Don't know what to believe no more!

I am seriously confused about everything now. I have read so many conspiracy theories and watched many videos on the JFK assassination that I have no idea what to write about it in my research paper in which I'm supposed to take a stand on. I'm thinking about proving the cover up of the evidence, zapruder film and things like that. How many of you actually believe though that all these conspiracy theories about the assassination were indeed formed by the government to confuse everyone so that they won't know what to think because it sure has got to me...lol Makes me feel like I am falling to the government's plan of what they wanted to happen but surely they have fooled all of us about this whole assassination. The truth will never be known and the conspiracies will always form.

[edit on 25-10-2008 by SonsOfAnarchy]

I just sent this to another member concerning some research of mine via U2U.
It is not complete, please consider this. I hope it helps you.

One thing that came to mind while I was down there was that the spot in the road where JFK is shot is at a higher elevation than the bridge. If the rifle was a hight caliber, I'd say it's plausible that it went through part of the car, hit Connely's leg, then changed direction slightly in his body, and then hit JFK. It would be intersting to do the research and see how thoroughly the car was searched for bullet holes.

It wasn't, it was sent to ford motor company for a complete refit. All the evidence was destroyed. The only thing we have are pictures that day, and it is enough to build a case that the first shot, while the care had just finished the turn, and in the Z film just before going behind the sign, was fired. The mark in the road shows the position of the last shot. I have enough pictures showing the bullet hole in the windshield, plus testimony. If you watch the Z film real close you can see a very fine glint of sun shine from the hole. The first shot is what made Kennedy look forward and stop waving to the crowd. At the point if you line up the hole in the windshield and the hole in the front of his neck, and the back, the trajectory comes straight from that pillar area. Next as the car comes out from behind the sign he is jolted by the shot from the rear, in his back. As he starts to fall forward and nears Jacky, two bullets hit him in the head almost simultaneously, one from the rear, one from the knoll. The combined impact doubled the expected damage, and you are left with what you see. If you look closely, you will see trajectories of brain matter going in completely different directions and not following the expected cone shape ejecta. Conclusion: at least two bullets coming from two different directions, it was over kill. The problem is: Who ever fired from the front was not part of the primary assassin teams or plan. It must have been a independent operation, and who ever ordered this shooter had no respect or concern for the CIA MOB teams, and more or less expected they would take the fall. This shot was a "In Your Face F*** Y**". You people are idiots, I will do it myself!!! All the shots by the CIA and MOB were to come from the rear so Oswald could be blamed. The shooter in the Knoll was to shoot as a last resort, which he did. The plan was always a head shot, from the rear! They have covered this frontal shot up for years, because it would have exposed the plan, and the conspiracy. I will try to write a page with the evidence, God help us all.. Be Safe ASE

[edit on 25-10-2008 by All Seeing Eye]

[edit on 25-10-2008 by All Seeing Eye]

I had a really hot dream about getting together with Jax on Sons of Anarchy, one of my favorite shows right now... Anyway, I could go with the idea posted above, I have always believed that Jaquie tried to leave the car not because she knew he was being shot by anyone in the vehicle, but from the direction of the shots which were wizzing past her head as well.

I have never before said what I think out of respect for Jaq, who I will never believe was a part of the bs. After, maybe but she was a devoted Mom and would protect her children as her Husband was already dead and she could do no more than remain silent or be silenced.

Jacky can not be blamed for her silence, and apparent hush money she received. When they can get the president, what could she hope to accomplish?
Live?



[edit on 25-10-2008 by All Seeing Eye]

Originally posted by SonsOfAnarchy
I am seriously confused about everything now.............................
[edit on 25-10-2008 by SonsOfAnarchy]

I think that is the whole point. How do you hide the truth? You bury it under a mountain of lies. I think that trick is being used on just about every thing now days. Like UFO reports, you hide one real picture under a 1000 fake ones. The same trick holds true no matter the subject. This is nothing new. It has been done though out history. That is where the saying of "Can not see the tree for the forest" or "How do you hide a tree? In a forest"

I think Jackie knew what happened...or at the very least, had a pretty good idea. I think that could've been behind her marriage to Onassis. Marry a rich guy who can offer security.

I don't fault her for not saying anything, either. Watching Jack and Bobby get struck down (one of which was up close and very personal) surely had to put fear in her. And not just for her own safety, but for John Jr. and Caroline, too.

Plus, I think she knew then what a lot of people are just now beginning to realize - it was a conspiracy, but who are you going to blame? There's no proof; there's nothing written on any document which outlines the assassination and the reasoning behind it. There is no one single person or organization which you can say was responsible. The assassins live in the shadows. Everything they ever did, before and after the Kennedys, was in the shadows. That's where they still are. But I can't prove it. But I know they're there. Everybody does.

Originally posted by fixer1967

Originally posted by SonsOfAnarchy
I am seriously confused about everything now.............................
[edit on 25-10-2008 by SonsOfAnarchy]

I think that is the whole point. How do you hide the truth? You bury it under a mountain of lies. I think that trick is being used on just about every thing now days. Like UFO reports, you hide one real picture under a 1000 fake ones. The same trick holds true no matter the subject. This is nothing new. It has been done though out history. That is where the saying of "Can not see the tree for the forest" or "How do you hide a tree? In a forest"

Yes, they have hidden the truth right before your eyes, but your busy chasing after the driver, a shooter in the sewer, and every other fairy tale they can think of.

They even claim the film was hoaxed so you waist more time trying to understand the idiocy they provide. Don't research the film, research who took the film, it was just too perfect a document. He too, was part of it. I suspect it was Zapruder's offices in the Dal Tex building were used as one of the rear "shooters nests", the other was atop the federal building where the sabot cases were found. And of course the sixth floor, the only print recovered belonged to LBJs personal hit man. He was a lousy shot, I think he was was the one who hit LBJ's best friend Connelly.

The sabot rounds were only fired to place the pre shot Carcono rounds into the car as evidence. When fired in this manner they are very inaccurate, most of these rounds were the misses. You just cant fire a pre fired bullet and expect accuracy, the rifling of the pre fired bullets will never match the refiling of the rifle that fired them, Teflon casing or not.

Wake up people, its time to care.

[edit on 25-10-2008 by All Seeing Eye]

Originally posted by SonsOfAnarchy
I am seriously confused about everything now.

Welcome to Babylon. The bricks and mortar line is to the left, the engineers are hanging out in the back room.

Not knowing how much time you have to complete your research paper it is difficult how to advise you. I assume by your comments that you do believe there was a cover up.

Go with that assumption and then try to seek out credible sources that agree with your position. There are so many articles and books about JFK's assassination it would take weeks of nonstop reading to get any hard evidence. I would concentrate on the points that either can't be explained, the contradictions, and those articles that support your position (It'll save you some research time).

Hint; Read the Wikipedia description of JFK assassination and pay special attention to what quotes of Kennedy they use. Check out the one about the CIA and remember that these government departments are influenced (controlled) by certain societies. Also check out some of the names mentioned and see what organizations they belong to. Allen Dulles was head of the CIA and his brother belonged to the CFR. Allen Dulles was quite adept in carrying out assassinations according to his biography. He was also on the Warren Commission. He also directed a program on mind control. Interesting fellow.

Check into JFK's background and what his position was on matters he was interested in and promised to advance during his term in office. Then follow the trail of those who opposed him. (LBJ for one). Check their backgrounds and find out what organizations they were affiliated with. If many of them were members of the organizations that we know have their own special agenda then I would concentrate researching articles connected with them. It may not give you the hard fact conclusion we all would like, but it would give some credibility as to who (Actually what organizations) was behind the murder and why.

My opinion from doing research is that Kennedy was not as deeply entrenched in these secret societies and therefore wasn't under the strict control that so many politicians are.

Because many of his ideas were contrary to the puppet master's, he was eliminated.

Although many government people may have been involved, they would have been recruited and advised (controlled) by others in positions far above the government.

I'm trying to be a bit evasive since I am new to this forum, and having read the rules I'm not sure just how far I can go when it comes to mentioning names, organizations, resources that might be construed as trying to advance their cause, etc. I realize the rules are used basically as a disclaimer for the protection of the owners/operators of this site but I'm not
sure how liberal they are with any enforcement. I haven't had a chance yet to read too much as I find almost every topic interesting and have some knowledge of them through the vast amount of reading I have done on most of these particulars. I stumbled upon this site by accident while trying to validate another topic I was reading about.



Good luck.

Later......................Jon

I made another post anonymously about "Is there an opposite of the Illuminati" before registering.

Maybe you should write it the different conspiracies as part of it. Might be a new an interesting angle which would get you a better grade.

Overall, I look at it like this - He was killed because he did not go along with the things people who have the power and would do such a thing wanted to do. As such, his actions before death would be the most likely clue towards being pointed in the right direction.