View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Discuss Conspiracies and Cover Ups - e.g. 9/11 Truth, JFK Assassination, New World Order, Roswell, Moon Hoax, Secret Societies, etc. whatever conspiracy floats your boat.

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Misha » 21 Aug 2012, 05:36

Thanks for your list, ProfWag. I've read excerpts of the Warren Commission, but not all its volumes. Not easy to get. Buglosi and Posner, frankly, I won't waste my time. Horne, Marrs, and Jim Fetzer take their arguments apart in full. Yes, I have read Marrs' book and have spoken with Jim at length on the assassination. Jim is a real pro. Douglass, Talbot, Livingston, Fetzer, Vinson, Prouty and others I can't think of for the moment. But the creme de creme is no doubt Horne's book. He nails it. ProWag, I would love to go down to Suitland and see the archives. Perhaps one day you and I can get together and go down and view them. Whad'ya say?

I'm pleased you like the Dulles statement. Thanks.
Misha
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 19 Aug 2012, 03:42






Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby ProfWag » 21 Aug 2012, 20:48

Misha wrote:Thanks for your list, ProfWag. I've read excerpts of the Warren Commission, but not all its volumes. Not easy to get. Buglosi and Posner, frankly, I won't waste my time. Horne, Marrs, and Jim Fetzer take their arguments apart in full. Yes, I have read Marrs' book and have spoken with Jim at length on the assassination. Jim is a real pro. Douglass, Talbot, Livingston, Fetzer, Vinson, Prouty and others I can't think of for the moment. But the creme de creme is no doubt Horne's book. He nails it. ProWag, I would love to go down to Suitland and see the archives. Perhaps one day you and I can get together and go down and view them. Whad'ya say?

I'm pleased you like the Dulles statement. Thanks.

Misha, not giving Buglosi's book any credit is a disservice to your unbiased JFK research. It's probably the best book on the market giving fair consideration to all sides of the discussion. I believe that unfortunately, you're not open to any consideration of the assassination except a conspiracy.
I'd love to visit with you at the Archives, but my schedule may not allow it for quite some time. I lived in D.C. just a few years ago, and quite frankly, am in no hurry to get back. Many of the exhibits are also available quite readily online. I do want to correct something I said yesterday concerning Horne wanting us to go to the Archives to see the windshield--several photos are available on the Archives' website and what is shown there is definitely not a through-on-through bullet hole. If Horne could get a copy of what he believes is an actual hole in the windshield, then it would be amazing if he could get it, blow it up, and post it for the world to see...
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Misha » 21 Aug 2012, 22:01

Hi ProfWag,

Keep in mind that Buglosi's argument is scrutinized point for point by Jim Fetzer, Jim Marrs and Doug Horne. So in essence, I am getting the details of what Buglosi and Posner are putting out. In fact, these two are what the major media refers too incessantly. Also, besides Buglosi's book I have also spoken with Jim Marrs on Buglosi. Furthermore, I caught some of what Buglosi has said on You-Tube too. Now you may think I am not being fair with Buglosi. However, when one has studied this subject in depth one gets a better sense of separating the signal from the noise without continuing beating one's head against the wall. Buglosi and Posner have shown to be noise.

Moreover, just because Buglosi's book is the best on the market does not mean it is correct. No, I am not interested in "conspiracy" as you might understand it. Your idea of conspiracy may be very different in the way I approach conspiracies. I am interested in pattern recognition weighed against cognitive associations which gives us a true historical perspective against the distortions. ProWag, sometimes one has to make a choice. Either cut the fat out or continue chewing indefinitely.
Misha
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 19 Aug 2012, 03:42

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby ProfWag » 22 Aug 2012, 00:25

Misha wrote: ProWag, sometimes one has to make a choice. Either cut the fat out or continue chewing indefinitely.

Yes, yes, yes! And that's what I have done, taken out the fat and here's the lean version of what I've discovered (I believe I've already pointed these out)

1. Pres Kennedy was shot twice
2. Forensics show that at least 1 and probably 3 bullets likely came from the direction of the School Book Dipository.
3. 50 years later and no one has been able to show any significant evidence of a 2nd shooter. Period.
4. LHO worked there, bought a gun, and was not seen during the time of the shooting.

If I'm wrong on any of those points, please let me know. Anything else other than the above requires imagination, theory, or hypothesis.

So there you have it, the lean version so I'm not continuously chewing. What have I discovered? Oswald probably acted alone in the shooting of Kennedy. Until something else comes out otherwise, that's my constructive opinion.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Misha » 22 Aug 2012, 01:13

Fair enough, ProfWag. All these points and the forensics are discussed in Horne's books. Also, Jim Douglass and Talbot show us why Kennedy was shot.
Misha
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 19 Aug 2012, 03:42

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby ProfWag » 22 Aug 2012, 02:40

Misha wrote:Fair enough, ProfWag. All these points and the forensics are discussed in Horne's books. Also, Jim Douglass and Talbot show us why Kennedy was shot.

I obviously haven't read Douglass or Talbot, but I doubt they show us why he was shot. Perhaps their interpretation of why he was shot, but it's not conclusive. If, and I want to emphasize "if," Oswald acted alone, then no one really knows why he was shot, do they?
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Misha » 22 Aug 2012, 04:41

No, Douglass and Talbot do an excellent job showing why Kennedy was shot. In short, JFK was a threat to the National Security apparatus in every sense. His assassination was one that was state sponsored at the highest levels. Now take Douglass' and Talbot's "interpretation" and Horne's forensic work and you get the big picture. Again, we finally have some of the answers that have been alluding us, ProfWag. That means the definitive expose and culmination of all the researchers' work involved in this subject - "Inside the ARRB."

By the way, I saw this: http://lewrockwell.com/miller/miller40.1.html

Addendum from the article's link above:

Next year will be the 50th anniversary of the first Kennedy assassination. Warren Commission loyalists and the national TV and print media will be out in force trumpeting the imperial state’s Oswald-did-it-alone narrative. Loyalists take comfort in two books written by attorneys defending the Commission’s findings, Case Closed by Gerald Posner (1993) and the more recent 2,600-page (with its CD) Reclaiming History (2007) by Vincent Bugliosi. These lawyers cite evidence that supports their client’s case and discount or ignore culpatory evidence of a conspiracy. Posner and especially prosecutor Bugliosi employ ad hominem attacks to dismiss assassination researchers who do not adhere to the government line, labeling them "conspiracy theorists," and worse, "conspiracy buffs." Bugliosi writes, "Most of them are as kooky as a $3 bill." Researcher Mark Lane is "unprincipled" and a "fraud." The New York Times approves and gives Reclaiming History an enthusiastic review, agreeing that "these people should be ridiculed, even shunned [italics in original]."
Misha
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 19 Aug 2012, 03:42

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby ProfWag » 22 Aug 2012, 05:42

Misha wrote:No, Douglass and Talbot do an excellent job showing why Kennedy was shot. In short, JFK was a threat to the National Security apparatus in every sense. His assassination was one that was state sponsored at the highest levels. Now take Douglass' and Talbot's "interpretation" and Horne's forensic work and you get the big picture. Again, we finally have some of the answers that have been alluding us, ProfWag. That means the definitive expose and culmination of all the researchers' work involved in this subject - "Inside the ARRB."

No Misha, I'm sorry but this is incorrect information. Their comments that his assassination was "state sponsored at the highest levels" is nothing more than opinion and theory. Please, you really need to understand that if you are open to what really happened that day. The evidence that is available as it stands, without twisting or speculating, points to Oswald acting alone. Everything else is complete conjecture.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Misha » 22 Aug 2012, 15:52

No, ProfWag. I have been completely open for 20 plus years on this. Perhaps you need to be more open? I even spoke with Jim Marrs for about an hour on Posner and Buglosi. Jim obviously finds their arguments specious and lacks the total context of what went on before, during and after the assassination. You and I are going to have to agree to disagree.
Misha
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 19 Aug 2012, 03:42

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby ProfWag » 22 Aug 2012, 21:01

Misha wrote:No, ProfWag. I have been completely open for 20 plus years on this. Perhaps you need to be more open? I even spoke with Jim Marrs for about an hour on Posner and Buglosi. Jim obviously finds their arguments specious and lacks the total context of what went on before, during and after the assassination. You and I are going to have to agree to disagree.

With all due respect for Mr. Marrs, he is a conspiracy theorist through and through and supports all things conspiracy, from aliens and remote viewing to 9/11. Some people just have that mindset that everything is a conspiracy, for whatever reason and no amount of evidence will convince them otherwise and Mr. Marrs is just one of those people. I respect his knowledge and thorough investigative habits, however, the truth is he has no more proof of a second gunman now than he did on 11/22/63. Unless he's changed his mind recently, I'm pretty sure Mr. Marrs believes James Files was the other gunman, although the gun he supposedly used was incredibly loud at the time and would have been heard by all sorts of people who would have looked back at the knoll rather than the TSBD where they all did. I firmly believe that there were all sorts of people that wanted JFK killed and perhaps plans had been sent in motion to do just that, but the strong evidence remains that all signs point to LHO doing it alone that day. Did people put him up to it? Did other people know it was going to happen? Maybe. However, neither Marrs nor anyone else has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that there were two gunman that day.
I would love to agree to disagree and will try to do that, but I'm not sure I can agree... :)
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Misha » 23 Aug 2012, 00:15

HSCA Final Assassinations Report:

Chapter 1, Item C:

"The committee believes on the basis of the evidence available to it, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy."

Now if you want to learn more on what "evidence" was not put forth by HSCA, please read Doug Horne's (military analyst for the 'Assassinations Records Review Board') book 'Inside The ARRB.

Moreover, the HSCA determined through the Dictabelt acoustical evidence that AT LEAST ONE SHOT WAS FIRED FROM THE FRONT OF THE JFK MOTORCADE. However, the HSCA also determined that the shot did not hit the president. This is the basis for their argument that JFK's assassination "was probably" the result of a "conspiracy."
Misha
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 19 Aug 2012, 03:42

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby ProfWag » 23 Aug 2012, 01:49

Misha wrote:HSCA Final Assassinations Report:

Chapter 1, Item C:

"The committee believes on the basis of the evidence available to it, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy."

Now if you want to learn more on what "evidence" was not put forth by HSCA, please read Doug Horne's (military analyst for the 'Assassinations Records Review Board') book 'Inside The ARRB.

Moreover, the HSCA determined through the Dictabelt acoustical evidence that AT LEAST ONE SHOT WAS FIRED FROM THE FRONT OF THE JFK MOTORCADE. However, the HSCA also determined that the shot did not hit the president. This is the basis for their argument that JFK's assassination "was probably" the result of a "conspiracy."

Thank you for that and yes, I'm well aware of that report. I also know that there is forensic evidence that that the Select Committee did not have at the time that essentially shows their Dictabelt evidence inaccurate, but we don't have to discuss that unless you want to.
Soooooo, here's what I DO want to discuss...
You are submitting the House Select Committee on Assassination Report that states it "probably" was a conspiracy, but that Oswald's shots were the ones that "succeeded" if you will. However, that's not what Mr. Marrs is saying which contradicts the Select Committee's report. So, what splecifically do you believe? That Oswald assassinated President Kennedy; that Oswald had nothing to do with the assassination; that he did, but another person shot and killed him also; that the HSCA is correct; or something else? I think the most important question here is that since you submitted the report from the House Select Committee as evidence, then you must agree with it in its entirety, or did you pick and choose from the report to fit your belief?
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Misha » 23 Aug 2012, 04:43

Hi ProfWag,

I submit that the House Select Committee on Assassinations engaged its final report as a "limited hangout" and covered up, obscured, and out right hid from the American people the true nature of the assassination. In effect, what was not reported to the American people and was classified until the year 2029 came out with the collation of papers from the government, intelligence, military, FBI, Secret Service (Destroyed Kennedy's SS detail for the months leading up to the assassination) and others as to the contextual nature of the assassination. These very pertinent items which have been kept secret were discovered by the ARRB. This is why the HSCA was compelled, at the very least, to admit that the assassination of JFK was "probably" the result of a conspiracy. Now either the assassination was a conspiracy or not. There can be no grey area here. So when the HSCA ruled "probably" it can only mean that they withheld testimonies and evidence which the American public is unaware. But wait, you and the folks in this forum can learn some of those "items" withheld.

Again, please read Douglas P. Horne's books (5 Volumes, 1808 pages) - "Inside the ARRB."
Misha
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 19 Aug 2012, 03:42

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby ProfWag » 23 Aug 2012, 04:59

Misha wrote:

Again, please read Douglas P. Horne's books (5 Volumes, 1808 pages) - "Inside the ARRB."

And again, thank you for the reference. I'm simply not going to spend over $100 to read 1800 pages of something that obviously hasn't blown the case wide open. I will say that you are beginning to sound as if you are Mr. Horne yourself and trying to sell a book.
Having said that, if you have the books with you, how about sharing one of the more relevant points in the books that you believe might be the smoking gun that Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone and let's discuss it. I would really, really enjoy that and perhaps some of the readers/lurkers may learn something along the line as well.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Misha » 23 Aug 2012, 05:27

To understand Oswald one must not look ONLY at Oswald. Oswald can only be understood in the total context and dynamics within the assassination. As for relevant points in Horne's book there are many. More importantly, I truly believe that to pick out some of Horne's salient points would only get this forum bogged down in a quagmire of other researchers' memes and chronological difficulties with the evolution of research on this subject. You and the folks on this forum can cut to the chase and see what the ARRB has found. ProfWag, I promise it will be the best 100 dollars you will spend on the assassination of JFK.

No, I am not Doug Horne. I'm just a student of history who would like you guys to discover what I have found. Get the books, guys. I promise Doug Horne will not waste your time.
Misha
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 19 Aug 2012, 03:42

PreviousNext

Return to Conspiracies / Cover Ups

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest