democrat Jan 2013 #59
LineLineLineLineLineReply I finished the Bugliosi book proper (not the supplemental end notes) about
 coalition_unwilling Jan 2013 #67
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply Great post.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #70
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply Speaking of motive...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #141
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Oswald had motives
 zappaman Jan 2013 #145
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply So basically...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #178
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply What were the motives of other presidential assassins?
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #576
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The Lincoln assassination...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #580
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The Lincoln assassination was a military operation?
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #593
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The thinking at the time...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #596
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply There were and are strong arguments that the facts of the case did not merit a military trial.
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #597
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I'm certainly not claiming they were competent...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #599
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply What you offer is speculation based on the occasional fact.
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #601
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Where did I say anything about an average CIA employee?
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #604
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Again, what does that have to do with LHO not firing the fatal shots?
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #606
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The theory is...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #618
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Well, if you had bothered reading any book on Oswald,
 stopbush Jan 2013 #207
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply That's quite a stretch...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #209
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply So, it's a stretch to think that Oswald killed JFk as a simple act of self aggrandizement,
 stopbush Jan 2013 #549
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You left out LBJ...
 zappaman Jan 2013 #551
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply How could I forget the lynchpins in the conspiracy?
 stopbush Jan 2013 #552
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Oswald was linked to the Walker shooting...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #557
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply No, that's not entirely true.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #559
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Regarding Gen. Walker...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #563
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Why am I required to provide evidence for my speculations
 stopbush Jan 2013 #565
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Maybe you should read the above posts more carefully...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #566
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Also, books that go into any depth about Oswald...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #211
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Wow. An objective proof for all those crazy ideas?
 stopbush Jan 2013 #269
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Objective proof?
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #279
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply None of that is objective proof. This person said this, that person said that, etc.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #289
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply First of all...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #299
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply AND YET - the HSCA and the WCR found NO involvement of the mob or the Cubans.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #310
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply As Blakey reveals...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #313
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply According to Blakey, at the PBS link:
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #370
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply BTW - let me know if you have problems with the following, which I would call objective proof:
 stopbush Jan 2013 #292
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Fine...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #295
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I stopped reading when your answer to the first point made it clear..
 zappaman Jan 2013 #296
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Your ad hominem attacks are always amusing...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #300
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply uh huh
 zappaman Jan 2013 #303
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply "test a possible theory"
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #308
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply OMFG! Are you kidding me? This is like textbook erroneous info about the killing!
 stopbush Jan 2013 #305
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Well at least now you presenting something to work with...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #311
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply "Again, I'm not the expert on this"
 zappaman Jan 2013 #312
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Yes, it occured in Dallas...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #315
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I'll try to answer without a personal attack.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #320
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I'm thrilled...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #328
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Simple facts again
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #405
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Spider Jerusalem, thank you for the info...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #407
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply No, evidence of a wound of entry was found in the skull.
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #410
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You failed to address my point about the beveling of the bullet entry wound
 stopbush Jan 2013 #325
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Reading through the comments made by witnesses to the autopsy, they seem contradictory...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #330
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You can excuse and deny all you want. The evidence says otherwise:
 stopbush Jan 2013 #331
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Your information states....
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #369
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply What do O'Neill and Silbert have to do with the experts who examined the skull fragments?
 stopbush Jan 2013 #382
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Having your blinders on works well for you...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #389
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You're missing the point.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #392
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply So, it sounds like you're willing to set aside NAA analysis as providing valid evidence....
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #396
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You misunderstand. I'm simply showing that the NAA isn't in any way
 stopbush Jan 2013 #397
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Really?
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #404
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The fact that CE399 was proved to have been fired from Oswald's rifle coupled with the lead
 stopbush Jan 2013 #429
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I won't pretend to have definitive answers...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #431
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Well, you've got me wondering if any newer scientific processes have been developed
 stopbush Jan 2013 #432
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply ...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #434
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You ask a reasonable question: what happened to the first shot?
 stopbush Jan 2013 #436
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I'm curious, how would (or did) Bugliosi....
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #522
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Can you cite where this came from?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #524
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Here is the wiki page for the Dal-Tex building with references...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #526
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Well one problem would be that no witnesses
 zappaman Jan 2013 #527
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply That's only what the wiki claimed...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #531
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I'm not really curious about such a hypothesis.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #528
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Small world in anti-Castro land...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #529
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Nonsense and easily refuted
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #406
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Uhhhh....
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #408
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Which highlights the problem with eyewitness testimony
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #409
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply ...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #411
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Very few of them were physicians, very few of them saw the wounds up close...
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #413
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Religious thinking?
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #430
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply "Farewell America" MAY reflect a CT devised by RFK? Really?
 stopbush Jan 2013 #438
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Obviously you aren't a Democrat or a liberal!
 zappaman Jan 2013 #442
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Why anyone would believe the wild speculations of
 stopbush Jan 2013 #447
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Time will tell if more truth will come out about RFK's beliefs at the time...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #453
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I just have a very hard time believing that principled men like JFK & RFK
 stopbush Jan 2013 #456
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The context of this thread hinges on the veracity of what RFK, Jr. is telling us...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #461
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply RFK Jr lost a lot of credibility with me when he went off on his anti-vac jag.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #465
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Not to mention, heroin addicts like to lie
 zappaman Jan 2013 #469
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I had forgotten about that arrest.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #472
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Sure.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #473
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Agreed. I worked at a homeless shelter for single adults.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #474
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply There is also evidence of what RFK believed privately...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #728
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You continue to label speculation as "evidence."
 stopbush Feb 2013 #729
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I'm citing statements made by reliable sources...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #734
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Statements aren't evidence. They're statements.
 stopbush Feb 2013 #743
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The WC was narrowly focused on the singular goal...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #745
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I couldn't disagree more with your extremely biased assessment of the WC's goals.
 stopbush Feb 2013 #746
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You missed one critical point...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #747
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Bullshit. Did the WCR lie about all of the forensic evidence in the case?
 stopbush Feb 2013 #749
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Once again...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #751
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply No, this is religious thinking.
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #443
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You provided one excellent example of religious thinking...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #449
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply This isn't about the FBI, it's about EVERY BIT OF EVIDENCE AND ANALYSIS, EVER.
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #450
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The timeline would have been 5 years later...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #457
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The only problem with that?
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #470
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I'm looking, and for the LIfe of me...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #476
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply ...
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #488
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply According to Richard Trask...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #489
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply All of this is highly irrelevant
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #490
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Let me be clear...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #508
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Again, no
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #513
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Then at least you are admitting...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #515
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I'm saying if it was then there are non-conspiracy related reasons
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #516
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I see you are back to focusing on the first bullet that went into JFK's back...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #519
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You are clearly a crank, and there is no point in continuing this discussion
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #520
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I'm a crank for citing real facts?
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #521
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You are a crank for deliberately misinterpreting facts.
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #523
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I can call you a crank for the same reason...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #525
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply No...
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #532
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Ok...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #533
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply ...
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #534
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply No one is disputing what the FBI memo to the WC states...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #567
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply "appears to be" and "looks like"
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #569
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The statement that lead fragments from Connally's wrist matches CE399...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #570
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Except:
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #571
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Your first sentence...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #574
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply There is no "glaring hole"
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #590
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Your argument is based on the following facts...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #609
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply No
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #616
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply All the "conclusions" you cite in your post are faulty in and of themselves...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #617
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply No, you basically ignore ALL the evidence
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #623
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply ...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #627
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply ...
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #628
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Doing a search on Dal-Tex....
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #630
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Again no
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #632
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Well actually...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #633
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply No, it doesn't
 Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #637
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply From your own quote...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #646
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply If nothing else, AntiFascist's postings of WCR info prove that the WCR was no whitewash.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #541
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I'm shocked, SHOCKED I TELL YOU!
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #568
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply And as I've pointed out many times - and as you seem to agree -
 stopbush Jan 2013 #572
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You seem to have missed the point...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #573
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply No. There have been conspiracies that have led to successful assassinations of world leaders.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #575
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Re: funding Oswald's return to the US.
 grantcart Jan 2013 #307
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply If Oswald was a spy...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #316
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply This is a classic tautology
 grantcart Jan 2013 #319
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply First of all...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #322
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Then let me help you out
 grantcart Jan 2013 #326
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You use the word "may" a lot there.
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #594
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Guiteau said in court that he admitted to the shooting but denied the killing.
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #595
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I have no comment on Guiteau...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #598
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I wonder why you're not willing to apply the same conspiracy-oriented speculation
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #600
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Again...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #602
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply And you contend that Lee Harvey Oswald *may* have been just shooting out the window to scare JFK.
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #603
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I never pretended to know precisely what Oswald may or may not have been up to...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #605
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply He *may* have been doing a lot of things.
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #607
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply As pointed out throughout the entire thread...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #610
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Yes it does. Especially with generous pepperings of "may"
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #611
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply In which case he could have still been involved with a conspiracy....already pointed out n/t
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #612
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply "Lone assassin." I guess you missed that phrase.
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #613
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Then you missed my point...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #614
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The only point you're really making
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #615
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply My purpose is not to mitigate Oswald's guilt...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #620
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Let me try this another way.
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #626
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Of course there is...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #629
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply It's not a question about whether or not someone persuaded you.
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #639
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply It's mostly a matter of political context...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #640
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Fair enough.
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #643
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply It depends on which items...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #644
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply A few thoughts about CE-399.
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #649
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply As I have pointed out elsewhere in the thread...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #654
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Okay. You have no objection to the single bullet theory
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #663
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Obviously I do have problems with the single bullet theory no matter how it is construed...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #665
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply This apprehended mafia-aligned suspect had a name, I take it?
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #666
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply If you would care to read through the thread...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #672
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I will hand it to you for having a name but: At what point does he kill the President?
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #675
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You misconstrue my pet theory...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #678
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply What you have is a story.
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #715
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply A story with legs...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #717
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You've mentioned the HSCA a fair bit.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #718
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I think you've overstated both the HSCA's conclusions and what they were looking at...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #719
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Still speculating!
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #720
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Jack Anderson had his sources, in this 1975 article...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #721
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply He had sources stating that RFK had an opinion?
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #723
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Perhaps you should read the rest of the article...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #725
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You've established that you're obsessed with the CIA and the Mafia
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #722
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Well put. Thank you for your many correctives to AF's CT fantasies in this thread.
 stopbush Feb 2013 #724
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply All I want is a uniform standard for what constitutes evidence.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #731
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Exactly. I don't know why the CTists don't realize that all they're doing is speculating.
 stopbush Feb 2013 #732
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Numerous facts are cited throughout the thread...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #735
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply They're fantasy as it relates to the JFK killing.
 stopbush Feb 2013 #744
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Consider the source of so many of the criticisms of the Warren Report.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #736
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Everybody did it / nobody did it...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #741
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You have plenty of criticisms for the "official" version, but you have no valid alternative.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #748
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Overtly, Brading had connections with the mafia as well as H.L. Hunt...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #750
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You can't prove the connections except in your own mind.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #752
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You and stopbush keep bringing up the same tired strawman argument...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #753
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I'm not saying you're convinced you can provide evidence. I'm saying you have no evidence.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #754
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Not so much evidence AGAINST Oswald as much as evidence related to how he was handled...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #755
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You weave Oswald in and out.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #757
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The theory does not depend on the number of shooters or the precise role Oswald played if any...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #758
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You're dodging both questions.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #759
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You keep referring to it as if it is my own unique theory...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #761
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply My apologies. I guess you meant "pet theory" some other way.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #762
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Yes, JFK was shot and killed...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #763
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply See? You're willing to say that Oswald was deeply involved with the government,
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #764
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I think you are veering far from the question of whether or not there was a conspiracy...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #765
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply So the FBI and the WC screwed it up?
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #769
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply As David Talbot points out...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #770
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Katzenbach pushed for the evidence condemning Oswald to be brought out.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #773
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You seem to ignore my point that RFK himself was playing along with this...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #777
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply So he's willing to take on Hoffa and tap Dr. King
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #779
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Who said anything about tapping Dr. King??
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #780
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I see. So the Warren Commission was right not to explore all avenues in this case?
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #782
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Ok, so given that the Warren Commission may have acted PURELY in the interests of national security.
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #784
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The Justice Department's investigation was virtually non-existent.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #785
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I prefer vetting to petting....
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #787
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I understand the thinking.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #789
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply RFK's top concern was national security...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #790
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You say they did an incomplete job
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #798
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The files would indicate Oswald's connections to anti-Castro CI programs...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #799
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Now now. We have no idea what the files would indicate.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #802
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply CE-399 bothers me primarilly because the FBI lied in its memo to the Warren Commission...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #803
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply CE-399 bothers you because you don't want Oswald to be tied to any shooting.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #804
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Again, I'm not one who wants to make Oswald out as some kind of hero...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #807
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I think you read too much politics into Oswald's motivations.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #808
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I don't believe he was motivated by politics....
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #809
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You know he was being handled but you don't know if he fired a shot?
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #811
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Here's one theory you can sink your teeth into...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #810
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply That looks like fun. Can I try it?
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #812
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply What facts support that argument?
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #813
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply What's Oswald doing with Guy Bannister and anti-Castro groups if he's more of a leftist?
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #814
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply He was being manipulated, more than anything else...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #815
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I see. So you don't think potential ties to segregationist groups should have been explored?
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #816
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Explore all the potential ties you want to...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #817
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply It's not hard to follow because I've heard it all before.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #818
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I never claimed that....
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #819
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I'm saying who would hire a flake like Oswald as their spy?
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #820
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The documents that the CIA could release...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #822
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Still not evidence that Oswald was a spy.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #826
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The WC was obviously afraid that any hint of a conspiracy...
 AntiFascist Mar 2013 #832
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Katzenbach's memo makes clear that he was concerned about RUMORS AND SPECULATION.
 nyquil_man Mar 2013 #834
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Katzenbach had taken over for Robert Kennedy, who was still in mourning...
 AntiFascist Mar 2013 #835
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineNew Reply We're going in circles.
 nyquil_man Mar 2013 #836
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineNew Reply Obviously only one CT can be true....
 AntiFascist Mar 2013 #837
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineNew Reply You're much more interested in exploring the historical/geopolitical aspects of the assassination
 nyquil_man Mar 2013 #838
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineNew Reply What do you think of the story told by Dallas County Deputy Sherrif Roger Craig?
 AntiFascist Mar 2013 #839
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineNew Reply Craig is basically saying there that 1. There were people doing suspicious things
 nyquil_man Mar 2013 #840
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineNew Reply Craig also points out numerous instances...
 AntiFascist Mar 2013 #841
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineNew Reply You're veering away from Dealey again.
 nyquil_man Mar 2013 #842
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineNew Reply The fact is...
 AntiFascist Mar 2013 #843
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineNew Reply Not so fast.
 nyquil_man Mar 2013 #844
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Are you familiar with the TV series "I Led Three Lives"?
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #823
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Oswald may have fancied himself a spy.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #825
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply No one claims he was particularly good at it...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #827
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply He didn't fake a suicide to leave. He attempted suicide in order to stay.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #829
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Apparently you're not even paying attention, so why should I even try?
 AntiFascist Mar 2013 #831
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Come up with some actual evidence, AntiFascist, and you'll have my full attention.
 nyquil_man Mar 2013 #833
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The bit about Walker deserves more of a response.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #830
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Your desire for perfect evidence seems to vanish when it comes to naming another shooter.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #805
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply There is a wide range of views on conspiracy in this case
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #772
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The pet CT I am focusing on...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #775
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Okay. How much of the evidence cited by the WC and HSCA would you like to toss out?
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #778
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply This is already covered in numerous other posts in this thread...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #783
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply As I've said before, dear AntiFascist, throw out CE-399.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #786
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply As a follow-up to your post...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #766
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply An internet post based on speculation.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #768
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Since both the WC and the HSCA turned a blind eye toward General Walker...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #771
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply They didn't turn a blind eye toward Oswald's attempt to assassinate Walker.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #774
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Of course it is true....
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #776
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply What role did Walker play in being shot at? Did he order "the setup"?
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #781
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Another reason Oswald was such a central person of interest to the CI division...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #756
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The talk of "Mafia dons and CIA spooks" also occured during the Church and the HSCA investigations..
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #727
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply HSCA and Church were over 30 years ago.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #730
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply What's new is the evolution of thought, particularly on the role played by the CIA...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #733
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Are you even familiar with the accomplishments of the HSCA,
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #737
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I've already pointed out in a number of posts...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #738
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Blakey had his shot. He failed.
 nyquil_man Feb 2013 #739
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Blakey was an expert when it came to organized crime...
 AntiFascist Feb 2013 #740
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply What?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #671
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Based on my pet theories which I have outlined throughout the thread...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #673
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Readers of Philip Melanson and John Newman would disagree.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #268
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Oswald admired the Cuban revolution and Castro's leadership of it. Oswald
 coalition_unwilling Jan 2013 #258
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Interesting he left the money on his wife's dresser before going off to shoot JFK.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #261
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The whole thing infuses me with such immense sadness, both for JFK and his
 coalition_unwilling Jan 2013 #262
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Even Marina Oswald was kept in the dark about much related to her husband...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #264
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply "There is a ton of evidence to implicate Lee Harvey Oswald as the sole..."
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #185
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The only bullets recovered from the scene were proven definitively
 coalition_unwilling Jan 2013 #257
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Sooooo.....
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #266
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Pure speculation. Do you any proof for this new set of craziness?
 stopbush Jan 2013 #271
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply None of what I posted is new...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #280
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The question is: it it really a "question" if it's already been answered?
 stopbush Jan 2013 #288
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply It's often said that it is difficult if not impossible to 'prove a negative'. IOW, in
 coalition_unwilling Jan 2013 #278
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Kudos to Bugliosi for his work against Bush and Cheney...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #281
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply This "circumstantial evidence" did not fit the timeline of events...
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #283
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You throw around crap and expect it to stick.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #327
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Not true, but you have heard that before...
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #395
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply "I hate to tell you how many of those witnesses were not interviewed by the commission'
 zappaman Jan 2013 #401
LineLineLineLineLineReply Have you read Bugliosi's book? Be honest.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #75
LineLineLineLineReply That tired reference of Bugliosi, again?
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #164
LineLineLineLineLineReply So you read it?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #165
LineLineLineLineLineReply Have you even read Bugliosi's book, MMM? Be honest.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #208
LineLineLineLineLineReply A response for jaggoffs who just have to know what I've read
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #216
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply "Jagoffs"?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #218
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Why are you calling yourself a jaggoff?
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #221
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply blackopradio.com
 zappaman Jan 2013 #222
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply This would be the extent of it...
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #224
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Heard it and...
 zappaman Jan 2013 #225
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Jim Marrs is on Blackopradio.com now
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #228
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Jim Marrs helped keep the researchers going when all the pressure was on to shut them down.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #418
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Excellent to get it for free!
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #444
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Isn't "Crossfire" the Marrs book where his main eye/earwitness to the JFK shooting
 stopbush Jan 2013 #454
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply CROSSFIRE is an excellent book for CTers
 zappaman Jan 2013 #455
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Or, pull an Oliver Stone and believe ALL of the contradictory CTs!!
 stopbush Jan 2013 #458
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Keep kicking the thread!
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #486
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You are spreading disinformation...
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #477
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply 'Reading is good. A vast array of reading is better. Try it."
 zappaman Jan 2013 #482
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Hey...
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #484
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply ~
 Tuesday Afternoon Jan 2013 #219
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Who dat?
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #223
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You are far too entertaining to be alerted on.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #227
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply Which book informed you that Oswald's body "spent 3-4 days lying in a mortuary?"
 stopbush Jan 2013 #451
LineLineLineLineLineReply We get it. Bugliosi is tired. The WCR is tired. The HSCA is tired. The evidence is tired.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #347
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply Not true...
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #394
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Like all CTists, you're not concerned with whether your theory is true,
 stopbush Jan 2013 #398
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply It's not conspiracy jags that are what's going off here...
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #399
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply "Statements are really getting old."
 zappaman Jan 2013 #402
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I'd think what is getting old are all the threads beating the dead horse
 stopbush Jan 2013 #416
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Where your proof that Oswald was in that window on the 6th Floor.
 Zen Democrat Jan 2013 #503
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You've never read the WCR, so how would you know whether or not it makes sense?
 stopbush Jan 2013 #511
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply All one needs know: For it to work, the Warren report REQUIRES a Magic Bullet.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #560
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Requires a magic bullet? That's just stupid.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #564
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I'm not a lone nut buff. Unlike you, I'm an evidence buff.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #641
LineReply The mob hated the Kennedys
 LeftInTX Jan 2013 #3
LineLineReply To me, the story of Joseph P. Kennedy, Sr., and the Mob is a canard.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #22
LineLineLineReply A canard? You must be in on the conspiracy yourself!
 stopbush Jan 2013 #97
LineLineReply I could say that I "hate" certain players on the Boston Red Sox.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #129
LineLineLineReply Actually, to many here, you would be the ONLY suspect.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #135
LineLineLineLineReply Here's where the BFEE comes in: Poppy was in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963
 Octafish Jan 2013 #412
LineReply I wonder what he thinks happened to JFK, Jr...
 reformist2 Jan 2013 #4
LineLineReply Charlie Rose didn't ask, FWIU.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #77
LineReply of coarse, the neo-cons could not have peace
 larkrake Jan 2013 #5
LineLineReply ''Money trumps peace.'' -- George Walker Bush, Feb. 14, 2007
 Octafish Jan 2013 #78
LineReply SMH
 Mr Dixon Jan 2013 #6
LineLineReply We may never know the names of the trigger men, but we know who has benefited most over 49 years.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #85
LineLineReply We already know the truth, but overwhelming evidence apparently isn't enough for some.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #133
LineReply RFK Jr also says vaccines cause autism.
 Archae Jan 2013 #7
LineLineReply Every bit of what you say may be true,
 colorado_ufo Jan 2013 #8
LineLineLineReply No, I can't "disprove" what they say.
 Archae Jan 2013 #9
LineLineReply How many people do you know who like to see Mercury injected into their kids?
 Octafish Jan 2013 #92
LineLineLineReply Here's the problem with your typical analysis of things.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #101
LineLineReply No, he didn't
 zipplewrath Jan 2013 #110
LineLineReply It is (was) only a matter of time...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #142
LineReply I thought they just said they didn't believe what the Warren Report said about...
 Little Star Jan 2013 #11
LineLineReply Er, more than one shooter defines the shooting as a conspiracy.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #114
LineReply The Kennedy Family Knows the Truth...
 triplepoint Jan 2013 #12
LineLineReply The family must have the strongest of hearts to carry the burden of what they know.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #387
LineReply Oh look, it's this thread again...nt
 SidDithers Jan 2013 #18
LineLineReply Well Sid
 zappaman Jan 2013 #24
LineLineLineReply He is from Canada so could be
 Rex Jan 2013 #41
LineLineLineLineReply I snapped a pic before he broke my phone ;)
 RandiFan1290 Jan 2013 #48
LineLineReply I have yet to see you post a substantiative post on *anything*.
 Lars39 Jan 2013 #25
LineLineReply Do I have to have your permission to post, siddithers?
 Octafish Jan 2013 #50
LineLineLineReply Dr. Sid Dithers.
 Rex Jan 2013 #55
LineLineLineReply You post whatever the fuck you want, octafish...
 SidDithers Jan 2013 #58
LineLineLineLineReply No, you don't
 zappaman Jan 2013 #64
LineLineLineLineReply Thing is, you don't actually comment on content, you just try to derail.
 Lars39 Jan 2013 #68
LineLineLineLineLineReply If you are talking about JFK being killed by more than Oswald...
 zappaman Jan 2013 #71
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply No, *any* topic he wants to shut down.
 Lars39 Jan 2013 #72
LineLineLineLineLineReply Lars39, I think you've best summed it up.
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #187
LineLineReply Complete with you whining again. You poor thing.
 KurtNYC Jan 2013 #93
LineReply I am glad he finally came out and said it.
 Rex Jan 2013 #21
LineLineReply It was an historic event.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #76
LineLineLineReply Anyone that will do dirtywork for the BFEE
 Rex Jan 2013 #83
LineLineLineReply You seem to be confused. You write:
 stopbush Jan 2013 #98
LineReply Congress agreed with RFK
 octoberlib Jan 2013 #23
LineLineReply Nope.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #28
LineLineLineReply Yep. The "4th shot" crap has been conclusively falsified, not that the CTists give a damn.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #31
LineLineLineLineReply The body was altered.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #32
LineLineLineLineLineReply You know that Jackie was involved in the conspiracy, don't you?
 stopbush Jan 2013 #38
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply Actually, she was in cahoots with LBJ
 zappaman Jan 2013 #40
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply There is nothing funny about the assassination, zappaman.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #117
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You are misguided about what I am laughing at, my friend.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #118
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You are grossly misinformed...
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #186
LineLineLineLineLineReply Bingo. There is nothing 'they' won't do.
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #39
LineLineReply G. Robert Blakey has stated that if the dictabelt "evidence" of a 4th shot could be falsified
 stopbush Jan 2013 #35
LineLineReply Jesus Tap-dancing Christ!
 stopbush Jan 2013 #47
LineLineReply When DoJ changed bosses from Carter to Reagan, the HSCA request fell by the wayside.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #115
LineLineLineReply Thank you for all the links and book recommendations nt
 octoberlib Jan 2013 #226
LineReply That "they" could not let Bobby Kennedy become president.
 Festivito Jan 2013 #26
LineLineReply They continue to cover-up: The Railroading of LCDR Terri Pike
 Octafish Jan 2013 #345
LineLineLineReply I wish I could attach your mind as a searchable device.
 Festivito Jan 2013 #352
LineReply Is it true that John Kennedy was moving toward a National Bank of the U.S.A.? nt
 patrice Jan 2013 #27
LineLineReply I read where he was going to sign (or did sign) an Executive Order
 Boomerproud Jan 2013 #42
LineLineLineReply The Federal Reserve? could print money back then? I'll have to look into that. It creates money as
 patrice Jan 2013 #51
LineLineReply Kennedy battled Wall Street
 Octafish Jan 2013 #245
LineLineLineReply Thank you very much for the links, Octafish! I will read and share this important information. :-))
 patrice Jan 2013 #246
LineReply He was Attorney General for almost the entire duration of the WC investigation.
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #33
LineLineReply Oh, FCS!! How do you know he did not?
 Coyotl Jan 2013 #44
LineLineLineReply What makes you the overnight authority on what happened in Dallas? Or why RFK was killed?
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #46
LineLineLineLineReply So now you are the authority on my "intimate, personal knowledge"?
 Coyotl Jan 2013 #54
LineLineLineLineLineReply I'll let Senator Kennedy reply. Again.
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #69
LineLineReply I'd side with RFK over LBJ
 Octafish Jan 2013 #150
LineLineLineReply Do you think LBJ was an accessory to the assassination of JFK?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #158
LineLineLineLineReply Who knows? I do know LBJ told Walter Cronkite he suspected conspiracy.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #177
LineLineLineReply Tonkin was trumped up. I think there is general consensus on that point.
 nyquil_man Jan 2013 #492
LineReply you got this crime solved yet?
 snooper2 Jan 2013 #34
LineLineReply These things take time.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #37
LineLineReply Why so dismissive? Smarter people than I are working on it.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #56
LineLineLineReply "Smarter people than I are working on it."
 zappaman Jan 2013 #65
LineLineLineReply And people who aren't nearly as smart as you
 stopbush Jan 2013 #95
LineReply Rory was in the womb when RFK was killed. Her information had to come from Ethel.
 Zen Democrat Jan 2013 #61
LineLineReply Vince PALAMARA: CIA Director told RFK 'there were two people involved in the shooting.'
 Octafish Jan 2013 #435
LineReply "American Tabloid"
 smackd Jan 2013 #81
LineLineReply Thank you for the book suggestion, smackd!
 Octafish Jan 2013 #126
LineLineReply Great book!
 zappaman Jan 2013 #128
LineReply +1000
 tex-wyo-dem Jan 2013 #82
LineLineReply Oswald and Ruby Phone Records – RFK, Jr. Got It Right
 Octafish Jan 2013 #109
LineReply Thanks, Octa.
 Mc Mike Jan 2013 #96
LineLineReply Like when stealing an election, an assassination is conducted to change policy.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #103
LineLineLineReply I've never seen a post of yours that didn't have a ton of good info
 Mc Mike Jan 2013 #213
LineLineLineLineReply Thank you, Mc Mike. Very much appreciate that. HERBLOCK and McCloy...
 Octafish Jan 2013 #231
LineLineLineLineLineReply There were a ton of good political cartoons to be viewed in the search,
 Mc Mike Jan 2013 #238
LineReply Lisa Pease mentions that a member of the Kennedy family acknowledged...
 MinM Jan 2013 #100
LineLineReply Lisa Pease is a giant.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #104
LineLineLineReply Lisa Pease references Carl Bernstein's "CIA & the Media"
 MinM Jan 2013 #191
LineLineLineLineReply Lisa Pease at ACORN, The Legacy of Penn Jones, Jr.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #252
LineLineLineLineLineReply "What you don't know can't hurt them."
 MinM Jan 2013 #253
LineLineLineLineLineReply Mae Brussell -Penn Jones Jr. Interview- (2-24-75) - YouTube
 MinM Jan 2013 #687
LineLineLineLineReply @johnsimkin: The journalist who worked for the CIA...
 MinM Feb 2013 #792
LineReply WOO!
 RomneyLies Jan 2013 #102
LineLineReply JFK, FDR and 'Seven Days in May'
 Octafish Jan 2013 #105
LineLineLineReply WOO!
 RomneyLies Jan 2013 #106
LineLineLineLineReply I have to disagree.
 HappyMe Jan 2013 #107
LineLineLineLineReply Please point out what is false. In fact, GOOGLE 'Octafish + BFEE' and find something that's false.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #111
LineLineLineLineLineReply WOO!
 RomneyLies Jan 2013 #121
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply Well, that means there is room for improvement!
 zappaman Jan 2013 #123
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply So you can't find even one thing I wrote that's false?
 Octafish Jan 2013 #124
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply WOO WOO n/t
 RomneyLies Jan 2013 #125
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Apparently this is the best they can do, Octafish...
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #182
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply So the links to the evidence in the case count for nothing?
 stopbush Jan 2013 #210
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply What evidence?
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #217
LineLineLineLineReply looks like you got a pizza for being a troll, too. so who cares?
 HiPointDem Jan 2013 #204
LineLineLineLineLineReply Provides a cooling off period for his 'w' and 'o' keys. Factory recommended. Nt.
 Mc Mike Jan 2013 #214
LineLineReply When you say 'woo' are you quoting Sid?
 Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #285
LineReply Curiosity will not be tolerated
 whatchamacallit Jan 2013 #108
LineLineReply If there's nothing to what RFK, Jr. and Rory said, why the virulent outcry on DU and in debunkerdom?
 Octafish Jan 2013 #112
LineLineLineReply Yes, it's causing much consternation
 whatchamacallit Jan 2013 #116
LineLineLineReply "why the virulent outcry on DU and in debunkerdom?"
 zappaman Jan 2013 #119
LineReply There was clearly a conspiracy.
 Waiting For Everyman Jan 2013 #122
LineLineReply "Denial of the documented facts" is what "conspiracy theorists" do.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #130
LineLineReply President Gerald Ford played a large role in foisting the lone nut fiction upon the United States.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #134
LineLineLineReply So, are you adding Gerald Ford to your list of those who helped kill or cover up?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #136
LineLineLineLineReply That's what Ford did, zappaman.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #137
LineLineLineLineLineReply Answer my question first, my friend.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #138
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply It's clear your sole interest in this thread is disruption, zappaman.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #144
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply No, what is clear is that you will not answer a simple question.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #146
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Dude the Disrupting Dude
 Octafish Jan 2013 #149
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply too afraid to back up your accusations?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #151
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Show me even one post where you've expressed criticism of George Walker Bush on DU, zappaman...
 Octafish Jan 2013 #154
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I should be flattered you googled me!
 zappaman Jan 2013 #155
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Dude the Disruption Dude
 Octafish Jan 2013 #156
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Keep dodging the questions, my lion-hearted friend!
 zappaman Jan 2013 #157
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Warren Commission had deep Nazi ties.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #254
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Nazis are bad.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #259
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The NAZI connection to the assassination of John F. Kennedy
 Octafish Jan 2013 #270
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply "And how much of the Warren Commission have YOU read, Mae?" Har Har.
 Mc Mike Jan 2013 #282
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply um....sure
 zappaman Jan 2013 #286
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Ha! Amazing! According to Octafish, everybody in the world had a hand in killing JFK!
 stopbush Jan 2013 #287
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You left out the Kennedy family
 zappaman Jan 2013 #291
LineReply This is essentially what Jesse Ventura spelled out on his conspiracy show
 BlueStreak Jan 2013 #139
LineLineReply People label Jesse Ventura a "crackpot"?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #140
LineLineLineReply "Believed" and proven are two different things.
 Comrade_McKenzie Jan 2013 #199
LineReply Most americans agree that something isn't "right" about the assasination.
 Kurovski Jan 2013 #143
LineLineReply I cannot fathom why a DUer would oppose discussion of conspiracy in the death of JFK.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #148
LineLineLineReply Oh my
 zappaman Jan 2013 #152
LineLineLineLineReply McAdams and Bugliosi... could there be a more narrow two references?
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #175
LineLineLineReply Octafish ... have you wrote a book on this stuff yet? What's taking so long ???
 doublethink Jan 2013 #174
LineReply So does any thinking person.
 MrSlayer Jan 2013 #160
LineLineReply Yes, because people are only killed over money.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #167
LineLineLineReply Presidents aren't mere "people".
 MrSlayer Jan 2013 #168
LineLineLineLineReply Presidents aren't people?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #169
LineLineLineLineLineReply You're intentionally being obtuse.
 MrSlayer Jan 2013 #171
LineLineLineLineLineReply That is not what was said.
 lonestarnot Jan 2013 #181
LineReply Well, he joins the vast majority of Americans who believe the same,
 MadHound Jan 2013 #194
LineLineReply While I agree that a significant majority of Americans now reject the WC findings, it simply
 coalition_unwilling Jan 2013 #297
LineLineLineReply a significant majority of Americans
 zappaman Jan 2013 #298
LineLineLineReply Then what you claim must have happened in just the first couple of minutes after the report came out
 MadHound Jan 2013 #317
LineLineLineLineReply Have you read Bugliosi's book yet? He clearly and coherently explains
 coalition_unwilling Jan 2013 #323
LineLineLineLineLineReply You're trying to make the case based on a difference of a few inches?
 MadHound Jan 2013 #329
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply I am somewhat hobbled currently, as I checked Bugliosi's book out of the
 coalition_unwilling Jan 2013 #333
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply No, it didn't "glance" off of Connally's wrist bone,
 MadHound Jan 2013 #336
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Republican Senator (and physician) Bill Frist, who famously diagnosed Terry Schiavo as still
 coalition_unwilling Jan 2013 #338
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Connally suffered a broken rib during the shooting. Let's recap...
 OldDem2012 Feb 2013 #795
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Er, it was the base of CE399 - not the bullet's nose - that hit Connally's wrist.
stopbush Jan 2013 #344
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply The "offset" between JFK and Connally is CLEARLY visible in the picture you provided.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #335
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply My friend, you need your eyesight checked, now.
 MadHound Jan 2013 #337
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I've posted these pictures elsewhere in this thread, but here ya go:
 stopbush Jan 2013 #341
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The common theme of their foolishness is to get you to spend time refuting their idiocy, MadHound.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #343
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Ha! Well, you do have a sense of humor after all.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #346
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Agreed!
 zappaman Jan 2013 #353
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Yeah!
 zappaman Jan 2013 #339
LineReply kick for later. eom
 ellenfl Jan 2013 #201
LineReply If RFK believed there was a conspiracy, AND..
 MicaelS Jan 2013 #212
LineLineReply It was during the Eisenhower Administration...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #235
LineReply Here are some good books/web links to read on the JFK assassination.
 321Morrow Jan 2013 #233
LineLineReply Soooo LBJ did it, eh?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #234
LineLineLineReply What would Bobby Baker say?
 Octafish Jan 2013 #236
LineLineLineLineReply What would Octafish say?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #239
LineLineLineLineLineReply You're like talking to an Air Force program, zappaman.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #241
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply No answers?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #243
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply ''We had been operating a damned Murder Inc. in the Caribbean.'' -- Lyndon B. Johnson
 Octafish Jan 2013 #244
LineReply Now you've done it !
 H2O Man Jan 2013 #240
LineLineReply The yelps resound with a swift kick from the hobnailed boot of Orwell.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #242
LineLineReply Howling indeed...
 zappaman Jan 2013 #247
LineLineLineReply What did RFK know?
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #248
LineLineLineLineReply A link to the book would be helpful
 zappaman Jan 2013 #249
LineLineLineLineLineReply "Farewell America"....
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #251
LineReply NAZI Echo in Dealey Plaza
 Octafish Jan 2013 #332
LineLineReply Yeah...so?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #342
LineLineLineReply Hairpin turn slowed car in 1942 and 1963.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #349
LineLineLineLineReply Wht plot in regards to JFK?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #351
LineLineLineLineLineReply The fascist plot Jack Ruby tried to describe to Justice Earl Warren.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #360
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply Wow.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #362
LineLineReply More outright lies.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #355
LineLineLineReply It's no lie, stopbush. The hairpin turn was the ambush location in both cases.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #357
LineLineLineLineReply The route was never changed. Period.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #358
LineLineLineLineLineReply Where did I write it was changed?
 Octafish Jan 2013 #361
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply Here ya go:
 stopbush Jan 2013 #363
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Thanks. My mistake. BTW: The word didn't change anything that mattered in my post.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #366
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply 'I'd rather side with Jim Garrison"
 zappaman Jan 2013 #367
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I'd rather side with Jim Garrison than with you, zappaman.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #371
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Good one!
 zappaman Jan 2013 #373
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply That's a very interesting photograph. I hadn't seen it. Here's a video from Frontline which...
 Poll_Blind Feb 2013 #824
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply The SS didn't object to that turn - they planned that turn.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #386
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply If the Secret Service planned that turn they were criminally negligent or part of the plot.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #420
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply What do you mean "if" the SS planned that route? They did.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #422
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Got a link for any of that, stopbush?
 Octafish Jan 2013 #423
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Already provided in my previous post.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #426
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply What links? You don't answer who OK'd the route to include the 120-degree turn, stopbush.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #440
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply But I did answer it. It's all contained in the WCR testimony, which I provided.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #445
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Thanks. So, Secret Service Special Agent Forrest V. Sorrels approved the route and hairpin turn.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #460
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I'm glad to see you followed those links and read what the WCR had to say.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #468
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply "In your typical arrogant tone"
 zappaman Jan 2013 #448
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Show me a link, stopbush, where any of what you contend is documented.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #424
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply As far as the question of whether JFK ordered the SS agents off his limo,
 stopbush Jan 2013 #425
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Octafish is busy deciding on whether or not Oswald is a hero...
 zappaman Jan 2013 #427
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Now THAT'S delusional!
 stopbush Jan 2013 #428
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply If I'm so wrong, why do you spend so many hours on this thread, zappaman?
 Octafish Jan 2013 #462
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You being wrong is entertaining.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #463
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I've asked you for years to show me where I'm wrong and you can't, zappaman.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #466
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Nothing to say about your words?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #467
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply When will you get around to actually contribute to the thread, zappaman?
 Octafish Jan 2013 #478
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Was he a hero when he shot JFK?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #480
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Oswald's Case Against the Warren Commission (1965)
 Octafish Jan 2013 #493
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Still no answers?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #494
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply So you have nothing to add, zappaman?
 Octafish Jan 2013 #495
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply What has that to do with my question?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #496
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply It has everything to do with your 'question.'
 Octafish Jan 2013 #497
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Now you're putting words in my mouth?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #498
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Does it bother you when people ask you if you've stopped beating your wife, zappaman?
 Octafish Jan 2013 #500
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Nope.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #502
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Still waiting...
 zappaman Jan 2013 #518
LineLineLineLineReply You mean bringing up some nazi assassination in a discussion about JFK?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #359
LineReply I've always thought so, too
 DFW Jan 2013 #334
LineLineReply The "moving target" was travelling at 11mph
 stopbush Jan 2013 #364
LineLineLineReply Not to mention....
 zappaman Jan 2013 #365
LineLineLineReply Stop with the disinformation, stopbush.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #368
LineLineLineLineReply You're right up there with the climate change deniers, Octafish.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #377
LineLineLineLineLineReply First you called me a 'Sandy Hook denier,' stopbush, and now its 'climate change denier.'
 Octafish Jan 2013 #381
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply Because you are so obviously anti-science when it comes to the evidence in this case.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #384
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Here's something scientific: Secret Service agent Abraham BOLDEN railroaded for telling the truth.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #415
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply That's not scientific. Interesting, yes. Scientific, no.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #417
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Forensic Science
 Octafish Jan 2013 #419
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Bolden may have been trained in forensic science, but the story you related about him
 stopbush Jan 2013 #421
LineLineLineReply Taking all that into account
 DFW Jan 2013 #374
LineLineLineLineReply Testimony by the USMC to the WC stated unequivicolly that Oswald was
 stopbush Jan 2013 #379
LineLineLineLineLineReply What condescending horse manure...
 Octafish Jan 2013 #506
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply Horse manure
 zappaman Jan 2013 #514
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply Your "expert" Pat Speer at least has the decency to provide Dale Myers rebuttal to his claims,
 stopbush Jan 2013 #550
LineLineReply Then-CIA man James Wilcott testified to Congress that Oswald was a CIA employee.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #372
LineReply Let us know when you decide if Oswald was a hero or not, Octafish.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #380
LineLineReply Why did the FBI destroy the note Oswald left for SA James HOSTY?
 Octafish Jan 2013 #385
LineLineLineReply Let us know when you decide if Oswald was a hero or not, Octafish.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #400
LineLineLineLineReply The guy was in Mexico City, apparently on US government business, so it is hard to tell.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #414
LineReply I had heard pieces of the CIA-mafia stuff before, but never put it together in such a straight line
 yurbud Jan 2013 #403
LineLineReply Fiction always moves in a straight line, especially in retrospect.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #433
LineLineLineReply Yes...
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #446
LineLineLineLineReply Right.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #464
LineLineLineLineLineReply 'Must be a coincidence...
 zappaman Jan 2013 #471
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply You must like spreading this...
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #479
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply LOL
 zappaman Jan 2013 #481
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You continue to do it...
 MrMickeysMom Jan 2013 #483
LineLineReply Nixon, Mobsters, the CIA, Cuba and Kennedy...
 Octafish Jan 2013 #499
LineLineLineReply Don't forget Oswald...who may have been a hero in your words...
 zappaman Jan 2013 #501
LineLineLineLineReply You continue the smear, zappaman. Do you think I'd post about Dallas on DU for 12 years?
 Octafish Jan 2013 #510
LineLineLineLineLineReply You don't seem to know what a smear is, Octafish
 zappaman Jan 2013 #512
LineLineLineReply great find--I knew the Nixon Hunt connections, but this adds a lot
 yurbud Jan 2013 #701
LineReply No, this isn't a Conspiracy Theory post at all...
 SidDithers Jan 2013 #504
LineLineReply Shhhhhh!
 zappaman Jan 2013 #505
LineLineReply No. It's a Lone Nut Theory post.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #507
LineLineReply Don't you know why it matters whether President Kennedy had been killed by a conspiracy?
 Octafish Jan 2013 #509
LineLineLineReply Keep chasing those unicorns!
 zappaman Jan 2013 #517
LineLineLineLineReply Unicorns? Almost as asinine as believing NAZIs had nothing to do with post-war US history.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #543
LineLineLineLineLineReply So the nazis killed JFK now???
 zappaman Jan 2013 #544
LineLineLineReply These guys operate like tag-team hokey tv wrestlers. Octafish.
 Judi Lynn Jan 2013 #530
LineLineLineLineReply Quick. Call the whaaambulance!
 stopbush Jan 2013 #537
LineLineLineLineLineReply Such ignorance is reprehensible.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #539
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply I don't work to shut down discussion on the JFK killing.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #540
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply No, what is reprehensible is that you think Oswald may have been a hero.
 zappaman Jan 2013 #546
LineLineLineLineReply Since Nov. 22, 1963, it's been full-throttle: 'Money trumps peace'
 Octafish Jan 2013 #548
LineLineLineLineLineReply So?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #553
LineLineLineReply Other side of the coin: and if it could ever be proved to your satisfaction that Oswald acted alone,
 stopbush Jan 2013 #542
LineReply And yet, RFK agreed with the "shoddy workmanship" of the WCR.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #554
LineLineReply Who ya gonna believe?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #555
LineLineLineReply 'Trolling is a art.' -- siddithers to zappaman
 Octafish Jan 2013 #556
LineLineLineLineReply Poor Octafish...
 zappaman Jan 2013 #558
LineLineLineLineLineReply Men of Courage
 Octafish Jan 2013 #561
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply Are you?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #562
LineReply RFK thinking it was a conspiracy doesn't make it an actual conspiracy.
 Bolo Boffin Jan 2013 #577
LineLineReply Yeah. When Attorney General Kennedy thinks conspiracy, however, I'm inclined to believe him.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #581
LineLineLineReply This message was self-deleted by its author
 zappaman Jan 2013 #582
LineLineLineReply RFK was on the record supporting the WCR.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #584
LineLineLineReply And if Attorney General Kennedy had thought no conspiracy, you'd have smeared him like you smear me.
 Bolo Boffin Jan 2013 #585
LineLineLineLineReply boloboffin, if I'd smeared you, you'd already have hit 'Alert.'
 Octafish Jan 2013 #588
LineLineLineLineLineReply Your assumption about my reliance on the Alert button is without merit.
 Bolo Boffin Jan 2013 #634
LineLineLineLineReply Yet the discussion is allowed to remain in GD...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #624
LineLineLineLineLineReply Yes, that is indeed my question. How does Octafish rate his disruption be tolerated?
 Bolo Boffin Jan 2013 #635
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply "A whole group for discussing these topics going virtually unused"...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #636
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply It's called the Dungeon even though there's nothing dungeony about it.
 Bolo Boffin Jan 2013 #638
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply You may notice that this thread now has over 8800 views...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #645
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply How many people are posting in this thread? How many clicking up and down to read the replies?
 Bolo Boffin Jan 2013 #650
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply I'm not taking credit...
 AntiFascist Jan 2013 #653
LineReply I wonder if RFK thought Oswald was a hero?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #583
LineLineReply No. Misrepresenting what I write makes you a disruptor, zappaman.
 Octafish Jan 2013 #586
LineLineLineReply Bullshit
 zappaman Jan 2013 #589
LineLineLineReply You don't know Oswald's role? Simple - he was the killer. He acted on his own.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #591
LineLineLineLineReply I guess some people have an odd definition of "hero"...
 zappaman Jan 2013 #592
LineReply CIA Document 1035-960 Concerning Criticism of the Warren Report
 Ichingcarpenter Jan 2013 #587
LineLineReply Nice find, if Jesse says it ain't possible who am I to argue
 Rex Jan 2013 #660
LineLineLineReply The complete scanned instruction
 Ichingcarpenter Jan 2013 #685
LineLineLineLineReply What's interesting to me is when foreign leaders are killed, the first thoughts of the....
 OldDem2012 Feb 2013 #796
LineReply Robert is right
 bluestater1966fgs Jan 2013 #631
LineLineReply What a bunch of bullshit.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #642
LineLineReply The biggest flaw in the Warren Commission was that it never asked the question
 dflprincess Feb 2013 #801
LineReply See some interesting things in the back-and-forth of this discussion
 Mc Mike Jan 2013 #655
LineLineReply Well, you certainly win this thread...
 zappaman Jan 2013 #657
LineLineLineReply Wow, 3 letters solves it all for you, huh, zap?
 Mc Mike Jan 2013 #709
LineLineLineLineReply Yes, 3 letters..
 zappaman Jan 2013 #710
LineLineLineLineLineReply Eternally vigilant.
 Mc Mike Jan 2013 #713
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply What you can't look up the answers yourself?
 zappaman Jan 2013 #714
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply Thanks for trying to help.
 Mc Mike Feb 2013 #806
LineLineReply Amazing the lengths (stupidities?) the CTists will go to when the facts upset their apple cart.
 stopbush Jan 2013 #661
LineLineLineReply ....
 doublethink Jan 2013 #677
LineLineLineReply ...
 doublethink Jan 2013 #683
LineLineLineReply Thanks for digging the pertinent W.C. statements out, stop.
 Mc Mike Jan 2013 #712
LineLineLineLineReply Typical CT whack-a-mole thinking. You wrote:
 stopbush Jan 2013 #716
LineReply @JFKLancer: When did it start?
 MinM Jan 2013 #679
LineLineReply Domestic Operations
 MinM Feb 2013 #794
LineReply Recommended and bookmarked. Great to see you "stir the shitstorm", Octafish!
 robertpaulsen Jan 2013 #692
LineReply 'Arrogant' CIA Disobeys Orders in Viet Nam
 MinM Jan 2013 #704
LineReply Thomas Arthur Vallee
 MinM Jan 2013 #711
LineReply ...
 SidDithers Feb 2013 #726
LineReply Will the RFK Jr. interview w/Charlie Rose ever air?
 MinM Feb 2013 #742
LineLineReply The MSM and RFK Jr.: Only 45 years Late this Time
 MinM Feb 2013 #767
LineReply I'll cross post this here... 50 reasons to continue to question after 50 years...
 MrMickeysMom Feb 2013 #760
LineReply How did the capture of a live Lee Harvey Oswald change the plot?
 MinM Feb 2013 #788
LineLineReply Thanks for he link to that educational debate forum, MinM...
 MrMickeysMom Feb 2013 #797
LineReply Kick & R n/t
 Dalai_1 Feb 2013 #791
LineReply I wish they were here. nt
 cecilfirefox Feb 2013 #793
LineReply Octafish, you created a monster mega-thread. Well done, sir! nt.
 OldDem2012 Feb 2013 #800
LineReply My dad always said it was Ladybird Johnson and the Texas Rangers.
 Pterodactyl Feb 2013 #821
LineReply Three tiny little video snippets which I thought painted a fascinating picture:
 Poll_Blind Feb 2013 #828
LineNew Reply Thanks for bringing this to our attention Octafish!...
 2banon Jul 2014 #845

Response to Octafish (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 10:40 AM

Star Member blm (110,770 posts)

1. Cue the 'coincidence theorists' to target their attacks on RFK.

.

Spread the love!Spread the love!Spread the love!Spread the love!Spread the love!Spread the love!

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to blm (Reply #1)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:00 PM

Octafish (55,745 posts)

10. Please, tell me why they would call themselves "Democrats"?

Any Democrat -- and most Republicans and independents -- I've met, and that goes back a very long ways, has been interested in the subject and in learning more about it. What's more: Not a single one ever told me to "shut up" about it whenever I raised it for discussion. Why such a devoted coterie of DUers are so quick to do so is most revealing.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Octafish (Reply #10)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:32 PM

zappaman (20,587 posts)

13. Great smear!

So, if you think JFK was killed by Oswald and not the hundreds you have implicated over the years, you can't be a democrat?
Just another reason not to take you seriously.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to zappaman (Reply #13)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:59 PM

Octafish (55,745 posts)

14. Project much?

I hadn't thought of you, until now.

Do you feel guilt?

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Octafish (Reply #14)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 02:02 PM

zappaman (20,587 posts)

15. Nope.

The BFEE has my back!

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to zappaman (Reply #15)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 02:10 PM

Octafish (55,745 posts)

17. Laugh all you want, zappaman, as it reveals what kind of person you are.

There's nothing funny on the subject. Look up Cliff BAXTER.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Octafish (Reply #17)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 02:14 PM

zappaman (20,587 posts)

20. Look up Lee Harvey Oswald

The murderer you would like to forgive while pinning blame on anyone else.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to zappaman (Reply #20)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 03:04 PM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

36. Agreed again! They excuse the little shit that did the killing!

Every time a bell rings, an angel gets its wings.

And every time a Democrat touts the JFK conspiracies, a Republican smiles, because that D is saying that JFK's own people and own party wanted him dead.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to stopbush (Reply #36)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 04:21 PM

Zen Democrat (5,898 posts)

53. That's incorrect. The CIA and Curtis LeMay did him in. The Mafia cleaned up the "problems"

Last time I checked Allen Dulles, the de facto head of the Warren Commission, who chaired all but the two meetings Warren attended, was a Republican.

Earl Warren was a Republican.

John J. McCloy was a Republican.

John Sherman Cooper from Kentucky was a Republican

Gerald Ford from Michigan was a Republican

The two Democrats on the WC (Russell from Georgia and Hale Boggs from Louisiana) were Southerners and NOT friends/supporters of JFK. It's a fact, however, found in later transcripts of WC meetings, that these two gentlemen dissented from the final report and were promised that their dissent would be recorded in the printed volume. It was not.

There was no investigation by the WC as they relied upon the FBI reports submitted by ... J. Edgar Hoover, a notorious Republican.

The biggest tell in the WC transcripts is Jack Ruby pleading with Warren and Ford to be taken back to Washington so he could tell them the whole story. It's obvious that the stuttering Warren almost messed his pants at that one, and told Ruby that would be impossible. Ruby told them if they left him in the Dallas jail he would die and the truth never known. Warren said, basically, Gee sorry 'bout that, Jack.

To say Democrats were behind the Warren Commission is a farce. What is true is that Lyndon Johnson stacked the commission with Republicans and two conservative Dems. When Walter Cronkite reported that LBJ believed there was a conspiracy behind Kennedy's assassination in 1969 and the media STILL refused to question the WC ... there was no hope. LBJ was briefed by Hoover (it's on tape) the day after Kennedy was murdered reporting to the president that Oswald was NOT the man in Mexico City. Hoover said he saw photos and heard tapes and it was NOT Oswald. Why were these destroyed when we now know they existed. Why was Agent Hosty in Dallas told to destroy the note that Oswald left at the FBI office if it actually incriminated Oswald. Many scholars of the assassination believe that the note in question was to warn the FBI of the assassination plot. That's why it HAD to be destroyed.

Read the Jim Douglass classic, JFK and the Unspeakable for the truth behind who wanted Kennedy dead. It's all there. Doesn't matter who pulled the trigger. There were hired guns to do the deed, but who ordered it? IMO, the guy who ran the Commission, Allen Dulles himself, with help from his CIA buddies Richard Helms and James Jesus Angleton.

Remember, LBJ put Dulles on the commission when Kennedy had personally fired Dulles in 1961, blaming him for setting him up with the Bag of Pigs fiasco. Unclean hands! The fact that none of this information is well-known should tell you something.

I don't know if there's anyone yet living with any answers, but the cover-up has been unraveling since Day 1 and hasn't stopped.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Zen Democrat (Reply #53)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 04:45 PM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

57. Unraveling since Day One? Yet here were are, 50 years later,

and not a shred of real evidence has been brought forth to challenge the findings of the WCR. Nothing but speculations and looney crapola to make an easy buck off the gullible.

What evidence in the WCR has been falsified? Tell me. I'd like to know.

Dontcha think 50 years of unraveling since Day One would have unraveled the whole thing by now?

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Zen Democrat (Reply #53)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 05:14 PM

Octafish (55,745 posts)

66. Well stated, Zen Democrat.

Building on your excellent exposition, here's my two-cents regarding how Warren Commission members Mr. Dulles and Mr. McCloy fit into the story:

A fact curiously missing from American history and any mention of the Warren Commission



It is amazing, ZD-san, how few Americans know this history. What's telling are those who show no interest in learning it. Worst of all are they who know it and don't want others to know.


Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Zen Democrat (Reply #53)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 09:10 PM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

79. What a laugh!

You wrote:

The biggest tell in the WC transcripts is Jack Ruby pleading with Warren and Ford to be taken back to Washington so he could tell them the whole story. It's obvious that the stuttering Warren almost messed his pants at that one, and told Ruby that would be impossible. Ruby told them if they left him in the Dallas jail he would die and the truth never known. Warren said, basically, Gee sorry 'bout that, Jack.

The facts:

JFK killed Nov 22, 1963

Ruby kills Oswald Nov. 24, 1963

WCR delivered to LBJ, Sept 24, 1964

Ruby dies TWO YEARS & 4 MONTHS later, on Jan 3, 1967, and over THREE YEARS after Ruby shot Oswald.

Are you saying that Ruby didn't have time to "come clean" about what he knew about the killing? He had over three years to tell anybody who would listen, and LOTS of people were ready to listen.

As far as the WC not wanting to speak with Ruby:

"During the six months following the Kennedy assassination, Ruby repeatedly asked, orally and in writing, to speak to the members of the Warren Commission. The commission initially showed no interest. Only after Ruby's sister Eileen wrote letters to the commission (and her letters became public) did the Warren Commission agree to talk to Ruby. In June 1964, Chief Justice Earl Warren, then-Representative Gerald R. Ford of Michigan, and other commission members went to Dallas to see Ruby. Ruby asked Warren several times to take him to Washington D.C., saying "my life is in danger here" and that he wanted an opportunity to make additional statements. He added: "I want to tell the truth, and I can't tell it here." Warren told Ruby that he would be unable to comply, because many legal barriers would need to be broken and public interest in the situation would be too heavy. Warren also told Ruby that the commission would have no way of protecting him, since it had no police powers. Ruby said he wanted to convince President Lyndon Johnson that he was not part of any conspiracy to kill Kennedy." - Source: Wikipedia

"According to an unnamed Associated Press source, Ruby made a final statement from his hospital bed on December 19 (1966) that he alone had been responsible for the murder of Lee Harvey Oswald. "There is nothing to hide… There was no one else," Ruby said." - Source: Wikipedia

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Zen Democrat (Reply #53)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 06:48 PM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

131. MAJOR woo.

I'm having a hard time believing you actually believe such wild fantasies.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to zappaman (Reply #153)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 11:52 AM

Octafish (55,745 posts)

195. Crapola at its deepest.

First, the author of the piece has promoted the lone-nut line since he witnessed the events in Dealey Plaza and two days later in Dallas police headquarters basement.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=12117


Second, the subject of the piece has promoted the lone-nut line, despite the evidence.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=13664


Third, the writer of the reply in which they are named acts to disrupt discussion on the subject.

For details, go up and down the thread.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to zappaman (Reply #20)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 09:09 PM

MrMickeysMom (20,453 posts)

161. What an ignorant comment.

Care to back it up?

I get it... when someone makes an informed comment and you don't like it, you make this shit up. Can't you be any more courageous than that?

Try reading something with a bibliography with references.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MrMickeysMom (Reply #161)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 09:11 PM

zappaman (20,587 posts)

163. Back what up?

That LHO killed JFK?
Look it up yourself...plenty out there.

Who do you think did it?
I'd love to see your "theory"...

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to zappaman (Reply #163)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 02:24 AM

MrMickeysMom (20,453 posts)

188. No you wouldn't...

You love to play silly games when serious subjects come up. You, zappaman, are a genuine petty thought on the subject.

While the rest of us are following the analysis (Destiny Betrayed, latest excellent book, thoroughly researched), listening to the early concerned American citizens who laid out the real questions behind the assassination, paving the better question of asking "why" by contemporary authors, you are doing your best (which is not good) to derail the subject.

You fail at it, so I guess you did something with proper vigor, didn't you?

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to zappaman (Reply #20)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 02:26 AM

HiPointDem (20,729 posts)

189. Seems the Attorney General of the US & the President's closest advisor was the one doing that.

 

Unless you think rfk's kids are lying.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Octafish (Reply #17)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 09:16 PM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

80. CT paranoia.

"The paranoid message will give more and more, and then it will give even more. The entertainment resources of the paranoid message are unrivaled. It offers puzzles, drama, passion, heroes, villains, and struggle. If the story-line can be tied to an historical event, especially one that involves romantic characters and unexpected death, then fiction, history, and popular delusion can be joined in the pursuit of profit. The story, moreover, need never end. If evidence appears that refutes the conspiracy, the suppliers of the discrediting material will themselves be accused of being part of the conspiracy. The paranoid explanatory system is a closed one. Only confirmatory evidence is accepted. Contradictions are dismissed as being naive or, more likely, part of the conspiracy itself."

- Political scientist Robert S. Robins and psychiatrist Jerrold M. Post in "Political Paranoia as Cinematic Motif: Stone's 'JFK.'" which was presented at the 1997 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to stopbush (Reply #80)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 10:25 AM

Octafish (55,745 posts)

84. Rather be called 'paranoid' than side with liars and the traitors they protect.



Oswald, the CIA and Mexico City

By John Newman, Ph.D.
Copyright ©1999 by John Newman.
All Rights Reserved.

I. The Rosetta Stone

The Assassination Records Review Board finished its search more than a year ago—a search for records relating to the murder of a president thirty-six years ago. Surprisingly, the passage of time has not managed to erode or cover over all of the important evidence. On the contrary, the work of the Review Board has uncovered important new leads in the case. I will leave medical and ballistic forensics to others. I will confine myself to document forensics, an area for which the work of the board had been nothing less than spectacular. More specifically, I will confine myself to the documentary record concerning Lee Harvey Oswald’s 1963 visit to Mexico City.

In 1978, the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) completed its work, including a report on Oswald’s activities in Mexico written by Eddie Lopez and Dan Hardway. Our first glimpses of their report began shortly after the 1993 passage of the JFK Records Act. Not even all the redactions of those early versions could hide the seminal discoveries in that work. While Lopez couched his words in careful language, he suggested that Oswald might have been impersonated while he was in Mexico City just weeks before the assassination. Lopez was more forthright when I interviewed him about this in 1995. Armed with more CIA documents and the first Russian commentary (Nechiporenko’s book, Passport to Assassination), I went further in my own Oswald and the CIA (Carroll & Graf: 1995) in advancing the argument that Oswald was impersonated in the Mexican capitol. Specifically, someone pretending to be Oswald made a series of telephone calls between 28 September and 1 October, allegedly to and from the Cuban and Soviet consulates in Mexico City.

I concluded then, that, based on the content of the CIA Mexico City telephone transcripts alone, the speaker purporting to be Oswald was probably an impostor. I will not repeat my lengthy discussion here, other than to summarize it in this way: the speaker’s words were incongruous with the experiences we can be reasonably certain Oswald underwent. For reasons still obscure, the CIA has lied consistently for these past several decades about the tapes from which those transcripts were made. The Agency concocted the story that the tapes were routinely destroyed before the assassination. It is perhaps true that some tapes were destroyed before the assassination. But Lopez uncovered FBI documents containing detailed accounts of how two of the tapes were listened to after the assassination by FBI agents familiar with Oswald’s voice.

More evidence would come in time. Shortly after the passage of the JFK Records Act, the public gained access to a telephone transcript the day after the assassination in which FBI Director Hoover informs President Johnson that it is not Oswald’s voice on the tapes. The Review Board diligently followed these leads and settled the matter when they found CIA documents in which the Agency itself explicitly states that some of the tapes were reviewed after the assassination. The CIA’s continued silence on the matter of the tapes stands, like a giant beacon, pointing the way forward to the investigator. The impersonation of Oswald in Mexico by someone who drew attention to an Oswald connection to a KGB assassination officer may prove to be the Rosetta stone of this case.

Before going further, I once again pay tribute to Peter Dale Scott, who wrote of these matters as early as 1995, advancing his "Phase I-Phase II hypothesis" on largely deaf ears. I will not repeat his lengthy discussion here, other than to summarize it in this way: In Phase I, immediately after the assassination, previously planted evidence of a Cuban/Kremlin plot surfaced in Oswald’s files; this, in turn, precipitated Phase II, in which a lone-nut cover-up was erected to prevent a nuclear war.

In Oswald and the CIA, I deliberately steered clear of the conspiracy-anti-conspiracy vortex in order to set out some of the facts concerning Oswald’s pre-assassination files. Since then, the cumulative weight of the evidence uncovered by the Review Board has led me to the conclusion that the Oswald impersonation can best be explained in terms of a plot to murder the president. I remain open to other interpretations and fresh analyses by fellow researchers, and I understand that new evidence could corroborate or undermine this hypothesis. What follows is a first stab at explaining, in a short and simple way, how those plotting the president’s murder may have left their fingerprints in the files.

CONTINUED...

http://www.ctka.net/pr999-osciamex.html


Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Octafish (Reply #84)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 10:42 AM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

86. Once again, Octafish posts that picture of nobody in particular.

I feel sorry for people like you.

You believe that you're "fighting the good fight" to "find the truth" and to "reveal the hidden blah blah blah," when all you're doing is repeating the popular opinion of the masses who haven't spent a minute investigating the JFK killing. You really believe you're in some rarified club that is "seeking the truth," when you're actually where the majority of willfully uninformed Americans have been since Day One of the JFK killing.

Your obsession with the "them" supposedly behind the JFK killing is very much akin to the paranoid mindset we see in the people who are now calling the Sandy Hook killings a hoax and a false flag operation. You're right up there with the truthers and the other conspiracy buffs whose paranoia stems from a deep distrust of the very government you yourself have elected to represent you.

There's a big helping of your fellow JFK CTist Alex Jones in your own JFK delusions. How else to explain your calling people who don't share your delusion "liars," and liars who are "protecting traitors?"

JFK CTists, truthers, Sandy Hook "hoaxters" - you're all the same soda pop in different cans. You're all cut from the same cloth.

It's like religionists claiming they know the "truth" about the existence of gods, a claim offered with no evidence whatsoever, except that the JFk CTs are more like promoting a belief in fairies, then calling people liars when they point out there's no evidence of fairies.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to stopbush (Reply #86)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 10:51 AM

Octafish (55,745 posts)

87. Please, keep up with the smears and name calling, stopbush.

Here's why that picture is so important:



...Despite the mysteries, one thing is certain. The events in Mexico City had a profound effect on the federal government's response to the assassination. President Johnson invoked fears of nuclear war in putting together the Warren Commission, finally enlisting a recalcitrant Earl Warren by telling him "what Hoover told me about a little incident in Mexico City."

CONTINUED...

http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/Oswald_in_Mexico_City



Interesting, almost, how you never address the issue at hand. Instead, you attack the messenger. It also shows where you stand, stopbush.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Octafish (Reply #87)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 11:02 AM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

89. But there is no "issue," Octafish. That's what you don't seem to understand.

It's not an issue because some CTist says it's an issue, anymore than it would be "an issue" that I needed to take seriously if you averred that werewolves were involved in killing JFK.

You ignore and cherry pick evidence in the JFK case, then construct these "issues" around what is a Swiss cheese argument. That's why it was so easy for Bugliosi to dismantle the various CTs in his book - all he had to do was exploit the holes in the "arguments" and the whole house of cards falls apart.

And where - exactly - did I call you a name or smear you in my last post?

No doubt you'll now report me to the gate keepers and get me banned from this JFK thread, just like you (or others) did the last time I spent a bit of time debating your wild claims.

You've got "the truth" on your side, but you can't take it when others push back.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to stopbush (Reply #89)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 11:14 AM

Octafish (55,745 posts)

91. Gee. Comparing me to Sandy Hook deniers might be a clue.

Don't worry, stopbush. I've never hit alert on you. It's good for others to see who's who and where they stand.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Octafish (Reply #91)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 12:13 PM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

94. Gee. You have no problem calling people "liars" and enablers of traitors,

but your panties get in a wad when turnabout becomes fair play.

BTW - I'd think that a person who is so adept at connecting dots in the JFK killing - dots that are miles apart and speculative at best - would see the obvious similarities between the mindset of the JFK CTists and the truthers (and others) who see the evil shadow of an evil government in each and every tragedy experienced in this country.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to stopbush (Reply #94)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 06:43 PM

Octafish (55,745 posts)

127. And you have no problem putting words into other people's mouths.

What's the technical term?

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Octafish (Reply #127)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 03:29 PM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

205. In this case, the technical term is "presenting the evidence."

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to stopbush (Reply #86)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 11:06 AM

RZM (8,556 posts)

90. It looks like Ed O'Neil playing angry birds on an iPhone n/t

 

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to stopbush (Reply #86)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 08:03 PM

alberg (412 posts)

452. Your the one who's in the "rarefied club" - the club that includes

the dwindling number of people who still cling to the belief that Oswald was the lone assassin in spite of 50 years of revelations and a growing mountain of evidence that proves that he was not.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to alberg (Reply #452)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 08:30 PM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

459. Check your Websters for the definition of "evidence." Then, get back to us.

You're just another plebe who gives a pass to the little shit who killed JFK, Oswald. Aren't you proud of yourself?

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to stopbush (Reply #459)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 11:27 PM

alberg (412 posts)

485. Your either ignorant of the evidence, genuinely confused about a topic that is

complex beyond your level of understanding or you have some other agenda in play.

In any case, I won't do your research for you. Endlessly repeating the same talking points doesn't make your case any stronger or make the findings of the Warren Commission believable.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to alberg (Reply #485)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 10:05 AM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

491. How would you know what the WCR says? You've never read it.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Octafish (Reply #84)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 10:34 AM

MinM (2,650 posts)

193. "Sprague... wanted complete information about the CIA's operation in Mexico City..."

Richard A. Sprague was born in Philadelphia. He received his B.S. from Temple University and his LL.B. from the University of Pennsylvania Law School. After joining the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office in 1958, Sprague served as a Chief Assistant District Attorney, Chief of the Prosecution Division, Chief of the Trial Division and Chief of the Homicide Division. From 1966 to 1974, he was the First Assistant District Attorney of Philadelphia County.

Sprague became a national figure when he successfully prosecuted Tony Boyle, President of the United Mine Workers for the murder of Joseph Yablonski. He also had a record of 69 homicide convictions out of 70 prosecutions.

In 1976 Thomas N. Downing began campaigning for a new investigation into the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Downing said he was certain that Kennedy had been killed as a result of a conspiracy. He believed that the recent deaths of Sam Giancana and Johnny Roselli were highly significant. He also argued that the Central Intelligence Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation had withheld important information from the Warren Commission. Downing was not alone in taking this view. In 1976, a Detroit News poll indicated that 87% of the American population did not believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman who killed Kennedy...

On 2nd February, 1978, Henry Gonzalez replaced Thomas N. Downing as chairman of the House Select Committee on Assassinations. Gonzalez immediately sacked Sprague as chief counsel. Sprague claimed that only the full committee had the power to dismiss him. Walter E. Fauntroy agreed with Sprague and launched a campaign to keep him as chief counsel. On 1st March, Gonzalez resigned describing Sprague as "an unconscionable scoundrel"

Louis Stokes of Ohio was now appointed as the new chairman of the HSCA. After a meeting with Stokes on 29th March, Sprague agreed to resign and he was replaced by G. Robert Blakey.

Sprague later told Gaeton Fonzi that the real reason he was removed as chief counsel was because he insisted on asking questions about the CIA operations in Mexico. Fonzi argued that "Sprague... wanted complete information about the CIA's operation in Mexico City and total access to all its employees who may have had anything to do with the photographs, tape recordings and transcripts. The Agency balked. Sprague pushed harder. Finally the Agency agreed that Sprague could have access to the information if he agreed to sign a CIA Secrecy Agreement. Sprague refused.... "How," he asked, "can I possible sign an agreement with an agency I'm supposed to be investigating?"

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6407

More on Richard A. Sprague here and here.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MinM (Reply #193)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 11:32 PM

happyslug (14,779 posts)

232. If, as I suspect the CIA knew what went on in Mexico City, I can see why the CIA demanded

 

I suspect that the CIA knew of the use of Oswald's name in Mexico City, it was NOT used by Oswald but by the KGB for one of their spy who came with information from the US to the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City.

In the 1960s, except for Cuba, the Soviets had no access to sent data back home except by the use of time consuming one time codes (which are almost unbreakable, for they are only used once and then with short enough transmission so anyone taping the transmission never gets enough data to break the code, but such codes have to be used once AND then on short enough messages so not enough data is transmitted to break the code). Thus radio was out for anything extensive.

With Soviet Ships and Planes to the US being watched, the Soviets had a problem getting anything extensive back to Moscow. One way around this was to send messages via a another country. Canada and the US were joined at the hip, so Canada was out, Cuba was being embargoed and thus out, that left Mexico.

I suspect Oswald's name was used by such a courier (or maybe even a US Citizens who wanted to sell US secrets). Oswald had moved to the Soviet Union, and as part of that move the Soviets had been able to obtained copies his DD-214 (discharge papers), his domestic Driver's license, his Birth Certificate and his passport. All good source of information on Oswald. When Oswald went back to the US, the Soviet retained these copies. Anyone crossing into Mexico could use Oswald's name and whatever duplicate ID the Soviets could make based on the Information they had on Oswald. The KGB would have told who ever is using the ID to go via Dallas so their trail and the actual Oswald's trail would have overlapped and to use Oswald's name in Mexico. On the return continue to use Oswald's name and ID till they pass Dallas and then "Lose" the ID, so anyone tracking them would divert to the real Oswald. In many ways such a use would be perfect, especially if the person using Oswald's name in Mexico kept its use to a minimum (and NEVER use his real name).

Now, using a real person's name was better then making one up, and Oswald's additional information the Soviets had due to Oswald's having lived in the Soviet Union would have provided even better data for fake IDs. Thus it would have been tempting for the Soviets to use Oswald's name till JFK was killed by the Oswald.

I suspect the CIA knows the above and that the person who used Oswald's name had nothing to do with the JFK assassinations. I also suspect that the reason the CIA knows this is the FBI told them. The reason the FBI told them, was the FBI had a spy near the top of the Kremlin and I suspect that spy told the FBI of the KGB's problem due to the fact they had used Oswald's name for an unrelated spy and the KGB was afraid that if the US found out "Oswald" had been in the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City that the fact the Oswald in Mexico City was NOT the actual Oswald that killed JFK would be ignored OR missed. i.e. the US would jump to the conclusion that the Oswald in Mexico City had killed JFK, not that the KGB was just using Oswald's name for an unrelated spy.

Now, the FBI spy high in the Soviet Government refused to have any dealings with the CIA and the Spy was giving so much good data from the Soviet Union the CIA wanted him but could not have him. On the other hand the data was excellent so the CIA accepted the situation.

Now, I remember when the story of these two spy came out, I believe in the early 1990s and they had been working for the FBI for decades. Given their position they was no way the CIA or the FBI was going to reveal they name or any information they provided, least the KGB determine they were spies and be shot. This was NOT an idle threat, when CIA analysts Ames first became a spy, the information he was giving the KGB included the name of some high ranking Soviet officials who were CIA spies. The KGB then had them shot (and arranged for one of their female agents to seduce a Marine guarding the US Embassy in Moscow, so they can spread the story these spy were caught due to what that spy recovered on her trips inside the US Embassy with the Marine).

Anyway, these spy were to valuable to be risked in any way. Thus Sprague request was NOT acceptable to the CIA nor the FBI and thus it was going no where.

Side note: Technically all intelligence gathering was concentrated into the CIA on its formation in 1947. This was NOT quite true, J Edgar Hoover wanted to retain his system throughout Latin America. In 1950 he was told to close it down and turn it over to the CIA. Hoover followed the order, in the early 1950s Hoover withdrew his people from their positions throughout Latin America, and then took with them their list of locals who were helping them (i.e. their actual intelligence lists).

Hoover then refused to turn those lists over to the CIA, the CIA had to start with nothing. In many ways the "Revolutions" on the late 1950s and early 1960s was the result of this change. The FBI had the list of people to contact, the CIA did not. It takes time, often a decade or more, to build up list of contacts and prospects and the FBI was not sharing their lists with the CIA. Thus you had about a decade where revolutionaries could organize without being discovered by the US and then undermined by the US. This is probably one of the reasons for the success of Castro, he developed his forces in that decade and by the time the CIA had the contacts it was to late.

I also suspect it was during the time of the FBI handling of intelligence in Latin America that the above spy in the Soviet Union came in contact with the FBI and only trusted the FBI agents they had meet in Latin America (or someone who those agents could vouch for personally). Another theory could be the Agents the FBI had, had friends who told them to trust the FBI but not the CIA due to experiences with both agencies in Latin America in the 1950s.

We have to remember that it has been noted that the people who make up the FBI and the CIA are different. Both are right wing but the differences start with who each agency tends to recruit. FBI agents tended products of mid west collages, while the CIA agents tended to be Ivy league. I hate to say this, but the FBI agents tend to be people who have dealt with poor people all their lives, even growing up with some in the same small town. These Small Town and Small Mid West Collage types see themselves as better then the poor, but the poor are people. On the other hand, the Ivy League tend to see themselves as the elite of the US and that everyone else is unimportant.

The FBI spies apparently wanted to deal with Small Mid West Collage types NOT Ivy leaguers, for some reason known only to themselves.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MinM (Reply #193)

Fri Jan 18, 2013, 09:12 AM

Mc Mike (9,060 posts)

237. Thanks for the background on Sprague's removal, MM.

Last edited Sat Jan 19, 2013, 10:25 AM - Edit history (1)

I remembered that he was forced out, and replaced by G. Robert Blakey, but never knew the dynamics or particulars.

The attacks on, smears against, and removal of Mr. Sprague might lead a reasonable, dispassionate observer to conclude that there was something to claims of 'politicization and de-railment of assassination investigations'.

(edited for clarity)

Spread the love!

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MinM (Reply #193)

Fri Jan 18, 2013, 04:13 PM

Octafish (55,745 posts)

250. CIA assigned 1963 Oswald minder George Joannides the 1977 job of liaison with HSCA.

Those who think Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone have their reasons. Personally, I believe they are on the wrong side of both the facts and history.

Key to my belief are works by several authorities, including John M. Newman and Jefferson Morley. Their work continued the investigation begun by Philip Melanson and Jim Garrison, who may not have been aware of Joannides' involvement, but recognized the CIA-Oswald connections in both Mexico City and New Orleans.

They report Oswald appears to have been impersonated in Mexico City and CIA failed to disclose this information to Warren Commission or the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA).

The person charged with providing that information to the HSCA in 1977 was George Joannides, who also happened to have known Oswald's most important contacts, the anti-Castro Cuban expatriates Joannides oversaw in New Orleans as their CIA paymaster in 1963. Small world!

One thing about this that’s most un-democratic is how CIA won’t divulge those records, even after ordered to do so by a Federal Judge John Tunheim, who led the Assassination Records Review Board, in the 1990s.

So, on behalf of history, the Truth and the People, Newman and Morley have had to sue CIA. And in the interest of national security, the case has been appealed until it has effectively been quashed -- over 300 pages of Joannides' work stuff from ca. 1963. Then there are the other files...

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Octafish (Reply #84)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 10:24 PM

happyslug (14,779 posts)

229. One of the Problems with the JFK assassination is the sheer number of people CYAing themselves

 

Several agencies failed to do they job when it came to the Assassination of JFK, mostly due to carelessness and that, while people TALKED about killing the President, it was rarely tried. Thus when a person actually did take a shot at a President (and succeeded) every agency involved went into CYA (Cover Your Ass) mode. And that includes the KGB (in addition to the FBI who had failed to check up on Oswald, even through he was on their Watch list, the Secret Service who failed to look over the route to make sure all the high rise buildings were "Secure" instead the night before they went to a "Go-Go Club", the local Dallas Police, for failing to make sure the route was safe, the CIA for they knew someone using Oswald name had gone to Mexico City etc).

As to the KGB, when Oswald was in the Soviet Union he had married the daughter of a KGB officer. Now, before you jump to a conclusion that this made Oswald a spy, the KGB was a combination of what in the US is the CIA, FBI, Homeland Security (including Immigration) and your State's State Police. Oswald's father in law appears to have been a low level equivalent to a State Police Officer.

On the other hand, when Oswald came back, his personal information was KNOWN to the KGB, and thus would have been useful to other spies the KGB sent to the USA. The KGB would have been careful NOT to use the ID to often (to avoid duplication between the agent and the real Oswald so that the FBI would catch on something was wrong) but used when needed to get an agent to and from Mexico. Mexico would have been ideal, Oswald, if he had a passport, had no intention of going to Mexico, Cuba maybe but not Mexico.

Thus the whole Oswald in Mexico City maybe just the use of the name Oswald by a Soviet Agent, who was in Mexico for other reasons (i.e. getting REAL intelligence on US intentions and getting that information back to Moscow). The agent may have used another name in the US, just used Oswald in Mexico to confuse anyone trailing him (by going via Texas the spy would have been close enough to the real Oswald to draw any tail from the agent to the real Oswald)

Worse, the person in Mexico City may have been an America who wanted to sell information to the Soviets, the Soviets gave him Oswald's name and information to confuse anyone tailing him from the US. Again Oswald being in Texas could draw any US counter intelligence operators to the real Oswald (especially if the American who was selling secrets made sure he went through the right city, i.e. Dallas before and after he did his visit to Mexico City).

If the above was the situation, when Kennedy was killed by Oswald, whoever was using his name in Mexico stopped using it for obvious reasons. The KGB also realized they were in the middle of a mine field, if this use of Oswald's name was found out by the Americas, all hell could break loose. Thus the KGB went into cover-up mode. The Agent who had used Oswald's name was withdrawn (if it was used by an American selling secrets, he was told to STOP using it and told that if he EVER said he did the KGB would kill him, no matter where he was and not matter what he was selling).

I suspect this worked with the admitted official cover-up, run by Robert Kennedy, to keep a lid an ANY facts that would indicate a Cuban or Soviet Involvement in the Kennedy Assassination. The KGB may have even told the CIA of they use of Oswald's name, once the KGB was confident the US was NOT looking to the Soviet Union or Cuba to blame the assassination on. Thus the whole Mexico City evidence became moot.

One last comment, the FBI had a spy high inside the people around the Politburo (The Central Committee of the Communist party that actually ran the Soviet Union). Those agents wanted nothing to do with the CIA and refused to deal with the CIA, even when the FBI asked them to do so. They may have told the FBI that the KGB was worried about being blamed for the KGB had used Oswald's name, Social Security Number, driver's license number etc for one of their spies. These FBI spies would have told the FBI and the FBI would then know that the Mexico City photos of Oswald had nothing to do with Oswald except the use of Oswald's name. This would NOT have come out right after the assassination, but a few months later when this was brought up to the Politburo, and then the FBI spies got that information to the FBI. The CIA would NOT have known of this, for the spies were FBI spies, but Hoover would have known and told the Warren Commission AND that it was from a Classified source (The Spies operated for the FBI for decades, they finally left the Soviet Union decades after the Assassination and by the time they "retired" they had forgotten about they report on JFK's assassination for it was probably just a one line concern, among what the considered more important information)

Just a comment that they are other explanations for those photos of Oswald in Mexico City NOT being Oswald, other then a cover-up of who assassinated JFK. In fact, knowing how people need IDs even in the 1960s, and that Oswald had to have given all the information one needed to get such IDs when he migrated to the Soviet Union, the Soviets had a REAL LIVE PERSON whose name they could use. The Soviets did NOT need to develop a person's ID as a native born American for one of their spies, they had it, in the name of Oswald. In many ways I would be surprised if the Soviet had NOT used Oswald's name in they spies service. Notice I did NOT say Oswald, but Oswald's NAME. The use of the name would have been so tempting to use, till JFK was killed. At that point it became a huge liability and the KGB went into CYA (Cover your Ass) mode. Thus I can NOT give much weight to those photos, there are other explanations for them, other then part of a conspiracy to cover-up who killed JFK.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to happyslug (Reply #229)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 06:28 PM

Star Member AntiFascist (12,645 posts)

255. I'm curious...

why was it so easy for the real Oswald to gain entrance back into the US after he had defected to the Soviet Union, especially since he was now married to the daughter of a KGB officer? This, at a time when the US government was particularly paranoid about cracking down on communist sympathisizers?

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to happyslug (Reply #229)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 11:05 PM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

321. And one of the problems with the JFK CTists is that they feel it necessary

to question EVERY piece of evidence in the case.

This defies all logic. It assumes that somehow, every person responsible for producing, examining or testifying on every disparate piece of evidence in the case was able to confer with the thousands of other people involved in the investigation to insure that their particular piece of evidence was in line with a "false narrative" what was being developed by the WC to explain the killing.

It would be one thing if the CTists were to, say, accept that Oswald was the sole shooter that day - because that IS what the EVIDENCE shows - and to spend their energy finding other evidence that someone besides Oswald was involved in the planning of the shooting. But they can't do that. They feel the need to dispute the idea that Oswald was involved at all.

And on and on it goes in the whack-a-mole world the the JFK CTists.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to stopbush (Reply #321)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 03:40 AM

AndyTiedye (23,499 posts)

651. I Don't Believe in Magic…

…bullets.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to AndyTiedye (Reply #651)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 10:40 AM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

652. Ignorance of the evidence on display for all to see.

Typical of people who get their history from Oliver Stone.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to stopbush (Reply #80)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 02:30 AM

HiPointDem (20,729 posts)

190. the kennedys are conspiracy theorists now? seems like rfk, both as us AG & kennedy admin

 

insider, might know more about the operations of government, intelligence, & organized crime than you do, & be in a much better position to judge the inside baseball.

'conspiracy theorist' = person espousing theory that doesn't fit the standard narrative.

it's a stupid phrase.

the standard explanation of 911 = conspiracy theory.
the american revolution = conspiracy theory.
'go along to get along' = conspiracy theory.
'scratch my back i'll scratch yours' = conspiracy theory.

politics = conspiracy.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to HiPointDem (Reply #190)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 03:23 PM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

293. Talk about contradicting yourself!

You wrote:

"seems like rfk, both as us AG & kennedy admin insider, might know more about the operations of government, intelligence, & organized crime than you do, & be in a much better position to judge the inside baseball."

AND YET, RFK didn't know enough about "the operations of government, intelligence, & organized crime" when it counted, ie: in Nov, 1963 to put a stop to any assassination attempt on his brother!

BTW: conspiracy theorist = person espousing a theory for which there is no objective proof

It's not a stupid phrase. It's a descriptive phrase.

You and Octafish and all the other JFK CTists seem to be under the impression that those of us who don't believe there was a conspiracy to kill JFK don't believe in conspiracies at all. That's not true.

Anwar Sadat was assassinated as part of a conspiracy. We know that because he was killed by multiple gunmen, in the open, and caught on film.

Abraham Lincoln was killed by a conspiracy. We know that because of the evidence that was gathered in the case.

But the EVIDENCE gathered in the JFK case points AWAY from a conspiracy and directly at Oswald.

Had you the guts to read Bugliosi's book, I would direct you to the chapter beginning on Pg 951, "Summary of Oswald's Guilt," wherein Bugliosi outlines 53 unique proofs of Oswald's guilt in the murder of JFK. I know it might hurt your sensitivities to read such a chapter, but I would encourage you to do so at some point in your life. It might keep you from making excuses for the little shit who killed JFK.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to stopbush (Reply #293)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 07:23 PM

Star Member AntiFascist (12,645 posts)

302. Uhhh, what?

The legal definition of a conspiracy goes something like this:

An agreement between two or more persons to engage jointly in an unlawful or criminal act, or an act that is innocent in itself but becomes unlawful when done by the combination of actors.

There's nothing about a conspiracy theory or conspiracy theorist that depends on "no objective proof". You are trying to color the term with your own bias and prejudice. In your world, anyone who puts forward a conspiracy theory is automatically unable to prove anything. You are trying to back us into a corner where we can only logically analyze the actions of lone wolves.

Whether Oswald is guilty of anything is really beside the point when it comes to a question of conspiracy. Even if he was the lone gunman, he could still be part of a conspiracy.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to AntiFascist (Reply #302)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 08:42 PM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

306. You wrote:

"Whether Oswald is guilty of anything is really beside the point when it comes to a question of conspiracy. Even if he was the lone gunman, he could still be part of a conspiracy."

Agreed.

The question is: what evidence is there that he WAS part of a conspiracy? So far, I've seen nothing compelling to make me think he was involved in a conspiracy.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to stopbush (Reply #306)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 10:41 PM

Star Member AntiFascist (12,645 posts)

318. From one point of view...

Oswald was setup to be a scapegoat. Whether he was there to shoot at JFK with the intent to kill or not, he got caught and the FBI investigation that ensued focused on him as a prime suspect and a lone gunman. After he announced to the media that he was a "patsy," he was subsequently shot and killed himself. To many people, this is a compelling reason to believe that he was being silenced so as not to reveal the nature of any conspiracy. You can cite all of the circumstantial facts involving Jack Ruby that you want, there are just as many reports that raise even more questions.

One thing that consistently gets ignored in the research that has been done in the past has been the overlap between the mafia, covert anti-Castro operations (particularly in New Orleans), CIA counter-intelligence, and Oswald's alleged involvement with either domestic or foreign intelligence.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to stopbush (Reply #293)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 11:55 PM

HiPointDem (20,729 posts)

324. there's no contradiction at all. sorry you don't see it. rfk had connections he could work after

 

his brother's assassination. you have -- bugliosi's book.

the fact remains, the kennedys don't believe the lone gunman theory. so you want to call someone names, you should be calling *them* names.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to zappaman (Reply #13)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 09:05 PM

MrMickeysMom (20,453 posts)

159. This sure is another reason to point to the pointless....

...Like the pointless post you somehow make yourself believe. Do you honestly believe anything in your "smear" comment?

No one who followed you in the "dungeon" would, which I'm sure you miss so much, you jump on the next opportunity to fabricate.

Yee-haw... how many non-Oswalds has the OP has mentioned that didn't shoot JFK?, Why, "the hundreds over the years"!

Please, if you wish to make claims, by all means, back them up. Otherwise, you're just blowing really hard.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MrMickeysMom (Reply #159)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 09:09 PM

zappaman (20,587 posts)

162. Cool!

Perhaps you can tell us how many people participated in the assassination and cover up?
My "hundreds over the years" is just an estimate from our esteemed poster.
If you can narrow the estimation down, then please do!

And yes, saying one can't be a Democrat if they don't believe there was a conspiracy in the JFK assassination, is a smear.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to zappaman (Reply #162)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 10:31 PM

MrMickeysMom (20,453 posts)

176. Divert much?

Why answer a question when you can ask another one?

You can't be a Democrat and you can't be a liberal if you don't believe there was a conspiracy. Congress backed up the conspiracy, and dip-shit epileptic seizures about "CTs" back up the other remarks spewn herein.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MrMickeysMom (Reply #176)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 06:44 PM

zappaman (20,587 posts)

441. 'You can't be a Democrat and you can't be a liberal if you don't believe there was a conspiracy"

Congrats on not only the single dumbest post in the history of DU, but, in all likelihood, the single dumbest thing ever written on the internet.
Seriously, congratulations!!!

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MrMickeysMom (Reply #159)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 12:09 AM

lonestarnot (77,097 posts)

180. You are pointless. What is the point of this post? Back up you own crap before you ask anyone else

 

to do so.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to lonestarnot (Reply #180)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 02:03 AM

MrMickeysMom (20,453 posts)

184. already have...

Not everyone knows... Now you do.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MrMickeysMom (Reply #184)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:48 AM

lonestarnot (77,097 posts)

192. Then explain why the secret service was waived off the car.

 

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to lonestarnot (Reply #192)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 03:35 PM

Star Member AntiFascist (12,645 posts)

206. People don't like to talk about the real reason for this...

because, upon analysis, it highlights the real nature of any plausible conspiracy.

JFK had enemies in the extreme right who viewed him as a traitor, enabling the Communists and not doing enough to remove Castro from power in Cuba. However, he did not want to appear intimidated by them. This may be why JFK, himself, requested that the plexiglass shield not be used on his limosine, and may have even requested that the secret service keep their distance:


And, if that wasn’t enough, none other than former agent Floyd Boring himself
stated to researcher Dan Robertson: “He [JFK] was responsible for his own
death,” and that the bubbletop was bullet-proof and that Kennedy wouldn’t let
the Secret Service put it on the limo.9


Also, I wonder if there is any truth to this:

1963, the evening before JFK's assassination, Joan <Crawford> attended a Pepsi function in Dallas with Richard Nixon.There they plotted how to get Pepsi's sugar cane fields in Cuba back from Castro. Joan also met with JFK (not their first meeting) in Dallas just before he was shot. She teased him about having security, saying she didn't have any in her Pepsi travels. She soon felt very bad about that.


Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to AntiFascist (Reply #206)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:24 PM

Octafish (55,745 posts)

220. JFK never ordered the bubble top off.

From footage found in a dumpster outside ABC Dallas in the late 90's:



Video: http://www.metacafe.com/watch/171830/secret_service_jfk /

Afterward, in William Manchester's book, Death of a President, we see the "official story" of what happened:

"Kennedy grew weary of seeing bodyguards roosting behind him every time he turned around, and in Tampa on November 18 (1963), just four days before his death, he dryly asked Agent Floyd Boring to 'keep those Ivy League charlatans off the back of the car.' Boring wasn't offended. There had been no animosity in the remark." (1988 Harper & Row/Perennial Library edition, pp. 37-38)

The thing is PRESIDENT KENNEDY NEVER SAID THAT.

Not until 35 years later do we learn the truth, though, when the great investigator Vincent Palamara asked the Secret Service agents who were there what happened in 1963:

Agents Go On Record

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Octafish (Reply #220)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 11:18 PM

Star Member AntiFascist (12,645 posts)

230. I'm not that familiar with the secret service point of view...


I guess my point is that it would have at least been easier for Kennedy to go along with this if he didn't want to appear to be afraid before the public. There are multiple reports that he may have been teased about needing so much security. I really have no opinion one way or the other whether secret service higher ups were in on the conspiracy.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Octafish (Reply #220)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:47 PM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

290. The Bubble Top Wasn't Bulletproof. So what does it matter if JFK or someone else

had it removed in Dallas? It wouldn't have stopped a bullet, wouldn't have deflected a bullet either.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to stopbush (Reply #290)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 06:51 PM

Star Member AntiFascist (12,645 posts)

301. Wrong...


it could have deflected a bullet, even if not bulletproof, or interfered with the assassins sight. There are also reports that a bullet-proof version of the shield had been, or was in development.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to AntiFascist (Reply #301)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 07:50 PM

zappaman (20,587 posts)

304. uh huh

"But the weather was fair, so the bubble had been removed. The plastic was not bullet-proof, in any case."

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/terrorists_spies/assassins/jfk/2.html

and so what if one was in development?

You really don't know much about the assassination, do you?

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to zappaman (Reply #304)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 05:45 PM

Star Member AntiFascist (12,645 posts)

375. Sorry, I assumed the SS agent knew what he was talking about...



Octafish's threads are always a learning experience and a chance to do more personal directed research on the matter.
I now know more about the faulty JFK autopsy and the discredited Neutron Analysis method of the bullet material, and I now believe that stopbush's argument is beginning to resemble Swiss cheese.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to AntiFascist (Reply #375)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 07:57 PM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

388. Wow.You're easily pleased...or deluded. Take your pick.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to stopbush (Reply #388)

Mon Jan 21, 2013, 08:05 PM

Star Member AntiFascist (12,645 posts)

390. In this case just being logical....

and about that Neutron Activation analysis....

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to AntiFascist (Reply #301)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 09:03 PM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

309. You wrote:

1. (the bubble top) could have deflected a bullet, even if not bulletproof,

A very, very slight chance. Read the evidence presented in the WCR. A high-caliber round from Oswald's rifle would have gone right through the plexiglass of the bubble top. However, the bubble top was actually six pieces of plexiglass that needed to be assembled, held together by metal strips, sort of like the way a screen door has metal strips. Had a bullet hit one of these strips, it might have been deflected slightly.

2. The bubble top could have interfered with the sight of the assassin. Possibly, but not probable.

Here's a picture of JFK in the limo with the bubble top installed. Notice that there is nothing but non-bullet-proof plexiglass along the entire rear of the bubble top. You can see the metal strips. Do you think the plexiglass would have interfered with the sight of the assassin? Perhaps if the sun was hitting the glass and causing a glare, though IIRC, the limo was pretty much in the shade of the TSBD when the shots were fired.

It might help to realize that the reason the bubble top was created was so that the president could ride in the limo in inclement weather AND STILL BE CLEARLY SEEN by the crowds lining a parade route.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/that_chrysler_guy/6481321617/in/pool-1848622

BTW - the picture always makes me a little sad, as JFK looks so good and so alive in that shot.

3. There are also reports that a bullet-proof version of the shield had been, or was in development.

Woulda, coulda shoulda. Irrelevant.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Octafish (Reply #220)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 09:55 PM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

475. The bubble top was ordered off the limo by Kenneth O'Donnell, one of JFK's top aides

and part of JFK's "Irish Mafia."

It's in the WCR.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Octafish (Reply #220)

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 09:20 PM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

668. That picture means absolutely nothing when it comes to protecting JFK that day.

I caught a rebroadcast yesterday on The Military Channel of "The Kennedy Detail," a documentary based on the 2010 book written about the SS agents assigned to protect JFK that day.

During part of an interview where SS Agent Clint Hill is asked if he thinks the SS could have done something different that day, he relates that by the time the limo turned onto Elm, the crowds began to thin, and the agents considered the "crowd part" of the motorcade to be over. Hill says that at that point in any motorcade, SOP was for any agents riding on the side rail or rear step of the limo to LEAVE the limo and get into the trailing cars, because at that point, the limo would start accelerating to make its entrance onto the freeway so it could get to the Trade Mart ASAP. The agents did NOT ride on the limo once it started accelerating to freeway speed.

Ergo, even if SS agents had been riding on the rear step of the limo for the entire route, they would have begun to dismount from JFK's limo once it hit Elm Street and began accelerating toward the Stemmons Freeway. That was SOP.

Imagine what the CTist would be saying IF the agents had been on that rear step and the Zapruder film showed them all suddenly dismounting! SOP would have appeared to have been clear evidence that they were all getting out of the way of shots they knew were coming.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to doublethink (Reply #676)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 01:31 AM

Star Member stopbush (24,128 posts)

680. Sorry, but putting nothing in your title line but an ellipse

and putting nothing in the field but a link to a known CT nut's site isn't going to cause me to click on your link.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to zappaman (Reply #13)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 12:07 AM

lonestarnot (77,097 posts)

179. You have handily diminished your credibility.

 

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to zappaman (Reply #13)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 06:38 PM

alberg (412 posts)

437. Their weren't "hundreds", only a small core group of experienced assassins

enabled by a much larger group who knew they would profit from the killing.

There's no reason to take you seriously if your still holding on to the ridiculous notion that Oswald was the "lone gunman".

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to alberg (Reply #437)

Tue Jan 22, 2013, 06:41 PM

zappaman (20,587 posts)