Who Killed Kennedy?

[Jan Van]

Conspiracy theories are much more fun. This thread makes that fairly clear. 
When watching that Nova documentary I mentioned above, I was hoping it would lead to some cool new finds showing that indeed it probably wasn't just Oswald alone. But alas, didn't work out that way. So I guess it's the Occam's razor thingy...

[Reub]

It is not a theory that Jack Ruby killed Lee Harvey Oswald as he was being escorted under police protection. If not for this fact, I would probably believe the unlikely single-bullet, crazed gunman theory, even with Oswald's ties to the Soviets and to Cuba. But adding Ruby to this equation makes it too much for me to believe.

[6 Iron]

Does anyone have a good reference on Jack Ruby's involvement that they have found satisfying?

[dualstow]

Conspiracy theories are much more fun. This thread makes that fairly clear. 
When watching that Nova documentary I mentioned above, I was hoping it would lead to some cool new finds showing that indeed it probably wasn't just Oswald alone. But alas, didn't work out that way. So I guess it's the Occam's razor thingy...

Yes!
I saw that documentary the other night, too. Very well done.

It is not a theory that Jack Ruby killed Lee Harvey Oswald as he was being escorted under police protection. If not for this fact, I would probably believe the unlikely single-bullet, crazed gunman theory, even with Oswald's ties to the Soviets and to Cuba. But adding Ruby to this equation makes it too much for me to believe.

I guess I'm just relieved that the burden of proof is not on believers of the mainstream theory. I mean, conspiracy theorists are free to theorize.

[Reub]

This is not a court of law with the requisite of a burden of proof. Those who believe that there is something very suspicious about the strange series of events 50 years ago are entitled to their beliefs. Again, a man who had just assassinated the beloved President of the United States does not just get taken out by a nobody who is angry at him.

[Kshartle]

I studied all the hard evidence and circumstantial stuff years ago and came to my conclusions about the murder. I can't remember 5% of it at this point.

I hafta say this.....if anyone believes Jack Ruby's story that he was distraught and didn't want to see Jackie go through the trial.........you will literally believe anything.

[Mountaineer]

This is the most entertaining analysis I've come accros - pure fiction but a completely entertaining read.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Third-Bullet- ... 145164020X

As for me, I think Col. Mustard did it in the dining room with the candle stick. 

[dualstow]

This is not a court of law with the requisite of a burden of proof. Those who believe that there is something very suspicious about the strange series of events 50 years ago are entitled to their beliefs. Again, a man who had just assassinated the beloved President of the United States does not just get taken out by a nobody who is angry at him.

But the beloved President of the United States was taken out by a nobody who was angry at him!
You're right: this is not a court. I was referring to the implicit burden of proof, b/c as far as the mainstream is concerned, case closed.

[Reub]

I have spent my entire life generally believing the story that Oswald and Ruby were both acting alone, with a few hints of doubt (was 6 at the time of the event). I really haven't even thought about JFK's assassination for many years until the anniversary approached. However, my belief system has been altered over the years by what I now know about government obfuscation and malfeasance....I saw it first hand with the TWA800 crash investigation and also with 9/11. Then Benghazi happened, where they have hidden away the witnesses and changed their names and sent out the ambassador to lie to the American people numerous times on television. Looking back at the JFK assassination, I now ask why wouldn't the government hide the truth if they wanted to?

[dualstow]

Looking back at the JFK assassination, I now ask why wouldn't the government hide the truth if they wanted to?

There's no question that people have been caught lying all the time.
I'm curious about why they would want to lie about this in the first place, unless you think it was a CIA job. Is that what you think happened?

[ns2]

There's no question that people have been caught lying all the time.
I'm curious about why they would want to lie about this in the first place, unless you think it was a CIA job. Is that what you think happened?

When it comes to politicians I don't think there is any point in looking for motives for why they lie. It's just what they do and it comes very natural to them.

I don't know about John Kennedy but I remember Bobby giving the peace sign and saying "on to Chicago" and then he was dead.

I have always believed this event probably altered the course of my own life.

Was there a vast conspiracy? Well, I was a devout Christian for a long time and truly devout Christians believe there is a vast conspiracy of evil going on in the universe despite Ad Orientem's very logical conclusions.

[Ad Orientem]

There's no question that people have been caught lying all the time.
I'm curious about why they would want to lie about this in the first place, unless you think it was a CIA job. Is that what you think happened?

When it comes to politicians I don't think there is any point in looking for motives for why they lie. It's just what they do and it comes very natural to them.

I don't know about John Kennedy but I remember Bobby giving the peace sign and saying "on to Chicago" and then he was dead.

I have always believed this event probably altered the course of my own life.

Was there a vast conspiracy? Well, I was a devout Christian for a long time and truly devout Christians believe there is a vast conspiracy of evil going on in the universe despite Ad Orientem's very logical conclusions.

I think one needs to be careful about assuming that the spiritual warfare that has been going on since the Fall implies all temporal crime (or sin) is a conspiracy.

[ns2]

There's no question that people have been caught lying all the time.
I'm curious about why they would want to lie about this in the first place, unless you think it was a CIA job. Is that what you think happened?

When it comes to politicians I don't think there is any point in looking for motives for why they lie. It's just what they do and it comes very natural to them.

I don't know about John Kennedy but I remember Bobby giving the peace sign and saying "on to Chicago" and then he was dead.

I have always believed this event probably altered the course of my own life.

Was there a vast conspiracy? Well, I was a devout Christian for a long time and truly devout Christians believe there is a vast conspiracy of evil going on in the universe despite Ad Orientem's very logical conclusions.

I think one needs to be careful about assuming that the spiritual warfare that has been going on since the Fall implies all temporal crime (or sin) is a conspiracy.

Hmmm.....

"You used to live in sin, just like the rest of the world, obeying the devil--the commander of the powers in the unseen world. He is the spirit at work in the hearts of those who refuse to obey God."

You don't actually believe this? Sometimes men are just evil on their own?

[Ad Orientem]

When it comes to politicians I don't think there is any point in looking for motives for why they lie. It's just what they do and it comes very natural to them.

I don't know about John Kennedy but I remember Bobby giving the peace sign and saying "on to Chicago" and then he was dead.

I have always believed this event probably altered the course of my own life.

Was there a vast conspiracy? Well, I was a devout Christian for a long time and truly devout Christians believe there is a vast conspiracy of evil going on in the universe despite Ad Orientem's very logical conclusions.

I think one needs to be careful about assuming that the spiritual warfare that has been going on since the Fall implies all temporal crime (or sin) is a conspiracy.

Hmmm.....

"You used to live in sin, just like the rest of the world, obeying the devil--the commander of the powers in the unseen world. He is the spirit at work in the hearts of those who refuse to obey God."

You don't actually believe this? Sometimes men are just evil on their own?

I believe in the Evil One. But I also believe his powers are limited. In the end, men have free will.

[dualstow]

Was there a vast conspiracy? Well, I was a devout Christian for a long time and truly devout Christians believe there is a vast conspiracy of evil going on in the universe despite Ad Orientem's very logical conclusions.

You can see from Ad O's page that he is also a devout Christian. I'm not, but if I were i guess I'd focus on living a righteous life and getting my reward in the Afterlife no matter how stinky things get on planet Earth. Anyway, it's a bit of a jump from "there's a vast conspiracy of evil..in the universe" to this looks fishy; maybe it's part of the vast conspiracy of evil.

Question for you, Ad Orientem: from your blog entry on JFK, it seems like you're kind of a reformed conspiracy theorist (CT) reborn as a skeptic. But what's all this about your believing the authorities monitor your blog? I'm referring to the right-hand sidebar text:

CAUTION

The owner believes that this blog is under continuous surveillance by the FBI and intelligence services of the United States Federal Government, and that all posts, comments and traffic to and from the blog are noted and recorded.

Is there something specific that led you to this suspicion?

[Reub]

Just for the record, all of us at these forums love the government and everything about it!
Period.

yes for those who don't know, most of us have a contrarian disclosure on record with the forum management, saying that everything we say is the opposite of what we believe, and a sworn affidavit stating that we love big brother...

[Ad Orientem]

Was there a vast conspiracy? Well, I was a devout Christian for a long time and truly devout Christians believe there is a vast conspiracy of evil going on in the universe despite Ad Orientem's very logical conclusions.

You can see from Ad O's page that he is also a devout Christian. I'm not, but if I were i guess I'd focus on living a righteous life and getting my reward in the Afterlife no matter how stinky things get on planet Earth. Anyway, it's a bit of a jump from "there's a vast conspiracy of evil..in the universe" to this looks fishy; maybe it's part of the vast conspiracy of evil.

Question for you, Ad Orientem: from your blog entry on JFK, it seems like you're kind of a reformed conspiracy theorist (CT) reborn as a skeptic. But what's all this about your believing the authorities monitor your blog? I'm referring to the right-hand sidebar text:

CAUTION

The owner believes that this blog is under continuous surveillance by the FBI and intelligence services of the United States Federal Government, and that all posts, comments and traffic to and from the blog are noted and recorded.

Is there something specific that led you to this suspicion?

The NSA, or as I like to call it, the eye of Sauron. My blog has been pretty sharply critical of both political parties. I would be astounded if it was not being watched along with hundreds of others.

[Kshartle]

I for one sincerely hope the NSA or whoever in the government monitors my posts and can trace them back to me to monitor emails and phone calls.

That way they can learn something.

If there are any NSA agents reading this please tap my phone and get an education.

[Reub]

Kshartle, please do not anger Sauron!

[dualstow]

I think that criticizing political parties is pretty mainstream.
You probably have to say or hint at something threatening to get monitored, I'd bet. Not that all kinds of data aren't blindly cached for future perusal should a red flag be raised. 

[vnatale]

When I have read the book I linked to before, I'll let you know how good its arguments are.

Try reading the one I linked to. It's by far the most exhaustive work on the subject. And it explores in detail all of the major, and many of the minor, conspiracy theories. It is available in most well stocked libraries.

As I said recently, I read the entire huge book (seemingly took forever). It was so comprehensive and thorough convinced me that it was solely Lee Harvey Oswald. Also, just another illustration of "Occam's razor".

Vinny

[jacksonm2]

Should probably ask Chuck Schumer. He warned Trump that if you piss off the intelligence agencies they have "six ways to Sunday" to come after you. Maybe he should be put under oath and asked to reveal what he knows that led him to make that statement?

(Note: I generally pay very little attention to conspiracy theories but this is one that is really hard to ignore - like maybe Epstein's suicide).

[vnatale]

Should probably ask Chuck Schumer. He warned Trump that if you piss off the intelligence agencies they have "six ways to Sunday" to come after you. Maybe he should be put under oath and asked to reveal what he knows that led him to make that statement?

(Note: I generally pay very little attention to conspiracy theories but this is one that is really hard to ignore - like maybe Epstein's suicide).

This allows me to practice what I hope to memorize from reading James Rickards's book - Death of Money.

I believe he stated that successful conspiracies need to be limited to the smallest number of people possible as all true conspiracies are subject to:

Betrayals
Disclosures
Blunders

After reading Bugliosi's book I was convinced it was Oswald alone. To believe ANY of the conspiracy theories requires a TREMENDOUS amount of faith.

In the now almost 60 intervening years we have never had anyone from any of these quite elaborate conspiracies betray anyone or make any disclosures. They may have been able to hold the line on those up to the point of the assassination but to believe ALL involved have maintained their silence for all these years just leaves me incredulous.

Vinny

[Ad Orientem]

Should probably ask Chuck Schumer. He warned Trump that if you piss off the intelligence agencies they have "six ways to Sunday" to come after you. Maybe he should be put under oath and asked to reveal what he knows that led him to make that statement?

(Note: I generally pay very little attention to conspiracy theories but this is one that is really hard to ignore - like maybe Epstein's suicide).

This allows me to practice what I hope to memorize from reading James Rickards's book - Death of Money.

I believe he stated that successful conspiracies need to be limited to the smallest number of people possible as all true conspiracies are subject to:

Betrayals
Disclosures
Blunders

After reading Bugliosi's book I was convinced it was Oswald alone. To believe ANY of the conspiracy theories requires a TREMENDOUS amount of faith.

In the now almost 60 intervening years we have never had anyone from any of these quite elaborate conspiracies betray anyone or make any disclosures. They may have been able to hold the line on those up to the point of the assassination but to believe ALL involved have maintained their silence for all these years just leaves me incredulous.

Vinny

I agree completely. Many years (decades) ago, I was a card carrying conspiracy true believer. But there is just no way. The more you look at the actual facts and evidence it becomes increasingly difficult to treat the various conspiracy theories seriously. There is a mountain of evidence pointing at Oswald. And there is no way 99% of it could be fabricated. You can't logically buy into conspiracy until you are prepared to dismantle all of that evidence. And yes, the number of people who would have had to be involved in a coverup makes the idea that not one person would talk or leave a note in a safe deposit box to be opened on their death, simply laughable.

[vnatale]

Should probably ask Chuck Schumer. He warned Trump that if you piss off the intelligence agencies they have "six ways to Sunday" to come after you. Maybe he should be put under oath and asked to reveal what he knows that led him to make that statement?

(Note: I generally pay very little attention to conspiracy theories but this is one that is really hard to ignore - like maybe Epstein's suicide).

This allows me to practice what I hope to memorize from reading James Rickards's book - Death of Money.

I believe he stated that successful conspiracies need to be limited to the smallest number of people possible as all true conspiracies are subject to:

Betrayals
Disclosures
Blunders

After reading Bugliosi's book I was convinced it was Oswald alone. To believe ANY of the conspiracy theories requires a TREMENDOUS amount of faith.

In the now almost 60 intervening years we have never had anyone from any of these quite elaborate conspiracies betray anyone or make any disclosures. They may have been able to hold the line on those up to the point of the assassination but to believe ALL involved have maintained their silence for all these years just leaves me incredulous.

Vinny

I agree completely. Many years (decades) ago, I was a card carrying conspiracy true believer. But there is just no way. The more you look at the actual facts and evidence it becomes increasingly difficult to treat the various conspiracy theories seriously. There is a mountain of evidence pointing at Oswald. And there is no way 99% of it could be fabricated. You can't logically buy into conspiracy until you are prepared to dismantle of that evidence. And yes, the number of people who would have had to be involved in a coverup makes the idea that not one person would talk or leave a note in a safe deposit box to be opened on their death, simply laughable.

On a related note. You started this Topic because it was the anniversary. On November 22, 2019 I am almost certain I read no reference to it being the anniversary in my daily newspaper, nor heard it anywhere, or read about it anywhere.

I was old enough to see Ruby shoot Oswald live on TV.

Vinny