Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

vanityfair.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 403 posts

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#321

Post by a2tech »

UberFly wrote: post #319
dave_sullivan wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose it's impossible to prove the specifics of the conspiracy, but that Jack Ruby, a guy running strip clubs for the mafia, takes it upon himself to publically shoot Lee Harvey Oswald kind of proves to me that there was some kind of conspiracy. What other explanation could there possibly be? What Oswald might have said if we were kept alive... no one will ever know. But if there was nothing there, why did Jack R…

Some who knew Ruby theorized that he wanted to be a national hero by killing JFK's killer. Those who knew him said he was fairly emotional and hot-headed too.

That is essentially what they say in the video.

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#322

Post by mulmen »

pliesfan97 wrote: post #282
a2tech wrote: post #225

I used to be passingly interested in the conspiracy part of the JFK assassination until I watched this EXTENSIVE in length and sourced video on the assassination: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DC8tO16xdrY It's all very logical and straightforward.

I personally believe it's somewhat possible that there was some CIA involvement in JFK's assassination. I did not watch the entire video, but the part that addresses potential CIA involvement seems to have 2 main flaws IMO: 1. It only addresses the Vietnam War as a potential motive and "debunks" this motive. Geopolitics is complicated, and there are countless other potential motives, especially surrounding Cuba and t…

This is what’s fascinating and terrifying about conspiracy theories. You’re clearly an intelligent person who can articulate their thoughts. But none of this is well reasoned. In the face of compelling evidence you propose vague, unsubstantiated alternative theories. This is a bottomless pit. It’s not hard to make up a fantasy to explain reality. But that way lies madness. Reasonable people can disagree and arrive at the truth. But constantly inventing unsubstantiated counter arguments simply delays the inevitable conclusion to the detriment of everyone.

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#324

Post by philistine »

pseingatl wrote: post #122

The article suggests that Landis' come to Jesus moment came after reading Josih Thompson's Six Seconds in Dallas. Three years ago Thompson wrote another book, Last Seconds in Dallas in which he and an audio expert examined recently released magnetophone recordings. The inescapable conclusion is that there were two gunmen.

The second gunmen doesn't require a conspiracy to explain. Oswald fired two shots: one in Kennedy's back which did not fully penetrate, and one through his neck which hit Connally.

Then, in the ensuing confusion, a Secret Service agent following the motorcade accidentally discharged his AR-15 in the back of Kennedy's head, killing him.

The agent who pulled the trigger on the ground doesn't even need to realize he had done it; it's possible to accidentally discharge without realizing it.

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#325

Post by JPws_Prntr_Fngr »

PrimeMcFly wrote: post #29
morby wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s an amazing bit of history. Leaders of major powers have regularly been assassinated in history. Here the leader of a globally hegemonic nation was assassinated on camera.

> It’s an amazing bit of history. Sure, it's the obsessing over conspiracy theories that I don't get. There's no way to verify the various speculations, so what's the point?

Fair enough, as long as you leave the thinking and decision-making to people who have even a modicum of historical curiosity.

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#326

Post by irrational »

mulmen wrote: post #322
pliesfan97 wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally believe it's somewhat possible that there was some CIA involvement in JFK's assassination. I did not watch the entire video, but the part that addresses potential CIA involvement seems to have 2 main flaws IMO: 1. It only addresses the Vietnam War as a potential motive and "debunks" this motive. Geopolitics is complicated, and there are countless other potential motives, especially surrounding Cuba and t…

This is what’s fascinating and terrifying about conspiracy theories. You’re clearly an intelligent person who can articulate their thoughts. But none of this is well reasoned. In the face of compelling evidence you propose vague, unsubstantiated alternative theories. This is a bottomless pit. It’s not hard to make up a fantasy to explain reality. But that way lies madness. Reasonable people can disagree and arrive at…

This seems to presuppose the “inevitable conclusion” is true.

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#327

Post by missedthecue »

eurticket wrote: post #318

Wasn't there a documented operation that JFK didn't want to sign/rejected, that pertained to the CIA wanting to set up false flags to justify war against Cuba? Found it: Operation Northwoods https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

So the CIA killed JFK and then decided not to invade Cuba anyway?

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#328

Post by cafard »

wheelerof4te wrote: post #173
ALittleLight wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the suspicious stuff about the JFK assassination is not the shot itself, but the fact that Oswald had a friend and mentor who was a CIA handler and Oswald himself was inexplicably murdered by Ruby before any real investigation could happen. Ruby's offered explanation - that he wanted to save Jackie a trial, doesn't seem plausible.

"I think the suspicious stuff about the JFK assassination is not the shot itself, but..." ...who ordered the murder. Shooter is the least important factor considering how many enemies JFK had in the establishment. It is too easy to blackmail someone in performing the murder. Especially if you have friends in the CIA.

Why should JFK have enemies in the establishment? He was the establishment.

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#329

Post by philistine »

jimhefferon wrote: post #192
WalterBright wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My dad kept a diary during his WW2 duty. In his 80's, he read it and was shocked to discover it did not line up with his memories.

I remember with 100 percent clarity doing great in sophomore high school math. I loved it and I went on to get a PhD. Then my mom passed and I got a box of stuff with my name on it from her house. It included my report card. C.

You had low standards when you were a kid. You thought a C was great.

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#330

Post by harry8 »

mulmen wrote: post #322
pliesfan97 wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally believe it's somewhat possible that there was some CIA involvement in JFK's assassination. I did not watch the entire video, but the part that addresses potential CIA involvement seems to have 2 main flaws IMO: 1. It only addresses the Vietnam War as a potential motive and "debunks" this motive. Geopolitics is complicated, and there are countless other potential motives, especially surrounding Cuba and t…

This is what’s fascinating and terrifying about conspiracy theories. You’re clearly an intelligent person who can articulate their thoughts. But none of this is well reasoned. In the face of compelling evidence you propose vague, unsubstantiated alternative theories. This is a bottomless pit. It’s not hard to make up a fantasy to explain reality. But that way lies madness. Reasonable people can disagree and arrive at…

>But none of this is well reasoned.

Conjecture: A is not the culprit because motive xyz does not check out.

Reasoning: That doesn't exonerate A, who could have other motives.

Without agreeing with it, that looks perfectly well reasoned to me.

Compelling evidence exonerating the CIA you say? Well ok, I'll believe that when I see it, just like any other evidence from gravity onward. The CIA's docs haven't been declassified and released.

Post reply on HN