I have always been interested by the whole JFK assassination story. I have heard all the theories and possibilities. You know them all too - Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone/with CIA/with mob/did nothing at all. CIA did it alone. Mob did it alone. Castro did it. Ad infinitum…
I have seen all the Nova/60 Minutes/Investigative Reports/Geraldo “Special Reports” on the subject - each presenting evidence and counter-evidence, bullet trajectories, enhanced photographs, paper records from Hustler Magazine. I even remember one program even NAMING the killer - some French assassin for hire named Lucien Sertis (?) who is now dead but someone has a sealed envelope with the names of all his accomplises that will not be opened until said person dies…
I personally think that Lee Harvey Oswald did it, unfortunately it was at the same time as another, unrelated group of people was trying to do it. He was just unlucky enough to get caught.
So what does the smartest collection of minds on the internet say about this. Will we ever know? Has Cecil ever taken a stab at this?
You guys got it all wrong. Oswald was a pawn in their game. The problem is I can’t figure out who “they” are. As you know, Kennedy was to withdraw our troops from Nam, and this did not suit the purpose of many factions within the gvt. On the other hand, the Mafia had it in for his brother, Bobby, who was out to get them. Note that Bobby was assassinated shortly thereafter. They had nothing against John and, after all, their father had ties with the Mafia and the father was close to the Mafia. In fact, that was how he amassed all his money, through bootlegging. Marilyn Monroe was a go-between between John and the Mafia. She was killed (officially she committed suicide) one year before John’s murder. Did John have any thing to do with that and did the Mafia take revenge.
But you guys know all that. I reiterate it merely to establish that there were several forces out there who wanted to see John and/or Bobby dead. I think Oswald was working for the CIA. His trips to the Soviet Union and Cuba had CIA written all over them.
Isn’t it mysterious that Oswald’s assassin (Ruby) died in prison. Before he died, he said that he could not reveal the truth. I don’t remember the exact number, but a large number of people who had some knowledge of the situation conveniently under strange circumstances died shortly after John’s assassination.
And the Warren Report was a farce. No one can say with a straight face that it wasn’t rigged to find Oswald the sole killer. In fact, in 1978, a legislative committe found that there was, beyond a reasonable doubt, a conspriacy. You know all the people that the Warren Report refused to interview or discounted their statements or didn’t publish and did not consider their statements. The one bullet theory is ridiculous. (The same bullet that struck Kennedy also hit the governor of Texas - I forget his name - but they had to conclude that to limit the number of shots.)
I can go on and on, but you guys know all this. So how can you say there was no conspiracy?
You guys got it all wrong. Oswald was a pawn in their game. The problem is I can’t figure out who “they” are. As you know, Kennedy was to withdraw our troops from Nam, and this did not suit the purpose of many factions within the gvt. On the other hand, the Mafia had it in for his brother, Bobby, who was out to get them. Note that Bobby was assassinated shortly thereafter. They had nothing against John and, after all, their father had ties with the Mafia and the father was close to the Mafia. In fact, that was how he amassed all his money, through bootlegging. Marilyn Monroe was a go-between between John and the Mafia. She was killed (officially she committed suicide) one year before John’s murder. Did John have any thing to do with that and did the Mafia take revenge.
But you guys know all that. I reiterate it merely to establish that there were several forces out there who wanted to see John and/or Bobby dead. I think Oswald was working for the CIA. His trips to the Soviet Union and Cuba had CIA written all over them.
Isn’t it mysterious that Oswald’s assassin (Ruby) died in prison. Before he died, he said that he could not reveal the truth. I don’t remember the exact number, but a large number of people who had some knowledge of the situation conveniently under strange circumstances died shortly after John’s assassination.
And the Warren Report was a farce. No one can say with a straight face that it wasn’t rigged to find Oswald the sole killer. In fact, in 1978, a legislative committe found that there was, beyond a reasonable doubt, a conspriacy. You know all the people that the Warren Report refused to interview or discounted their statements or didn’t publish and did not consider their statements. The one bullet theory is ridiculous. (The same bullet that struck Kennedy also hit the governor of Texas Connally- I think - but they had to conclude that to limit the number of shots.)
I can go on and on, but you guys know all this. So how can you say there was no conspiracy?
You guys got it all wrong. Oswald was a pawn in their game. The problem is I can’t figure out who “they” are. As you know, Kennedy was to withdraw our troops from Nam, and this did not suit the purpose of many factions within the gvt. On the other hand, the Mafia had it in for his brother, Bobby, who was out to get them. Note that Bobby was assassinated shortly thereafter. They had nothing against John and, after all, their father had ties with the Mafia and the father was close to the Mafia. In fact, that was how he amassed all his money, through bootlegging. Marilyn Monroe was a go-between between John and the Mafia. She was killed (officially she committed suicide) one year before John’s murder. Did John have any thing to do with that and did the Mafia take revenge.
But you guys know all that. I reiterate it merely to establish that there were several forces out there who wanted to see John and/or Bobby dead. I think Oswald was working for the CIA. His trips to the Soviet Union and Cuba had CIA written all over them.
Isn’t it mysterious that Oswald’s assassin (Ruby) died in prison. Before he died, he said that he could not reveal the truth. I don’t remember the exact number, but a large number of people who had some knowledge of the situation conveniently under strange circumstances died shortly after John’s assassination.
And the Warren Report was a farce. No one can say with a straight face that it wasn’t rigged to find Oswald the sole killer. In fact, in 1978, a legislative committe found that there was, beyond a reasonable doubt, a conspriacy. You know all the people that the Warren Report refused to interview or discounted their statements or didn’t publish and did not consider their statements. The one bullet theory is ridiculous. (The same bullet that struck Kennedy also hit the governor of Texas - Connally I think - but they had to conclude that to limit the number of shots.)
I can go on and on, but you guys know all this. So how can you say there was no conspiracy?
What are you, a whacko? C’mon. How can any reasonable person think that? I mean, look at the evidence! There’s tons of it. It’s completely obvious there was conspiracy.
You people who aren’t seeing boogeymen in every shadow really piss me off. I just do not understand how someone living in this supposedly enlightened day and age can promulgate the idea that one guy got mad and shot the president. What are you, naive? Don’t you know that every time something bad happens that we don’t understand, there has to be some convoluted explanation for it? People don’t just decide to do things, you know.
Oh, and by the way. If you take the certain ascii values and assign them to the letters in Oswald’s last name, and then add them up, you get 666. Go ahead, stick your head in the sand and try to deny it, but don’t say I didn’t warn you.
I know that I can always count on Ptahlis to bring a smile to my face, or make me think about stuff in a new way. Necros’ Toothbrush. I love it. I’ll have to use that one.
“Marilyn Monroe was a go-between between John and the Mafia. She was killed (officially she committed suicide) one year before John’s murder. Did John have any thing to do with that and did the Mafia take revenge.”
—OK. I may not know a lot about politics, and I know there are others here who know a LOT more than I do about JFK and his assassination. But I do know a LOT about Hollywood and about Marilyn Monroe. And this is the most laughable load of banana oil I have seen in ages.
Do you really think the president of the U.S. would use an emotionally unstable and highly public actress as a “go-between” with the Mafia? This is a woman who had attempted suicide several times before, and had accidentally overdosed just weeks before she died.
And do you think the Mafia would assassinate the president of the U.S. because they thought maybe he had some Hollywood star bumped off?
I just finished reading “Anatomy of Motive” by John Douglas and Mark Olshaker. You may remember that Douglas is the FBI “profiler” who has studied mass murderers, spree killers, arsonists, and serial killers for over 25 years. He mentions Oswald and Ruby in this book during his discussion on assasins. If I had the book with me I’d quote him on it but I loaned it to my buddy and she’s not around today. Anyhoo…he says that Oswald fits the “profile” to a tee for this kind of killer. A square peg kind of guy who wanted to be “somebody”. He seriously doubts that if there were any kind of real consipracy that they would send a nut job like this to do the deed. Something to that effect. I happen to agree. It may be fun to imagine some complicated plot as being behind this terrible act, it may even make some people feel better. It would give it perhaps a little more meaning. Rather than have this man’s life be taken by some desparate loser with a half way decent aim, but sad as it is that is probably the logical answer.
I don’t buy all the CIA, Mafia, alien cospiracy crap.
The “Magic Bullet” theory bugs the hell out of me though. As sensationalist as the film “JFK” was, it still had real points to make about the assassination. The infamous “back and to the left” moment clearly does not correspond with the “Magic Bullet” theory. Then the supposed path the actual bullet took…ummm, no.
I want some of those bullets the next time I go hunting, maybe I can get two or three deer with one shot.
BTW, anyone know if any DNA testing has been done on the bullet to see if both Connally’s and Kennedy’s blood were on it?
I saw a documentary on the assassination a few years ago (may have been an episode of Nova). It was great at unraveling all the accumulated stories.
The best example I remember was the bullet that hit President Kennedy and Governor Connally. The Warren Commission said that the bullet ricocheted of Kennedy’s rib and the frame of the car seat, and conspiracy theorists have said that was ludicrous and there must have been another bullet. But the commission’s report was based on both Kennedy and Connally sitting perfectly upright and looking straight ahead. If Kennedy was leaning slightly forward and Connally was turning his head and shoulders to the left (as the film shows they were), the wounds line up perfectly.
I consider that a reasonable and plausible explanation. Amid all the noise on this subject, I’ve only heard it once.
And these discussions always remind me of the Mad magazine parody of “Network”. After Howard Beale (or whatever Mad called him) goes on the air with news that his network is being purchased by Arab businessmen, two of the executives have this exchange;
“Do you think the deal will still go through?”
“That depends.”
“Depends on what?”
“On whether 50 million Americans can keep a secret.”
I didn’t say the Mafia rubbed out Jack K. because he had Marilyn killed. In fact I made no conclusions on who killed whom or why. I did say that Congress concluded with a 90% certainty in 1978 that there were at least two people involved in the assination. That was based on evidence the Warren Commission ignored.
Even if the bullets lined up correctly, a bullet that spent reasonably could not have seriously injured Connally. There is of course a lot more than that. A doctor who saw Jack K. right afterwards said that the throat wound was an entry wound.
I’m not a conspiracy nut, but the facts speak for themselves. There was a cover-up. What the gvt. is hiding and whom they are protecting is a mystery.
Before I begin a serious reply, I’d just like to point out:
barbitu8 said:
If you miss that period, as I did in reading it, it’s a hilarious sentence.
Anyways.
“Back and to the left” has been scientifically disproven- when a bullet passes through the brain, much compressed matter is pushed through the exit wound at high velocity, causing a jet propulsion which pushes the head back in the direction the shot was fired from. In other words, Kennedy’s jump “Back and to the left” was towards where he was being shot from (i.e., Oswald) rather than away from where he was being shot from (i.e., mysterious man with umbrella hiding in the grass knoll in the pay of the Mafia).
As for the “conspiracy”… the Mafia would never carry the hit out on Kennedy- it was Bobby Kennedy who was the thorn in their side, and they knew that if a hit on the President was traced back to them, no AJ or FBI head for the next twenty years would consider ‘leave them alone’ an option like Hoover had.
The Cubans or the Soviets? The Cubans had no ties to Oswald, and given that there was no invasion of Cuba following the Missle Crisis, had little fear of Kennedy. As for the Soviets- as soon as they heard the news, nearly every major party figure was on the phone with his/her U.S. counterpart to assure them that they had nothing to do with it, and there was no reason for alarm. And why take such a major risk- assassinating the President and risking either nuclear war or complete loss of face- and then not do anything about it? Johnson certainly gave the Soviets no better terms or warmer greetings than Kennedy every did.
So, that leaves the insidious industro-military complex, which Ike had given dire warnings about, and obviously Kennedy was screwing over by pulling out of Vietnam.
Except Kennedy was only half-heartedly pulling out of Vietnam, and like Johnson, probably would have committed heavier to 'Nam when faced with the '64 elections and the spectre of not being anti-communist enough. And it’s not as if Johnson was known as a hawk, or someone willing to take the military’s “absolute direction”. Hell, Kennedy had been willing to absolutely trust the same people that Johnson “fell under the power of” during the Bay of Pigs and the Cuban Missle Crisis.
So basically, what a conspiracy theory comes down to is a group of strong, immensely powerful people doing something really risky and really stupid given their objectives. I find it much easier and more likely that Oswald was a lone nut.
I haven’t seen any evidence that Kennedy was planning to withdraw from Vietnam. He couldn’t afford to politically, the Republicans major sticking point against was that he was soft of communism. Maybe he wasn’t going to go escalate the war the way Johnson did, but how did these government factions know what Johnson was planning if he became president? Unless you think Johnson was in on it, I don’t see how this makes sense.
Not true. Joe Kennedy made most of his wealth through the stock market before the crash and in real estate after the war. The evidence he was a bootlegger is circumstantial. If he was a bootlegger, he was likely a nickel and dimer. Cecil talks about this in a classic column.
Not really, it wasn’t like he was rubbed out. He was old and he died of cancer. I know Ruby thought the guards injected cancer cells into his body, but since this won’t give anyone cancer, I think we can discard it.
The 1978 legislative committe is bunk for the same reason the Warren commision was bunk, both were a political means to an end. Neither was a real investigation. I suggest Case Closed : Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK by Gary Posner. It shows where the Warren commision got it wrong and what’s wrong with every conspiracy theory I’ve ever heard of. It is very well researched and meticulous in its analysis and it concludes that Oswald acted alone.
If you haven’t read Flymaster’s comments and the citations he has, please do so. As to Case Closed by Posner, one critic points out that Posner discounts witnesses whose stories don’t support his lone-assassin theory. Another critic indicates that the City of Dallas may be the conspirator! He notes that after the Bay of Pigs, JFK fired the Deputy Director of the CIA whose brother was mayor of Dallas.
Far-fetched as that may sound, it has some support. The guard who was stationed at the only door to the ramp to the underground garage where Oswald was killed by Ruby swore that the door was locked. That was the only possible entrance for Ruby.
I don’t know if Oswald was a lone assassin, but I do know there were many peoples out there who had good reason to see him dead.
The problem with the conspiracy theories is that there are too many suspects. Perhaps we’ll never know for sure.
What about the theory that Oswald was the assassin but his intended victim was Governor John Connally?
As we all know, Oswald served in the U.S. Marine Corps. When it came out that Oswald was a Red, he was discharged less-than-honorably (but NOT dishonorably) from service. And despite his communist sympathies, Oswald was purportedly angry about the discharge. Guess whose signature was on the discharge papers? That’s right, the Secretary of the Navy Department at the time, John Connally.
And this theory explains why his shooting was so good when he was a so-so marksman in the Marines – his shooting WASN’T good, because he hit the wrong target.
