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

JFK 50TH Anniversary

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 50TH Anniversary

Postby ProfWag » 02 Jun 2014, 17:49

Misha wrote:Yes, Syd, nothing wrong with that whatsoever. The evidence and preponderance of evidence when it comes to any event, whether it is a conspiracy or not, has to be weighed. However, when ProfWag takes a supercilious position by saying "not everything is a conspiracy and none of us should believe everything we read" is insulting to those members who have looked hard at the data. Yes, ProWag did say "us", but really I have to ask what is he really projecting? Statements like this tells more about the mindset of someone who has not evolved in critical thinking and exudes myopia. Moreover, do we really have to read such an innocuous statement as if it is some revelation which only third graders should hear? Frankly, I am way past that and I think you are too.

Okay, so you've looked hard at the data. A lot of us have spent a lot of time looking at a lot of data. We still need to consider the credibility of the source--and that goes for all of us so don't take that personally. Not only is there misinformation on conspiracy themed sites and books, but in those sites and books that support a lone gunman. We ALL have to be careful and weigh the evidence, wherever that may lead us.
I still want to know what your or Syd's data say about the length of time that LHO would have had from the first to the 3rd bullet? (Though if the first one missed, then we're really only talking about the 2nd and 3rd.) It's really the first hurdle to get over IMHO. If he couldn't have fired the shots, then there's a conspiracy. If he could have, then we must move on to the next subject.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54






Re: JFK 50TH Anniversary

Postby SydneyPSIder » 02 Jun 2014, 21:14

ProfWag wrote:
Misha wrote:Yes, Syd, nothing wrong with that whatsoever. The evidence and preponderance of evidence when it comes to any event, whether it is a conspiracy or not, has to be weighed. However, when ProfWag takes a supercilious position by saying "not everything is a conspiracy and none of us should believe everything we read" is insulting to those members who have looked hard at the data. Yes, ProWag did say "us", but really I have to ask what is he really projecting? Statements like this tells more about the mindset of someone who has not evolved in critical thinking and exudes myopia. Moreover, do we really have to read such an innocuous statement as if it is some revelation which only third graders should hear? Frankly, I am way past that and I think you are too.

Okay, so you've looked hard at the data. A lot of us have spent a lot of time looking at a lot of data. We still need to consider the credibility of the source--and that goes for all of us so don't take that personally. Not only is there misinformation on conspiracy themed sites and books, but in those sites and books that support a lone gunman. We ALL have to be careful and weigh the evidence, wherever that may lead us.
I still want to know what your or Syd's data say about the length of time that LHO would have had from the first to the 3rd bullet? (Though if the first one missed, then we're really only talking about the 2nd and 3rd.) It's really the first hurdle to get over IMHO. If he couldn't have fired the shots, then there's a conspiracy. If he could have, then we must move on to the next subject.

Well, no, you wouldn't move on to the next subject, because possessing the ability to fire at least 2 accurate shots in a few seconds does not make him guilty. It's more of an irrelevancy, but if of course it was proven to be absolutely impossible, then I suppose you could say he couldn't have done it. It was and is held to be highly unlikely for a large number of reasons, to do with the difficult action of that make of gun, that particular gun having a number of problems, no convincing evidence that LHO had done any rifle shooting since leaving the Marines (although the FBI managed to get his wife to change her testimony after months of coaching, threats and inducements), and still more evidence suggesting that the Carcano gun in question had not been fired for a long time. Further, no fingerprints of LHO were found anywhere else in the room, except one palm print on the gun which could have been planted after his death, and there were several suspicious and furtive visits to his corpse over a couple of days by 'officials'. Further, a Mauser was also found hidden away on the same floor by one police officer, making one wonder which rifle was fired from the 6th floor and by whom. The policeman who testified to the existence and sighting of the Mauser by a number of Dallas PD police officers present was hounded out of his job and eventually apparently murdered in the early 70s for refusing to change his story to remove the presence of the Mauser, unlike his colleagues. There were a number of other suspicious deaths concerning people suspected to have been somehow involved in the assassination over time, going against all the epidemiological odds on both the numbers and their manner of dying. The actions of the cover-up itself by police, FBI, and the Warren Commission make the whole thing very suspect.

But of course the rust found on the firing pin, in the barrel and in entire mechanism suggested that the rifle in question had not been fired for a very long time. A single shot through that rifle would have been enough to remove barrel rust and knock the rust off the firing pin, according to experts, and that had not happened. Further, testers were worried about breaking the firing pin in testing, suggesting it had rusted to the point where it may no longer function at all.

So whether or not LHO could get 2 accurate shots and a miss off in 6 or 9 seconds on the day is just once highly circumstantial factor amidst a host of other more convincing factors pointing to other people. It is far more circumstantial and indirect in nature than the physical rust demonstrably found on the weapon, for instance, and no-one can place LHO on the 6th floor, or really associate him with the Carcano, given that he is shown holding a different rifle in earlier pictures on inspection. There is even a question over whether those photos in turn were faked, meaning not only was it a different rifle, but it was a different person! The fact of LHO holding up a newspaper at the same time is also deeply suspicious as already discussed -- why do that unless someone asked you to with the intention of setting you up as a patsy. Then there is the question of the presence of a Mauser on the same floor which seems to have disappeared and was never examined for suspicious fingerprints. For instance, the fingerprints of one Mac Wallace, LBJ's known hitman, who left a fingerprint on a box in the so-called sniper's nest. So why would you 'move on to another subject' with those pieces of evidence and signs of an official cover-up?

I intend to write further responses to the previous remarks when I have more time, as most of the rebuttals being made don't hold any water, similarly to the claim that if LHO 'could' have made 2-3 accurate shots in a few seconds then he must automatically be guilty of murdering someone. Further, even if LHO HAD been up there and pulled the trigger -- and there is absolutely NO convincing evidence whatsoever that he was, and quite a lot of convincing evidence placing him elsewhere at the time -- how would that preclude a conspiracy by a number of people to shoot the President? There is also absolutely no evidence connecting LHO with a shot fired at General Walker, and a good deal of evidence suggesting otherwise, especially that a very high powered weapon appeared to be involved in Walker's case with a different gauge ammunition that passed through a brick wall, something the Carcano was incapable of. There is a suggestion that again LHO was framed in the presentation and fabrication of evidence including switching bullets and faking some results, as already cited above. The more evidence that is faked against LHO, the more you might have to start assuming that government officials were somehow involved in the operation to remove JFK, or at the very least decided to fake evidence against an innocent party in order to close the case rather than pursue far more likely suspects. It is, of course, never right to fake evidence to obtain a conviction or finger a suspect, for obvious reasons -- if you are absolutely sure that John Doe did something, then you must have enough substantial evidence somewhere to prove it, without having to fake more.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: JFK 50TH Anniversary

Postby Scepcop » 27 Jul 2014, 13:24

Check out this new documentary called "Agent Oswald: The CIA Patsy". It was made by the Dark Journalist and is very good. It features many clips from people who knew Oswald and from government insiders and assassination researchers, which attest to Oswald being a CIA agent framed for the murder of President Kennedy. The last part about Oswald's body after it was exhumed years later and what his mortician Paul Groody discovered about it, will run a chill up your spine!



Have any of you listened to the full one hour radio interview with Lee Harvey Oswald from August, 1963, after he was arrested for getting into a fight while distributing flyers for the "Fair Play For Cuba Committee"?

I just listened to it. It's very interesting. Oswald comes across as very intelligent and level headed. It's very interesting to hear him and get a sense of his personality. He was very articulate and good with words for a 24 year old. He makes a lot of sense too, and doesn't sound like a lone nut who is violent and unstable, as the government claims. (But then again, Mark David Chapman, the assassin who killed John Lennon, also sounded very sane and rational in his interviews as well) Listen to it and let me know what you think. There are two interviews of Oswald. The first one is 40 min and the second one is 20 min. Here is the link:

“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: JFK 50TH Anniversary

Postby SydneyPSIder » 27 Jul 2014, 15:46

I think I posted those two earlier, Winston! anyhow... I agree with what you say in exactly the same vein. He had most likely been sheep-dipped and filmed as a communist sympathiser in the little film he made. similarly with sending pics of himself to the paper supposedly holding guns and a current newspaper. I think he was a bit stupid too, tho, he should have realised he was being used as a patsy when asked to do those things -- but he thought he was forging a post-Marines career as some sort of CIA spook, and just did as he was told. he probably had no idea about the complete lack of loyalty and the expediency of his masters. even james files had CIA contracts out on his life in the end, and numerous other people associated with the op were murdered soon afterwards.

I agree also about the Mark Chapman/John Lennon thing, there are some who say Chapman was some sort of set-up to silence Lennon and the peace movement also, in a period of organised assassinations designed to look like a string of crazed lone gunmen. Funnily enough that sort of thing seems to have mostly stopped now, even as more Americans are more crazily armed than ever! Which observation also tends to lend weight to the notion that they were planned by a central group -- they kind of thrashed that 'lone gunman' MO to death for a while -- but maybe they even eventually had some ethical qualms about using that method over and over -- but then again, they expediently set up 9/11 and went to a great deal of trouble there, so forget the ethics about individual lives. I do wonder about Chapman and his current intelligence and lucidity though. I also sometimes wonder if jailed 'patsies' are actually in jail or just wheeled in and then let out the back door later to their quiet freedom, but that might be a suspicion too far.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: JFK 50TH Anniversary

Postby Scepcop » 28 Jul 2014, 04:32

SydneyPSIder,
Yeah I agree. Some of these patsies like Chapman could just be actors and not really even in jail. Whenever you see him, he doesn't look like he's suffering in any way. Maybe Charles Manson isn't really in jail either. lol

Yeah they no longer use lone nut patsies to take out people anymore. Maybe they don't have to because they have more sophisticated ways of killing people now. Many Hollywood celebrities seem to die in Illuminati occult sacrifices, such as Heath Ledger for instance.

Or, perhaps they don't need to because their mind control techniques and mass pacification methods, are good enough now to the point where they no longer fear dissent or revolution. You see, people nowadays are too self-absorbed and live on their own iphones and smart phones. So they are easily pacified. Thus, the government no longer worries about revolutions anymore, because people are too self-absorbed and selfish to go out and start revolutions. Also, the GMO foods, vaccines, fluoride water, etc. all serve to keep people dumbed down, zombie-like, weak and passive too. They have so many ways to keep people passive and pre-occupied now.

I think this is why they now allow people like Alex Jones and David Icke to talk publicly all they want. People are too dumbed down, segregated and living in fear to be a threat. Long ago, the ruling elite would not have allowed people like Alex Jones and David Icke to speak publicly. But now, with the population zombied out, they no longer care and no longer fear mass revolution. Their mind control techniques are so sophisticated that they no longer fear revolutionaries. They probably figure that zombie-fying the population is a lot better than constantly having to silence every public figure who becomes a threat to them with a lone nut patsy.

Did you listen to the Oswald interview above? What did you think of it? Doesn't he sound like a sane level-headed person?

Speaking of Oswald, there are so many unanswered questions and mysteries about him that no one can figure out. So let's think outside the box for a moment.

What if Oswald was just an actor too? Maybe Oswald's assassination was staged too? Did you see the video clip of Oswald's assassination? I've seen it many times and something about it seems staged. How is it that immediately after Oswald's assassination, an ambulance pulls up as though it were waiting to pick Oswald up? The whole scene seems staged and rehearsed somehow. I can't prove it. It's just a feeling.

Also, when Ruby shoots Oswald, you do not see any smoke from his gun, nor any blood on Oswald, which is very strange. Watch the clip again and see what I mean.

Furthermore, there were many people impersonating Oswald, so we can't even be sure what happened to the original Oswald, or if the one on TV was even the real Oswald. Or if Oswald is just a fictional creation with actors.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: JFK 50TH Anniversary

Postby SydneyPSIder » 28 Jul 2014, 06:47

The notion of Oswald faking his death is a novel one, and even quite possible and achievable! I believe they exhumed his corpse due to such an enquiry many years later, I'm a bit sketchy on the details now. They'd probably retire him to South America somewhere and give him plastic surgery or some other such fantastical thing I suppose. Or maybe, more probably, they just killed him and had the ambulance waiting nearby because they knew it was going to happen AND possibly bump him off in the ambulance too to make sure if necessary -- much as seemed to happen to Lady Di. I mean, they killed their own president here and needed to cover it up, it's not something where you want to get found out. Remember Jack Ruby ended up in jail and died of cancer, unless that was another situation where he was released -- which would require more plastic surgery or living in isolation somewhere. I suspect they just threw those guys under a bus, they certainly killed a few others at the same time who knew something, and didn't spare their prime assassin either. These scenarios of faked deaths are Marvel and DC comics material...
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: JFK 50TH Anniversary

Postby SydneyPSIder » 05 Aug 2014, 19:16

hmm, some further evidence and ideas have come to light. I wasn't aware (or have been reminded again) of then Texas Governor John Connally's links to LBJ, once upon a time his campaign manager and electoral consultant, who almost brazenly rigged the vote on LBJ's behalf in the 1948 Democratic Senate primary.

The most famous person caught tampering with paper ballots was President
Lyndon Johnson, who defeated the popular former Texas governor
Coke Stevenson in the 1948 Democratic Senate primary. Johnson trailed
Stevenson by 854 votes after the polls closed, but new ballots kept appearing.
Various witnesses describe watching men altering the voter rolls
and burning the ballots. Finally, when 202 new votes showed up (cast
in alphabetical order), Johnson gained an 87-vote margin and was declared
the winner.

LBJ’s campaign manager at the time, John Connally, was publicly
linked to the report of the suspicious and late 202 votes in Box 13 from
Jim Wells County. Connally denied any tie to vote fraud. 5

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/bbv_chapter-4.pdf

There are even theories that Connally fired one of the lethal shots! And may not have been wounded by any external shots but was faking it. Then again, maybe he was wounded and was (unwisely) willing to trust the marksmen who had been selected for the assassination.

It is important to note that Connally ran and won every single Johnson campaign for over 20 years, and both had never lost an election until the primary against Kennedy.

Johnson was the most powerful person in the Democratic party, and Kennedy was practically forced to appoint Johnson to VP to ensure support from the Democratic party, no doubt with some incredibly direct pressure from Johnson.

At that time, Texas oil men had over half a century of formidable influence on American politics.

It's also important to note that Connally was an Admiral in the Navy [actually discharged as a Lieutenant-Commander, later Secretary of the Navy], a constant gun-toting Texan, an avid gun collector, and a master ambidextrous marksman.

Connally despised Kennedy so much that he abruptly and angrily quit the Secretary of the Navy position that Kennedy had appointed him to.

Just watch Connally's first and only interview in the hospital following the "Big Event". Connally was neither distraught nor bereaved when discussing Kennedy's assassination. In fact, he looked a bit elated.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/scott-ri ... 7150435762

There are a lot of links on that Facebook page to further analysis and information. I'm not saying Connally was somehow quietly packing heat and shot JFK inside the car, as there are lots of reasons you couldn't pull that off -- mainly being witnesses inside and outside the car as events unfolded in an unpredictable and visible way. I find it implausible, as it's too hard to disguise or believe you can disguise such an action in planning, and it is more likely just a coincidence in trajectory of bullets. However, Connally was certainly no friend of JFK's, as noted above. The overarching MO was to lure Kennedy to Texas where the Texas oilmen could deal with him on their own turf, including aiding and abetting their political tame jackals Connally and LBJ, who played the innocents throughout. Further, this is not a prelude to a host of other 'theories' suggesting it was the limo driver, it was the Secret Service guy in the car travelling behind accidentally discharging his weapon, etc. I would simply look closely at whether Connally was really injured the way it has been said, or whether he was the kind of 'false patsy' who had faked injuries to draw potential blame away from the LBJ team. He's undoubtedly a sleazy and theatrical SOB, which kind of goes with that territory, and doesn't look too unwell at all in his hospital interview after supposedly taking one or two serious shots to the body. Reading the body language of LBJ and Connally in various interviews, they look very suspicious and have the standard 'tells' of deception, even for smug psychopaths -- it can be difficult to distinguish between people who look distressed or are choosing their words carefully and people who are covering up inside knowledge and guilt -- but LBJ closes his eyes and looks away in his Walter Cronkite interview where he alleges slowly and in stumbling words that he's not sure if 'international forces weren't involved' in JFK's death in a way that suggests deception, even for a skilled dissembler.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: JFK 50TH Anniversary

Postby ProfWag » 07 Aug 2014, 19:39

Do you guys ever go back and re-read what you wrote with a critical mind? Sometimes the theories you come up with just really crack me up.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: JFK 50TH Anniversary

Postby SydneyPSIder » 07 Aug 2014, 20:34

http://rense.com/general70/connol.htm

Connally Admitted Supporting JFK Coverup
Is Deception The Best Way To Serve One's Country?

By Doug Thompson
Capitol Hill Blue
3-29-6

The handwritten note lay in the bottom drawer of my old rolltop desk, one I bought for $50 in a junk store in Richmond, VA, 39 years ago. "Dear Doug & Amy," it read. "Thanks for dinner and for listening." The signature was a bold "John" and the letterhead on the note simply said "John B. Connally" and was dated July 14, 1982. I met John Connally on a TWA flight from Kansas City to Albuquerque earlier that year. The former governor of Texas, the man who took one of the bullets from the assassination that killed President John F. Kenney, was headed to Santa Fe to buy a house. The meeting wasn't an accident. The flight originated in Washington and I sat in the front row of the economy cabin. During a stop in Kansas City, I saw Connally get on the plane and settle into a first class seat so I walked off the plane and upgraded to a first class seat right ahead of the governor. I not only wanted to meet the man who was with Kennedy on that day in Dallas in 1963 but, as the communications director for the re-election campaign of Congressman Manuel Lujan of New Mexico, I thought he might be willing to help out on what was a tough campaign. When the plane was in the air, I introduced myself and said I was working on Lujan's campaign. Connally's face lit up and he invited me to move to the empty seat next to him. "How is Manuel? Is there anything I can do to help?" By the time we landed in Albuquerque, Connally had agreed to do a fundraiser for Lujan. A month later, he flew back into New Mexico where Amy and I picked him up for the fundraiser. Afterwards, we took him to dinner. Connally was both gracious and charming and told us many stories about Texas politics. As the evening wore on and the multiple bourbon and branch waters took their effect, he started talking about November 22, 1963, in Dallas. "You know I was one of the ones who advised Kennedy to stay away from Texas," Connally said. "Lyndon (Johnson) was being a real asshole about the whole thing and insisted." Connally's mood darkened as he talked about Dallas. When the bullet hit him, he said he felt like he had been kicked in the ribs and couldn't breathe. He spoke kindly of Jackie Kennedy and said he admired both her bravery and composure. I had to ask. Did he think Lee Harvey Oswald fired the gun that killed Kennedy? "Absolutely not," Connally said. "I do not, for one second, believe the conclusions of the Warren Commission." So why not speak out? "Because I love this country and we needed closure at the time. I will never speak out publicly about what I believe." We took him back to catch a late flight to Texas. He shook my hand, kissed Amy on the cheek and walked up the ramp to the plane. We saw Connally and his wife a couple of more times when they came to New Mexico but he sold his house a few years later as part of a bankruptcy settlement. He died in 1993 and, I believe, never spoke publicly about how he doubted the findings of the Warren Commission. Connnally's note serves as yet another reminder that in our Democratic Republic, or what's left of it, few things are seldom as they seem. Like him, I never accepted the findings of the Warren Commission. Too many illogical conclusions. John Kennedy's death, and the doubts that surround it to this day, marked the beginning of the end of America's idealism. The cynicism grew with the lies of Vietnam and the senseless deaths of too many thousands of young Americans in a war that never should have been fought. Doubts about the integrity of those we elect as our leaders festers today as this country finds itself embroiled in another senseless war based on too many lies. John Connally felt he served his country best by concealing his doubts about the Warren Commission's whitewash but his silence may have contributed to the growing perception that our elected leaders can rewrite history to fit their political agendas. Had Connally spoken out, as a high-ranking political figure with doubts about the "official" version of what happened, it might have sent a signal that Americans deserve the truth from their government, even when that truth hurts.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: JFK 50TH Anniversary

Postby SydneyPSIder » 10 Aug 2014, 12:52

ProfWag wrote:Do you guys ever go back and re-read what you wrote with a critical mind? Sometimes the theories you come up with just really crack me up.

To enter this forensic study with an appropriately scientific open mind requires ruling nothing in or out until overwhelming evidence suggests it or rejects it. This is the basis that the Dallas PD, the FBI and the Warren Commission should also have operated under, but did not. The true scientific sceptics here have done this so far, disproving your allegations about the exact gun used and the fact that guns give off smoke when fired, that the gun claimed to have been used would not have fired at all or would have fired very inaccurately if it did not fail outright but in fact showed signs that it had not been fired for months, that secret servicemen unexpectedly stood down around the President making him an easy target from all directions, that there were many other anomalies in the planning that day, that certain other people stood to gain handsomely from JFK's death and therefore must be suspect, that it is unlikely LHO was on the sixth floor of the TSBD at the time of the assassination, that nonetheless he believed he was an important CIA operative and had been recruited as such, and we have even seen evidence that a different rifle, a Mauser, was discovered on the sixth floor of the TSBD and then disposed of, and that a known assassin's fingerprint was found on one of the boxes in the so-called 'sniper's nest'. An assassin known well to LBJ. And that people associated and investigated with the events of that day died in ways and in numbers that are statistically anomalous with the general population.

Not ruling anything in or out until good evidence can be obtained or a strong likelihood can be ascertained allows for good hypothesis forming, rather than being the subject of convenient ridicule by people with something to hide. Accusations have been made variously about the car's driver, Texas Governor John Connally and a secret serviceman in the car behind, but none of these seem to hold much water in the face of all the evidence and the impracticality of using assassins in JFK's car, and evidence showing shots from other directions in the case of the secret serviceman. LBJ remains a prime suspect in organising the assassination, John Connally used to work for him as campaign manager, it is worth investigating the link.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: JFK 50TH Anniversary

Postby Scepcop » 16 Aug 2014, 00:14

SydneyPSIder wrote:There are even theories that Connally fired one of the lethal shots! And may not have been wounded by any external shots but was faking it. Then again, maybe he was wounded and was (unwisely) willing to trust the marksmen who had been selected for the assassination.


There are a number of problems with that theory:

1. A gun fired inside the limo would have been heard by everyone inside it.
2. Most people in Dealey Plaza heard shots from the grassy knoll. Some witnesses saw people behind the white picket fence at the grassy knoll too, and saw them running away from it as well.
3. A man in front of another man would have trouble shooting him in the side of the head. The angle would make it difficult.
4. If Governor Connally was in on it, he certainly would not have been willing to sit in front of Kennedy, knowing that multiple shooters would be firing at him. Would you?
5. Governor Connally said he didn't believe in the single bullet theory of the Warren Commission and that the bullet that hit him, did not hit JFK. If he were part of the conspiracy, he would have corroborated with the cover up and supported anything the Warren Commission said.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: JFK 50TH Anniversary

Postby Scepcop » 16 Aug 2014, 01:11

Check out this taped phone conversation between LBJ and Hoover about Oswald and the JFK Assassination. What do you think? Why was this taped? Notice in it, that Hoover said that JFK was the one who asked for the limo top to be removed and that Presidential limos ought to be bullet proof.

“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: JFK 50TH Anniversary

Postby SydneyPSIder » 16 Aug 2014, 20:59

Scepcop wrote:
SydneyPSIder wrote:There are even theories that Connally fired one of the lethal shots! And may not have been wounded by any external shots but was faking it. Then again, maybe he was wounded and was (unwisely) willing to trust the marksmen who had been selected for the assassination.


There are a number of problems with that theory:

1. A gun fired inside the limo would have been heard by everyone inside it.
2. Most people in Dealey Plaza heard shots from the grassy knoll. Some witnesses saw people behind the white picket fence at the grassy knoll too, and saw them running away from it as well.
3. A man in front of another man would have trouble shooting him in the side of the head. The angle would make it difficult.
4. If Governor Connally was in on it, he certainly would not have been willing to sit in front of Kennedy, knowing that multiple shooters would be firing at him. Would you?
5. Governor Connally said he didn't believe in the single bullet theory of the Warren Commission and that the bullet that hit him, did not hit JFK. If he were part of the conspiracy, he would have corroborated with the cover up and supported anything the Warren Commission said.

Yes, all good points. The thing couldn't have had a silencer, it would be even larger lol. I think it would just be incredibly risky and foolhardy to attempt such a thing. There are other competing 'claims' that it was the driver (same problems) or an accidental discharge by a secret service agent behind them. These could possibly be used as smokescreens to provide FUD by some. It's good to do it to death and check it out for plausibility though. According to the article found at random by someone claiming to have sat on a plane with Connally, Connally claimed that LBJ kept pressing JFK to make the trip.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: JFK 50TH Anniversary

Postby Scepcop » 23 Aug 2014, 20:49

There are some things I don't get about the JFK assassination plot. I was wondering if anyone could answer them.

Many conspiracy researchers claim that Governor Connally must have been in on the JFK assassination conspiracy. But if that's so, then how do you explain the following?

1. If Connally knew that JFK was going to be assassinated in Dallas that day, why would he sit right in front of him? No one would sit anywhere near a man whom he knew would be shot at from multiple angles. Would you?

2. In several interviews, Connally said that the bullet that hit him was NOT the same one that hit Kennedy. In doing so, he contradicted the single bullet theory and the Warren Report. Why would he do that if he was in on the plot? Shouldn't he have said something that would support the single bullet theory?

Also, there seems to be some plotholes in the assassination plan that I don't understand:

1. Why would the conspirators frame Oswald with a cheap rifle that was used in the 1940's and outdated by 20 years? Why didn't they frame him with a more modern and higher quality rifle to make his alleged shooting more plausible?

2. How did the conspirators know that JFK would ask the limo top to be removed that day? Hoover said that JFK was the one who wanted the limo top removed. Is that true? If so, how did they know that he would do that? What if JFK had asked the limo top to be put over the limo? What would the conspirators have done then?

3. Why did LBJ say before he died that he was not sure that the Warren Commission got it right? If he was one of the masterminds behind it, why would he have doubts about the lone gunman theory? Why did he say that?

4. Also, listen to this 20 min conversation between LBJ and Hoover. They are talking about Oswald and his guilt. If they are both conspirators and part of the plot, and therefore know the truth, why would they be talking on the phone like this? And why was it taped? What was the purpose of the conversation?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-1E7pivtss

Does anyone know the answers to these?

Thanks.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: JFK 50TH Anniversary

Postby SydneyPSIder » 25 Aug 2014, 22:20

Scepcop wrote:There are some things I don't get about the JFK assassination plot. I was wondering if anyone could answer them.

Many conspiracy researchers claim that Governor Connally must have been in on the JFK assassination conspiracy. But if that's so, then how do you explain the following?

1. If Connally knew that JFK was going to be assassinated in Dallas that day, why would he sit right in front of him? No one would sit anywhere near a man whom he knew would be shot at from multiple angles. Would you?

2. In several interviews, Connally said that the bullet that hit him was NOT the same one that hit Kennedy. In doing so, he contradicted the single bullet theory and the Warren Report. Why would he do that if he was in on the plot? Shouldn't he have said something that would support the single bullet theory?


It appears highly unlikely the Connally was in on it, in that case.

Also, there seems to be some plotholes in the assassination plan that I don't understand:

1. Why would the conspirators frame Oswald with a cheap rifle that was used in the 1940's and outdated by 20 years? Why didn't they frame him with a more modern and higher quality rifle to make his alleged shooting more plausible?

2. How did the conspirators know that JFK would ask the limo top to be removed that day? Hoover said that JFK was the one who wanted the limo top removed. Is that true? If so, how did they know that he would do that? What if JFK had asked the limo top to be put over the limo? What would the conspirators have done then?

3. Why did LBJ say before he died that he was not sure that the Warren Commission got it right? If he was one of the masterminds behind it, why would he have doubts about the lone gunman theory? Why did he say that?

4. Also, listen to this 20 min conversation between LBJ and Hoover. They are talking about Oswald and his guilt. If they are both conspirators and part of the plot, and therefore know the truth, why would they be talking on the phone like this? And why was it taped? What was the purpose of the conversation?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-1E7pivtss

Does anyone know the answers to these?

Thanks.

1. I don't know, because the quality and condition of the Mannlicher-Carrcano was enough to disprove LHO as the shooter. Apparently a Mauser was also on the 6th floor and surreptitiously removed and suppressed in the evidence, according to one honest police witness, who was later killed. Maybe they just didn't think it through, they just needed a cheap 'throw down' rifle and went out and got one. They used to sell them for $20 in stands. Perhaps they wanted to make LHO look like an enthusiastic amateur, a better gun might attract suspicion about where he got it, where he was trained, and if others were involved. It was not the same as the rifles sold on mail order that LHO supposedly purchased, they were 36" and the one discovered was 40", which was NOT for sale in the mail order catalogue with a scope fitted. Nor was the rifle the one LHO was photographed holding at an earlier date.

2. I doubt JFK made that request. It's possible someone gave him the idea, i.e. strongly encouraged him to request it and weaselled him into doing it 'for the people of Dallas' who supposedly hated JFK and needed some convincing. (Or perhaps it was more big business and big oil in Texas who hated him.) Clearly all the arrangements would not have worked. I have heard there were 3 possible locations where they would try to assassinate him on his arrival -- at the airport, on the motorcade at Dealey Plaza, and at the talk he was due to give after the motorcade, where the venue had been changed suddenly. He would have been an easier target clearly at the airport or at the talk if the roof was on the limo. It would have been similar to the Bobby Kennedy assassination if at the talk.

3. LBJ said it as a smokescreen. He was a sly old fox. Just said things to try to put people off the scent -- made it look as though he too had doubts about who might have been involved, which made him look like he was uninvolved and had his doubts just like everyone else -- it was anyone but him, e.g. Cubans or some such. 'He who excuses, accuses', or 'methinks he doth protest too much'.

4. Don't know. Needs more historical research. I note they included Allen Dulles in the shortlist, JFK's bitterest enemy and recent sackee, who was of course on the Warren Commission.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

PreviousNext

Return to Conspiracies / Cover Ups

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests