Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

JFK Assasination

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by copenhagen View Post
    I disagree with Bo's thesis. And perhaps he does mine. Neither have called each others beliefs "garbage"
    That was days ago, can you leave it be or will you bring it up again in the future?

    Can I call the fake document you tried to pass off garbage?
    John

    Play La Marseillaise. Play it!

    Comment


    • Originally posted by JBark View Post
      That was days ago, can you leave it be or will you bring it up again in the future?

      Can I call the fake document you tried to pass off garbage?
      It means you have no manners whether it be a few days ago or today. It is mentioned because I think you're here to poke a stick at this rather than anything else which is common with this subject but that's ok. You can call it whatever you like but I think we both know your knowledge of all this is very thin so it doesn't really matter what you say until you go and do the reading. I mean your comments about Cuba not going anywhere or what was so important about a little country like Vietnam. The military and some of Congress tried to rail road Kennedy into pretty much starting WW3 over Cuba. People believed that Communism was on the very verge of squashing the US and Kennedy was an appeaser.* This shows your very limited understanding of the political landscape and thinking within the US about the Cold War at this time. That is not to insult you that is simply an informed observation and why you calling what is talked about garbage doesn't wash.

      *I recommend Micheal Dobbs' One minute to midnight.
      Last edited by copenhagen; 30 Nov 14, 08:41.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by copenhagen View Post
        I disagree with Bo's thesis. And perhaps he does mine. Neither have called each others beliefs "garbage." I have looked at this stuff with a healthy critical eye through the research and consider them credible as far as some one like me can tell because they are from official archives. The memo shows the CIA's knowledge of Oswald and his associates within the New Orleans mob who also did work for the CIA in regards to Cuba. Oswald is arrested for the murder and is in turn murdered by a man who worked for the New Orleans Godfather and also owed him money. Ruby had been involved in gun running in regards to Cuba for the mob a few years earlier. Co-incidences are not liked in criminal investigations. If you think its all made up by crazy people that's up to you.
        It is to be expected that a defector to the USSR would be watched by both the FBI and CIA on return to the U.S. Monitoring his habits and associates would be expected. Yes, Ruby had a past linked with organized crime but not every action he takes will be linked to that part of his past. I didn't call you crazy (that I recall) but I do think there is a tendency to make more of co-incidences than should be. The assassination of a president will draw tremendous scrutiny resulting in the uncovering of all sorts of odd information but it doesn't have to be a conspiracy.
        John

        Play La Marseillaise. Play it!

        Comment


        • Originally posted by JBark View Post
          It is to be expected that a defector to the USSR would be watched by both the FBI and CIA on return to the U.S. Monitoring his habits and associates would be expected. Yes, Ruby had a past linked with organized crime but not every action he takes will be linked to that part of his past. I didn't call you crazy (that I recall) but I do think there is a tendency to make more of co-incidences than should be. The assassination of a president will draw tremendous scrutiny resulting in the uncovering of all sorts of odd information but it doesn't have to be a conspiracy.
          He should have been arrested if he was real, ( this was the time of the red scare , when Gary Powers was treated with suspicion) instead he was given a US passport within 24 hours and ended up living with a known CIA contract handler. A socialite white Russian called George de Mohrenschildt. Not the kind of man who the nephew of bookie who worked for the New Orleans Mafia would associate with. Ruby did not just have past links. He was a bag man for the Dallas mob and ran a night club there right up to 1963. All those establishments were run for the mob, they couldn't be otherwise.. This was a guy who had helped smuggle weapons into Cuba and even worked to get Santos Trafficante( the godfather of Tampa) out of a Cuban jail.Bobby Kennedy had Ruby's phone logs checked. They included a lot of people that RFK had indicted when on the racketeering commission and when he was attorney general a period when the Justice department had brought more cases against the mob in its history. and was preparing to deport for the second time the biggest mobster in America. It wasn't JFK they wanted off there back, it was his brother. Ask any investigator. They don't like co-incidences even if you don't seem to mind. As Rojik said, if you know who Ruby is , you go into the rabbit hole. Sorry buddy you have to read this stuff and I'm no faked moon landings, the Nazis live in Antarctica loon. If you still don't see it that's up to you but until you do, its just the Warren Commission line which is hilarious in itself.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by copenhagen View Post
            It means you have no manners whether it be a few days ago or today. It is mentioned because I think you're here to poke a stick at this rather than anything else which is common with this subject but that's ok. You can call it whatever you like but I think we both know your knowledge of all this is very thin so it doesn't really matter what you say until you go and do the reading. I mean your comments about Cuba not going anywhere or what was so important about a little country like Vietnam. The military and some of Congress tried to rail road Kennedy into pretty much starting WW3 over Cuba. People believed that Communism was on the very verge of squashing the US and Kennedy was an appeaser.* This shows your very limited understanding of the political landscape and thinking within the US about the Cold War at this time. That is not to insult you that is simply an informed observation and why you calling what is talked about garbage doesn't wash.

            *I recommend Micheal Dobbs' One minute to midnight.
            I think you want to rehash the "garbage" thing because you are trying to hide the fact that you believe and have posted such an obvious fake letter. Either you are providing evidence you know to be fake or you are very gullible. Which? It doesn't matter because either mean your credibility is nil.

            You only read what you want to to support what you've read before. You have a self perpetuating reading list there that doesn't allow for critical thinking. Kennedy was dead...what happened in Cuba with him gone? NOTHING. Communism in Vietnam was going to go where? Was going to crush the US? Really. How did I live through that and not know that. Please, tell me more about my country's history.
            John

            Play La Marseillaise. Play it!

            Comment


            • Originally posted by JBark View Post
              I think you want to rehash the "garbage" thing because you are trying to hide the fact that you believe and have posted such an obvious fake letter. Either you are providing evidence you know to be fake or you are very gullible. Which? It doesn't matter because either mean your credibility is nil.

              You only read what you want to to support what you've read before. You have a self perpetuating reading list there that doesn't allow for critical thinking. Kennedy was dead...what happened in Cuba with him gone? NOTHING. Communism in Vietnam was going to go where? Was going to crush the US? Really. How did I live through that and not know that. Please, tell me more about my country's history.
              How do you know its fake? Anything is possible but the amount of other documentation that partners it would suggest its not and there is a lot especially as researchers pulled them out of official files. You haven't read these books so how can you claim that I'm simply gullible?Why was nothing done to Cuba after Kennedy was gone? I know why but do you? Do you not know that many in the Joint Chiefs believed that the Communists were ahead of America, that war was inevitable and even a pre-emptive strike should be considered. Kennedy stormed out of the room when it was put to him. How do you not know that and live through it? You tell me but clearly you didn't know I'm afraid but then again why would you , its was all kept from the public and much of it still is. Again try Michael Dobbs' excellent book for example on the Cuban missile crisis and you will be in for a shock. Sorry you aren't aware of these things but I cant help that. My nationality is irrelevant in that regard. I suspect that having lived through it all and not realising is a bit annoying perhaps and you don't like the implication of that so you want to attack the messenger.
              Last edited by copenhagen; 30 Nov 14, 09:19.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by copenhagen View Post
                How do you know its fake? Anything is possible but the amount of other documentation that partners it would suggest its not and there is a lot especially as researchers pulled them out of official files. You haven't read these books so how can you claim that I'm simply gullible?Why was nothing done to Cuba after Kennedy was gone? I know why but do you? Do you not know that many in the Joint Chiefs believed that the Communists were ahead of America, that war was inevitable and even a pre-emptive strike should be considered. Kennedy stormed out of the room when it was put to him. How do you not know that and live through it? You tell me but clearly you didn't know I'm afraid but then again why would you , its was all kept from the public and much of it still is. Again try Michael Dobbs' excellent book for example on the Cuban missile crisis and you will be in for a shock. Sorry you aren't aware of these things but I cant help that. My nationality is irrelevant in that regard. I suspect that having lived through it all and not realising is a bit annoying perhaps and you don't like the implication of that so you want to attack the messenger.
                It is so clearly a fake. Are you trying to be this obtuse? UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT? It is comical. Again, why is the Secret Service involved with this?
                The Joint Chiefs (big policy makers-lol) thought the communists were "ahead" at what? Were we playing football?
                I think you clearly know more than I...about what is in these books you have read. Try to remember that because somebody put it in a book doesn't make it true. I can show you multiple books that say that the Battle of the Bulge was a critical battle in WWII, that Germany could win the war with this offensive. This is an absurd distortion of the reality. Examine what you read.
                John

                Play La Marseillaise. Play it!

                Comment


                • Originally posted by JBark View Post
                  It is so clearly a fake. Are you trying to be this obtuse? UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT? It is comical. Again, why is the Secret Service involved with this?
                  The Joint Chiefs (big policy makers-lol) thought the communists were "ahead" at what? Were we playing football?
                  I think you clearly know more than I...about what is in these books you have read. Try to remember that because somebody put it in a book doesn't make it true. I can show you multiple books that say that the Battle of the Bulge was a critical battle in WWII, that Germany could win the war with this offensive. This is an absurd distortion of the reality. Examine what you read.
                  Hmmmm. I'm open the possibility that it is a fake but I suspect not.Are you open to the possibility that its genuine? I think this is the sign that you realise that you've moved into a subject you don't really understand (or thought you understood) and you're lashing out but that's ok. Maybe you get your information from a signal in the top of your head but to dismiss genuine scholarly research within books because you don't like what it might say is well a bit of a stretch. I think your comfortable world view has been tested a bit and you find it uncomfortable. What has been discussed in this thread can easily be read about which is where most of us follow our interests including the ones you are comfortable with no doubt. If you wish to stick to what you've always known that's your choice. When you've thought about it maybe you'll give this stuff a look. You know where to look now at least.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by copenhagen View Post
                    Hmmmm. I'm open the possibility that it is a fake but I suspect not...
                    Well let's work with this. Tell us;
                    1.) Where you got it,
                    2.) Have you ever seen a comparable document headed GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES? If so please share it with us.
                    3.) Explain why it does not have a Treasury Department heading
                    4.) Explain why the Secret Service is investigating LHO after his death.

                    This should help you come to a conclusion about whether it is fake or not.
                    John

                    Play La Marseillaise. Play it!

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by JBark View Post
                      Well let's work with this. Tell us;
                      1.) Where you got it,
                      2.) Have you ever seen a comparable document headed GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES? If so please share it with us.
                      3.) Explain why it does not have a Treasury Department heading
                      4.) Explain why the Secret Service is investigating LHO after his death.

                      This should help you come to a conclusion about whether it is fake or not.
                      I reject the premise you've made by editing my post. As whether its fake or not the data that shows Oswald was no lone nut is extensive yet you choose to ignore it as you're mind is made up. Why on earth do you think hte Secret Service would investigate LHO? Really you wonder why? I've told you where to investigate this yourself. So do so or do not. You will accuse me of backing out and all that other fluff but that matters not. I will not be able to convince you of anything no matter what I write so again it matters not. From your posts it is clear you have a lot of gaps in the knowledge of the period whether it be about JFK or the cold war around it. So I shall no longer play your game I'm afraid as your mind is closed. I've given you where to read just like I had to read unlike yourself and I have done the legwork because I was sceptical yet intrigued. Accuse me of whatever you will in your next post because this is about you really not the subject at hand. Adieu... Look up what that means if you like aswell...
                      Last edited by copenhagen; 30 Nov 14, 13:23.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by copenhagen View Post
                        I reject the premise you've made by editing my post. As whether its fake or not the data that shows Oswald was no lone nut is extensive yet you choose to ignore it as you're mind is made up. Why on earth do you think hte Secret Service would investigate LHO? Really you wonder why? I've told you where to investigate this yourself. So do so or do not. You will accuse me of backing out and all that other fluff but that matters not. I will not be able to convince you of anything no matter what I write so again it matters not. From your posts it is clear you have a lot of gaps in the knowledge of the period whether it be about JFK or the cold war around it. So I shall no longer play your game I'm afraid as your mind is closed. I've given you where to read just like I had to read unlike yourself and I have done the legwork because I was sceptical yet intrigued. Accuse me of whatever you will in your next post because this is about you really not the subject at hand. Adieu... Look up what that means if you like aswell...
                        I appreciate your sensitivity in my editing your post BUT I clearly showed that you said more. Anyone wishing to read more of what you said could simply scroll up or, as most of experienced posters know, click on the double arrow symbol next to your name to be taken to the post it came from. I see your need to try to accuse me of something since I am accusing you of posting a clearly faked memorandum. That falls flat on its face.
                        Did you notice that Bo questioned its authenticy right away? Why didn't you jump on him? Let me help you with a few things. First, no agency writes UNITED STATES GOVERNMENt on their heading or memorandi. They use a heading with their agency name and the department in the government that agency falls in. The Secret Service was a part of the Treasury Department in 1963. That is all you would see on the top of the page. Next, I asked why the Secret Service would investigate LHO in 1964 (after his death) because the areas of responsibility of the SS are financial crimes ( counterfeitting, bank fraud, etc.) and physical protection of the executive branch and others. I askedd you why they were investigating LHO because it falls outside their normal activities. In the future if you are going to post anything on this forum give the readers of the thread the opportunity to verify it and look at its source.
                        You may look at evidence like this and be easily convinced, I was once myself. I am playing devils advocate here but the problem, I think, is two fold. You have read and strongly believe one person's work to the point that no other point of view is acceptable to you. In your reading you do not understand that historians can lie or be wrong. The second problem is that you are being very sensitive to being found to be wrong. This is bad. It is no fun to be found to be wrong, I know, but eventually we learn to accept the mistake and move on. If you need to run away again I understand that, some day you will change I think.
                        John

                        Play La Marseillaise. Play it!

                        Comment


                        • Stop making assumptions about me. There are plenty of flase leads out there , the difference between me and you is that you're convinced they're all false and are closed to anything else. Am I 100% about the mob, no but I think the evidence now makes it highly likely. Evidence you haven't and aren't willing to read. You haven't read Waldron's work have you and I read it as a healthy sceptic. He's the one whose done the latest work on the Mafia and the Cuban coup material with the documentation coming from the archives, that has not been looked at before. Stop accusing me of being gullible etc which is your assumption and read it then come back and give me whatever you like. I've read it all , think its highly credible and have put it out there. Read it or don't read but until you have you cant accuse me of being gullible, believe everything I read etc etc. That's just your prejudice. Until you read it the discussion from this perspective is pointless as you don't understand the material. Its like saying a film is rubbish that you haven't seen and accusing me of this and that having seen it and liked it. Your attempt to paint me as a conspiracy nut is lame and cheap. There is no argument to win here. Only whether you will look at what has been shown to you and then decided upon. That's up to you

                          PS OK. I'm open to that particular one being dubious if not an out right fake. Its not part of Waldron's research however.... My mind is open to all possibilities but more so towards probability. So should you be...
                          Last edited by copenhagen; 30 Nov 14, 15:48.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by copenhagen View Post
                            Stop making assumptions about me. There are plenty of flase leads out there , the difference between me and you is that you're convinced they're all false and are closed to anything else. Am I 100% about the mob, no but I think the evidence now makes it highly likely. Evidence you haven't and aren't willing to read. You haven't read Waldron's work have you and I read it as a healthy sceptic. He's the one whose done the latest work on the Mafia and the Cuban coup material with the documentation coming from the archives, that has not been looked at before. Stop accusing me of being gullible etc which is your assumption and read it then come back and give me whatever you like. I've read it all , think its highly credible and have put it out there. Read it or don't read but until you have you cant accuse me of being gullible, believe everything I read etc etc. That's just your prejudice. Until you read it the discussion from this perspective is pointless as you don't understand the material. Its like saying a film is rubbish that you haven't seen and accusing me of this and that having seen it and liked it. Your attempt to paint me as a conspiracy nut is lame and cheap. There is no argument to win here. Only whether you will look at what has been shown to you and then decided upon. That's up to you

                            PS OK. I'm open to that particular one being dubious if not an out right fake. Its not part of Waldron's research however.... My mind is open to all possibilities but more so towards probability. So should you be...
                            (My emphasis.)

                            I'm a little confused. You say it is not from Waldron but in your post #460 you said this:

                            "That document and it's not the first time it's been posted here was from the Lamar Waldron reading. I really suggest you read hidden history and legacy of secrecy where he found these sources within government files. This includes the Operation Camtex file in which Carlos marcello admitted his complicity to an fbi informer in the 1980's. Also a CIA memo card confirming that they were aware of LHO's connections to David Ferrie and guy bannister both Carlos Marcello employees and did work for the CIA in respect to Castro in 1962/3. The reason that the media over the years don't touch this stuff because it basically cost you your job. Having Oswald as the lone killer solved a lot of problems for a lot of important people. If you like looking in rabbit holes then look down this one... See what you make of it.." (My emphasis.)

                            What goes on here?
                            John

                            Play La Marseillaise. Play it!

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by JBark View Post
                              (My emphasis.)

                              I'm a little confused. You say it is not from Waldron but in your post #460 you said this:

                              "That document and it's not the first time it's been posted here was from the Lamar Waldron reading. I really suggest you read hidden history and legacy of secrecy where he found these sources within government files. This includes the Operation Camtex file in which Carlos marcello admitted his complicity to an fbi informer in the 1980's. Also a CIA memo card confirming that they were aware of LHO's connections to David Ferrie and guy bannister both Carlos Marcello employees and did work for the CIA in respect to Castro in 1962/3. The reason that the media over the years don't touch this stuff because it basically cost you your job. Having Oswald as the lone killer solved a lot of problems for a lot of important people. If you like looking in rabbit holes then look down this one... See what you make of it.." (My emphasis.)

                              What goes on here?
                              What goes on is a mistake by me...

                              Are you willing though to read the Waldron research or not?

                              Comment


                              • JBark

                                The immediate opening for US to invade Cuba died with the destruction of the CIA Cuba Exile Army on the beaches of the Bay of Pigs. Cuba did not have to go "anywhere" but the correct situation for the US ground troops to invaded Cuba did go away. Additional reason to not invade with US troop was that JFK and the Russians were in talks and had a settlement. Both reasons the militant right wing elites were so angry with JFK.

                                You falsely claimed if JFK had lived he would have been forced to introduce ground troops due to the coming Gulf of Tonkin incidence that LBJ used to same effect. I believe and many do that the Gulf of Tonkin was fabricated by LBJ and Pentagon to lay the legal framework for the US ground invasion. JFK would likely not have gone along with this.

                                I agreed with your statement that "the CIA and military know of creative ways to bring us to war." Vietnam and Iraq are classic cases for that statement of your.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X