231–240 of 403 posts
At this point the effects of the JFK assassination are so far back in history that new knowledge of possibly real and alternative sequences of events should have little impact on society as it is now. Let’s say it was orchestrated by political enemies—what effect would this have on things today? The state of US government is so dramatically different from back then. This kind of discussion is really only interesting…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>This kind of discussion is really only interesting from a historical perspective. It doesn’t really have any bearing on modern politics or society. This is completely untrue. Some of his family members suspect he was murdered by the US intelligence agencies for planning to curb their power. Given the intelligence agencies have even more power now than back then, and are still not held accountable for their actions,…
The family member is RFK Jr., right? RFK Jr. simultaneously believes that his father and uncle were killed by the intelligence state, and that they ought to be providing him protection, and that they want to kill him. I find his opinions pretty confusing on this matter
The DHS didn't even exist back then, the SS was absorbed into it some time after it was created in 2002.
Regardless, one can want the usual protections given and needed and also hold the belief that some agencies are too powerful and corrupt and need to be broken up. (like breaking up the DHS and making the SS it's own entity)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>This kind of discussion is really only interesting from a historical perspective. It doesn’t really have any bearing on modern politics or society. This is completely untrue. Some of his family members suspect he was murdered by the US intelligence agencies for planning to curb their power. Given the intelligence agencies have even more power now than back then, and are still not held accountable for their actions,…
Completely agree. I'd even go further and say that those still living should be tried for high treason.
The problem with conversations about this topic and similar topics (9/11) is that almost no-one who cares about the topic deeply enough to have an argument about it online is interested because they're just super into ballistics and forensics and don't care about the political implications. It's all motivated reasoning because they don't like the _implications_ of the official story for whatever reason (or, alternati…
> Probably if you're about to comment on this post, you've got some motivated reasoning behind it that has nothing to do with finding out what really happened. I'm not sure that's true in this case. I remember 9/11, but I wasn't even born yet when the Kennedy assassination happened. I doubt that many people under age 70 remember that personally. It doesn't really have emotional salience for most people now. For me, i…
Jesus of Nazarath was reportedly crucified in Judea almost 2000 years ago, and people have all sorts of opinions on that event.
Events like these just have a way of getting out of hand. Honestly, I think my grandma, who was a JFK fan-girl, would probably be incredibly confused by the ideology of modern JFK conspiracy theorists.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the JFK and RFK assassinations were done by secret services it seems to make a lot of sense (psychologically) that they'd use people that were the "opposite" of themselves as patsies. So some right-wing CIA people (and their Mafia/Anti-Castro helpers) used a left-wing communist Oswald as the patsy for JFK. There was a lot of motive for these people to kill JFK And then some Jewish Israel Mossad people copycatted f…
Shinzo Abe was killed last year. It's not some grand conspiracy, just some guy with a gun. I can imagine pulling off JFK 2.0... but I don't want to. Surveillance cements consequences. If it was Israel, then who cares? Are we doing diplomacy by assassination now? The reality of politically motivated, err , unpleasantness, has existed forever. Let's not forget the 20yr war that happened straight after 9/11. Less killin…
What has changed is that covert political assassinations by the secret services of nation states is no longer a viable strategy the way it was when JFK and RFK were killed.
Not even the Mossad is good enough to pull it off these days, and they're probably the best in the world: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Mahmoud_Al-Ma...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oswald was a marine sharpshooter, and it took him 3 shots with a scoped rifle (probably at point blank range, though I don't know the ballistics of that gun). That suggests it wasn't Oswald. Though even then Oswald clearly would have been standing next to the unknown shooter urging him to do it.
TIL what “point blank” actually means. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point-blank_range
I didn't read the article but a few months ago I randomly came across https://www.posner.com/case-closed and gave it a read. I haven't really read much else about the Kennedy assassination and the various conspiracy theories (certainly no other 400p books on the subject) but came away from the reading pretty impressed with the thoroughness of the argument. Spoiler alert, the argument is that the official story that O…
How does this book account for the magic bullet, an exit wound to the back of the head, gun smoke seem from another location, eyewitness reports of Oswald that make it impossible for him to make the shots in those timeframes, or the eyewitness reports of a "police officer" near the grassy knoll that was never accounted for or found? The magic bullet and exit wound - as seen on film kept from Americans for years - wer…
Not sure what specifically you are referring to with all of them, but in general it covers the various eyewitness reports used to establish multiple shooters. In short (and would really recommend reading the book if you are interested in the subject) they are not credible. Often inconsistent (both internally as the stories are told on different occasions) and also mutually inconsistent. There were a lot of people there that day and it was quite chaotic after the assassination. It doesn't seem that implausible to me that there would be a lot of conflicting information from eyewitnesses. But the eyewitness testimony taken as a whole is completely consistent with Oswald firing all three shots from the Book Depository.
> magic bullet
From memory, there was nothing "magical" about the magic bullet. The injuries on both Kennedy and Connelly and the video evidence are completely consistent with the official story that a bullet hit Kennedy in the back of the neck, exited through his throat and then hit Connelly in the the thigh.
> exit wound
I assume you mean the story that there was an exit wound on the back of Kennedy's head. But according to the actual autopsy that was not the case. He had an entry wound on the back of his head and exit wound on the side/front (again consistent with the official story). The story of a rear exit wound is from two doctors who treated Kennedy at the hospital in Dallas. They were not doing an autopsy. They were administering emergency medicine to a man whose head was covered in blood and brain fragments. And there accounts have been directly contradicted by other doctors who were there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does this book account for the magic bullet, an exit wound to the back of the head, gun smoke seem from another location, eyewitness reports of Oswald that make it impossible for him to make the shots in those timeframes, or the eyewitness reports of a "police officer" near the grassy knoll that was never accounted for or found? The magic bullet and exit wound - as seen on film kept from Americans for years - wer…
The magic bullet took a straight trajectory through Kennedy and Connolly. Modern theory is that they weren't seated in a straight line and Connolly was turned. Oswald could definitely have made the shots. He was a trained Marine marksman. There have been multiple tests showing that it is possible to make the shots. Kennedy had a small entry in back of the head. The explosion on top and side of head was not the entry…
If you are in the room, you might be able to make the shots - although the FBI failed to, and Oswald was a lousy shot - but my main problem is that he could not have moved through the building as needed without being seen by some people, and not by others who did.
The photos of Kennedy do not show a small wound in the back of the head. They are distressing for a number of reasons, not least they clearly show the back of the head has exploded out.