Which JFK Assassination Conspiracy Theory Do You Prefer?

I think one of the most intriguing theories I've encountered was that originally the plan was an attempted assassination blamed on Castro so JFK would give a green-light for Cuba but some one, A Jewish Intelligence unit, caught wind and turned the attempted hit into a real one and made all the Americans look like fools. This theory can be found here: ahealedplanet.net...

That Oswald was paid by the societs to kill JFK and then,nor wanting ro start a war,paid ruby to kill Oswald

originally posted by: Flesh699
I think one of the most intriguing theories I've encountered was that originally the plan was an attempted assassination blamed on Castro so JFK would give a green-light for Cuba but some one, A Jewish Intelligence unit, caught wind and turned the attempted hit into a real one and made all the Americans look like fools. This theory can be found here: ahealedplanet.net...

Just popped in to ask that you not take my silence as any kind of out of hand dismissal of your link. It's a good read and an angle I'd not heard of before. I'm taking my time and allowing for pauses to think of what I've read. No guarantee that I'll wind up in agreement, but I'm not just skimming, either.

originally posted by: CornShucker

originally posted by: Flesh699
I think one of the most intriguing theories I've encountered was that originally the plan was an attempted assassination blamed on Castro so JFK would give a green-light for Cuba but some one, A Jewish Intelligence unit, caught wind and turned the attempted hit into a real one and made all the Americans look like fools. This theory can be found here: ahealedplanet.net...

Just popped in to ask that you not take my silence as any kind of out of hand dismissal of your link. It's a good read and an angle I'd not heard of before. I'm taking my time and allowing for pauses to think of what I've read. No guarantee that I'll wind up in agreement, but I'm not just skimming, either.

. Yea man, it is nuts. The more I read, the more things in that link make sense. I'm new to the JFK gig but that was the very first thing I read regarding that conspiracy and I'm glad that's the first thing that I stumbled upon.

a reply to: Flesh699

Really? You're that new to the study of the JFK assassination? You speak as if you have more knowledge than that. I guess I was the same way back in 1980 after reading Best Evidence. It changed my life back then. I think it was actually the catalyst that made me start to study a lot of other things that culminated in the career and hobbies I have now.

a reply to: wtbengineer

Well just because I'm new to it doesn't mean I haven't spent a ridiculous amount of hours reading and watching documentaries. Lol. I always go full bore with these things. What started me on the conspiracy path, though, was years ago when a friend told me about the Philadelphia Experiment ... boy that was a life changer.

One thing I can't understand is why, if a bullet that passed through two men and was recovered largely intact, did the bullet that struck his head end up fragmented in his skull and in the car?

a reply to: Flesh699

I've never looked into the Philadelphia experiment that much, I just always dismissed it as a story. It just sounds too implausible to me. It is a good story though.

a reply to: wtbengineer

Yea it is a real mind bender, and hell at this point nothing surprises me so who really knows. It's fun to think about at least.

originally posted by: sg1642
One thing I can't understand is why, if a bullet that passed through two men and was recovered largely intact, did the bullet that struck his head end up fragmented in his skull and in the car?

As soon as I'm back to feeling better I'll post a better reply.

The bullet/missile that caused the throat wound (it was above the shirt collar and tie, btw) was successfully removed by the crude digging done through the tracheostomy/entrance wound. It had penetrated enough to bruise (at the very least) the pleural membrane of the right lung. (I'll double check that)

When CDR Humes used his little finger to probe the back wound, he was told to, "Quit That!!!" by one of the bigshots in the gallery that were directing the autopsy. He'd gone in far enough that his finger was stopped, but he was a large man with big hands. When they used a flexible metal probe they found that the bullet had turned slightly left. (measurements and what likely happened to the bullet later) For reasons unknown, the bullet in the back shot acted like a "light load" or misfire much like the throat shot. If the back shot had continued in a straight line it would have gone through Kennedy's heart and sternum.

I would have liked to believe in the deathbed confession of the Secret Service Agent who passed away a year or so ago who said he'd found the "magic" bullet and put it on that gurney in the hopes it would be found without having to become involved.

Turns out that the guy that found it on the (little boy's bloody) gurney steadfastly claimed that the bullet he found was pointed like a hunting round rather than like the one that became the "magic" bullet.

As far as the head shot(s)... After a lot of audio expert analysis, the HSCA chose to cherry pick the findings from the motorcycle officer's dictabelt. The findings of the first group of experts were peer reviewed by another company and both agreed that there was evidence of six shots on the tape. After "acoustically fingerprinting" the characteristics of Dealey Plaza, two of the shots were ignored because the HSCA chose only to address the locations of the snipers nest and the grassy knoll.

To be continued...

Anyone watching "I killed JFK" with Files interview? On tv tonight, not bad.

a reply to: zazzafrazz

Saw the last of it when it ran earlier and was pretty satisfied that he's been debunked.

Not sure there is one exact particular theory I buy, but I certainly don't accept the lone gunman, totally out of the blue, magic bullet stuff.
It was orchestrated and carried out with perfect planning and many people were in on it.

a reply to: CoriSCapnSkip

His body language reads as recalling actual, not recalling a rehearsed story. I.E present in memory. Just an aside point, but reading body language has worked for me over the years.

How do you think he was debunked satisfactorily in simple dot points?

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
a reply to: CoriSCapnSkip

His body language reads as recalling actual, not recalling a rehearsed story. I.E present in memory. Just an aside point, but reading body language has worked for me over the years.

How do you think he was debunked satisfactorily in simple dot points?

I'm sure someone did some ballistics investigation and it was proven the casing he claimed to have left wasn't in circulation in 1963 it was something to do with the casing design changing when the manufacturer moved factory location.

"Oh, no, no, no. My God. They're going to kill us ALL!"

This is what Governor John Connally (JBC) shouted when he was shot. My question is why "ALL"?

Journalist Martin Agronsky interviewed Connally five days after the assassination and Connally said: "we heard a shot; I turned to my LEFT I was sitting in the jump seat. I turned to my left to look in the back seat – the president had slumped. He had said nothing. Almost simultaneously, as I turned, I was hit and I knew I had been hit badly. I knew the president had been hit and I said, “My God, they are going to kill us all.”
173.255.143.197...

This explained why Connally used "ALL". He SAW JFK had been hit and slumped and it would be the right reaction of shouting "ALL" when he also had been hit.

This interview happend just FIVE days after the assassination. However, during Warrent Committee hearing, Connally told another story:
"I heard this noise which I immediately took to be a rifle shot. I instinctively turned to my RIGHT because the sound appeared to come from over my right shoulder, so I turned to look back over my RIGHT shoulder, and I saw nothing unusual except just people in the crowd, but I did NOT catch the President in the corner of my eye, and I was interested, because once I heard the shot in my own mind I identified it as a rifle shot, and I immediately--the only thought that crossed my mind was that this is an assassination attempt. So I looked, FAILING to see ...I immediately, when I was hit, I said, "Oh, no, no, no." And then I said, "My God, they are going to kill us all."
home.comcast.net...

The obvious difference between two claims is this time Connally claimed he turned RIGHT while not LEFT and did NOT see JFK. Why this time "RIGHT"?

My guess is because of the existence of Abraham Zapruder's 26 seconds' amateur film in which the assassination incidentally was recorded. Since this evidence is hardly chanllenged, Connally had to change his story from turning left to turning right.

But the change of direction will cause severe consequences. If he had turned left, he would have seen JFK being hit; however, if he just turned right, he could not see JFK, which is consistent with his testimony. Then the problem is why Connally used "ALL" in spite of his unawareness of JFK's injury.

Could it be a reaction of something else? What if Connally had already been aware of some kind of plot but had never realized he could also be killed? Would "Oh, no, no, no. My God. They're going to kill us ALL!" sound reasonable?

According to Godfrey McHugh, after the assassination, he found LBJ hiding in a bathroom in Airforce One saying repeatedly, "They're going to get us all. It's a plot. It's a plot. It's going to get us all."
en.wikipedia.org...
Why LBJ said those words? We know that Connally and LBJ were very close and if Connally's severe injury made LBJ thinking of something?



"I am just a PATSY."

LHO claimed. If you were accused of a crime, what would you say? I am INNOCENT rather than A PATSY. By claiming A PATSY, I beilieve that LHO was saying that the assassination of JFK was a conspiracy and he was in some extend involved in it.

originally posted by: sg1642

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
a reply to: CoriSCapnSkip

His body language reads as recalling actual, not recalling a rehearsed story. I.E present in memory. Just an aside point, but reading body language has worked for me over the years.

How do you think he was debunked satisfactorily in simple dot points?

I'm sure someone did some ballistics investigation and it was proven the casing he claimed to have left wasn't in circulation in 1963 it was something to do with the casing design changing when the manufacturer moved factory location.

That was the main thing, yes. Also, the quote above is confusing. The part about body language might be taken as written by me when it wasn't.

A question for you CornShuker. I would appreciate your thoughts on the James Files interview where Files stated he was the shooter at the grassy knoll.

a reply to: CornShucker

originally posted by: CoriSCapnSkip

originally posted by: sg1642

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
a reply to: CoriSCapnSkip

His body language reads as recalling actual, not recalling a rehearsed story. I.E present in memory. Just an aside point, but reading body language has worked for me over the years.

How do you think he was debunked satisfactorily in simple dot points?

I'm sure someone did some ballistics investigation and it was proven the casing he claimed to have left wasn't in circulation in 1963 it was something to do with the casing design changing when the manufacturer moved factory location.

That was the main thing, yes. Also, the quote above is confusing. The part about body language might be taken as written by me when it wasn't.

apoligies .

originally posted by: bucsarg
A question for you CornShuker. I would appreciate your thoughts on the James Files interview where Files stated he was the shooter at the grassy knoll.

a reply to: CornShucker

I'll be back up to snuff shortly (I hope). When these headaches set in it's hard to concentrate on taking in what I read let alone string a few intelligent sentences together. Try to get up to speed with YT...

Been forgetting to even log out. Last time was a record, just a little over a year. I've compared it to AM radio, the static is always there just worse at times. Same thing with cluster headaches only I can't turn it off on the days when there is more static than there is music.

The name does ring a bell.