The JFK assassination [View all]

I think it's very likely I'll regret it , but I thought I'd make a thread for people who have questions on the JFK assassination.

It's something I've looked at a long time, and it's an amazingly complex topic.

There are a lot of myths that can be dispelled, and questions that can be answered. And some that can't, critically.

A summary from my point of view:

In order to prove a conspiracy, a number of things would be helpful, including motive, means, opportunity - a lot more than 'hey this group didn't like JFK, so maybe they killed him.' For example, the CIA has a hell of a big burden for plausibility to kill the president.

Sadly, some of those biggest burdens are very clearly met. The motives were overwhelming for both organized crime and the CIA.

And a VERY strong amount of presidential betrayal had already been seen from the CIA - for examples:

- President-elect Kennedy wanted to work with Congo Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba for his policies of independence for African colonies; Lumumba was the continent's leader for unity and independence. The CIA had him killed days before Kennedy took office.

- The CIA quite intentionally lied to President Kennedy in their Bay of Pigs scheme to gain his approval, and hid large parts of their plans from him, attempting to force him to commit US military forces to an invasion against his wishes.

Robert Kennedy called the actions by the CIA "virtually treason" and this led to the exit of the two top CIA officials.

- The new CIA officials under the new Director continued working with organized crime on plots to assassinate Castro, against the orders of President Kennedy, and lied about the activities.

However, those things do not prove conspiracy in the assassination. They're just big steps along what's needed.

Then they run into very serious obstacles AGAINST the idea of a conspiracy, because of the facts known about the act.

The evidence strongly suggests that all of the shot came from Oswald's rifle in the TBSD, fired by Oswald.

And that raises quite serious problems for any conspiracy, where such a critical operation would make no sense to place in the hands of Oswald, using a very poor quality rifle.

On the other hand, there is almost an embarrassingly strong case of plausibility for Oswald as the lone assassin.

And there are thousands of mysteries, some with answers, some not.

Let's take just one example - consider the following quote from Jack Ruby in jail, strongly in favor of conspiracy:

"I have been used for a purpose, and there will be a certain tragic occurrence happening if you don't take my testimony and somehow vindicate me so my people don't suffer because of what I have done."

He said he'd tell all if but only if he were transferred, which is was not.

Yet consider his saying the opposite:

"I am as innocent regarding any conspiracy as any of you gentlemen in the room."

He answered a question who was behind the assassination by saying it was Lyndon Johnson.

Yet earlier, he was very praising of Johnson, and said:

"It may not be too late, whatever happens, if our President, Lyndon Johnson, knew the truth from me. But if I am eliminated, there won't be any way of knowing."

It's rather odd for him to have begged to reveal to Johnson the truth about the assassination, yet claim the truth was Johnson did it.

How do you sort that our for any help?

A little recommended reading:

- Very good summary of the conflicts between JFK and the security establishment, $3 Amazon e-book:
"JFK's War with the National Security Establishment: Why Kennedy Was Assassinated", Douglas Horne

- One of the best books arguing Oswald as the lone assassin:
"The Assassination of John F. Kennedy: The Reasons Why", Albert Newman

- Perhaps the best book arguing for a conspiracy:
"The Hidden History of the JFK Assassination", Lamar Waldron