IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags assassinations , JFK assassination , John F. Kennedy , Kennedy conspiracies

Reply
Old 22nd February 2021, 12:40 PM   #161
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,392
Originally Posted by Major Major View Post
If I've "bailed" it's because you don't get the point. You have assembled the detail why from your point of view you are right. And Hornberger has assembled the detail from his point of view that he is right. You put it forth to your circle. He puts it forth to his. You consider that you have decisively made your case.
It's not Hank's case. What he argues is that the facts should speak for themselves.

Quote:
He considers he has decisively made his case.
Most conspiracy theorists do. His problem is his basic premise is historically inaccurate. His theory has no truthful foundation.

Quote:
And meanwhile, the majority of people seem to think, "gee, there must be something to that."
...and?

Quote:
It all dates back to Jackie Kennedy. She couldn't believe that a lone nut Marxist could have done it all by himself, not in that city full of right-wing anti-Kennedy hate. And that fit so well with the opinions of the Kennedy people that they took it up. (For more on this see Camelot and the Cultural Revolution by James Piereson.)
Jackie wasn't the only one to think this.

But history shows it was RFK who shut down many avenues of investigation which drifted too close to revealing the Kennedy Administration's operations against Castro. Throw in the Kennedy family's influence over New York-based news media and what happened was a careful creation of a JFK mythos. This mythos lasted through the mid-1980s, but as CIA and FBI files were declassified the JFK legacy has tarnished quite a bit.

The larger issue is that EVERYONE was trying to link Oswald to a larger conspiracy. The recent document release details this fact. Hoover demanded agents shake down their CI's at least four times throughout 1964 looking to link Oswald to Castro. The same was true at CIA.

Quote:
Meanwhile the Soviets discovered that oh govno, this was a man who had defected to them (and whom they were glad to be rid of), we had better deflect the focus. So they too publicized conspiracies. Not in coordination or cooperation or association with the Kennedy people, but they were pushing it too. (For the beginning of this read Operation SOLO by John Barron, wherein he describes how utterly consternated the Soviets were by all this.)
We've discussed this multiple times.

Quote:
So conspiracy, pushed by two different groups, each for their own purpose, was founded. Then it got picked up by those, not of either group, but with their own purposes, and since there was no point in just reiterating one person's book something new was always added. Jim Garrison was neither a KGB asset not a Kennedy supporter, just a guy with a failing reputation trying to find something to grab the headlines. And so on.
It was more than two different groups.

In April 1964 the CIA's Mexico City Station sent a cable wherein they listed about 20 conspiracy theories forwarded to them by various Central American diplomats. Each one of these conspiracies would eventually become the subject of a "Tell All" book as low-level intelligence sources who saw the memo either misinterpreted its meaning, or did care that the theories were labeled as gossip.

As the 1960s progressed, and Vietnam wore on, the JFK Assassination became parlor game. The myth that Hornberger postulates about JFK pulling the US out of Vietnam became popular even though there is no reason to believe it would have happened. Also, in the late 1960s, the FBI continued to investigate leads, but now their net had spread to the Mafia's involvement in the killing (thanks to Mark Lane). The Chicago Mafia was happy to use the accusation that they were behind killing JFK as advertising to their enemies about not screwing with them. This lead to the House investigation in the 1970s, and perpetuated the myth of a second gunman.


Quote:
And they don't have to show how you are wrong. They say that you are wrong. The next level up. No need to confront the evidence.
According to CT rules, yes. According to reason, and law - no. The reason being that every time they confront the evidence they fail. Their theories fall apart like the wet toilet papar they're written on.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2021, 02:53 PM   #162
Allen773
Graduate Poster
 
Allen773's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cali Four Neea
Posts: 1,627
Mark Lane, a left-wing lawyer, spread conspiracy theories about US government/right-wing extremists/Mafia involvement to deflect attention from the troubling fact that Lee Harvey Oswald was a Castro-lover.

The Soviets and Cuba spread similar conspiracy theories for similar reasons.

The CIA and Bobby Kennedy withheld key information from the Warren Commission staff to protect JFK’s legacy - and their own - from being tarnished by association with the assassination plots against Castro, and so that Congress and the public wouldn’t get the impression that JFK’s death was some form of blowback from Operation Mongoose.

The Warren Commission might have downplayed the significance of Oswald’s political beliefs out of fears of inflaming Cold War tensions to the point of (nuclear) war. After all, it had been less than two years since the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Everyone had an incentive for covering things up. Doesn’t mean that Lee Harvey Oswald wasn’t the lone assassin of JFK, unconnected to any conspiracy.

Last edited by Allen773; 22nd February 2021 at 02:59 PM.
Allen773 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2021, 05:56 PM   #163
HSienzant
Philosopher
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Never Mind
Posts: 5,071
Originally Posted by Major Major View Post
If I've "bailed" it's because you don't get the point. You have assembled the detail why from your point of view you are right. And Hornberger has assembled the detail from his point of view that he is right. You put it forth to your circle.
FALSE. I understood your point. I first summarized your argument, then showed you how it was wrong.

In case you forgot, I wrote this (and more):
Originally Posted by HSienzant View Post
Major Major:

It appears you have bailed on the discussion. If that's true, I'm only putting this point out there for the lurkers:

Your argument is that there are two unwavering sides, and we're talking only within our own circles and are only talking past each other.

I know for a fact in my own case that's untrue. You see, from the publication of the earliest critical books on the assassination, I was a conspiracy believer. I read Rush to Judgment by Mark Lane, Whitewash by Harold Weisberg, Six Seconds in Dallas by Josiah Thompson and Accessories After the Fact by Sylvia Meagher in the mid-1960s and was convinced of a conspiracy. I read of lot of other stuff as well by lesser known authors.

It was only when I decided to find the conspirators and started by reading the 26 Warren Commission volumes and the 12 HSCA Volumes of supporting evidence (first doing this every Saturday at a major metropolitan public library -- then shelling out $2500 to The President's Box Bookshop to purchase the 26 Warren Commission volumes (the HSCA volumes cost considerably less from the Government printing office) -- that I began to be convinced otherwise. I can't count how many days I went to work dog-tired from reading and re-reading the testimony until one, two, or three in the morning.

By reading everything - twice - I saw how the sleight of hand by the conspiracy authors was done. I saw behind the curtain. I discovered how they took stuff out of context, how they ignored contrary evidence, and how they used supposition and innuendo in place of facts to fill in the gaps in what they believed happened....

I've put it plenty of places. He has no forum that I can find, so there is no way to put it forth directly to his circle.

Here's one other place I'm currently debating the Kennedy assassination.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk

Feel free to invite him to join us here, or there, or anywhere the assassination is being discussed.


Originally Posted by Major Major View Post
He puts it forth to his. You consider that you have decisively made your case. He considers he has decisively made his case.

And meanwhile, the majority of people seem to think, "gee, there must be something to that."
The truth is not up for vote. It only happened one way. What the majority thinks really doesn't matter. The majority of people on the planet weren't even born when JFK was shot. I would venture we're over 50% of the population wasn't even born when the movie JFK was released (30 years ago) - if not, we're damn close. This is ancient history to most.

Moreover, if more than 1/100th of one percent of the U.S. population has read the Warren Report, I'd be very surprised. I would wager far fewer than that have actually read the 26 Warren Commission volumes of testimony and evidence. So why does their uninformed opinion matter?

I'm reminded of this comment in a different context about a different subject, but it is applicable here:
"Some things are believed because they are demonstrably true, but many other things are believed simply because they have been asserted repeatedly."

--- Thomas Sowell

Originally Posted by Major Major View Post
It all dates back to Jackie Kennedy. She couldn't believe that a lone nut Marxist could have done it all by himself, not in that city full of right-wing anti-Kennedy hate. And that fit so well with the opinions of the Kennedy people that they took it up. (For more on this see Camelot and the Cultural Revolution by James Piereson.)
Jackie commissioned a book about the JFK presidency after the assassination. It was serialized in LOOK magazine (a competitor to LIFE). I don't recall it pushing a conspiracy theory. Both Robert and Ted Kennedy said they agreed with the conclusions of the Warren Report. I don't recall either of them pushing a conspiracy theory either. Blaming the "anybody but Oswald" fervor on the Kennedys when there are more obvious culprits (see below) seems to be stretching it too thin for my taste buds.


Originally Posted by Major Major View Post
Meanwhile the Soviets discovered that oh govno, this was a man who had defected to them (and whom they were glad to be rid of), we had better deflect the focus. So they too publicized conspiracies. Not in coordination or cooperation or association with the Kennedy people, but they were pushing it too. (For the beginning of this read Operation SOLO by John Barron, wherein he describes how utterly consternated the Soviets were by all this.)
The Soviets were pushing a right-wing conspiracy theory on the day after the assassination. But that didn't make much of an impact on the U.S. population whatsoever, which was familiar with Soviet propaganda.


Originally Posted by Major Major View Post
So conspiracy, pushed by two different groups, each for their own purpose, was founded. Then it got picked up by those, not of either group, but with their own purposes, and since there was no point in just reiterating one person's book something new was always added.
Most of the early critics were on the extreme left. Mark Lane, Harold Weisberg, Sylvia Meagher, Richard Popkin, Thomas Buchanan, Joachim Joesten, etc. Those are the people I read back in the day. Those are the people that moved the needle with the U.S. population's belief on whether there was a conspiracy or not.

Indeed, I just checked Piereson's book online. And he blames many of the same authors for the spread of conspiracism after the assassination on page 124 of his book. (I used the "surprise me!" function at Amazon.com. Serendipity strikes again.


Originally Posted by Major Major View Post
Jim Garrison was neither a KGB asset not a Kennedy supporter, just a guy with a failing reputation trying to find something to grab the headlines. And so on.
I think that's an extreme over-simplification, but I'm not going to bother arguing it.


Originally Posted by Major Major View Post
And they don't have to show how you are wrong. They say that you are wrong. The next level up. No need to confront the evidence.
Assertions are not evidence. They duck confronting the evidence because the evidence is against them.

Hank
__________________
I have never ”refused” to provide evidence. I provide evidence if requested to do so in a specific and relevant manner.

Hanks ”method” [of requesting evidence] is not going to [get me to] provide any evidence since it has a completely different purpose. To create the the illusion of me not providing evidence when requested to do so.
- Manifesto

Last edited by HSienzant; 22nd February 2021 at 06:40 PM.
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd February 2021, 08:19 PM   #164
Pacal
Graduate Poster
 
Pacal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,403
Originally Posted by Major Major View Post
And they don't have to show how you are wrong. They say that you are wrong. The next level up. No need to confront the evidence.
If they have "No need to confront the evidence.", then all they are engaging in is fantasy and their assertions can be dismissed out of hand.

They can scream to high heaven that they don't have show how you are wrong, it only makes them look like true believing fools. They can say you are wrong until kingdom come and their opinion is worthless unless they can demonstrate that.

It is obvious they are engaged in fantasy story telling and their story is constructed by them in such a manner has to be unfalsifiable. (All the evidence is fake, the documents are fake, witnesses are lying etc.) With this fantasy construct any fantasy can be advanced. For example I am a brain in a vat and everything I experience is the result of a conspiracy of AI to deceive me into thinking this is all real.

It is all worthy only of contempt.

People are perfectly free to believe in stupid idiocy, (Like JFK conspiracy crap.), without evidence that withstands even the most minimal scrutiny it is not worth taking seriously. And if they are starting with the stance that dismisses the evidence out of hand, with absolutely no proof it is fake, fraudulent etc., then it is worthy only of utter contempt.

As for JFK planning to withdraw from Vietnam, that is and has been for quite sometime an easy to disprove myth. Of course JFK was planning to withdraw from Vietnam - once America had won the war!!! (Just like Lyndon) But withdrawal without victory? The evidence is close to zero.

In fact recently disclosed documents reveal that JFK was much more deeply involved in the overthrow and assassination of Diem than previously thought and this was only weeks before JFK's own assassination. This of course provides no support to the JFK withdrawal without victory nonsense. Why? Because the main reason Diem was overthrown, murdered was because Diem was thought to ruining the chances for victory in Vietnam.

The "other side" has to confront the evidence, if they fail to do so it only shows they are true believers who belong in the same place has Qanon nut bars, Creationists, believers in the great Jewish conspiracy and vast numbers of other true believers.

The next level up for these people is into non-falsifiable clap trap and all sorts of stupidity can be put there also.
Pacal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd February 2021, 09:19 PM   #165
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,392
The best part is that both Hank and I used to believe the JFK conspiracy theories.

I read every CT book written up through 1995. I thought the Warren Commission and those who supported it ignored evidence.

And then I went to Dallas.

Every theory went down the toilet when I looked out of the 6th floor window next to the "sniper's nest" onto Elm Street, and realized that it was a ridiculously easy shot:

https://www.earthcam.com/usa/texas/d...am=dealeyplaza

Down on the sidewalk it was clear that no shot came from the Grassy Knoll, and a gunman would have been visible in almost all of the pictures of the incident. Every book I'd ever read made it impossible for Oswald to have hit JFK, and it is clear that CT authors either lied, or parroted other CT authors. If the CTists could screw up such an easy and obvious fact I wondered what else they got wrong. As it turned out, other than JFK and Tippit being murdered on 11/22/63 there are few facts to be found in any JFK-CT book.

This is why I'm here, to do my penance for twenty four years of spreading lies about the murder of JFK. I know all the tricks.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 08:11 AM   #166
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 22,247
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
Every theory went down the toilet when I looked out of the 6th floor window next to the "sniper's nest" onto Elm Street, and realized that it was a ridiculously easy shot:
That's what did it for me too. I didn't subscribe to the conspiracy theories before then, but I was prepared to give them a fair shake. Now I've stood where Oswald was. I've stood where Abraham Zapruder was. I've stood where the alleged Grassy Knoll shooter stood. I've driven the motorcade route myself with a Dallas local. At the time I was a reasonably competent rifle shot. I know which shot was easier. When you realize that most of the conspiracy authors must have been in that same spot and gathered the same observations, you realize it's more likely they know what they're doing when they peddle their handwaving nonsense.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 01:41 PM   #167
Big Les
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 5,056
There's been a rehash of the 2007 claims by Ion Mihai Pacepa (ex-Romanian secret police) that Oswald was a Soviet asset after all, and that he went ahead after they stood him down. This has attracted some press attention because his new book is co-authored by R. James Woolsey, a former CIA Director, to whom this claim is now being attributed. It's not clear to what extent Woolsey is able to corroborate Pacepa's theory, or if it really is just a rehash of the latter's speculation. Anyway, here's the NY Post story on it;

https://nypost.com/2021/02/22/soviet...-ex-cia-chief/
Big Les is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 03:20 PM   #168
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,392
Originally Posted by Big Les View Post
There's been a rehash of the 2007 claims by Ion Mihai Pacepa (ex-Romanian secret police) that Oswald was a Soviet asset after all, and that he went ahead after they stood him down. This has attracted some press attention because his new book is co-authored by R. James Woolsey, a former CIA Director, to whom this claim is now being attributed. It's not clear to what extent Woolsey is able to corroborate Pacepa's theory, or if it really is just a rehash of the latter's speculation. Anyway, here's the NY Post story on it;

https://nypost.com/2021/02/22/soviet...-ex-cia-chief/
So many problems with their theory.

Oswald went to Mexico City to get a Cuban visa, and flipped out when they told him no. Then he storms off to the Soviet Embassy where he pulls out his .38 demanding the Soviets intervene on his behalf.

I see zero tradecraft here.

Then there are his actions in New Orleans. Why put himself on the radar as a pro-Castro activist? An assassin is discrete.

Next problem is that no other KGB assassins ever used a high powered rifle. Competent assassins kill at close range. Look at the FSB's successful kills over the past 20 years, all hands on. Mossad kills at point-blank range.

Consider Oswald's finances. The KGB would have made sure he could pay his bills. If he was a Soviet agent who went "rogue" they would have killed him before 11/22/63.

Someone just wants to sell a book.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th February 2021, 03:40 AM   #169
The Common Potato
Muse
 
The Common Potato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: The Scunthorpe Problem
Posts: 555
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
A sandwich that he spent the entire morning eating, and it made him sick so he left work early because nobody wants to use the work men's room when you have diarrhea. This forced him to take the taxi after the bus was caught in traffic. The toilet at the rooming house must have been clogged thus explaining why he left the house to go downtown to search for a restroom. Obviously he couldn't hold it and snuck into the movie theater to use the men's room. He stayed because he knew he'd have to use it again soon.

I hereby copyright "The Sandwich Theory" and my e-book will be available soon on Amazon.
The Manchurian Candidate was released 1962 so that leaves plenty of time for stuff. It's not impossible that it was being shown in Dallas a year later. You ought to be aware of stuff and incorporate it. #FACTS #Eleventy

Last edited by The Common Potato; 26th February 2021 at 03:42 AM.
The Common Potato is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th February 2021, 01:18 PM   #170
Big Les
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 5,056
Agreed. At most you could argue that he was radicalised and encouraged to carry out the attack, but it seems incredibly reckless of the USSR to entrust such a rube with that mission, given the high chance of failure and of the CIA figuring out the connection and the US retaliating. Frankly, any significant historical claim that first appears in a mass market book is automatically suspect.
Big Les is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th February 2021, 01:30 PM   #171
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,392
Originally Posted by Big Les View Post
Agreed. At most you could argue that he was radicalised and encouraged to carry out the attack, but it seems incredibly reckless of the USSR to entrust such a rube with that mission, given the high chance of failure and of the CIA figuring out the connection and the US retaliating. Frankly, any significant historical claim that first appears in a mass market book is automatically suspect.
Look at it from the Cold War perspective.

Oswald had defected to the USSR and then returned. The KGB would know the FBI would keep an eye on him for a while, and certainly have a file. If Oswald was caught the first place the US would look was Moscow, which the declassified documents show they did. This was just over a year since the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the Soviets would have been risking all-out war. They saw the US military's movements during the Crisis, and they knew that LBJ and RFk were anti-Soviet hawks.

Personally I can't believe Hoover didn't string together a link to Moscow anyway.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th February 2021, 01:36 PM   #172
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,392
Originally Posted by The Common Potato View Post
The Manchurian Candidate was released 1962 so that leaves plenty of time for stuff. It's not impossible that it was being shown in Dallas a year later. You ought to be aware of stuff and incorporate it. #FACTS #Eleventy
Yes, obviously the KGB brainwashed Oswald while in Mexico City by locking him in a room with a Soviet Mariachi band, and forcing him to listen to a loop of JFK's voice saying "Cuber" over and over.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2021, 02:07 PM   #173
Allen773
Graduate Poster
 
Allen773's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cali Four Neea
Posts: 1,627
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
Yes, obviously the KGB brainwashed Oswald while in Mexico City by locking him in a room with a Soviet Mariachi band, and forcing him to listen to a loop of JFK's voice saying "Cuber" over and over.
While the CIA did the same thing but with Oswald's body double and an American mariachi band, also in Mexico City, at the same time.

To this day, no one knows whether the KGB-brainwashed Oswald or the CIA-brainwashed Oswald body double killed JFK. Or whether the whole "assassination" was a ruse to distract the fact that JFK had died a year earlier in a bizarre gardening accident.

In any event, the authorities said, "Best leave it unsolved."
Allen773 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2021, 03:20 PM   #174
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 22,868
A new book out on the subject of the JFK assassination.

"Kennedy's Avenger: Assassination, Conspiracy, and the Forgotten Trial of Jack Ruby" by Dan Abrams and David Fisher

Review
https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-r...nedys-avenger/

MSNBC interview with the author
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibgn0Vuqa8E
__________________
Science supplies evidence, invites you to analyse and evaluate that evidence, and then to draw conclusions from that
Religion supplies no evidence, demands you have faith, and expects you to uncritically and automatically believe that something is true simply because "the Bible tells you so"
If you don't like my posts, opinions, or directness then put me on your ignore list!
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2021, 03:51 PM   #175
HSienzant
Philosopher
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Never Mind
Posts: 5,071
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
A new book out on the subject of the JFK assassination.

"Kennedy's Avenger: Assassination, Conspiracy, and the Forgotten Trial of Jack Ruby" by Dan Abrams and David Fisher

Review
https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-r...nedys-avenger/

MSNBC interview with the author
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibgn0Vuqa8E
Not the first book on the Ruby trial.

Dallas Justice by Melvin Belli, a genius lawyer (if you don't believe me, read his book! He'll set you straight):
https://www.abebooks.com/first-editi...30914043573/bd

The Jack Ruby Trial Revisited: The Diary of Jury Foreman Max Causey
https://www.abebooks.com/servlet/Sea...20Causey&sts=t

My personal favorite:
The Trial of Jack Ruby: A Classic Study of Courtroom Strategies
https://www.abebooks.com/servlet/Boo...%2Bjack%2Bruby

Hank
__________________
I have never ”refused” to provide evidence. I provide evidence if requested to do so in a specific and relevant manner.

Hanks ”method” [of requesting evidence] is not going to [get me to] provide any evidence since it has a completely different purpose. To create the the illusion of me not providing evidence when requested to do so.
- Manifesto

Last edited by HSienzant; 2nd June 2021 at 04:30 PM.
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2021, 10:53 AM   #176
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,392
I like Dan Abrams. I'm ordering this book.

The book points out that had Oswald not paused to change into that black sweater he would have been gone before Ruby arrived.

Looks like Abrams and Fischer, both lawyers, focus more on Melvin Billi's defense strategy more than anything.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th June 2021, 12:07 AM   #177
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,392
Book arrived today. The introduction is spent shutting down the conspiracy nonsense, which is a good sign. Looks like this is a lawyer book dedicated to strategies and personalities of the trial. I'm always happy to read a straight history on this event.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th July 2021, 04:17 PM   #178
Allen773
Graduate Poster
 
Allen773's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cali Four Neea
Posts: 1,627
I find it interesting that the USSR and the domestic American Far-Left were so instrumental in spreading JFK conspiracy theories, specifically ones involving the CIA and anti-Castro exiles.

It’s almost as if there were some facts about JFK’s actual assassin that were embarrassing for them…
Allen773 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th July 2021, 04:26 PM   #179
Allen773
Graduate Poster
 
Allen773's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cali Four Neea
Posts: 1,627
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
The better question is:

Why not frame Oswald as part of a larger Marxist/Cuban Conspiracy?

Hoover could have rolled up Communist organizations across the country as threats, and LBJ would have been in a better position to make the case to check the Soviet/Red Menace in places like SE Asia and Central/South America.

If the conspiracy was to get the US into Vietnam, and or Cuba while turning the CIA loose then why accurately paint Oswald as the sad-sack dork that he was? How does that advance the secret US agenda?

Yes, the Warren Commission in particular, along with many US government agencies downplayed Oswald’s political beliefs, especially his love of Castro. From my reading, that was done out of fear that Cold War tensions would re-ignite to Cuban Missile Crisis levels and also, that Americans (specifically members of Congress and journalists) would start asking questions about why exactly a Castro sympathizer would assassinate JFK.

In other words, was there something that the US government—particularly the CIA and Attorney General Bobby Kennedy—was trying to keep under wraps?

Last edited by Allen773; 24th July 2021 at 04:29 PM.
Allen773 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th July 2021, 08:06 PM   #180
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,392
Originally Posted by Allen773 View Post
I find it interesting that the USSR and the domestic American Far-Left were so instrumental in spreading JFK conspiracy theories, specifically ones involving the CIA and anti-Castro exiles.

It’s almost as if there were some facts about JFK’s actual assassin that were embarrassing for them…
No.

The KGB saw an opportunity to stir the pot. That's all

Look up Yuri Nosenko to get an idea how badly they needed the US to believe they were not behind the assassination.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th July 2021, 08:11 PM   #181
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,392
Originally Posted by Allen773 View Post
Yes, the Warren Commission in particular, along with many US government agencies downplayed Oswald’s political beliefs, especially his love of Castro. From my reading, that was done out of fear that Cold War tensions would re-ignite to Cuban Missile Crisis levels and also, that Americans (specifically members of Congress and journalists) would start asking questions about why exactly a Castro sympathizer would assassinate JFK.

In other words, was there something that the US government—particularly the CIA and Attorney General Bobby Kennedy—was trying to keep under wraps?
It's not so much that the WC downplayed Oswald's political beliefs as much as they kept them in perspective with the larger fact that the man was a loser. Making him into a Marxist legend is what Oswald would have wanted.

And yes, RFK and the intelligence community needed to keep Operation Mongoose and JMWAVE secret. Poking around the Cuban exile community could have screwed a lot of things up.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2021, 10:30 AM   #182
tinribmancer
Hasbarian NWO Templar Cattle
 
tinribmancer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: The Intergalatic Solar System!
Posts: 1,692
Saw this video on Youtube:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


60 years later and there are STILL JFK nutters, like c'mon...

Someone would've already spilled the beans by now.. :
__________________
"Bravery Is Not A Function Of Firepower." - JC Denton

"And belief in conspiracy theories is not the function of a higher intellect." - BStrong
tinribmancer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2021, 04:51 PM   #183
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,392
Sounds like he spent 20 minutes "researching".
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd August 2021, 10:34 AM   #184
Allen773
Graduate Poster
 
Allen773's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cali Four Neea
Posts: 1,627
Been reading this book:

https://www.amazon.com/Hunting-Presi.../dp/1621572072

Here’s the thing. All Presidents get TONS of violent threats, some more credible than others. The Secret Service is even busier today than in the past with the level of political polarization and number of violent conspiracy theorists (!) out there.

I don’t think any reasonable person could deny that plenty of right-wingers, some anti-Castro exiles, Mafiosos, white supremacists (JFK was pushing the Civil Rights Act in 1963!), Bircher types like General Edwin Walker (who was targeted by one Lee Harvey Oswald), and yes, perhaps a few bitter CIA people mad about Allen Dulles being fired and “the abandonment of the exiles in Cuba” had it out for Kennedy. Some of these people no doubt fantasized about killing him, and a subset might have been actively planning on doing just that. To reiterate: all US Presidents get a lot of violent threats.

Ultimately, though, the simple truth is that Lee Harvey Oswald was the person who killed JFK, and there is no credible evidence that he was a part of ANY conspiracy—Left or Right, foreign or domestic. Regardless of who else was planning on getting Kennedy, Oswald got him first.
Allen773 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd August 2021, 07:41 PM   #185
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,392
Originally Posted by Allen773 View Post
Been reading this book:

https://www.amazon.com/Hunting-Presi.../dp/1621572072

Here’s the thing. All Presidents get TONS of violent threats, some more credible than others. The Secret Service is even busier today than in the past with the level of political polarization and number of violent conspiracy theorists (!) out there.

I don’t think any reasonable person could deny that plenty of right-wingers, some anti-Castro exiles, Mafiosos, white supremacists (JFK was pushing the Civil Rights Act in 1963!), Bircher types like General Edwin Walker (who was targeted by one Lee Harvey Oswald), and yes, perhaps a few bitter CIA people mad about Allen Dulles being fired and “the abandonment of the exiles in Cuba” had it out for Kennedy. Some of these people no doubt fantasized about killing him, and a subset might have been actively planning on doing just that. To reiterate: all US Presidents get a lot of violent threats.

Ultimately, though, the simple truth is that Lee Harvey Oswald was the person who killed JFK, and there is no credible evidence that he was a part of ANY conspiracy—Left or Right, foreign or domestic. Regardless of who else was planning on getting Kennedy, Oswald got him first.
Back in the late 1990s, ABC News aired a 1-hour special about JFK wherein they detailed his many sins. It was hosted by the late Peter Jennings and the underlying statement of the piece was JFK pissed off a lot of people.

Here is the important thing: Killing a President of the United States is a big deal. In 1963 you would end up swinging from a rope when caught. The Mafia knew this, the CIA knew this, anyone else with a grudge against Kennedy knew this.

Unfortunately there is a mythology about JFK, most created by Kennedy loyalists and the Kennedy family, that has twisted the background of the events of his Presidency and has spawned false motives for his assassination. One of the big ones is the myth that JFK was going to destroy the CIA and fire Hoover. Neither is true.

After the Bay of Pigs someone had to fall on their sword, and Dulles knew it and accepted it. After the failed invasion the JFK NSC EXPANDED the CIA's mission set beyond its charter. This included things like reaching out to major news outlets to funnel propaganda, and a doubling of the efforts to remove and or kill Castro. The myth says he was going to "smash the CIA into a thousand pieces", but JFK made it bigger and turned it into the monster it became in the 1960s and early 1970s.

All of the alleged and actual threats against his life are tangential to te events of Dallas on November 22, 1963. In the parlor game of the JFK Assassination CT-World nobody has ever successfuly tied Oswald to anyone, nor have they proven a conspiracy.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd August 2021, 10:08 AM   #186
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 8,970
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
In the parlor game of the JFK Assassination CT-World nobody has ever successfuly tied Oswald to anyone, nor have they proven a conspiracy.
..but they have created a conspiracy to try and create a provable conspiracy by manufacturing 'evidence' and connections that don't exist.
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd August 2021, 02:45 PM   #187
Pacal
Graduate Poster
 
Pacal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,403
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
Back in the late 1990s, ABC News aired a 1-hour special about JFK wherein they detailed his many sins. It was hosted by the late Peter Jennings and the underlying statement of the piece was JFK pissed off a lot of people.

Here is the important thing: Killing a President of the United States is a big deal. In 1963 you would end up swinging from a rope when caught. The Mafia knew this, the CIA knew this, anyone else with a grudge against Kennedy knew this.

Unfortunately there is a mythology about JFK, most created by Kennedy loyalists and the Kennedy family, that has twisted the background of the events of his Presidency and has spawned false motives for his assassination. One of the big ones is the myth that JFK was going to destroy the CIA and fire Hoover. Neither is true.

After the Bay of Pigs someone had to fall on their sword, and Dulles knew it and accepted it. After the failed invasion the JFK NSC EXPANDED the CIA's mission set beyond its charter. This included things like reaching out to major news outlets to funnel propaganda, and a doubling of the efforts to remove and or kill Castro. The myth says he was going to "smash the CIA into a thousand pieces", but JFK made it bigger and turned it into the monster it became in the 1960s and early 1970s.

All of the alleged and actual threats against his life are tangential to te events of Dallas on November 22, 1963. In the parlor game of the JFK Assassination CT-World nobody has ever successfuly tied Oswald to anyone, nor have they proven a conspiracy.
I like this. The myth of St. John of Kennedy who was also the Son of God sent to Earth to inaugurate the Millennium but the Evil Ones led by the Prince of Darkness - Satan! killed him!! This myth is annoying.
Pacal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th August 2021, 08:58 AM   #188
Major Major
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 410
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
Back in the late 1990s, ABC News aired a 1-hour special about JFK wherein they detailed his many sins. It was hosted by the late Peter Jennings and the underlying statement of the piece was JFK pissed off a lot of people.

Here is the important thing: Killing a President of the United States is a big deal. In 1963 you would end up swinging from a rope when caught. The Mafia knew this, the CIA knew this, anyone else with a grudge against Kennedy knew this.

Unfortunately there is a mythology about JFK, most created by Kennedy loyalists and the Kennedy family, that has twisted the background of the events of his Presidency and has spawned false motives for his assassination. One of the big ones is the myth that JFK was going to destroy the CIA and fire Hoover. Neither is true.

After the Bay of Pigs someone had to fall on their sword, and Dulles knew it and accepted it. After the failed invasion the JFK NSC EXPANDED the CIA's mission set beyond its charter. This included things like reaching out to major news outlets to funnel propaganda, and a doubling of the efforts to remove and or kill Castro. The myth says he was going to "smash the CIA into a thousand pieces", but JFK made it bigger and turned it into the monster it became in the 1960s and early 1970s.

All of the alleged and actual threats against his life are tangential to te events of Dallas on November 22, 1963. In the parlor game of the JFK Assassination CT-World nobody has ever successfuly tied Oswald to anyone, nor have they proven a conspiracy.
Originally Posted by Pacal View Post
I like this. The myth of St. John of Kennedy who was also the Son of God sent to Earth to inaugurate the Millennium but the Evil Ones led by the Prince of Darkness - Satan! killed him!! This myth is annoying.
You forgot that he was going to pull out of Vietnam, end the Cold War, and smash the Military-Industrial Complex. After which the world would enter an age of peace, truth, love, and beauty and everything would be so hip that we would live forever (or so it would seem) . . .
Major Major is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th October 2021, 09:14 PM   #189
Allen773
Graduate Poster
 
Allen773's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cali Four Neea
Posts: 1,627
IF JFK was such a threat to the Deep State, why couldn't they leak all of the dirt on him about his horrendous medical condition, his womanizing, or his and his brother's OWN key roles in Mongoose and other CIA covert action (including sabotage of governments and - gasp- assassination of foreign leaders), especially since JFK was up for re-election in ONE YEAR as of November 1963?

Remember, JFK was only in Texas because be had to mend a rift a bitter rift within the Texas Democratic Party (LBJ and Governor John Connally vs. Senator Ralph Yarborough) and he needed Texas in 1964...just as he had needed Texas (and LBJ) in 1960, which had been an extremely close election, after all.

Last edited by Allen773; 10th October 2021 at 09:17 PM.
Allen773 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th October 2021, 09:47 PM   #190
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,392
Originally Posted by Allen773 View Post
IF JFK was such a threat to the Deep State, why couldn't they leak all of the dirt on him about his horrendous medical condition, his womanizing, or his and his brother's OWN key roles in Mongoose and other CIA covert action (including sabotage of governments and - gasp- assassination of foreign leaders), especially since JFK was up for re-election in ONE YEAR as of November 1963?

Remember, JFK was only in Texas because be had to mend a rift a bitter rift within the Texas Democratic Party (LBJ and Governor John Connally vs. Senator Ralph Yarborough) and he needed Texas in 1964...just as he had needed Texas (and LBJ) in 1960, which had been an extremely close election, after all.
He wasn't a threat to the Deep State, he embraced it and expanded it.

There was no guarantee he would be re-elected in 1964.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th October 2021, 10:35 PM   #191
Allen773
Graduate Poster
 
Allen773's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cali Four Neea
Posts: 1,627
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
He wasn't a threat to the Deep State, he embraced it and expanded it.

There was no guarantee he would be re-elected in 1964.
I know, I know. My point exactly.
Allen773 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th October 2021, 06:10 AM   #192
Gord_in_Toronto
Penultimate Amazing
 
Gord_in_Toronto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 23,345
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
He wasn't a threat to the Deep State, he embraced it and expanded it.

There was no guarantee he would be re-elected in 1964.
Surely, if the Deep State actually existed, it could guaranty he would be reelected? After all, what's a Deep State for otherwise?
__________________
"Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick
Gord_in_Toronto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd October 2021, 09:46 PM   #193
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,392
Biden, it seems, is no better than the last guy. Postponement of the final records release:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-...dent-john-f-k/

Quote:
Sec. 3. Temporary Certification. In light of the agencies’ proposals for continued postponement under the statutory standard, the Archivist’s request for an extension of time to engage with the agencies, and the need for an appropriate review and disclosure process, I agree with the Archivist’s recommendation. Temporary continued postponement is necessary to protect against identifiable harm to the military defense, intelligence operations, law enforcement, or the conduct of foreign relations that is of such gravity that it outweighs the public interest in immediate disclosure. Accordingly, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 5(g)(2)(D) of the Act, I hereby certify that all information within records that agencies have proposed for continued postponement under section 5(g)(2)(D) shall be withheld from full public disclosure until December 15, 2022.

Sec. 4. Interim Release. Any information currently withheld from public disclosure that agencies have not proposed for continued postponement shall be reviewed by NARA before December 15, 2021, and shall be publicly released on that date. Out of respect for the anniversary of President Kennedy’s assassination, such release shall not occur before December 15, 2021.

Sec. 5. Intensive 1-Year Review. (a) Over the next year, agencies proposing continued postponement and NARA shall conduct an intensive review of each remaining redaction to ensure that the United States Government maximizes transparency, disclosing all information in records concerning the assassination, except when the strongest possible reasons counsel otherwise. This review shall include documents within the assassination records collection designated as “not believed relevant” by the Assassination Records Review Board established under the Act, but nonetheless placed within the collection by the Assassination Records Review Board.


This is BS.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2021, 05:24 PM   #194
Allen773
Graduate Poster
 
Allen773's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cali Four Neea
Posts: 1,627
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
Biden, it seems, is no better than the last guy. Postponement of the final records release:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-...dent-john-f-k/



This is BS.
The level of over-classification within the federal bureaucracy is beyond parody. Retroactive classification of things that have been widely reported in the news media, for example.
Allen773 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2021, 07:16 PM   #195
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,392
They have had almost 30 years to get this done.

NASA went to the moon in under 8 years.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th October 2021, 01:10 PM   #196
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,392
Ah yes, it's that time of year; the changing colors of the leaves, the chill in the air, and new JFK Assassination conspiracy claims.

Here's yet another "My dad's deathbed confession" stories:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...amp/ar-AAQ3OIg

Quote:
Almost 40 years after his death following a bar brawl in Key Biscayne, Ricardo Morales, known as “Monkey” — contract CIA worker, anti-Castro militant, counter-intelligence chief for Venezuela, FBI informant and drug dealer — returned to the spotlight Thursday morning when one of his sons made a startling claim on Spanish-language radio:

Morales, a sniper instructor in the early 1960s in secret camps where Cuban exiles and others trained to invade Cuba, realized in the hours after President John F. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas in 1963 that the accused killer, Lee Harvey Oswald, had been one of his sniper trainees.

Morales also told his two sons that two days before the assassination, his CIA handler told him and his “clean-up” team to go to Dallas for a mission. But after the tragic events, they were ordered to go back to Miami without learning what the mission was about.
The spolier:

Quote:
A series of killings, including the death of Morales’ lawyer months before Morales himself was killed “destroyed my family,” his son told the Herald. The family split and scattered all around the country, fearing retaliation.

Morales Jr. currently lives in Michigan. He didn’t say anything before about the Kennedy connection because in the beginning, the family was “scared to death,” he said. Later he thought people would not believe him.

He mentioned the family is now considering a TV deal in connection to his father’s life, but gave no further details.

“It’s an amazing story,” he said. “It seems larger than life.”
Why it's BS:

Quote:
“When my old man was training in a CIA camp — he did not tell me where — he was helping to train snipers: other Cubans, Latin Americans, and there were a few Americans,” he said. “When he saw the photo of Lee Harvey Oswald [after the assassination] he realized that this was the same character he had seen on the CIA training field. He saw him, he saw the name tag, but he did not know him because he was not famous yet, but later when my father sees him he realizes that he is the same person.”
Nobody wore name tags in those places, if they did they were fake names.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th October 2021, 02:20 PM   #197
Allen773
Graduate Poster
 
Allen773's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cali Four Neea
Posts: 1,627
^^^Nice debunking. Well done.
Allen773 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st October 2021, 01:03 PM   #198
KDLarsen
Illuminator
 
KDLarsen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,821
Not to mention we know an awful lot about Oswald's time in the period between his return to the US and the assassination. The idea that he could skip off to some CIA camp for a few weeks without notice is absurd.
KDLarsen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st October 2021, 05:08 PM   #199
Axxman300
Philosopher
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,392
Originally Posted by KDLarsen View Post
Not to mention we know an awful lot about Oswald's time in the period between his return to the US and the assassination. The idea that he could skip off to some CIA camp for a few weeks without notice is absurd.
Yes, exactly, but as they say on TV, "There's more!"

Nothing about Oswald's shooting indicates sniper training.

Snipers were not a thing in 1963, the USMC's modern Scout Sniper School wasn't launched until 1977, and the US Army Sniper School wasn't spun up until 1986. Any training at those camps would have simply been Marksmanship, and that was enough.

Nobody in the CIA, or Cuban Exile Militia groups would have touched Oswald with a 10-foot pole. He was a wannabe. Even the Soviets and the Cuban intel folks saw this as a fact and kept him at arm's length.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2021, 12:54 PM   #200
Allen773
Graduate Poster
 
Allen773's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cali Four Neea
Posts: 1,627
The flipside is that, assuming history is any guide, if the CIA or any other intelligence agency (foreign or domestic) tried to assassinate JFK, it would have been incredibly obvious and sloppy and have a high chance of failing outright. Way too risky.

Exhibit A from the JFK era: the many ridiculous and sometimes comical attempts to off Castro. More recently, the poisonings of Russian defectors and the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. The culprits were obvious almost immediately and the attempted cover-ups pretty pathetic to be honest.

As I saw someone on social media put it, “a big reason why I don’t believe the CIA was involved in the JFK assassination is that Oswald didn’t miss and fall out of the window of the Book Depository.” Covert operations tend to be clown shoes stuff as much as anything else.

Last edited by Allen773; 15th November 2021 at 01:03 PM.
Allen773 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:48 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.