Different topic - 11/22/1963

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from oklahomapatriot. Show oklahomapatriot's posts

    Re: Different topic - 11/22/1963


    Was about 4 and a half years old at the time. I remember watching it all on TV. What a sad time for our country.

    Personally I think our country has been going downhill since that time.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Different topic - 11/22/1963

    I've tried to remain apart from all of the conspiracy discussions simply because there hasn't been one I've heard that current science hasn't refuted one way or another.  The alleged shooter on the grassy knoll never existed nor was there ever any other shooter.  All of the forensic science has proven this out.  To those who have alleged that Oswald was merely a patsie his background simply doesn't support that nor do his actions following the assassination.  He returned to his apartment, retrieved a handgun and when merely approached by Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tibbit shot him 3 times.  When he was apprehended in a nearby movie theater he attempted to shoot another police officer.  These are hardly the actions of a patsie.  Although I find Ruby's actions the following day somewhat troubling he was most likely simply another mentally unstable individual acting out of impulse.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: Different topic - 11/22/1963

    In response to themightypatriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to themightypatriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    JFK campaigned on increasing the number of nuclear missiles capable of ending all life on Earth.  The psychopath got what he deserved.

    [/QUOTE]

    Interesting comment on the cold-blooded murder of the President of the United States; particularly so coming from someone who has repeatedly postioned himself on this board as someone who abhors violence.  Interesting word that: psychopath.

    [/QUOTE]

    Whatever.  Lots of people are murdered every day.  I'm sick of the rich and powerful glorifying themselves.

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't see it as glorification at all. Regardless of jfks social status and wealth, he was the democratically elected person in charge of the country. The assassination of him was in fact a direct blow to us and what we hold dear. 

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: Different topic - 11/22/1963

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    We'll never know. Not ever.

    I've read the books, watched the documentaries. I had a chance to meet a writer who's written books on the Kennedy family, the CIA, FBI, etc. Was best friends with Ted (spent an hour talking about Chappaquiddick). He's convinced there was a conspiracy, that they wanted to kill him in Chicago but the trip was cancelled, and then Tampa but someone tipped off the FBI so the attempt was called off.  

    Could be, he makes a strong argument. But they've never tied Oswald to anybody. He renounced his citizenship, wanted to become a Russian but they could see he was nuts. He was a lone wolf, whackjob, delusional communist. 

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm inclined to subscribe to this view.  Only thing that has ever give me pause was Jack Ruby.  Can't seem to reconcile that part of it.

    [/QUOTE]

    Of course it was a conspiracy to kill JFK.

    first..It is virtually impossible for a lone gunman to make the shots Oswald did from his position and with the weapon he supposedly used to do it. You would need to be expert and have a great deal of luck on your side to even come close,to pull it off.

    second..jfks security detail was told to stand down. the usual secret service guys who ride on the back of his limo were pulled off minutes before the shooting, exposing the back of Kennedy. Why?

    third...evidence such as entry and exit wounds, the direction of jfks head and body moved after the headshot suggest a shooter from in front and to his right. Not the grassy knoll but a well hidden storm drain where several eye witnesses that day claim they heard multiple shots come from.

    there is many many more items. In summary, too many questions and suspicious activities to beleive the official story. It's full of holes that have,been hidden from the American public for far too long.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Different topic - 11/22/1963

    In response to themightypatriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    JFK campaigned on increasing the number of nuclear missiles capable of ending all life on Earth.  The psychopath got what he deserved.

    [/QUOTE]



    Please tell me you didn't just write this...I mean you have a reasonable following around here with your mindless three word posts, etc...and the you write this? You dipping into the moonshine?

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: Different topic - 11/22/1963

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Obviously any conspiracy is going to pick an unconnected guy to be the fall guy.

    [/QUOTE]

    So, when Leon Czolgosz murdered President McKinley in front of hundreds of people that too must have been a conspiracy.    We just haven't found the co-conspirators 100+ years later.

    [/QUOTE]

    Think for yourself. Look objectively at what is available. To believe Kennedy was assassinated by 1 person in the manner he was is bordering on ludicrous. 

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Different topic - 11/22/1963

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    second..jfks security detail was told to stand down. the usual secret service guys who ride on the back of his limo were pulled off minutes before the shooting, exposing the back of Kennedy. Why?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Recently one of the SS agents assigned to that duty explained why the other guy who was shrugging his arms in a clear w-t-f gesture when being told to stand down from the run along at the back of the car by claiming the guy had to "go to lunch".

    The BS doesn't get any deeper than that, especially when the interviewer just moves on without asking the obvious question; why weren't they replaced?

     

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: Different topic - 11/22/1963

    In response to CatfishHunter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Of course not, but are you seriously this uneducated on how the mob or even the CIA works?

    The CIA does stuff we'll never know about and that includes the president.

    DO some homework on the topic before just lashing out in a condescening, immature tone vs those who might have done some more research on the topic.

    I am not saying my beliefs are correct, but they are certainly very possible.

    [/QUOTE]

    No doubt.   But Oswald did not get his job in the TSBD from the mob or the CIA.  He bought the rifle on his own.  And the 2 shots that hit the President, killing him, came from his rifle.

    The CIA is a non sequitur.

    [/QUOTE]

    Lol. Yeah and I have a bridge to sell you. 

    Do you know anything about weapons, marksmanship or angles? Do you know how a body reacts to being hit? Explain to me how Oswald, sitting up in a windows behind the motorcade gets off 2 shots with a piece of crap rifle, one of the shots a headshot with Kennedy being propelled back and to his left? Physically impossible. If Oswald was able to get off the headshot from where he was, Kennedy's body goes forward, not back. The whole thing stinks. I am not insinuating the CIA or mob were behind it, only that it was a conspiracy to kill Kennedy that in involved more than just Oswald. He was the patsy.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: Different topic - 11/22/1963

    In response to OneManBanned's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to OneManBanned's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    9/11 as an inside job is whackjobs on the interwebs with too much time on their hands. We can go back to Julius Caesar and Shakespeare with the fall of a leader and conspiracies to do so.

    9/11 is another story.  Anyone who thinks terrorists cuckoos hijacking planes to promote some anti-Bush pro war theory, is a moron.  Terrorism is terrorism and we know their motives.

    It's simply impossibly to ignore the roots of the mob ties to the Kennedys, especially with the Cuba situation.

    Kennedy wasn't relenting on Cuba.  Casino business would have been a massive boon especially for the mob leaders in the South. Wheter Cuban officials were in on it or not, who knows, but the mob presence is hard to ignore.

    Marcello all but admitted his involvement before his death.

    IN 1963, only weeks after JFK was killed, the FBI questioned 14 Marcello mob associates. Yet the godfather’s name doesn’t even appear in the Warren Report. This secrecy, it seems, was all because of Cuba. (And that info is contained in Waldron’s first incredible book, “Ultimate Sacrifice.”)

    http://pagesix.com/2009/01/06/jfk-assassination-confession/

    [/QUOTE]

    This explains plenty about your stupidity, you cite Page Six of the NY Post as your source!!

    Shouldn't you be watching Keeping Up With The Kardashians?

    [/QUOTE]


    Shouldn't you be watching reruns of the butt-fumble, after all, it is butt-fumble weekend? Twit.

    [/QUOTE]

    Who do your dolphins play today?

    [/QUOTE]

    The warren report and commission were a big joke. Allen Dulles who was running the CIA and was fired by Kennedy ran parts of the investigation. Sound strange? 

    even the well known zupruder film story is full of holes. That home movie was edited and frames replaced and deleted based on how they wanted it to show. 

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: Different topic - 11/22/1963

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    second..jfks security detail was told to stand down. the usual secret service guys who ride on the back of his limo were pulled off minutes before the shooting, exposing the back of Kennedy. Why?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Recently one of the SS agents assigned to that duty explained why the other guy who was shrugging his arms in a clear w-t-f gesture when being told to stand down from the run along at the back of the car by claiming the guy had to "go to lunch".

    The BS doesn't get any deeper than that, especially when the interviewer just moves on without asking the obvious question; why weren't they replaced?

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Because the supposed patsy wouldn't be able to supposedly hit the president with either shot if the SS were in his line of sight. If the SS were there like they were supposed to be and like they were on every occasion prior, Kennedy doesn't get hit with the first shot, a SS takes it instead, and once he does, the motorcade speeds off not giving the supposed patsy a second shot. 

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share