Film to shed new light on plot to assassinate JFK

David Mamet to Direct 2 Days/1963, a New Film About the Kennedy Assassination

https://deadline.com/2022/06/david-...phew-nicholas-celozzi-script-1235050605/

Oh great, now Mamet is going to say Giancana killed Kennedy.

Giancana was deeply involved with the CIA but Marcello and Johnny Rosselli also.

Great. Another "definitive" story about the Mob's involvement in the JFK hit.
At least this time we have amazingly credible sources who can shed a new light on this mystery.

First. we have Momo's grandnephew who as we know was a dominant force in Chicago Organized crime. I mean ,My God,his uncle Pepe told him that Sam was involved. I can only assume that these conversations took place at the kind of high level Mob conclaves that only the elite were privy to.

Second is the other unimpeachable source:Momo's daughter.who makes Victoria Gotti look like a piker when it comes to living off dead Mob daddies.
I think the case has finally been solved,and hopefully the input of these 2 geniuses will satisfy our quest for the truth.

As far as Mamet is concerned,I think he should sell every mirror in his house,so that he can be spared from ever having to look at himself after this piece of celluloid larceny hits the market.

From the start it was a blame it on the mob story or Oswald was acting alone lol.

Oswald was acting alone.

((sigh) Here we go again:
Majority of Americans question if Oswald acted alone. So, Giancana and other Mob bosses step in: "We killed JFK. And if we can kill a President, we can kill you!" Relatives cash in with "inside" stories, big-name director spreads the wealth.

Kuklinski was the trigger man with Frank Sheeran as his spotter.

There were others blamed from the start. The Military Industrial Complex was a big theory, along with Communists groups within the U.S. and Russia being blamed.

And rogue political elements of the U.S. Government as well (who are the exact culprits IMO).

I didn't include them because there are so many conspiracy theories on them they may not fir on a page here. As long as bookst and videos about the JFK assassination keep coming out the list will grow.

There have always been so many wild stories about the JFK assassination. As implausible as some of the theories are it still holds by interest

I was just on facebook looking to see if any conspiracy theories were coming up on the death of Trump's ex-wife. There they were, saying she was beaten, pushed, or it is a coverup to stop her from testifying. People are crazy and obsessed. It's sad to see.

There are so many nut jobs out there it's not even funny. Pushed? Beaten? Coverup so the kids can delay testifying? WTF is wrong with people?

. Certain people are sick. The ones that hate Trump that much also hate anyone associated with him which is Disgusting. It would be so easy to say “Hey I don’t like Trump but my prayers goes out to him and his family for their loss”. This is another reason I hate social media. It’s 95% negativity

JC, NYMafia, or anyone else, on Facebook type in Ivana Trump, go to posts, and look at the comments. As JC said, they are sick with hatred. There are not just few posts, it is in the high thousands at least. I looked at a few of the people posting this stuff and they are all Trump haters, or anti-gun or pro transgender studies for children types.

If they can come up with these theories so fast on Ivana, it's no wonder the JFK conspiracy theories live on.

You're 1000% correct of course. It's called decency. Regardless of which side you cast your vote for, show some brains (and some fucking class) and a bit of humility also. What does one thing have to do with another?

But many people don't have a single brain cell in their heads (and thats not an exaggeration either). Democrat. Republican. Who gives a good fuck! But show some class.

. Exactly! I don’t give a damn what you believe in AS LONG as you show some human decency and class. Thad’s why I don’t mind the JFK theories as long as those people arent attacking others may not share the same view

Oswald was NOT acting alone, it's very obvious it was an inside job. I can't believe you brainwashed nut cases are still falling for the same old tricks like with 9/11 and the coronahoax. What's next, a staged alien invasion? You'd fall for that too.

Howard Donahue (1922-1999) was a noted gunsmith, weapons examiner, gunshop owner, marksman, and an expert in the science of forensic ballistics. His expertise was mainly as one of the people who invented the science, although later in life he studied for but did not complete a Masters degree in Forensics. And he was very good at it, being regularly accepted by the courts as an expert witness, including before, during and after these formal studies.
Donahue's theory, in a nutshell:
Lee Harvey Oswald fired only two shots at President Kennedy. The first missed, but a ricochet fragment hit Kennedy, inflicting a relatively trivial but painful scalp wound. The second hit and wounded both Kennedy (probably mortally) and Governor Connally.
The third shot, the bullet that then struck Kennedy in the head, was fired by George Hickey, a Secret Service agent riding in the follow-up car immediately behind Kennedy, and presumably fired by accident.
The bullet that struck Kennedy in the head didn't behave like the other rounds Oswald fired, or like the ammunition he was using would be expected to behave. It behaved exactly like a round from an AR-15 would behave.
The entry wound for the head shot is incompatible with the calibre of Oswald's rifle, but perfectly compatible with the calibre of the AR-15.
Hickey was carrying an AR-15 at the time, and one of the agents with him thought at first that he had fired, but later decided they were mistaken.
The fragments in Kennedy's skull were incompatible with the rounds Oswald used, but perfectly compatible with AR-15 ammunition.
The trajectory of the head shot is incompatible with one fired by Oswald, but perfectly compatible with one fired by Hickey.
http://alderspace.pbworks.com/w/pag...0theory%20on%20the%20JFK%20assassination

Please cite the evidence that you are using to conclude that the JFK killing was an inside job. Not speculation,2nd or 3rd party hearsay,or schoolyard insults,but evidence.
You have a chance to perform a valuable service by providing any evidence that you are in possession of to prove your point ,since by doing so,all of us "brainwashed nut cases" could then review your compelling arguments,and as a result,be able to intelligently discuss the merits of your position with the objective,intellectual analysis that you so graciously have put forth.

How about you prove that the versions put forth by our history books and controlled mainstream media are true, brainwashed piece of shit.

How about you stop flaming other posters here and try to be civil? No more of this shit!

If it's very obvious, it should be a simple matter of pointing out the facts that make it very obvious and thereby shuttering all debate.

There's no need for name-calling, particularly when you haven't yet laid out your case.

You still haven't laid out your case explaining how the "official" versions are true, such as proof of how Oswald acted alone.

Is there anyone here that's awake who doesn't believe the official stories of major, world-changing events, or does everyone simply believe everything their mainstream presstitutes tell them on their TV programming? Just curious.

Speaking only for myself, I haven't laid out a case because I haven't asserted anything here. You are the one who says you have all the answers and that the rest of us are idiots.

My primary knowledge of the JFK assassination (other than the movie) comes from, on the "pro" side, the Warren Report, Vincent Bugliosi's Reclaiming History, and on the "con" side Six Seconds in Dallas by Josiah Thompson. I have also made three visits to Dealey Plaza myself, as I've had a life-long fascination with the assassination of Kennedy myself. I've likewise visited the Texas Theatre and Oswald's former home at 214 W. Neely in Oak Cliff. I walked the route he was alleged to have taken following the assassination from his rooming house at 1026 Beckley to the Texas Theatre to time it myself. As a side note, I also had dinner at Campisi's on one of those visits, Campisi of course being the Underboss of the Dallas mob at the time, and his eponymous restaurant being the site of Jack Ruby's last dinner as a free man.

Based on the facts I have examined, I believe the shooting that is alleged to have occurred there is entirely plausible.

I use the word alleged in all contexts above because none of the allegations pro or con were, of course, ever court-tested.

Alternative theories are also entirely plausible but haven't been proven, at least to me, to a level that surpasses the plausibility of the theories advanced by the Warren Commission.

If you'd like to debate various aspects of the case I'd be more than happy to do that respectfully. If instead you have reached the conclusion that I am a stupid man with whom any dialogue would be a waste of time, then we need only agree to disagree. You will certainly not find yourself insulted by me.

If Oswald acted alone why wouldn't he claim it instead he said he was a patsy.

This is only my opinion,but for an accused murderer to claim that he was framed for his crime is not unusual.
Pretty much everyone accused of a serious crime,like murder,denies their guilt.
I think Oswald really was mentally unstable enough to believe that he would get an acquittal when the case went to trial.
The worst thing Oswald could have done was to say on National TV that he did it.
It really sucks that we never got the chance to bring him to trial.
The ratings for that show would eclipse the Nuremberg,McCarthy,and OJ trials combined.

I would echo Lou's words, but perhaps somewhat differently, and just pose the question:

Why would anyone take what Oswald said at face value and just say: "Case closed. If he says he didn't do it, he must not have done it."

Hitler promised Chamberlain in 1938 that he wouldn't invade Poland. How did that work out? People say things they don't mean all the time, for any number of reasons and sometimes for no reason at all.

It would be pointless to try figure out the reasons why unreasonable people would do what they do. Even if you got the explanation out of him, it might not make any sense, as with Mark Chapman. Oswald was obsessed with the idea of becoming a well known figure, to the point that upon returning to the United States following his defection to the USSR his first question to his brother Robert was: "where are the reporters?" hoping that a mob of press would be there to ask him why he had returned. According to Robert Oswald, Lee was disappointed to make the realization that nobody cared.

Only six months earlier he had tried to (and came close) to assassinating General Edwin Walker, with the same purpose in mind. The idea that he would martyr a public figure was a thought he had been entertaining for some time.

I don't think the nut fell too far from the tree in the Oswald family. Lee's mother,Marguerite, publicly stated on numerous occasions that her son was an intelligence agent of the American Government,was framed for the JFK hit,and deserved to be buried at Arlington.

In her later years,she would benefit financially from giving paid interviews,and even going so far as to sell her signed expired Driver Licenses and Library cards for up to $200.00.

Supposedly,she would occasionally sell business cards that read "Marguerite Oswald,mother of Lee Harvey Oswald" to tourists in Dealey Plaza for $5.00 apiece.

You sound knowledgeable and I would like to see your reaction to Howard Donahue's theory. He is the only person to duplicate 3 hits on target from the exact spot Oswald was on a moving car duplicating the presidential limo. What is your explanation for the discrepancy in the size of the entry wound which was smaller than the round fired by the Manlichter-Carcano but the same size as the .223 fired by George Dickey? Further, the round fired by Oswald was designed for penetration, while the .223 fired by an AR15 are anti personnel and made for disintegration, like the round the struck Kennedys head. Look at this video.

I am familiar with this theory, but I don't think it's effectively established itself.

I am not an expert in forensics or ballistics so I cannot offer any great expert opinion on the wounds, but I'll give you my best layman's perspective.

As this interviewer asks in the latter part of this interview, I think this theory falls down where Mr. Donahue asserts that a different and smaller scale conspiracy took place - one between all the Secret Service Members present that day - not one of whom will come forward and admit that which should have been obvious to hundreds of eyewitnesses present in Dealey plaza. If some see fit to reject the idea that Oswald could pull of the headshot from his alleged nest in the TSBD, I can't see why there would be more appeal in the idea that a completely unintentional shot just so happened to align perfectly with the President's head by accident while somebody who was actually trying to kill him just a relatively few hundred feet away did not.

The ballistics he uses to back up his theory certainly do sound plausible - but again, I would ask - are they *more* plausible than the Warren Report's version? I'm not so certain. I have been shooting guns for the past 28 years and one thing I know for sure is that you simply cannot ever predict what a bullet will do on impact against much other than a paper target. You can shoot an empty pop can where the bullet goes right through - shoot the same can again where this time it falls over, and shoot it a third time when it propels itself straight up into the air. His opinion on which was the better round to produce the eventual result may be entirely plausible - but the question isn't "which bullet would be the better option for creating this desired result?" The question is "*could* the bullet from the Mannlicher-Caracano have achieved the same result? I am going to say that yes, it could.

A few other thoughts on the topic:

The rifle is often maligned as having been a "cheap" rifle. The problem with this characterization is that the word cheap has a few different nuances. It could mean cheap as in that it is a piece of crap, or it could mean cheap an in that it is inexpensive. The Mannlicher-Caracano was not a top-end sniper rifle; but neither was it a piece of crap either. It was an inexpensive military surplus rifle just as today surplus Russian SKS and other such former military weapons are often cheap to acquire. At the relatively short distance a sniper would have to be successful in making a kill shot from the Texas Schoolbook Depository, a high end rifle would not be required.

The so-called magic bullet theory, also referred to in this video, is a misnomer which appears to be based on an assumption initially made by Jim Garrison that Kennedy and Connally's seats were in alignment - in fact, they were not. The middle jump seat that Connally was seated in was positioned to the left - and three inches lower than Kennedy's. Once the true alignment of the seats is taken into account, the trajectory of Oswald's bullet makes a lot more sense.

Interesting, and I agree with the fact that Mr. Donahue's theory hasn't effectively established itself. However, I would point out that Mr. Donahue was the only other person, using the same exact rifle and ammunition from the same box as Oswald, to duplicate 3 hits on target from TSBD, even though 11 other marksmen attempted the same feat.
Here is a more in depth explanation of Mr. Donahue's theory with supporting facts, interviews and witnessed actions of the Secret Service in taking possession of the president's body and other indicators of a conspiracy to cover up, as is often the case in politics, it's not the crime, it's the cover up.
As far as the rifle goes, I believe that Mr. Donahue's issue is not as much with the rifle but the quality of the scope on it, which is why Oswald missed his 1st shot, which was to the right of the presidential limo and fragmented with a small piece striking the president behind the head, which is when he raises his hand to the back of his head in the Zapgruder film.
I believe Donahue agrees with you about the Magic Bullet. Further, I believe the round fired by the Carcano was designed for penetration at long distance, which would explain its condition after penetrating two victims and still remaining relatively "pristine", I believe there's some questionable Secret Service behavior regarding that bullet, also.
Here's the link to the better Donohue video

CNote,

I appreciate you posting this and I will watch it, although I probably won't have time for it until later in the week or the weekend, so I'll have to get back to you on it, although I'll certainly watch this with interest. I admittedly have spent less time on this theory than the various more salacious ones that are typically offered.

Out of curiosity, are you merely playing the devil's advocate for sake of discussion, or is this theory your favourite?

No, unlike some gadflies in this forum, I prefer to engage in reasonable discussions based on facts and not opinions. Like you, I have always been intrigued by the Kennedy assassination and felt that while there was another shooter, it was not on the grassy knoll. After reading many articles and reports about the assassination, I came across Mr. Donohue and his theory, and after watching this longer documentary came to believe Mr Donohue was correct in his assessment of the ballistics and the behavior of the Secret Service to cover up what transpired that sad day in Dallas. I appreciate you taking the time to engage in this discussion with me.

. Thank You for Posting this CNote. As I mentioned in a previous post I’m not a big conspiracy theorist in any way but I’m always intrigued by the JFK assassination and different viewpoints

For me,the most difficult part of accepting the Hickey-as-killer of JFK is that in all of the photos and movies of the assassination,Hickey is never seen holding a rifle prior to the fatal head shot. It is only after that shot that Hickey is seen with his weapon. Even the iconic Dealy Plaza photos taken by Ike Altgens,do not show Hickey with a rifle in his hands until after the fatal shot. All of the ballistic "evidence" and Secret Service coverup conspiracy is moot,since Hickey couldn't have killed JFK with a rifle he wasn't holding.

I appreciate your feedback as a way to determine whether or not Donohue's theory is plausible, which is my ultimate prosecution. This is a summary of the events leading to the accidental shooting of President Kennedy according to Donohue, let me know what you think.
"According to Donahue’s analysis, the shooting unfolded like this: Oswald fired his first shot from a sixth-floor window of the Texas School Book Depository soon after the motorcade made the turn onto Elm Street. But his scope was not adjusted properly, according to the Warren Commission, and the bullet missed, hitting the pavement behind and to the right of Kennedy’s limousine. Fragments ricocheted up and struck the inside windshield trim. At least two caught the president in the scalp and caused him to cry out, “My God! I’m hit!”

Oswald chambered a second round. This time, he skipped the rifle’s offset-mounted scope and instead drew a bead along the iron sights on top of the barrel. He fired again and the bullet ripped into Kennedy’s upper back, exited his neck and pierced Gov. Connally’s right side.

At this moment, photos from Dealey Plaza show Secret Service Special Agent George W. Hickey Jr. — riding in the left-rear seat of the follow-up car and sitting up high near the trunk deck — already had turned completely around and was looking back toward the book depository. He may well have spotted the barrel of Oswald’s rifle protruding from the sixth-floor window.

So Hickey reached down and grabbed the Colt AR15 select-fire, semi-automatic rifle from the floor of the car and flipped the safety lever off. He started to stand and turn to acquire Oswald’s position and return fire. But the follow-up car braked suddenly to avoid a collision with the presidential limousine and Hickey lost his balance. His finger slipped off the trigger guard and the weapon discharged. The bullet was flying at 3,300 feet-per-second when it slammed into the back of Kennedy’s head, 21 feet away, and disintegrated."
https://mokan9997.medium.com/hidden-in-plain-sight-4761be7b8115

Here's another article that presents some impressive facts supporting Mr. Donahue's theory.
"In Donahue’s first, the rifle jammed. In his second, he had trouble with the sticky bolt mechanism and only got off two shots, both of which hit. The third try was more successful. He was able to fire three shots, all of which hit, in 4.8 seconds. He later found that he was the only one of the eleven marksmen to better the target time. As a result of this test, Donahue was later approached by the editor of True magazine asking if he would write an article supporting the findings of the Warren Commission. He agreed, but asked for a little time to do his own research. And that was how it all started."
https://www.lindastratmann.com/news/26/438/Mortal-Error

I haven't had time to listen to the 2-hr interview yet, although I did read Linda Stratmann's article. Which is very well written.

She makes only passing reference to the shot that injured James Tague on the far side of Dealey Plaza, standing just outside of the underpass between Main and Commerce. Incidentally, standing in the exact spot where Tague was hit in the face with a piece of concrete where it is (generally) presumed that the first bullet hit, if you look from that location back up to the window on the sixth floor of the TSBD, it is an absolutely clear line of sight. If you draw out on a map of Dealey Plaza a line from that spot to the window it would make the most sense that would be the first of Oswald's shots as the presidential limousine would have just passed by the TSBD on Elm Street.

I look forward to the whole interview; it is unfortunate this theory has not received more attention, it is quite a rational one much like pro-conspiracy writer Josiah Thompson's book Six Seconds in Dallas, which even Vincent Bugliosi complimented in Reclaiming History. I think I only first heard it myself within the last ten years and I've been reading about this subject for 25. I would guess that it suffers from not being as outrageous and therefore not as attractive to someone who's confirmation bias is seeking evidence of a true "conspiracy" involving sexier conspirators (the VP, the mob, the Cubans, etc.) but I can easily see why it deserves equal consideration alongside the more "fun" conspiracy theories.

People like eastsideofvan will defend the official stories behind major world-changing events until their very last breath. He wants so badly to believe he wasn't lied to his whole life.

Actually, I was a die-hard believer in the conspiracy for many years. I would say I changed my mind circa 2013-2015.

A perfect example of how it is dangerous to make assumptions complete with a psychological profile of someone you have never met.

In any event, my personality/motivations/beliefs shouldn't be forming part of your argument. What are the facts? What is the smoking gun you are in possession of, and why will you not share it?

Many years ago I bought and read a thick paperback book titled "Contract on America"

It was a very complex and intricate, yet amazing read about the true multifaceted conspiracy to murder JFK, his brother, and many other officials and layman connected in abstract ways with President Kennedy's assassination.

If anyone is truly interested in learning just how widespread and deep this conspiracy was, then I suggest you try a get a copy of it. It is NOT an easy read. But I promise you that you're eyes will be opened in ways you never imagined.

My compliments on your restraint,calm demeanor ,and gentlemanly behavior. Let me just say that if you are actually expecting an intelligent reply to your request for a lucid counter-argument, as opposed to receiving something along the lines of "Nyah-Nyah". then I would suggest that you pursue a more attainable goal,such as explaining gravity to a chicken.

I seriously doubt that. No way he made those shots with that rifle on a moving target. No fucking way

!000% right. Different trajectories, different angles. It defies logic and common sense. I can't believe that in the year 2022 so many people refuse to believe it was a conspiracy when all evidence points that way. We will likely never know who was behind the conspiracy, although its not all that hard to surmise some of the "entities" who had to have collaborated for this to happen. But WTF people.

Here is a photo showing the view from the alleged snipers nest on the sixth floor of the TSBD:

https://www.reddit.com/r/texashisto...ugh_the_window_of_the_texas_school_book/

With apologies, I tried to upload my own photo of this which I took in April of 2016, but this will do.

The first time I saw this, my first visit to the Sixth Floor Museum, was in February of 2011 and that was the beginning of the seeds of doubt that began to sow in my mind, shaking my very firm belief in a conspiracy. Somehow, years of film, various dramatizations and archival footage had led me to believe that this area - Dealey Plaza - would be much bigger than it really was in person. In fact, the alleged kill shot from the window travelled a distance of only 265 feet.

In this photo you can see, although you will have to look closely, a white "X" marked on the centre lane of Elm Street. It's located just to the right of the third lane marker on the left. This marks the site of the fatal headshot, the alleged third of Oswald's shots.

Having fired and owned bolt action rifles since 1994 all I can tell you is that if you say you cannot make this shot at just 81m then you just don't know how to shoot. Every day across this continent, hunters kill deer and moose at distances further than this. Keep in mind that in 1956 Oswald qualified as a sharpshooter with the USMC, successfully hitting his target 48/50 and 49/50 times respectively, at a distance of 200 yards or 183 metres.

The shot from the TSBD is only 81 metres.

I wanted to add that this a must-see in Dallas. And the way they present the exhibit is without any bias as to whether it is a conspiracy or not a conspiracy; they present the facts and let you make up your own mind. I highly recommend it, it's a very impressive exhibit.

Something else to consider is that the Limo was moving at a slow speed in a direct line away from the snipers nest. In essence,this had the same effect as shooting at a stationary target.
For a man with Oswald's experience shooting rifles,the killing was a no-brainer for him.

Actually, it ended up being a no-brains-er for JFK.




Too soon?

Good one !!

The distance is not the issue, I hunt all the time and have made shots that far. But when we shoot deer they are not on the move, we generally don't shoot at them when they're moving. Too much of a chance to miss. To shoot and score hits on a shot like that is tough for even the best snipers who shoot at stationary targets. As I said before there is still too big a risk of missing on a moving target.

Now am I saying it is impossible? No. But with a mail order Italian rifle, on a moving target, and having to shoot "cold" like that it is about impossible on your first try.

Plus why would Ruby want to kill Oswald if Oswald acted alone? Why would anyone need to shut him up if he was just some crazy dude who wanted to pop the president? Makes no sense for him to act alone and pull this off. Alone. I'm generally the last to believe in conspiracy theories but there is no way Oswald done this alone.

I have a tough time arguing with your reply, dixie - for the main reason that that is precisely why I believed in a conspiracy for so long.

My thinking, in a nutshell was this: if you asked an actuary to calculate the odds of a lone assassin killing the president, combined with another crazed assassin killing the original assassin, then compounded it further by having the slain President's brother also assassinated five years later as he was on the cusp of becoming President by yet another crazed lone assassin - what would the odds be? They're be astronomical!

Or would they???

On the 50th anniversary of the assassination, the NYT put out a couple of videos with Josiah Thompson - who book Six Seconds in Dallas, published in 1966 was the first book ever published championing a conspiracy theory. Even Vincent Bugliosi describes it as a "serious, scholarly work." Thompson is pro-conspiracy although he doesn't champion any one theory - just his belief that a conspiracy took place. He made two videos, which I think were both excellent, one which served as a more cautionary tale, regarding the "Umbrella Man" (whose nickname was in fact coined by Thompson himself) and another more general video, both of which links I'll include here for whomever might be interested. The Umbrella Man video delves into the concept that coincidences do indeed occur all the time, which Thompson points out is a recurring theme in quantum mathematics.

"The Umbrella Man" (6.5 mins)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yznRGS9f-jI

"November 22nd, 1963" (13 mins)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ICxqP-t1Ms

Both of these shorts were directed by Errol Morris, filmmaker behind "Fog of War" and other great documentaries. He also did one about famed mob lawyer "Don't Worry Murray" Murray RIchman I believe you can find on YouTube also if you want.

Also: examples of other "unbelievable" coincidences:

https://www.cracked.com/pictofacts-10-29-mind-blowing-coincidences-you-wont-believe-happened

I remember reading somewhere that the CIA actually coined the phrase "conspiracy theorist" back in the 1960s or 70s to shut people up from questioning the "official" version behind planned events.

Let me remind everyone that no one else besides Howard Donahue was able to make the the 3 shots on target in the allotted time frame. Further, it wasn't the quality of the rifle Oswald used, it was the quality of the scope which was of even lower standards than the rifle, Howard Donahue was a far superior marksman than Oswald..
There's another article about an AR15 malfunction called Slam Firing, where a rifle can discharge without a finger ever bring placed on the trigger, my nephew has recounted to me how this happened to him in training on Parris Island. I still don't believe that Oswald was the lone shooter but the conspiracy was to cover up the accident, not to kill the president. The premise that the mob did it is undermined on numerous counts including Jack Ruby's coincidental appearance at the Dallas Courthouse as Oswald was coming out. Ruby's brought his favorite dog with him and it was unlikely he would have brought this dog, if he was planning to kill Oswald.
Here's the link to the slamfire malfunction of the AR15 and how it was never used by the Secret Service again after November 22, 1963.
https://mokan9997.medium.com/hidden-in-plain-sight-4761be7b8115

To me, the Donahue theory makes the perfect sense. Keep in mind Oswald went one for two. He didn't get three shots off. His round that hit, went in and through. The ar round caused the brain explosion.

You are referring to the report mentioned in this article: https://www.logically.ai/factchecks/library/a341c089

As the article explains, the term conspiracy theorist predates this report by at least 100 years; in fact it had popular utility in the early 1900's when the Protocols of the Elders of Zion was released.

The CIA memo you are referring to was publicly released in 1998, and you can read in its entirety here: "Countering Criticism of the Warren Report" (1967)
https://conspiracy-theories.eu/countering-criticism-of-the-warren-report-psych-1967/

Interestingly, the term "conspiracy theorist" is only mentioned once, in plural form.

This is the problem with making your argument based on "I remember reading some time ago" or "my friend told me" or "I saw on Facebook"... lazy conspiracy theorists take a kernel of truth (the fact the memo exists) and blow it up out of proportion, often without having read it themselves. It is unfortunate because it detracts from the conspiracy theorists who ask real questions which everybody should be trying to answer.

I always was frustrated wanting to talk seriously about these issues with conspiracy theorists who just haven't done the research. I remember referring to the 9/11 report when this guy starts ranting about "why would I read that?? it's all lies anyway." But of course, if you haven't read it, how would you know? People reject the "mainstream" story right on the face of it, because they are unwilling to be open to what's in it - in other words, they've already made up their mind and they do not require any more information, other than "supporting information" which their confirmation bias will allow.

I actually have tremendous respect for conspiracy theorists who come up with plausible, researched, reasoned theories. Thompson's work is fantastic and from my brief exposure to Mr. Donahue here he would appear to be immersed in fact-based arguments.

The reality is that conspiracies DO happen - and we KNOW this because of proven conspiracies such as Watergate. The Mafia itself was one of the most vast conspiracies that ever existed; the fact that it did with thousands of members and it took the government 30 years to admit its' existence is simply incredible. So, if we know that conspiracies do actually happen, then there is an important role to play in asking tough questions. Asking uninformed questions however based on half-truths and misinformation simply muddies the water and gets everybody nowhere.

I've heard the official 911 story over and over again as it's been rammed down my throat, over and over again, and I can tell you that the official version is what sounds like more of a conspiracy theory to me. Take off your coat of blind patriotism that you so strongly cling to and wake up to the truth, which is that we've been lied to about everything.

Dude...I'm not even American. Remember what I said about assumptions?

Since you are the one making the claim that 911 was a conspiracy.the burden of proof falls upon you to provide the following evidence :
Who were the conspirators?
Who really destroyed the Twin Towers,Pentagon,and crashed at Shanksville?
What truth is it that we should wake up to?
I promise to read your response with an open mind,and not respond with sarcasm or insult,and would appreciate it if you would do the same.

I don't have to prove anything, I've seen documentaries and heard other versions, and it all makes so much more sense than the official story that was shoved down our throats. Do your own research, I'm not doing your homework for you. If you choose to believe that some caveman in the Middle East masterminded the biggest false flag attack of all time because he hated our so-called "freedoms," that's on you. All anyone has to do is see who benefited the most from it, and it wasn't "those terrorists."

With all due respect Liggio, thats a bunch of bullshit. WTF are you even talking about? If thats the hogwash you've been fed and believe, then where you source your information from is "highly" questionable at best. Did you buy a subscription to "Terrorists-R-Us Monthly?"

There are always multiple moving parts and unnamed conspirators, as well as varied motives for these sort of conspiracies, but to say that the WTC attack in Lower Manhattan was NOT committed by terrorists from the Middle East is the equivalent of saying "water is dry, not wet." WTF have you been putting in your pipe and smoking? LOL

and we have a winner folks!! This guy takes first prize for the dumbest comment of the year!!

Liggio - Seriously though, if Bin Laden was just a caveman with no money. Your thought would be logical.

BUT, it’s not because he had access to more money than most. Somehow all of the other attacks his organization SUPPOSEDLY carried out around the world were false-flag operations actually carried out by swamp dwelling deep state Illuminati skull & cross bones Bilderberg operatives right??

The Sept 11th attacks were planned,financed,and executed by Osama Bin Laden.
To date, no credible evidence has surfaced to contradict this premise.

I never understood the theory about 9/11. On top of coordinating the planes crashing into the buildings, they (the government) also used explosives? Why not just use the explosives and blame it on the terrorists?

Funny guy!...Like Ha! Ha! funny!

. The 9/11 conspiracy theorists really piss me off. Not only do they not make any logical sense with their “theories” but it’s also disrespectful to those who lost their lives

What pisses me off is when scumbags like you use the fact that people lost their lives to try and gag anyone who questions the official version put forth by a controlled mainstream media machine. Funny how lowdown scum like you always resort to this hush tactic yet probably walked over homeless people for years and turned a blind eye to every tragedy around you, yet when your media masters tell you to get in an uproar over an attack perpetrated by your own government, out the door you go waving your American flag made in China. Hypocrites.

September 11th, 2001, 9:59 AM: WTC 2 is collapsing after being hit by a plane at 9:03 AM. THINK ABOUT THAT.

Over 200,000 tons of steel collapsed in under 10 seconds with no resistance from the undamaged steel below from the fire burning for ONLY 56 MINUTES.

Now take a good look at WTC 1 (the North Tower). A plane hit that building at 8:46 am between floors 94-98. But TAKE ANOTHER GOOD LOOK. There is NO DAMAGE to the 93 floors below where the plane hit. The building is intact and the fires are black which means they were out or going out.

Yet in just 29 minutes after that iconic photo of the North Tower collapsing was taken, the tower would collapse in 11 seconds with absolutely NO RESISTANCE from the 93 UNDAMAGED FLOORS you see in the photo.

And WTC 7 would collapse in just 6 seconds at 5:21 pm, 7 HOURS AFTER the North Tower collapsed, and WTC 7 WAS NOT EVEN HIT BY A PLANE.

Some people don't want to hear the truth,
because they don't want their illusions destroyed.
But the TRUTH is, that on September 11, 2001,
The Laws of Physics DID NOT EXIST 3 times that day!
WTC 2 collapsed in seconds WITHOUT ANY RESISTANCE!
(A PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY )
WTC 1 collapsed in 11 seconds WITHOUT ANDY RESISTANCE!
(A PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY )
and
WTC 7 collapsed in 6 seconds WITHOUT ANY RESISTANCE!
(A PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY )
This had NEVER happened before on the planet earth,
and has NEVER happened SINCE,
because of The Law's of Physics, specifically
Newton's Third Law of Motion which states:
"For every action (force) in nature there is an equal and opposite reaction. In other words, if object A exerts a force on object B, then object B also exerts an equal and opposite force on object A."
"The object exerting force will meet RESISTANCE from the object it is exerting force upon."
In other words on September 11, 2001, what SHOULD have happened was when the damaged floors of the towers started to collapse, once they met the UNDAMAGED structural steel below, the collapse SHOULD HAVE SLOWED DOWN and then STOPPED because of the RESISTANCE from the UNDAMAGED steel below.
But in the case of WTC 1, WTC 2 & WTC 7,
Instead of the collapse SLOWING DOWN and eventually STOPPING,
the collapse GAINED SPEED! a PHYSICAL impossibility!
On September 11, THE LAWS OF PHYSICS did not exist,
Not ONCE, not TWICE, but THREE TIMES!
THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE unless
it was done by a CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!

Liggio, All I got to say to a guy like you is that you're straight out delusional, if not outright nuts! Lol

I wouldn't even dignify your idiotic comments (or rants) with an addressed response.

I was working at the Queens Costco on Vernon Blvd by the Queensborough Bridge riverfront to the East River. I am an eye witness to what happened that day and was dating a survivor who was working at JP Morgan in WTC 1. It's an insult to the memory of those who gave their last full measure of grace on earth to die in those buildings to suggest it was anything but what it was, a stupidly simple plan that took advantage of a lax aviation travel security system and succeeded.
It's well known that Louie DiBono the Gambino soldier, cut corners on the Fireproofing Contact for the World Trade Centers and failed to coat or only minimally coated the steel girder trellis throughout both Towers. This significantly impacted the structural integrity when exposed to the extreme temperatures of the fireball ignited by the fuel, building and office materials and directly led to the collapse of both Towers.

I don't think the image uploaded Is working, admins.

CNote, those buildings were obliterated in seconds, that's demolition at work. Sorry, try again.

1000% correct CNote.

I also lost several boyhood school chums that awful day and what you're saying is 100% correct, and anybody who spews any other bullshit like what Liggio is doing is either #1: completely delusional, #2: completely full of shit, #3: a half a terrorist sympathizer, #4: certainly NOT an American citizen (or in the alternative, an Anti-American sympathizer at best), #5: just a jerk off antagonist, #6: or just a straight out jerk off to begin with, and a disgruntled prick!

THERE IS NO TWO WAYS ABOUT IT!

PS: May I also say he's also a very callous and disrespectful individual to so cavalierly "dismiss" our pain and suffering who further even DARES to accuse us (The U.S.of A.) of bombing and sabotaging our own citizens....What a fucking idiot and loser this guys is. He is really sick!

I don't normally ever talk this way about a fellow poster. But in Liggio's case I'm gonna make an exception!

Demolition? Are you serious?
Just imploding a Vegas casino,which has been done dozens of times, involves advance preparation taking days,if not weeks.
The main support beams are strategically cut,high tension steel cables are wrapped around the beams and cinched tight,so as to direct them toward the center of the structure.
Then,of course the explosives must be placed at precise points within.
Mind you this is a routine Casino demo.
So are we to believe that all of these things were done to the Towers,but on a scale of about 10-1 given the size of the buildings,while at the same time doing it with absolutely no one reporting anything suspicious,no person involved ever coming forward with a "confession"
Believing that an enormous amount of equipment,tons of explosives,and quite a few operatives,were all mysteriously smuggled into the Towers,and then spent many days,if not weeks,doing the "prep" work,all under the noses of everyone in the Towers,thousands of employees and visitors is the ultimate "Tinfoil Hat" conspiracy.

Bingo Lou!

On September 11th, 2001, 19 men armed with box cutters directed by a caveman on dialysis in a caved fortress halfway around the world using a satellite phone and a laptop directed the most sophisticated penetration of the most heavily defended airspace in the world, overpowering the passengers and the military combat-trained pilots on 4 commercial aircraft before flying those planes wildly off-course for over an hour without being molested by a single-fighter interceptor. These 19 hijackers, devout religious fundamentalists who liked to drink alcohol, snort cocaine, and live with pink-haired strippers managed to knock down 3 buildings with 2 planes in NYC. Now THAT sounds like a conspiracy theory.

In 1996 Khalid Sheikh Mohammed met bin Laden in Tora Bora, Afghanistan. The 9-11 Commission (formally the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States), set up in 2002 by Pres. George W. Bush and the U.S. Congress to investigate the attacks of 2001, explained that it was then that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed “presented a proposal for an operation that would involve training pilots who would crash planes into buildings in the United States.” Khalid Sheikh Mohammed dreamed up the tactical innovation of using hijacked planes to attack the United States, al-Qaeda provided the personnel, money, and logistical support to execute the operation, and bin Laden wove the attacks on New York and Washington into a larger strategic framework of attacking the “far enemy”—the United States—in order to bring about regime change across the Middle East.

The September 11 plot demonstrated that al-Qaeda was an organization of global reach. The plot played out across the globe with planning meetings in Malaysia, operatives taking flight lessons in the United States, coordination by plot leaders based in Hamburg, Germany, money transfers from Dubai, and recruitment of suicide operatives from countries around the Middle East—all activities that were ultimately overseen by al-Qaeda’s leaders in Afghanistan.

So I guess it wasn't just a bearded caveman and pink haired strippers after all.

Exactly.

Carlos Marcello would be my number one suspect

Liggio is just upset that cavemen smarter than him accomplished something.

Bin Laden is from a family of billionaires and had CIA training in the 1980's back when her was on our side, "living in caves" all while he was assisting the United States to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan with the ultimate goal of bankrupting the Soviet Union.

To dismiss him as a "caveman" is to make a very deliberate and conscious decision to ignore his vast wealth, his family ties to the Saudi Royal family and his extensive CIA training and involvement in one of the *real* greatest geopolitical conspiracies of all time: the successful dismantling of the USSR.

He may have hid out in caves, but he was no caveman.

Liggio says he will not do the research for us - but in fact, like most conspiracy theorists, he actually requires that we do all the research all along. He spouts out claims without any reference and we're the ones who are supposed to go verify - or find the fault - in his claims.

Let's break down his post:

1.

"On September 11th, 2001, 19 men armed with box cutters directed by a caveman on dialysis in a caved fortress halfway around the world using a satellite phone and a laptop directed the most sophisticated penetration"

- So far, all correct, while making the deliberate decision to omit the context that this caveman is a billionaire CIA operative. The word "caveman" implies uneducated, backward and incapable and this is exactly the assumption that he is hoping will stand. Let's move on.

2.

"of the most heavily defended airspace in the world,"

- False. As there had been no attack on this scale at any time in US history, armed response was not contemplated prior to 9/11. In Liggio's mind perhaps, AFB's across the country keep armed fighters on scramble stand by in the event of a domestic hijacking, but this was not in fact the case pre-9/11 - which is easily, independently verified.

3.

"overpowering the passengers and the military combat-trained pilots on 4 commercial aircraft"

- Most employees even at domestic businesses are taught to co-operate with armed robberies, hijacking, etc. -hijacking was actually common in the 1970's and the policy then was ALWAYS to co-operate with the hijackers rather than risk any conflict that could lead to the whole plane going down. Again this is easily verified.

4.

"before flying those planes wildly off-course for over an hour without being molested by a single-fighter interceptor."

- False. The time between Flight 11's hijacking and the crash into the first tower was just 32 minutes. Again, if Liggio really did "do the research" he says he has done, it is staggering he could make such an obvious error. It is likewise ridiculous to believe that, pre-9/11, planes which have been off course for 32 minutes would regularly be shot down as a matter of policy.

5.

These 19 hijackers, devout religious fundamentalists who liked to drink alcohol, snort cocaine, and live with pink-haired strippers managed to knock down 3 buildings with 2 planes in NYC. Now THAT sounds like a conspiracy theory."

- In a conspiracy theorists' mind, everything works exactly the way it should all the time, and people's stated motives are unassailable. For example, if Oswald said he was a Patsy, then he's a patsy...simple as that. Likewise, if this guy is a religious fundamentalist then it is therefore irreconcilable that he would consume drugs and/or alcohol. This is despite plenty of examples of outwardly religious men doing decidedly unreligious acts; Jimmy Swigert? Benny Hinn? Hundreds if not thousands of molesting Catholic priests? It hasn't occurred to Liggio that they might be outwardly religious but inwardly hypocritical.

Al-Qaeda had already hit the tower in 1994 and failed. Then everybody is shocked that they would try it again. What was so shocking about it? The US Government used bin Laden for a decade then completely fucked him over. I wonder why he would want revenge??

In the end, what were the motives for the conspiracy? Who benefitted? Travel became a pain in the ass for everyone - so unless the TSA was behind it, it certainly wasn't the airlines. Maybe you'll say "Carlyle Group/Halliburton" etc. OK. If we follow that thread, explain to me why the hijackers weren't all Iraqi? Bush wanted Iraqi oil so badly that he filled four planes with maniacal Saudis in order to convince the American public that they should attack Afghanistan, only then to go to Iraq after claiming weapons of mass destruction - which were never found, even though this is supposedly the leadership group that was able to pull off a controlled demolition in the middle of Manhattan but somehow couldn't plant a few fake WMD's in Iraq during a war.

How does that plan work?

BRAVO Eastsideofvan....Bravo!

THAT was the most well worded, well written, explanation and analytical breakdown of the 9/11 Attacks that I've ever read. Moreover, you were extremely intelligent but a gentleman in your manner. Thats impressive. I don't think a single logical and sane individual could ever argue with your response to Liggio's nonsensical diatribe......once again, Bravo my friend!

That was fabulous! Lol

Robert Kennedy Jr: ''I have proof. John Kennedy's death was caused by the CIA''
Luca Grossi July 10, 2023
US presidential candidate speaks in an interview with '' The Newyorker ''
The President of the United States, John Fitzgerald Kennedy , was assassinated before the eyes of the world on November 22, 1963. Five years later, on June 6, 1968, his brother , Robert Francis Kennedy, was assassinated . The latter became Attorney General (the equivalent of our Minister of Justice) in the government of President Kennedy. While in office, he earned recognition for the effective and impartial administration of the Justice Department. Bob Kennedy, in fact, he was the politician who most of all inflicted very hard blows on the overseas mafia. In fact, as minister he launched a successful campaign against organized crime. Both were undisputed protagonists of American history, and both were assassinated in two different ambushes with a mafia background.
In our newspaper we have dealt several times with these state murders: many documents analyzed and interviews carried out. Among these also to Gianni Bisiach , the Italian journalist certainly closest to the Kennedy family (in particular to Ted), who had access to the secrets of one of the most important American families, precisely because of that friendship established with the three brothers. The first ever to say, (as it is written in his book "The President", in his film "The Two Kennedys") that John Kennedy was killed by the Mafia, in collaboration with some sectors of the CIA.
To corroborate that thesis of reports such as that of the Stokes commission, the Select Committee on Assassination of the US House of Representatives, which confirms what until 1979 could have seemed only theories. Not only. Even former CIA director William E. Colby , who died under mysterious circumstances, admitted during a presentation of Gianni Bisiach 's book, that the Central Intelligence Agency had collaborated with the mafia, while categorically excluding its participation in the assassination of the President.
The new documents, declassified on the input of Donald Trump (who deserves credit despite the fact that we still consider him unsuitable today to cover any institutional role with his racist and far-right policy) provide new elements that highlight how the truth it can also be hindered but, sooner or later, it always comes to light. And so it emerges that it was not Lee Harvey Oswald who assassinated the US president , but a police officer, JD Tippit .

Acts that add to the investigation conducted by judge Jim Garrison , which demonstrated that the CIA had been helped by "others", such as the FBI itself or, albeit marginally, the Mafia. Theories that will also be taken up in the film "JFK" by director Oliver Stone .
A mass of evidence that completely dismantles the bizarre version of the Warren Commission, the one that created the bizarre story of the 'magic bullet'.
In this regard, the new presidential candidate Robert Kennedy Jr , son of 'Bob Kennedy', also expressed himself in a long interview given to the newspaper 'The Newyorker' : “I don't think anyone who has seriously looked into my uncle's murder believes the Warren Commission is right. I am a trial lawyer. I have dealt with hundreds of cases ”. I can guarantee “ by looking at this case, that I could prove that my uncle's death was caused by the CIA. I have enough evidence now, without any interrogation, to prove that my uncle's death was the result of a conspiracy. And that the CIA was involved, not only in the original conspiracy, but in covering up the facts for sixty years and continues to maintain secrecy ."
The reason, according to the candidate for the White House, lies in the fact that John Kennedy " had not invaded the Bay of Pigs and provided air cover to Cuban opponents ofFidel Castro , which they considered a betrayal. They had trained those men. Those men were dying on the beach. At that point, they believed my uncle was a traitor to the United States. When my uncle and father stopped the attacks on Cuba after the missile crisis, they agreed with Khrushchev during the missile crisis to stop the attacks from Miami via Alpha 66 and the other groups that were going to Cuba to stop them."
Speaking of his father's murder, Kennedy referred to a second shooter, stray bullets, and a Mafia lawyer whose body was later found "dismembered into a hundred pieces in an oil drum." Kennedy also said he visited Sirhan Sirhan in prison, convicted of the murder of his father: “ I support his release ” concluded Robert Kennedy Jr .

https://www.antimafiaduemila.com/ho...n-kennedy-e-stata-causata-dalla-cia.html

Speaking of his father's murder, Kennedy referred to a second shooter, stray bullets, and a Mafia lawyer whose body was later found "dismembered into a hundred pieces in an oil drum." Kennedy also said he visited Sirhan Sirhan in prison, convicted of the murder of his father: “ I support his release ” concluded Robert Kennedy Jr .

Who was the lawyer?? Or do they mean Johnny Roselli?

Hard to tell. It doesnt mention where the body was found.

Johnny testified for the committee three times, the last a secret appearance three months before his death, when he was questioned about the assassination of President Kennedy.

But I never read he may be linked to the RFK murder.

Yes Roselli did that and years before, he was already known by his peers in the Outfit as a "loudmouth" individual. So Accardo and Aiuppa probably didnt want to take any chance.

Also, I dont know any other Outfit guy, besides Roselli, being found cut into pieces and later stuffed in a barrel, especially when the JFK situation is the main subject, or the CIA/Outfit connections.

Maybe Kennedy Jr used the term "Mafia lawyer" in a different context...and btw, back in the days some researchers also thought that Giancana or his accomplices were allegedly behind the RFK hit, but as usual, none of that was ever confirmed.

Ok thanks Roselli wouldn't be far fetched imo because he was shot in Los Angeles. Around the time of the assassination, mob leader and Hoffa associate Carlos Marcello was on trial in New Orleans. He was convicted in 1968 of “intimidating” a FBI agent.

Bobby Jr. is no Bobby.

He's not even a JFK Jr.

Eleven children had Bobby very old school Irish lol.

Kathleen Hartington (1951)
Joseph Patrick II (1952)
Robert Francis jr. (1954)
David Anthony (1955-1984)
Mary Courtney (1956)
Michael LeMoyne (1958-1997)
Mary Kerry (1959)
Christopher George (1963)
Matthew Maxwell Taylor (1965)
Douglas Harriman (1967)
Rory Elizabeth Katherine (1968)