Another JFK Conspiracy?

[Stink Fish Pot]

OK, Not exactly. But every JFK conspiracy theory program run nowadays (usually by the History Channel or A&E) is now bent on proving that the Warren Commission was correct, that LHO acted alone, etc.

I seem to remember a program that was about 6-8 hours long, spread out over one long day or a few days in a row. The title, if I recall correctly, was "The Men Who Killed Kennedy". I personally found it very interesting, and watched it a few different times. One of the things I remember that seems ironic now is that current Oswald proponent and 6th floor Museum curator Gary Mack was in the show, and he was most decidedly a CT buff.

Does anyone else remember this show, and if so, can you remember the last time you saw it?

I think it is strange that I have never seen it since the late 1990's. Anyone recall this show, and have any idea why it might have been pulled? I don't believe there was anything in it that could have been libelous, and anyway, it's an investigative report, certainly well done and worthy of a viewing if you are interested in the assassination at all.

[Boyo Jim]

Maybe because it was a pile of unsubstantiated suppositions, and eventually even the conspiracy theorists had seen it one time too many, and it was taken off due to bad ratings?

Perhaps they had to make room for compelling documentaries about ice road truckers, swamp loggers and ghost hunters?

[Marley23]

I've seen it more recently than that, and yes, it's "The Men Who Killed Kennedy." Maybe it's not being aired a lot these days because it's a 25-year-old pile of bullshit and there is a lot of newer bullshit to take its place. JFK conspiracy theories have probably taken a backseat to September 11th conspiracy theories in the broader market of CT nonsense.

[Stink Fish Pot]

I don't remember it being a pile of bullshit, but I also haven't seen it in a long time, so maybe there are things in that program that are patently false. Now that I'm thinking about it, I think it came either right before or right after Oliver Stone's movie, JFK, which was in 1991 or '92 I believe. So at least 20 years have passed.

I remember a couple of things in particular. The deaf and dumb guy who was a witness to the conspiracy and the grassy knoll shooter. I thought "how unlucky is this? Tens of thousands of people are in Dallas to see the motorcade, and the ONE person that could break this wide open was deaf and dumb, therefore unable to communicate with the police in time. That's one of those moments. The other story I remember was the heavy guy with the story that he was the serviceman on the grassy knoll right beside Zapruder and was witnessed there but never identified at the time. They showed him an enhanced picture of the Mary Mooreman photo and it showed him, Zapruder, and the shooter (badgeman) and a railroad worker looking toward the TSBD. He got visibly upset when he realized that he had seen the officer behind him that day and he believed he saw the man who shot Kennedy. That was one of the moments in the show which I though "he certainly doesn't seem like he's lying. Maybe he WAS there, and maybe he DID see a policeman that day. It doesn't mean that guy shot Kennedy, but it was an interesting nugget if it was indeed him in the photo."

I'll have to see if I can dig up a copy of that at the library or something. Because those are the only two significant things I remember about the show. I remember other bits and pieces, like the guy who supposedly tracked down the killers, but who knows what he was talking about... Over the years I've become convinced that the people of this country will believe just about anything someone with an English accent tells them, and this guy had one. He could have easily been selling us the SHAM-WOW if he lived 20 years later.

[Marley23]

Originally Posted by Stink Fish Pot

Now that I'm thinking about it, I think it came either right before or right after Oliver Stone's movie, JFK, which was in 1991 or '92 I believe.

"The Men Who Killed Kennedy" was first aired in October 1988. You can read a lot of what they "found" at that Wikipedia entry. There were some expanded versions later. Stone's JFK is from the end of 1991.

That's one of those moments.

Do you mean it's a ridiculous story, or that it casts doubt on the Oswald theory?

Spoiler alert: all of this stuff is bullshit. Oswald shot Kennedy.

[BMalion]

Just read Gerald Posner's Case Closed, then turn off the TV.

[pseudotriton ruber ruber]

The baseball writer Bill James subscribes to the theory that the fatal shot came from the gun of one of JFK's Secret Service agents, by accident, as the agent was reacting to the sound of gunfire. I forget the details, and I'm a few hundred miles from my library to check, but he makes it sound pretty convincing.

[John DiFool]

Retreading old ground, but I believe the ballistics reconstruction of Kennedy's fatal wound most reliably points back to the window where Oswald was perched (imagine a cone of "uncertainty", since the exact position of Kennedy's head at the moment of impact is not precisely known). The SS chase car and the agent carrying the AR-15* is a bit outside of the said envelope. If there were any actual shooters on the grassy knoll, they were terrible shots because the wound conclusively was shown to have come from a bullet to the rear of the limo, not the front.

[*Do a search of "Mortal Error: The Shot that Killed Kennedy" for more info, if you wish]

[Stink Fish Pot]

Originally Posted by Marley23

Do you mean it's a ridiculous story, or that it casts doubt on the Oswald theory?

I thought it was BS. Come on.... A witness who just happens to be deaf And dumb?

[Stink Fish Pot]

Originally Posted by BMalion

Just read Gerald Posner's Case Closed, then turn off the TV.

I like watching TV. And I refuse to take anyone's word who wears his hair like the little Dutch boy after the age of 5. There's something very plastic about Mr. Posner.

[Marley23]

Originally Posted by Stink Fish Pot

I like watching TV. And I refuse to take anyone's word who wears his hair like the little Dutch boy after the age of 5. There's something very plastic about Mr. Posner.

This is the level of seriousness Kennedy conspiracy theories should be treated with.

[Saint Cad]

Originally Posted by pseudotriton ruber ruber

The baseball writer Bill James subscribes to the theory that the fatal shot came from the gun of one of JFK's Secret Service agents, by accident, as the agent was reacting to the sound of gunfire. I forget the details, and I'm a few hundred miles from my library to check, but he makes it sound pretty convincing.

I thought that was a theory in RFK's assassination.

[Stink Fish Pot]

Originally Posted by Marley23

This is the level of seriousness Kennedy conspiracy theories should be treated with.

It seems that you are totally convinced of oswald's guilt.



Who got to you?

[tomndebb]

Originally Posted by Stink Fish Pot

I remember a couple of things in particular. The deaf and dumb guy who was a witness to the conspiracy and the grassy knoll shooter. I thought "how unlucky is this? Tens of thousands of people are in Dallas to see the motorcade, and the ONE person that could break this wide open was deaf and dumb, therefore unable to communicate with the police in time. That's one of those moments.

And, of course, he was also illiterate, had broken fingers, and was phobic about typewriters, pencils, pens, and paper, right?

Originally Posted by Stink Fish Pot

He got visibly upset when he realized that he had seen the officer behind him that day and he believed he saw the man who shot Kennedy. That was one of the moments in the show which I though "he certainly doesn't seem like he's lying.

So, a guy gets set up by a CT adherent to believe that part of the imaginary activity happened near him and when he is then shown "evidence" that one of the "bad guys" really was near him, he freaks out. I have watched dozens of parades in my life and, aside from family members who accompanied me, I could not remember anyone who was near me at any of them. If someone showed me a photograph, years later, placing me near an historically important person, I would tend to be surprised. If they had just prepped me to believe that the person had done some incredibnly evil thing at the same time, I might react with a bit of shock.
The guy does not have to be lying, just human in having a lack of memory about a particular situation along with a touch of human gullibility regarding the story he was being fed to get his reaction.

[The Second Stone]

There is overwhelming evidence that Oswald did it. The conspiracy questions are: was he the only shooter? Was he put up to it?

The evidence that there were other shooters were witnesses who heard shots coming from other places. There were witnesses who saw suspicious people. I am dubious about hearing where a rifle shot came from. The suspicious people were not seen with guns. No other guns were found. For that reason I am dubious that there were other shooters.

As for whether Oswald was put up to shooting Kennedy, knowingly or unknowingly, by other persons, we have no direct evidence, but rather suspicious circumstances. He was known by the CIA, and possibly used as an asset from time to time. He was killed by a small time mobster (Jack Ruby) in a classic shut him up set up. There isn't enough evidence to prosecute anyone but Ruby (who was convicted of murdering Oswald), but the overall circumstances make it look like a trained ambush, not the political act of a madman as most political assassinations are.

Personally I think Oswald was an assassin on someone else's orders. Oswald did claim to be a patsy, but he is not credible. He was at best mentally fragile.

No other shooters were seen at the crime scene. Although they were heard by many, it could be echos. Oswald isn't talking.

[Marley23]

Originally Posted by The Second Stone

He was killed by a small time mobster (Jack Ruby) in a classic shut him up set up.

Ruby wasn't a mobster. There's also no evidence of anybody putting Ruby up to it or even much plotting on Ruby's part.

[Mr. Miskatonic]

This should be required reading for anyone referencing that series:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/holland3.htm

[Ibn Warraq]

Originally Posted by Marley23

Ruby wasn't a mobster. There's also no evidence of anybody putting Ruby up to it or even much plotting on Ruby's part.

I would also think a conspiracy as large and powerful as this one which would have had to basically control several law enforcement agencies would have found an easier way to dispose of Oswald. I.E. have him committ suicide in jail or even just have him shot to death when captured by the Dallas police in the theatre.

[The Second Stone]

Originally Posted by Marley23

Ruby wasn't a mobster. There's also no evidence of anybody putting Ruby up to it or even much plotting on Ruby's part.

Of course not. The FBI's official position was that there was no mafia. And we know that the FBI is always right. If there were one or more people like Ruby in the area waiting for the opportunity, we wouldn't really expect them to say they committed premeditated murder and name their bosses. The evidence that Ruby whacked Oswald is on film. And it is exactly how the mafia would have done it if they were involved. I'm pretty sure that the Godfather II hit on Hymen Roth was inspired by this real shooting.

I agree that it is possible Oswald acted entirely alone and Ruby acted entirely alone. But I don't buy it.

[jtgain]

The Zapruder film itself shows that the fatal head shot did NOT come from the grassy knoll. Bullets don't do damage like that. The entrance wound is small, the bullet tumbles and then creates a dramatic exit wound (as we see on film). It really couldn't have come from any other place BUT the Book Depository.

[42fish]

Originally Posted by The Second Stone

The evidence that Ruby whacked Oswald is on film. And it is exactly how the mafia would have done it if they were involved.

Oddly, I can't think of too many mob hits that were knowingly done in front of a couple dozen cameramen.

[The Second Stone]

Originally Posted by 42fish

Oddly, I can't think of too many mob hits that were knowingly done in front of a couple dozen cameramen.

On a Tuesday with a police escort, etc.?

The mob do murder people in public. http://mob-who.blogspot.com/2011/04/...1923-1978.html

[Mr. Miskatonic]

Originally Posted by 42fish

Oddly, I can't think of too many mob hits that were knowingly done in front of a couple dozen cameramen.

And done by a hitman who barely arrives in time (Ruby would have missed Oswald completely if Oswald hadn't decided to change his shirt) and leaves a beloved dog in the car to an unknown fate.

...and is known by pretty much every cop there, because Ruby liked to pal around with cops. We all know how much the mob loves guys who are chatty with police.

[tomndebb]

Originally Posted by The Second Stone

Of course not. The FBI's official position was that there was no mafia.

Really? Casn you point to an official statement from the FBI that makes that claim?

I have often seen various people who hated J. Edgar Hoover make the claim that he used to say there was no Mafia, (without ever citing the time or place where he is supposed to have said it), but I do not recall ever seeing a quote by Hoover, himself, making that claim.

My view of Hoover is that over time he went from being an earnest if overzealous agent of the law to a power mad little king who wanted to control far too many aspects of American life, but I would still prefer to see evidence of this claim rather than simply accepting it because it is a common belief.

[The Second Stone]

Originally Posted by tomndebb

Really? Casn you point to an official statement from the FBI that makes that claim?

I have often seen various people who hated J. Edgar Hoover make the claim that he used to say there was no Mafia, (without ever citing the time or place where he is supposed to have said it), but I do not recall ever seeing a quote by Hoover, himself, making that claim.

My view of Hoover is that over time he went from being an earnest if overzealous agent of the law to a power mad little king who wanted to control far too many aspects of American life, but I would still prefer to see evidence of this claim rather than simply accepting it because it is a common belief.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/25/us...ted=all&src=pm

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=592633

And Ruby's mafia connections: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Ruby

It is plausible to me that Ruby was mafia connected. He ran a strip club. It is also plausible, but less likely in my opinion, that he was clean of mafia connections. But he was a sleazy guy who murdered someone. He really isn't credible.

Law & Order Courthouse step murders are always scripted. Oswald's killing has always looked to me like insurance to shut him up.

[42fish]

Originally Posted by The Second Stone

Law & Order Courthouse step murders are always scripted.

Probably because when you're taping an hour-long show every week, you don't have the time to let the actors do a lot of improv.

[Marley23]

Originally Posted by The Second Stone

He was killed by a small time mobster (Jack Ruby) in a classic shut him up set up.

Originally Posted by The Second Stone

It is plausible to me that Ruby was mafia connected. He ran a strip club. It is also plausible, but less likely in my opinion, that he was clean of mafia connections.

Methinks I see someone backtracking. (And the comments about the FBI are strawmanning.) The evidence, including the timing, the dog, and Ruby's bank receipt, indicate he made what was basically an impulse decision to shoot Oswald. Professional hitmen don't leave their success to chance.

[The Second Stone]

Originally Posted by Marley23

Methinks I see someone backtracking. (And the comments about the FBI are strawmanning.) The evidence, including the timing, the dog, and Ruby's bank receipt, indicate he made what was basically an impulse decision to shoot Oswald. Professional hitmen don't leave their success to chance.

Yes, the evidence is not clear on Ruby's motives. I don't think there is any doubt he was mob affiliated. He knew lots of mobsters. He ran a strip club. Was he a made man? No evidence of that. But he was "a friend" in my opinion. The dog is utterly dismissible. The receipt indicates he was at the bank at a certain time. But it doesn't mean he wasn't available to shoot Oswald. He was. What evidence do I have of that? He shot Oswald. He might not have been the only person available to shoot Oswald and who was there to shoot Oswald. There could have been any number of other people there to shoot Oswald at the first opportunity and do the same thing and just walk away when someone else got him. Had I been planning as the mastermind and Ruby was an asset, I would have had everyone else there to covering other possibilities. I wouldn't have relied on or expected Ruby to be the guy. The others would have just faded away.

As for the FBI, I wasn't going for a straw man, I was attacking their credibility in general and their general denial of such a thing as the mafia. That is called ad hominem. However, it isn't a fallacy in a formal sense when their position until 1957 was that there was no such thing as a mafia and they continued to downplay it until the mid-60s. They are not trustworthy on the issue of mafia during this time. Nor are they trustworthy when their reputation is on the line. As it was here.

[ralph124c]

Hoover did accept that there was Italian-American run organized crime-but he always denied the existence of the Mafia. This was (I believe) for two reasons:
-he wanted "his" FBI to be "clean"-he felt that tangling with the Mafia, "his" FBI agents would be subjected to bribery (of course, this did happen)
-Hoover was personally corrupt-he gambled (horse tracks were his favorite), and may well have been blackmailed by the Mb (he was widely considered to be a closet transvestite and homosexual).
The FBI's record with organized crime is mixed-the Mafia flourished in the 1940's, 50's, and 60's-when the FBI was supposed to have been at its most effective.Las Vegas was almost totally under Mob control, until the State of Nevada cleaned it up in the 1970's.

[Marley23]

Originally Posted by The Second Stone

I don't think there is any doubt he was mob affiliated.

As a matter of fact, that claim is very dubious and your own Wikipedia entry discusses that isue. Of course you may be using your own definition of "affiliated," but in terms of real affiliation with organized crime, you're wrong.

He knew lots of mobsters. He ran a strip club.

As far as I know, he knew a couple of mobsters, not "lots," and that's not particularly surprising for a guy who ran a nightclub. If he'd been a librarian it would have been a little more unusual.

Was he a made man? No evidence of that.

You must be kidding. Ruby was non-Italian and Jewish. Of course he wasn't a made man.

Had I been planning as the mastermind and Ruby was an asset, I would have had everyone else there to covering other possibilities. I wouldn't have relied on or expected Ruby to be the guy. The others would have just faded away.

I bet you can't identify a single assassination of this kind that was ever attempted, and that's because it's a ridiculous idea. Hiring five assassins quintuples your risk that one of them gets caught, and if more than one of them starts shooting it begins to look very obvious that there was a conspiracy.

As for the FBI, I wasn't going for a straw man, I was attacking their credibility in general and their general denial of such a thing as the mafia. That is called ad hominem.

It was a straw man since I hadn't mentioned the FBI in the first place. I said there was no evidence of Ruby being involved in any plot, and there actually is no evidence.

[BMalion]

What I love about all these silly conspiracies is that nobody ever dies of natural causes.

They're all "silenced".

[Dissonance]

Originally Posted by The Second Stone

He ran a strip club.

You keep saying this as if its evidence of something. I can assure you being the owner of or running a strip club does not grant one membership in the mafia.

[42fish]

Originally Posted by Marley23

You must be kidding. Ruby was non-Italian and Jewish. Of course he wasn't a made man.

It's irrelevant to the JFK assassination, but being non-Italian and Jewish isn't a complete bar to being a made man, as the likes of Meyer Lansky and Bugsy Siegel could've attested.

[Marley23]

Originally Posted by 42fish

It's irrelevant to the JFK assassination, but being non-Italian and Jewish isn't a complete bar to being a made man, as the likes of Meyer Lansky and Bugsy Siegel could've attested.

I don't think that's true. They were major figures in organized crime, but I don't think they were made guys. My understanding is that if you are not full-blooded Sicilian, you may have extensive ties to the Mafia but you will never be a member.

[tomndebb]

Originally Posted by The Second Stone

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/25/us...ted=all&src=pm

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=592633

In response to a request for evidence that Hoover ever claimed the Mafia never existed, you provide a link to a newspaper article in which his minions actively, (if illegally and immorally), attacked the Mafia and a thread on this board in which there is a little bit of discussion that he may have believed that the Mafia was more localized than it was, but with neither link providing any reference to Hoover claiming that the Mafia did not exist.

I think Hoover, particularly as he built his FBI kingdom, was a horrible blot on the U.S., but I still have never seen genuine evidence that he ever claimed that there was no Mafia. If there was a point where he said it, it would seem to have been prior to 1957 with plenty of time for him to reverse his position, (which, based on FBI activities, he seems to have done).

[Ibn Warraq]

Originally Posted by 42fish

It's irrelevant to the JFK assassination, but being non-Italian and Jewish isn't a complete bar to being a made man, as the likes of Meyer Lansky and Bugsy Siegel could've attested.

Neither of them were "made men."

[The Second Stone]

Originally Posted by Marley23

It was a straw man since I hadn't mentioned the FBI in the first place. I said there was no evidence of Ruby being involved in any plot, and there actually is no evidence.

He killed Oswald. His story was a very weak motive. He wanted to save Mrs. Kennedy from a trial and prove a Jew had guts? Bull puckey. But other than the evidence that he wanted Oswald, a man claiming he was a patsy, dead, and actually killing him, and having a weak explanation, other than that, what have the Romans ever done for us! If there was a secret plot there would only be hints. It seems you are saying that there cannot be a secret plot unless there is evidence of it.

The idea that there could not possibly have been other people participating because there would be public evidence ignores what looks like an assassination conspiracy. Ruby shut Oswald up. It is the simpler explanation. The excuses that Ruby shot Oswald was just a lucky coincidence is, in my mind, remotely possible. To me it looks like it was to take care of Oswald as a loose end.

[jtgain]

Originally Posted by The Second Stone

To me it looks like it was to take care of Oswald as a loose end.

As was mentioned upthread, read Posner's Case Closed. It makes these conspiracy theories look silly.

One chapter documents Ruby's moves that weekend. It's been a while, and I forget all of the details. Many people saw him angry and crying. He voluntarily shut down his strip clubs in honor of Kennedy. He was across town and got a call from one of his former strippers begging for money, so he drove across town to the Western Union office to wire her money, and brought his dog along.

There's a time stamp on the wire. Oswald should have been in transit to the county jail at that time because there was a delay in arranging transit. They changed the location at the last minute. Ruby happened to be wandering by at the time. He was well known around police headquarters, so nobody said anything when he walked right into the parking garage.

So much of that makes a conspiracy where Ruby kills Oswald to shut him up look silly. First, why would the plan allow Oswald three days in which to sing like a canary? Have someone behind him at the book depository to plug him after he kills the President.

Why take the chance of shooting him on national TV when a million things could have gone wrong?

[42fish]

Originally Posted by jtgain

There's a time stamp on the wire. Oswald should have been in transit to the county jail at that time because there was a delay in arranging transit.

And one of the things that delayed the transfer was Oswald demanding to change shirts. So apparently, Oswald deliberately held up his transfer so Ruby's appearance could look like a coincidence. Although if Oswald was going to put in that much effort, you think he could've just hanged himself in his cell and saved the other conspirators the bother of offing him.

[42fish]

Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq

Neither of them were "made men."

Apparently made man doesn't equal big cheese in the Mafia. Fair enough.

[CurtC]

I'm 51 years old and have never heard the expression "made man" before, but here everyone's using like it's common.

[fumster]

Originally Posted by The Second Stone

He killed Oswald. His story was a very weak motive. He wanted to save Mrs. Kennedy from a trial and prove a Jew had guts? Bull puckey. But

Wanting to kill Oswald was a very common reaction at the time.

[The Second Stone]

Originally Posted by jtgain

As was mentioned upthread, read Posner's Case Closed. It makes these conspiracy theories look silly.

One chapter documents Ruby's moves that weekend. It's been a while, and I forget all of the details. Many people saw him angry and crying. He voluntarily shut down his strip clubs in honor of Kennedy. He was across town and got a call from one of his former strippers begging for money, so he drove across town to the Western Union office to wire her money, and brought his dog along.

There's a time stamp on the wire. Oswald should have been in transit to the county jail at that time because there was a delay in arranging transit. They changed the location at the last minute. Ruby happened to be wandering by at the time. He was well known around police headquarters, so nobody said anything when he walked right into the parking garage.

So much of that makes a conspiracy where Ruby kills Oswald to shut him up look silly. First, why would the plan allow Oswald three days in which to sing like a canary? Have someone behind him at the book depository to plug him after he kills the President.

Why take the chance of shooting him on national TV when a million things could have gone wrong?

I'm aware of all of this. I think it is weak sauce. Ruby killed Oswald. It shut Oswald up. The rest of it to me sounds like so much defense attorney complications, all of which could be made up in advance. As for the coincidence of Ruby meeting Oswald, Ruby had no business there. Him knowing police makes him an ideal hit man. If Ruby has to kill Oswald publicly, there is a criminal practice called making an alibi for someone who is going to commit a crime. All of the things you mention could have been arranged for Ruby (and others who never had to act because Ruby had the first opportunity) to be mitigating factors. Yes, a case can be made that he wasn't a hit man. It's been made. Most Americans don't believe it. I don't believe it. These are not credible people. It looks like a hit. I can see why you buy it, but I don't.

I no more believe that Ruby didn't assassinate Oswald than I believe that glove didn't fit OJ Simpson. I can make my own gloves look like they don't fit me by flattening out my hand.

[Stink Fish Pot]

Originally Posted by jtgain

As was mentioned upthread, read Posner's Case Closed. It makes these conspiracy theories look silly.

One chapter documents Ruby's moves that weekend. It's been a while, and I forget all of the details. Many people saw him angry and crying. He voluntarily shut down his strip clubs in honor of Kennedy. He was across town and got a call from one of his former strippers begging for money, so he drove across town to the Western Union office to wire her money, and brought his dog along.

There's a time stamp on the wire. Oswald should have been in transit to the county jail at that time because there was a delay in arranging transit. They changed the location at the last minute. Ruby happened to be wandering by at the time. He was well known around police headquarters, so nobody said anything when he walked right into the parking garage.

So much of that makes a conspiracy where Ruby kills Oswald to shut him up look silly. First, why would the plan allow Oswald three days in which to sing like a canary? Have someone behind him at the book depository to plug him after he kills the President.

Why take the chance of shooting him on national TV when a million things could have gone wrong?

I have not read Posner yet, but plan to do so. However, if this is the kind of thing he does to "prove" Oswald was the lone assassin, then I'm already questioning his outcome. There is no more validity for his scenarios not happening to prove Oswald was guilty than anythin I've read that makes Oswald a patsy. Seriously, Posner goes through all of those "what if" scenarios as if he is the prosecution for the government in the case shaker oswald. But his ideas of why someone didn't kill Oswald right away or why they let Oswald have a chance to speak for three days doesnt prove a damn thing, and you all know it.

I can't wait to read this book now, which is always brought up in these threads like it answers every question out there. I have read that Ruby was sweating profusely after he shot Oswald, and his blood pressure was spiked the entire time after he shot Oswals until he died. After Ruby learns of his death, his blood pressure goes down and he stops sweating. These are two involuntary bodily functions that changed as a direct result of oswald's condition. Does that prove he was hired to kill Oswald? Of course not. But one could point to this "evidence" that Rubys life Must have depended on killing oswald. The CT'ers point to this and say SEE? while the non-CTers say "big deal. That doesnt prove anything."

[pulykamell]

Originally Posted by CurtC

I'm 51 years old and have never heard the expression "made man" before, but here everyone's using like it's common.

If you watch mob films or have any interest in the mafia, it's a pretty common expression. Definition.

[Bookkeeper]

Originally Posted by Stink Fish Pot

I have not read Posner yet, but plan to do so. However, if this is the kind of thing he does to "prove" Oswald was the lone assassin, then I'm already questioning his outcome. There is no more validity for his scenarios not happening to prove Oswald was guilty than anythin I've read that makes Oswald a patsy. Seriously, Posner goes through all of those "what if" scenarios as if he is the prosecution for the government in the case shaker oswald. But his ideas of why someone didn't kill Oswald right away or why they let Oswald have a chance to speak for three days doesnt prove a damn thing, and you all know it.

I can't wait to read this book now, which is always brought up in these threads like it answers every question out there. I have read that Ruby was sweating profusely after he shot Oswald, and his blood pressure was spiked the entire time after he shot Oswals until he died. After Ruby learns of his death, his blood pressure goes down and he stops sweating. These are two involuntary bodily functions that changed as a direct result of oswald's condition. Does that prove he was hired to kill Oswald? Of course not. But one could point to this "evidence" that Rubys life Must have depended on killing oswald. The CT'ers point to this and say SEE? while the non-CTers say "big deal. That doesnt prove anything."

The police arrest Ruby and the first thing they do is to put a blood pressure cuff on him to monitor his involuntary bodily functions? Cite?

[CurtC]

Originally Posted by The Second Stone

As for the coincidence of Ruby meeting Oswald, Ruby had no business there. Him knowing police makes him an ideal hit man. If Ruby has to kill Oswald publicly, there is a criminal practice called making an alibi for someone who is going to commit a crime. All of the things you mention could have been arranged for Ruby (and others who never had to act because Ruby had the first opportunity) to be mitigating factors.

What you're saying here is "sure, all the evidence points to the idea that Ruby simply made a bad decision and killed Oswald in a moment when he had the opportunity, but all that evidence could have been arranged by the mob to give Ruby a plausible alibi!"

Just face it - all the evidence points to Ruby's making a spontaneous bad decision, and there is no evidence that it was planned or ordered, except for your gut feel that it must have been.

And why would the mob want Oswald killed anyway? Wouldn't the theory that someone ordered Ruby to take out Oswald, depend on Oswald's killing of Kennedy being at the request of the mob? That's probably the weaker link in your chain - I think it's obvious to everyone that the mob would never hire someone like Oswald to do their dirty work.

[spifflog]

Originally Posted by The Second Stone

I'm aware of all of this. I think it is weak sauce. Ruby killed Oswald. It shut Oswald up. The rest of it to me sounds like so much defense attorney complications, all of which could be made up in advance. . . . Yes, a case can be made that he wasn't a hit man. It's been made. Most Americans don't believe it. I don't believe it. These are not credible people. It looks like a hit. I can see why you buy it, but I don't.

I no more believe that Ruby didn't assassinate Oswald than I believe that glove didn't fit OJ Simpson. I can make my own gloves look like they don't fit me by flattening out my hand.

[Can't believe I'm actually participating in one of these . . .but]

I don't think that majority of Americans still support the conspiracy, so I'd like to see a site for that. But hell, 6% of Americans think the moon landing was a hoax so I'm not sure that's a good site in your favor.

If you think the evidence that has been laid out showing that it was complete chance that Ruby was there when Oswald came out (including the delay, Ruby being asked for a money order, his dog, etc.) I don't think anyone is going to change your mind.

But smarter men than I have pointed out that IF you think Ruby killed Oswald to shut him up, all you have done is trade in one loose end for another. Now you have Ruby in custody for the rest of his life, and he can sell out the conspiracy. You've told him to kill Oswald, he knows who you are, and why you're telling him to do it and now Ruby can sell you out. What do you do now, kill him too? If Oswald was killed and the killer was never caught, you might (I wrote might) have a case. But not in this one.

[spifflog]

Originally Posted by Stink Fish Pot

I have not read Posner yet, but plan to do so. However, if this is the kind of thing he does to "prove" Oswald was the lone assassin, then I'm already questioning his outcome. There is no more validity for his scenarios not happening to prove Oswald was guilty than anythin I've read that makes Oswald a patsy.

If I could be King for a day, I think my sole dicate would be to stop using Oswald's quote "I'm a patsy" as evidence of his innocence.

Because as we all know, no guity guy has ever proclaimed his innocence.

[The Second Stone]

Originally Posted by spifflog

[Can't believe I'm actually participating in one of these . . .but]

I don't think that majority of Americans still support the conspiracy, so I'd like to see a site for that. But hell, 6% of Americans think the moon landing was a hoax so I'm not sure that's a good site in your favor.

Happy to oblige

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-215_162-23166.html

Only one in ten Americans think Oswald acted alone. Many also believe there was a government cover-up.

Just remember, it's not a majority vote. You are entitled to be in the small minority and it might be right.

As for Oswald saying he was a patsy, that doesn't even slightly convince me of his innocence. The evidence against Oswald is overwhelming.

As for the Ruby blood pressure spike finally dropping when Oswald was pronounced dead, I had not heard that before. I'd like to see a cite. If true, that might suggest that Oswald would have implicated Ruby.