Conspiracy Talk Archive October 22 2012

 

Use our posting form to send us conpiracy talk.

22 Oct 2012 21:27:14
I'm doing history gcse and my teacher told us to learn about the assignation of JFK and Ive read so many things such as castro was involved, there were other shooters and CIA was behind it does anyone actually know? Is there any evidence that the CIA or the Cubans were behind it or the shooter was just a nut job?

Believable1 Unbelievable1

It wasn't the cubans or a lone psycho , and who
pulled the trigger(s) is almost incidental now.
I think it's pretty obvious it was ordered by the
people at the very top of the military industrial compex at that time (a few names which are still
around U.S govt and big business today ).

JR

Agree4 Disagree0

Pretty sure if you check out who the new American century were, it'll give you an idea of how people at a high level of authority can orchestrate a scenario in order to Persue personal or consensual agendas!

Peace

Jay
Glasgow

Agree1 Disagree0

There is a really good 10 part jfk asasination documentary on you tube.i think you should watch it.will give you a good starting point for more research.best of luck bud.

Agree1 Disagree0

Be careful what you read, make sure it comes from credible sources and any information provided is backed up with sufficient empirical evidence and not just anecdotes or peoples opinions. There is a lot of stuff out there about the JFK assassination - i recommend reading Voodoo Histories by David AAronovitch. He has a very detailed description of events and the aftermath. Also bear in mind that in over 50 years of conspiracy theories regarding the death no evidence has ever been presented that shows Lee Harvey Oswald did not kill him or that there were any other shooters or the mafia, military or anyone else was involved.

Graeme

Agree1 Disagree1

U.S. military/CIA at the highest level were responsible, possibly with some possible involvement from America's financial elite. I think the Mafia were involved at a lower level purely because they always had their hands in on a few thing, but only knew so much.
Watch the film "JFK" (which is a great film with a great cast imo) to get a heads up on some of the stuff that went on leading up to/during and just after the assassination as well as the on line documentaries. I'm not even sure Lee Harvey Oswald even had any known involvement, where he was alleged to be or even fire one of the shot's.
Good luck.

Supasub

Agree3 Disagree3

Supasub, I'm sorry but JFK is about as historically accurate as Braveheart. Oliver Stone took many liberties in his portrayal of the assassination. It's a good film but not accurate.

Graeme {Ed001's Note - that would make it as accurate as the story of a lone gunman who has the power to arrange for the President's bodyguards to leave their posts enabling him to have a free shot.}

Agree2 Disagree2

You are correct, although I doubt you intended to be. Lee Harvey Oswald would not have the power to arrange the bodyguards to leave their post - I do not know many who think he did. Working from the presumption that he would need to in order to assassinate him is misguided and the wrong approach especially when evidence points to the fact he didn't need to.

Anyway, believing Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK is irrelevant to discussing the historical validity of Oliver Stones film. He got a lot wrong and altered the course of events (i doubt intentionally to misrepresent what happen but probably because it made for a much better story) and using that film as a benchmark as proving a conspiracy is wrong because of the inaccuracies and falsehoods prevalent in the movie. That's the point I was making. If people want to research the events and decide for themselves what happened then they should try and research, as best they can find, accurate and factual information.

Graeme {Ed001's Note - who was working from any presumption? I was talking about the clear footage of JFK's bodyguards being ordered away from their stations on either side of the car. Obviously you have no idea what you are talking about, as that is one of the main pieces of evidence that proves that it was not Oswald acting alone. There are very few people with the power to remove the President's bodyguards from their stations. Perhaps you need to do some research yourself, no one at all has suggested Oswald did have them ordered away, I have no idea why you are even suggesting such a thing. Also, you say it was not essential, no maybe not, but it is certainly preferable to not have a body in the way of your shot and to get them far enough away for a second shot to be possible, to make sure of a kill shot.}

Agree0 Disagree2

You are working with that presumption, in my opinion. You 'presume' the bodyguards being moved from their position is somehow interlinked with Oswald (also the footage you refer to is not explicit and highly questionable). Your interpretation of the footage is connected to your assertion that he could not have acted alone, therefore you are working from a pre-determined position.

Also, I mentioned it because you brought it up. I was only responding to your quip regarding the accuracy of Oswald having the power to move bodyguards. I was never suggesting that Oswald did - in fact I explicitly say that he would not have had that power and that I don't know anyone who thought he did. I thought I was pretty clear in what I was saying, my main point was regarding the validity of Oliver Stones movie.

cheers for responding though,

Graeme {Ed001's Note - that is a complete load of codswallop. There is nothing highly questionable about the footage, it is clear that the guards are called away and told to go elsewhere, in direct violation of everything they are taught. Otherwise perhaps you would like to explain why they are not at their station next to the car? As the footage is so questionable, perhaps you think they were there? As for my assertion, you might want to rethink that, because you are completely and utterly wrong in the complete nonsense you are saying. My interpretation of the events are not from a pre-determined position at all, unlike yours, clearly. I instead have an open mind, it is viewing the evidence that has made me believe that it could not be a lone gunman acting alone, not my belief in it not being a lone gunman that has made me interpret the footage. Please don't make up lies about what I think, because I am quite capable of using my brain to interpret things. You on the other hand, are only capable of posting half truths, misinformation and blatant lies about other people's opinions, with no basis in truth, no attempt to ascertain if there is any truth in your assertions, just blatant misrepresentation. Just because you follow official lines on everything, doesn't mean we are all as sheep like.}

Agree1 Disagree2

Would advise reading (the synagogue of satan).
J.F.K was going to smash the federal reserve bank.
They tried to assassinate Woodrow Wilson for doing the exact same thing... Illuminati/Zionists.

Agree5 Disagree0

Graeme, I was responding to the original post which is trying to help a lad in his gcse's. I'm well aware that JFK has some theory content. What it does have though is countless witness statement's referred to in the film which do carry substantial weight, evidence from various balistic reports, reference's to the majority of JFK's brain missing on the flight from dallas, more witness statement's of miltary doctor's getting involved, (Lee Harvey Oswald would have done well to have slipped that past custom's) and so on.
I think Braveheart was a good film also come to think of it with a little bit of what actually happened within the storyline.
Maybe you could suggest a better film for the lad?

Supasub

Agree2 Disagree0

Graeme, also for the record I havent read the book voodoo histories but if your suggesting David Aaronovitch as a person who can give detailed information on event's that happened I'd be careful. He is a journalist for one, wanted to be a politician but did'nt get the job he wanted and has been found in court to have mis-represented people regarding his writing on his interviews with people.

Supasub

Agree3 Disagree0

1. The bodyguards being ordered away, there is footage of this on youtube and elsewhere on this site.

2. The zapruder film clearly shows the killing shot coming from the front not behind i.e. the TBD and LHO.

3. The impossibility of someone being able to get off 3 shots in 6 seconds with a shoddy rifle.

It clearly was a conspiracy. Whilst JFK as a film does have its flaws it does open up many avenues to research and it does get you thinking. Garrison's whole investigation was flawed due to his somewhat weird obsession with Clay Shaw/ Bertrand but he was also at the same time onto something.

Many of the people involved in Operation Mongoose and the Bay of Pigs also crop up in JFK's assasination, Watergate and the presidencies of Reagan, Bush sr and Bush Jr.

Coincidence?

I don't believe in them.

Mort

{Ed033's Note - JFK bodyguards being ordered away from the JFK limousine




Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura - JFK assassination

Agree0 Disagree0

I seen a documentary on the history channel last year i think with the bodyguards in question,its the only interview they have ever done, they totally refute the claims they were part of the cover up, they claimed jfk would go against protocol and go to the crowds to shake hands etc,and they claim jfk ordered them away so the crowd could see the the president , i am just putting it out there, personally i don't think it made any difference whether they were there or not a couple of snipers would have took him out anyway.
frankyscouse

Agree0 Disagree0

Its a bit dodgy for a teacher to be asking kids to research into this, the teachers job is to teach what is considered fact. {Ed001's Note - not true, a teacher should be teaching kids how to think for themselves.}

Agree4 Disagree1

Interesting video ed. I keep saying that it keeps coming back to Nixon, the same people involved in the Bay of Pigs also pop up in Watergate and the major event between the 2 was JFK. And who was behind Nixon? Prescott Bush. George Sr was involved in Bay of Pigs, possibly in Dallas, eventually became President and both him and George Jr gave out a lot of jobs to old Nixon people like Rumsfeld.

Personally i think Nixon wasn't involved in the planning for plausible denialbility reasons, but he sure as hell knew what was going down even if he didn't know the exact details. He knew a lot of those involved. Just what was on the lost sections of the Oval Office Tapes i think would prove it but we'll never know.

Mort

Agree0 Disagree0

22 Oct 2012 14:05:10
Hi eds and regulars. Anyone have any decent info or sources on the pyramids allegedly found under the Bermuda triangle ? Find it pretty fascinating !

Also like to approach things with a degree of skepticism so the more scientific the better !

Cheers
Gordo

Believable0 Unbelievable0

Where did you read this? i'm same as you fascinated by this stuff

Agree1 Disagree0

You can find an actual news report regarding this here...
http://www.plenglish.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=636741&Itemid=1

Agree0 Disagree0

This seems very interesting would like to have a bit of info an maybe a video added, ed whats you opinion on this ?

dio

{Ed033's Note - Sorry, I don't have enough info to make a determination

Agree0 Disagree0

It defo look legit......very interesting but why no major noises in the press, if this is true its massive!!!

Agree0 Disagree0