JFK vs. The Organization

Beyond the majic bullets and all the other distractions you can find your true answer as to what happened in Texas by looking at one man. His name is Jack Ruby. Jack was notorius for killing Lee Harvey in the Dallas Police Department Basement when he was being moved. Now ask yourself why would Jack Ruby a well to do nightclub owner
who had money, women and association with the mob throw away everything he had worked for to kill some guy who was rumored at the time to have killed the president. The answer is quite simple. Ruby became friends with Lee Harvey before the hit occurred. Ruby had lose lips and told Lee Harvey more than he should have heard. Lee more than likely dismissed Ruby as a big talker. But when it happened Lee realized the significance of what had just happened. Imagine your Lee Harvey. You have just been fingered for killing JFK and your plastered all over TV and Police Radio. I dont know about you but if I were him the last thing I would do is hang around Dallas to see the sights if you know what I mean. When Lee Harvey heard of JFK he decided to call police and surrender as a material witness at the theatre. When police picked up Lee Harvey Ruby crapped a brick. Lee harvey knew the who, what, when, where and why of the entire incident. When Ruby told the organization of what he had done they simply told him to kill Lee Harvey ASAP or they would kill him and then kill Lee Harvey. So for Ruby he could get three hots and a cot or die right now! The choice for Ruby was a simple one. When Lee Harvey was in the process of being moved by the Feds it was for protective purposes for his testimony
against all involved. This was Jacks only chance to stop Lee Harvey from providing any further details to the Feds. Once you take this veiw into account you will now know the overall answer to who hit JFK! A helpful hint is it was not Castro!

The conspiracy theories surrounding JFK are so many and so convoluted they make my head ache just trying to read about it!
And i HAVE tried to read several books on the matter...

Ruby's relations were the mob were much more tenuous than you're implying...he wasn't a made man, and he was largely in debt and out of favor with Marcello in New Orleans.



Why would Jack Ruby have anything to do with the virtually anonymous Lee Harvey Oswald? They had no reason to even know each other. Oswald's uncle I believe did have a link to Trafficante, which has led some to think he was recruited and then made into the obvious scapegoat for the crime (regardless of whether he was the lone gunman or not).



Ruby had loose lips? This is a pretty big accusation considering that Ruby was in prison and remained silent from 1964 up until his death in 1967. Jim Garrison couldn't get to him during his investigations, if I'm not mistaken, and this is mentioned in Oliver Stone's JFK.



Oswald was assassinating the President of the United States...I fail to see how he wouldn't have "realized the significance" of what he was doing when he was preparing for it.



Oswald was correct; he was a "patsy" for the larger conspiracy, whomever it involved.



Then why did he kill that Dallas cop? Why was he acting so suspiciously? If he wanted out of Dallas, why did he go to the theatre where he knew he'd be caught?



No he didn't. He knew exactly what his job was - he attended the press conference, made sure that the public knew Oswald was involved in the "Fair Play for Cuba" organization, and then used his ties with the Dallas police department to get into that garage and then kill Oswald, leaving him the only link to the crime, and he (repeatedly) refused to talk, despite your claim that he had "loose lips."



It's true Ruby had an ultimatum, from his higher ups - either be whacked by them, or kill Oswald and remain silent in prison.



Not really. Once you look at your "veiw" [sic] it's full of holes...

• Why would Jack Ruby, a nightclub owner, act on his own and order the death of the President?
• Jack Ruby didn't know Lee Harvey Oswald.
• Oswald was complicit in the assassination to a degree - he knew he was a patsy, and he knew his job was to kill the President...there was no qualms or trepidations.
• Why have you removed Castro from the list of suspects? Your argument does little to supplement any links between Ruby and organize crime but it especially doesn't provide any evidence either way that Castro, Lyndon B. Johnson, the military-industrial complex, the Soviets, the Cuban exiles, etc. weren't involved.

I suggest you read "Deep Politics and the Death of JFK," by Peter Dale Scott, "Live by the Sword" by Gus Russo, "Case Closed" by Gerald Posner, "A Farewell to Justice" by Joan Mellen, "Contract on America" by David Scheim, and "Ultimate Sacrifice" by Hartman and Waldron. Whether or not I agree with any of these texts is irrelevant, but they should give you a decent overview of the prevailing theories on the death of JFK.

Best,
Double-J

Scott McClellan's(former bush press secretary) father was one of LBJ's top attorneys and wrote a book a few yrs ago detailing LBJ's part in the conspiracy. Oswald was there, but there were TWO shooters in the school book dep. I read it but can't remember the author's first name or the name of the book.

Again, its by Scott McClellan's daddy though.

Seems unlikely if we're to take what the witnesses at the grassy knoll say...the whole point was triangulation (if you don't believe in the lone gunman theory). Why would they risk two men in the school book depository, and why hasn't this ever come up in in the testimony of eyewitnesses in or near the depository?

All of these conspiracy theories about JFK end up contradicting one another in the end. Yet another reason I subscribe to the 'chaos/politicians are really aliens theory'. Here is Scott McClellan's dad's book.

Blood, Money, Power
by Barr McClellan(Scott's daddy)

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/mcclellan.htm


It is VERY entertaining at the least.

The JFK "conspiracy" is so plausible however because, unlike other events of this scale, there is quite a bit of evidence to support a variety of outcomes, and so many coincidences that may have either been standard (albeit secret) government protocol or the work of a larger conspiracy.

Not really. Once you look at your "veiw" [sic] it's full of holes...

• Why would Jack Ruby, a nightclub owner, act on his own and order the death of the President?
• Jack Ruby didn't know Lee Harvey Oswald.
• Oswald was complicit in the assassination to a degree - he knew he was a patsy, and he knew his job was to kill the President...there was no qualms or trepidations.
• Why have you removed Castro from the list of suspects? Your argument does little to supplement any links between Ruby and organize crime but it especially doesn't provide any evidence either way that Castro, Lyndon B. Johnson, the military-industrial complex, the Soviets, the Cuban exiles, etc. weren't involved.

George Bluth was a patsy too. I feel bad.

Flyer circulated in Dallas TX on Nov.21,1963




'THE WINK'(Oh so sorry Jackie this is a tough business though )Congressman Albert Thomas winks at a grinning LBJ who stands next to his brightly smiling wife as he is sworn is as President. All of this in the presence of a grieving Jackie Kennedy. I wonder why she claims to have lived the rest of her life in great fear.

hmmmm all this is really interesting but i doubt we'll ever kno what really happened

I'm no expert on any of this, but while searching for info on the East German woman JFK was seeing in 1963, I found this. Lots of info about LBJ, and a great URL name too

http://www.americanmafia.com/Feature_Articles_221.html

Interesting read, thanks for sharing.

Here's my boy Bill Hicks on the assassination.
I hope you ppl join us all someday!


Bill Hicks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQBus_RKZ9E

It's important to keep certain facts staright. To wit:

The "Police Department basement" is actually the old Dallas City Hall basement. I used to work in the old Dallas City Hall and I walked through that basement on more than one occasion

Jack Ruby at one point operated three nightclubs. Only the Carousel did well. He lived in an aaprtment. I would not classify him as a well to do.

As I'ver stated in other posts, my uncle was actually a wiseguy in Cleveland. Does that mean I am associated with the mob? What associates one with the mob?

Lee Harvey Oswald's picture and description were not "plastered" all over the media until after he was arrested for the murder of Dallas police officer Tippet. Prior to that arrest, Dallas police were directed to look for a white male wearing pants and a light colored shirt.

Death by lethal injection did not exist in Texas at the time in question.

The "Feds" did not move Oswald for security reasons. The Feds had no jurisdication. At the time of his move from Dallas City Hall he was only charged with murdering the Officer Tippet and was a suspect in the murder of JFK. The murder of JFK was a violation of Texas statute; there was no similar US statute. He was being moved to the Dallas County Jail as all alledged felons are eventually.

Just got back from Dealey Plaza about an hour ago. Me and a friend argued: there is no way a second gunman could have hoisted a rifle and fired a shot from behind the fence adjacent to the train yard and not have been noticed. No way!

Wink?
Grin?
There's no wink or grin in that photo.
Christ,
LBJ doted on jackie. She had nothing to fear from him.
LBJ retained JFK's cabinet and offered RFK the option of staying on.
Some Coup D'tat.

Ruby was not a gangster and oswald was the typical loser assassin..


I suppose Meyer Lansky is in that photo as well.

HL Hunt was the man behind that Flyer/Newspaper ad.

Ditto.

I think Fredo and Johnny Ola did it.

The JFK assassination is something that's fascinated me for over 20 years, ever since we skimmed through it in history at school. In the scant time we spent on it, I read Anthony Summer's 'The Kennedy Conspiracy' as backup and became engrossed. Since then I've read countless accounts, watched many documentaries and have even read a high portion of the Warren Report at Manchester Central Library.

There is an excellent documentary, made in 1989 and updated in 2003, called The Men Who Killed Kennedy. I believe that the History Channel broadcast three episodes in 2003 and were forced to take it off their repeat schedules and screen rebuttal shows. While that doesn't surprise me at all, I do think that everone should be given the opportunity of seeing these episodes. The original 1989 episodes can be purchased at Amazon.co.uk, but the 2003 updates can be found here.

Witnesses such as Beverly Oliver have come forward to state that yes, Ruby knew Oswald prior to the assassination. The second episode of the 2003 updates will also give you the story of a lady that, although fantastic and sometimes very hard to stomach, also fills a few gaps regarding Oswald's trip to Mexico City and his frantic attempts to get into Cuba.

What do I think? The Mob were involved, and Ruby was the go-between. I also believe he was given the 'kill or be killed' order, but both scenarios eventually prevailed. LBJ's involvement? Not really convinced I'm afraid.

However, the key to this is an open mind and I always keep one.

It's actually available on DVD as a two-disc set...I know, because I own it. It's through A&E and the History Channel, I believe.



I too think that the mob was involved in some way, certainly because of the politics involved in the failed Cuban invasion and the problems with Castro. Given that JFK "agreed" to not invade after the Missile Crisis, it may have signaled to guys like Trafficante, Marcello, and Giancana that their interests in Havana were gone for good.

David Scheim has an excellent book called Contract on America, which details the mob's role in the JFK, RFK, and MLK assassinations (yes, that's quite a few "k's"). Also, for the Cuban connections, I "recommend" (its a fascinating read, but I don't know how much I really believe it) Gus Russo's Live By The Sword. I still have so much work to do on my senior thesis that I haven't finished it (I received it for Christmas a couple of years ago), but the Lamar Waldrom/Thom Hartman Ultimate Sacrifice does a nice job of tying the mob/cuban connections together, plus it has some good stuff from Harry Ruiz Williams.

My problem, outside of the general conspiracy, is still the day of the assassination. Gerald Posner's Case Closed really is troublesome for me, because I've always been fascinated with the grassy knoll and the umbrella man, but he does a pretty convincing job in proving the lone-gunman theory (particularly that the magic bullet really wasn't "magic"). I don't know. I'm one of those who are desperately waiting for more evidence to be released, but even though I'm in my early 20's, it still may be ages before we get anything really meaningful to go on.

The works cited about organizeed crime's alledged involvement simply focus on its members' possible motivations. They provide no evidence, just anecdotal information. The book Case Closed by Gerald Posner demolishes such information.

True, but most of the conspiratorial topics don't ever discuss evidence, but merely assert or assume motives, which is probably more important (and ultimately, more difficult to determine) who wanted JFK dead, rather than how it happened.

Well, the problem with that is that there are always a considerable number of people who have grievances against a President. Speculating on who would have sufficient grievances is a mind game, but that's all. It might be fun for some, but alot of conspiracy buffs are really serious and think they know.

Pirates: 3-0

True, but it is really the only meaningful research, given that the assassination itself (i.e. the physical murder of the president) still continues to boggle the mind, and probably will never be truly revealed, whether or not one believes or disbelieves in the grassy knoll, the umbrella man, etc., unless some new, mysterious, impromptu evidence surfaces...

I've wondered if technology may some day make it possible for us to see the bullets on the Zapruder film.

The technology probably exists. Who knows? They're probably working on it now.

Double J, I'm interested in your opinion of Juditn Vary Baker's story. Do you give it any credence? As I said before, it ties a whole lot of loose ends right up.

Is she the one who claims to have seen the gunman on the grassy knoll? I can't remember. There was a book (if its her) where she described her story to a ghostwriter, called "The Last Witness" or something like that.

I'll have to watch the DVD again, I haven't seen it in years. Let me get back to you on that.

Judith Vary Baker was the lady who claimed to have had an intimate affair with Oswald. She was a cancer scientist, employed by the CIA to create a virus essentially to give to Castro through a CIA plant in his medical staff.

She gave an account of the work she did, Oswald's (and Ruby's) involvement in the project and also those that touched the Garrison investigation including Clay Shaw and David Ferrie.

If she is lying, it's the most compelling and fantastic lie I've ever heard.

You're kidding! I've never heard of her or the tale she spins. Almost every minute of Oswald's life from the Marines on is accounted for. Where does she fit in with her affair?

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=TMWKK

You're looking for the 2nd episode, The Love Affair. It sucks that it's chopped up into nine-minute chunks but you'll get the idea. Have a watch of it and let me know your thoughts.

I think Oswald pulled the trigger and blew off Kennedy's skull.

But was he involved with a conspiracy involving mobsters and rogue CIA operatives? Maybe.

Maybe I was also. There's no evidence to support his association withe any conspiracy group.

Olivant, a good conspiracy is one that you can't prove.

So what's the point of discussing it then?

Whats the point?

We gotta talk about something besides Yankees, movies, wrestling, and fantasy sports...right?

Anyway, "Who shot JFK?" is always a good fun debate among people.

Again, I wish to think that Oswald shot JFK, but possibly was part of a bigger cabal, but who knows.

All I know is, put the rifle on display. That would be cool.

Can anyone tell me what happened to jack ruby after he shot lee harvey oswald? all replys welcome

Wikipedia's entry on Jack Ruby

To briefly summarise, he was arrested immediately after he killed Oswald and convicted of murder on March 14th 1964, when he received the death sentence. Whilst in jail, he begged Chief Justice Earl Warren to take him to Washington DC so he could testify as to his involvement in the assassination, and also because he feared for his life. Warren denied his request and Ruby, in spite of being granted a new trial a few years later, died before it could take place of a pulmonary embolism on January 3rd 1967

Originally Ruby was convicted and sentenced to death. But after winning an appeal he was granted a new trial by an appellate court.

While awaiting his new trial, Ruby came down with pneumonia and about a month later died from what was said to be a pulminary embolism.

Wow, I never knew that Ruby was originally sentenced to death - interesting. Was the death penalty enforced in Texas at that time? I know there was a time in the 60s or maybe even through the 70s that the death penalty was outlawed. I may be thinking of a federal law though.

The death penalty was declared unconstitutional in the early 70s by the U.S. Supreme Court. I forget the year, but it coincided with the Manson trial/conviction although it was not related to it. I may be off by a year or two.

It was declared Constitutional a few years later, and the first person executed was Gary Gilmore in Utah around 1977-8.

Klyd. Wasn't it declared unconstitutional AFTER Manson and company were already on death row? And because of this delcaration weren't their death sentences overturned and changed to life in prison sentences instead?

DC - I read Helter Skelter recently (damn good read by the way) and can confirm you're correct on this. Their death sentences were commuted to life imprisonment.

But I personally don't believe Ruby, if he'd not died earlier, would have been alive to see the law changed.

DC, you sound skeptical about the way Ruby died. I also have my doubts that an embolism caused his death. I've heard and read stories of visits by mystery doctors to Ruby's cell when he was in perfect health and his sudden deteriation afterwards. Am I sounding like a complete conspiracy geek here?

Helter Skelter is a fantastic read. How brilliant was Bugliosi in building this case against Manson, who never ever entered those home to commit those murders? In truth, when he first started investigating the case, all he really had was circumstantial evidence. Bugliosi did some job in collecting evidence and getting witnesses to testify against Manson. Simply brilliant.

As for Ruby, no, you don't sound like a conspiracy geek. I've always suspected that something intentional was done to deteriorate his health. There is no question in my mind that the whole John F. Kennedy assassination was a conspiracy of some sort.

I can't really remember where I read this - could be Jim Marrs's Crossfire or Mark Lane's Plausible Denial, but I do seem to remember speculation that the hospital staff administered injections to Ruby containing cancerous chemicals. This ties in somewhat with Judith Vary Baker's story of a CIA-sponsored programme to develop a cancer virus to be injected into Castro, a project Oswald allegedly assisted in New Orleans in the summer of 1963.

I'm in agreement, DC. The Warren Commission's version of events vs the eyewitness accounts, medical and forensic expertise, physical evidence and, of course, the Zapruder film... there's no contest which is more plausible.

Poleese! Do you include aliens from another planet in your eyewitness accounts? Why not? They too are unsupported by any evidence, so they qualify, right? Ruby received injections? No, your wrong. Actually, nano-robots developed through the technology that was discovered at Roswell were inserted into his body and told to disassemble his internal organs killed him. I have no evidence, let alone proof. But, it is plausible, huh!

Woah... olivant, chill out.

You must have misunderstood. I used the word speculation because that's exactly what it is. I didn't say I subscribed to it, I was simply discussing a theory I read once. That's all.

Do I really believe that Ruby was injected with a cancerous agent? Well, considering how many eyewitnesses and vital witnesses died after the assassination, I would conclude that it's indeed a possibility. Add to that the fact that, as previously discussed, Ruby knew more than he could tell in Dallas, and was denied the opportunity to give his account in a safer environment.

Regarding the eyewitness accounts etc, I was referring to the assassination as a whole. It was an arse-about-face way of agreeing with DC that, IMHO, it was a conspiracy.

Geez Olivant, there is no need for such hostilities. We're just having a discussion on the subject, that's all. No one is saying that what they believe in is fact. It's purely speculation on our part, that's all. Conversation. If you do not agree with the conspiracy theories or the speculation surrounding the Kennedy assassination and Jack Ruby, all you had to do was say so.

Thaks for the replys guys.i recently read double cross by chuck giancana and according to the book mooney was personally resposible for jfk's death i honestly dont know what to belive.

Chuck Giancana, much like the testimony/evidence from mob lawyer Frank Ragano, is nearly impossible to substantiate, which makes it difficult from an academic standpoint to validate these sources. Obviously, you have to take them at face value, or discard them entirely. I do however think that there is some truth to what they say - mostly because after some time and research I still think the mob had some part in the assassination - but that you have to remember where the stuff is coming from, and put it into perspective.

Yes i know what your saying in chuck giancanas book some things just dont ring true with me, although still a very interesting book as it shows just how heartless mooney really was.

Not read Chuck Giancana's book, Chopper. Not sure what you're talking about. Does it give an account of the events from Momo's point of view?

The book is wrote by mooney's brother chuck and his godson and namesake sam giancana the book is called double cross and in the book chuck tells the story of mooneys early child hood and his rise to power it also tells you alot about mooneys personality how angry he could be one minute and the next bearing gifts.Obviously it goes into the kennedys,marylin monroe etc it really is worth reading i got my copy off amazon hope that helps you out.
Regards Chopper

Really enjoying the new tome by Bugliosi, Reclaiming History. It's better than Posner, and its huge (1500 pages, plus endnotes, plus a CD of source material).

Highly recommend it.

The Supreme Court, in its 1972 ruling, did not say the death penalty itself was unconstitutional. They ruled that the penalty, as administered under state laws, was "arbitrary and capricious," agreeing with a NAACP contention that blacks were sentenced to death far more often than whites. The Court was careful to say that the states could revise or correct their death penalty statutes and resume executions, which is what happened starting in '78. Fuller details here:

http://justice.uaa.alaska.edu/death/history.html

I have never been convinced that Sam Giancana swung Illinois votes for Kennedy in 1960. He hated both Kennedys. JFK was a member of the McClellan Rackets Committee, which heard evidence of rackets and labor crimes in 1957-59. Bobby Kennedy was its chief counsel. While interrogating Giancana, Bobby pointedly chided him for giggling and said, "I thought only little girls giggled." Seem like the kind of remark that would induce Momo to put money and votes behind JFK in '60? Bobby also went after Jimmy Hoffa, Momo's big ally; the Teamsters supported Nixon in '60. And in any event, JFK had Mayor Daly--the state's most powerful Democrat--behind him. Daly delivered Illinois through the time-tested technique of having voters vote early and often.

I agree with you Turnbull on both accounts especially regarding the Supreme Court. That's the trouble with media reporting of SC decisions. It takes a 50, 100, or 150 page opinion and condenses it down to a few paragraphs. No wonder there is so much misinformation out there.

So,turnbull whats your opinion of chuck giancanas book Double cross?

I haven't read this book.
I agree completely with what Double J said about the unreliability of most Mob books. Gangsters weren't the types of people to leave their collected papers to universities for people like us to peruse. Most Mob autobiographies and bios by relatives or friends are even more self-serving than the usual run. But I read 'em anyway .

Just as another nod, the further I get into the Bugliosi book, the more I love it. Sure, it kills my arms after a couple of hours (it weighs at least 10 pounds :p) but it is extremely thorough and loaded with evidence.

Yeah sure i understand what you are saying.some do seem more reliable than others though which goes without saying i suppose.

On his show Hardball, Chris Matthews really bored into one JFK assassination proponent (whose name I can't recall) about Oswald's job at the School Book Depository. The guy couldn't answer the question.

One thing Bugliosi does well is showing how many assassination theories actually cite evidence from the Warren Report, but merely exempt or call into question (or just plain ignore) anything that contradicts that.

A big example, he notes, is when conspiracy theorist will bash the FBI evidence in one sentence, and then cite and FBI report related to the assassination as reliable evidence for something...

I have noted that. I look upon the assassination critics the same way I look upon the evolution critics. Evolution critics do not provide any support for their theories; they simply criticize evolution. The JFK critics don't support their explanations with evidence; they simply criticize the Warren Report and and have created these elaborate "what if" scenarios.

If everyone loved Helter Skelter and respected Bugliosi for his research and work in convicting Charles Manson, then I suppose his new book Reclaiming History closes the door on "conspiracy theories" once and for all?

First time the Zapruder film was shown to the public.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DwKK4rkeEM&NR=1

Robert Groden appeared on "Good Night America" hosted by Geraldo Rivera in 1975. This was the very first time the film that contained the murder of President Kennedy, was shown to the public.

While watching, Geraldo and company commented SEVERAL times that the fatal head shot - as well as the throat shot - OBVIOUSLY came from the front! (Of course, they were wrong. Right? )

BTW-In addition to the Zapruder film, we also see footage that was filmed across the street, i.e to Kennedy's left! I had no idea such a tape existed. After seeing this angle I'm completely convinced that the fatal head shot came from the front. With this angle we truly get to see Kennedy's head move "back and to the left."
Can anyone tell me why we've been watching the "Zapruder film" all these years and not the "guy on the other side of the street film?"

Springbok captain, John Smit, has spent the last 24 hours being interrogated by the French Secret Service about his involvement in the 1963 shooting of former US President, John F. Kennedy. Mr Smit is believed to have been an ex-KGB assassin-for-hire at the time, and was commissioned by the then head of the Mafia, Jake White, to “take that dirty dog out”.

The reason for the killing, as stated by a source close to Mr White, was because President Kennedy allegedly cited one of Mr White’s thugs for “being a naughty little boy”, and sentenced him to sit in the corner for a while. This citation proved deadly for the well-loved President, as was witnessed by thousands of stunned Americans on that fateful day in November ‘63.

It is believed that John Smit hung up his rifle in 1968 after he allegedly assassinated Robert F. Kennedy, because he was JFK’s “China” (Mr Smit is openly and fiercely anti-Communist). There is very little known of Smit’s whereabouts from ‘68-’99, except for an eye-witness’s account stating that she saw someone fitting Mr Smit’s description standing in a “scrum stance” in a tunnel in Paris in 1997. John Smit reappeared in 2000 as a member of the alleged terrorist group “The Springboks” and has enjoyed a successful campaign with them as their leader since 2004

Interesting, but I doubt that the mafia would go outside to pull of such a job...could just be this guy trying to make a "name" for his "organization."

It really is a fabulous, thorough book. I wish I had more time to read it.

You're talking about the Nix film. Look, I've seen umpteen people shot and they fall in all kinds of directions. However, I've never seen an entrance wound that results in an explosion of a a person's flesh unless it's the result of a shotgun blast and from up close. It is rather amatuerish to describe the effect (back and to the left) as the result of the cause (shot from the front). There are any number of physiological reactions to bullet inuries. It would be advisable for those who persist with this cause and effect relationship tale to read a book on human physiology.

Fair enough. But 97 out of 100 ppl who are shot in the BACK of the head, will fall FORWARD.



Chalk it up to my ignorance - but I think it's a matter of simple--and I do mean SIMPLE ;)--physics.



That's true. But again, Mr. Newton pays us a visit. Kennedy is shot in the BACK of the head, thus, he should fall FORWARD.



In all seriousness...I think I will. But it's not going to change my mind about the Kennedy assassination - seeing is believing.

Kennedy might have been making a DISASTROUS mistake by pulling out of Vietnam. Thus, the "powers-to-be" eliminated him. Either way, I've come to the conclusion that Kennedy had become a serious threat to national security due to all of his shenanigans - and THAT is why the government took him out.

Kennedy knew the stakes of being a politician, I don't feel bad for him - the man has been immortalized. I'm sure he wouldn't mind being remembered as a Caesar - hell, he's WAY bigger than Caesar.

Decades-old documents purportedly linked to the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy, among which a transcript of a conversation between Lee Harvey Oswald and his own killer, have been brought to light from an old safe at the Dallas County district attorney’s office.

The news was first brought by the Dallas Morning News on Sunday. The documents had been sitting in the antiquated safe on the 10th floor of the county courthouse for a long time.

Found among the papers was a transcript of an alleged conversation between Lee Harvey Oswald, the president’s assassin, and Jack Ruby, as they plotted the Nov. 22 shooting. According to the Associated Press, the two talked of killing Kennedy because the Mafia wanted to “get rid of” his brother, Attorney General Robert Kennedy.

Oswald reportedly says in the script: “I can still do it, all I need is my rifle and a tall building; but it will take time, maybe six months to find the right place; but I'll have to have some money to live on while I do the planning.”

Oswald himself was shot two days after Kennedy’s death, by Jack Ruby.

One theory concerning the implausible transcript is that the paper is not authentic and more probably part of a movie that former District Attorney Henry Wade, the now-dead prosecutor in the Ruby trial, was working on. The film was never made.

Also in the safe were letters to and from Wade, letters to Ruby, official records from his trial, a gun holster and clothing that probably belonged to Ruby and Oswald, Dallas District Attorney Craig Watkins said.

The AP adds that the disputed paper resembles one published by the Warren Commission, which investigated Kennedy's assassination and concluded Oswald acted alone.

In that other transcript, Oswald and Ruby allegedly talked about killing Texas Gov. John Connally, who was riding in the car with Kennedy and was wounded in the attack. The FBI determined at the time that the conversation was bogus.

Oswald was shot dead by Ruby on Nov. 24 as he was being transferred by police officers to a county jail. Ruby was arrested immediately after the shooting and died from cancer while awaiting a new trial date in 1967.

http://www.efluxmedia.com/news_JFK_Documents_Unearthed_Decades_After_Assassination_14152.html

BUMP BUMP:

Bill Hicks - JFK
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11Fl9ZVJ7B8&feature=related

Comedian Bill Hicks talking about JFK from 'Revelations.'

figure on bringing this up again.

a couple months ago i watched a thing on the conspiracy of kennedy, and it brought up good snip-its like for the invasion of cuba they were going to use the mafia to take castro out (the don in chicago was part of this, but the plan was pulled back.). another thing came up that edgar hoover knew that john was messing around with a mafia don's girlfriend (the same one in chicago). am i saying the mafia had something to do with it well no, but its hard not to though.

along with those facts while kennedy was running for president his father joe kennedy sr. paid the mafia off to help him win in certain states (i.e chicago). john and his brother before that as well as during that time fought against hoffa and the mafia. now the question is would the mafia take out the president of the united states or would they just take it?

The question will forever be debated; "Did the American Cosa Nostra kill JFK?' There are certainly valid arguments for and against this claim. Will we ever know the truth? That's another good question. Will the US Government ever officially confirm a "conspiracy"?..perhaps. But one thing, IMO, will NEVER be CONFIRMED by any person or branch of The US Government - that the Mafia killed JFK. That would establish that at one time in US history, the American Mafia was indeed more powerful than The US Government.

all i know is that alot of people connected to this case has died well suddenly...i would put the government on the trigger side, and the mafia at the side looking the scene.

also too is anybody interested in the RFK conspiracy?

People who don't think the JFK murder was a huge conspiracy don't know what's up. They don't even know about the grassy knoll. What about all those people who later mysteriously died who knew something about the murder. There were four LCN families involved and they were the Trafficante family, New Orleans family, Chicago Outfit and the Dallas family. The Eastern families had nothing to do with it. These mob groups were mad at him because John and his brother Robert were going after the mob. That was after the mob helped get him elected. But it wasn't just the mob either. The CIA and Anti Castro Cubans were mixed involved in the assasination. The CIA and Cubans were mad at him for pulling out of the Bay of Pigs. Even VP Johnson was pissed at him for not wanting to start the war in Vietnam. I think guys like Robert Groden are saints. His films are the best proof of the conspiracy to kill the President. Oswald was just a damn patsy like he said. They used the man. I'm not saying he was not involved but not at a high level. If you see the actual film you will notice folks running up the grassy knoll to where they heard shots fired. There were three locations where shots were fired, one was the grassy knoll and the other was the school book depository. The third shot came from a storm drain. They say Chicago mobster Johnny Roselli shot Kennedy from inside a storm drain. The reasons why they don't want to open the files on the killing is because there's still some guys within our government who were involved in it.

There were fewer than 400 American soldiers in Vietnam on the day Kennedy took office, more than 16,000 on the day he died.

Ya but Johnson and Kennedy sure had different views about going to vietnam. I stand corrected about troops in nam, though. you da man Turnball.

They had different views about the role of American troops. At the time of his death, Kennedy wanted our troops in support and training roles, not direct combat. Johnson started out the same way, building up American troops in support roles. But, the more American troops in Vietnam, the greater the target and provocation they were for the Commies. By 1965, Johnson had to committed them to active combat in order to protect themselves, because the South Vietnamese Army wasn't up to the job.

While that was the difference between Kennedy and Johnson, they had one thing in common: both thought Vietnam was worth a major commitment of American power. Had Kennedy lived, and had he built up American troops in the same numbers as Johnson, he would have faced the same dilemma of his own making.

I here you but me and many other fellow Amercani think Johnson played a big role in the killing of JFK.