Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Creative Speculation
In reply to the discussion: 32 Reasons and Arguments There Was No Conspiracy Behind Oswald Killing Kennedy [View all]Bolo Boffin
(23,872 posts)12. (12) The Warren Commission's conclusions were supported by JFK's brothers and son.
Robert Kennedy Jr's recent assertion aside, let's let Robert Kennedy speak for himself. He always supported the Warren Commission's conclusion. His statement on September 27, 1964:
I am convinced (Lee Harvey) Oswald was solely responsible for what happened and that he did not have any outside help or assistance. I have not read the report, nor do I intend to. But I have been briefed on it and I am completely satisfied that the Commission investigated every lead and examined every piece of evidence. The (Warren) Commission's inquiry was thorough and conscientious.
This was not said as a private citizen. This was while he was the US Attorney General. As such and as the brother of a beloved, assassinated president, he could have brought tremendous pressure on the Commission and the FBI for not doing enough or not doing the right things. He never did. In fact, he told the commissioners in August 1964 that he knew of no "credible evidence to support the allegations" of a conspiracy, foreign or domestic, and that he had no suggestions for an additional investigation before releasing the report.
Edward Kennedy in 1975 said that he was fundamentally satisfied with the findings of the Warren Commission.
John F. Kennedy, Jr. could barely sit at the table with Oliver Stone when the director of "JFK" brought up the notion of conspiracy, not even to score a interview for the second issue of his new magazine George.
The brothers and the son of the assassinated president accepted the conclusion of no conspiracy. They would have the strongest reasons of all to press for the truth if they felt they did not have it. And with the power they had, both in the government and public opinion, they could have done so. They never did. Their familiarity with the evidence satisfied them.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
80 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
32 Reasons and Arguments There Was No Conspiracy Behind Oswald Killing Kennedy [View all]
Bolo Boffin
Mar 2013
OP
(1) There is no credible evidence, direct or circumstantial, that any suspected group actually did.
Bolo Boffin
Apr 2013
#1
(2) Any entertainment of a conspiracy by them would have been "reckless, irrational, and dangerous."
Bolo Boffin
Apr 2013
#2
(3) Since there's no credible evidence against the "usual suspects," who else?
Bolo Boffin
Apr 2013
#3
(5) The complexity of any proposed JFK assassination conspiracy argues against it working.
Bolo Boffin
Apr 2013
#5
(6) If Oswald was part of a conspiracy, they waited a long time to bring him aboard.
Bolo Boffin
Apr 2013
#6
(7) Oswald's conduct in the month before the assassination (until Nov 19) precludes a conspiracy.
Bolo Boffin
Apr 2013
#7
(9) Oswald wasn't the kind of person anyone would hire to be the point person.
Bolo Boffin
Apr 2013
#9
(10) Oswald wasn't the kind of person who would work with or for a conspiracy.
Bolo Boffin
Apr 2013
#10
(11) Those who then knew Oswald and Ruby rejected the idea either acted in concert with others.
Bolo Boffin
Apr 2013
#11
(12) The Warren Commission's conclusions were supported by JFK's brothers and son.
Bolo Boffin
Apr 2013
#12
(13) Oswald never showed any evidence of having a mysterious source of money.
Bolo Boffin
Apr 2013
#13
(15) No group would have let Oswald use a rifle so easily traceable to him.
Bolo Boffin
Apr 2013
#15
(17) The use of a military rifle that could not use soft-point bullets argues against conspiracy.
Bolo Boffin
Apr 2013
#17
(18) Conspirators would not have chosen someone with Oswald's shooting expertise.
Bolo Boffin
Apr 2013
#18
(19) Oswald had no track record as a hit man with any suspected organization.
Bolo Boffin
Apr 2013
#19
(21) Oswald's desire to blow up the Dallas FBI office argues against conspiracy.
Bolo Boffin
Apr 2013
#25
(22) Oswald would not have done anything to draw attention to himself before the hit.
Bolo Boffin
Apr 2013
#26
(23) Oswald's many applications for employment in October preclude a conspiracy.
Bolo Boffin
Apr 2013
#27
(27) Oswald's extreme isolation in the weeks before the assassination argue against conspiracy.
Bolo Boffin
May 2013
#31
(28) A conspiracy would have made sure Oswald was unavailable for any interrogation.
Bolo Boffin
May 2013
#32
(29) Oswald not bringing his revolver to work on Thursday is evidence of his acting alone.
Bolo Boffin
May 2013
#33
(30) Oswald never offering to turn state's evidence supports no conspiracy.
Bolo Boffin
May 2013
#34
(31) Almost all of the "usual suspects" would have to have enlisted the others.
Bolo Boffin
May 2013
#35
the evidence is that he can't see one of the most obvious conspiracies and
NoMoreWarNow
May 2013
#44
Thanks, but that testimony has more holes in it than a spaghetti strainer, and it's full of
Ghost in the Machine
Nov 2013
#67
Ok, I've read some of the "53 Reasons" post, but I still have to say it's full of holes....
Ghost in the Machine
Nov 2013
#69