Oswald didn't shoot JFK

  • New to the board or trying to figure out how something works here? Check out the User Guide.
  • New 2019 Hours: The message board is closed between the hours of 4pm ET Thursday and 8:30am ET Tuesday.

    As always, the Board will be open to read and those who have those privileges can still send private messages and post to Profiles.

Do you think Oswald shot JFK?


  • Total voters
    21
Status
Not open for further replies.

kay brown

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2016
77
73
62
Why do people want to believe everything but the obvious, I wonder?
So I was wondering about your stance here as you have not said anything really of any substantial value .. but I went to the votes on the poll and saw you are one of the "yes" votes... yeah you are wrong.. but believe what you want ... 50 percent of the people don't believe Hillary Clinton is an evil possessed self serving lying b*tch... but she is and their opinions doesn't change that .. at one point the whole world believed that every thing revolved around the earth ... but it didnt change the fact that they were wrong did it..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: mal

staropeace

Richard Bachman's love child
Nov 28, 2006
15,192
48,705
Alberta,Canada
So I was wondering about your stance here as you have not said anything really of any substantial value .. but I went to the votes on the poll and saw you are one of the "yes" votes... yeah you are wrong.. but believe what you want ... 50 percent of the people don't believe Hillary Clinton is an evil possessed self serving lying b*tch... but she is and their opinions doesn't change that .. at one point the whole world believed that every thing revolved around the earth ... but it didnt change the fact that they were wrong did it..
I believe that Oswald killed him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mal and GNTLGNT

Tery

A homeward angel on the fly
Moderator
Apr 12, 2006
14,648
41,369
Bremerton, Washington, United States
Mr. Brown, you obviously have an opinion. For some reason, you are very invested in convincing others of what you believe. But your insistence that you -- and only you -- are entitled to an opinion on this topic is getting out of hand.

What you need to understand is that, when it comes to something that does not have hard, solid, reasonable and empirical evidence, everyone has a different opinion. Your insistence that everyone but you is wrong is churlish. Can you not live in a world where others are allowed to hold a different opinion? If this is the case, you really ought to avoid bringing up topics like this on message boards.

You are sidling up to warning territory on this. You are not allowed to be insulting to the other members of this MB. If you aren't able to follow that rule, you will find your time here to be limited. We treat one another with respect on this MB. Everyone is expected to act civil to one another.

We can hold a debate on any topic here. But, the ground rule is that each of us is entitled to our own opinion and, further, that opinion is to be given the same consideration as your own. You are free to disagree but you are not free to treat other Members as you have been.

I hope that you are able to check yourself and act responsibly. Thank you.
 

Blake

Well-Known Member
Feb 18, 2013
4,086
17,027
I agree that there were more than one shooter. I have read "Did the Mafia kill JFK" and obviously JFK and his brother were getting on their nerves. They weren't just playing ball, especially Bobby cracking down on organised crime. I think it was an 'in-house' assassination to tell you the truth. There were about nine things that the powers to be weren't happy about JFK, obviously one of the bigger ones was his idea that the 'military/industrial' complex that Eisenhower talked about was in need of change. Oswald was a crap marksman and the rifle he had couldn't have done it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mal and GNTLGNT

Blake

Well-Known Member
Feb 18, 2013
4,086
17,027
In 1952 my father worked at the Elks club in San Francisco. He told me that he found it strange how there was gangsters and lawman intermingling at the place. FBI guys and such. He figured you have to hang around them to bust them. One time he told me that the head chef got drunk. My father had done two years as an apprentice chef at the Grand Hotel in Stockholm. They were running about in a dither and my father said what you want. Some Italian Americans wanted some Italian food. Easy.
 

Moderator

Ms. Mod
Administrator
Jul 10, 2006
49,354
135,988
Maine
Mr. Brown, you obviously have an opinion. For some reason, you are very invested in convincing others of what you believe. But your insistence that you -- and only you -- are entitled to an opinion on this topic is getting out of hand.

What you need to understand is that, when it comes to something that does not have hard, solid, reasonable and empirical evidence, everyone has a different opinion. Your insistence that everyone but you is wrong is churlish. Can you not live in a world where others are allowed to hold a different opinion? If this is the case, you really ought to avoid bringing up topics like this on message boards.

You are sidling up to warning territory on this. You are not allowed to be insulting to the other members of this MB. If you aren't able to follow that rule, you will find your time here to be limited. We treat one another with respect on this MB. Everyone is expected to act civil to one another.

We can hold a debate on any topic here. But, the ground rule is that each of us is entitled to our own opinion and, further, that opinion is to be given the same consideration as your own. You are free to disagree but you are not free to treat other Members as you have been.

I hope that you are able to check yourself and act responsibly. Thank you.
Perfect response, Tery. I couldn't agree more.
 

RichardX

Well-Known Member
Sep 26, 2006
1,702
4,249
My experience is that you can't convince a JFK conspiracy theorist of Oswald's guilt with any amount of evidence, logic, or common sense. If that could be done, they would not be a conspiracy theorist to begin with. The JFK case actually is fairly simple and the evidence is overwhelming against Oswald. He was arrested within two hours of the crime. So why argue with a CTer? The only reason is to point out to others with an open mind the many falsehoods, half truths, and often wrong facts they espouse. Why do so many people accept a conspiracy? William Manchester said it was because if you put JFK on one end of a scale and Oswald on the other it doesn't balance. Some people need a more substantial reason for JFK's death. They don't want to accept that one deranged individual with a cheap rifle could be responsible. Oswald was also a weird dude. Defecting to the USSR and being an outspoken pro-marxist. Very odd for a guy in the 1960s south. It is also impossible to disprove the negative with 100 percent certainty. That leaves open the possibility - no matter how small or unsubstantiated - that Oswald was working with someone. There is no evidence of this but it can't be disproven with absolute certainty. That allows those of a paranoid tendency or with anti-government views to substitute their own pet theory (i.e. it was the mob, cubans, russians, aliens etc) for the facts. Last but not least if you are willing to nitpick every piece of evidence in any case (e.g. OJ) for long enough you can raise some doubt in the minds of a few. That doesn't mean there is real doubt but you can raise questions. And those with a bias can then suggest these false doubts add up to the outcome they desire. Most sane people do not obsess on this case and understandably don't know all the facts and evidence. They watch a TV show or hear some piece of false information and reasonably but not properly informed leave open the possibility of a conspiracy. If you haven't seen King's event in Dallas, you might want to watch as he did an excellent job detailing why he believes Oswald was guilty. I think it is on You Tube.
 

Bardo

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2011
305
1,408
san diego
In all my studies of JFK and his murder.. regarding Oswald.. I am convinced he was a patsy .. that he was clueless to the roll he was playing .. that the police knowingly marched him into public on camera knowing he would be killed ... and that he did know in advance of JFK .. that he was to be killed that morning...for one.. his behavior and location in the school book depository that morning basically proves his innocence.. to the shooting

.. HOWEVER... i DO believe he may have had prior knowlege of the planned murder of JFK...it makes no sense that he was not outside watching .. trying to get a view of Kennedy.. not with his interest in government.. and by James Files assertion that Owwald showed up at Files hotel room the week before the shooting.. assisted Files with showing him all around dallas.. dealey plaza ..getting to know the escape routes etc... to helping Files sight in the assasination weapons and retrieving shell casings from the ground... however according to files ...the subject of JFK never came up at all durring the few days they spent in each others company...Files and Oswald both were instramental in training cuban rebels in southern florida prior to the bay of pigs invasion ( this is where Files said he first met Oswald ).. ..that JFK pulled air support from the invasion at the last minute leading to its outright failure and death or incarceration and torcher of many of those cuban national rebels .. to say that files .. the cia .. anyone who had in a hand in planning the bay of pigs did in fact hate Kennedy's guts would be an understatement. JFK was despised by many ..
But you need to remember, your talking about many different realities here,.
Every time he steps thru, he is changing the future, so unless you are on the EXACT reality string as Jake the facts will not jive.
 

kay brown

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2016
77
73
62
Okay I'm starting the book and it's infinitely more elaborate than the series which hyped the concept that Oswald shot JFK. I am assuming Mr King believes that as well or other wise why would he so expertly try to convince us?
What i am also wondering about is why so far as I can tell by the subject lines on the posts on 11/22/63 is no one seems to doubt that.
Hmmm ..well if that is the prevailing belief on here...you're all wrong!
It is known who took the fatal head shot from the grassy knoll ...it is known who shot JFK in the back from the Dal Tex building across the street from the school book depository building where Oswald did not fire on JFK..it is not known who shot JFK in the throat from the triple underpass on the left front of Dealey Plaza.
Am I the only member of this forum who is calling Mr King out on this?..it's become an easy way to discredit an official story on national issues by simply calling them conspiracy theories which Mr King has made use of to bolster his plot that Oswald shot JFK.
I love the style in which Mr King writes. I have ready many of his books. He pulls much from his imagination including this book 11/22/63.
What is tragic though ..the lie that was up until 9 11 was the biggest lie in history perpetuated on the American Public ..a flimsy horrid lie that shrinks and evaporates under real investigation and scrutiny..it is tragic that someone with as much power as Stephen King has made use of that power to further fuel injustice and deception on the many readers who will just look at 11/22/63 as further reason to believe that terrible bullsh*t that Oswald killed JFK.
My final review on 11-22-1963 ..I enjoyed the book..the time travel aspect.. especially towards the end is pretty interesting. Once again Stephen King has proven that he has an extraordinary imagination.. an amusing with.. Okay niceties aside.. after the final paragraph.. the final sentence .. into his afterword where he goes on for several pages explaining why he believes through his extensive research that Oswald killed JFK .. alone no less ...well if anyone wants to peruse all the replys and my replys to their replys in this thread .. you will see that I think that notion is totally wrong ..in fact I go onto state that Owald did not fire a shot .. did not kill Officer Tibbit..many people on here who are also wrong say their are witnesses to this .. to that ..... believe what the heck you all want ...doesnt really matter now does it? I have done years of research .. I know who shot him from the Knoll ..who shot him from the rear from the Dal Tex building .. I know he was shot in the throat from the area of the triple underpass and that particular shooter is not been 100% identified... Mr King in his assessment ignores one glaring fact .. in 1979 The House Select Committee on Assassination ruled that due to the indisputable audio evidence recording from an open mic 4 shots .. that there was no way Oswald could have gotten off all 4 shots .. and that there had to be at least one additional shooter..and by definition that is a conspiracy. They also ruled that most likely there was 2 other shooters .. which there was .. that accounts for the soldiers who did the killing .. The planners .. the reasons.. well that had to do with LBJ ..Connally ...J Edgar Hoover ... certain individuals with in the CIA ( David Attlee Phillips) rich business cronies from TX of LBJ ... Sam Giacana from Chicago's organised crime ...who all had a hand in the planning and subsequent cover up ..Oswald from months before being a low level CIA asset was duped into certain behaviors that after JFK was killed would add the picture of him being the lone nut ..he was though a patsy ...I am fairly convinced though that he had a good idea that JFK was to be assassinated that day due to his activities the prior week in assisting James Files who was the knoll shooter in sighting in his weapons..and driving him around Dallas so Files could learn the area better .. Files stated though they had no discussion of what Files was doing there ..or JFK .. they knew each other prior due to the CIA involvement in training rebel cubans for the bay of pigs and they both had the same CIA handler..David Attlee Phillips ... believe though what you want ..in closing i recommend again Jim Marrs Crossfire " The Plot to Kill Kennedy" as one of the best investigative books written that totally destroys the official story ... and this web site JFKMURDERSOLVED.COM EXCLUSIVE - WARREN COMMISSION REPORT RIGGED
 
  • Like
Reactions: mal and Bardo

kay brown

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2016
77
73
62
Mr. Brown, you obviously have an opinion. For some reason, you are very invested in convincing others of what you believe. But your insistence that you -- and only you -- are entitled to an opinion on this topic is getting out of hand.

What you need to understand is that, when it comes to something that does not have hard, solid, reasonable and empirical evidence, everyone has a different opinion. Your insistence that everyone but you is wrong is churlish. Can you not live in a world where others are allowed to hold a different opinion? If this is the case, you really ought to avoid bringing up topics like this on message boards.

You are sidling up to warning territory on this. You are not allowed to be insulting to the other members of this MB. If you aren't able to follow that rule, you will find your time here to be limited. We treat one another with respect on this MB. Everyone is expected to act civil to one another.

We can hold a debate on any topic here. But, the ground rule is that each of us is entitled to our own opinion and, further, that opinion is to be given the same consideration as your own. You are free to disagree but you are not free to treat other Members as you have been.

I hope that you are able to check yourself and act responsibly. Thank you.
No you are behaving churlish.. what I said about others being wrong.. is based on facts that I know them to be wrong .. there was no insulting .. and only a mild attitude based on other attitudes directed towards my own reply .. but given that what you does not matter to me any more than the others .. you are basing your reply as the others on insufficient evidence .. meaning you have not been exposed to it ... and that is fine .. have a great day... believe what you want!
 
  • Like
Reactions: mal

kay brown

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2016
77
73
62
Mr. Brown, you obviously have an opinion. For some reason, you are very invested in convincing others of what you believe. But your insistence that you -- and only you -- are entitled to an opinion on this topic is getting out of hand.

What you need to understand is that, when it comes to something that does not have hard, solid, reasonable and empirical evidence, everyone has a different opinion. Your insistence that everyone but you is wrong is churlish. Can you not live in a world where others are allowed to hold a different opinion? If this is the case, you really ought to avoid bringing up topics like this on message boards.

You are sidling up to warning territory on this. You are not allowed to be insulting to the other members of this MB. If you aren't able to follow that rule, you will find your time here to be limited. We treat one another with respect on this MB. Everyone is expected to act civil to one another.

We can hold a debate on any topic here. But, the ground rule is that each of us is entitled to our own opinion and, further, that opinion is to be given the same consideration as your own. You are free to disagree but you are not free to treat other Members as you have been.

I hope that you are able to check yourself and act responsibly. Thank you.
my 2nd response to your replay ... by the way ...you seem to single me out and make observations that I said no one else has a right to there opinions which it totally untrue... after I stated in every incidence that I believe people thinking Oswald was the shooter was wrong.. i also stated they could believe what ever they wanted.. that they we were entitled to their own opinions .. and I notice in your effort to be all politically correct on myself and how I needed to "check myself"... did you go back through all the replys and particular those that were just behaving silly .. ig: the individual who donned tinfoil with his cat who also donned tinfoil" and give them a stern little politically correct lecture too? .. no I didnt think so ... I tell you what I do think of your warning ... not much .. I respect every one on here that believes what they want based on what they appear to be evidence they have been exposed to... I hold no malice .. your threat that my time time here unless I learn to "check myself" ... lord really ? .. as if this post .. or all of our replys really had any bearing to anything in reality anyway .. its a discussion about a fictional book .. and my beliefs while not reflect on this forum.. do a google search ...the majority of Americans believe that JFK was a conspiracy...with 75% believing LBJ was involved...over 60% believing the CIA had involvement (they did) over 55% believing the mob was involved (they were ) and the majority of Americans far outweigh the people who believe as Mr King that Oswald acted alone... I suggest ..if you want .. for anyone interested to read this page at least 10 good reasons in believing as Mr King that acted alone is "crazy" 10 Reasons It's Crazy to Think Lee Harvey Oswald Acted Alone to Kill JFK | The Stir
Have a nice day!
 
  • Like
Reactions: mal

Dana Jean

Moderator
Moderator
Apr 11, 2006
49,067
210,004
Thornfield
Kay, I'm in the camp he acted alone. BUT, that doesn't mean I'm not open to hear other sides. When new evidence comes out that I believe in my own mind, I might change my stance, but till then, that's where I stand.

Debate and discussion are always good things. This board just tries to be a little different about civility. And you may not have time for that and that seems to be the way of the world these days, the way people are treating each other, but there are other boards than these that love that type of discourse. Argue and debate your point passionately, just be kind and respectful to others.

No one is trying to silence you and I find the information interesting. It's the delivery that is abrasive.
 

kay brown

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2016
77
73
62
Kay, I'm in the camp he acted alone. BUT, that doesn't mean I'm not open to hear other sides. When new evidence comes out that I believe in my own mind, I might change my stance, but till then, that's where I stand.

Debate and discussion are always good things. This board just tries to be a little different about civility. And you may not have time for that and that seems to be the way of the world these days, the way people are treating each other, but there are other boards than these that love that type of discourse. Argue and debate your point passionately, just be kind and respectful to others.

No one is trying to silence you and I find the information interesting. It's the delivery that is abrasive.
HI Dana.. I have not been abrasive to anyone..I stated my opinion as this posts originator...and subsequently the approximate 6 pages of replys..at least 4 of them are filled up with well you decide..cat pictures...this that ..sentences that imply people are kooks if they believe any sort of conspiracy..then references to elvis being alive etc...and youbare calling all of that being civil?..really?...as the lady who got all authorative on here and said I'm churlish and approaching where I might need a good warning...you know I don't really care what anyone says on here.. if my saying ..you are wrong but you can believe what ever you want offends people..you that's their issue..they have like I said gone on for pages replying silly crap oh well...did I ever cry or complain..no.. cause I don't care.. I have my beliefs..they have there's.. .. I have put sources for people to access and study if they want ..if they really care and want to know who blew out JFK from the knoll..they can check it out make an informed decision..or not.. I dont care if some one wants to call me churlish or abrasive..I know I'm not..... as i said this small little group of people who are majority Oswald as the killer are responding to my post..not me theres...I could really care less if i got kicked off of it...whoo scary how will I live some people who think Oswald is the killer got mad cause I said I think they're wrong..
Have a nice day! ...believe whatever makes yiu happy!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mal

Dana Jean

Moderator
Moderator
Apr 11, 2006
49,067
210,004
Thornfield
HI Dana.. I have not been abrasive to anyone..I stated my opinion as this posts originator...and subsequently the approximate 6 pages of replys..at least 4 of them are filled up with well you decide..cat pictures...this that ..sentences that imply people are kooks if they believe any sort of conspiracy..then references to elvis being alive etc...and youbare calling all of that being civil?..really?...as the lady who got all authorative on here and said I'm churlish and approaching where I might need a good warning...you know I don't really care what anyone says on here.. if my saying ..you are wrong but you can believe what ever you want offends people..you that's their issue..they have like I said gone on for pages replying silly crap oh well...did I ever cry or complain..o.. cause I don't care.. I have my beliefs..they have there's.. .. I have put sources for people to access and study if they want ..if they really care and want to know who blew out JFK from the knoll..they can check it out make an informed decision..or not.. I dont care if some one wants to call me churlish or abrasive..I know I'm not..... as i said this small little group of people who are majority Oswald as the killer are responding to my post..not me theres...I could really care less if i got kicked off of it...whoo scary how will I live some people who think Oswald is the killer got mad cause I said I think they're wrong..
Have a nice day! ...believe whatever makes yiu happy!
Okay. Read what you just wrote. You don't find your approach abrasive? Obviously you are agitated by the way your wording is taking a slide down the rabbit hole. Take the chip off your shoulder and look around at the board. You say you don't care. Well, this community does care. We are like a family, and we do have dust-ups now and then, and we do admonish people for posts that are not appropriate. But, sometimes we do that privately, so you have no idea what a moderator has said to any of the above contributors.

People were teasing you. That's all.
 

kay brown

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2016
77
73
62
Okay. Read what you just wrote. You don't find your approach abrasive? Obviously you are agitated by the way your wording is taking a slide down the rabbit hole. Take the chip off your shoulder and look around at the board. You say you don't care. Well, this community does care. We are like a family, and we do have dust-ups now and then, and we do admonish people for posts that are not appropriate. But, sometimes we do that privately, so you have no idea what a moderator has said to any of the above contributors.

People were teasing you. That's all.
No actually you being abraisive.."take the chip off your shoulder" ..I think you are the getting agitated as you said and resulting in insulting me .. I don't care about the 5 pages of what you are calling teasing.. I'm using it in reference to you ..the other lady making reference to my behavior and excusing theirs..maybe I should have replied to both of you and hers by telling you both to go back to each one of their replys and chastise their behavior as well first showing that you are being objective and then addressing my so called behavior...no i think people get mad when someone calls their views wrong..again you say to look around this board..how much people care and they're family
..well that's okay 5 pages of cat pictures and replys that I can't see has anything to with the subject in question...again I'm just responding to you..I'm not mad..I'm not agitated..I didn't open my reply calling you names or such... I have a suggestion ...I'm willing if you are...let's let it go..you don't have to reply ..that's good then..and then I won't as well.. good bye..have a great rest of your day .. in case you do though want to slip in a last dig or something..it's okay..im just going to move on.. this post was never about attacking people personally for their erroneous (that's just my opinion) beliefs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mal

Dana Jean

Moderator
Moderator
Apr 11, 2006
49,067
210,004
Thornfield
And if you read what I said, you don't know what was said to the other contributors to this thread. How do you know they weren't chastised? You don't. So don't assume they weren't.

And again, I did not attack you for your beliefs. In fact, I quite clearly say I found them interesting. In my world, that's not an attack.

You have a good day too. Check out other parts of the board. Lots of good topics.
 

kay brown

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2016
77
73
62
I agree that there were more than one shooter. I have read "Did the Mafia kill JFK" and obviously JFK and his brother were getting on their nerves. They weren't just playing ball, especially Bobby cracking down on organised crime. I think it was an 'in-house' assassination to tell you the truth. There were about nine things that the powers to be weren't happy about JFK, obviously one of the bigger ones was his idea that the 'military/industrial' complex that Eisenhower talked about was in need of change. Oswald was a crap marksman and the rifle he had couldn't have done it.
Mr Cranky.. you are correct ..the specific mechanics of the killing was ordered by Sam Giacana..fulfilled by Charles Nicoletti one his top hit men and Lt..and James File's one of his favorite underlings. The larger picture had to do with LBJ..J Edgar Hoover..the CIA.. LBJs Texas cronies..they all had reason to feel threatened by Kennedy..they planned it...the mob primarily implemented the killing.. LBJ and Hoover along with Earl Warren (pressured by LBJ) orchestrated the cover up.. the CIA killed off many more people over the next few years to silence and tie off loose ends.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mal
Status
Not open for further replies.
The Institute - Coming September 10th, 2019