The Kennedy Thread

[Aristotle]

...that E. Howard Hunt confessed on his death bed that...

Cord Meyer
Frank Sturgis
David Sanchez Morales
David Atlee Phillips

were involved in the assassination of John F. Kennedy, at the behest of Lyndon B. Johnson...

...and that his statements about LBJ's "almost maniacal urge to become President" line up perfectly with the fact that LBJ's former lover said that he told her,
"After tomorrow, those goddamn Kennedys will never embarrass me again -- that's NOT a threat -- that's a promise."...

...which both make sense in light of the fact that Kennedy's secretary said that the day President Kennedy left for Dallas, they talked about LBJ's role in the Bobby Baker scandal, and how he could destroy the campaign, and how he was going to try to find a running mate for the next campaign, but that it would definitely not be LBJ...

...and how, if JFK wouldn't've been killed, it's almost certain that Johnson would have been forced from office and indicted in the Bobby Baker case?






And this isn't a Matt-type question, where I'm not really asking a question, but actually trying to make a statement.

Do people know about this and disbelieve it, and if so, could you tell me why because I can't find any discreditors.

Or are they so jaded with "Crackpot JFK Conspiracy Gobbledy-Gook" that they never bothered to listen to E. Howard Hunt's deathbed confession?

Or do most people just not care that LBJ had JFK murdered to take the presidency, since people have been assassinating leaders to take their power since the dawn of civilization?



I'm also interested in why the guy's deathbed confession that he faked the Loch Ness Monster pictures is considered to be iron-clad proof that the story is bull****, by naysayers, but a deathbed confession about killing JFK is ignored.



What makes more sense?
...that an innocent guy would be about to die and then take the time in his last few hours on Earth, to completely fabricate a wild story about being an accomplice to murder, naming other men, shocking and torturing his family with his last breath, for absolutely no reason...


Or...that a guilty guy would be about to die and be so afraid that he was going to Hell for his crimes, or be so happy to finally tell the secret he kept for his whole life, since the people who would retaliate couldn't hurt him anymore, that he would finally tell the truth now that nothing in life matters anymore?


Think about it.
You're dying...this is it.
You look up at your beloved wife...and your eldest son, knowing that you'll never see them again....and you start making up a lie about how awful you were (when you really weren't), exposing the fact that you'd lied to them for your whole lives together...for NO reason???

You know what? I'll check this out. But a deathbed confession doesn't really prove jack-****. A during-your-life confession doesn't prove anything either. It helps as ancillary evidence, but it's never going to be iron-clad proof of something. Fact of the matter is, this is one of the most heavily investigated incidents in American history. Historians have tried for decades to prove a conspiracy. Credible historians have failed to do so. At most, there is circumstantial evidence...and now, apparently, the death-bed confession of a guy who wants his name to go on after he's dead. That's often a motivating factor behind death-bed confessions. "Oh my God, no one will remember the name E. Howard Hunter after I die...I KILLED JFK!"

 

[Aristotle]

I'd also like to add, (and this is one that I had never seen before recently), many know the famous picture of LBJ being sworn in after JFK was killed...

But the next picture, they didn't print in the magazine for some reason, and while it's not super clear, or proof of anything, it sure as Hell looks like the bow tie guy is WINKING at LBJ after he's sworn in...which would be insanely inappropriate after the assassination of the former president...and very understandable, if the great undertaking of these evil men was to kill JFK and get sworn in.

Even his wife looks like a little smug smirk is slipping out.

See, this is why nobody believes you. You don't actually believe any of that was of substance, do you? How many crappy pictures have been taken of you, where your face was doing something goofy right at the instant the camera flashed? So Ladybird has a goofy smirkish thing going on, and bowtie's eyes are hooded. Doesn't demonstrate anything of substance.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Oh, and guess who else was there that day looking particularly evil in the photograph...

George Bush sr.

...who went on to be named director of the CIA by Ford ( EHH is saying the CIA killed Kennedy for LBJ, and Kennedy said, before he was killed, that completely dismantling the CIA was on his agenda....meanwhile J. Edgar Hoover is frantically interviewing ****s to try to prove that the Marilyn Monroe sex footage showed JFK's penis. )

...and then went on to become vice president...for Ronald Reagan, who got shot, by a "loony lone gun man", while Bush was having BREAKFAST with that "lone gun man's freaking DAD...(sounds familiar, a vice president having a president killed so he could become president...hmm)

And then, Bush became president, touting a "New World Order", and his dim-witted failure of a son became president twice, even though he didn't get more votes, and his other son runs Florida...and was in charge of the place where the votes were disputed for his brother's election...

And his other son, Marvin, the president’s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport.
Guess when the last day of his contract was.
Guess.
September 11th.

And wow...George W. Bush's father was meeting with Osama bin Laden's brother, Shafig bin Laden, in the Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Washington, on the morning of 9/11.
What a "screwy, nutball" coincidence. Kind like eating with the father of the dude that shot Reagan.
And, what's one of the FIRST things YOU'D do if you suspected a guy killed 3,000 Americans?

That's right, have his entire family flown out of the country.
Makes tons of sense.

And also, the financier of the hijackers, Mahmoud Ahmad, was meeting with Bush administration officials the week before 9/11. He also met with Bob Graham and Porter Goss on the morning of the attacks, who would later go on to head the first 9/11 investigative committee.
Objective dudes.

Wow, it's like coinkydinks are going out of style with the Bush family.
Does there ever come a time when you just have to hear all of the quacking, and see all of the feathers flying, and at least admit that you may be dealing with a duck?

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

See, this is why nobody believes you. You don't actually believe any of that was of substance, do you? How many crappy pictures have been taken of you, where your face was doing something goofy right at the instant the camera flashed? So Ladybird has a goofy smirkish thing going on, and bowtie's eyes are hooded. Doesn't demonstrate anything of substance.

Can you read?

while it's not super clear, or proof of anything

Do you know what my words meant there?
They meant, that the picture, proves, NOTHING.
It's just another weird thing to add to a growing pile.

Where do you even get "nobody believes you" ?
I'm not the one who taped a confession of anything, and I said the EXACT opposite of anything close to suggesting that that pictures substantially proved anything.
This is isn't even ABOUT believing me regarding ANY conspiracy.
It was about how weird it seems to me, that the media talktalktalked about "deathbed confessions" of a guy who faked the Loch Ness Monster, a guy who said that Aliens crashed on Earth, but a guy confessing to being an accomplice to a presidential assassination, who actually was an insider, doesn't seem to warrant as much attention.

That's not a disputable thing where I'm trying to convince anyone of anything.
It's me wanting to know if people heard of this and didn't care, or if they never heard of it, and observing that I'd think it'd cause a bigger buzz.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

A during-your-life confession doesn't prove anything either.

So, for instance, you didn't believe FBI deputy director W. Mark Felt when he confessed to being "Deep Throat" ?

 

[OctaviusINC]

This is the smartest thread on the hype

 

[Aristotle]

And then, Bush became president, touting a "New World Order", and his dim-witted failure of a son became president twice, even though he didn't get more votes, and his other son runs Florida...and was in charge of the place where the votes were disputed for his brother's election...

And his other son, Marvin, the president’s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport.
Guess when the last day of his contract was.
Guess.
September 11th.

And wow...George W. Bush's father was meeting with Osama bin Laden's brother, Shafig bin Laden, in the Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Washington, on the morning of 9/11.
What a "screwy, nutball" coincidence. Kind like eating with the father of the dude that shot Reagan.
And, what's one of the FIRST things YOU'D do if you suspected a guy killed 3,000 Americans?

That's right, have his entire family flown out of the country.
Makes tons of sense.

And also, the financier of the hijackers, Mahmoud Ahmad, was meeting with Bush administration officials the week before 9/11. He also met with Bob Graham and Porter Goss on the morning of the attacks, who would later go on to head the first 9/11 investigative committee.
Objective dudes.

Wow, it's like coinkydinks are going out of style with the Bush family.
Does there ever come a time when you just have to hear all of the quacking, and see all of the feathers flying, and at least admit that you may be dealing with a duck?

But when people like you keep tossing geese into the flock, it gets hard for a lot of people to see the real ducks. When you waste time and precious social capital on ******** like JFK conspiracy theories, you take all the credibility away from people trying to expose real conspiracies.

In the current socio-political climate, it should be very easy for us to convince people of things like the Bush Administration's complicity in 9/11. Americans haven't trusted the government since Watergate and Vietnam forcibly disillusioned them. Yet today, FACTS about government complicity in 9/11 are dismissed as "crackpot theories." The reason is that everyone's tired of the dumb **** like JFK getting buttraped by aliens, or Elvis secretly being a CIA operative in China, or Ed Wood actually being J. Edgar Hoover in a genius disguise. Even worse, basic principles of sociology like institutional racism and the cyclical nature of poverty get dismissed as "crackpot conspiracy theories" because of this.

Ask yourself this: Even if JFK's assassination is ****ed up, what do we gain by exposing it? And what do we lose? By exposing it, we could gain a greater understanding of just how deranged our political system was in the 1960s. But by wasting time and credibility on it, we lose an opportunity to show everyone how deranged our political system is right now.

 

[Dark Vigilante]

Oh, and guess who else was there that day looking particularly evil in the photograph...

George Bush sr.

...who went on to be named director of the CIA by Ford ( EHH is saying the CIA killed Kennedy for LBJ, and Kennedy said, before he was killed, that completely dismantling the CIA was on his agenda....meanwhile J. Edgar Hoover is frantically interviewing ****s to try to prove that the Marilyn Monroe sex footage showed JFK's penis. )

...and then went on to become vice president...for Ronald Reagan, who got shot, by a "loony lone gun man", while Bush was having BREAKFAST with that "lone gun man's freaking DAD...(sounds familiar, a vice president having a president killed so he could become president...hmm)

And then, Bush became president, touting a "New World Order", and his dim-witted failure of a son became president twice, even though he didn't get more votes, and his other son runs Florida...and was in charge of the place where the votes were disputed for his brother's election...

And his other son, Marvin, the president’s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport.
Guess when the last day of his contract was.
Guess.
September 11th.

And wow...George W. Bush's father was meeting with Osama bin Laden's brother, Shafig bin Laden, in the Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Washington, on the morning of 9/11.
What a "screwy, nutball" coincidence. Kind like eating with the father of the dude that shot Reagan.
And, what's one of the FIRST things YOU'D do if you suspected a guy killed 3,000 Americans?

That's right, have his entire family flown out of the country.
Makes tons of sense.

And also, the financier of the hijackers, Mahmoud Ahmad, was meeting with Bush administration officials the week before 9/11. He also met with Bob Graham and Porter Goss on the morning of the attacks, who would later go on to head the first 9/11 investigative committee.
Objective dudes.

Wow, it's like coinkydinks are going out of style with the Bush family.
Does there ever come a time when you just have to hear all of the quacking, and see all of the feathers flying, and at least admit that you may be dealing with a duck?

The New World Order. It's being assembled behind scenes as we speak.

 

[Dark Vigilante]

But when people like you keep tossing geese into the flock, it gets hard for a lot of people to see the real ducks. When you waste time and precious social capital on ******** like JFK conspiracy theories, you take all the credibility away from people trying to expose real conspiracies.

In the current socio-political climate, it should be very easy for us to convince people of things like the Bush Administration's complicity in 9/11. Americans haven't trusted the government since Watergate and Vietnam forcibly disillusioned them. Yet today, FACTS about government complicity in 9/11 are dismissed as "crackpot theories." The reason is that everyone's tired of the dumb **** like JFK getting buttraped by aliens, or Elvis secretly being a CIA operative in China, or Ed Wood actually being J. Edgar Hoover in a genius disguise. Even worse, basic principles of sociology like institutional racism and the cyclical nature of poverty get dismissed as "crackpot conspiracy theories" because of this.

Ask yourself this: Even if JFK's assassination is ****ed up, what do we gain by exposing it? And what do we lose? By exposing it, we could gain a greater understanding of just how deranged our political system was in the 1960s. But by wasting time and credibility on it, we lose an opportunity to show everyone how deranged our political system is right now.

I disagree. It's the same government today that it was then, run by the same people, and if not them, their children, friends, or business associates. I believe that cracking the JFK conspiracy is very important.

 

[DV8]

Can you read?




Do you know what my words meant there?
They meant, that the picture, proves, NOTHING.
It's just another weird thing to add to a growing pile.

Where do you even get "nobody believes you" ?
I'm not the one who taped a confession of anything, and I said the EXACT opposite of anything close to suggesting that that pictures substantially proved anything.
This is isn't even ABOUT believing me regarding ANY conspiracy.
It was about how weird it seems to me, that the media talktalktalked about "deathbed confessions" of a guy who faked the Loch Ness Monster, a guy who said that Aliens crashed on Earth, but a guy confessing to being an accomplice to a presidential assassination, who actually was an insider, doesn't seem to warrant as much attention.

That's not a disputable thing where I'm trying to convince anyone of anything.
It's me wanting to know if people heard of this and didn't care, or if they never heard of it, and observing that I'd think it'd cause a bigger buzz.

[/size]

hahaha,

Wilhelm Scream in:

Wilhelm Pwns Again!!

 

[PLAS]

This is the smartest thread on the hype

yet, the celebrity forum gets dozens more posts

but it seems you don't really have to think to post there

 

[Aristotle]

So, for instance, you didn't believe FBI deputy director W. Mark Felt when he confessed to being "Deep Throat" ?

I was skeptical about someone "confessing" to being one of the greatest heroes of our democracy, yes, but Woodward and his then-editor confirmed it, so it looks like pretty solid evidence to me.

It's just another weird thing to add to a growing pile.

No, it isn't. It is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. It's a photograph of people doing nothing illegal or questionable.

It's me wanting to know if people heard of this and didn't care, or if they never heard of it, and observing that I'd think it'd cause a bigger buzz.

Fine. Then your answer is, as I said in my previous post, that conspiracy theories involving JFK are a huge part of the reason that no one gives a **** about any conspiracy theories anymore, and that many people still believe President Bush's pretexts for war. They know they're not supposed to trust the government, but they also know they're not supposed to trust the tinfoil-hat-wearing crackpots. They end up erring on the side of the people with the guns.

 

[Aristotle]

I disagree. It's the same government today that it was then, run by the same people, and if not them, their children, friends, or business associates. I believe that cracking the JFK conspiracy is very important.

As a historian, I agree that the JFK conspiracy, if true, is important. But as an American, I don't agree. Because the price of exposing it has already been far too high. Americans trust their government again. And that is horrifying.

 

[PLAS]

But when people like you keep tossing geese into the flock, it gets hard for a lot of people to see the real ducks. When you waste time and precious social capital on ******** like JFK conspiracy theories, you take all the credibility away from people trying to expose real conspiracies.

In the current socio-political climate, it should be very easy for us to convince people of things like the Bush Administration's complicity in 9/11. Americans haven't trusted the government since Watergate and Vietnam forcibly disillusioned them. Yet today, FACTS about government complicity in 9/11 are dismissed as "crackpot theories." The reason is that everyone's tired of the dumb **** like JFK getting buttraped by aliens, or Elvis secretly being a CIA operative in China, or Ed Wood actually being J. Edgar Hoover in a genius disguise. Even worse, basic principles of sociology like institutional racism and the cyclical nature of poverty get dismissed as "crackpot conspiracy theories" because of this.

Ask yourself this: Even if JFK's assassination is ****ed up, what do we gain by exposing it? And what do we lose? By exposing it, we could gain a greater understanding of just how deranged our political system was in the 1960s. But by wasting time and credibility on it, we lose an opportunity to show everyone how deranged our political system is right now.

I believe someone smarter than both of us said "Knowledge is Power"

the more people become aware of the different ways the ones in power have to keep us under control, the easier it is for the people to loose their fear

remember, those who rely on fear have very little else to stand upon, once you eradicate the fear... the rest is easy

 

[Aristotle]

Again: As a historian, I agree that the JFK conspiracy, if true, is important. But as an American, I don't agree. Because the price of exposing it has already been far too high. Americans trust their government again. And that is horrifying.

Even if we could prove that the JFK assassination was an LBJ conspiracy, would anyone believe it anymore? We have gotten to the point now at which Americans are confronted with cold, hard, factual evidence that the government at the very least profited from 9/11, probably could have prevented it and knowingly did not do so, and may have even been the perpetrator, and they don't even give it a chance. You can be banned or suspended on this forum for saying the government had something to do with 9/11. That's the price that the JFK conspiracy theory has exacted.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

But when people like you keep tossing geese into the flock, it gets hard for a lot of people to see the real ducks. When you waste time and precious social capital on ******** like JFK conspiracy theories, you take all the credibility away from people trying to expose real conspiracies.

It's official, you're an *****.
I'm at work, talking about something that interests me. Not for two seconds do I have the power to take anyone's credibility away.
I agree with a TON of what David Icke says, regardless of the fact that I think he's full of **** in other areas. Only an idiot would cast away an entire community for the actions of SOME of it's members. I thought that was what you were erroneously trying to say in Zenien's thread.
Life is not this Black+White thing you make it out to be.

The reason is that everyone's tired of the dumb **** like JFK getting buttraped by aliens, or Elvis secretly being a CIA operative in China, or Ed Wood actually being J. Edgar Hoover in a genius disguise.

Yeah. That's why this is notable. It's the first time an actual insider, who was there, and connected, has confessed to anything and named names and explained a motivation.
It's as far away as non-verifiable claims can get from goofball aliens butt-raping Elvis in the back of JFK's car that runs on water...it deals with real, contemporaneous figures, and explains some unknowns while confirming what others who were involved have said also.

Can you at least ****ing admit that it deserves as much public attention as a colonel claiming that we got microwave ovens and Atari 2600's from crashed alien ship technology?!

Ask yourself this: Even if JFK's assassination is ****ed up, what do we gain by exposing it? And what do we lose? By exposing it, we could gain a greater understanding of just how deranged our political system was in the 1960s. But by wasting time and credibility on it, we lose an opportunity to show everyone how deranged our political system is right now.

1. I have no credibility on a socio-politically massive scale with the denizens of internet-world, nor should I. Melodrama much?

2. One of the BIGGEST things I hear incessantly repeated when talking about 9/11, is that people "refuse to believe that the president of the United States would be involved in something so evil." If you can prove precedent for presidential evil, it can NOT hurt a thing, and could help some to open their eyes.

3. Asking "what do we stand to gain?" is profoundly ********.
What do we stand to gain from trying to discover who really wrote the works of "Shakespeare"?
What do we stand to gain from trying to figure out how the Egyptians erected the pyramids?
It's a great question of history that has sparked intense debate for decades and knowing about new developments is not detrimental in any way.
And it's preposterous to even suggest that being interested in a high level Washington conspirator's deathbed confession about one of the biggest questions of American history = "LOSING" some "once-in-a-lifetime" "chance" to expose the LATEST incarnation of our amoral government.

If you have any experience at ALL with discussing these types of topics, you know that people naturally fall somewhere on a spectrum between...

• those who refuse to believe any conspiracy theories regardless of evidence
• those who pathetically embrace any wild theory because it makes life seem more exciting

If you think anything said here is going to jeopardize someone's chances of ever taking an open-minded interest in the evils of American government, you are Daffy Duck dry-humping the rings of Saturn - insane.




P.S. way to just ignore the fact that you were wrong to irrationally attack me for putting the photo forth as something substantive...while I said that it proves "N.O.T.H.I.N.G."
really, ridiculous...

 

[Aristotle]

It's official, you're an *****.

I can't think of a swear-word that starts with a vowel. Did you mean "a *****"?

I'm at work, talking about something that interests me. Not for two seconds do I have the power to take anyone's credibility away.

Every time someone lends credence to a theory before first gathering a very substantial body of evidence to support it, the credibility of all conspiracy theories is eroded.

Only an idiot would cast away an entire community for the actions of SOME of it's members.

Says the guy who wants to end all religion because sometimes it's a bad thing? I personally am not discrediting all conspiracy theories because most of them are ********, but the American people are. Yes, they think very simplistically. The American people are a herd of sheep most of the time, even though they aspire to be more. They think in very vague, general, black-and-white terms. And if you want to reach them, you have to speak to them in such terms. Which means quit wasting your time on pointless, probably-false, unprovable conspiracies about aliens or JFK, and expend your energy on the real conspiracies.

Yeah. That's why this is notable. It's the first time an actual insider, who was there, and connected, has confessed to anything and named names and explained a motivation.

Yes. It is notable. But it proves nothing, and when weighed against the ocean of distrust that conspiracy theorists have engendered against themselves, it's not at all surprising that nobody cared.

It's as far away as non-verifiable claims can get from goofball aliens butt-raping Elvis in the back of JFK's car that runs on water...it deals with real, contemporaneous figures, and explains some unknowns while confirming what others who were involved have said also.

It isn't verifiable though. It's one account, with no physical evidence to prove its validity. It's just not enough. In a different world, maybe it would be, but in a world where "goofball aliens butt-raping Elvis in the back of JFK's car that runs on water" has probably been posited as a real theory by some crankshaft, it isn't enough.

Can you at least ****ing admit that it deserves as much public attention as a colonel claiming that we got microwave ovens and Atari 2600's from crashed alien ship technology?!

Of course it deserves public attention. But first, I'm not surprised that it didn't get it. And second, I don't think it's wise for us to keep focusing on it. It's continuing to cost us credibility in other areas.

1. I have no credibility on a socio-politically massive scale with the denizens of internet-world, nor should I. Melodrama much?

I thought we were supposed to think globally and act locally. Everything is interconnected and everything you say about conspiracies impacts the people who hear it. The fact of the matter is, a lot of minds are shaped and molded, even if not drastically shifted, by what they read on the internet. You can't help but by somewhat shaped by it.

2. One of the BIGGEST things I hear incessantly repeated when talking about 9/11, is that people "refuse to believe that the president of the United States would be involved in something so evil." If you can prove precedent for presidential evil, it can NOT hurt a thing, and could help some to open their eyes.

But it has taken so long, and it has been discredited so many times, it's not out of the question that even if it were proven as FACT, many or most Americans would refuse to believe it. For example, people still refuse to believe that FDR knew about Pearl Harbor in advance, and allowed it to happen so he could enter World War II. In this climate, continuing to advance theories about an event that, in all likelihood, can never actually be proven, only serves to erode the credibility of more immediate and current conspiracy threats.

3. Asking "what do we stand to gain?" is profoundly ********.

It's the most important question in all of science, even though it is almost never asked. All discovery and learning should be prefaced by the questions of pro and con. If learning comes at a price greater than the benefit, it is morally reprehensible to continue with it.

What do we stand to gain from trying to discover who really wrote the works of "Shakespeare"?

A broader understanding of the literary and artistic world of the time. Weighed against absolutely no moral or social cost, it is a good idea to try and discover the answer.

What do we stand to gain from trying to figure out how the Egyptians erected the pyramids?

A broader understanding of art history and architectural history, as well as architectural and construction breakthroughs of that time that we have still not been able to replicate with modern technology.

It's a great question of history that has sparked intense debate for decades and knowing about new developments is not detrimental in any way.

Even if it erodes the credibility of more immediate conspiracy threats? Knowledge and discovery are not virtues unto themselves. They just aren't.

And it's preposterous to even suggest that being interested in a high level Washington conspirator's deathbed confession about one of the biggest questions of American history = "LOSING" some "once-in-a-lifetime" "chance" to expose the LATEST incarnation of our amoral government.

It's not that big of a question. American historians skip over the JFK assassination like mathematicians skip over basic addition. There are much bigger, and much more important, questions surrounding our government's more recent activities in the Middle East and Latin America--and not surprisingly, historians are increasingly frustrated by a population too jaded by conspiracy-nuts to care about real, factual conspiracies that our government perpetrated in Latin America and the Middle East. Even though the knowledge is widely available, most Americans dismiss the Guatemala coup, or our support for Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, as crackpot conspiracy crap. I'm not making that up.

If you have any experience at ALL with discussing these types of topics

All too much.

you know that people naturally fall somewhere on a spectrum between...

• those who refuse to believe any conspiracy theories regardless of evidence
• those who pathetically embrace any wild theory because it makes life seem more exciting

• Unfortunately, there just aren't that many who choose a middle ground. Most people reject ALL conspiracy theories, either because they don't want to be the pathetic tinfoil-hat guys, or they don't want to be SEEN as the pathetic tinfoil-hat guys.

way to just ignore the fact that you were wrong to irrationally attack me for putting the photo forth as something substantive...while I said that it proves "N.O.T.H.I.N.G."
really, ridiculous...

You presented the photo as substantive. It is not. It has nothing to do with anything except photographic evidence that Lyndon Johnson was sworn in as President.

 

[Arkady Rossovich]

...that E. Howard Hunt confessed on his death bed that...

Cord Meyer
Frank Sturgis
David Sanchez Morales
David Atlee Phillips

were involved in the assassination of John F. Kennedy, at the behest of Lyndon B. Johnson...

It's because most think this is a "conspiracy theory" that doesn't have any truth to it. So they just don't care,even if it could be true.

 

[Gerald Root]

Let me get this straight Aristotle. Your reasoning for not following up on the JFK conspiracy basically boils down to "Eh who cares anymore?" If it needs to be explained to you how horse**** a reason that is, it's not worth it. It really isn't.

 

[Addendum]

The New World Order. It's being assembled behind scenes as we speak.

 

[Gamma Ray]

"I care"

 

[Joker]

I havent heard of it till just now. If true, that really does shed some light on the whole matter, but I'd really like more details...which we'll surely never get now.

 

[ForgottenLAW]

Thats crazy. First time I've heard of it. First time I've seen the video suggesting the driver delivered the head shot to JFK as well.

 

[Superman4ever]

Wow. I haven't heard of this until now. I stopped looking into JFK a couple of years back...wow.

Thanks Wil. Actually I didn't know that little factoid about Bush Sr. and Hinckley's father. I'm looking into that right now.

 

[sithgoblin]

Why did this get no media coverage?