Did a right winger kill Kennedy???

[gipper]

Yes, I do. I believe that their was no conspiracy and the whole JFK assassination has been very easily explained ad nausium.

JFK Assassination Magic Bullet Test (Part 2) - YouTube


^^^^ There you go, folks - the "impossible" to replicate "magic bullet" fully replicated.

I bet you believe Obama when he said ad nauseum...."We will keep this promise to the American people … if you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period."

I bet you believe you have an account at the Social Security Administration waiting to pay for your retirement.

I bet you believe the Federal Reserve is a bank run by the federal government.

I bet you believe LBJ when he escalated the Vietnam War after the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

I bet you believe the US Government is NOT spying on Americans.

I bet you believe the bailouts of Wall Street saved America and the world from certain economic catastrophe.

I bet you believe you are smarter than and see clearer than everybody else.

No I do not. I do know that big centralized government always lies...and you should too. History shouts it to you...are you listening?

 

[Soupnazi630]

I bet you believe Obama when he said ad nauseum...."We will keep this promise to the American people … if you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period."

I bet you believe you have an account at the Social Security Administration waiting to pay for your retirement.

I bet you believe the Federal Reserve is a bank run by the federal government.

I bet you believe LBJ when he escalated the Vietnam War after the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

I bet you believe the US Government is NOT spying on Americans.

I bet you believe the bailouts of Wall Street saved America and the world from certain economic catastrophe.

I bet you believe you are smarter than and see clearer than everybody else.

No I do not. I do know that big centralized government always lies...and you should too. History shouts it to you...are you listening?

No government can always lie anymore than a government can always tell the truth.

The government proved throuhg evidence that OSwald killed Kennedy no evidence proves a conspiracy it is that simple.

Yes corruption and lies byt the government in some cases are irrefutable such as Watergate.

But one has nothing to do with the other

 

[Bfgrn]

I bet you believe you are smarter than and see clearer than everybody else.

No I do not. I do know that big centralized government always lies...and you should too. History shouts it to you...are you listening?

No government can always lie anymore than a government can always tell the truth.

The government proved throuhg evidence that OSwald killed Kennedy no evidence proves a conspiracy it is that simple.

Yes corruption and lies byt the government in some cases are irrefutable such as Watergate.

But one has nothing to do with the other

You clearly don't know anything about the Kennedy assassination do you?

The Warren Commission was a ruse set up by Johnson and FBI Director J Edgar Hoover to prevent Congressional investigations into the assassination. The Warren Commission did no investigating of the assassination. They relied totally of the FBI for 'evidence'.

Johnson, Hoover and the Justice Dept decided the outcome of the Warren Commission the moment Oswald was silenced.

Oswald did not act alone (the physical, ballistic and forensic evidence proves more than one gunman), but the government decided 3 days after the assassination of President Kennedy and one day after the killing of Oswald that Oswald MUST be the lone assassin.


Memo from the Attorney General's office to the White House:

Memo from Nicholas deB. Katzenbach, Deputy Attorney General

November 25, 1963

MEMORANDUM FOR MR. MOYERS

It is important that all of the facts surrounding President Kennedy's Assassination be made public in a way which will satisfy people in the United States and abroad that all the facts have been told and that a statement to this effect be made now.

1. The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial.

2. Speculation about Oswald's motivation ought to be cut off, and we should have some basis for rebutting thought that this was a Communist conspiracy or (as the Iron Curtain press is saying) a right-wing conspiracy to blame it on the Communists. Unfortunately the facts on Oswald seem about too pat-- too obvious (Marxist, Cuba, Russian wife, etc.). The Dallas police have put out statements on the Communist conspiracy theory, and it was they who were in charge when he was shot and thus silenced.

3. The matter has been handled thus far with neither dignity nor conviction. Facts have been mixed with rumour and speculation. We can scarcely let the world see us totally in the image of the Dallas police when our President is murdered.

I think this objective may be satisfied by making public as soon as possible a complete and thorough FBI report on Oswald and the assassination. This may run into the difficulty of pointing to in- consistencies between this report and statements by Dallas police officials. But the reputation of the Bureau is such that it may do the whole job. The only other step would be the appointment of a Presidential Commission of unimpeachable personnel to review and examine the evidence and announce its conclusions. This has both advantages and disadvantages. It think it can await publication of the FBI report and public reaction to it here and abroad.

I think, however, that a statement that all the facts will be made public property in an orderly and responsible way should be made now. We need something to head off public speculation or Congressional hearings of the wrong sort.

Nicholas deB. Katzenbach

Deputy Attorney General

 

[gipper]

The evidence proving a conspiracy in the JFK assassination is overwhelming. Yet millions Americans cling to the absurdity of the government's case against Oswald.

It defies logic.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

The evidence proving a conspiracy in the JFK assassination is overwhelming. Yet millions Americans cling to the absurdity of the government's case against Oswald.

It defies logic.

No, it isn't. What's overwhelming is that an endless supply of inane humans will not let it go.

It has been debunked at every turn.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

No I do not. I do know that big centralized government always lies...and you should too. History shouts it to you...are you listening?

What are YOU telling me that it is shouting?

 

[TooTall]

A loser killed Kennedy.

Kennedy's death did not hurt the feelings of a lot of right wingers. That doesn't mean they killed him.

It wasn't about feelings, dear. It was about money. Lots of money. More money than your tiny little brain can perceive.

And a river of it that would go on for decades, as we have seen starting with Viet Nam. Remember? How it really started ramping up in....Oh gee!..... 1964! And the Gulf of Tonkin "incident". Barely a year after the cartel killed Kennedy.

So let's take the cartel concept to another place: Mexico. We all know they have a drug cartel. Does anyone truly believe that the ones who stand to gain from moving illegal drugs into the U.S. are actually out there armed and in the streets of Sinaloa?

No, they get soldiers to do all their shooting for them. Stupid, desperate men who have nothing to lose...

I remember how Vietnam started ramping up when Kennedy took office. Going from 400 'military advisors' to 16,000 is quite an increase in 3 years.

 

[Bfgrn]

The evidence proving a conspiracy in the JFK assassination is overwhelming. Yet millions Americans cling to the absurdity of the government's case against Oswald.

It defies logic.

No, it isn't. What's overwhelming is that an endless supply of inane humans will not let it go.

It has been debunked at every turn.

Read the Katzenbach memo in post 123. three days after Kennedy's assassination the highest levels of government are telling you how the official government version was going to turn out...'Oswald acting alone'

If you are a cognizant adult, you could probably figure out that 'Oswald acting alone' is the only version the government could endorse. To say otherwise would:

A) Reign criticism on J Edgar Hoover's beloved FBI for not knowing about Oswald, especially since a month and a half before the assassination two Lee Harvey Oswald's showed up at the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City, one real and one an imposter.

B) Mean that assassins were still at large and our government has no idea who they are, how many there are and where to find them.

C) America would be the laughing stock of the world. We couldn't even prevent a coup d'état at high noon on a busy urban street.

 

[Snouter]

Prolly MOSSAD since JFK agreed with zionists before his election to let zionists run middle east policy for substantial campaign donations, but once in office was not enthusiastic about zionists getting the bomb.

 

[gipper]

The evidence proving a conspiracy in the JFK assassination is overwhelming. Yet millions Americans cling to the absurdity of the government's case against Oswald.

It defies logic.

No, it isn't. What's overwhelming is that an endless supply of inane humans will not let it go.

It has been debunked at every turn.

Read the Katzenbach memo in post 123. three days after Kennedy's assassination the highest levels of government are telling you how the official government version was going to turn out...'Oswald acting alone'

If you are a cognizant adult, you could probably figure out that 'Oswald acting alone' is the only version the government could endorse. To say otherwise would:

A) Reign criticism on J Edgar Hoover's beloved FBI for not knowing about Oswald, especially since a month and a half before the assassination two Lee Harvey Oswald's showed up at the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City, one real and one an imposter.

B) Mean that assassins were still at large and our government has no idea who they are, how many there are and where to find them.

C) America would be the laughing stock of the world. We couldn't even prevent a coup d'état at high noon on a busy urban street.

Our government decided who killed Kennedy, before investigating the event.

One would think this little bit of factual information would clue in those who blindly accept the government's conclusion. But...no.

 

[Soupnazi630]

The evidence proving a conspiracy in the JFK assassination is overwhelming. Yet millions Americans cling to the absurdity of the government's case against Oswald.

It defies logic.

You have it quote vackwards the evidence of a conspiracy is non existent.

No one has yet to produce evidnece proving anything dishonest about the Warren Commission report.

 

[Soupnazi630]

No I do not. I do know that big centralized government always lies...and you should too. History shouts it to you...are you listening?

No government can always lie anymore than a government can always tell the truth.

The government proved throuhg evidence that OSwald killed Kennedy no evidence proves a conspiracy it is that simple.

Yes corruption and lies byt the government in some cases are irrefutable such as Watergate.

But one has nothing to do with the other

You clearly don't know anything about the Kennedy assassination do you?

The Warren Commission was a ruse set up by Johnson and FBI Director J Edgar Hoover to prevent Congressional investigations into the assassination. The Warren Commission did no investigating of the assassination. They relied totally of the FBI for 'evidence'.

Johnson, Hoover and the Justice Dept decided the outcome of the Warren Commission the moment Oswald was silenced.

Oswald did not act alone (the physical, ballistic and forensic evidence proves more than one gunman), but the government decided 3 days after the assassination of President Kennedy and one day after the killing of Oswald that Oswald MUST be the lone assassin.


Memo from the Attorney General's office to the White House:

Memo from Nicholas deB. Katzenbach, Deputy Attorney General

November 25, 1963

MEMORANDUM FOR MR. MOYERS

It is important that all of the facts surrounding President Kennedy's Assassination be made public in a way which will satisfy people in the United States and abroad that all the facts have been told and that a statement to this effect be made now.

1. The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial.

2. Speculation about Oswald's motivation ought to be cut off, and we should have some basis for rebutting thought that this was a Communist conspiracy or (as the Iron Curtain press is saying) a right-wing conspiracy to blame it on the Communists. Unfortunately the facts on Oswald seem about too pat-- too obvious (Marxist, Cuba, Russian wife, etc.). The Dallas police have put out statements on the Communist conspiracy theory, and it was they who were in charge when he was shot and thus silenced.

3. The matter has been handled thus far with neither dignity nor conviction. Facts have been mixed with rumour and speculation. We can scarcely let the world see us totally in the image of the Dallas police when our President is murdered.

I think this objective may be satisfied by making public as soon as possible a complete and thorough FBI report on Oswald and the assassination. This may run into the difficulty of pointing to in- consistencies between this report and statements by Dallas police officials. But the reputation of the Bureau is such that it may do the whole job. The only other step would be the appointment of a Presidential Commission of unimpeachable personnel to review and examine the evidence and announce its conclusions. This has both advantages and disadvantages. It think it can await publication of the FBI report and public reaction to it here and abroad.

I think, however, that a statement that all the facts will be made public property in an orderly and responsible way should be made now. We need something to head off public speculation or Congressional hearings of the wrong sort.

Nicholas deB. Katzenbach

Deputy Attorney General

Actually I would state that I know far more about the Warren Commission report than you do.

The Warren Commission report conducted one of the most exhaustive and comprehensive investigations in criminal history.

They relied on far more than the FBI as you claim that is proven by looking at their evidence.

The physical, ballistic, and forensic evidence all proves Oswald shot Kennedy. The vast majority of the eyewitnesses supports all of that evidence.

The Commission followed the evidence to a logical conclusion they did not start out or set out to determine Oswald was the lone shootetr they actually pursued all leads even those which at first implicated an accomplice. Only to find no evidence of one.

The Memo clearly proves what I am stating it does not prove a conspiracy nor does it prove a government effort to decieve anyone/ The author was giving advice based on what was known wand what was known was that Oswald shot Kennedy. Katzenbach was not in charge and gave no orders. Others did and they prove you wrong.

It is obvious you have never read the warren Commission reprot and have no idea what is contained in it.

Your assertions are only beliefs and facts prove you wrong

 

[gipper]

The evidence proving a conspiracy in the JFK assassination is overwhelming. Yet millions Americans cling to the absurdity of the government's case against Oswald.

It defies logic.

You have it quote vackwards the evidence of a conspiracy is non existent.

No one has yet to produce evidnece proving anything dishonest about the Warren Commission report.

I did not state the WC report was dishonest. It was however incomplete at best and a cover up at worst.

Why did the docs at Parkland initially say JFK had an exit wound in the back of of his head only to recant later? How exactly does an ER doctor misdiagnose an exit wound in the president's head?

 

[daws101]

Why to you continue to spout foolishness?

This threads and others have exposed the lies of the Warren Commission and the silly belief that Oswald was a nut job who acted alone. Anyone who has bothered to study the event KNOWS of the numerous contradictions and misinformation.

Please debunk just the following:
1. Why did several doctors at Parkland who administered to JFK, state on the record that he had an exit wound in the back of his head?
2. How does Oswald immigrate to the USSR,only to easily and without scrutiny return to the USA and all at the height of the Cold War?
3. How does Oswald become involved with so many people with ties to the CIA?
4. How does Ruby get easy access to the Dallas PD to shoot Oswald?
5. How do you explain Rose Cherami?
6. How do you explain the unbelievable lax security in Dallas the day of the shooting?
7. How do you explain men found behind the fence immediately after the shooting, claiming they were SS agents, when no SS agents were there?
8. How do you explain JFK's brain matter falling behind him, if he was shot from the rear?

I could go on and on, but lets see you debunk these points first.

all have been asked and answered ....

You are incapable of refuting anything 'gipper' posted , my guess is you haven't got a clue as to what he's talking about - in fact you appear to be totally clueless, yet pathetically arrogant, on any thread I find you.

Daws, you simple minded Hollywood-humping socialist, you truly are a clear and present danger to social sanity. You sir are a virus. Can you for once post something other than mindless whore shit .

You challenged me to an intellectual 'duel' in a private message, probably because you were too much of a pussy ass cum guzzler to do so in public - yet you haven't posted anything beyond one liners and asinine mindless comments in days.

false, I did not challenge you, there is no reason to ....
every assumption you made about me is false...
looks like you brought a spoon to a gun fight...

 

[daws101]

Because you would of course believe anything I had to say, right? No, you would come back at me with still "more questions," because no matter how many times conspiracy nuts get hosed, they bounce back with the same debunked garbage time after time.


Homework, eh? I'll pass for now - I actually work for a living.

Do you believe Oswald acted alone?

Yes, I do. I believe that their was no conspiracy and the whole JFK assassination has been very easily explained ad nausium.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZRUNYZY71g]JFK Assassination Magic Bullet Test (Part 2) - YouTube[/ame]


^^^^ There you go, folks - the "impossible" to replicate "magic bullet" fully replicated.

hey cabbie I and everyone else that is not mentally damaged have used that piece of conclusive evidence ,but as you will find facts and evidence have no meaning to CTers..you could try this ... [ame=http://youtu.be/SjrupSwqrAs]JFK Inside The Target Car Part 4 - YouTube[/ame]


[ame=http://youtu.be/EoMY0eR3eEs]JFK Inside The Target Car Part 3 - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://youtu.be/8MNj8S0A_T4]JFK Inside The Target Car Part 2 - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://youtu.be/e246B581jHo]JFK Inside The Target Car Part 1 - YouTube[/ame]

 

[daws101]

A loser killed Kennedy.

Kennedy's death did not hurt the feelings of a lot of right wingers. That doesn't mean they killed him.

It wasn't about feelings, dear. It was about money. Lots of money. More money than your tiny little brain can perceive.

And a river of it that would go on for decades, as we have seen starting with Viet Nam. Remember? How it really started ramping up in....Oh gee!..... 1964! And the Gulf of Tonkin "incident". Barely a year after the cartel killed Kennedy.

So let's take the cartel concept to another place: Mexico. We all know they have a drug cartel. Does anyone truly believe that the ones who stand to gain from moving illegal drugs into the U.S. are actually out there armed and in the streets of Sinaloa?

No, they get soldiers to do all their shooting for them. Stupid, desperate men who have nothing to lose...

I remember how Vietnam started ramping up when Kennedy took office. Going from 400 'military advisors' to 16,000 is quite an increase in 3 years.

my dad was an "adviser"...

 

[Bfgrn]

The evidence proving a conspiracy in the JFK assassination is overwhelming. Yet millions Americans cling to the absurdity of the government's case against Oswald.

It defies logic.

You have it quote vackwards the evidence of a conspiracy is non existent.

No one has yet to produce evidnece proving anything dishonest about the Warren Commission report.

The Warren Commission apparently did not have the sort of cooperative relationship with the FBI one might have wished for in so important an investigation. “The evidence,” the House Select Committee on Assassinations discovered, “indicates that Hoover viewed the Warren Commission more as an adversary than a partner in a search for the facts of the assassination.” The HSCA’s chief counsel, Robert Blakey, an experienced criminal investigator and prosecutor himself, was impressed with neither the Commission’s vigor nor its independence from the FBI. “What was significant,” Blakey has written, “was the ability of the FBI to intimidate the Commission, in light of the bureau’s predisposition on the questions of Oswald’s guilt and whether there had been a conspiracy.

At a January 27 [1964] Commission meeting, there was another dialogue [among Warren Commissioners]:

“John McCloy: … the time is almost overdue for us to have a better perspective of the FBI investigation than we now have … We are so dependent on them for our facts … .

Commission counsel J. Lee Rankin: Part of our difficulty in regard to it is that they have no problem. They have decided that no one else is involved … .

Senator Richard Russell: They have tried the case and reached a verdict on every aspect.

Senator Hale Boggs: You have put your finger on it. (Closed Warren Commission meeting.)”

FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover
(LBJ Library Photo)

Hoover may have succeeded in intimidating the Commission by employing one of his favorite dirty tricks. “[D]erogatory information pertaining to both Commission members and staff was brought to Mr. Hoover’s attention,” the Church Committee discovered. During an appearance before the HSCA in 1977, no less than Warren Commission chief counsel J. Lee Rankin sheepishly conceded, “Who could protest against what Mr. Hoover did back in those days?” Apparently not even presidential appointees.

Thus, with the exposes of the Church and Select Committees, the government has itself granted one of the more potent criticisms of Warren Commission skeptics: that its final conclusions had been determined even before work had commenced. Looked at this way, the reasons for the Commission’s inattention to clear conflicts in the medical and autopsy evidence can be seen as of a piece with the Commission’s general disinterest in anyone other than Oswald, an orientation that is well explored in the works of skeptics such as Sylvia Meagher, Harold Weisberg, Josiah Thompson, Henry Hurt, Peter Dale Scott, Robert Blakey, etc.

 

[Bfgrn]

If the shot came from the 6th floor of the TSDB, struck the back of President Kennedy's head at a downward angle, where is the exit wound that would be in his face???

He was shot in the temple (just like Asst. Press Secretary Malcolm Kilduff shows after talking to the Parkland doctors)

And the back of his head was blown out, just like Dr. McClelland shows in the sketch he drew and the picture, along with about 20 other Parkland doctors, nurses and medical assistants saw.

ROBERT McCLELLAND, MD: "...I could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had been shattered...so that the parietal bone was protruded up through the scalp and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half, as well as some of the occipital bone being fractured in its lateral half, and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, posterior cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been blasted out...." (WC--V6:33)

 

[Bfgrn]

Parkland doctor Dr. Charles Crenshaw explains entry wound in the President's throat and that the fatal shot came from the front.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGNMBRq3Kxw"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGNMBRq3Kxw[/ame]

 

[Soupnazi630]

The evidence proving a conspiracy in the JFK assassination is overwhelming. Yet millions Americans cling to the absurdity of the government's case against Oswald.

It defies logic.

You have it quote vackwards the evidence of a conspiracy is non existent.

No one has yet to produce evidnece proving anything dishonest about the Warren Commission report.

The Warren Commission apparently did not have the sort of cooperative relationship with the FBI one might have wished for in so important an investigation. “The evidence,” the House Select Committee on Assassinations discovered, “indicates that Hoover viewed the Warren Commission more as an adversary than a partner in a search for the facts of the assassination.” The HSCA’s chief counsel, Robert Blakey, an experienced criminal investigator and prosecutor himself, was impressed with neither the Commission’s vigor nor its independence from the FBI. “What was significant,” Blakey has written, “was the ability of the FBI to intimidate the Commission, in light of the bureau’s predisposition on the questions of Oswald’s guilt and whether there had been a conspiracy.

At a January 27 [1964] Commission meeting, there was another dialogue [among Warren Commissioners]:

“John McCloy: … the time is almost overdue for us to have a better perspective of the FBI investigation than we now have … We are so dependent on them for our facts … .

Commission counsel J. Lee Rankin: Part of our difficulty in regard to it is that they have no problem. They have decided that no one else is involved … .

Senator Richard Russell: They have tried the case and reached a verdict on every aspect.

Senator Hale Boggs: You have put your finger on it. (Closed Warren Commission meeting.)”

FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover
(LBJ Library Photo)

Hoover may have succeeded in intimidating the Commission by employing one of his favorite dirty tricks. “[D]erogatory information pertaining to both Commission members and staff was brought to Mr. Hoover’s attention,” the Church Committee discovered. During an appearance before the HSCA in 1977, no less than Warren Commission chief counsel J. Lee Rankin sheepishly conceded, “Who could protest against what Mr. Hoover did back in those days?” Apparently not even presidential appointees.

Thus, with the exposes of the Church and Select Committees, the government has itself granted one of the more potent criticisms of Warren Commission skeptics: that its final conclusions had been determined even before work had commenced. Looked at this way, the reasons for the Commission’s inattention to clear conflicts in the medical and autopsy evidence can be seen as of a piece with the Commission’s general disinterest in anyone other than Oswald, an orientation that is well explored in the works of skeptics such as Sylvia Meagher, Harold Weisberg, Josiah Thompson, Henry Hurt, Peter Dale Scott, Robert Blakey, etc.

What you have here is an opinion of how Hoover was uncooperative with the WC not evidence that the WC was wrong.

Hoover had an empire to defrend and yes he was embarressed by the fact that the FBI dropped the ball and failed to identify Oswald as a threat when they had the chance.

Hoover was well known for defending the FBI ( his little kingdom ) above all else. This does not however prove the Warren Commission wrong or prove a conspiracy.

Even the House select Committee on Assasinations tried to have it both ways by defending the Warren Commision in their conclusion and claiming a probable conspiracy.

The probable conspiracy was based on one and only one piece of evidence which was then proven false thus also proving their conclusion wrong.

Once again many people have opinions about the Warren Commission but noone has yet to offer any evidence proving them wrong