JFK Assassination
73- Rick Marlow
- 279 posts
- Joined: 3 months ago
- Hubs: 14
- Fans: 33
Did Oswald act alone?
92- ralwus
- 2814 posts
- Joined: 6 months ago
- Hubs: 70
- Fans: 411
I can't say, who can for sure?
95- dohn121
- 1563 posts
- Joined: 5 months ago
- Hubs: 69
- Fans: 630
Nope, there were at least 2 others involved...Since I don't want to get shot myself, I will not go into details
Here's a hint: CIA- 92
- ralwus
- 2814 posts
- Joined: 6 months ago
- Hubs: 70
- Fans: 411
CIA is 3 more ain't it? LOL
89- wavegirl22
- 206 posts
- Joined: 2 months ago
- Hubs: 11
- Fans: 82
ha and to think I always thought it was the Mob . .so I guess if you add the CIA and Oswald to the mob. . there you have it . .3 which makes dohn right as usual
- 73
- Rick Marlow
- 279 posts
- Joined: 3 months ago
- Hubs: 14
- Fans: 33
dohn121 wrote:
Nope, there were at least 2 others involved...Since I don't want to get shot myself, I will not go into details
Here's a hint: CIAI`ve shot a lot of weapons over the years and every target I hit moved in the direction of the bullet.The first rounds obviously came from behind as his body went into forward motion.But when the last round struck him in the forehead his body went backwards along with the back of his skull. My contention is of a forward shooter also,though not necessarily from the grassy knoll.
- 73
- Rick Marlow
- 279 posts
- Joined: 3 months ago
- Hubs: 14
- Fans: 33
ralwus wrote:
I can't say, who can for sure?
Ralwus, I thought a man of your wisdom would add a little more spice. Are you holding back?
Did Oswald act alone? I don't think so. KILLING KENNEDY (BY HARRISON LIVINGSTONE) and HERITAGE OF STONE (BY JIM GARRISON) and BEST EVIDENCE (BY DAVID LIFTON) are among quite a few others which strongly identify the basic elements of conspiracy. There are some undisputed facts that stand out in this murder case which investigations like the above are able to develop convincingly toward the conspiracy option.
There are perhaps a million contrary "facts" and arguments against the conspiracy option, but I've found that persistent study of the assassination diminishes those in favor of plausibility and the basic undisputed facts of the case.
It does not seem basically above board when government officials who say they have nothing illegal to hide would, nevertheless, hide evidentiary documentation directly attached to a murder case involving the head of state.
The claim by such officials that national security interests prevented them from publishing the documents is revealed as nothing more than a generic political and judicial smoke screen when closely considered. The assertion that American society would self-destruct upon finding out the hidden facts of this case is not a reasonable calculation. If that were so, one might ask why has it not done so under the weight of all its other socio-psychological traumas? Or why has it not done so despite the prevalence of its belief that this case involves high treason and conspiracy?
Further, any retaliatory action taken against foreign agents involved in the assassination at any level, if there were any, would lie strictly within the power of the government, not within the grasp of the general population. No matter how disturbed it were about the case or how vocal it became over it, the general population has no ability to order and execute a nuclear attack, covert operation or other judicial action designed to punish those it believed to be guilty in this case. The idea that people would break into mass rioting that would end with the government overturned seems more reflective of fear originating within that government than of the probable outcome of revealed facts applying to this case.
Besides the series of obvious, timely murders of material witnesses in this case, there are some key admissions of high officials on record that occurred after the fact which directly contradict their prior position on key points in the official investigation. Certain of these admissions support the option of conspiracy by implication. Hoover and Clay Shaw are among these.
In my view, after years of personal study and contemplation of this subject, the Kennedy assassination is solved as a whole; all the key names, documents, and undisputed facts needed to solve it are publicly known. All an interested person has to do is take enough time to seriously consider the disputed elements of this case in comparison with those that are undisputed on both sides. The political atmosphere of that time period is one of those undisputed facts. The puzzle falls clearly into place after such factors are considered.
In the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the investigated results are not the ultimate issue.
The enactment of due justice is what has remained elusive. Perhaps irretrievably so.
85- A Texan
- 3227 posts
- Joined: 5 months ago
- Hubs: 42
- Fans: 147
Now this is an interesting thread, a Marine could have made at least one shot from his position but Oswald is said to have hit Kennedy 3 times, right? In the film you see Kennedy's head go backwards as if shot from the front, I would have to say at least one other shooter.
I think It was Elvis !
- 85
- A Texan
- 3227 posts
- Joined: 5 months ago
- Hubs: 42
- Fans: 147
tony0724 wrote:
I think It was Elvis !
or bigfoot
Back and to the left, Back and to the left.
I don't think so- 85
- A Texan
- 3227 posts
- Joined: 5 months ago
- Hubs: 42
- Fans: 147
bgpappa wrote:
Back and to the left, Back and to the left.
I don't think soWhat do you mean?
- 92
- ralwus
- 2814 posts
- Joined: 6 months ago
- Hubs: 70
- Fans: 411
Ok, here it is, my wisdom as you have put it. Don't say the old lady screamed. Bring her on and let her scream. Johnson and J. Edgar had it done!
- 73
- Rick Marlow
- 279 posts
- Joined: 3 months ago
- Hubs: 14
- Fans: 33
LEWJ wrote:
Did Oswald act alone? I don't think so. KILLING KENNEDY (BY HARRISON LIVINGSTONE) and HERITAGE OF STONE (BY JIM GARRISON) are among quite a few others which strongly identify the basic elements of conspiracy. There are some undisputed facts that stand out in this murder case which investigations like the above are able to develop convincingly toward the conspiracy option.
There are perhaps a million contrary "facts" and arguments against the conspiracy option, but I've found that persistent study of the assassination diminishes those in favor of plausibility and the basic undisputed facts of the case.
It does not seem basically above board when government officials who say they have nothing illegal to hide would, nevertheless, hide evidentiary documentation directly attached to a murder case involving the head of state.
The claim by such officials that national security interests prevented them from publishing the documents is revealed as nothing more than a generic political and judicial smoke screen when closely considered. The assertion that American society would self-destruct upon finding out the hidden facts of this case is not a reasonable calculation. If that were so, one might ask why has it not done so under the weight of all its other socio-psychological traumas? Or why has it not done so despite the prevalence of its belief that this case involves high treason and conspiracy?
Further, any retaliatory action taken against foreign agents involved in the assassination at any level, if there were any, would lie strictly within the power of the government, not within the grasp of the general population. No matter how disturbed it were about the case or how vocal it became over it, the general population has no ability to order and execute a nuclear attack, covert operation or other judicial action designed to punish those it believed to be guilty in this case. The idea that people would break into mass rioting that would end with the government overturned seems more reflective of fear originating within that government than of the probable outcome of revealed facts applying to this case.
Besides the series of obvious, timely murders of material witnesses in this case, there are some key admissions of high officials on record that occurred after the fact which directly contradict their prior position on key points in the official investigation. Certain of these admissions support the option of conspiracy by implication. Hoover and Clay Shaw are among these.
In my view, after years of personal study and contemplation of this subject, the Kennedy assassination is solved as a whole; all the key names, documents, and undisputed facts needed to solve it are publicly known. All an interested person has to do is take enough time to seriously consider the disputed elements of this case in comparison with those that are undisputed on both sides. The political atmosphere of that time period is one of those undisputed facts. The puzzle falls clearly into place after such factors are considered.
In the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the investigated results are not the ultimate issue.
The enactment of due justice is what has remained elusive. Perhaps irretrievably so.
LEWJ, Thats an excellent reply and very inclusive. It appears you`ve given the subject much concideration over the years as I have .Thanks
- 73
- Rick Marlow
- 279 posts
- Joined: 3 months ago
- Hubs: 14
- Fans: 33
ralwus wrote:
Ok, here it is, my wisdom as you have put it. Don't say the old lady screamed. Bring her on and let her scream. Johnson and J. Edgar had it done!
Now Ralwus, that`s what I`m talking about. I hoped more was forthcoming.
97- KCC Big Country
- 2085 posts
- Joined: 14 months ago
- Hubs: 252
- Fans: 802
LEWJ did give a good reply. That was almost a hub's worth. Well done.
96- Pete Maida
- 510 posts
- Joined: 9 months ago
- Hubs: 163
- Fans: 323
The movie JFK posed a lot of interesitng questions. The idea that I thought was unique was that JFK was considering ending the growing idea of the military industrual complex.
I was considering pulling out of Vietnam and restructing and rethinking how defense money was spent.
I have no more facts that anyone and I can't say if that had anything to do with his death, but it would have put an end to provate industries control of our defense.- 73
- Rick Marlow
- 279 posts
- Joined: 3 months ago
- Hubs: 14
- Fans: 33
A Texan wrote:
Now this is an interesting thread, a Marine could have made at least one shot from his position but Oswald is said to have hit Kennedy 3 times, right? In the film you see Kennedy's head go backwards as if shot from the front, I would have to say at least one other shooter.
I used to have a 6.5 Carcano exactly like Oswald supposedly used and theres no way Oswald could have gotten off 3 rounds at that range even mounted in a bench rest,much less freehand.
Rick Marlow wrote:
A Texan wrote:
Now this is an interesting thread, a Marine could have made at least one shot from his position but Oswald is said to have hit Kennedy 3 times, right? In the film you see Kennedy's head go backwards as if shot from the front, I would have to say at least one other shooter.
I used to have a 6.5 Carcano exactly like Oswald supposedly used and theres no way Oswald could have gotten off 3 rounds at that range even mounted in a bench rest,much less freehand.
I appreciate your reply, Rick, and yours, KCC. I've read and heard that Oswald's supposed firing position was 88 yards away from the Kennedy car, that Oswald was not a good shot according to his marine records, that his palm print was'nt found on the claimed weapon until AFTER his death, that no gun powder residue was found anywhere on Oswald after the assassination, that several other rifles were claimed to also be the murder weapon soon after the assassination, that expert riflemen were unable to hit the target in 6 seconds at 88 yards distant, that Oswald was a CIA agent who knew David Ferry among other major players in the case, and that Oswald sent a Telex message warning of an assassination attempt against Kennedy just a few days before it happened. After all this and more of a circumstantial kind is considered, it seems that the real question should be "Did Oswald act AT ALL?," and the answer appears to be that he DID'NT act at all in the murder of Kennedy itself.
The case of CIA agent Gary Underhill is to me one of the most dramatic and transparent elements in the case which points with painful confidence to a monstrous governmental conspiracy against John Kennedy.
All this does not even take into account that the official physician reports on the condition of the ex-president's corpse at the time of its initial examination show clear contradictions of its condition after it had been examined later at Bethesda by unqualified personnel. These contradictions involve the location, size and type of the wounds inflicted on Kennedy's body, and have been publicly verified by the physicians involved in the initial exam.
Nor is it yet mentioned that the original examination of the corpse was illegally controlled by top brass military personnel who repeatedly interrupted the efforts of the attendant physicians to perform the examination according to the standard requirements of their profession and the legal requirements of law.
Nor is it yet mentioned that the forced and very hurried removal of Kennedy's body from Parkland Hospital by armed CIA agents was an unlawful act in breach of established state law.
There is so much else that can be added to this topic which is unknown to the general public due to lack of interest and willingness to let others do all the thinking.
The end results scream, beg and groan in anguish of CONSPIRACY.
