Moi!....SSHhhhhhh...don't tell anyone.....tee hee! :-)
2006-10-27 04:05:25
·
answer #1
·
answered by Coyote 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The film JFK raised a question "Who benefitted?" With that question, the answer is supposedly easy. However, murder on such a scale is so dangerous that another question needs to be asked: "Who had nothing to lose?" The assassin(s) must ask: "If I / we get caught or killed, what then?" They must not care about the consequences, THEY MUST BE IN A POSITION WHERE THEY HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE. I believe that point may be very important.
The only ones in that exact position were the anti Castro Cubans, who had lost their country and had desparately tried but failed to get it back. They may well have blamed Kennedy directly. They had access to weaponry. Some of them no doubt trained to assassinate Castro more or less in the way Kennedy was shot. They were based in the southern states.
It seems to all fit - MO, opprtunity, motive, no alibi.
The only problem with the Anti Castro Cubans as prime suspects is the command structure, or who gave the order? To some extent, that is a spurious question. The question should be: "Who first thought of the basic plan?" That could still lay the blame squarely with the A.C. Cubans. They suggest it, even outlining a plan that seems secure, the government, etc, give the ok because they stand to benefit substially, but cover it up knowing that any leak could lead to emmbarrassment for the government which had promised not to attack Cuba in any way after the missile crisis.
Im sorry if it sounds like a garble argument, but I think that any lone asassin theory doesn't wash, as there are too many things that go against it. Also, extreme conspiracy theories that point the finger anyone and everyone are just paranoid. But I suppose paranoia is one of the dominant qualities of our time.
2006-10-29 16:32:56
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Who assssinated J.F.Kennedy. Was it Oswald or anyone else. It was debated at length, but on record it is Oswald. Read excerpts from Wikipedia-
President Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, Texas, at 12:30 p.m. CST on Friday, November 22, 1963, while on a political trip through Texas. He was struck by at least two bullets. Texas Governor John Connally, seated ahead of Kennedy, was also struck by a bullet, but survived.
Lee Harvey Oswald was arrested in a theatre about 80 minutes after the assassination and charged at 7:00 p.m. for killing a Dallas policeman by "murder with malice", and also charged at 11:30 p.m. for the murder of Kennedy (there being no charge for "assassination" of a president at that time). Oswald denied shooting anyone; he claimed that he was being set up as a "patsy", and that photographs of him holding the alleged murder weapon were fabrications. Oswald was fatally shot less than two days later in a Dallas police station by Jack Ruby, in front of live TV cameras. Consequently, Oswald's guilt or innocence was never determined in a court of law, and some critics (such as New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison, and conspiracy researchers Mark Lane and David Lifton) contend that Oswald was not involved at all and that he was framed.
Five days after Oswald was killed, President Lyndon B. Johnson created the Warren Commission—chaired by Chief Justice Earl Warren—to investigate the assassination. It concluded that Oswald was the lone assassin. A later investigation in the 1970s by the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) also concluded that Oswald was the assassin. The assassination was captured on Super 8 mm film by Dallas dress manufacturer Abraham Zapruder. The film shows President Kennedy clutching his throat after the first bullet struck. Later, his head recoils backwards from the force of another bullet which fatally struck his upper right skull. There is visible blood spatter, and then the president slumps to his left onto the seat.
2006-10-27 13:10:06
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It *was* LHO. I believe this for two main reasons (and a host of little ones):
1. Most of the "evidence" of the so-called conspiracy is in fact coincidence. One example: conspiracy theorists claim that "someone" (ie: the CIA / KGB / Cubans / Mafia) arranged for LHO to get a job at the TSBD so he would have a clean shot of the motorcade route. This "evidence" ignores the fact that LHO had his job at the TSBD before Kennedy's Texas trip was arranged. That's a pretty good trick - planting an assassin along the parade route before anyone (including Kennedy himself) knows there's going to be a parade!
2. A conspiracy this large would be impossible to maintain for 43 years - someone would've talked by now. During 1995-97, President Clinton had a series of affairs with a young intern. There were no witnesses besides themselves, and yet they couldn't keep it secret for even two years. Any alleged conspiracy in the JFK assassination necessarily requires hundreds of conspirators at all levels (ie: the shooting, the autopsy, the "hit" on LHO, the cover-ups), and yet not one of these alleged conspirators has ever said a word.
The prinicple of Occam's Razor stipulates that, when multiple explanations are available to explain an event, the correct one is usually the simplest, not the most complicated one.
2006-10-27 13:00:41
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
This case has been investigated for years. the one missing peace is the film taken by KTBC in Austin of the parade. I watched this live filming and i know what happened. Lindon Banes Johnson owed KTBC TV in Austin. The film was never turned up as evidence in any investigation yet. So were is the film? I believe it is locked away in the Presidential archives, were no one can get to it, until the time statue runs out. I also know a lady that was in Dallas on the very spot were Kennedy was shot taking pictures. She was held for 14 hours by Dallas police and CIA agents. They destroyed her pictures and told her she didn't see a thing and if she ever said anything she would be gone missing, a dead woman. We will never know the answer in our life time seeing that the answer is locked away for 99 years.
2006-10-28 22:58:25
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It was probably Lee Harvey. But perhaps a better question is who was behind Oswald, pulling his strings?
2006-10-27 11:20:09
·
answer #6
·
answered by Dark Prince of Pomp 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Protestants afraid of a catholic president
Look at the smile on Johnsons face as he was sworn in
while Jackie cried.
Bobby Kennedy killed two weeks after he goes to senate with
his findings on mercury poisoning in vaccinations
then bamo, aids breaks out due to poisonous vaccinations in Africa.
Who knows, I'm just guessing.
then did John jr. a journalist with law school ed. did too far and find the same? Dead.
Ted Kennedy sold his soul?
Fast forward, then another John F, runs for president, A catholic, and the election is shaky?
Just depends, do you beleive in coincidence?
2006-10-28 11:14:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by eg_ansel 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
You are awfully clever to know what no one else knows. Lee Harvey Oswald did the deed
2006-10-27 11:21:14
·
answer #8
·
answered by devora k 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Sorry, Edward, much as I'd like to believe otherwise, it was indeed Lee Harvey Oswald, on his own.
2006-10-27 11:10:05
·
answer #9
·
answered by Hello Dave 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
There was a BBC documentary, about 5 years ago which reconstructed the shooting. They showed that the original measurements were off and that using the correct measurements it was almost certain that the shots were fired by LHO from the book depositary.
No cover-up, no conspiracy.
Kind of dull though!
Read American Tabloid by James Ellroy, I chose to believe that he has told the true story, despite it being complete fiction!
2006-10-27 11:06:49
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I feel that the Mob was behind the assassination. Joseph Kennedy made his millions during prohibition by helping the mob boot-leg booze into the country. When John ran for president, it was mob influence that helped him carry Northern states. Once in office, he made his brother Bobby Attorney General and then began an open war on organized crime. Its not nice to fool Mother Nature, and its really not nice to double cross Vito.
2006-10-28 21:41:27
·
answer #11
·
answered by Benjamin H 1
·
0⤊
0⤋