Friday, June 26, 2009

 

JFK: Courage Under Fire?

This just occurred to me: I think the most plausible explanation for JFK's demise is that people who controlled the government took him out. In other words, I think it is crazy to assume that (a) the mob or the Cubans could sneak past the Secret Service and (b) that these same mobsters or Cubans *could then convince the rest of the government to cover up their crime*. Maybe (a) is possible, but no way is (b) possible.

OK, so that means JFK was, in a sense, a prisoner of the presidency. In fact, he had the most bugged and monitored work place of any American. These people watched his every move; they had their guys--who were trained to kill--literally following him around 24-7. Kennedy knows he's crossed these people and they are waiting for the right time.

Then on November 22, Kennedy realizes the motorcade is taking a decidedly unsafe route. Had he been alone, he would have seriously considered making a break for it, or blurting out the names of the key people.

But no, he just smiled and waved, because they had put his wife in the car with him.



Comments:
If only it wasn't a perfect conspiracy, right?
 
Or it really was just some crazy commie. Garfield & McKinley didn't require any massive conspiracy. John Hinckley didn't need inside connections to shoot Reagan (unless it was all just a secret plan to make Reagan more popular and pass legislation he supported!).
 
Where's the ":)"? Are you serious?
 
Sometimes individuals kill leaders. There were about 15 or so assassanition attempts on Adolf Hitler - he avoided each by sheer luck. Only ONE of those was a genuine conspiracy (and it, too, failed), the rest were individuals.

If you want to kill a high-ranking figure, and you have control of the security apparatus, you don't do it in such a risky way as the JFK assassaniation. You would do it John Paul I style (regardless of what really happened).

Heartattacks, car accidents, plane crashes, and if you need a lone gun-man, you make sure it's somebody withit point-blank distance.

But - shooting him from long-range with a rifle? You have to be mad to even think of it.
 
Hang on a second. Do you folks believe the Warren Report? You think it was a single shooter?
 
I think the most plausible explanation for JFK's demise is that... Lee Harvey Oswald shot him?
 
Of course it was, Bob.
 
It was Roger McDowell, behind the bush on the gravelly road.
 
I think it was Sam McDowell.
 
JFK attempted to undermine the Federal Reserve by issuing U.S. Notes. You don't cross the international bankers by trying to introduce competing currency.
 
Actually, yes. I think the single shooter idea is the most plausible to me. And so, yes, I think it was Lee Harvey Oswald. Maybe some people knew about his plans and decided to let him go aheade. Who knows. But, yes, my money is on LHO.

Oh, and the silly idea about interventionist mafia scion JFK wanting to undermine the Fed - and getting shot for that - is just plain silly. If only because I find it laughable that somebody like JFK would suddenly find the straight and narrow on monetary matters.
 
Put a fork in it Bob.

The only conspiracy was the conspiracy of stupidity spearheaded by Arlen Specter ...
 
I agree it was Oswald acting alone. See Jean Davison's Oswald's Game. It convinced me.
 
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]





<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]