JFK Assassination

Lone shooter or conspiracy?

Discussions on 9/11, moon landing etc.

Moderators: Calilasseia, DarthHelmet86, Onyx8

JFK Assassination

#1  Postby Emmeline » Nov 21, 2013 6:57 pm

50th Anniversary tomorrow - what do people think about the various theories of his death?
Emmeline
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 10401

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: JFK Assassination

#2  Postby The_Metatron » Nov 21, 2013 6:58 pm

What did you do here?
My new website is up. Who wants to be a contributor?

I AM Skepdickus!

https://www.skepdick.us/blog/
User avatar
The_Metatron
Moderator
 
Name: Jesse
Posts: 19463
Age: 54
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: JFK Assassination

#3  Postby Emmeline » Nov 21, 2013 7:00 pm

The_Metatron wrote:What did you do here?

I didn't do nuffink gov'nor :waah:
Emmeline
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 10401

Print view this post

Re: JFK Assassination

#4  Postby DougC » Nov 21, 2013 7:02 pm

Emmeline wrote:50th Anniversary tomorrow - what do people think about the various theories of his death?

I'm going out on a limb here, but I think he was shot.
To do, is to be (Socrate)
To be, is to do (Sartre)
Do be do be do (Sinatra)
SUBWAY(1985)
DougC
 
Posts: 14151
Age: 45
Male

Country: UNITED Kingdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: JFK Assassination

#5  Postby Doubtdispelled » Nov 21, 2013 8:41 pm

I prefer the version offered by Red Dwarf.

Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.

― Mark Twain
Doubtdispelled
 
Posts: 11744

Print view this post

Re: JFK Assassination

#6  Postby Bubalus » Nov 21, 2013 10:19 pm

I like the theory on TV the other day - the Secret Service, by accident.

The cover up was to protect their arses.

:smoke:
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge.” -Stephen Hawking‏
User avatar
Bubalus
 
Posts: 625
Age: 63
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: JFK Assassination

#7  Postby proudfootz » Nov 22, 2013 1:33 am

Yes, JFK was assassinated in broad daylight.

Who pulled the triggers? No one knows (or if they do know they're not telling).

Like all great unsolved mysteries, it attracts a lot of speculation.

But IMO the 'Oswald did it' theory is the bunk.
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
User avatar
proudfootz
 
Posts: 10259

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: JFK Assassination

#8  Postby Precambrian Rabbi » Nov 22, 2013 1:52 am

DougC wrote:
Emmeline wrote:50th Anniversary tomorrow - what do people think about the various theories of his death?

I'm going out on a limb here, but I think he was shot.

Hmm... probably somewhere within the 'head' region...
:sherlock:
"...religion may attract good people but it doesn't produce them. And it draws in a lot of hateful nutjobs too..." AronRa
User avatar
Precambrian Rabbi
 
Posts: 1591
Male

Country: Greenandpleasantland
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: JFK Assassination

#9  Postby Jango » Dec 18, 2014 2:55 am

Emmeline wrote:50th Anniversary tomorrow - what do people think about the various theories of his death?


Not as black-and-white as some believe -- the lone nut. There's unfortunately more to it than that. And the government is as tight-lidded over this as they were back in '63 as tens of thousands of relevant documents are still purposely withheld as of this moment. IIRC, most of 'em are supposed to be declassified in 2017, but I suspect that many with be withheld for one reason or another that the government cites for not being transparent, which only serves to perpetuate the conspiracy as we're told, "Trust us, there's nothing important that we're not telling you, we promise." Blind trust and faith in anyone, let alone the government, is not conducive to skeptical or rational thought.
Brainstorm take me away from the norm.
User avatar
Jango
 
Posts: 98
Male

Country: CONUS
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: JFK Assassination

#10  Postby Jerome Da Gnome » Dec 18, 2014 3:40 am

http://www.jfklibrary.org/Research/Rese ... 10427.aspx

President John F. Kennedy
Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, New York City
April 27, 1961





The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.

But I do ask every publisher, every editor, and every newsman in the nation to reexamine his own standards, and to recognize the nature of our country's peril. In time of war, the government and the press have customarily joined in an effort based largely on self-discipline, to prevent unauthorized disclosures to the enemy. In time of "clear and present danger," the courts have held that even the privileged rights of the First Amendment must yield to the public's need for national security.

Today no war has been declared--and however fierce the struggle may be, it may never be declared in the traditional fashion. Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe. The survival of our friends is in danger. And yet no war has been declared, no borders have been crossed by marching troops, no missiles have been fired.

If the press is awaiting a declaration of war before it imposes the self-discipline of combat conditions, then I can only say that no war ever posed a greater threat to our security. If you are awaiting a finding of "clear and present danger," then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent.

It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions--by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labor leader, and by every newspaper. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.

Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match.

Nevertheless, every democracy recognizes the necessary restraints of national security--and the question remains whether those restraints need to be more strictly observed if we are to oppose this kind of attack as well as outright invasion.

For the facts of the matter are that this nation's foes have openly boasted of acquiring through our newspapers information they would otherwise hire agents to acquire through theft, bribery or espionage; that details of this nation's covert preparations to counter the enemy's covert operations have been available to every newspaper reader, friend and foe alike; that the size, the strength, the location and the nature of our forces and weapons, and our plans and strategy for their use, have all been pinpointed in the press and other news media to a degree sufficient to satisfy any foreign power; and that, in at least in one case, the publication of details concerning a secret mechanism whereby satellites were followed required its alteration at the expense of considerable time and money.

The newspapers which printed these stories were loyal, patriotic, responsible and well-meaning. Had we been engaged in open warfare, they undoubtedly would not have published such items. But in the absence of open warfare, they recognized only the tests of journalism and not the tests of national security. And my question tonight is whether additional tests should not now be adopted.

The question is for you alone to answer. No public official should answer it for you. No governmental plan should impose its restraints against your will. But I would be failing in my duty to the nation, in considering all of the responsibilities that we now bear and all of the means at hand to meet those responsibilities, if I did not commend this problem to your attention, and urge its thoughtful consideration.

On many earlier occasions, I have said--and your newspapers have constantly said--that these are times that appeal to every citizen's sense of sacrifice and self-discipline. They call out to every citizen to weigh his rights and comforts against his obligations to the common good. I cannot now believe that those citizens who serve in the newspaper business consider themselves exempt from that appeal.

I have no intention of establishing a new Office of War Information to govern the flow of news. I am not suggesting any new forms of censorship or any new types of security classifications. I have no easy answer to the dilemma that I have posed, and would not seek to impose it if I had one. But I am asking the members of the newspaper profession and the industry in this country to reexamine their own responsibilities, to consider the degree and the nature of the present danger, and to heed the duty of self-restraint which that danger imposes upon us all.

Every newspaper now asks itself, with respect to every story: "Is it news?" All I suggest is that you add the question: "Is it in the interest of the national security?" And I hope that every group in America--unions and businessmen and public officials at every level-- will ask the same question of their endeavors, and subject their actions to the same exacting tests.

And should the press of America consider and recommend the voluntary assumption of specific new steps or machinery, I can assure you that we will cooperate whole-heartedly with those recommendations.

Perhaps there will be no recommendations. Perhaps there is no answer to the dilemma faced by a free and open society in a cold and secret war. In times of peace, any discussion of this subject, and any action that results, are both painful and without precedent. But this is a time of peace and peril which knows no precedent in history.
The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.
-Albert Camus
User avatar
Jerome Da Gnome
Banned User
 
Name: Jerome
Posts: 5719

Country: usa
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: JFK Assassination

#11  Postby Jerome Da Gnome » Dec 18, 2014 3:43 am

And so it is to the printing press--to the recorder of man's deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news--that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.


/

JFK
The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.
-Albert Camus
User avatar
Jerome Da Gnome
Banned User
 
Name: Jerome
Posts: 5719

Country: usa
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: JFK Assassination

#12  Postby Darwinsbulldog » Dec 18, 2014 5:29 am

There is no controversy or conspiracy, I killed JFK.
Jayjay4547 wrote:
"When an animal carries a “branch” around as a defensive weapon, that branch is under natural selection".
Darwinsbulldog
 
Posts: 7440
Age: 62

Print view this post

Re: JFK Assassination

#13  Postby igorfrankensteen » Dec 18, 2014 7:26 am

I haven't seen anything over the years that didn't add to the likelihood that JFK was killed by a lone nut, and that a ton of other people took advantage of what happened to further their own agendas.

As usual.
User avatar
igorfrankensteen
 
Name: michael e munson
Posts: 2114
Age: 64
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: JFK Assassination

#14  Postby devogue » Dec 18, 2014 7:26 am

I read Posner's Case Closed and it convinced me Oswald was a lone gunman. I can't help but feel the conspiracy theories aren't grounded in reality.

I shall now settle back, grab a reserve pack of Uncle Orph's popcorn and be destroyed :lol:

:popcorn:
It's PETUNIAS TIME again, folks!!!

The Blue Butterfly
User avatar
devogue
 
Posts: 2148
Age: 43
Male

Chile (cl)
Print view this post

Re: JFK Assassination

#15  Postby Bubalus » Dec 18, 2014 10:46 am

I do like the idea I saw recently, that he was accidentally killed by one of his Secret Service protection goons, after the initial shots from Oswald.
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge.” -Stephen Hawking‏
User avatar
Bubalus
 
Posts: 625
Age: 63
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: JFK Assassination

#16  Postby cyghost » Dec 18, 2014 10:58 am

Why do you like that idea?
cyghost
 
Posts: 232

South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: JFK Assassination

#17  Postby Bubalus » Dec 18, 2014 11:39 am

It gives the Secret Service a reason to cover up their actions, and did seem to explain some of the supposed discrepancies.

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge.” -Stephen Hawking‏
User avatar
Bubalus
 
Posts: 625
Age: 63
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: JFK Assassination

#18  Postby Jango » Dec 18, 2014 11:48 am

Yeah, that is sometimes the case with people and the way they act or don't act, but is it that way with a 6.5mm? Does that piece of lead slamming supposedly into the back of President Kennedy's head send him in the direction the bullet is traveling or does President Kennedy resist a stronger force and push backwards and then towards his wife to the left which is where the chunk of his brain that his poor wife chased frantically after was at I.e. the direction of the bullet.
Brainstorm take me away from the norm.
User avatar
Jango
 
Posts: 98
Male

Country: CONUS
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: JFK Assassination

#19  Postby tolman » Dec 18, 2014 7:33 pm

If a great conspiracy was going to frame someone, why would they choose to have the real shooter (or a back-up shooter) in a position which gave results incompatible with their story?

If I was going to frame someone for shooting from a building, I'd plant my real assassin[s] in the same building, and have someone on hand to 'catch them red handed' and shoot them before they had a chance to say anything in their defence.
It'd seem pretty trivial to have a secret service agent or similar spot something suspicious in a building (a possible rifle barrel at a window) and rush into the building only to arrive just too late.

It is utterly predictable that someone being framed is going to deny the crime and claim they are being framed.
Any conspiracy would be certain to see that in advance, and if they wanted to avoid denials happening, the obvious solution is the immediate killing of the framed person at or close to the scene of the crime.
I don't do sarcasm smileys, but someone as bright as you has probably figured that out already.
tolman
 
Posts: 7106

Country: UK
Print view this post

Re: JFK Assassination

#20  Postby Jango » Dec 19, 2014 3:38 am

What does an anomalous plot point mean when those who have publish the reports and who also own the monopoly of violence won't admit to it? I see that level of interaction weekly from state and local police in my country -- there's empirical evidence of their illegalities but they refuse to admit to it. And what happens when civilians try to put the authority's feet over the fire?

Image
Brainstorm take me away from the norm.
User avatar
Jango
 
Posts: 98
Male

Country: CONUS
United States (us)
Print view this post

Next

Return to Conspiracy Theories

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest