kennedy assassination

[jimarilyn]

Oswald Didnt renounce his citizenship, or rather he didnt follow up on that request, and His citizenship WASNT renounced.
The so called "magic bullet" wasnt magic at all.Tests showed it acted in a way that it could reasonabley be expected to.
The shots that were fired at Kennedy were proved to have come from the depository,they couldnt have come from anywhere else....thats been proven.
Oswald wasnt a poor shot.
His re-entry into the US WASNT allowed at "amazing speed",other examples show that clearly.
The autopsy in dallas issue.The autopsy was carried out well within the limits law allowed.Its complicated state of affairs but its not really an issue.
The warren commission report was not a cover up,in fact completely the opposite, no stone was left unturned, every aspect was covered.There are 27 volumes of the commissions work aeound 18,000 pages and around 11,000,000 words.the commission took testimony affadavits etc fromover 550 witnesses, 10 times the number of witnesses called before congressional committee that investigated Pearl harbour for instance. The FBI conducted 25,000 interviews and handed in 2,300 seperate reports. 80 extra agents were sent to dallas in the immediate aftermath and over 3,000 items of evidence were handed over to the Warren commission. quote" never in history was a crime probed so intensely,and never before was an inquiry subjected to such intense scrutiny" unquote.....Now if there was a cover up,god knows how many people must have participated in it.
All your questions can be answered,but suffice it to say there has never been any evidence that a conspiracy occurred....but i guess its more fun to think that everyone except the Pope was involved.
regards

The magic bullet was not just "magic" it was "ridiculous".

It's nowhere near been proven that the bullets that killed JFK were fired from the TSBD.

By U.S law the autopsy should have been performed where the heinous deed was carried out.

The 888 page Warren Report was the biggest cover-up ever. LBJ even made sure that the 70 year old former CIA Chief Allen Dulles (fired from that position in 1961 by JFK) was one of the key members of the Commission. And Dulles did not like Kennedy one iota (to put it mildly).

There are 26 Volumes of testimony, documents and exhibits, not 27 as you say.

I suggest you read the full 26 volumes (they are available on-line for anyone to study, see the link below). It took me well over a year to plough through those many thousands of pages. Once anyone has read and studied these volumes it becomes as plain as the nose on one's face that the 888 page Warren Report bears hardly any resemblance to some of the dynamite stuff that is in those 26 volumes of testimony, documents and exhibits (these same 26 volumes also contain hundreds of pages of inane stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with the assassination).

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib.htm

[Doctor X]

The magic bullet was not just "magic" it was "ridiculous".

Save that it has been recreated.

It's nowhere near been proven that the bullets that killed JFK were fired from the TSBD.

Save the shot has been repeatedly created.

By U.S law the autopsy should have been performed where the heinous deed was carried out.

Ipse dixit but incorrect; autopsies are performed at different locations for various reasons. You may disagree with it, but it is not relevant to the finding.

The 888 page Warren Report was the biggest cover-up ever.

I would have rather thought Hitler's investigation of the fire at the Reichstag proved just a bit more obfucatory. . . .

None of your claims address the evidence previously reported.

Now . . . when do you have actual evidence that overturns the current findings?

--J.D.

[Ally]

Magpie,

And I was replying to someone elses use of the word ..LOL. In any case the Conspiracy theorists use "mint" with the bullet to indicate that it was not completely and totally deformed like the movies would have you believe a fired bullet must always be. The bullet had some deformity to it, but not as much as they think it ought to have so they say it was mint. I generally just go with the parlance of the people I am speaking to, rarely going out of my way to correct semantics if their point is understood.

[jimarilyn]

Save that it has been recreated.



Save the shot has been repeatedly created.



Ipse dixit but incorrect; autopsies are performed at different locations for various reasons. You may disagree with it, but it is not relevant to the finding.



I would have rather thought Hitler's investigation of the fire at the Reichstag proved just a bit more obfucatory. . . .

None of your claims address the evidence previously reported.

Now . . . when do you have actual evidence that overturns the current findings?

--J.D.

I could be wrong but you sound like a typical American who has the mentality that there is no such thing as a conspiracy. Hey man...get real. Conspiracies happen all the time in public lives, private lives.

Conspiracy : "A secret plan to commit a crime or do harm"

Don't be lazy, do your own homework. Get hold of a few dozen books both for and against, study them impartially and you'll come to one conclusion only (unless you're a friend or relative of Posner's,or Mailer's).

[Doctor X]

I could be wrong but you sound like a typical American who has the mentality that there is no such thing as a conspiracy.

Argumentum ad veritatem obfuscandam, et ad hominem, et Poisoning the Well.

Congratulations! Three classical fallacies in one sentence!

Nevertheless, never claimed that. I am merely the "typical critical thinker" who expects evidence and not slogans like . . . this:

Hey man...get real. Conspiracies happen all the time in public lives, private lives.

So . . . providing evidence for the JFK conspiracy should be easy, particularly that evidence the bullet was, as you claimed, "ridiculous."

I am certain you can disprove the reconstructions.

Take your time.

Don't be lazy, do your own homework. Get hold of a few dozen books both for and against, study them impartially and you'll come to one conclusion only (unless you're a friend or relative of Posner's,or Mailer's).

Have.

Why I realize you have done none of your "homework." Watching Kevin Costner films is never research.

Mailer? Self-important unreadable blow-hard. Mourned not his passing. Woody Allen claimed he would leave his ego to science.

You will need to pick another exemplar for your argumenta ad hominem.

Shermer! There is a good one!

Wait . . . I am not related to him.

Sorry, cannot help you with your fallacies.

Now, I am sure you can pick apart Posner, yes?

Take your time.

Yours critically,

--J.D.

[jimarilyn]

Any non-conspiratorial crime dies a quick death and is soon forgotten.

[Doctor X]

Any non-conspiratorial crime dies a quick death and is soon forgotten.

Interesting.

Not sure I find that true. "Memorable" crimes are memorable [Deep.--Ed.]. Well, they have elements that intrigue people. If they are unsolved--like the Ripper cases--they can attract attention. People can make them famous--as in the Ripper case.

However, it can get a bit circular: if you believe the Ripper murders were a conspiracy, you can respond, "a-HA!!"

What about the St. Valentine's Day Massacre? No conspiracy there. For ye who live in Ol' Blighty: Lord Lutton? Unless you think he was part of a conspiracy or others helped him cover it up.

The Holocaust. Not much of a conspiracy there--quite well know "whodunnit."

O.J. Simpson: "Not much of a conspiracy there--quite well known 'whodunnit.'"

Somewhere above there was a discussion on "balance." What drives a conspiracy theory is a lack of "balance" as well as curiosity--I will leave aside less-laudable drives like Anti-Semitism in Holocaust Denial, or political views in some 9/11 Conspiracies. I am intrigued that the "Clinton Death List" has officially been resurrected in e-mail chain letters! Funny, Monica and Linda survived, just like all of those JFK conspiracy book authors! Darn! Always miss those!

"Balance" in that when you look at a crime like the Holocaust you have the Third Reich on the other side of the scale. Rape of Nanking? Japanese military. Mei Lei? "American military." In all three there were cover-ups or attempts to cover-up the crimes. O.J.'s murder? You have him, his wealth, and "those lawyers!" Actually, you have to add in incompetent prosecutors.

Anyways, those things "balance." They make "sense" even though they are tragedies.

There was less of a drive to make Martin Luther King's assassination a wider conspiracy because his killer was an avowed racist. It made "sense." It "balanced."

JFK?

You have this loser. The more you study Oswald, the more he is revealed as a disturbing person. Even his brother has stated that as much as he wishes it was not his brother--or some "larger conspiracy"--the evidence points to him.

Oswald.

JFK--popular young telegenic President at the height of his power--before he could be blamed for Vietnam and "South American Activities"--versus . . .

. . . Oswald.

Just does not seem "fair." Does not "balance."

Add to that, as I stated, curiosity. What drives Ripperologists? Aside from bad tastes in music? Curiosity? Even the ones who [Huge sweeping generalization fallacy coming.--Ed.] know they will never "find t3h r34l killer" have a curiosity regarding the fact it remains unsolved.

The idea that one has discovered "something" is very attractive.

A very good example of this process is the wonderful documentary by Errol Morris: Mr. Death. Briefly, it describes a true "nebish"--a nerd who gets into repairing execution machines. If you are anti-death penalty, you will enjoy it just for those historical details.

He gets hired by defenders of Ernst Zundel. Who is he? Careful if you "Google" him--he is an infamous Anti-Semite, Holocaust Denier, and outright loon. He was on trial in Canada where it is illegal to publish lies like Holocaust Denial. Fred Leuchter--with no scientific background--wanders about Auschwitz and . . . long story short . . . thinks he has proven that no gas chambers ever existed.

He publishes a report--a mainstay on racist White Nationalist card-tables next to other crap I will not name.

This ruins him.

Now Fred was "excited" thinking he discovered something he thought was a "lie" a "puzzle." The reaction destroys his career, his marriage. His only friends become the Nazi-Wannabes who treat him like a university professor.

So he progressively embraces Holocaust Denial. All of the attacks he receives are merely part of the conspiracy.

Now, I am NOT saying those who promote JFK conspiracies for legitimate reasons--other than "hey, I can sell this!--have the same racist thinking. What is similar is the process. Fred NEVER looks at the evidence for the gas chambers. They are preserved at Auschwitz. He never does, because to do so would be for him to admit he was a fool.

The longer he exists in this world, the harder it is for him to crawl out. Psychologically, the only ones supporting him are . . . supporters of the conspiracy. Contrary evidence? It is part of the conspiracy.

Same process with other conspiracy theories.

What matters is the evidences.

Right. Blathered enough.

Yours long-windedly,

--J.D.

[Graham]

Being old and warty I remember quite well the JFK Assassination, and even as it was being sensationally reported on TV and radio the word 'conspiracy' was being bandied about. Possibly because it was considered that no one man was capable of such a horrendous and momentous crime as killing the young and hugely popular President of the USA, in public, and in the presence of his beautiful wife. Killing Presidents even in 1963 was something that happened in America only in the bad old monochrome days, not in modern technicolor times. Personally, I keep an open mind as to whether Oswald was part of a conspiracy or not, but I do find it rather difficult to accept that only he, and he alone, was involved in the planning of the thing. Maybe he acted alone in its execution.

I can think of cases in which there would seem very little doubt that some kind of conspiracy was behind them - the Lindbergh Kidnapping, the Rosenberg Case and Rudolf Hess being examples. On the other hand, there are still-celebrated murders in which no conspiracy has been suggested or detected, and which are still discussed avidly - William Wallace, The Axeman of New Orleans, and so forth.

I agree with Dr X that it's the nature of a crime that keeps it alive and kicking over the years. Even without the silly (in my opinion) conspiracy theories that have been cooked up about it, JtR will remain debated probably for ever - it was a most memorable series of murders at the time and remains so today.

Dr X - it's Lord Lucan you're thinking of. A rotter, a bounder and a cad, if ever there was a man with the attributes of all three. No doubt at all that he (accidentally) killed the baby-sitter, and probably very little doubt that what's left of him now lies on the bed of the English Channel. What keeps the case alive is not what he did but who he was, and how he apparently managed to do what millions of others would like to do, i.e., disappear off the face of the earth. By the way, his direct ancestor led the Charge of The Light Brigade....

Cheers,

Graham

[YankeeSergeant]

website

I found the website mentioned earlier in the post. and checked it out let me say that I don't know I still believe that there may have been a conspiracy but as a history major I believe the subject bears much more investigation. From a strictly legal stand point Oswald was innocent. He was never brought to trial. He was the only presidential assassin (known there are doubts that Harding died of natural causes)other than John Wilkes Booth not brought to trial and Booth freely admitted he killed Lincoln. Would the controversy exist if Ruby had not killed Oswald? The House Select Comittee inferred the possibility of a conspiracy fifteen years after the fact. Again I find too many questions to totally discount the theory of a conspiracy. The flip side of the coin is that there is a lot of disinformation coming form the pro-conspiracy camp as well.

[dougie]

The magic bullet was not just "magic" it was "ridiculous".

It's nowhere near been proven that the bullets that killed JFK were fired from the TSBD.

By U.S law the autopsy should have been performed where the heinous deed was carried out.

The 888 page Warren Report was the biggest cover-up ever. LBJ even made sure that the 70 year old former CIA Chief Allen Dulles (fired from that position in 1961 by JFK) was one of the key members of the Commission. And Dulles did not like Kennedy one iota (to put it mildly).

There are 26 Volumes of testimony, documents and exhibits, not 27 as you say.

I suggest you read the full 26 volumes (they are available on-line for anyone to study, see the link below). It took me well over a year to plough through those many thousands of pages. Once anyone has read and studied these volumes it becomes as plain as the nose on one's face that the 888 page Warren Report bears hardly any resemblance to some of the dynamite stuff that is in those 26 volumes of testimony, documents and exhibits (these same 26 volumes also contain hundreds of pages of inane stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with the assassination).



http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib.htm

You are wrong .The things you state that are "magic" "ridicolous" and inane have been proven to be just the opposite.The facts are there, no doubt whatsoever about it.I suggest you stop believing in these silly conspiracy theories and look at the facts,only then will you understand what really happened in those few days.
QUOTE " When I hear someone say the Warren commission investigation was superficial, inane and a cover-up,I immediately knoiw that the person has never read or worked with the 27 volumes of the commission,and is just parroting hearsay from some other person who hasnt read or worked with it either" UNQUOTE

[jimarilyn]

You are wrong .The things you state that are "magic" "ridicolous" and inane have been proven to be just the opposite.The facts are there, no doubt whatsoever about it.I suggest you stop believing in these silly conspiracy theories and look at the facts,only then will you understand what really happened in those few days.
QUOTE " When I hear someone say the Warren commission investigation was superficial, inane and a cover-up,I immediately knoiw that the person has never read or worked with the 27 volumes of the commission,and is just parroting hearsay from some other person who hasnt read or worked with it either" UNQUOTE

What you knoiw about the JFK assassination is less than nothing Doggie. Just for your information let me list all the books I have read concerning the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy.( I have all these books at home, except for the 26 Volumes of exhibits, testimony and documents ).

1) The 888 page Warren Commission Report (twice).
2) The FULL 26 volumes of exhibits, testimony and documents
3) "Assignment Oswald" by James P. Hosty.
4) "Coup d'Etat" by Alan J Weberman & Michael Canfield.
5) "Mrs. Paine's Garage" by Thomas Mallon.
6) "Deep Politics and the death of JFK" by Peter Dale Scott.
7) "ZR Rifle: The plot to kill Kennedy and Castro.
8) "Crossfire" by Jim Marrs.
9) "JFK. The CIA, Vietnam and the Plot to assassinate John F Kennedy.
10) "Conspiracy of One" by Jim Moore.
11) "Who shot JFK ?" by Bob Callahan.
12) "Case Closed" by Gerald Posner.
13) "Case Open" by Harold Weisberg.
14) "Plausible Denial" by Mark Lane.
15) "Marina and Lee" by Priscilla Johnson McMillan.
16) "Say Goodbye to America" by Matthew Smith.
17) "Assassination Science" by James H. Fetzer.
18) "High Treason" by Harrison E. Livingstone & Robert J. Groden.
19) "JFK. The Second Plot" by Matthew Smith.
20) "Best Evidence" by David S. Lifton.
21) "The Second Oswald" by Richard H. Popkin.
22) "Deadly Secrets" by Warren Hinckle & William Turner.
23) "Who killed Kennedy" by Thomas G. Buchanan.
24) "Triangle of death" by Brad O'Leary & L.E. Seymour.
25) "Final Judgment" by Michael Collins Piper.
26) "A Farewell to Justice" by Joan Mellen.
27) "On the trail of the assassins" by Jim Garrison.
28) "The Kennedy Conspiracy" by Anthony Summers.
29) "Oswald Talked" by Ray & Mary La Fontaine.
30) "Fatal Hour" by G.Robert Blakey & Richard N. Billings.
31) "Death of a President" by William Manchester.
32) "Rush to Judgment" by Mark Lane.
33) "The Assassinations" by James DiEugenio & Lisa Pease.
34) "The People v Lee Harvey Oswald" by Walt Brown.
35) "The man who knew too much" by Dick Russell.
36) "The search for Lee Harvey Oswald" by Robert J. Groden.
37) "The Killing of a President" by Robert J. Groden.
38) "Who killed JFK ?" by Carl Oglesby.
39) "The Mafia killed President Kennedy" by David E. Scheim.
40) "Inquest" by Edward Jay Epstein.
41) "Oswald's Tale" by Norman Mailer.

Not to mention all the other books hired from public libraries over the years.


So it is you young squire who is irrefutably 100% wrong.

[sdreid]

But you don't have the Hustler Magazine accusing Onassis.

[dougie]

Mary,
Im surprised Enid Blyton isnt amongst your list of authors.You may (or may not ) have read those books...the question is do you understand what you read?I note with glee Garrisons book is amongst those you glanced through,that guy was as much in touch with reality as a unicorn at a brothel might be .There are several other titles there which arent even worthy of the trash can....ever heard of the saying "quality not quantity"?You are wrong in your assessments,simple as that...its not up for question,unfortunately for you.

[jimarilyn]

Hi Stanley, you wouldn't like TIBET.

[dougie]

Marylin?
Mrs Paines garage? some book i bet! certainly some title..I bet that was a cracker!Was Ruth Paine the one behind the picket fence? or was she the intermediary between Oswald ,Ruby ," umbrella man "and Lyndon Johnson?...and of course the CIA,(we cant leave them out can we?)....The title of that book alone says it all.
Doggie