Who Killed Kennedy (JFK)? What say you?

[LadyZod]

Keep in mind that I believe in UFOs, Bigfoot, Ghosts and the Lochness Monster...

I personally believe this:

1) Oswald was a pathetic little man.

He had delusions of grandeur.

He defected to Russia, and no one cared.

He came back to the USA, and no one cared. He was a little man.

2) Oswald was the lone gunman who killed the president.

His marksmanship had nothing to do with anything. If it did, he'd have fired one shot and killed the man.

He fired as many shots as he could get off before the target was out of sight. It was just luck he hit the president with a killshot.

3) Jack Ruby was another loser who decided to play hero.

Interviews with him have him saying that he wanted to prevent Jackie the agony of a trial.

4) People like to believe in a conspiracy

Because no one wants to admit a small pathetic man accidentally brought the world's mightiest nation to it's knees with cheap rifle brought from the back of a comic book.

[batmanmc]

I believe oswald didnt do it because witnesss have said he was in the caferteria when the shots were fired and couldnt make it to the caferteria that quick after shot without being seen or heard.

[LadyZod]

Eye witnesses aren't always reliable. A few reported there was a little dog sitting between Jackie and the President. Watching the Zapruder films proves otherwise.

[HapSlash]

Everyone should know by now, that president Kennedy assassinated himself in an attempt to prevent his own impeachment, leading to the election of J. Edgar Hoover as president.

[EmergencyIan]

Keep in mind that I believe in UFOs, Bigfoot, Ghosts and the Lochness Monster...

I personally believe this:

1) Oswald was a pathetic little man.

He had delusions of grandeur.

He defected to Russia, and no one cared.

He came back to the USA, and no one cared. He was a little man.

2) Oswald was the lone gunman who killed the president.

His marksmanship had nothing to do with anything. If it did, he'd have fired one shot and killed the man.

He fired as many shots as he could get off before the target was out of sight. It was just luck he hit the president with a killshot.

3) Jack Ruby was another loser who decided to play hero.

Interviews with him have him saying that he wanted to prevent Jackie the agony of a trial.

4) People like to believe in a conspiracy

Because no one wants to admit a small pathetic man accidentally brought the world's mightiest nation to it's knees with cheap rifle brought from the back of a comic book.

Well written.

I do not believe that it is as simple as that, but I could certainly be wrong.

-Ian

[piecemaker]

I dont think the whole truth behind this will ever be known.

I dont buy Oswald as the lone gunman theory.He was involved and may have even fired some shot(s).
He was groomed to be the perfect "patsy"

I believe this was planned and carried out by the CIA,the Mob and other factions of the government.
LBJ and Hoover were involved.Texas was LBJ's state,he planned the visit and had complete control in Texas.

I think there were multiple shooters in different locations to ensure that JFK was killed that day and the final fatal head shot came from behind from The School Book Depository or The Dal-Tex Building,But i dont believe Oswald fired that fatal shot.

Oswald was not an Expert markman and i dont buy the firing 3 shots in 6-8 seonds theory.It would be very difficult for even an "expert" markman to accomplish and maintain any accurancy.But Oswald does this and hits JFK in the head from the farthest distance away and at a moving target,i dont think so.

The list of things that dont add up goes on and on,but heres a few.
Doctored photos/films.
Dozens of potential witnesses or whistleblowers ending up murdered or dying an "accidental" death.
The refusal to let an autopsy be done in Dallas.
The Limo driver doing the opposite of what should have been done and actually braking/slowing down when the shots started being fired.

[jwyblejr]

If there were multiple shooter think about this;why didn't any of them come forward(or family members if they're no longer around) and try to cash in on being involved?

[EmergencyIan]

If there were multiple shooter think about this;why didn't any of them come forward(or family members if they're no longer around) and try to cash in on being involved?

There is no statute of limitation on murder. Therefore, it seems unlikely that another shooter would come forward to, necessarily, anyone.

-Ian

[jimsmegos]

Having seen the latest doc on the REELZ channel got me thinking about this too. The head shot as seen in the Zapruder film always seemed to be a much more 'explosive shot' than the first one that hit Kennedy and Connally. With this latest documentary it seems to me that a separate or different type of round makes a lot of sense. But what do I know?

The main thing this latest doc does for me is to entertain the possibility that it was the Secret Service agent and that the fool simply slipped, pulled the trigger and bang, history changed course. Astronomical odds? Sure. BUT as far as a cover up goes it would make perfect sense to me that ALL of the powers that be would want something like that buried deep. The level of incompetence that incident would show would be a blight on the nation at most certainly the worst possible time. How much respect would be lost on the global stage?

But then again, if you were the guy who did goof in such an Earth shattering way, how could you possibly live with yourself? That thought is the only thing that keeps me from going all in on this particular theory. Personally I believe the guy would have lost his mind and killed himself. Holding on to what would be the biggest secret ever told would simply more than a human could handle.

Still, what do I know?

[EmergencyIan]

Having seen the latest doc on the REELZ channel got me thinking about this too. The head shot as seen in the Zapruder film always seemed to be a much more 'explosive shot' than the first one that hit Kennedy and Connally. With this latest documentary it seems to me that a separate or different type of round makes a lot of sense. But what do I know?

The main thing this latest doc does for me is to entertain the possibility that it was the Secret Service agent and that the fool simply slipped, pulled the trigger and bang, history changed course. Astronomical odds? Sure. BUT as far as a cover up goes it would make perfect sense to me that ALL of the powers that be would want something like that buried deep. The level of incompetence that incident would show would be a blight on the nation at most certainly the worst possible time. How much respect would be lost on the global stage?

But then again, if you were the guy who did goof in such an Earth shattering way, how could you possibly live with yourself? That thought is the only thing that keeps me from going all in on this particular theory. Personally I believe the guy would have lost his mind and killed himself. Holding on to what would be the biggest secret ever told would simply more than a human could handle.

Still, what do I know?

Jim, this is the same documentary that reopened my mind to the possibility of multiple shooters.

- Ian

[jimsmegos]

Jim, this is the same documentary that reopened my mind to the possibility of multiple shooters.

- Ian

Out of all of the theory's out there, this one to me seems to be the most plausible. But how incredible would the affect be on the American psyche if it were proved to be the case? A simple mistake led to the most unthinkable tragedy.

[EmergencyIan]

Out of all of the theory's out there, this one to me seems to be the most plausible. But how incredible would the affect be on the American psyche if it were proved to be the case? A simple mistake led to the most unthinkable tragedy.

It's very interesting, and it is not a new theory. However, it is the first time I can recall hearing it.

- Ian

[jwyblejr]

There is no statute of limitation on murder. Therefore, it seems unlikely that another shooter would come forward to, necessarily, anyone.

-Ian

But how many mobsters have ratted each other out for a buck? Or made a deal with the feds to save their own skin? Greed makes people do dumb things.

[EmergencyIan]

But how many mobsters have ratted each other out for a buck? Or made a deal with the feds to save their own skin? Greed makes people do dumb things.

In this case, they wouldn't come forward in order to make money, because they would most certainly face prosecution. Additionally, in order for the Feds to make a deal with someone, they would have to have a someone to charge with the murder. They don't appear to have anyone in mind, and there most probably won't be anyone coming forward.

The killing of a president is much more significant than probably any mob related crime to which deals have been made with those involved, over the years.

- Ian

[LadyZod]

My husband is a big JFK assassination buff. (how big? He purchased uncounted hours of CBS broadcast footage from a TV station in Texas from that day, and has forced me to watch it with him...)

Beyond the whole who shot Kennedy thing, the thing we always get hung up on is... how is it that it was not a federal crime to assassinate a president at that time?


Murder was considered a capital crime to be tried by the state, but not the federal government.

That's his argument.

I contend that the assassination of a president counts as treason and since treason carries a death sentence on the federal level, that a presidental assassin would just be tried as such and a murder conviction would be unnecessary, since the outcome would be death anyway.

Jim (my husband) argues that it makes no sense after the Lincoln assassination for murder of a head of state to not be a specific crime. And that since that was the case, the US Government committed a crime by removing the body of Kennedy from Texas, since murder was a state crime.

I insist "treason" covers it and that "treason" supersedes "murder."