WaffenThinMint Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 The argument usually is because elements within the CIA were still annoyed about the Bay of Pigs fiasco when JFK bottled out of backing the invasion force and because they still wanted to engineer an invasion of Cuba. Having a pro-Castro Marxist as the assassin would have helped on that and Oswald shouting out that he was "just a patsy" even fits the scenario that he was framed to provide an excuse for an invasion. On the second part LBJ had to be at least after the fact if you believe that the Warren Commission was a cover up. Offset against that is the fact that Lee Harvey Oswald was a notorious attention whore whose testimony was less than trustworthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 A lot of people claim that elements within the CIA have long been involved with the drugs trade (stuff like the Air America movie starring Mel Gibson, and all the Iran-Contra stuff revolving around Mena, Arkansas) as have the Mafia obviously, so the two theories are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 This thread has become surreal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Offset against that is the fact that Lee Harvey Oswald was a notorious attention whore whose testimony was less than trustworthy. Also the fact that Oswald shot the president. Other than that, the conspiracy loon balls have a solid case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 You were there and saw him do it? To me the biggest problem with the official version, because it removed the possibility of there being a trial that would have provided American society with closure, is the Jack Ruby angle. That looked a lot like the silencing of an awkward witness before he could elaborate on the patsy remark and Jack Ruby doesn't appear to have been the sort of person that would do it out of a fierce sense of patriotism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 You were there and saw him do it? To me the biggest problem with the official version, because it removed the possibility of there being a trial that would have provided American society with closure, is the Jack Ruby angle. That looked a lot like the silencing of an awkward witness before he could elaborate on the patsy remark and Jack Ruby doesn't appear to have been the sort of person that would do it out of a fierce sense of patriotism. Was he not a terminally ill mafia associate? Maybe just looking after his family, in both senses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Not sure he was terminally ill when he shot Oswald. Having somebody with Mafia connections walk into a heavily guarded police station and shoot the alleged assassin on live TV looks very like a desperate attempt to silence Oswald and I'm sure that's the main reason why the conspiracy thing has never died. He obviously could have done it, but in the absence of a confession or a trial, it takes a leap of faith to be emphatically sure that he did and not being a religious type I prefer to be agnostic about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Not sure he was terminally ill when he shot Oswald. Having somebody with Mafia connections walk into a heavily guarded police station and shoot the alleged assassin on live TV looks very like a desperate attempt to silence Oswald and I'm sure that's the main reason why the conspiracy thing has never died. He obviously could have done it, but in the absence of a confession or a trial, it takes a leap of faith to be emphatically sure that he did and not being a religious type I prefer to be agnostic about it. All I know is from fictional tellings of the tale, the non fiction accounts leap to conclusions from motives alone with very little evidence. Don Dellilo's Libra and James Ellroy's American Tabloid are excellent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 You were there and saw him do it? To me the biggest problem with the official version, because it removed the possibility of there being a trial that would have provided American society with closure, is the Jack Ruby angle. That looked a lot like the silencing of an awkward witness before he could elaborate on the patsy remark and Jack Ruby doesn't appear to have been the sort of person that would do it out of a fierce sense of patriotism. The idea that LHO acted alone is as facile as the idea that he had nothing to do with it. The Warren Report serves to point at his guilt, while doing nothing to disprove the conspiracy. The gross incompetence of the Dallas police meant Oswald would have most likely been cleared on a mistrial. Ruby merely saved the country one heck of a legal shenanigans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sooky Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Some suggestions for potential VPs: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/05/who-will-be-donald-trumps-running-mate/?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_term=Autofeed#link_time=1462476929 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Given that security was a lot laxer in those days I don't see why a trained marksman couldn't have read the route in the local papers, found a good position in the Book Depository, and fired a few rounds off. I realise there are thousands of pages saying how this couldn't have happened, but equally there are thousands of pages saying the opposite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Some suggestions for potential VPs: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/05/who-will-be-donald-trumps-running-mate/?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_term=Autofeed#link_time=1462476929 Rob Portman, 60, Senator from Ohio says he is focused on his own race. Verdict: Strong possibility Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fullerene Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Did anyone think that this whole conspiracy about JFK being assassinated was itself the conspiracy. Let's face it - they botched it. The most powerful country in the world could not protect their own president - from whom - a nutcase who wanted to shoot someone. Would it not be better to suggest it was more complicated than that? Don't get me wrong. I do believe in conspiracy. There are plenty of people who conveniently leave the scene at just the right time. However, with JFK it is simpler - make sure he does not get re-elected. Are you really saying nobody was capable of dishing the dirt on JFK? If so, it is a different world to the one we live in now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Briggs Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Some suggestions for potential VPs: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/05/who-will-be-donald-trumps-running-mate/?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_term=Autofeed#link_time=1462476929 Some strange analysis in that article Susana Martinez, 56, Governor of New Mexico Pro: The first Latina to serve as governor, she would help alleviate Mr Trump’s lack of government experience and struggles with women and Hispanics. Con: Has disavowed Mr Trump's immigration policies and said she's not interested in the job Verdict: Strong possibility Nikki Haley, 44, Governor of South Carolina Pro: A conservative superstar trusted by the establishment, Mrs Haley could serve as a bridge builder on the Trump ticket Con: Criticised Mr Trump bitingly in a high-profile speech and as a surrogate for Marco Rubio, and has also said she's not interested. Verdict: Strong possibility John Kasich, 63, Governor of Ohio Pro: The governor of a crucial state with a resume a mile long and a history of outreach to independents, he is a textbook VP choice Con: Was shown blatant disrespect by Mr Trump during the campaign, and has long said he has no interest in being vice president Verdict: Strong possibility Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Did anyone think that this whole conspiracy about JFK being assassinated was itself the conspiracy. Let's face it - they botched it. The most powerful country in the world could not protect their own president - from whom - a nutcase who wanted to shoot someone. Would it not be better to suggest it was more complicated than that? Don't get me wrong. I do believe in conspiracy. There are plenty of people who conveniently leave the scene at just the right time. However, with JFK it is simpler - make sure he does not get re-elected. Are you really saying nobody was capable of dishing the dirt on JFK? If so, it is a different world to the one we live in now. There was certainly shedloads of dirt available, that's why he couldn't sack Hoover. A new conspiracy theory brought to you tonight is that Kennedy arranged it himself. His body was a total wreck, fucked spine, incapable of sex other than by blow job (apparently). His life of agonising pain mitigated by colossal amounts of opiates and amphetemines wasn't going to last much longer. Go out with a beautiful girl at your side on a sunny day in a limousine? Why not? Can you prove it didn't happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Briggs Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 The BBC is reporting that Trump is backing Brexit! Tim Franks ✔‎@BBCTimFranks BREAKING: @realDonaldTrump backs Brexit on @FoxNews 11:15 PM - 5 May 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmc dafc Posted May 6, 2016 Share Posted May 6, 2016 Another of the JFK reasons was he signed a bill to let the US start printing dollars, the banks were furious and it was the the first thing overturned after the murder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted May 6, 2016 Share Posted May 6, 2016 Another of the JFK reasons was he signed a bill to let the US start printing dollars, the banks were furious and it was the the first thing overturned after the murder So it was the banks, the Cubans, the Russians, the Mafia and LBJ? How about it was just a few screwballs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagfox Posted May 6, 2016 Share Posted May 6, 2016 The Donald thinks the UK should BREXIT, not a recommendation just a feeling, apparently... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yank Mike Posted May 6, 2016 Share Posted May 6, 2016 Some suggestions for potential VPs: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/05/who-will-be-donald-trumps-running-mate/?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_term=Autofeed#link_time=1462476929 I want this guy for VP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.