posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 11:52 AM
All of this is not to say that Bush was not involved, simply that it is unlikely that Files was involved, though at times the story can be fairly
convincing. I simply do not feel that there is ANY evidence from a shot from the knoll., either from witness testimony, autopsy photos, photos from
the scene (no, I dont believe badgeman is a real shooter) or movies.
I also dont believe that the organization that was smart enough to arrange the assasination of the President of the USA would have shot him from the
front and tried to pretend it was from the rear.
Consider this - Lee Harvey Oswald was likely not a CIA asset, but an FBI ASSET. There was a memo from J Edgar Hoover in 1960 (I believe) about someone
else using the name Lee Oswald. Why was this of such concern, unless the FBI ws already using LHO? This wasnt simply a field agent, this was J. Edgar
Hoover HIMSELF who was paying attention to the name Lee Oswald....
Now, the CIA was already steaming mad at Kennedy about the Bay of Pigs invasion - for failing to support them. Though he publically took the blame, he
did fire some very NASTY individuals, the kinds of individuals who would have the power to DO this and to COVER IT UP.
Kennedy ordered Hoover to locate and close down CIA training camps that the CIA wanted to keep open. Now, exactly how Hoover did this remains open for
speculation. But it happened.
Now, lets say, lets just speculate for a minute, that the CIA decides they have had quite enough of Kennedy. They want to kill Kennedy, and ALSO send
a message to Hoover that he better not open his trap about it or he would be next. What better way than to set up Oswald as the fall guy for it?
"I'm just a patsy!" right? Maybe true.
Lets also speculate that the CIA arranged to have Oswald at the Book Depository. Probably not to fire shots at the President, just be there, so they
can set him up. Now, on the Dal-Tex building (where I feel it was more likely the shots came from) there is a shooter on the roof, out of site.
Possibly one on the TSBD, too...they do the job, get out unseesn (remember, there were people caprtured on the z-film that day that STILL have not
been identified...though not suspicious, just proves someone COULD get away unidentified).
Much like Oliver Stone's scenario, Oswald knows somethng BAD is happening, psossibly even that he is being set up...so he hightails it out of there,
and the rest is history.
Now, it didnt need to happen EXACTLY like that, but it lines up really well...it sends the message to Hoover that they took out his boss and framed
one of his own guy, so he certainly isnt immune and could be next if he doesnt keep his mouth shut.
As far as Bush/Republican involvement...thats an interesting thought, which I feel lines up even better. Jack Ruby worked for Richard Nixon in the
late 1940s, I believe it was. Interesting Coincidence?
Then of course, theres the whole Watergate thing, which was going to "blow the lid off the whole bay of pigs thing" if it went public. Yes, thats
what they said they were worried about..thats why they broke in there, to keep the "bay of pigs thing" from going public. Well, the bay of pigs
thing already WAS public...so what were they hiding? Well, what is the most obvious RESULT of the "bay of pigs thing" acording to my scenario?
I could ramble forever, but I'm almost out of room on this post. Maybe it made sense to someone here.