|
1 registered members (1 invisible),
265
guests, and 3
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums21
Topics42,337
Posts1,058,843
Members10,349
| |
Most Online796
Jan 21st, 2020
|
|
|
Re: JFK Assassination - 50th Anniversary
[Re: B_A_]
#692033
01/21/13 12:28 AM
01/21/13 12:28 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,156
jonnynonos
Underboss
|
Underboss
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,156
|
From what I've read Chicago would have had the biggest reason to hit him. It was Chicago who won the election for him and it was Chicago they turned to for help with the Bay of Pigs and the assassination attempt on Castro. Then they had the audacity to sick RFK on the lot of them. There is also not much doubt both JFK and Giancana were sleeping with both Marilyn Monroe and Judith Exner. Russo's book is pretty good. Like I said, he does use some lousy sources, including "Double Cross," which is an obvious piece of garbage, but he also went out and did a LOT of interviews with people who were there. I forget his reasoning for saying that the mob actually had nothing to do with the hit, but remember thinking it was fairly persuasive at the time. though I believe numerous people were thinking about it...
Carlos + Santo, likely with rogue CIA encouragement, made the Jack hit happen. Waaaaaay too much bad juju in 1960s New Orleans to explain away as coincidence, not to mention Bobby K. jumping Carlos' ass to Guatemala. A balls out move for sure... though at what cost?
The question which needlessly confuses people (not here but folks generally) is that YES, Lee Harvey Oswald ** could have been ** the (or a) shooter ** AND there was a larger conspiracy.
Interesting also how G. Robert Blakey was both RICO law mastermind/advocate and leading critic of the Warren Commission Report. I think this debunks that for once and all: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=888638 Interesting. Binder is about the best there is. All I can say is this paper was published several years before Russo's book. If one were really interested they could compare the arguments. I'm interested in this stuff but not that interested!
|
|
|
Re: JFK Assassination - 50th Anniversary
[Re: jonnynonos]
#692096
01/21/13 12:11 PM
01/21/13 12:11 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 86
Netherlands
B_A_
Button
|
Button
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 86
Netherlands
|
Ah you are correct. And I see he does address Russo. Was reading on phone last night and couldn't look at it. Again I am not interested enough to read the paper or reread the relevant section of the book, but Binder is generally spot on. Same here, so I just assume this is true untill proven otherwise:-).
|
|
|
Re: JFK Assassination - 50th Anniversary
[Re: Mark]
#692130
01/21/13 03:40 PM
01/21/13 03:40 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 290
ATL
SilentPartnerz
Capo
|
Capo
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 290
ATL
|
I recently saw this news item and thought it deserved its own thread. In this story, RFK Jr. comments about what his late father truly believed regarding JFK's death and the events following November 22, 1963. Maybe our more "seasoned" BB members will share their memories and thoughts about that fateful day in Dallas. http://news.yahoo.com/rfk-children-speak-assassination-dallas-050810379.html Here is the scenario that makes the most sense to me. I also believe that the CIA and LBJ/J. Edgar Hoover were complicit because they all benefitted. None of them liked the Kennedy's and their power was threatened by the brothers...especially by RFK. Anyway the link to the following article gives a brief overview. Google, read and dig deeper for further details: http://www.ibtimes.com/french-connection-did-corsican-mobsters-kill-john-f-kennedy-898346
Last edited by SilentPartnerz; 01/21/13 03:41 PM.
"Three can keep a secret..if two are dead."
Calogero Minacore
|
|
|
|
![[Linked Image]](http://i1364.photobucket.com/albums/r729/michaeld78/Namnls000_zps164d4a3d.png)
. Having read over alot of arguments on both sides i agree with the lone gunman theory. If that's close minded, can you convince me otherwise? I'm genuinely asking btw .