JFK Assassination Conspiracy

[Scepcop]

Check out Sirhan Sirhan's lawyer Larry Teeter presenting overwhelming evidence of a conspiracy in the RFK assassination beyond all doubt. He describes how the LAPD deliberately covered up the RFK assassination. Why would the LAPD do that? How do you get an entire police department to cover up a murder of someone so likable as RFK? It's very informative and he also explains how and why governments use lone nut assassins to take out people that threaten their corrupt interests.

[ProfWag]

Winston, is it your belief that Oliver Stone's film, JFK, is historical fact?

[Scepcop]

[Scepcop]

Btw, you can get the director's cut of Oliver Stone's JFK on Amazon.com starting at $2 and up for used copies. It's a historical masterpiece - well researched, documented, eloquent, powerful and moving. It's a film you will never forget. If any of you are interested in history, truth, conspiracies, and how things really work behind the scenes in Washington, I strongly recommend you get a copy. I just saw it and was totally blown away. It will leave you in tears and anger, but you will glad that someone exposed the truth at least. Used copies on Amazon start at $2 and up.

http://www.amazon.com/JFK-Special-Editi ... 606&sr=8-3

You can also get the Ultimate Collector's Edition for $11 at:

http://www.amazon.com/Ultimate-Collecto ... 606&sr=8-4

It includes the following:

Two-disc special edition DVD, including:
-Director's cut of the movie
-Commentary by director/co-writer Oliver Stone
-Documentary: Beyond JFK: The Question of Conspiracy
-Deleted/extended scenes with optional commentary by Stone
-Multimedia essays
-Production notes
-Theatrical trailer
-DVD-ROM: essays and articles on the JFK assassination and the films of Oliver Stone
44-page book of rare behind-the-scenes production photos
Set of six character photo cards with the stars and bios of the real people they portray
Five reproduction letters written by or to John F. Kennedy plus his historic inauguration address
Bonus DVD: "The Kennedys: America's Emerald Kings" (2008)

You can also read nearly 400 raving reviews and praises of the film at either of the links above.

"Kings are killed, Mr. Garrison, politics is power..." - Mr. X to Jim Garrison in JFK.

[ProfWag]

Winston, for you to think that JFK is “mostly accurate” is a testament to your lack of independent and unbiased research. JFK is not historically factual. There are many, many inaccuracies, incomplete story lines, and other mis-guidings throughout the film. The Director was unhappy about the “myths” he speculates came out from the Warren Commission Report and he set out to provide “counter myths.”

In his own words, Oliver Stone says the following: “What I've tried to do with this movie is to open a stall in that marketplace of ideas and offer a version of what might have happened as against the competing versions of what we know did not happen and some other possible versions as well.” http://www.prouty.org/stone/stone_x.htm

For the record, I do not believe the Warren Commission was without errors. I also believe that “JFK” was a wonderful film and one of the best films of the 1990’s. The Director set out to make people think about alternate versions of historical facts and he did a brilliant job of that. The difference between you and I, Winston, is that I don’t take the movie as historical fact. As such, your critique in Amazon of Posner’s book is quite comical as you use JFK as a basis for Posner’s inaccuracies while you assert that the movie was accurate when, in reality, it is not and you show no attempt in your critique to pinpoint the movies facts and “not-so-factuals.”

Finally, thank you for Mr. Teeter's information, however, I am quite able to do my own research across the spectrum of theories and facts and can draw my own conclusion based on reliable information. I don't need to watch anyone do that for me.

[Scepcop]

I'm sorry ProfWag, but the best JFK assassination researchers, such as Robert Groden, Gary Mack, Jim Marrs, and others, say the film is MOSTLY ACCURATE. They've researched this topic for decades and are in a better position to know what's accurate and what isn't than you are.

Even if only 10 percent of the film was accurate, the conspiracy would still be proven.

The reason you think it's inaccurate is due to a disinfo campaign put out by the mainstream media. Oliver Stone was probably forced to say that in order that he be allowed to make more movies.

All you do is deny and ridicule. This conspiracy was proven long ago in the 60's to a 100 percent certainty, many times over. The entire American public knows that the government lied and covered up this conspiracy. That's why they lost faith and trust in the government after that. It was a major turning point for good reason.

After watching some disturbing but revealing films about the JFK assassination, such as:

- Evidence of Revision (10 hour documentary on YouTube)
- The Men Who Killed Kennedy (9 episode History Channel series, available on YouTube)
- Oliver Stone's JFK (1991)

It is very clear and obvious that during the cover up of the JFK assassination, various departments were involved, FBI, CIA, police department, military, secret service, etc. as well as the major media networks. How can that be? How can so many departments and agencies and major media all collaborate in a cover up? That's pretty disturbing when you think about it. Yet it definitely seems to be true.

How can the mainstream media constantly deny the existence of a conspiracy in the JFK assassination, and continually preach the lone nut fictional theory, when all evidence points to a conspiracy, which has been conclusively proven to a 100 percent certainty? Does the major media know that they are involved in fraud and cover up?

Now the question is, doesn't this indicate that every organization and department in America is infiltrated at the top by some kind of control network? If so, does this prove the existence of some Illuminati-like group that is in control of everything, at least in the Western world? If so, does this mean that the Illuminati, or some shadow organization like it, exists after all and is pulling the strings of seemingly separate organizations?

What do you think?

[Scepcop]

This is supposed to be the best documentary series on the JFK assassination. It's called "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" and consists of 9 episodes shown on the History Channel. It is very informative and features tons of witnesses, experts, whistleblowers, scientific and forensic evidence, etc. all proving a massive conspiracy and cover up in the assassination of JFK. There are several versions of it on YouTube. Here is one of them:

Episode 1 of 9:



Note: If the above video should be taken down, just go to YouTube and search for "The Men Who Killed Kennedy". There are several versions of it.

Also, this older documentary by Robert Groden, one of the top JFK assassination researchers and experts in the world, is amazingly effective and logical. Point by point, in meticulous detail, it refutes the single bullet theory of the Warren Commission, showing it to be a fiction that even "Mother Goose would reject" as it says. It also shows interview clips from all the doctors and nurses that examined Kennedy's body who all unanimously said that there was a massive EXIT wound at the back of his head, proving conclusively that the official autopsy photos and x-rays are forged as part of the cover up. And it presents photographic evidence of a possible second gunman on the grassy knoll. An amazingly effective and 100 percent logical film. No rational person can see this film and still believe in the lone nut fiction.

Part 1:

[Scepcop]

Ok here's something I don't understand.

As much as I like the Kennedy's, they honestly didn't seem too bright. Consider the following:

JFK made enemies with many powerful people, J Edgar Hoover, the CIA, the military industrial complex, the mafia, the oil industry, LBJ (who may have gone to jail for his crimes had he not become president), Castro, and everyone who blamed him for the Bay of Pigs failure.

With the most powerful enemies in the world, why would JFK be riding around in an open limosine in public with no secret service at his side, like a sitting duck? I mean, come on now. That's totally reckless and unclever. It's like the guy didn't have common sense. Even ruthless dictatos never ride out in open cars like a sitting duck. Even Sadam Hussein and Joseph Stalin would not expose themselves like that.

At least JFK could have asked for a top to cover the limo. Didn't he know about the Lincoln assassination, where some actor just walked up to him and shot him, just like that? Where was Lincoln's security guards? That was so lame.

Furthermore, didn't JFK realize that something was wrong on the day of his assassination, when his secret service was not running alongside his car and were withdrawn for no reason? They were totally useless that day. Anyone could shoot him and the agents sitting in the car behind him could not protect him. He was a sitting duck. Why didn't he immediately get suspicious?

He did seem very naive though, to think that he could go against the CIA, Federal Reserve and military industrial complex and get away with it. Or maybe he just didn't think about it. Or maybe he didn't care if he got killed?

Also, why would his brother Bobby try to run for President in 1968 so that he could stop the war in Vietnam, and not realize that he would be assassinated too? He could have deduced that from basic logic. Why didn't he take any steps to protect himself or have some security? Did he lack any survival instinct?

Did RFK think that Oswald acted alone, and therefore with him out of the way, no one would assassinate him? Surely RFK didn't buy the lone nut theory deep down did he? Was he really that naive and reckless? As much as I like him, it seems like he just walked into an obvious death trap. Was he really that dumb?

Finally, with so many Kennedy's coming to such a tragic end (even before JFK), and with the myth of the "Kennedy curse", why would JFK Jr. go flying around in a small plane with little training and skill? I'm sure he was aware of his family history and that his uncle and aunt both died in separate plane crashes. Whether there was a curse or not, or just a lot of powerful people wanting to kill them off, either way, wouldn't he be more cautious than to take such reckless risks as flying a small plane? It seems strange.

There was no reason for JFK Jr. to take such a reckless risk of flying a small plane. He was no expert pilot. Why didn't he just take a commercial flight? Or hire a private jet with a professional pilot? That would have been the safest way. He should have known that in a small plane, anyone who wanted to kill him could do it easily by sabotaging his plane or shooting it down. (It was never clear exactly how his plane went down or why)

He did seem like a naive simpleton, not clever, cunning or calculating. Were all the Kennedy's like that? Why did they take such reckless risks and expose themselves and never think about guarding against the worst, which kept happening to them? Did they have no survival instinct? Did they not understand logic? Why didn't they just hire people to protect them?

It's like they always walked around without ever looking behind their back or looking out for danger. Anyone notice that? What was wrong with them? Did they lack intelligence, wits, or cleverness? Were they simpletons who only had looks and charisma, but not smarts? Why would they walk around with no protection, keep getting killed and never learning from it?

I don't know. But the blunders they made do seem bizarre. They seem almost as senseless as the actions that characters in B horror movies make, which defy common sense, basic logic and survival instinct. Can anyone explain this? Were they trying to get themselves killed? It seemed like it, as if they were following some kind of script.

I don't know. Maybe people in the 60's were too trusting and weren't as jaded and paranoid as we are now, so they didn't think about those kind of things? From the voices of people in the 60's that are on video, they sure sound a bit naive and incapable of deeper thought.

What do you think?

Another question that I don't get:

Jack Ruby, Oswald's assassin, was in jail for about 3 years. Why didn't he reveal more about the plot during all that time? It was obvious that his co-conspirators betrayed him and left him in jail, so why wouldn't he expose them all in revenge? He had nothing to lose at that point right?

Also, why didn't anyone probe him for more info and details? In three years, all they got out of him was a 30 second cryptic spiel about "no one will ever know the truth about my motives"? WTF? That was such a wasted opportunity to find out what the truth was. Why didn't anyone try to seize that golden opportunity during those three years? That doesn't make sense. You'd think someone would, wouldn't you? That's a long time let a golden opportunity go to waste. How could such a blunder last for three years?

Come to think of it, if Oswald had lived, gone to trial and then to jail, might the same thing have happened? Maybe he would have just sat in jail, revealing nothing until he died, just like Ruby? The other alleged lone nut assassins didn't reveal much while they were in jail, so why would he?

[Scepcop]

The driver of JFK's limo, William Greer, appears to be involved. Why did he slow down after the first shot was fired? You'd think he would have speeded up and tried to get away wouldn't you? Instead, he slowed to 10 mph and waited until the fatal head shot before taking off. Isn't that way too suspicious and convenient? If he wasn't trying to get JFK killed, then what was he trying to do?

See episode 7 of "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" on YouTube. It implicates the Secret Service.



Also see episode 9, where LBJ is implicated. In fact, his mistress and one of his attorneys say they have evidence that he was in on the assassination plot. Plus he had a criminal history where he murdered many people including his own sister. It's a very damning and shocking episode. Here it is.



Polls show that over 90 percent of Americans do believe it was a conspiracy. The evidence all points to one, and plus the deliberate overt cover up attempt by the government is clear and unambiguous to all. Even a child can see that there was a big coverup.

How do TPTB get the media and police department in on it though? Doesn't anyone have morals?

That's pretty scary. It means they can take out any one of us, make it look like a suicide, and the police and media won't look into it if they are ordered to stand down.

How did they get the police to help in the cover up and framing of Oswald? How did they get the secret service to stand down? How did they get the driver, William Greer, to agree to slow the limo down to 10 mph until the fatal shot to JFK's head? How did they know that they would all cooperate? It can't just be that they were paid can it?

How many people would agree to a conspiracy to murder someone? I don't know anyone that would. Do you?

[ProfWag]

[Scepcop]

[Scepcop]

Check out this take on things to my question on the David Icke forum. Isn't it pretty disturbing?

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=216594

"A group? Yes. Secret? No.

Well to be fair there is always the possibility that it could be a secret unknown group or groups always trying to infiltrate with varying degrees of success.

The central banking cabal is still at the top of the pyramid though and their globalization through controlling all the world's resources, usury, economic monopoly, etc. via warfare, terrorism, their media, their police, their intelligence agencies, etc. It's not a secret or really a conspiracy. When shills and useful idiots deny it as if it is some kook fantasy idea it's baseless accusation. Same thing with those shills who say that no one power controls the world. That's technically true, but the ones who do number in the single digits and are basically tentacle arms of the same octopus.

When people use the term illuminati, it's true that they are generally speaking about the these guys and their various subsidiaries. There are also groups in history who have called themselves illuminati who either have worked for these guys or have worked against them. Some even for the greater good.

A cover up is a good indication they are all working for the same purpose. Any loose ends (and there are circumstantial and non-circumstancial loose ends) could cause their house of cards to fall. In recent years they're getting sloppy. The whole Osama raid comes to mind. Whatever that really was, we only have clues from the locals and initial reports, none of which had anything to do with Osama and everything to do with a Pakistani military raid with no real indication of a SEAL involvement, an exploded helicopter which killed several people because the neighbors saw the corpses, and then later on the 'accidental' crash that killed SEALs allegedly involved.

The laughable Osama story (including magic DNA, instant sea burial, no photos, and a video of some old guy watching and 'Osama' video from behind) is the cover up for whatever occurred here by the media arm of the banksters (Which never reports actual truth, not even local news. If you're ever involved with even local news you'll see what I mean).

What we and our fellow humans need to come to terms with (if we haven't already done so) is that our government is not elected by the people. That is an illusion. They own us through contract slavery. They are an ownership class. They will never seriously investigate any of their crimes, including the JFK assassination, the USS Liberty incident, 9/11, etc. The media propaganda is written by them like Hollywood screenplay writers. Some of it IS written by Hollywood screenplay writers. Once they establish a narrative, the narrative becomes history. They will never revisit it or revise it unless it suits their purposes. Never.

All these people trying to get a new investigation going for 9/11 are wasting their time. They'll never approve of one and they'll never allow 3rd parties access to what is essentially their private property. We need to spread awareness from a rational POV so people understand this and overthrow them in a civil manner. They own the police and the military, but the police and military are mostly our people. Their leaders are not, but the people can be persuaded to denounce their leadership and take our side. Maybe that's wishful thinking, but I gotta hope.

One example of an established fake narrative is Iran Contra. Iran Contra and the courtroom drama was televised. This was a conspiracy theory that became conspiracy fact. A lot was written about it and it was no longer a secret. Since that time, the establishment has revised the narrative to make it sound better. Something to do with hostages which is not what it was about. It also ignores who it created the Los Zetas who trouble the US border today (which we still arm...). Or the Jessica Lynch story. There is Jessica Lynch's official recollection of the events backed up by everybody there. Then there is the media story which claims some sort of heroic rescue from terrorists that is currently the official story. Lynch is considered 'crazy' from being traumatized. This is meant to debunk the actual history despite it being backed up by others. That's another tactic they use. "

[ProfWag]

[Scepcop]

[ProfWag]