Assassination of Kennedy

Jan 2009
9
Well, this is a topic I debated about many times.
So, what I believe is that it was a inside job, and by that I don't mean the limousine driver turned around and shot him point blank.
The thing is if you look at the facts, JFK was speaking out about "Secret Societies" and was assasinated on his trip to Dallas, Texas by "Oswald"
I think JFK was a person that couldn't be controlled by the secret societies.
 
Jan 2009
639
I used to believe that there was a conspiracy, but I just kind of realized that there was no reason for one. I could go over the specifics, but it would take a lot more than a single forum post.

The biggest problem is that he really wasn't speaking out about much. He was aggressive against the communists and a close review of his actions wouldn't seem to suggest that he was planning to pull out of Vietnam. He was just another politician that was killed by a crazy guy.

I find it interested that similar circumstances surrounded the assassination of Garfield and McKinley and the attempted assassination of Reagan, Roosevelt, and a bunch of others. Just look at all the assassinations and attempted assassinations that have happened for simple reasons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Assassinated_United_States_Presidents
 
Jan 2009
181
Philadelphia
I used to believe that there was a conspiracy, but I just kind of realized that there was no reason for one. I could go over the specifics, but it would take a lot more than a single forum post.

The biggest problem is that he really wasn't speaking out about much. He was aggressive against the communists and a close review of his actions wouldn't seem to suggest that he was planning to pull out of Vietnam. He was just another politician that was killed by a crazy guy.

I find it interested that similar circumstances surrounded the assassination of Garfield and McKinley and the attempted assassination of Reagan, Roosevelt, and a bunch of others. Just look at all the assassinations and attempted assassinations that have happened for simple reasons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Assassinated_United_States_Presidents
The right wing anticommunist didn't think he was aggressive against the communist ( John Birch Society ) They thought JFK was a communist or at least a sympathizer. The failure of the The Bay of Pigs operation, the Cuban Missle Crisis ( a direct result of the bay of pigs), Missle treaties with Russia, appeasement tword Russia to never invade Cuba and removal of missles from Turkey in return for removal of missles from Cuba. His stance on segragation, at the time the FBI thought that the Civil Rights movement was a Communist Plot or at least highly influenced by the Communist. In 1963 we had "Military Advisors" in Vietnam and in the Pentagon Papers it indicates that the JFK Administration had no intensions of esculating the War in Vietnam. The hard right wing saw JFK as soft on Communism or an agent of the Communist. If Oswald, as they say, was a lone nut why was all the evidence sealed? In 1963 it wasn't a Federal Offense to kill a president and jurisdiction for the investigation would be local, unless the Federal Government had evidence that it was a conspiracy, it was always a Federal Offense to conspire to kill a Gov. Offical in the performance of his duties. The initial action of the Government and the FBI on that day leads me to believe that the Government was sure that JFKs assassination was a conspiracy. They had proof that other people were involved, the phone calls to the Cuban embassy in Mexico, the photo of Oswald in Mexico, which was proven not to be Oswald.
 
Last edited:
Jan 2009
118
I'm not sure what to think, but both things could be likely.

The Kennedys are quite powerful, and thus probably have "gained" a bunch of enemies over time. Some of these enemies might be "insiders", others might be people outside of politics with other interests in mind. So with all that in mind, both theories make sense to me.
 
Jan 2009
639
Hello Porsteamboy,
I'll just hit the high points that I can remember. I think most people (even at the time) acknowledged that the Bay of Pigs failed because the people were strangely happy with communism. Kennedy's only failing was refusing to send in air support.

I checked the wikipedia page for the Pentagon Papers and all it said was the Kennedy supported the overthrow of Ngo Dinh Diem in 1963. That doesn't sound like a plan to withdraw. The only evidence of that policy is that he secured Christmas leave for some soldiers at one point, and even that was dependent on South Vietnamese forces being ready to pick up the slack.

It shouldn't be strange that they treated it as a conspiracy. A Soviet conspiracy was the worst possible outcome and therefore the first thing they wanted to rule out. I will admit that the Warren Commission was more focused on pushing it under the rug than turning the country upside down, but subsequent investigations didn't reveal anything either.

As far as classification, I'll just point to the currently classified brief on a plot to assassinate Santa Clause (I really wish I was kidding). We classify a bunch of random garbage as it is. Throw in the Red Scare and we're lucky that they released anything.
 
Jan 2009
35
These theories are just ridiculous and are created by people who have nothing better to do than stir-up rumors and try to act like they know something.
 
Jan 2009
181
Philadelphia
Hello Porsteamboy,
I'll just hit the high points that I can remember. I think most people (even at the time) acknowledged that the Bay of Pigs failed because the people were strangely happy with communism. Kennedy's only failing was refusing to send in air support.

I checked the wikipedia page for the Pentagon Papers and all it said was the Kennedy supported the overthrow of Ngo Dinh Diem in 1963. That doesn't sound like a plan to withdraw. The only evidence of that policy is that he secured Christmas leave for some soldiers at one point, and even that was dependent on South Vietnamese forces being ready to pick up the slack.

It shouldn't be strange that they treated it as a conspiracy. A Soviet conspiracy was the worst possible outcome and therefore the first thing they wanted to rule out. I will admit that the Warren Commission was more focused on pushing it under the rug than turning the country upside down, but subsequent investigations didn't reveal anything either.

As far as classification, I'll just point to the currently classified brief on a plot to assassinate Santa Clause (I really wish I was kidding). We classify a bunch of random garbage as it is. Throw in the Red Scare and we're lucky that they released anything.
Well, the CIA and Cuban exiles felt that by not supplying air support was the reason for failure. JFK took full responsibilty for the failure and then fired the the people he thought contributed to its failure, Allen Dulles for one. Its in the Pentagon papers, you have to read the Pentagon Papers. Secretary McNamara and General Taylor reported their judgement that the major part of the U.S. Military task can be completed by the end of 1965. on Oct.,1963 White House announcement of the Phase out Policy. It's true that it depended on the south Vietnamese to pick up the slack. But secretary McNamara and Gen.Taylor both judged this was occuring and would be completed by 1965. This was for advisory personnel, as I'm sure you know we had no ground troops over there at the time. So by the time Oswald was shot about two days later the Dallas Police and the FBI concluded that Oswald killed officer Tippet and was the lone shooter in the assassination of JFK. The reason for the Warren Commission was to squelch the conspiracy rumors that were developing and make the public beleive Oswald was the lone shooter and no conspiracy had taken place. Also to stop a congressional committee and Texas attorney General investigation into the assassination. They had the "Proof" that Oswald was a lone shooter and acted alone, why the Warren Commission, because most people didn't believe the Offical story and I don't even today.
 
Last edited:
Jan 2009
11
I think there is a little bit of a conspiracy. Oswald probably acted alone but the CIA or FBI had a hand in making things look a little odd. We may never know for sure though
 
Jan 2009
140
People often forget that the house select comittee on assasination sin the 70's which was the more thorough investigation concluded that oswald probably didnt act alone in the assasination. Forget aboutthe fact that oswald was a pro marxist and had made his feelings well know before and yet was stationed at a top secret air base in japan that monitored u2 spy plane flights.

Anyone who studied the assasination enough would know that it smelled fishy from head to tail.

I guess some people failed to study nsam 263 and nsam 273, oh lets not forget nsam 55,56 or 57.

there is so much I could say but I see we have the rose pettled glasses on today:)

There were many reasons to take him out, but as always the biggest reason to take anyone out is for business and war is the biggest business out there.
Its funny how he fired allen dulles who was the head of the cia and guess who appears as one of the heads of the warren comission investigating the death of the very guy who fired him looooooooooooooooooooool. Thats right folks, good ole allen dulles.
This is called power folks plain and simple.
 
Last edited:
Jan 2009
181
Philadelphia
People often forget that the house select comittee on assasination sin the 70's which was the more thorough investigation concluded that oswald probably didnt act alone in the assasination. Forget aboutthe fact that oswald was a pro marxist and had made his feelings well know before and yet was stationed at a top secret air base in japan that monitored u2 spy plane flights.

Anyone who studied the assasination enough would know that it smelled fishy from head to tail.

I guess some people failed to study nsam 263 and nsam 273, oh lets not forget nsam 55,56 or 57.

there is so much I could say but I see we have the rose pettled glasses on today:)

There were many reasons to take him out, but as always the biggest reason to take anyone out is for business and war is the biggest business out there.
Its funny how he fired allen dulles who was the head of the cia and guess who appears as one of the heads of the warren comission investigating the death of the very guy who fired him looooooooooooooooooooool. Thats right folks, good ole allen dulles.
This is called power folks plain and simple.
The house select committee on assassination based their findings (Oswald probably didn't act alone , key word probably ) on acoustics which now have been placed in doubt. I don't believe the conclusion of the Warren commission or any other Government Investigation. Its plausible that Oswald could have acted alone, what bothers me is; if oswald acted alone and the Dallas Police and FBI had all this hard evidence that Oswald acted alone, why the need for the warren commission. Well, because people were bringing up doubts about the offical story, questioning evidence, investigation procedures and so on. These doubts, they called conspiracy theories, so LBJ formed the Warren Commission to Squelch these doubts and make the public believe Oswald acted alone and there was no conspiracy. But there was evidence that other people were involved, not one Government investigation pursued this evidence in their investigations.
 
Last edited:
Jan 2009
639
I'll just make a note that you're right about the acoustics. Those have been pretty well discredited.

I always saw the Warren Commission as a requirement to help calm the country and dispel fears that the Soviets were behind it. I always did feel that they rushed through it to confirm their basic suspicions. That's why the agreed to do the later investigations and examine new angles.

I really just don't think there's much evidence of other people's involvement. It seems pretty plausible that some crazy guy bought a cheap Italian rifle and shot the President. Like I said, it had happened before at close range for crazier reasons.

Note to PingPong - I hadn't ever heard about the U2 story and it doesn't sound correct to me (I'd have to check and it is honestly too much of a pain to dig up my debunking sources). That said...we did a whole bunch of stupid stuff with our aircraft technology. If I remember correctly we often let ambassadors that we working for the Soviets take tours of Area 51 (where they also saw the U2).
 
Jan 2009
181
Philadelphia
I'll just make a note that you're right about the acoustics. Those have been pretty well discredited.

I always saw the Warren Commission as a requirement to help calm the country and dispel fears that the Soviets were behind it. I always did feel that they rushed through it to confirm their basic suspicions. That's why the agreed to do the later investigations and examine new angles.

I really just don't think there's much evidence of other people's involvement. It seems pretty plausible that some crazy guy bought a cheap Italian rifle and shot the President. Like I said, it had happened before at close range for crazier reasons.

Note to PingPong - I hadn't ever heard about the U2 story and it doesn't sound correct to me (I'd have to check and it is honestly too much of a pain to dig up my debunking sources). That said...we did a whole bunch of stupid stuff with our aircraft technology. If I remember correctly we often let ambassadors that we working for the Soviets take tours of Area 51 (where they also saw the U2).
Arlen Specter in testimoy to the Select Committe on Assassinations...Question- was the goal of the Warren Commission to allay public fears? answer- No, To prevent an international crisis? answer- No, To allow a smooth transition in National leadership? answer-No. Then he said "to find facts surrounding the assassination of JFK, plain and simple. Then later in his testimony he stated "I think it's healthy in a Democracy to investigate, whenever there is public concern". So, to me it sounds like the Warren Commission was created to squelch the publics concerns over the conclusion of the Dallas police and FBI.. During this testimony of Arlen Specter it came out that, in Dec. of 1963 Attorney General Robert Kennedy wrote to each member of the Warren Commission recommending that the commission issue a press release stating the FBI report clearly showed there was no International conspiracy and Oswald was a loner. Arlen Specter stated, that he was not aware of that but he didn't join the Commissission until Jan. of 1964. but was thankful that the Commission didn't comply. I think the fact that the FBI and the CIA had evidence, tapes and a photo of a man claiming to be Oswald in Mexico was pretty important. It is plausible that Owald bought a rifle and killed the president but its also plausible that he did it in conspiracy with other or others. Pingpong was correct in that Oswald was stationed at the Naval air Facility at Atsugi Japan and that Top Secret U-2 spy planes were stationed there, he was a Radar operator and only held a CONFIDENIAL security clearence, so I doubt that Oswald was involved in any of thier operations.
 
Last edited:
Jan 2009
639
I definitely do think that the Warren Commission handled it pretty sloppily. They were obviously just trying to get a good and solid verdict on the matter, so they cut out a number of inconsistencies to make a pretty little package.

That doesn't necessarily mean that their findings were wrong though. Just that they need to be taken with a grain of salt.
 
Jan 2009
181
Philadelphia
I definitely do think that the Warren Commission handled it pretty sloppily. They were obviously just trying to get a good and solid verdict on the matter, so they cut out a number of inconsistencies to make a pretty little package.

That doesn't necessarily mean that their findings were wrong though. Just that they need to be taken with a grain of salt.
Cut out a number of inconsistencies! Like anything that would lead to a conspiracy!
The house Select Comittee On Assassinations charged with investigating the murders of JFK and MLK, got of to a rocky start. Famed prosecutor Richard Sprague, brought in to head the probe, quickly ran afoul of the CIA with refusal to sign secrecy oaths and his aggressive investigation into covered up aspects of the Oawald in Mexico saga, particularly around supposedly erased tapes of phone calls involving Oawald or an imposter. Then Dr. Burkley, JFK's personal physician whom the Warren Commission had never interviewed, had his lawyer contact the committee with information in the JFK assassination. Within days, Sprague had been ousted from the Committee and was replaced by G. Robert Blakey. So IMO the Mexico thing is pretty important, important that it not be investigated.
 
Last edited:
Jan 2009
181
Philadelphia
Arlen Specter testimony to the The house select Committee on Assassinations... "Well, I think from my own personal point of view that the investigation should not have been closed and the conclusion should not have been reached and I did not want to come to final conclusions without seeing the X-rays and photographs, so I went with the evidence I had." The X-rays and photographs were never released, he wanted those to verify the degree of angle of the wounds compared to the drawings of the wounds. So he based his single bullet conclusion on evidence that could have been faulty.
 
Last edited:
Jan 2009
181
Philadelphia
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/Hawaii2.jpg Pingpong to continue our conversation... Here is a picture of JFK in open motorcade, secret service in back up care, I have another from Ireland but it won't come up. House Select Committee on Assassinatons-Testimony of Col. Robert E. Jones, operations of the 12th military intelligence group from June '63 until Jan. '65 " We provided a small force-I do not recall how many but I would estimate between 8 and 12- during the Presidents visit to San Antonio, Tx. and then the following day, on his visit to dallas. The region also provided additional people from region 2".
 
Jan 2009
181
Philadelphia
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/cork.jpg Pingpong, here is the other picture of open motorcade in Ireland. Notice that the secret service is out of the car, if you read secret service agent Hill's testimony to the Warren Commission, he states that this is normal procedure when the crowds are close and the car is moving very slow. Also notice that no windows are closed and many people on balconies and in open windows.
 
Last edited:
Jan 2009
639
Yeah. I remember that being a big point with Kennedy. He loved the publicity of being an open car and waving to the crowd. Dallas was a PR trip, and riding in a closed car wouldn't exactly have made for the best newspaper pictures.

I also don't think they were as worried about snipers back then. The distribution of the secret service shows it pretty well. They were mainly concerned about some nut doing it at close range. That's how almost every other assassination had been.