JFK Assassination: What is the Truth?

Remove this Banner Ad

RisingPhoenix

RisingPhoenix

Club Legend
Dec 20, 2010
2,981
805
Great Southern
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
NAFC, SDFC, MUFC.
It's been interesting to see the ongoing debate over whether there was a conspiracy surrounding the Port Arthur massacre on my 'Most Evil Prisoners' thread. Personally, I just cant buy into that one - its just too out there. The motivations, the alleged conspirators...its just too crazy.

One conspiracy on the other hand I do buy into is the JFK assassination.

I believe this man fired the 'kill shot' from behind the grassy knoll.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Files

With this man the second shooter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Nicoletti

Leaving the third shooter LHO as the fall guy.

I also believe LBJ (along with his Texan oil buddies) was in it up to his eyeballs.

I would love to hear the views of others on this subject, as to whether they believe the aformentioned individuals were indeed involved, other potential theories etc etc.
 
Illinois Nazi said:
It was John Howard, assisted by an unknown international intelligence agency.
Click to expand...

The faces of evil.

170px-John_Howard_boy.jpg
rgN3006_safari_narrowweb__300x726-0-420x0.jpg

1304HOWARD_narrowweb__300x378,0.jpg
 

Log in to remove this ad.

There was a fascinating documentary on tv recently about Lee Harvey Oswald, interviews with him in the 24 hours after his capture. The really interesting thing for me was he kept claiming "I didn't kill anybody" , obviously meaning the President...however remember a copper was shot and killed just after JFK got shot. Alledgedly LHO did this shooting as well. So either he was a very good liar, deluded, or somebody else killed the cop. I'm not sure which.
 
Sloth said:
There was a fascinating documentary on tv recently about Lee Harvey Oswald, interviews with him in the 24 hours after his capture. The really interesting thing for me was he kept claiming "I didn't kill anybody" , obviously meaning the President...however remember a copper was shot and killed just after JFK got shot. Alledgedly LHO did this shooting as well. So either he was a very good liar, deluded, or somebody else killed the cop. I'm not sure which.
Click to expand...

This is all supported by Files version of events.
 
RisingPhoenix said:
It's been interesting to see the ongoing debate over whether there was a conspiracy surrounding the Port Arthur massacre on my 'Most Evil Prisoners' thread. Personally, I just cant buy into that one - its just too out there. The motivations, the alleged conspirators...its just too crazy.

One conspiracy on the other hand I do buy into is the JFK assassination.

I believe this man fired the 'kill shot' from behind the grassy knoll.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Files

With this man the second shooter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Nicoletti

Leaving the third shooter LHO as the fall guy.

I also believe LBJ (along with his Texan oil buddies) was in it up to his eyeballs.

I would love to hear the views of others on this subject, as to whether they believe the aformentioned individuals were indeed involved, other potential theories etc etc.
Click to expand...

The Port Arthur massacre one is a tough one for me. On the one hand, it's really difficult to see how Martin Bryant could have done it; he shot with military grade accuracy despite having little to no previous experience with guns. The gunman was also identified as NOT Martin Bryant by a number of witnesses.

On the other hand, yeah, the motivation for setting him up is just too.... unlikely. Neither option really adds up.

JFK, well, it's certainly possible. I'm not a conspiracy theorist by any means, but it is the type of thing that could be set up and executed relatively easily and quietly.
 
Dig a bit deeper. The James Files story has been thoroughly shot down. The guy is clearly an attention whore who can't even get his story straight.

The best theory for the shooter I've seen is - Jackie!

Yep, google 'Jackie killed Kennedy' and it's all there. Hard to think of who hasn't been suggested as shooter or conspirator. Maybe Bobby Kennedy is the only one. Although, sibling rivalry, you know..........
 
There were 4 gunmen, with 3 guns fired and the kill shot came from the bridge in front of them.

The gunmen were unknown to the public and had links to the Italian mafia. The treatment of the mafia by JFK post election (after they helped him out greatly) was a large part of the motive, but there were many other motives, and there were government agencies complicit in the assassination including the CIA (the mafia and CIA worked together in Cuba) and in Johnson knew about it.

Do I have physical proof of this theory? Nope!
 
In one of the doco's shown last November the family that was sitting at the bottom of the grassy noll and for whom it was 'right in front of me' was interviewed.

They said they heard a shot from behind them ie behind the fence on the grassy noll.
 
RisingPhoenix said:
It's been interesting to see the ongoing debate over whether there was a conspiracy surrounding the Port Arthur massacre on my 'Most Evil Prisoners' thread. Personally, I just cant buy into that one - its just too out there. The motivations, the alleged conspirators...its just too crazy.

One conspiracy on the other hand I do buy into is the JFK assassination.

I believe this man fired the 'kill shot' from behind the grassy knoll.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Files

With this man the second shooter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Nicoletti

Leaving the third shooter LHO as the fall guy.

I also believe LBJ (along with his Texan oil buddies) was in it up to his eyeballs.

I would love to hear the views of others on this subject, as to whether they believe the aformentioned individuals were indeed involved, other potential theories etc etc.
Click to expand...
The fact is that in those days the mafia could get to any one . And if anyone knew exactly the set up, then they are probably dead al la Oswald and Jack Ruby. The grassy knoll stuff has been talked about for ever , so has the Oswald stuff , the experts have never been able to scientifically prove where the shots all came from they have theories that could be correct or not correct . I've seen all the docos' etc on this . I remember where I was when JFK was killed, some people in higher places don't want to know the truth, and , the truth is probably buried now under a billion tons of theories.
Its a dead story and history now. Why go over it again its been done to death by a thousand investigators and they'll never know who!
PS the mafia hide their tracks and from those times there'd be no trail to follow, I think they did it but which family and who actually set the operation up and hired the killers will never ever be known. But that side of it was political , you can bet on that, even Bobby Kennedy was a set up killing don't worry about that.
The mobsters involved are gone . But the families are not, they are still there its just that no one knows who they are these days. They actually stay out of sight , unlike some well dressed dons that are gone now too.
 
RisingPhoenix said:
It's been interesting to see the ongoing debate over whether there was a conspiracy surrounding the Port Arthur massacre on my 'Most Evil Prisoners' thread. Personally, I just cant buy into that one - its just too out there. The motivations, the alleged conspirators...its just too crazy.
Click to expand...

You currently disbelieve it on the basis that it is "too out there", so if the same crap machine produced a less out there theory you would buy into it. Still total crap but not too out there so you'd believe it.

See how your brain works?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

HarryTiger said:
You really don't get it?

Crap Machine produces "out there" theory. Don't buy it, too out there.

Crap Machine produces plausible theory. Yep can buy that, sounds plausible.

Hint, focus on the bolded bit.
Click to expand...

Wow. Talk about too smart by half.

If it's a plausible theory, then by definition it's not produced by a "Crap Machine". The defining feature of Crap Machine theories is that they are implausible.
 
It's perceived as being plausible in the eyes of those so keen on believing an alternative theory. See his reasoning for not buying the Martin Bryant theory, all it had to be was not be too out there and he'd be a fan of it.

Usually they have neglected to consider that one theory is made less plausible when another more plausible theory conflicts with it.
 
HarryTiger said:
It's perceived as being plausible in the eyes of those so keen on believing an alternative theory. See his reasoning for not buying the Martin Bryant theory, all it had to be was not be too out there and he'd be a fan of it.

Usually they have neglected to consider that one theory is made less plausible when another more theory plausible conflicts with it.
Click to expand...

OK, now I'm defending another poster's honour, which is weird, but I can't resist a good debate. That is making a gigantic assumption about RisingPhoenix's intelligence upon which you have absolutely no evidence. You are assuming he has a natural bias towards conspiracy theories, and there is absolutely nothing to suggest that.

He is simply saying he doesn't believe the Port Arthur massacre conspiracy, because it's objectively implausible. That's a good thing. If it was objectively plausible, then it would be worth much further investigation. You are assuming a subjective, looking-for-plausibility element which there is no reason to believe exists.
 
bloodstainedangel5 said:
You are assuming he has a natural bias towards conspiracy theories, and there is absolutely nothing to suggest that.
Click to expand...

Yes I am assuming that. I assume a guy who...

1. Finds the Martin Bryant conspiracy theory to be interesting though not "buyable" on the grounds that it is "just too crazy". Note, he's not perturbed by the fact that overwhelming evidence exists that Martin Bryant did it, he just finds the alternative too crazy (and importantly not crazy due to the existence of overwhelming evidence that Martin Bryant did it <- another assumption!).

2. Believes that 3 shooters were involved in the JFK assasination backed by Texan oil interests and a former president of the USA.

...I do assume that person has a natural bias towards conspiracy theories.

You believe what you want to believe and I'll believe what I want to believe.
 
Sloth said:
There was a fascinating documentary on tv recently about Lee Harvey Oswald, interviews with him in the 24 hours after his capture. The really interesting thing for me was he kept claiming "I didn't kill anybody" , obviously meaning the President...however remember a copper was shot and killed just after JFK got shot. Alledgedly LHO did this shooting as well. So either he was a very good liar, deluded, or somebody else killed the cop. I'm not sure which.
Click to expand...

was that the one where they were getting oswalds name wrong, plenty of smoking on set and no voice over just raw footage?

think it was at least a 2 parter, was addictive watching
 
flight23 said:
was that the one where they were getting oswalds name wrong, plenty of smoking on set and no voice over just raw footage?

think it was at least a 2 parter, was addictive watching
Click to expand...

Yeah there was an impromptu presser in the police station (hallway?) where a bunch of reporters were just yelling out questions to Oswald. He didn't even seem to be aware that officer Tippet had been shot. Quite bizzare really.
 
Bill Hicks is probably right. To a layman the head going back and to the left would make it appear as if he was shot from the front right.

It's a shame for that theory that his head goes forward before it/his body goes backwards.

And while the jokes about Oswald hanging from his feat and getting carried by Cuban pigeons are amusing, I hope no one takes them seriously. Kennedy was less than 100 metres away almost directly in front of Oswald. Hardly miraculous shooting.

Mooster7 has some good posts about it in this thread

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=778226&highlight=Oswald&page=3
 
I want to be Mooster's friend. I dont care to get into the argument of whether he's right or not (pretty bloody convincing though), but that was such an entertaining way of explaining it.

Normally I'm all tl;dr but I was sad to get to the end of that.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

JFK Assassination: What is the Truth?

Similar threads

Gavin Excell
D Day - 80th anniversary of the Normandy landings
Replies
7
Views
674
swingdog
swingdog
SBD Gonzalez
The true cost of the British Raj?
Replies
7
Views
1K
Johnny Bananas
Johnny Bananas

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top