Who Really Killed John F. Kennedy (1 Viewer)

[Scott]

I'm really on the fence with this one, I will watch a documentary or read something that makes me completely believe it was Oswald acting alone and then I'll see another programme or read something else that gets me thinking again.

That's what sells advertizing.

One point I would like clarification on having read through the earlier posts is that what was Oswalds motivation for doing this, if he wasn't owning up or admitting to it, surely he would want the fame and everyone to know it was him?

Oswald didn't jump out in the street and yell "Sic Semper Tyrantus".

 

[Cornwallis]

Oswald didn't jump out in the street and yell "Sic Semper Tyrantus".[/QUOTE]

^&confuse^&confuse^&confuse

 

[Louis Badolato]

Oswald didn't jump out in the street and yell "Sic Semper Tyrantus".

^&confuse^&confuse^&confuse[/QUOTE]

That's what John Wilkes Booth yelled when he assassinated Lincoln. Its latin for "death to all tyrants".

 

[Cornwallis]

^&confuse^&confuse^&confuse

That's what John Wilkes Booth yelled when he assassinated Lincoln. Its latin for "death to all tyrants".[/QUOTE]


Thanks Louis, would have been easier for him to just have shouted "death to all tyrants" ^&grin

 

[Cornwallis]

Have any of you ever seen this?

Lincoln's name has 7 letters
- Kennedy's name has 7 letters

- In Lincoln's & Kennedy's names the vowels & consonants fall in exactly the same place;***
in the order c, v, c, c, v, c, c

- Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846
- Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946

- Lincoln was elected president in 1860
- Kennedy was elected president in 1960

- Kennedy had a secretary named Lincoln

- War was thrust upon Lincoln almost immediately after inauguration
- War was thrust upon Kennedy almost immediately after inauguration

- Lincoln ordered the Treasury to print its own money
- Kennedy ordered the Treasury to print its own money

- International bankers may have arranged the assassinations of Lincoln and Kennedy

- Lincoln gave negroes freedom and legalized equality
- Kennedy enforced equality for negroes

- Lincoln delivered the Gettysburg Address on November 19, 1863
- Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963

- Lincoln was loved by the common people and hated by the establishment
- Kennedy was loved by the common people and hated by the establishment

- Lincoln was succeeded, after assassination, by vice-president Johnson
- Kennedy was succeeded, after assassination, by vice-president Johnson

- Andrew Johnson was born in 1808
- Lyndon Johnson was born in 1908

- Andrew Johnson's name has 13 letters
- Lyndon Johnson's name has 13 letters

- Andrew Johnson had a pug nose and slicked-back hair
- Lyndon Johnson had a pug nose and slicked-back hair

- Lincoln was sitting beside his wife when he was shot
- Kennedy was sitting beside his wife when he was shot

- Rathbone, who was with Lincoln when he was shot, was injured (by being stabbed)
- Connally, who was with Kennedy when he was shot, was injured (by being shot)
- Rathbone's name has 8 letters
- Connally's name has 8 letters

- Lincoln's wife held his head in her lap after he was shot
- Kennedy's wife held his head in her lap after he was shot

- Lincoln was shot on a Friday
- Kennedy was shot on a Friday

- Lincoln was shot in a theatre named Ford
- Kennedy was shot in a car made by Ford

- Kennedy was shot in a car named Lincoln

- Lincoln's bodyguard was away from his post at the door of the President's box at the theatre
- Kennedy's bodyguards were away from their posts on the running-boards of the President's car

- Lincoln was shot in a theatre and his assassin ran to a warehouse
- JFK was shot from a warehouse and his alleged assassin ran to a theatre

- Lincoln's assassin had a three-worded name, John Wilkes Booth
- Kennedy's alleged assassin had a three-worded name, Lee Harvey Oswald

- John Wilkes Booth has 15 letters
- Lee Harvey Oswald has 15 letters

- John Wilkes Boothe was born in 1839 (s/b 1838)
- Lee Harvey Oswald was born in 1939

- Lincoln didn't die immediately after being shot
- Kennedy didn't die immediately after being shot

- Lincoln and Kennedy died in places beginning with the initials P and H
- Lincoln died in Petersen's house
- Kennedy died in Parkland Hospital

- Booth was shot and killed* in police custody before going to trial
- Oswald was shot and killed in police custody before going to trial

- Kennedy's funeral was modelled on Lincoln's funeral

- Andrew Johnson was a heavy drinker with crude behaviour
- Lyndon Johnson was a heavy drinker with crude behaviour

- There were conspiracy theories that Johnson was knowledgeable about Lincoln's assassination
- There were conspiracy theories that Johnson was knowledgeable about Kennedy's assassination**

- Days before it happened Lincoln told his wife and friends about a dream he'd had of being shot by an assassin
- Hours before it happened Kennedy told his wife and friends it would be easy for an assassin to shoot him from a crowd

- Shortly after Lincoln was shot the telegraph system went down
- Shortly after Kennedy was shot the telephone system went down

- Kennedy's father had been the Ambassador to England at the Court of St James
- Lincoln's son became the Ambassador to England at the Court of St James

- Lincoln and Kennedy were 2 of the greatest presidents of the nation

- Lincoln's wife tastefully and expensively re-decorated the White House
- Kennedy's wife tastefully and expensively re-decorated the White House

- Lincoln loved great literature and could recite poetry by heart
- Kennedy loved great literature and could recite poetry by heart

- Lincoln had young children while living at the White House
- Kennedy had young children while living at the White House

- Lincoln's sons had ponies they rode on the White House grounds
- Kennedy's daughter had a pony she rode on the White House grounds

- Lincoln lost a child (12 year old son) to death while President
- Kennedy lost a child (newly born son) to death while President

- Lincoln had 2 sons named Robert and Edward. Edward died young and Robert lived on.
- Kennedy had 2 brothers named Robert and Edward. Robert died young and Edward lived on

- Lincoln let his children run and play in his office
- Kennedy let his children run and play in his office

- After Lincoln's assassination the nation experienced an emotional convulsion
- After Kennedy's assassination the nation experienced an emotional convulsion

- the whole world cried when Lincoln died
- the whole world cried when Kennedy died

- Lincoln's funeral train travelled from Washington-DC to New York
- Kennedy's brother's funeral train travelled from New York to Washington-DC

- Lincoln Assassination conspiracy theories are believed these 140 141 years later
- Kennedy Assassination conspiracy theories are believed these 42 43 years later

- Abraham was the first name of the man who filmed Kennedy's murder in the Lincoln

- The man running alongside Kennedy's car snapping pictures with his 35mm camera was a salesman of Lincoln cars

- Kennedy bought a Virginia home that was the 1861 Civil War headquarters of Lincoln's first general-in-chief, McClellan

- Jefferson Davis was the name of the president of the Confederate states while Lincoln was president of the Union states
- Jefferson Davis Tippit was the name of the police officer killed allegedly by Kennedy's alleged assassin

- Lincoln was famous for his wit and for telling hilarious stories and anecdotes
- Kennedy was famous for his wit and for telling hilarious stories and anecdotes

- Lincoln was sitting in a rocking chair at Ford's Theater when he was shot
- Kennedy had a special rocking chair he sat in at the White House
- Henry Ford bought the rocking chair Lincoln died in and put it in his museum in Dearborn

- Kennedy's seat in the Lincoln he was sitting in when he was shot is in Ford's museum
- Lincoln's seat in the Ford he was sitting in when he was shot is in Ford's museum

- John Kennedy is the name of a character in a 1951 movie about a detective travelling by train
to thwart the assassination of President Lincoln
- John Kennedy is the name of the real-life detective who travelled in the train with President Lincoln in 1860
to thwart his assassination

- In 1863, the Tsar sent the war fleet of the Russian empire to assist President Lincoln during the American civil war
- In 1962, during the Kennedy presidency, a fleet of Russian ships transporting instruments of war
were steaming towards America with less benign intent ------NEW

 

[Combat]

I'm really on the fence with this one, I will watch a documentary or read something that makes me completely believe it was Oswald acting alone and then I'll see another programme or read something else that gets me thinking again.

One point I would like clarification on having read through the earlier posts is that what was Oswalds motivation for doing this, if he wasn't owning up or admitting to it, surely he would want the fame and everyone to know it was him?

There is a literal mountain of evidence that ties Oswald directly to this crime. You would be hard pressed to find anyone in prison who has more evidence against them than Oswald. To the extent that there are any anomalies - real or imagined - in the evidence, they don't matter when you accept that there is no other rational explanation than Oswald did it based on the evidence we do have. Some people can't get past that. If there is one tidbit that doesn't add up to them = conspiracy in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. I would say if you have any doubts read the Bugliosi book - but that is probably an unreasonable expectation given that it is 1500+ pages. A good alternative is the ABC/Peter Jennings show a few years ago which covered and dismissed the prevalent conspiracy theories. These are objective reviews of the evidence and not half baked internet chatter based largely on falsehoods.

The motives of assassins vary and often don't make a great deal of sense. This was a crime of opportunity for Oswald. There is evidence that he wanted to be "someone" with his defection to Russia (where he thought he would be a big shot), his return to the US (where he believed the press would be waiting to interview him), his attempt to assassinate Gen. Walker (any conspiracy theorist remember that?). He also had a suicidal mentality. My guess is that he was as surprised as anyone when he pulled this off and got out of the building and had no plan whatsoever. Suddenly facing life in jail or a death sentence. He was just playing it out at that point enjoying the attention and playing with the head of the police and press. Like I said before - this was a very simple case. If it was anyone other than Kennedy, no one would have the slightest doubt what happened here. Trying to understand Oswald's motivation is an interesting discussion but really doesn't matter in understanding what happened.

 

[Cornwallis]

Thanks Combat I'm definately leaning back towards Oswald acting alone, but I guess we'll never be sure 100%, as its not beyond the capabilites of government to pull something like this off.

Was Princess Di an accident.... ^&confuse

 

[Scott]

Oswald didn't jump out in the street and yell "Sic Semper Tyrantus".

^&confuse^&confuse^&confuse[/QUOTE]

Sorry Cornwalis. John Wilkes Booth jumped on the stage at Ford's theater and shouted that after shooting President Lincoln. (plus Booth was a well known actor)
I didn't see Oswald doing anything similar.

 

[tdubel]

There is a literal mountain of evidence that ties Oswald directly to this crime. You would be hard pressed to find anyone in prison who has more evidence against them than Oswald. To the extent that there are any anomalies - real or imagined - in the evidence, they don't matter when you accept that there is no other rational explanation than Oswald did it based on the evidence we do have. Some people can't get past that. If there is one tidbit that doesn't add up to them = conspiracy in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. I would say if you have any doubts read the Bugliosi book - but that is probably an unreasonable expectation given that it is 1500+ pages. A good alternative is the ABC/Peter Jennings show a few years ago which covered and dismissed the prevalent conspiracy theories. These are objective reviews of the evidence and not half baked internet chatter based largely on falsehoods.

The motives of assassins vary and often don't make a great deal of sense. This was a crime of opportunity for Oswald. There is evidence that he wanted to be "someone" with his defection to Russia (where he thought he would be a big shot), his return to the US (where he believed the press would be waiting to interview him), his attempt to assassinate Gen. Walker (any conspiracy theorist remember that?). He also had a suicidal mentality. My guess is that he was as surprised as anyone when he pulled this off and got out of the building and had no plan whatsoever. Suddenly facing life in jail or a death sentence. He was just playing it out at that point enjoying the attention and playing with the head of the police and press. Like I said before - this was a very simple case. If it was anyone other than Kennedy, no one would have the slightest doubt what happened here. Trying to understand Oswald's motivation is an interesting discussion but really doesn't matter in understanding what happened.

Again, I disagree with the statement this is a very simple case. Even with the evidence that Vincent cites, why all the seemingly governmental cover up. Why the BS Warren Commission report? Too many whys that I can name here.

I really don't know what happened nor do I lean one way or the other. I simply believe that things are not as cut and dry as Vincent portrays it nor was it an outlandish conspiracy. BUT there was something, too much smoke, there is fire.

Furthermore, with regard to Vincent's book, I think he chose a very appropriate time to publish a counter point to popular belief that there was a conspiracy.

I truly believe we will never get the full truth and that probably in some ways, both sides are true to a certain extent. There are facts all around.

TD

 

[theBaron]

Red pen alert--it's actually, "Sic semper tyrannis". "(Be it) ever thus to tyrants". It's the motto of Commonwealth of Virginia, suggested by George Mason in 1776 (I just read that detail in Catherine Drinker Bowen's "Miracle in Philadelphia" the other day). It's also the motto of our own Queen City, Allentown, PA.

Prost!
Brad

 

[wayne556517]

Was it this bloke !!

 

[PanzerAce1944]

Kennedy was a very popular president amongst the average american citizen.He was not popular at all amongst those who had power and influence. Some of the decisions that he made to include: Taking the Fed out of the picture to produce currency as they saw fit,Firing the current head of the CIA "Allen Dulles" who conveniently wound up as a member of the Warren Commission. At the same time JFK voiced his desires to dismantle the CIA and give the military the task to handle intelligence services for the country. JFK's actions were somewhat radical.
He Signed a presidential order to begin the "Withdrawal of Troops" from Vietnam thus preventing our escalating involvement there. Combine this with having a Vice-President under you that is under the scope for being brought up on charges for illegal financial dealings which are coming to surface very quickly. Kennedy already knew he did not want LBJ to be his running mate for the 1964 re-election campaign. Those in power at the time as listed above had a clear choice to make.
Remove the source of their problems...... JFK ! Add to this Kennedy's body was stolen illegally to be flown to Bethesda Naval Hospital for the "Official Autopsy"
Texas law required that a homicide that was committed there have the proper autopsy done there in Dallas. This was out of the question entirely as the "actual"
locations of wounds to the president would have been made quite apparent.Instead they Take the body to Bethesda and "Mysteriously" lose the presidents brain !!!!
Another convenient oddity added to a very long list.

 

[PanzerAce1944]

Was it this bloke !!

View attachment 71014

A Sniper shooting at a Kangaroo !!!! {sm3}

 

[Combat]

Again, I disagree with the statement this is a very simple case. Even with the evidence that Vincent cites, why all the seemingly governmental cover up. Why the BS Warren Commission report? Too many whys that I can name here.

I really don't know what happened nor do I lean one way or the other. I simply believe that things are not as cut and dry as Vincent portrays it nor was it an outlandish conspiracy. BUT there was something, too much smoke, there is fire.

Furthermore, with regard to Vincent's book, I think he chose a very appropriate time to publish a counter point to popular belief that there was a conspiracy.

I truly believe we will never get the full truth and that probably in some ways, both sides are true to a certain extent. There are facts all around.

TD

If you get beyond the many unfounded conspiracy theories which is not that difficult (pick one and check it out), it actually is a very simple case. Many people refuse to believe that for whatever reason like they once wanted to believe that the world was flat. The fact that there are a lot of theories and many people believe in them isn't evidence of anything. I don't follow how there is some middle point between conspiracy and anti-conspiracy theories. But anyone who believes the government could pull this off and cover it up for fifty years has never worked for the government! Look at Watergate which was a million times less complex than what is alleged here.

A simple way to review this case for general signs of a conspiracy is to ask yourself what would the conspirators have known at the time before the assassination when they would have been planning this and not what we know now after the fact. Does the information that they would have known conform to a plan here to frame Oswald? For example, if you believe there was a shooter on the grassy knoll and someone was framing Oswald, then how would the conspirators know that no one would get a picture of them? There were dozens of people taking pictures in Dealey Plaza. Answer - It was impossible for them to know what would show up on various photographs. How would they know Oswald couldn't be accounted for at the time of the shooting? Answer - they wouldn't unless he was locked in a closet which we know isn't true since he was seen before and after the shooting. How and when did Oswald get his job at the TSBD where he shot Kennedy (a critical factor in any conspiracy plan). Answer - it was a matter of chance involving two ladies in the suburbs of Dallas. Not even the conspiracy theorists believe these ladies were secret agents. Would an intricate conspiracy at the highest levels to frame Oswald be based on that chance? No one even knew that Kennedy was coming to Dallas or that his motorcade would pass the Book Depository when Oswald got the job. Did the conspirators have a crystal ball to know this before that decision had even been made? If not, it couldn't have been a planned conspiracy. It's simply impossible to get around that time line even if you believe there are anomalies in the evidence. If you accept the uncontested fact that Oswald got his job at the Texas School Book Depository as a matter of chance before anyone knew Kennedy was coming to Dallas - it significantly undermines any notion of a pre-planned conspiracy to frame Oswald. This is just common sense without even getting into the overwhelming direct evidence that links Oswald to the murder weapon and indirect evidence about his behavior before and after the shooting which would have convicted him a hundred times over. I realize most people have made up their minds and there is no dissuading them. But my frustration is seeing the flimsy arguments in support of a conspiracy raised over and over again when they are just flat out unsupported, implausible and/or inaccurate. Some people with open minds then begin to accept them as the truth which is unfortunate.

 

[PanzerAce1944]

That is just it. The other shooters do show up on film. Thanks to todays enhanced
technology. Go on "GOOGLE" and type in "Badgeman" or "Grassy Knoll Shooters" or type in "Dogman" and the images appear. The one image that does "not appear" is that of Lee Harvey Oswald firing a weapon or being in the 6th floor window of the TSBD. There were actual human beings who saw people with weapons on the grassy knoll. I:E Lee Bowers (rail yard worker) behind the knoll at the time.Many other witnesses gave statements to police which never made its way to the Warren Commission. Those who wound up seeing or knowing too much wound up DEAD. Another coincidence how Lee Boyers wound up dead.The mass media carried the "Official Story" to the American public. In 1963 there was no such thing as the media challenging the government about anything.

 

[Scott]

Red pen alert--it's actually, "Sic semper tyrannis". "(Be it) ever thus to tyrants". It's the motto of Commonwealth of Virginia, suggested by George Mason in 1776 (I just read that detail in Catherine Drinker Bowen's "Miracle in Philadelphia" the other day). It's also the motto of our own Queen City, Allentown, PA.

Prost!
Brad

Thanks Brad. I didn't have "The Google" handy when I posted the wrong spellin'. Maybe I had "ever thus to dinosaurs."

 

[tdubel]

If you get beyond the many unfounded conspiracy theories which is not that difficult (pick one and check it out), it actually is a very simple case. Many people refuse to believe that for whatever reason like they once wanted to believe that the world was flat. The fact that there are a lot of theories and many people believe in them isn't evidence of anything. I don't follow how there is some middle point between conspiracy and anti-conspiracy theories. But anyone who believes the government could pull this off and cover it up for fifty years has never worked for the government! Look at Watergate which was a million times less complex than what is alleged here.

A simple way to review this case for general signs of a conspiracy is to ask yourself what would the conspirators have known at the time before the assassination when they would have been planning this and not what we know now after the fact. Does the information that they would have known conform to a plan here to frame Oswald? For example, if you believe there was a shooter on the grassy knoll and someone was framing Oswald, then how would the conspirators know that no one would get a picture of them? There were dozens of people taking pictures in Dealey Plaza. Answer - It was impossible for them to know what would show up on various photographs. How would they know Oswald couldn't be accounted for at the time of the shooting? Answer - they wouldn't unless he was locked in a closet which we know isn't true since he was seen before and after the shooting. How and when did Oswald get his job at the TSBD where he shot Kennedy (a critical factor in any conspiracy plan). Answer - it was a matter of chance involving two ladies in the suburbs of Dallas. Not even the conspiracy theorists believe these ladies were secret agents. Would an intricate conspiracy at the highest levels to frame Oswald be based on that chance? No one even knew that Kennedy was coming to Dallas or that his motorcade would pass the Book Depository when Oswald got the job. Did the conspirators have a crystal ball to know this before that decision had even been made? If not, it couldn't have been a planned conspiracy. It's simply impossible to get around that time line even if you believe there are anomalies in the evidence. If you accept the uncontested fact that Oswald got his job at the Texas School Book Depository as a matter of chance before anyone knew Kennedy was coming to Dallas - it significantly undermines any notion of a pre-planned conspiracy to frame Oswald. This is just common sense without even getting into the overwhelming direct evidence that links Oswald to the murder weapon and indirect evidence about his behavior before and after the shooting which would have convicted him a hundred times over. I realize most people have made up their minds and there is no dissuading them. But my frustration is seeing the flimsy arguments in support of a conspiracy raised over and over again when they are just flat out unsupported, implausible and/or inaccurate. Some people with open minds then begin to accept them as the truth which is unfortunate.

Doug,
My point is there are facts laid out both by the "official" investigation and some of the various conspiracy theories that are facts. I do believe the truth is somewhere in between here. Too much suppression of evidence, for example, the grassy knoll, there are a lot of people who saw the first news reports and chaos who talk about shots from the knoll, eyewitnesses, why are they not in the official record? Why do later news broadcasts appear to be edited and whitewashed with officialdom? There are countless other facts that don't add up.

Where I lie is what I said, I don't know what the truth is and most who do are dead and that is that. People will believe which side they believe and I don't know if there is a "right" answer, b/c each of us who are now armchair historians who all have our own interpretation and belief of the evidence. In other words, if you took a survey of 100 people, I bet you get 50 votes on one side and 50 on the other and each side will say the other side is flat out wrong and don't know what they are talking about!

TD

 

[PanzerAce1944]

Doug,
My point is there are facts laid out both by the "official" investigation and some of the various conspiracy theories that are facts. I do believe the truth is somewhere in between here. Too much suppression of evidence, for example, the grassy knoll, there are a lot of people who saw the first news reports and chaos who talk about shots from the knoll, eyewitnesses, why are they not in the official record? Why do later news broadcasts appear to be edited and whitewashed with officialdom? There are countless other facts that don't add up.

Where I lie is what I said, I don't know what the truth is and most who do are dead and that is that. People will believe which side they believe and I don't know if there is a "right" answer, b/c each of us who are now armchair historians who all have our own interpretation and belief of the evidence. In other words, if you took a survey of 100 people, I bet you get 50 votes on one side and 50 on the other and each side will say the other side is flat out wrong and don't know what they are talking about!

TD

I agree with you TDUBEL {bravo}}

 

[Scott]

Thanks Combat I'm definately leaning back towards Oswald acting alone, but I guess we'll never be sure 100%, as its not beyond the capabilites of government to pull something like this off.

Was Princess Di an accident.... ^&confuse

No......I'm pretty sure her parents wanted another child.

 

[Combat]

Just finished a new book called "The Kennedy Detail" written by a couple of the secret service agents including Clint Hill who jumped on the back of the car after Kennedy was hit. A poorly written book for the most part - and an amazingly annoying choice to write it in the third person - but a couple of interesting details about the security measures. Bottom line that the security detail was stretched thin, understaffed and overworked. No real criticism of the slow reaction to the shooting by the agents, but it could be implied that fatigue was a substantial factor. Also confirmation that Kennedy ordered agents off the riding boards during a Tampa motorcade a few days before the assassination. The conclusion by the authors is that there was no conspiracy. They discuss and explain a couple of the crazier theories involving the secret service agents themselves.