I think I've narrowed the JFK assassination to two possibilities

C

Craig234

Verified User
1. Oswald acted alone.

2. Certain CIA figures misguidedly thinking they were protecting the free world had Kennedy assassinated, using Oswald as a patsy and likely with MKULTRA conditioning; in this case, Ruby could have acted on behalf of Carlos Marcello, at the request of the CIA. Most likely CIA figures to be involved are led by Allen Dulles, followed by Richard Helms, James Angleton, and a few others. LBJ slightly involved? Possibly, not likely. J. Edgar Hoover and Warren Commission outside of Dulles not involved.

It's pretty remarkable how strong the cases for each of these scenarios are. It's also pretty remarkable how many basic issues have not been resolved.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
54 years later, with most of the principles no longer walking the earth, what difference does it make now?
Click to expand...

One reason it matters is because people would like to know if our 'democracy' got to the point that it had government staff decide they had the right the the obligation to kill our president - or if that didn't happen.

I think that the very fact of how many elements of that did happen alone is noteworthy and important.

How we got to the point that innocent people were harmed by programs like MKULTRA/Project Artichoke.

But nihilism seems to be growing in popularity - I wonder if even the taboo against using nuclear weapons is threatened. And we have just the president to end it.

Some would like to know the truth of what happened, if it can be found, which is not clear.
 
Craig234 said:
1. Oswald acted alone.

2. Certain CIA figures misguidedly thinking they were protecting the free world had Kennedy assassinated, using Oswald as a patsy and likely with MKULTRA conditioning; in this case, Ruby could have acted on behalf of Carlos Marcello, at the request of the CIA. Most likely CIA figures to be involved are led by Allen Dulles, followed by Richard Helms, James Angleton, and a few others. LBJ slightly involved? Possibly, not likely. J. Edgar Hoover and Warren Commission outside of Dulles not involved.

It's pretty remarkable how strong the cases for each of these scenarios are. It's also pretty remarkable how many basic issues have not been resolved.
Click to expand...

:popcorn:
 
Craig234 said:
1. Oswald acted alone.

2. Certain CIA figures misguidedly thinking they were protecting the free world had Kennedy assassinated, using Oswald as a patsy and likely with MKULTRA conditioning; in this case, Ruby could have acted on behalf of Carlos Marcello, at the request of the CIA. Most likely CIA figures to be involved are led by Allen Dulles, followed by Richard Helms, James Angleton, and a few others. LBJ slightly involved? Possibly, not likely. J. Edgar Hoover and Warren Commission outside of Dulles not involved.

It's pretty remarkable how strong the cases for each of these scenarios are. It's also pretty remarkable how many basic issues have not been resolved.
Click to expand...

come on


why is it hard to believe some gun nutter killed kennedy all on a idiot nutball whim.


look at the reagan assasination


The world hasnt changed much huh.


except now its much harder to kill people like the president


so now nutters like this just kill people at a country concert in vegas huh



the simplist answer is often the most likely senario
 
evince said:
come on


why is it hard to believe some gun nutter killed kennedy all on a idiot nutball whim.


look at the reagan assasination


The world hasnt changed much huh.


except now its much harder to kill people like the president


so now nutters like this just kill people at a country concert in vegas huh



the simplist answer is often the most likely senario
Click to expand...

Nobody has ever been able to replicate the shot. Even highly trained snipers. Oswald was one lucky mother fucker
 
evince said:
come on


why is it hard to believe some gun nutter killed kennedy all on a idiot nutball whim.


look at the reagan assasination


The world hasnt changed much huh.


except now its much harder to kill people like the president


so now nutters like this just kill people at a country concert in vegas huh



the simplist answer is often the most likely senario
Click to expand...


Well I guess there are two points. Do you not understand that scenario number 1 of 2 I posted IS that Oswald acted alone?

And there's a hell of a lot of evidence that's important to understand making the second scenario plausible. 'Simple' is neither proof nor helpful in getting to the truth on this when used to simply say 'don't look at the evidence for a conspiracy'.

Simply pointing to other crimes does not answer what happened here.

Before the Iraq War when Bush was looking for justification to attack, he had a plan to put Iraqi exiles into Iraq who would announce a coup, forcing Saddam to attack them, and then use that to justify the invasion. You could say the 'simplest explanation' had
that happened would have been for there to be no US role and you'd have been wrong, as they wanted. You have to not just say 'simple is right' even if it usually is.

Otherwise, you're at their mercy when they do conspire on something.
 
Craig234 said:
Well I guess there are two points. Do you not understand that scenario number 1 of 2 I posted IS that Oswald acted alone?

And there's a hell of a lot of evidence that's important to understand making the second scenario plausible. 'Simple' is neither proof nor helpful in getting to the truth on this when used to simply say 'don't look at the evidence for a conspiracy'.

Simply pointing to other crimes does not answer what happened here.

Before the Iraq War when Bush was looking for justification to attack, he had a plan to put Iraqi exiles into Iraq who would announce a coup, forcing Saddam to attack them, and then use that to justify the invasion. You could say the 'simplest explanation' had
that happened would have been for there to be no US role and you'd have been wrong, as they wanted. You have to not just say 'simple is right' even if it usually is.

Otherwise, you're at their mercy when they do conspire on something.
Click to expand...

link to proof of your claims?
 
evince said:
link to proof of your claims?
Click to expand...

I don't have links handy for that particular plot. But there are plenty of others well established that make the same point.

I don't know if you're at all familiar with CIA history. Just checking for a quick link on the one above, here are a couple links for you - one about an earlier coup against Saddam the CIA did attempt in 1998, and another more general link on plots.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/iraqi-officers-pay-dear-for-wests-coup-fiasco-1145298.html

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/217.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top