Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
91
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Any CIA disinformation agents here?
« Last post by Jake Maxwell on March 15, 2025, 04:59:27 PM »

I'm not sure anyone in the US government is concerned about the lives of people in Russia or Cuba who might have been connected to Oswald or JFK's assassination in any way.

The most likely concern to explain all the secrecy is to protect the reputation of prominent families here, or the reputation of the agencies who pulled off a coup and pinned it on Oswald.

When the top law enforcement official dictates a memo THE DAY AFTER the assassination, that says:

(On November 23, 1963) "The thing I am concerned about, and so is Mr. Katzenbach, is having something issued so we can convince the public that Oswald is the real assassin." - J. Edgar Hoover

THE DAY AFTER!

If that doesn't concern you... Whew!... I'm not sure any rational conversation about this can be productive... and I wouldn't suspect you to accept a conspiracy at the top level if MORE evidence is produced to implicate the guilty parties.

Did I say, THE DAY AFTER!?

Yes, THE DAY AFTER!

Hoover had no concern to discover the truth of the matter. A rush to judgment and a rush to pin it all on Oswald.
If that doesn't concern you and make you want to investigate Hoover and others at the top level of government, you have little or no concern for truth and justice... and no concern for the principle of "innocent, until proven guilty."

There's your evidence of conspiracy, if you choose to accept it.
92
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: The Parkland Doctors, Part Two
« Last post by Steve M. Galbraith on March 15, 2025, 03:31:58 PM »
Quote from: Fred Litwin on March 15, 2025, 02:03:54 PM
https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/the-parkland-doctors-part-two

The Parkland Doctors, Part Two

The Parkland doctors made many statements about what they saw, and there is no unanimity between them. Their statements are erratic and do not prove there was a blow-out in the back of Kennedy's head.
Excellent summary using *original* or primary sources and documents. They not only disagreed with each other on what they saw; they disagreed with themselves, with prior descriptions. It's fascinating how their answers change depending on who is asking them and how it's phrased. And when. But we see that with a lot of witnesses.

From the accounts I've read of the people who knew and worked with him Dr. McClelland was a fine man, a good doctor and person. But he's completely unreliable on this question. He didn't draw that Thompson picture even though he kept saying he did. Thompson explained he had a medical artist friend draw it for him. And he admitted early on that he never saw the throat wound: by the time he was in the ER Perry had performed surgery on it. Later he's drawing pictures of the wound *before* the surgery, in its pristine state. Most important he said in his early accounts that the wound he saw was on the *side* of the head, not the back. Side not back. Sorry sir, you helped a lot of people, eased their suffering; but you simply cannot be believed here (yes, I know he's dead).

The ER doctors were in a rushed, shocking situation. They neither had the time or ability to closely examine the head wound. They were busy, as they said, trying to save the life of the patient. Again, here's the solution to these confused and contradictory explanations: perform an autopsy. That will settle the question.

Dr. Aguilar's list of "back of the head" witnesses is, let's just say, questionable. As Lincoln said in the Gettysburg Address, don't trust anything you read on the internet.
93
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / JFKA records: just a bit of perspective
« Last post by Lance Payette on March 15, 2025, 03:29:37 PM »
Just a bit of perspective, conspiracy fans:

The CIA was still declassifying World War I - World War ONE - documents in 2011: https://fas.org/publication/cia_wwi/

Many, many documents were declassified 50, 60 and 70 years after the end of WWI.

The same is true of documents relating to other historical events that might seem like ancient history to most of us. Millions of pages of World War II records (not all CIA, of course) supposedly remain classified. 29,000 pages were released by the NSA in 2016: https://www.nsa.gov/Press-Room/News-Highlights/Article/Article/1623741/nsa-releases-thousands-of-wwii-era-documents-to-national-archives/

The Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act was passed in 1998, but documents were still trickling out 20 years later.

Any notion that JFK-related records occupy some special niche of secrecy is a fantasy.

More than 20 years of my legal career were spent in-house at completely innocuous state, county and municipal agencies that had very little worth hiding. I don't think I ever dealt with an FOIA-type request where the immediate, knee-jerk response was not "No way!!! How do block them from getting all that, Mr. Lawyer?"
94
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Buell Wesley Frazier
« Last post by Tom Sorensen on March 15, 2025, 03:20:22 PM »
Quote from: Richard Smith on March 15, 2025, 02:53:34 PM
Otherwise.  Oswald practiced with the rifle.  If it misaligned, he simply adjusts his aim to compensate.

Sounds quite involved to me, when would he have done that?
95
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: How many questionable deaths of witnesses possibly related to the assassination?
« Last post by Tom Sorensen on March 15, 2025, 03:09:05 PM »
Quote from: Lance Payette on March 15, 2025, 12:56:12 PM
I did list Buell Frazier. You unwittingly make my point for me: You really think Lee Bowers and these other characters posed a greater threat than Crazy Buell, who didn't toe the party line when he was 19 and has since morphed into a fuil-tilt wacko?

You seem to have a talent for missing the point. Lee Bowers "couldn't be trusted" and "posed a threat" and thus had to be whacked in a one-car accident on a remote highway? Really? William Pitzer had to be whacked in his Naval office but all the Parkland and Bethesda doctors chugged merrily on for decades, doing interviews and occasionally saying non-LN-type things? Really?

Ruth Paine at 80, 85, 90 and now 92 can be trusted? Really? Not only trusted not to let anything slip but to participate in mock trials, documentaries, TV interviews and whatnot. No wonder she was picked by the CIA for her dark conspiratorial role - the woman is a rock, I tell ya!

The whole point being, most of the Major Players in Conspiracy World lived long after the assassination and died distinctly Non-Mysterious Deaths, whereas the large majority of supposed Mysterious Deaths were bit players and tangential figures who would have had nothing to tell anyway. It simply Makes No Sense, except in Conspiracy World.

Did Gene Hackman and his wife die "mysterious deaths?" Well, yeah, I think so. In Conspiracy World, it would be "obvious" Betsy was injected with hantavirus because she knew about the nefarious shenanigans at the Santa Fe Library.

Read the news: Many, many people die deaths that leave you scratching your head and hoping you don't die the same way. Read about Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal. one of the pet Mysterious Deaths of UFO Conspiracy World that actually isn't mysterious at all. It's all, or least 99.8%, cherry-picked nonsense. For that matter, we can extend it right out to the JFKA. You really think sophisticated operators determined to whack JFK would pick a parade during the noon hour in a plaza filled with 300 or so potential witnesses? Rather Unlikely, it seems to moi, but this is the scenario Conspiracy World is stuck with.

What a mistaka to maka, missing Frazier. Ironically, it makes your list even more insane, lumping him with the Paines; like Richard's replicating death squads insane. By not answering my question, you fully confirmed my suspicion that you set up a strawman to allow yourself to ramble about any conspiracy known to mankind. Well done, and enjoy your weekend!
96
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Any CIA disinformation agents here?
« Last post by Richard Smith on March 15, 2025, 03:00:33 PM »
Quote from: Jake Maxwell on March 14, 2025, 11:54:08 PM

What difference does it make to anyone in government today what anyone believes happened in 1963?

Isn't that the ultimate question?

Which raises another: Why have there been persistent efforts to keep the public from knowing all there is to know about the assassination of our president, which happened over 60 years ago?

Yeah... these are the questions.

And another question: "Why shouldn't we know "the sources?"

Every law-abiding citizen should want to know "the sources" involved in either the assassination of their president or the cover-up... and should want to know "the methods" used for either the assassination or the cover-up or perhaps, the framing of Oswald.

To claim that such secrecy of "sources" and "methods" is an effort to protect national security is most likely the reason given by those who are trying to hide something - to protect prominent names or government agencies or some other entity.

Furthermore, national security is jeopardized MOST when "sources" and "methods" are protected from exposure.
THAT is what jeopardizes national security... as well as the security of every citizen who might be framed and blamed.

And who has any trust in anything government officials say, when the highest ranking law enforcement official dictates a memo THE DAY AFTER the assassination, that says:

(On November 23, 1963) "The thing I am concerned about, and so is Mr. Katzenbach, is having something issued so we can convince the public that Oswald is the real assassin."

THE DAY AFTER!

If that doesn't concern you... Whew!... I'm not sure any rational conversation about this can be productive...

It is possible that intelligence sources that were used to investigate Oswald's connection to Russia, Cuba, and the mob are still alive.  The lives of those people and their families might be at risk if their identities became known.  Again, though, intelligence agencies are secretive by nature.  Their inclination is to never disclose any information.  Nothing good can come from that from their perspective.  You are conflating that with having something to hide about the JFK assassination.  They are not the same thing.  Once the remaining documents are released and they do not provide any evidence of a conspiracy, will you be satsified that LHO acted alone?  My guess is no.
97
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Buell Wesley Frazier
« Last post by Richard Smith on March 15, 2025, 02:53:34 PM »
Quote from: Tom Sorensen on March 15, 2025, 02:23:06 AM
As per Richard's suggestion earlier;

Even if there was some misalignment with the scope, an experienced shooter who had used the rifle could make adjustments to compensate.

You mean on the fly or otherwise?

Otherwise.  Oswald practiced with the rifle.  If it misaligned, he simply adjusts his aim to compensate.
98
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / The Parkland Doctors, Part Two
« Last post by Fred Litwin on March 15, 2025, 02:03:54 PM »
https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/the-parkland-doctors-part-two

The Parkland Doctors, Part Two

The Parkland doctors made many statements about what they saw, and there is no unanimity between them. Their statements are erratic and do not prove there was a blow-out in the back of Kennedy's head.
99
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: How many questionable deaths of witnesses possibly related to the assassination?
« Last post by Lance Payette on March 15, 2025, 01:58:07 PM »
Quote from: Michael Capasse on March 15, 2025, 01:48:13 PM
Are you an A-I computer?
Who talks like this?
People with IQs above 85?

People who at least did fairly well in high school?

I really do love how people today are so comically illiterate and inarticulate that a straightforward sentence immediately strikes them as AI-generated. It's sort of like watching a clerk at Walmart try to calculate your change manually when the system is down.
100
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: How many questionable deaths of witnesses possibly related to the assassination?
« Last post by Michael Capasse on March 15, 2025, 01:48:13 PM »
Quote from: Jonithan Carl on March 15, 2025, 08:04:27 AM
It’s true that both men lived long after the events, making the idea of a cover-up at that stage unlikely. History often sparks speculation, but sometimes the simplest explanations make the most sense.

Are you an A-I computer?
Who talks like this?
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]