Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There would be no “favorite” conspiracies were it not for the absolute fact that the Warren Report is a bunch of hot garbage.
The vast majority of pushback on this entire thread is nothing more than attacking so called conspiracy theorists, calling them nut cases, without providing a shred of evidence to explain the dozens of inconsistencies found inside the Warren Report.
I don't agree with that at all.
I don't think "nut case" was ever mentioned, rather we, particularly I, have pointed out the human nature and phycological need of people wanting to explain a senseless act on something greater and more significant other than one man with a rifle. I get it.
In regards to evidence explaining the inconsistencies. I and others have made several threads explaining it. However, you and others have simply dismissed them as fake - fake evidence, fake witnesses, fake videos, the list goes on. Everything that doesn't support a conspiracy is "fake". Sometimes the "inconsistencies" are irrelevant, I mean seriously the fact that one of 9 witnesses to the Tippit shooting testified a car door window was closed when it was open as proof that Oswald did not shoot Tippit? It starts getting silly.
You and others have also continuously pointed back to the warren report while there have been threads on independent verifications and dismissals, that have nothing to do with Warren, that support the fact that Oswald acted alone, that you have similarly dismissed in a fashion as previously noted. There has been so much investigation and re-investigation at this point as to almost make Warren Report obsolete.
Many of us that are skeptical of a conspiracy have regardless come here with an open mind. There indeed have been several posts here that made me go "hmmmm". But also all of us need to realize that not all events in life will be explained due to the variabilities that occur at all times. In terms of having an open mind, I don't see the same behavior with you and a few others. Some of you are acting with barely hidden hostility. Your mind is closed to even the possibility that there was no conspiracy, and any evidence is simply dismissed as "fake".
Ok, that’s a fair point about who was behind it. If you think it was the left, I’d be willing to entertain that. But those theories are not as fleshed out as the CIA war hawk theory.
I don’t believe Castro capable of striking JFK. Remember, none of this would’ve happened without Secret Service complicity during the assassination and after, during the “investigation” phase. Khrushchev seems like a stretch as they both got what they wanted, nukes out of Turkey and Cuba.
Now the leftists in America, the domestic enemies of the state, I’m open to that. But I need names and organizations to research that angle.
One name that comes to mind is that of General Lyman Lemnitzer, Chairman of the JCOS. In March, 1962, he proposed a plan that involved the assassination of innocent civilians, among other things. JFK rejected the plan, and removed Lemnitzer from the Joint Chiefs 3 months later. (There are other names, but this is already a legthy post.)
"Following presentation of the Northwoods plan, Kennedy removed Lemnitzer as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, although he became Supreme Allied Commander of NATO in January 1963. U.S. military leaders began to perceive Kennedy as going soft on Cuba, and the President became increasingly unpopular with the military. A rift had already reared during Kennedy's disagreements with the service chiefs over the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962 and flared up again with his June 10, 1963 announcement of a unilateral U.S. Test Ban Treaty."
"This gave Kennedy yet another triumph over a cadre of enemies more relentless than the ones he faced in Moscow. The president and his generals suffered a clash of worldviews, of generations—of ideologies, more or less—and every time they met in battle, JFK’s fresher way of fighting prevailed."
One name that comes to mind is that of General Lyman Lemnitzer, Chairman of the JCOS. In March, 1962, he proposed a plan that involved the assassination of innocent civilians, among other things. JFK rejected the plan, and removed Lemnitzer from the Joint Chiefs 3 months later. (There are other names, but this is already a legthy post.)
"Following presentation of the Northwoods plan, Kennedy removed Lemnitzer as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, although he became Supreme Allied Commander of NATO in January 1963. U.S. military leaders began to perceive Kennedy as going soft on Cuba, and the President became increasingly unpopular with the military. A rift had already reared during Kennedy's disagreements with the service chiefs over the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962 and flared up again with his June 10, 1963 announcement of a unilateral U.S. Test Ban Treaty."
"This gave Kennedy yet another triumph over a cadre of enemies more relentless than the ones he faced in Moscow. The president and his generals suffered a clash of worldviews, of generations—of ideologies, more or less—and every time they met in battle, JFK’s fresher way of fighting prevailed."
This is closer to what I have always believed than most of the other posts here. JFK had a lot of enemies, personal enemies. There were a lot of assassinations back then but we didn't hear about them. The CIA plans to killed Fidel Castro with poison failed but the CIA did try. The CIA tried, or actually, did assassinate foreign leaders, and probably killed The Congo's leader Patrice Lamumba--shot to death in 1961.
"The records also detail how the CIA organized a group of "internal dissidents along with several exile organizations" that successfully assassinated Dominican Republic dictator Rafael Trujillo on May 30, 1961." ) LA Times-JFK Files Detail CIA.
A lot of it was about Cuba. Remember, it was still a big deal back then that Cuba now had Fidel Castro, that Cubans went into exile to get away from him, that they wanted their country back AND, maybe most of all, we now had COMMUNISTS ruling a country only 90 miles off our coast!
From the same article cited above, they wanted to use the Mafia to assassinate Castro. Robert Kennedy was going after the Mafia at that time, if you remember, and his comment to The Rockefeller Commission which was investigating the CIA in the 1970s was "if we were going to get involved with the Mafia, in the future at any time, to make sure you see me first."
There is a 1967 memo from J Edgar Hoover (FBI) titled "Central Intelligence Agency's Intentions to Send Hoodlums to Cuba to Assassinate Castro." It mentioned something about a Mafia member using his connections to the CIA to his advantage.
"Recently released files have that Marcello, Traffacante, Giancana, were all involved, at varying levels, in the CIA-Mafia plots to get Castro." (Irish Central Staff from "Irish Central" Nov. 20, 2018.)
Marcello was acquitted in New Orleans the same day the president was killed. "While serving time later in life, he was caught on a federal wiretap confessing to an FBI informant that he'd had JFK killed, according to FBI files." (Irish Central.)
To make it simple, it was mostly about Cuba and the CIA. An inside job. A few government higher-ups who hated JFK and were terrified of Communism being so close to our shores. They used people like LHO to carry out their mission. LHO wanted fame so he was a good patsy for them. Who knows what they promised him? Money? He was sucker enough to fall for it. Whoever these insiders were, they must have thought JFK was too soft on Cuba. Russian Nikita Krushchev had nothing to do it with; he told us that we would collapse from within. And remember, there was an extreme phobia of anything to do with Communism back then--McCarthyism. No one favors Communism but back then the fears were worse than today--maybe they would nuke us, maybe there were spies amongst us (there probably were--and are.)
Oh--and this little tidbit: a guy named Dulles of the CIA was FIRED by JFK. That must have thwarted his plans just a little bit! Made him hate JFK & seek revenge. I've heard mention of a General Walker and another general who both were pro Viet Nam War. JFK wasn't doing enough as far as they were concerned.
I don't care about the Z film although it is interesting. I don't watch JFK movies either. I've read a few books over the years and quite a few articles. I don't know much about Jack Ruby except that he had Mafia connections and was probably hired to silence LHO before he talked too much. If anyone remembers Dorothy Kilgallen, it has always been said, that she (a journalist) investigated and learned a lot. She was found dead in her apartment and it looked staged.
"She didn't go to Washington, D.C., to look into the military-industrial complex, or stay in Dallas and look at Lyndon Johnson, or go to Miami looking at these Cuban exiles," Shaw says. He believes that Ruby had told Kilgallen that he was connected to Louisiana mob boss Carlos Marcello, and that at his behest, Ruby had killed Oswald — "to build the wall, to silence him," Shaw explains. https://history.howstuffworks.com/hi...-kilgallen.htm
I don't think much has changed regarding the amount of knowledge we have. A lot of people who knew things were killed off a long time ago. Some powers in our own government felt threatened by JFK (and RFK) and so they had them killed just as they had other people killed. CIA probably used Mafia to help.
A coup d' etat in November 1963.
Last edited by in_newengland; 03-19-2022 at 12:17 PM..
I don't think "nut case" was ever mentioned, rather we, particularly I, have pointed out the human nature and phycological need of people wanting to explain a senseless act on something greater and more significant other than one man with a rifle. I get it.
In regards to evidence explaining the inconsistencies. I and others have made several threads explaining it. However, you and others have simply dismissed them as fake - fake evidence, fake witnesses, fake videos, the list goes on. Everything that doesn't support a conspiracy is "fake". Sometimes the "inconsistencies" are irrelevant, I mean seriously the fact that one of 9 witnesses to the Tippit shooting testified a car door window was closed when it was open as proof that Oswald did not shoot Tippit? It starts getting silly.
You and others have also continuously pointed back to the warren report while there have been threads on independent verifications and dismissals, that have nothing to do with Warren, that support the fact that Oswald acted alone, that you have similarly dismissed in a fashion as previously noted. There has been so much investigation and re-investigation at this point as to almost make Warren Report obsolete.
Many of us that are skeptical of a conspiracy have regardless come here with an open mind. There indeed have been several posts here that made me go "hmmmm". But also all of us need to realize that not all events in life will be explained due to the variabilities that occur at all times. In terms of having an open mind, I don't see the same behavior with you and a few others. Some of you are acting with barely hidden hostility. Your mind is closed to even the possibility that there was no conspiracy, and any evidence is simply dismissed as "fake".
You keep harping on “psychological need”, that I and others need something greater, which makes no sense to me. I’m perfectly fine with any scenario, as long as it makes sense. The Lone Wolf does not make sense to me.
If you want to be honest about it, I feel that you have a psychological need for it to be a Lone Wolf so you can maintain your faith in the system.
If you feel that that is a condescending take on your beliefs, then you now know how I feel when I read your “psychological need” garbage.
As far as Tippit, Oswald’s timeline makes no sense. I don’t trust witnesses because people will say whatever you want them to say if you give them the right motivation. Obviously, you can make a case that the people who refute the Lone Wolf theory could be doing the same, and I’m sure that some have done that.
All we can do is look at all the evidence, hear all the testimony, and form our own conclusions. I used to believe the Lone Wolf theory, I do not anymore. If you want to believe Oswald acted alone, that is your prerogative, but for the life of me I don’t get why you keep clinging to it.
This is closer to what I have always believed than most of the other posts here. JFK had a lot of enemies, personal enemies. There were a lot of assassinations back then but we didn't hear about them. The CIA plans to killed Fidel Castro with poison failed but the CIA did try. The CIA tried, or actually, did assassinate foreign leaders, and probably killed The Congo's leader Patrice Lamumba--shot to death in 1961.
"The records also detail how the CIA organized a group of "internal dissidents along with several exile organizations" that successfully assassinated Dominican Republic dictator Rafael Trujillo on May 30, 1961." ) LA Times-JFK Files Detail CIA.
A lot of it was about Cuba. Remember, it was still a big deal back then that Cuba now had Fidel Castro, that Cubans went into exile to get away from him, that they wanted their country back AND, maybe most of all, we now had COMMUNISTS ruling a country only 90 miles off our coast!
From the same article cited above, they wanted to use the Mafia to assassinate Castro. Robert Kennedy was going after the Mafia at that time, if you remember, and his comment to The Rockefeller Commission which was investigating the CIA in the 1970s was "if we were going to get involved with the Mafia, in the future at any time, to make sure you see me first."
There is a 1967 memo from J Edgar Hoover (FBI) titled "Central Intelligence Agency's Intentions to Send Hoodlums to Cuba to Assassinate Castro." It mentioned something about a Mafia member using his connections to the CIA to his advantage.
"Recently released files have that Marcello, Traffacante, Giancana, were all involved, at varying levels, in the CIA-Mafia plots to get Castro." (Irish Central Staff from "Irish Central" Nov. 20, 2018.
Marcello was acquitted in New Orleans the same day the president was killed. "While serving time later in life, he was caught on a federal wiretap confessing to an FBI informant that he'd had JFK killed, according to FBI files." (Irish Central.)
To make it simple, it was mostly about Cuba and the CIA. An inside job. A few government higher-ups who hated JFK and were terrified of Communism being so close to our shores. They used people like LHO to carry out their mission. LHO wanted fame so he was a good patsy for them. Who knows what they promised him? Money? He was sucker enough to fall for it. Whoever these insiders were, they must have thought JFK was too soft on Cuba. Russian Nikita Krushchev had nothing to do it with; he told us that we would collapse from within. And remember, there was an extreme phobia of anything to do with Communism back then--McCarthyism. No one favors Communism but back then the fears were worse than today--maybe they would nuke us, maybe there were spies amongst us (there probably were--and are.)
Oh--and this little tidbit: a guy named Dulles of the CIA was FIRED by JFK. That must have thwarted his plans just a little bit! Made him hate JFK & seek revenge. I've heard mention of a General Walker and another general who both were pro Viet Nam War. JFK wasn't doing enough as far as they were concerned.
I don't care about the Z film although it is interesting. I don't watch JFK movies either. I've read a few books over the years and quite a few articles. I don't know much about Jack Ruby except that he had Mafia connections and was probably hired to silence LHO before he talked too much. If anyone remembers Dorothy Kilgallen, it has always been said, that she (a journalist) investigated and learned a lot. She was found dead in her apartment and it looked staged.
"She didn't go to Washington, D.C., to look into the military-industrial complex, or stay in Dallas and look at Lyndon Johnson, or go to Miami looking at these Cuban exiles," Shaw says. He believes that Ruby had told Kilgallen that he was connected to Louisiana mob boss Carlos Marcello, and that at his behest, Ruby had killed Oswald — "to build the wall, to silence him," Shaw explains. https://history.howstuffworks.com/hi...-kilgallen.htm
I don't think much has changed regarding the amount of knowledge we have. A lot of people who knew things were killed off a long time ago. Some powers in our own government felt threatened by JFK (and RFK) and so they had them killed just as they had other people killed. CIA probably used Mafia to help.
A coup d' etat in November 1963.
Lemnitzer would prove the war hawk assassination theory, not the leftist assassination theory, just to be clear. Curtis LeMay, who I do know quite a bit about as I’ve talked directly with people who worked on his staff when he was the SAC Commander, had to have known about the plot. He did not like JFK, and that’s putting it mildly.
But in regards to Cuba, I have a lot of problems with that connection being used, other than the fact that the war hawks were upset with JFK’s handling of the Bay of Pigs and the Missile Crisis. I don’t believe Fidel and the communists had the power to infiltrate the Secret Service and bring down JFK. I also don’t believe Fidel worked with the war hawks who wanted him dead to help assassinate JFK.
One side note: I don’t believe we couldn’t kill Castro. I believe we easily could’ve done it. He was 90 miles from Miami for crying out loud. No, I believe he was kept alive because somehow, “they” deemed he was more valuable to the US alive and in charge in Cuba. There’s just no way we would’ve left him be all those years unless it was in our best interests. Again, just nonsense that we tried so hard to take him out and couldn’t.
If Marcello was involved, he certainly didn’t run the operation, as some have said this was a mob hit, pure and simple.
Isn’t a plausible scenario that the war hawks killed him and tried to pin it on the communists with the help of their patsy, Lee Oswald? That’s what I believe. But I’m open to most other theories, other than the Lone Wolf nonsense.
As far as the Z film, you are right that it doesn’t really matter when you are discussing who ordered the hit. The original Z film is valuable when refuting the Lone Wolf theory, though.
But we do agree on the main point here, there was a coup d’ etat in November 1963. It makes me wonder how many we’ve had throughout our 246 year history?
^^^ Interesting post but it's late so I'll make my reply brief.
But in regards to Cuba, I have a lot of problems with that connection being used, other than the fact that the war hawks were upset with JFK’s handling of the Bay of Pigs and the Missile Crisis. I don’t believe Fidel and the communists had the power to infiltrate the Secret Service and bring down JFK. I also don’t believe Fidel worked with the war hawks who wanted him dead to help assassinate JFK.
---------------------------------------------------------------
So much of what I've read had to do with Cuba. And it was HUGE back then with people really freaking out about communists so close to us. The Missile Crisis was scary and I don't think it was handled well but I agree that some wanted more aggressive actions. No, Castro and his communists wouldn't have infiltrated the Secret Service. Not at all. He didn't try to assassinate JFK.
Whoever decided to get rid of JFK was from within our own government. Just a few who really hated him, probably Allen Dulles, former head of the CIA who was fired by JFK. I've read this in several places. It could have been Dulles, a general or two, and then they gathered their stooges to do the dirty work. Oswald was set up and had been working for the CIA for a while. They probably were the ones who sent him to Russia and who also allowed him back into the USA with no questions asked. Then kept using him for their own purposes, including attending rallies for Cuba. He wasn't lying when he said he was a patsy.
Last edited by in_newengland; 03-19-2022 at 12:24 PM..
The Missile Crisis was scary and I don't think it was handled well
JFK handled it very well. He won. They took the missiles out.
JFK was also in the process of normalising relations with Cuba and the USSR.
JFKs big mistake was allowing the US trained on US soil, Bay of Pigs invasion to go ahead. That was plain wrong to invade a country because the USA perceived a country adopted a political & economic system they disliked. That tiny country that was no threat whatsoever.
That is the same mentality Putin is using today over Ukraine.
Quote:
Whoever decided to get rid of JFK was from within our own government.
The USSR did a two year investigation on the assassination of JFK, for internal use only, concluding it was LBJ. The Republicans were not well established in Texas. There was the mainstream Democrats and the right wing Tory Democrats. LBJ was a Tory.
You keep harping on “psychological need”, that I and others need something greater, which makes no sense to me. I’m perfectly fine with any scenario, as long as it makes sense. The Lone Wolf does not make sense to me.
If you want to be honest about it, I feel that you have a psychological need for it to be a Lone Wolf so you can maintain your faith in the system.
If you feel that that is a condescending take on your beliefs, then you now know how I feel when I read your “psychological need” garbage.
As far as Tippit, Oswald’s timeline makes no sense. I don’t trust witnesses because people will say whatever you want them to say if you give them the right motivation. Obviously, you can make a case that the people who refute the Lone Wolf theory could be doing the same, and I’m sure that some have done that.
All we can do is look at all the evidence, hear all the testimony, and form our own conclusions. I used to believe the Lone Wolf theory, I do not anymore. If you want to believe Oswald acted alone, that is your prerogative, but for the life of me I don’t get why you keep clinging to it.
We there you go again with the barely hidden hostility. The "psychological need garbage" is not from me originally, but from leading experts in the field that documented the human nature of needing to believe in conspiracies. I can find a few links if you wish...
There is no "psychological need" on my part as I already indicated that I come here with an open mind and I have documented posts in this thread where I have admitted certain evidence was compelling, I think even to a few of your responses. So we can dismiss that claim. I come here with an open mind, but I will counter a claim that is simply wrong or non-relevant.
You are free to stick to your theory, but a closed mind (maybe not entirely from you, but from others) holds back the discussion.
JFK handled it very well. He won. They took the missiles out.
JFK was also in the process of normalising relations with Cuba and the USSR.
JFKs big mistake was allowing the US trained on US soil, Bay of Pigs invasion to go ahead. That was plain wrong to invade a country because the USA perceived a country adopted a political & economic system they disliked. That tiny country that was no threat whatsoever.
That is the same mentality Putin is using today over Ukraine.
The USSR did a two year investigation on the assassination of JFK, for internal use only, concluding it was LBJ. The Republicans were not well established in Texas. There was the mainstream Democrats and the right wing Tory Democrats. LBJ was a Tory.
I'll have to go back and study that again but there was a lot of confusion and disagreement as to what to do. The general public was terrified of the thought of nukes from the USSR being brought to nearby Cuba. Remember, this was only shortly after the era of "duck and cover" when school kids had to dive under their desks just in case a nuke landed here. People were terrified of nukes and communism, really terrified.
As for the USSR completing an investigation, I wouldn't put much stock in that. Some Americans believe that LBJ was behind it too. LBJ hated JFK and was only on the ticket so that the part of the country he came from would vote for them. He wasn't going to be on the VP ticket for the next term. Of course he was glad to see JFK killed. Apparently he was at a party the previous night when he heard about the plot. I can't recall his exact words but he was pleased with the idea and did nothing to stop it. But he is not one of the people who set LHO up and got the Mafia involved. He was close to it and he stood to gain from it, but he didn't have much, if anything to do with it.
It was the CIA, a few generals. Allen Dulles especially, the head of the CIA who had just been FIRED by JFK. And who else was head of the CIA? George W. Bush. Not that he was in on it but that guy sure knew a lot more than he ever told us. Head of the CIA in 1976/77. he was the junior officer on a three- to four-man watch shift at CIA headquarters between September 1963 and February 1964, which was on duty when Kennedy was shot.
Practically jumping off the screen was a memorandum from FBI director J. Edgar Hoover, dated November 29, 1963. Under the subject heading “Assassination of President John F. Kennedy,” Hoover reported that, on the day after JFK’s murder, the bureau had provided two individuals with briefings. One was “Captain William Edwards of the Defense Intelligence Agency.” The other: “Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency.” https://www.salon.com/2018/12/08/geo...-told_partner/
Probably many people knew about it, heard rumors about an assassination of JFK, wanted it to happen, and GW Bush was just one more example. The above article goes on to mention Cuba and wanting to prevent an unauthorized raid now that JFK was gone. BTW, Bush Sr was in Dallas that day. His spying went back a very long way because he was a powerful oil man and needed to spy on his competitors, way back to WWII. So he knew about it too but that doesn't equate to actually having been involved in carrying out the assassination.
Last edited by in_newengland; 03-19-2022 at 12:31 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
