Who Killed Kennedy?

[Ad Orientem]

I read a lot of the negative comments and I noticed some common threads.

Most read only parts of the book, which admittedly is massive, and in some cases I suspect little or none. Secondly most demonstrated that that their minds were made up going in and were reverting to conjecture as a counter to facts. (i.e. it came from the FBI so we know that was a lie.)

I've been there so I know the mentality that grips so many of these people. The bottom line though is that the Kennedy assassination conspiracy has entered into the realm of urban legend. Once you go there it becomes more or less impossible to dislodge it. There reaches a point where the true believers are simply impervious to facts and logic. It took me probably twenty years before I could admit I had been wrong on the subject, and I still don't want to believe that a lone nut with a mail order rifle could kill the President of the United States in broad daylight. And having spent a lot of years venting at the people who still believed the government's coverup story and lies, I have little enthusiasm for waging a battle that I know is lost against the true believers.

Still there are some signs of hope. Recent polls show that while most Americans continue to believe in conspiracy, the numbers who don't are at the highest level since they have been polling on the subject.

[6 Iron]

Nova: Cold Case JFK

Can modern forensic science uncover fresh clues about the assassination of JFK?
Aired November 13, 2013 on PBS

Jan, thanks for posting this link. They do a great job analyzing the ballistics, supporting the single bullet theory as well as explaining the head wound. I was hoping that there would be more on Jack Ruby, as this part of the saga just does not pass my sniff test. I realize that with the retrospectoscope, the area where Oswald was shot was far from secure, but he was killed by someone clearly willing to trade his life for Oswald's. That is powerful motivation, and I am not sure how that could have been foreseen.

[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?