I know the JFK assassination conspiracy theories have been beaten to death but...

[ralph124c]

(Minty Green): But wasn’t organized crime in Dallas under the Chicago Mafia (Sam Giancana)? Presumably, Jack Ruby had to pay protection money (in order to operate his strip club), to whomever rpresented the local mob boss. This is the connection that I find interesting-JFK was in thick with the Mafia (as was his father, Joseph Kennedy). Giancana died under mysterious circumstances, and the Kennedy family has been extremely reluctant to allow any investigation of their familie’s ties to the Mob.

[Zoe]

…and the Kennedy family has been extremely reluctant to allow any investigation of their familie’s ties to the Mob.

I have no doubt they have ties to the mob. You seem to have no doubt. Doesn’t sound like they’ve stopped much of anything. Who’s preventing an investigation?

[Doc_Nickel]

There were people who were talking about the inconsistencies at the time.

-Good lord, of course there are! This isn’t a murder mystery or a Sherlock Holmes novel where all the loose ends get tied up nice and neatly.

It was a horrific, chaotic, unexpected, unplanned event. Eyewitnesses looking the wrong way, people misremembering what they heard (for example, see today’s Staff Report on “cold reading”) and just generally being shocked and devastated.

Personally, such stories are the earmark of an actual event. It’s when the story is perfect, or every aspect has an answer, every participant has an alibi, that things start to smell really fishy.

Police investigators look at precisely that- question three witnesses and get three similar but different answers, chances are they’re pretty close to the truth. Get three nearly identical answers, and you’d better dig deeper- somebody’s been coached.

I’m reminded of the instructor giving a class to new police officers or investiagtors. In the course of his lecture, unexpectedly, a man rushes from offstage, knocks the lecturer down and makes like he’s snatching his wallet, then runs back offstage.

The instructor then has the students “file a report”- what did the man look like? Tall? Thin? Short? Black? Latino? White? What color hair? What was he wearing? Shorts? Pants? Jacket? Which way did he run?

They then compare those reports to the man himself- and as I recall, an accuracy of about 30% is the average you can expect.

And these are trained police officers.

You expect a couple hundred Joe and Jane Q Sixpacks out on a sunny day to give a rational, unbiased, accurate report on a momentous, traumatic event like someone being murdered in front of them in broad daylight?

This is the connection that I find interesting-JFK was in thick with the Mafia (as was his father, Joseph Kennedy).

Cite?

Forty years on and some very intelligent people do not believe the Warren Commission.

-Nearly sixty years on and people still believe an alien spacecraft crashed in Roswell, New Mexico. People right now- with access to the internet- believe we never landed on the Moon, that psychics can talk to their pets telepathically, and that duck quacks don’t echo.

There’s a bunch of people that believe OJ is not guilty, and a bunch that believe he’s guilty as sin. Both groups can’t be right, but that doesn’t stop a bunch of people from believing in one or the other.

People’s belief in a thing, does not prove or disprove that thing.

[LonesomePolecat]

*Originally posted by mipsman *
**I truly believe that you people who so vehemently wish to stifle discussion on this subject have an agenda. (See, no name calling, just a simple accusation.)
**

Please do tell me what my agenda is. This I gotta hear.

[minty_green]

*Originally posted by Zoe *
Can anyone suggest any good reason why Oswald did not shoot when the Presidential motorcade was coming toward him or as it was making the curve? (Especially if Connelley was slightly to the left of Kennedy.)

Several reasons. First, the limo was only on Houston St. for a short drive (I’d estimate 100 ft or less), and its approach on Main St. was blocked from Oswald’s view. This would have given him little time to prepare to shoot. Second, if the limo had been fired on from the TSB while it was on Houston St., it could have quickly and easily driven straight ahead instead of turning left on Elm. That would greatly limit Oswald’s opportunity to fire, much more so than waiting until the car was trapped on Elm.

Finally–and this is just speculation on my part–it wasn’t exactly Lee’s psychological style to go after somebody directly. He was an angry coward . A shot in the back was simply much more his style.

Did any of you who know much about sharp shooting notice the scope on Oswald’s weapon? It looked crooked to me.

The investigation revealed that it was very slightly out of alignment. This could have occurred when it was tossed between the boxes during Oswald’s escape, although it has also been speculated that the misalignment was actually beneficial in leading a moving target.

The autopsy photos show a head that is intact.

Not true. WARNING: That’s a black and white photo of the large exit wound above Kennedy’s right eyebrow, taken during autopsy after the brain was removed. Don’t click on the link if you’re squeamish.

You would have to disbelieve all of the doctors who were with Kennedy at the hospital that day to believe that there wasn’t a coverup.

This too is false. Though you offer no specifics, you should know that the doctors are in nearly complete agreement about the identity and location of Kennedy’s wounds, and have confirmed that the autopsy photos accurately depict what they saw at Parkland. Only one doctor has dissented from that conclusion, and his account really can’t be taken all that seriously.

Even the doctor who announced Kennedy’s death said that Kennedy died of a gunshot wound to the head. He pointed to his forehead – not to the back of his head. Why would he point to the exit wound?

Probably ecause the exit wound was far larger than the entrance wound. It was where Kennedy’s brains has been blown out.

And the same is true of one of the doctors who was with Oswald when his body came into the hospital. He received a call from President Johnson who said that a man was there who was going “to hear Oswald’s death bed confession.” The White House denied making the call, but the hopital operator backed the doctor up on it.

Even if it’s true, so what? You think the White House didn’t want to investigate the president’s assassination?

There are so many, many stories like this that just don’t make sense unless there was a cover up of some sort – or at least behind the scenes manipulation.

But there was a cover-up, of the FBI’s failures to identify Oswald as a threat, of JFK and the CIA’s plots against Castro, etc. That doesn’t have any direct relevance to the identity of the assassin.

There were at least two people who had film of the grassy knoll who were forced to give over that film – one at gunpoint. The other thought that she was giving it over to the FBI, but she never saw it again.

Cite, please?

And remember that there are things that are not to be revealed for another twenty or twenty-five years. Why would they keep more information about Oswald secret?

What makes you think it’s info about Oswald? I know the National Archives and the Kennedy family are keeping materials about JFK secret, but that’s understandable in trying to protect his privacy and his public image.

More responses to come, as time permits.

[ralph124c]

Here’s what I know about this…it started in the 1920’s, when the US had national prohibition. Joseph Kennedy made several deals with the Mob (Mafia), because he was involved in a motion-picture studio (forget the name, but in those days the studios owned the movie theatre chains). Kennedy paid bribes to get labor peace in his Chicago area movie theatres, and later, Kennedy became involved in running scotch whiskey into the USA. For this he needed help, and the Chicago Mob was happy to oblige. Later, when his son Jack ran for president, the Mob delivered the votes in Cook County, which made Kennedy’s election possible.
JFK himself was directly involved-when he ran for a House seat in massachusetts, the localMafia stuffed ballot boxes for him…they even ran another candidate (of the same name as his opponent) to confuse the voters.
So, the Kennedy family DOES NOT WANT a full investigation of the assassination-it would air too much dirty linen.
The really awful thing-Kennedy dated Judith Exner, who was at the same time very friendly with Sam Giancana-who was the kingpin of the Chicago Mafia!

[RickJay]

*Originally posted by minty green *
The investigation revealed that it was very slightly out of alignment. This could have occurred when it was tossed between the boxes during Oswald’s escape, although it has also been speculated that the misalignment was actually beneficial in leading a moving target.

In my experience, it probably wouldn’t much matter anyway, minty. A small misalignment makes less difference than you’d think - when zeroing sights and scopes, I found that most misalignments caused drift of no more than eight or nine inches even at a hundred metres. I never saw a rifle so badly misaligned that the average error was more than a foot at 100 metres or less(obviously at longer ranges it would be) and Oswald’s shot was only 70 metres or so.

Who knows; maybe if it had been aligned properly he would have just barely missed. At that range, though, you’re talking a matter of inches. Two-three inches to either side and Kennedy would still have lost a large part of his head.

[Eve]

*Originally posted by Aro *
**I haven’t read any of the books mentioned, so I’m judging Garrison’s behaviour solely from Stone’s film and from a little googling . . . **

. . . Yet another reason to hate Oliver Stone. There must be web sites where all the mistakes and just plan b.s. in JFK are listed—anyone know of one?

[LonesomePolecat]

*Originally posted by Eve *
**. . . Yet another reason to hate Oliver Stone. There must be web sites where all the mistakes and just plan b.s. in JFK are listed—anyone know of one? **

You could start here:

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

[minty_green]

Try this one, Eve. And don’t miss out on McAdams’ highly informative Jim Garrison page.

Finally, Zoe, your claim that Kennedy was planning to get the U.S. out of Vietnam is completely contrary to the historical record. In particular, the “plan” to withdraw by 1965 was really nothing more than an aspiration, dependent upon the war being successfully fought or concluded by the South Vietnamese. Again, from materials compiled by Prof. McAdams (whose web site really is fantastic):

The other cornerstone of the pullout thesis is the fact that at one point in the Fall of 1963, JFK had made tentative steps toward having 1000 of the 16000 advisors withdrawn by years end, as emboided in an on-site evaluation by Maxwell Taylor and Robert McNamara. This is frequently cited as having been the first phase of a planned pullout, but this is not the case. Not only do all the above advisors (RFK and Rusk) confirm that their was no overall pullout planned, but JFK had already announced at his October 31, 1963 press conference that of the 1000, the first 250 would come from the ranks of those “who are not involved in what might be called front-line operations.” JFK was also careful to stress in the press conference that the proposed 1000 troop reduction was not a done deal, since it was dependent on the increased efficiency of the South Vietnamese performance.

Kennedy and the Cold War; see also this page on the “liberal” myths about Kennedy.

Finally, ralph, would it be too much to ask for some actual evidence of Ruby’s supposed mob ties? All you’re offering is speculation and innuendo.

[Aro]

Eve, I have looked through this one:

One Hundred Errors of Fact and Judgment in Oliver Stone’s JFK. I can’t vouch for its accuracy, But it looks pretty thorough.

[LonesomePolecat]

** mipsman: ** Still waiting to hear what my agenda is supposed to be.

[Eve]

Thanks, all! I tried Googling but got nowhere.

[Mr.Miskatonic]

*Originally posted by Zoe *
**There were at least two people who had film of the grassy knoll who were forced to give over that film – one at gunpoint. The other thought that she was giving it over to the FBI, but she never saw it again.
**

I don’t know about 2, but there’s at least one story about film confiscation that is an outright lie.

[CurtC]

Aro wrote:
What do you think was going through the mind of Jim Garrison - what’s your reading of him as a DA? Did he behave like a DA in the course of his personal investigation? Do you think he was a decent man and decent lawyer who got obsessed to the point of ‘madness’ with this particular case? Or was he always thought of as a little flaky?

It’s highly illuminating to read about Garrison. A good compliation is at McAdams’ Garrison Page, which minty already linked to. This cites Posner:

In 1952, Jim Garrison was relieved of duty in the National Guard. Doctors at the Brooke Army Hospital in Texas diagnosed him as suffering from a “severe and disabling psychoneurosis” which “interfered with his social and professional adjustment to a marked degree.” The evaluation further said that Garrison “is considered totally incapacitated from the standpoint of military duty and moderately incapacitated in civilian adaptability,” and recommended long-term psychotherapy.

But it also quotes Newsweek:

He went from a highly intelligent eccentric to a lunatic in the period of one year… Every time press interest in the case would start to wane, he would propound a new theory. One week it would be 14 Cubans shooting from storm drains. The next week it would be H. L. Hunt and the far right in Dallas.

You really should look through this page - I especially liked how he broke the “code” linking Oswald to Ruby:

Moreover, Garrison said that “PO 19106” was a code that, when deciphered, produced Jack Ruby’s unlisted telephone number, WH 1-5601, and “no other number on earth.” The method by which Garrison “deciphered” the code is worth following. Starting with the “scrambled” number 19106, Garrison “unscrambled” it (by choosing the nearest digit, then the farthest, then the next nearest, etc.) to produce the number 16901. Ruby’s number was 15601, so by unscrambling the digits Garrison managed to match the last two digits in the two numbers. The next step was to subtract the arbitrary number 1300 from 16901, and presto 15601. Finally, Garrison converted the prefix “PO” to “WH” by a system that, according to the prominent cryptographer Irwin Mann, yields at least six different prefixes: Garrison chose Ruby’s.

[Tedster]

There’s no money to be made (relatively) by recognizing LO as a punk with a mail order rifle killing the leader of the free world.

I too speculated on why LO didn’t shoot earlier - and figure he probably balked when the time came, but regained his “composure” when he saw his date with destiny slipping away.

A silly little marxist commie wannabe, with no life - sort of like Mark Chapman or any number of other loser-killers.

[Flash-57]

> But I truly DESPISE those who say it is all over and we
> know what happened and there is no reason to discuss
> it further. Do you people have something to fear?

Generally, that’s a laudable idea, but many times, a discussion will get to a point where it’s obvious that no amount of additional discussion will change anyone’s mind.

I point you to the moon-landing-hoax people. I’ve heard all the theories as to how it was all faked. And I’ve read all the counter claims and fairly considered both points of view.

I’m nearly 100% sure that were actually landed on the moon and I am not particularly interested in discussing it anymore. There really is no need.

I’m not saying that the JFK situation is to that point yet, but it feels like it’s pretty darn close.

[tomndebb]

For the rest of you, be sure to watch the repeat on Kennedy assassination on the History Channel this Friday.

Or check out Forensic Files: The JFK Assassination: Investigation Reopened on Court TV (tonight, at least) and/or the upcoming ABC special Peter Jennings Reporting: The Kennedy Assassination – Beyond Conspiracy.

[minty_green]

Speaking of ABC, there is a fascinating interview on their website with Robery Oswald, Lee’s older brother. It provides good insight into Lee’s character.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/WorldNewsTonight/JFK_Robert_Oswald.html

[Carnac_the_Magnificent]

*Originally posted by minty green *
**Speaking of ABC, there is a fascinating interview on their website with Robery Oswald, Lee’s older brother. It provides good insight into Lee’s character.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/WorldNewsTonight/JFK_Robert_Oswald.html **

Minty, two questions:

1. Sorry to be macabre, but can you provide some orientation to that ghastly photo of JFK that you linked above? Is that a picture of the top of his head, his face, what?

2. In “The Men Who Killed Kennedy,” one of the experts claims that he super-enhanced some photograph to clearly show a hidden sniper. Your thoughts on his claim, please.