# Assume it is proved that Kennedy was assassinated by a conspiracy. What next? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [November 20, 2013, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-it-is-proved-that-kennedy-was-assassinated-by-a-conspiracy-what-next/674380 "2013-11-20T21:54:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-it-is-proved-that-kennedy-was-assassinated-by-a-conspiracy-what-next/674380/21 "2013-11-21T14:50:56Z")
> [@GusNSpot](#): > > So far, no one but me seems to have watched that show. Or offered an proof to me that the movies, pictures, the words said at that time sa shown on that show were factually wrong. > > … > > ::: sigh :::: another thread off limits due to my inability to follow up the imaginatively built escape hatch to rational thought that has been built over the rabbit hole. Bawahahahah > > Good times. Later The reason why we’re not debunking a TV show is that this thread is not dedicated to debunking a TV show. That’s [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=707526) and [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=706851). (The first one is a bit more recent.) This thread is asking you _what would be the consequences if it were proved that the Secret Service theory was correct?_ In other words, at least for this thread at least, we’re assuming the CT theories are _correct_, as opposed to your little sigh up above. So… assume it is true and proved conclusively, beyond a reasonable doubt that the SS agent gave Kennedy the killing shot, and that this proof arrives today. What now? What will change for the better or worse? What do you want to happen? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-it-is-proved-that-kennedy-was-assassinated-by-a-conspiracy-what-next/674380/22 "2013-11-21T15:56:38Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I’m having a hard time seeing the logic of this. The Secret Service was there to keep people from shooting the President. Oswald was there to shoot the President. So how does it make more sense to think the President got shot by a Secret Service agent rather than Oswald? You may be missing the point on this one; it’s not _“rather than”_. The idea is, shots ring out as Oswald unexpectedly puts a bullet in JFK, at which point a Secret Service agent ineptly plays bodyguard by accidentally discharging his own weapon. The ramifications for this thread would be – well, they weren’t really covering up for any other conspirators; there was no second shooter, be he Mafia or CIA or whatever, lying in wait on the grassy knoll; the authorities just saw no reason to mention that (a) Oswald opened fire and shot Kennedy, before (b) someone else then made an oopsie. Why _tell_ people that? Who would it help? Why not just trumpet the _first_ part, which happens to be true? _Oswald planned to kill the President, and deserved to die, and is dead; nobody else planned to kill the President, let’s just stop talking._ ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-it-is-proved-that-kennedy-was-assassinated-by-a-conspiracy-what-next/674380/23 "2013-11-21T16:54:39Z")
> [@GusNSpot](#): > > So far, no one but me seems to have watched that show. Or offered an proof to me that the movies, pictures, the words said at that time sa shown on that show were factually wrong. > > Now I know that unless we all sat down in a room with all information available to us & we go point by point on ANY sequence of events will we ever agree that because you say it is a CT and wrong, but my interpretation or the Warren commission is indeed all the true facts… > > That can’t happen. > > If all television is untruthful and Wikp is absolute truth from learned top of the profession experts then you all need to go edit a lot of old posts you have made. > > Pick some points from that broadcast & cite the wrong parts with an SDMB acceptable cite. Got to watch it first. > > I did not say it was THE answer, but IMO, it did answer many things that I have wondered about that were never even touched on enough to make it into the normal news as far as I know. > > You all may be absolutely correct. I hope that the powers that be notice and you get the accolades for impeccable critical thinking that seems to be desired & getting them by shouting that every thing you do not want to even talk about is a CT. > > ::: sigh :::: another thread off limits due to my inability to follow up the imaginatively built escape hatch to rational thought that has been built over the rabbit hole. Bawahahahah > > Good times. Later The Warren Commission conducted an actual investigation. They looked at the evidence and questioned the witnesses and checked with experts and did all of the things that investigators are supposed to do. They submitted an 889 page long report of their findings backed up by twenty-six volumes of evidence. So you want to be taken credibly? Produce twenty-seven volumes of evidence. You need to show you put at least as much effort into finding out what happened as the professionals did. Saying you watched a TV show doesn’t give you credibility. Saying you _produced_ a TV show doesn’t give you credibility. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-it-is-proved-that-kennedy-was-assassinated-by-a-conspiracy-what-next/674380/24 "2013-11-21T17:07:13Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > You may be missing the point on this one; it’s not _“rather than”_. The idea is, shots ring out as Oswald unexpectedly puts a bullet in JFK, at which point a Secret Service agent ineptly plays bodyguard by accidentally discharging his own weapon. > > The ramifications for this thread would be – well, they weren’t really covering up for any other conspirators; there was no second shooter, be he Mafia or CIA or whatever, lying in wait on the grassy knoll; the authorities just saw no reason to mention that (a) Oswald opened fire and shot Kennedy, before (b) someone else then made an oopsie. Why _tell_ people that? Who would it help? Why not just trumpet the _first_ part, which happens to be true? _Oswald planned to kill the President, and deserved to die, and is dead; nobody else planned to kill the President, let’s just stop talking._ So you’re figuring there were people who were willing to commit serious felonies and risk life imprisonment in order to “help out” a Secret Service agent who’d just screwed up on the job? Because that’s what we’re talking about. This wasn’t “Hey, I’m going to sneak out of work half an hour early. Cover for me if the boss asks.” This was the murder of a President. To put it in perspective, suppose you were at the office Christmas party and somebody accidentally killed another employee. And then he went and asked everyone to help him hide the body. Nobody else was guilty of the killing but if they agree to help hide the body they all become guilty. And then if anyone at the party ever reveals the secret, everyone goes to prison. Do you really think everyone there is going to be willing to agree to that kind of risk? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-it-is-proved-that-kennedy-was-assassinated-by-a-conspiracy-what-next/674380/25 "2013-11-21T17:48:49Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > So you’re figuring there were people who were willing to commit serious felonies and risk life imprisonment in order to “help out” a Secret Service agent who’d just screwed up on the job? Because that’s what we’re talking about. This wasn’t “Hey, I’m going to sneak out of work half an hour early. Cover for me if the boss asks.” This was the murder of a President. It’s not what _ **I’m** _ figuring; I just objected to your “rather than” characterization of it. And the CT on that one, such as it is, is that the only guy out to murder a President succeeded, which is why pretty much all the evidence points to him acting alone. And so if the Warren Report could be 90% what happened (Oswald wasn’t a patsy, there was no second shooter on the grassy knoll, that photo is real and not doctored, et cetera, et cetera) and 10% what could’ve happened (Oswald was a skilled enough rifleman to fire that many shots in that short a time, the “magic bullet” trajectory is technically possible), then, hey, if that’s how the authorities want it, _and the murderer has been brought to justice,_ it’s not crazy to think they’d sign off on such a conclusion while putting the rest in sealed files. This isn’t some office party where one guy accidentally did it all by himself; it’s an office party where some left-hander did it on purpose, and some right-hander accidentally made it worse while trying to help the victim, and the cops make clear they’d prefer to hear a ‘yes’ when they ask whether the first wound could’ve been inflicted by a leftie, and ditto for the second, and ditto for the third. Are they wrong? Probably. Are they crazy? I’m not seeing it. ---
**Author:** ![BrotherCadfael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@BrotherCadfael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrotherCadfael)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-it-is-proved-that-kennedy-was-assassinated-by-a-conspiracy-what-next/674380/26 "2013-11-21T21:18:31Z")
> [@bup](#): > > CT’ers - at least some of them - disbelieve the \*new \*explanation of events, and go deeper down the rabbit hole for the real truth. This. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/assume-it-is-proved-that-kennedy-was-assassinated-by-a-conspiracy-what-next/674380.md?page=1)