having just watched JFK this week- I think William Lloyd Garrison's problem was that he tryed to implicate too many people in his conspiracy theory (if that final speech in the film happened in real life)- all the way up to Lyndon Johnson from the police in Dallas on the day he was shot and the CIA, FBI, New Orleans Mafia, the Free Cuba movement etc.

If so many people were involved in the conspiracy someone would have spilt the beans by now.

I think Lee Harvey Oswald was at least one of the gunmen but that he wasn't working alone. What the motivation was I don't know- it gets complicated!

Jim Garrison didn't give that speech in court but certain elements are taken from his book, if you follow me.

I don't think a debate is to 'convince', for want of a better word, someone to change their beliefs. A debate is so that two or more parties can put their cases forward and let everyone else decide which one is right and wrong. If this forum was able I would show you my 'evidence' for conspiracy.

For those who think Oliver Stone made a documentary:

"JFK" is fiction not fact

Not everything in that site is true Allan D.

Well its the mafia/mob and maybe Castro. The Kennedy brothers went to the mob for help to win the presidential elections. JFK promised the mob an easy ride if they did their thing. They did, and they stabbed the mob in the back by throwing many of them in jail. Some heard the mob talking of revenge so the rest they say is history. They tried to kill Castro (CIA) in the failed bay of pigs landings and he might have wanted revenge? For me the mob sounds more likely.

quote:

Originally posted by Don't Stop Movin':
Not everything in that site is true Allan D.

Such as?

quote:

Originally posted by Guile:
Well its the mafia/mob and maybe Castro. The Kennedy brothers went to the mob for help to win the presidential elections. JFK promised the mob an easy ride if they did their thing. They did, and they stabbed the mob in the back by throwing many of them in jail. Some heard the mob talking of revenge so the rest they say is history. They tried to kill Castro (CIA) in the failed bay of pigs landings and he might have wanted revenge? For me the mob sounds more likely.

I agree about the Mob as being the most likely candidates. Both Jack & Bobby Kennedy had established their political credentials before the 1960 campaign in running the sub-commitee investigating the Mob's links with the unions (especially Jimmy Hoffa's Teamsters) modelled on the McCarthy inquiry into Communist subversion (Bobby was a great admirer of McCarthy and wanted the position of chief investigator that Roy Cohn got. He also attended McCarthy's funeral in 1957. JFK had been the only Democrat who didn't vote to censure McCarthy for his investigation into the US Army in 1954). However Joe Kennedy, their father, who had links with the Mob going back to Prohibition persuaded Sam Giancana to support JFK in the 1960 election in return for a promise not to mount a FBI investigation into the Mob if he won (which J.Edgar Hoover, the head of the FBI, didn't want either). Mob money was used to bribe the union leaders into supporting Kennedy and defeating Humphrey in the vital West Virginia primary, a mainly Protestant and heavily-unionised state, thus enabling Kennedy to win the Democratic nomination. There is some evidence that the Mob bribed local officials to rig the votes in both Illinois (Giancana's state) and Florida, crucial states that Kennedy needed to win, in the general election against Nixon.

Giancana fell out with Kennedy after he became President because he felt he had reneged on his promise by making his brother Attorney-General who then pressured Hoover, much against his will, to conducyt investigations into the Mob. However Bobby also chaired a committee to investigate the possibilities of eliminating Castro. After the disastrous Bay of Pigs operation in April 1961 both brothers had little faith in the competence of the CIA to carry out such an operation and thought that the Mob, who had at least had a history of carrying out successful "hits", would have a better chance and using them would also carry out the extra advantage of plausible deniability on their part since an official government agency would not be involved. Also the Mob had good reason to seek revenge on Castro as he had ended their lucrative gaming and vice franchises in Cuba after he had come to power in !959 (although he had accepted money from the Mob prior to the Revolution) and they were well embedded within the expatriate Cuban community in the US, particularly in Florida.

Keenedy used his mistress, Judith Exner, whom he shared with Giancana to establish a relationship and he used her to ferry messages and money. However Kennedy was noted hfor his Hamlet-like indecisiveness and as soon as the Mob came close to setting an operation up Kennedy got cold feet and would decide to cancel it and may have been frustration at this continual lack of direction that resulted in Kennedy being substituted for Castro as the target. That's what Kennedy's successor, Lyndon Johnson, who was never convinced by the findings of the Warren Commission, even though he had set it up in the first place, thought. He obviously knew about the Kennedys' links with the Mob, although they weren't revealed to the public until 1976 when Judith Exner testified to the House Assassinations Committee. He once told an aide in his typically blunt manner: "If you mess with those guys
you're going to get burned and I guess that's what happened to Kennedy."

A nice story. How about some evidence?

quote:

Originally posted by Allan D:

quote:

Originally posted by Don't Stop Movin':
Not everything in that site is true Allan D.

Such as?

OK well going from memory of when I visited that site during my research. They say that Stone made a big to-do out of David Ferrie dying accusing 'others' of helping David die. Now in that site they say that David Ferrie died of an aneurysm bursting (corrrect word?) in his head. When in fact David Ferrie died of being to the head. And that was what killed him NOT the aneurysm. Want more?

They don't mention that Lee Bowers said he heard the shots like this. Bang...BANG BANG! The second and third on top of each other.

"Oswald's widow, Marina, has confirmed to the Warren Commission, the House Select Committee, and numerous independent researchers that she herself took the photos, which the House Select Committee panel determined were made with Oswald's own Imperial Reflex camera, to the exclusion of all other cameras." Actually Marina says that she can't even remember taking the photos of Lee in their garden.

"It is true that Jack Ruby did make the claim that he had been injected with cancer cells, but one simply could not develop cancer from such injections." There were experiments going on and isn't it odd that after his claims Jack died?

And the President's autopsy, where do I start?! There are two many holes in the President's body for it to be how the government says! Look at the photos!


One last thing...JD Tippit was shot in exactly the same places as the President and his autospy photos are identical!

We were talking about this yesterday in my history class. Some people suggested that Jackie did it, as revenge for his many affairs. It was also suggested that JFK organised his own shooting as he was ill and didn't want the public to watch his detoriation. The most popular theory, supported by my teacher, is that Johnson was behind it. She cited a lot of evidence (which I don't recall right now).

Johnson definetly had something to do with it in my eyes.

Aparrently just as the shooting started he bent over to do up his shoe lace...

quote:

Originally posted by Don't Stop Movin':

quote:

Originally posted by Allan D:

quote:

Originally posted by Don't Stop Movin':
Not everything in that site is true Allan D.

Such as?

OK well going from memory of when I visited that site during my research. They say that Stone made a big to-do out of David Ferrie dying accusing 'others' of helping David die. Now in that site they say that David Ferrie died of an aneurysm bursting (corrrect word?) in his head. When in fact David Ferrie died of being to the head. And that was what killed him NOT the aneurysm. Want more?

They don't mention that Lee Bowers said he heard the shots like this. Bang...BANG BANG! The second and third on top of each other.

"Oswald's widow, Marina, has confirmed to the Warren Commission, the House Select Committee, and numerous independent researchers that she herself took the photos, which the House Select Committee panel determined were made with Oswald's own Imperial Reflex camera, to the exclusion of all other cameras." Actually Marina says that she can't even remember taking the photos of Lee in their garden.

"It is true that Jack Ruby did make the claim that he had been injected with cancer cells, but one simply could not develop cancer from such injections." There were experiments going on and isn't it odd that after his claims Jack died?

And the President's autopsy, where do I start?! There are two many holes in the President's body for it to be how the government says! Look at the photos!


One last thing...JD Tippit was shot in exactly the same places as the President and his autospy photos are identical!

Don't know what "being to the head" means! As far as the shots are concerned there is undoubtedly confusion as to the number of bullets that were fired but it was perfectly possible for Oswald, who was rated very highly for his marksmanship abilities whilst in the Marines contrary to popular belief, to fire off even the maximum number of shots in the time available and, from his vantage point, have a clear view of the Presidential limousine.

The number of tall buildings surrounding Deeley Plaza turned into an echo chamber which reduced the certainty of knowing, especially at ground level, from which direction the bullets were being fired. Initially attention of bystanders was drawn to "the grassy knoll" and in was in this direction that police searched (including behind the wooden fence) rather than the book depository building. However nothing (and noone) was found and it was impossible for any assassin located in that area to have made his escape. However the popularity of "the grassy knoll" theory has survived to this day.

I don't consider your argument about the photograph to be a particularly strong one. Whether Marina Oswald tookthe photograph or not, noone, as far as I know, has ever denied that that is Oswald holding the rifle, or an almost identical version of it, that was used to kill Kennedy. Most accept now that Oswald was the principal assassin. The argument is over whether he was the sole assassin or part of some larger conspiracy.

Jack Ruby was an obese middle-aged man who had imbibed large quantities of tobacco and alcohol for most of his life. He had a high probability of becoming cancer sufferer and he hardly needed the government's assistance. Contrary to popular belief he was put on trial and pleaded guilty to the murder of Oswald. If he had been part of a conspiracy he could have informed his defence team (who were willing to employ that as a strategy) and they could have used that in his trial. Again contrary to popular belief he was not kept incommunicado whilst in prison but had regular visits from members of his family including shortly before he died in 1975. If he had been part of a wider conspiracy he could have informed his relatives at any time as he had nothing to lose since he was suffering from a terminal illness. His relatives are adamant that he never did so.

You are stronger ground when it comes to the post-mortem, or autopsy to use the American term. There were several skilled pathologists in Dallas who had experience in gunshot deaths (since Dallas was then the murder capital of the US) who could have done an excellent job and filed reports that could have clarified all the speculation about entry and exit wounds.

However rather than keep the President's body in Dallas the government chose to fly it back to Washington on the same plane as now President Johnson and Mrs Kennedy flew back on and hand it over to naval surgeons who had never performed a post-mortem before and who performed what can only be described as an act of butchery on Kennedy's corpse. Whether this was an intentional act or simply mind-boggling incompetence again remains a matter for debate. As in the O.J.Simpson case incompetence does not prove conspiracy, rather it undermines it. Medical incompetence cost the lives of both James Garfield (who died of blood poisoning three months after he was shot) in 1881 and William Mckinley in 1901. In neither case was there a conspiracy however. The medical skills of two surgeons in a Washington general hospital who voted Democratic saved the life of Ronald Reagan in 1981 coupled with the quick thinking of a secret service agent who discovered that Reagan had been shot and ordered his car to divert from returning to the White House to the nearest hospital. There are many unanswered questions about the events of 22 November 1963 including why the Presidential procession was rerouted at the last minute and why even Kennedy chose to visit Texas in the first place when such figures as Adlai Stevenson, his predecessor as Democratic Presidential nominee, had advised him not to but then Lincoln had been advised not to go to the theatre on14 April 1865 but went ahead anyway. On such small choices the life of individuals, and of nations, hinges. Random chance is more often responsible for the fate even of the greatest and most well known among us as is some hidden and unknown conspiracy.

quote:

Originally posted by Don't Stop Movin':
Johnson definetly had something to do with it in my eyes.

Aparrently just as the shooting started he bent over to do up his shoe lace...

I think the overwhelming majority of those in the vicinity bent down (not to tie their shoelaces) when the shooting started. It's called an instinctive human reaction for self-preservation. If Johnson had really wanted to kill Kennedy would he really have chosen his own state with an assassin (or assasins) shooting downwards with he himself in an open limousine immediately behind the Presidently and directly in the line of fire? Although not as great a cinema fan as Kennedy he would have been aware of John Frankenheimer's "The Manchurian Candidate" released the year prior to Kennedy's assassination (although the book had been published emuch earlier) in which Laurence Harvey as the brainwashed assassin in a moment of conscience turns his weapon (a highpowered rifle as in Oswald's case) onto the authors of the conspiracy, the vice-presidential nominee and his wife, standing by the side of the potential target, the presidential nominee. The moral for any would-be conspirators watching the film would have been never place yourself in the line of fire which Johnson did.

The only proven conspiracy to have successfully assassinated a US President occurred in 1865 when Lincoln was shot but that was not just a plot to remove Lincoln but decapitate the entire US government by removing the next in the line of succession, the Vice-President, also called Johnson and the Secretary of State, Seward as well as possibly Grant, the commander of Union forces, who had been expected to attend the theatre with Lincoln. In the event both Johnson & Grant declined Lincoln's invitation to the theatre. Grant left Washington to visit his daughter and the assassin sent to Johnson's residence got cold feet and went home whilst Seward, who was in his sickbed, was severely but not fatally wounded. Johnson and Grant both benefitted from Lincoln's death in the sense that they were Lincoln's immediate successors as President (in both cases, as with LBJ, the Presidency proved to be a poisoned chalice) but there is no evidence that either of them had any hand in the conspiracy to kill Lincoln. LBJ, who had taught history in his youth, would have been very familiar with the story of the Lincoln assassination and would have reflected that any conspiracy, from either within or outside the government, to kill the President may well have encompassed him too.

The other main argument against Johnson's involvement in any plot to kill Kennedy is the close bond of affection that existed between himself and Mrs Kennedy. This is evidenced by the telephone conversations that he had with her after he became President and are now in the public domain. Both came from the South and whatever his views of her husband (and there is a great deal of evidence to suggest that he had grown to admire and respect Kennedy particularly following his handling of the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962 although it is true he still held his brother, Bobby, in deep contempt) his code of honour and chivalry would not have allowed him to have placed her in any kind of jeopardy. LBJ's feelings for Jackie were reciprocated as the phone conversations show and she gave no credence to any conspiracy theories that involved him.

Johnson bent over before the shooting started and didn't come back up until afterward. He had a perfect alibi, Why would he 'cheat' his way into office.

And on the shots case; Lee Bowers SAW a couple of men at the Grassy Knoll fence during the shooting and after the last shot they ran out of the area. Not to mention the fact that a bullet was found there!!!

So tying your shoelaces is evidence of complicity in a criminal conspiracy? Come off it! I think I would have stayed down too had I heard shots coming over my head.

And on the shots case: that's not what Bowers testified to at the time (or rather four months later). He said he saw two cars circling the Book Depository (one of which had a Goldwater '64 sticker) and then leave before the Presidential motorcade arrived. He saw several people in the are of the triple underpass, all of whom he recognised apart from two men, one of whom was still there when the police descended on the area en masse (at least 50 of them) after the shots had been fired.


Bowers_interview

Bowers_affidavit

In 1994 a Canadian JFK conspiracy buff claimed to have a letter from Bowers stating that he saw two Dallas police officers fire at the motorcade from the grassy knoll. Curiously, despite promises to the contrary, this letter has yet to be produced:

Bower_letter?

Here's an interesting site which setsout to debunk most of the theories surrounding the grassy knoll including Sam Holland's "puff of smoke" evidence (doubtless proving that a flintlock musket was one of the murder weapons!):


"Smoke & Mirrors"


On a more general point, here's an interesting site which debunks the oft-quoted coincidences between Lincoln's & Kennedy's asssassinations:


Lincoln & Kennedy: Nothing in Common

Oliver Stone admits that he used artistic licence in making JFK over the magic bullet theory and the transcript from the Garrison trial.

He used the pseudo documentary style to make the film look more dramatic because he makes Hollywood films and is not an historian.

The film JFK was flawed with half-truths and outright lies (which Stone reproduces as fact) and shouldn’t even be considered when discussing a real historical event.

Lee harvey Oswald & others working for Carlos Marcello.

Marcello was the Mafia boss of the southern states based in New Orleans where Oswald & a number of related people came from, Robert Kennedy was trying to deport him, he spent the weekend before the killing in private conference with David Ferrie (implicated in virtually all conspiracy theories), the prostitute who told the police BEFORE the assassination that she had travelled with 2 men who told her they had been hired to kill was travelling from New Orleans, Marcello was an ally of Giancana whose lawyer said made a deathbed confession, ultimately he was Jack Ruby's boss, Jim Garrison (who was actually pretty corrupt) was in his pocket & number of other lines lead to him.

Apparently Johnson was in on it too. Kennedy was going to get US out of Vietnam, a few CiA and High level Generals organised it. Oswald was set up.

There is no evidence that Kennedy wanted to get out of Vietnam except one "options" paper that presented a whole range of different scenarios including withdrawal. Kennedy had been a stern anti-communist before he became President and was eager to avoid the isolationist label that thad been stuck to his father. As President he had increased the small number of specialist "advisers" sent to Vietnam by his predecessor, Eisenhower, as well as expanding their role to encompass front-line combat, the first US casualties in Vietnam occurring during his term of office. He also conducted a secret war in Laos without Congressional authorisation. It is likely that he would have become as enmeshed in Vietnam as Johnson was and that therefore his premature death preserved his reputation which would have undoubtedly have become tarnished during his second term.

There is no evidence that Johnson had any connection with any plot. It is unlikely because he would not have wanted his home state being tarred with the stigma of having hosted the assassination of a President and also he had established a warm and affectionate relationship with Mrs Kennedy (who also came from the South and which persisted after her husband's death) so it is highly unlikely he would have been a party to anything which would have caused her distress or placed her in jeopardy as the shooting did.