Latchy wrote: » Wasn't to prove anything ,that's just a statement to say Dallas police were very aware of potential dangers of the presidents vist and doing what they were supposed to be doing ,escorting and protecting the president on his trip through Dallas but overall the SS men were in charge of JFK's personell protection .
So ? Not just a trait of Texans
For starters ? Make sure he isin't there in the first place
Not using those side boards on that day cost him his life . Yes I have posted in those other threads to
Why wouldn't they have known when it would most likley have looked the place to shoot from ? But we are talking 1963 when .
Nobody we know of was vetted before entering any building in Dealy Plazza
No it doesn't and giving all the possible scenarios with conspiracy theories , the lone nut with a rifle has never sat easy with millions of people who will always want to believe other forces were at hand in the killing .
tallus wrote: » There's plenty of physical evidence to support the fact that Oswald didn't work alone.
Di0genes wrote: » Such as?
Di0genes wrote: » Oswald made a very specific attorney request which the police were unable to reach. Reports of his interview made up part of the Warren Commission.
And your point?
So, JFK made an offhand remark about his opinion of texans and this is proof he knew we was about to be assassinated.
Em so the secret service were supposed to station men at every conceivable vantage point in every building along the entire route of the motorcade?
Yes, however you were trying to say that there was something suspicious about the agents not being on the sideboards in Dallas, when it in fact it was something that JFK regularly insisted on.
I'm sorry so the secret service were supposed to map out the route and instantly know exactly were the best vantage point for a sniper in every building.
Yes because it's a public space. When Clinton visited Dublin no one was vetted outside trinity college.
Thats nice and millions of people believe in the rapture or that evolution doesn't exist. Just because people want to be believe something doesn't make it more plausible.
**** wrote: Thats nice and millions of people believe in the rapture or that evolution doesn't exist. Just because people want to be believe something doesn't make it more plausible.
EnterNow wrote: » Nonsense, we all know the cigarette smoking man carried out that assignment In reality? I wouldnt put it past the Mob/CIA or other government body at the time.
tallus wrote: » A quick search on google video :http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8440302925206489846 It's a long piece of video but worth the look. Plenty of evidence that contradicts the official story put out.
Latchy wrote: » http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh7/html/WC_Vol7_0153b.htm Yes but the Warren commision report is famous for the pile of crap it was on release .It was quickly put together and more concerned with appeasing a still shocked american public than getting to any truth '' at the time '' . Oswald at the police station used the term 'Patsy ' to describe his part in the shooting .
Well now if that was the case he would hardly likely to want to be driven around Dallas in an open Limousine now would he ?
You're splitting hairs , soloution was to have the bubble top on Limousine down - simples
No I am only stating a fact that this made it easier for any potential assassian to hit his target , in this case Oswald .
Instantly ??? the Secret Service and Dallas police new weeks beforehand the president was coming to Dallas so given them plenty of time to look around for any potential danger spots .But we are talking about a president who is so loved that he rides around in an open top Limousine when all the bad vibes and feedback surrounding the trip to Dallas suggests they should have insisted he kept it down .
But you can be sure that all the modern Technology that goes to protect him were in place and working
When all the facts research and characters involved in this assassination have being looked into as they have a million times over since november 22 1963 , then anybody who' took the time to do same can come to any conclusion they wish as to who did what . Suppose if one question were to be asked by the world it might be this . Why ? Why did oswald kill JFK . Was he just a patsy , somebody looking for eternal fame or just plain nuts ??? You could use same logic that got the president killed and say that Oswald never got the time to expand on this because another nut ' Ruby ' under strain of emotional and patriotic duty , never gave him the chance to do so or was it as simple cut and dried as that ? .
Mahatma coat wrote: » remember that this applies equally to all sides
Di0genes wrote: » I'm not interesting in watching another in a long line of debunked JFK nonsense.
tallus wrote: » How do you know what the content is like if you haven't even looked at the video ?
Looks to me like your mind has already been made up.
mysterious wrote: » Oh I'm back after that ban:rolleyes: Jfk was taken out for exposing the truth end of. It was only a matter of time before the CIA and secret service were gonna take him out. In fact it was planned for quite some time, since his death was a ritual, like 9/11, Diana and among many other traumatic events to "traumatize" the nations of nations. Same ol same ol, Question is, can the people of "boards" .ie handle the truth.
TalkieWalkie wrote: » There is a youtube clip on page 1 which pretty sums up what kennedy was goin or was exposing. Also, Kennedy wanted to do away with the federal reserve and had begun printing his own money. No sooner than he was killed, his money was taken out of circulation. There is some good info on this here http://www.john-f-kennedy.net/thefederalreserve.htm
SECTION 1. Executive Order No. 10289 of September 9, 1951, as amended, is hereby further amended (a) By adding at the end of paragraph 1 thereof the following subparagraph (j): '(j) The authority vested in the President by paragraph (b) of section 43 of the Act of May 12, 1933, as amended (31 U.S.C. 821(b)), to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury not then held for redemption of an outstanding silver certificates, to prescribe the denominations of such silver certificates, and to coin standard silver dollars and subsidiary silver currency for their redemption,' and (b) By revoking subparagraphs (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 thereof. SECTION 2. The amendments made by this Order shall not affect any act done, or any right accruing or accrued or any suit or proceeding had or commenced in any civil or criminal cause prior to the date of this Order but all such liabilities shall continue anymay be enforced as if said amendments had not been made. John F. Kennedy, THE WHITE HOUSE, June 4, 1963.
to understand exactly what Kennedy's order was trying to do, we must understand the purpose of the legislation which gave the order its underlying authority. The Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933 (ch. 25, 48 Stat 51) to which Kennedy refers permits the President to issue silver certificates in various denominations (mostly $1, $2, $5, and $10) and in any total volume so long as the Treasury has enough silver on hand to redeem the certificates for a specific quantity and fineness of silver and that the total volume of such currency does not exceed $3 billion. The Silver Purchase Act of 1934 (ch. 674,48 Stat 1178) also grants this power to the Treasury Secretary subject to similar limitations. Nowhere in the text of the order is a quantity of money mentioned, so it is unclear how Marrs arrived at his $4.2 billion figure. Moreover, the President could not have authorized such a large issue because it would have exceeded the statutory limit.2 As economic activity grew in the fifties and sixties, the public demand for low denomination currency grew, increasing the Treasury's need for silver to back additional certificate issues and to mint new coins (dimes, quarters, half-dollars). However, during the late fifties the price of silver began to rise and reached the point that the market value of the silver contained in the coins and backing the certificates was greater than the face value of the money itself.2 To conserve the Treasury's silver needs, the Silver Purchase Act and related measures were repealed by Congress in 1963 with Public Law 88-36. Following the repeal, only the President could authorize new silver certificate issues, and no longer the Treasury Secretary. The law, signed by Kennedy himself, also permits the Federal Reserve to issue small denomination bills to replace the outgoing silver certificates (prior to the act, the Fed could only issue Federal Reserve Notes in larger denominations). The Treasury's shrinking silver stock could then be used to mint coins only and not have to back currency. The repeal left only the President with the authority to issue silver certificates, however it did permit him to delegate this authority. E.O. 11,110 does this by transferring the authority from the President to the Treasury Secretary.2 E.O. 11,110 did not create authority to issue new silver certificates, it only affected who could give the order. The purpose of the order was to facilitate the reduction of certificates in circulation, not to increase them. In October 1964 the Treasury ceased issuing them entirely. The Coinage Act of 1965 (PL 89-81) ended the practice of using silver in most U.S. coins, and in 1968 Congress ended the redeemability of silver certificates (PL 90-29). E.O. 11,110 was never reversed by President Johnson and remained on the books until 1987 when there was a general cleaning-up of executive orders (E.O. 12,608, 9/9/87). However, by this time the remaining legislative authority behind E.O. 11,110 had been repealed by Congress with PL 97-258 in 1982.2 In summary, E.O. 11,110 did not create new authority to issue additional silver certificates. In fact, its intention was to ease the process for their removal so that small denomination Federal Reserve Notes could replace them in accordance with a law Kennedy himself signed. If Kennedy had really sought to reduce Federal Reserve power, then why did he sign a bill that gave the Fed still more power?
Di0genes wrote: » So the Warren Commission is a pile of crap unless some part of it agrees with your position.
So they dragged him into the limo at gunpoint.
Except the bubble top was perplex and not bullet proof or even bullet resistant.
And that isn't a compelling argument for a CIA stand down.
Yes the Secret Service respond to "vibes". There were thousands of potential snipers nests and vantage points along the route. Neither the SS or the Dallas PD had the resources or manpower to put a man at every one of these places.
Precisely. Theres a reason why the SS consider JFK's death their darkest moment and completely reorganised and reassessed their security procedure.
Again take the death of RFK, at the time he did not have a secret service detail. Because he was a potential primary candidate. After his death secret service agents began providing candidates with greater security earlier in the campaign.
Pretty much yes. We know a great deal about how unstable and erratic Oswald was. By the time he was discharged from the marines he wasn't allowed access to firearms. He attempted to defect to the USSR twice, and was only accepted the 2nd time after a failed suicide attempt .He was unstable he tried to assassinate "general" walker a few weeks before Kennedy.
Di0genes wrote: » Latchy argument was that" millions of people don't believe Oswald didn't act alone, therefore there must be some kind of weight to the conspiracy".
Latchy wrote: » Public response to the Warren Report Almost immediately after the Warren Commission Report was issued, several researchers began seriously questioning its conclusions. A multitude of books and articles criticizing the Warren Commission's findings have been written. The Commission's conclusions have also gradually but continually lost widespread acceptance from the American public and various prominent government officials. Fifteen years later, the United States House Select Committee on Assassinations came to a different conclusion based on an audio recording then made available.
Well JFK did have bad back problems but I'm sure he managed to walk into the Limo ok
And
In plain speak 2 guys each side standing standing on side of Limo are better protection than none at all
Yes so obiously any danger was played down and risk assessment was not considered to be high enough to cancel trip or make other safer travel arrangements
Of course they did.
And giving he was mobbed as much if not more than JFK the potential to shoot/ kill him was always going to be made that much easier easy
Yes he did try assassinate the General and nobody in the DPF was keeping an eye on him .But then we are back to manpower and resources
millions of people do believe this because it has never being proved beyond doubt that Oswald acted alone.
I never went for the grassy knoll gunman theory myself
Di0genes wrote: » You're back tracking now, your point was the bubble top would have protected JFK when it was pointed out that it was plastic you start retracting. No I never said it would protect him at all but it might have .You are suggesting that with bubble top cover on, Oswald - without full view of the president head ( or no view at all ) would have had the same perfect head shot forgetting that bullets can Ricochet and according to the Warren commision report did just that with the trajectory of the fired bullets going first through the President than Governor Connally. Agreed but and I'll say this again JFK didn't want the agents there Therefore suggesting that agents not being stationed is proof of a CIA stand down/Secret Service involvement/ the Mob... That feeds into the conspiracy theories were I am only saying it was a serious error of judgement by the president And JFK made a trip to Miami another area where with potential threats. If every president cancelled every trip because of a potential trip, they'd spend all their terms in a bunker in the whitehouse. He didn't want to travel to Dallas but looking to be re-elected in 64 he needed the southern votes and Lyndon Johnson pursuaded him that he should go ahead with the trip and actually on the whole , the trip to texas was very welcoming except for the actions of one man . And what proof would satisfy you? Satisfy me about what ? I like millions of others believe Oswald killed the president ,that's not the issue . It's were other involved with him ? Just because he was a nut who pulled the trigger doesn't mean other people weren't involved .
You're back tracking now, your point was the bubble top would have protected JFK when it was pointed out that it was plastic you start retracting.
Agreed but and I'll say this again JFK didn't want the agents there Therefore suggesting that agents not being stationed is proof of a CIA stand down/Secret Service involvement/ the Mob...
And JFK made a trip to Miami another area where with potential threats. If every president cancelled every trip because of a potential trip, they'd spend all their terms in a bunker in the whitehouse.
And what proof would satisfy you?
Di0genes wrote: » Hmmm take it you like James Elroy? Oswald was unstable. And while he achieved the Marine grade of Marksman while enlisted, however by the time of his discharge he was not allowed to handle a firearm. He attempted to defect to the USSR who declined to accept him until he attempted suicide. Several weeks before he killed kennedy he tried to kill an extreme right wing radio host. Does this sound like someone the mafia would hire to kill Kennedy.
Di0genes wrote: » Wrong
stevejazzx wrote: » You've left out huge portions of Oswald life in that summary; I can't believe, from this extract anyway, that you've properly read up on this subject. You seem to be taking the stragiht - 'conspiracy theorists are all crrrazy' line and inisiting on Oswald as a lone gunman out of nothing more than fidelity to the casue of anti-conspiratorialist
Heres a more condensed version Straight from the army, saved up a couple of thoudand dollards (when he was about 20 years old in 1960's - thats about 60-80k now btw)
learned Russian (he actually took Russian exams while in the Military I believe)
a extremly hard language to learn my wife of 6 years is Russian so I know)
-worked for the miltary decoding soviet signals, eventually got to russia, after recieving a visa in two days (virtually impossible at the time) travelled to Helsinki from london wihtout any record of such
- the Warren report could not find his flight details.
In Moscow he checks into the savoy hotel (then called berlin) with his appointed guide. He then turns up at the embassy and said 'hi i'd like to be to Russian'? In the middle of the cold war?
The guy that ends up getting lynched for killing Kennedy is a defector from the military, gets married to a Russian - pushes Cuban propoganda (on his return) from an office related to foreign intelligence,
a self confessed Marxist, not a communist though? During the cold war. And he's killed before he can stand trial by a low level mafioso? Don't you think somethings rotten in denmark? And then Bobby Kennedy is assinated? The official story has articles to back it up what Government has concluded. And it's so much easier to believe the official story than any kind of CT because well it's the offical story, there no stigma attached to its support. But the American goverment has 2 offical stories. The Warren commission says 3 shots, one shooter, The assinations committee (1976/1978) says 4 shots, 2 shooters? Why? They got snookered by the audio evidence. The explantion of the timelime of Oswald shots by explaining the Zapruder film framerates is pointless. The shots can be heard from the audio recorded from the open police mic, 3 shots 6/8 seconds is possible but from 264 yards away at a moving target.
Latchy wrote: » Di0genes wrote: » No I never said it would protect him at all but it might have . How? You are suggesting that with bubble top cover on, Oswald - without full view of the president head ( or no view at all ) would have had the same perfect head shot forgetting that bullets can Ricochet The bubble top was see through perpex, if you think a high calibre rifle round is is going to bounce or have it's trajectory altered in any meaningful way by a few cms of plastic than your grasp of physics comes from a roadrunner cartoon. and according to the Warren commision report did just that with the trajectory of the fired bullets going first through the President than Governor Connally. I'm sorry this is literally nonsensically. What is your point honestly. That a bullet that entered and exited a human body, entered and exited another person. And you think some perpex could have stopped the bullet? That feeds into the conspiracy theories were I am only saying it was a serious error of judgement by the president An error of judgement by the president explicitly doesn't feed into the conspiracy theory. Again you flat out contradict yourself. He didn't want to travel to Dallas but looking to be re-elected in 64 he needed the southern votes and Lyndon Johnson pursuaded him that he should go ahead with the trip and actually on the whole , the trip to texas was very welcoming except for the actions of one man . So President visits potential swing state in the run up to re election, is part of your conspiracy theory? Satisfy me about what ? I like millions of others believe Oswald killed the president ,that's not the issue . It's were other involved with him ? Just because he was a nut who pulled the trigger doesn't mean other people weren't involved . The problem being if you're going to engage in an assassination, do you use an incompetent nut who by professional marksmanship standards was mediocre, and give him a ****ty knock off rifle with a dodgy scope.
Di0genes wrote: » No I never said it would protect him at all but it might have .
You are suggesting that with bubble top cover on, Oswald - without full view of the president head ( or no view at all ) would have had the same perfect head shot forgetting that bullets can Ricochet
and according to the Warren commision report did just that with the trajectory of the fired bullets going first through the President than Governor Connally.
That feeds into the conspiracy theories were I am only saying it was a serious error of judgement by the president
He didn't want to travel to Dallas but looking to be re-elected in 64 he needed the southern votes and Lyndon Johnson pursuaded him that he should go ahead with the trip and actually on the whole , the trip to texas was very welcoming except for the actions of one man .
Satisfy me about what ? I like millions of others believe Oswald killed the president ,that's not the issue . It's were other involved with him ? Just because he was a nut who pulled the trigger doesn't mean other people weren't involved .
Di0genes wrote: » How?
The bubble top was see through perpex, if you think a high calibre rifle round is is going to bounce or have it's trajectory altered in any meaningful way by a few cms of plastic than your grasp of physics comes from a roadrunner cartoon.
I'm sorry this is literally nonsensically. What is your point honestly. That a bullet that entered and exited a human body, entered and exited another person.
And you think some perpex could have stopped the bullet?
An error of judgement by the president explicitly doesn't feed into the conspiracy theory. Again you flat out contradict yourself.
So President visits potential swing state in the run up to re election, is part of your conspiracy theory?
The problem being if you're going to engage in an assassination, do you use an incompetent nut who by professional marksmanship standards was mediocre, and give him a ****ty knock off rifle with a dodgy scope.
Latchy wrote: » Because Oswald would have had other moveable Obstacles in his line of vision now assuming first shot hits the pres , what do ya thinks going happen next ??? yeah that's right, one or two of those SS men are going to cover Kennedy or and most likely would have
Oswald would have no clear head shot vision so it's possible he might have hit Kennedy in the head but it's not a 100% certainty. . ' .
My point ?, it's yours I'm trying to understsnd .IF you were following my train of thought you would see that was in reference to the Warren commisions report and your use of the word 'trajectory ' .Like that' magic bullet ' discription of trajectory was laughed at by top physics experts at the time so dont even go there about bubble top trajectory
Who said anything about stopping a bullet ? It may not have hit the target as easy as it did with the top off . You / We are talking about what did happen with the added benefit of hindsight as to what may have occured if the dynamics of the event are changed .
You're the one who keps making references to me looking for conspiracy theorys when all I'm doing is pointing out facts
See your doing it again , If I say kennedy didn't want to go to Dallas and I explain reason why , as I have done it doesn't mean I see it as part of some paronia on JFK's behalf to do with conspiracy theorys which you keep harping on about .He wasn't stupid or living in a bubble but the was very aware of people out there wanting to kill him .
Well good point but considering the average normal person giving such a task would be quifering like jelly and ****ting themselfs ,
that incompentant nut Oswald , with that ****y knock of rifle did a perfect job , as good as could be asked by any professional marksman
Oswald was very lucky that day
1 he had full view of the Limo and target with no obstacles in his way
2 no plastic bubble top or SS men to distract and block his target
3 The president had serious back problems all his life and wore a brace to keep him comfortable which is why he's still sitting upright in limo after first shot is fired at him ( pity his poor wife didn't have the presence of mind to pull him foreward but then she was didn't know much about it till it was to late )
4 the limo was going at a slow pace ,
stalled at the first shot and only Excelerated away after the final and fatal 3rd shot .
Di0genes wrote: »
It wasn't perfect. It took three attempts, firing at a slow moving target travelling horizontally (any marksman will tell you shooting at an object moving on a horizontal axis is easier than shooting at one on a vertical axis)
Really? Where?
Again not proof of a conspiracy.
Commonplace for presidential motorcades at the time. Again not proof of a conspiracy.
Latchy wrote: » JFK assassinated by the Mob , Cia ,Hoover ,Fbi,Castro ,Cuban Exciles Russians , lone nut Oswald .....take your pick
Because as a trained marksman he picked his position carefully and with foresight.
But Oswald wasn't an average normal person /was a lone nut / Oswald was a trained marksman /
The limo did not stall.
Latchy wrote: » It wasn't perfect but as soon as first shot went off the limo should have being out of there or at least ( with speculation ) would have being had any SS men being riding on the tailboard .
Below My first post (below ) on this subject does not have me saying there was a conspiracy ,what it say's is take your pick from the the conspriacy list of people who have being added to it over the years . You're repeat of conspiracy theory is annoying
I suppose we could all put ourselfs inside Oswalds head in those minutes , moements before pulling the trigger and come up with ' fcuk knows what '
Tell us something new .
Had that Limo being moving a bit faster Oswalds target might have being that bit akawrd to hit .
The Limo slowed down enough for the driver to look around at JFK and Jackie before burning rubber and getting the F... out of dodge
The actual assassination took what 10,12 seconds to carry out .
It's the cause and affect before and after the assassination that fascinates and intrigues people as much as the terrible act ,from the very first minutes after the story broke , were any damming evidence that would have brought much into the light was shrouded in so much mystery afterwards , Oswalds defection to the Russians who also thought him a fruitcake , his fair play for cuba thing , then being shot by Ruby only adding to speculation of ' Conspiracy ' ,the whole cold war /cuba crisis /ww3 / Mob scenarios , how much the kennedys were loved and hated in equal measure . So scientific facts aside ,there has always being enough there for people to want to belive a conspiracy could be possible which title of this thread asks and suggests .
Di0genes wrote: » This is going to be fun. Interesting definition of inflation. US military salaries were pretty decent, a WW2 paratrooper earned several hundred dollars a month. Also room and board were paid for by he military. Combined with the fact that Oswald spent most of his time in Army in South East Asia were a dollar could go very far in the 50s.Oswalds salary as a recruit was $78.00 per month. When he attained rank of E-2 or Private First Class was $85.00 per month and after two years service up to $108.00. Room and board is only paid when one is allowed to live off base.Of the two years and 10 months in the Marines, Oswlad only spent a little over a year overseas.I am not an economic expert, but there are various permetations on the value of x amount of dollars being worth so much in todays money. I came across a site which has $2,000.00 in 1960 being worth in 2009 from $14,500 to 54,000. Quite a lot of money to save up on his salary. He didn't get a visa to go to Russia. He travelled to Helsinki, applied to defect at the soviet embassy. Was declined, attempted suicide and the Soviets took him in to avoid public embarrassment.He applied for and was granted a six day tourist visa.
bog master wrote: » Oswalds salary as a recruit was $78.00 per month. When he attained rank of E-2 or Private First Class was $85.00 per month and after two years service up to $108.00. Room and board is only paid when one is allowed to live off base.
He applied for and was granted a six day tourist visa.
