JFK Conspiracy Docudrama on the History Channel Now

[Nickdfresh]

Well, what do you bros think?

No other murder in history has produced as much speculation as the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Forty years after he was fatally shot, more than 70 percent of polled Americans believe there was a conspiracy and that Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone. In this 2-hour special, ABC News Anchor Peter Jennings takes a fresh look at the assassination, the evidence, the various and many theories, and an exact computer simulation of the famous Abraham Zapruder film that offers surprising results.

Rating: TVPG

Running Time: 120 minutes

Genre:Political & Historical Figures

http://www.history.com/shows.do?action=detail&episodeId=174281

[Terry]

Think it's just as likely Oswald killed JFK in more or less the fashion Earl Warren and Co said it happened than it was the product of some kind of conspiracy.

If I had to go with a broader conspiracy, the one that seems to have the most substance and circumstantial evidence to support it would be some combination of events and players regarding the CIA, Cuba and the Mob.

But Ruby was just a crackpot who acted on his own, regardless.

Oswald was flirting with people involved with the whole Cuban question. LHO was a very peculiar man and was involved in some odd things around the time of the assassination...

Broad-based and vague theories like those posed by Oliver Stone are, to me, dubious at best.

The further away we get from the JFK murder in years, though, the less resonance it has for me; not too many years down the line, it's gonna have as much meaning as the Lincoln killing.

[Grant]

Well, there's not much that can be said on it since this documentary needs to be viewed in order to be appropriately commented on. Wasn't this one only made a few years ago?

[LoungeMachine]

No way in hell Oswald acted alone....

if he was even involved at all......

:gulp:

[thome]

Your trolling is fucking getting old, idiot...

Keep it up, and you're going to be banned from this forum...

I'm starting a Thome gibberish thread here:

http://www.rotharmy.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=52498

[Little Texan]

Originally posted by thome
http://www.jeannecarmen.com/

A old friend of ours died a month or so ago if you are into Burlesque babes like I am.

Sorry, i'm twisted like that .

Too bad we can't hear more from the bed partners.

Too bad no-one mentions these women who bring us the show night after night and they are so much more interesting than threads about Tittinie and what other skank is on the news.

The Bitches of today are horrible to look at and even more unintersting than the news dikks who report on them.



And this has what to do with the JFK Conspiracy?




Originally posted by thome
I think we all know who killed Kennedy ..?

A better question would be what killed off all your brain cells? That's assuming you even had a brain to begin with, of course.

[thome]

You are correct, I should have know all along it was the what that leans .

Incredible the simplicity of it all.....

One singular lineal thought.

OUTSTANDING!

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
No way in hell Oswald acted alone....

if he was even involved at all......

:gulp:

Um, dude, I think the fact he ambushed and shot a cop --finishing him off execution style-- tells me he at least had something to do with it...

[knuckleboner]

yeah, ballistically, it's been established that it's possible that a person from oswald's distance, with oswald's rifle could've gotten off the requisite shots in the requisite amount of time.

now, in reality, did oswald actually do that? maybe. maybe not. but it's definitely possible. and absent any real evidence to the contrary, i'm mildly in the lone shooter theory camp.

[FORD]

For one thing, Jack Ruby (real name Rubenstein) was anything BUT a random nut. He was a long time BCE flunkie who also had ties to the Giancana mob in Chicago.

Proof of his BCE ties.....

http://knowability.googlepages.com/RubyNixon.jpg

[FORD]

As for Oswald, the FBI and CIA admit that he did work for them at some point, but of course won't specify. But we all know that old J. Edna Hoover was no friend of the Kennedys.......

http://knowability.googlepages.com/OswaldCIA.jpg

[Bob Brubake]

I liked how they picked apart Oliver Stone's movie. JFK was a good movie, but it was full of holes. Specifically how Stone shortened the time frame Oswald had to shoot 3 shots(some old fart got off the 3 shots with a second to spare on the show), and Stone lied about Oswald being a bad marksman. Oswald was a fine marksman trained in the Marines.

Were others in on it, maybe, but we'll never know for sure.

Good show, gotta love the History Channel.

[hideyoursheep]

The autopsy photos were a cover-up.
Of what, I don't know, other than the wound was actually nothing like the one pictured.

Oswald was the gunman. Three shots from within 13 seconds. It's been proven it can be done in 9. And with a scope, even a mediocre
marksman can get those on target from that distance.

The "Magic Bullet"? Look at the trajectory, and it's very possible.

My therory of why the first shot missed his head was that the range was actually too close for the scope to be accurate.

[scamper]

Originally posted by FORD
For one thing, Jack Ruby (real name Rubenstein) was anything BUT a random nut. He was a long time BCE flunkie who also had ties to the Giancana mob in Chicago.

Proof of his BCE ties.....



How do you get to sleep at night?

[knuckleboner]

Originally posted by hideyoursheep
The autopsy photos were a cover-up.
Of what, I don't know, other than the wound was actually nothing like the one pictured.

Oswald was the gunman. Three shots from within 13 seconds. It's been proven it can be done in 9. And with a scope, even a mediocre
marksman can get those on target from that distance.

The "Magic Bullet"? Look at the trajectory, and it's very possible.

My therory of why the first shot missed his head was that the range was actually too close for the scope to be accurate.

i kinda believe that it's highly possible that any coverup is the government actually covering any (honest, but perhaps negligent) mistakes made in the pre-event security and in their initial inability to get oswald.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by hideyoursheep
[B]The autopsy photos were a cover-up.
Of what, I don't know, other than the wound was actually nothing like the one pictured.

There are two pictures: one showing JFKs head a mess from the final shot, the other showing it together again.

Because, they reconstructed his skull after the autopsy for the funeral...


Oswald was the gunman. Three shots from within 13 seconds. It's been proven it can be done in 9. And with a scope, even a mediocre
marksman can get those on target from that distance.

Almost everything regarding the Oswald-as-shooter theory has been vindicated by reenactments...

In fact, it was more plausible for him to have done it than even the Warren Commission believed...

The only grain of truth in the film is Stone's contention that the Carcano rifle/carbine was unreliable (for a bolt action rifle) and was prone to jamming. But that is all relative...


The "Magic Bullet"? Look at the trajectory, and it's very possible.

Yes, because people assume Gov. Connolly was sitting directly in front of JFK, he wasn't.

And the bullet was by no means "pristine" as it had obviously been scuffed and the lead core smashed out...


Stone also left out that Jim Garrison was prone to rambling and spouting off delusionally about tanks and troops in the streets of Dallas, which no one else saw...

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by knuckleboner
i kinda believe that it's highly possible that any coverup is the government actually covering any (honest, but perhaps negligent) mistakes made in the pre-event security and in their initial inability to get oswald.

I do agree...

[Seshmeister]

I used to watch these things and whatever and thought that there was something really fucking dodgy about it.

Now after seeing people fire the shots in the relevant time, finding out the little counter intuitive shit like how a bullet wound to the head from the front makes the head move forward etc etc I think the conspiracy shit is just shit.

Apart from the fact that every new really convincing documentary that comes out with a definative theory always gets shot down in flames the 9-11 shit has convinced me that it's all a crock. Stone's stuff for example is just nonsense.

Watching all of the 1000 ludicrous 9-11 conspiracies shows how these things develop. If you can have live footage of planes crashing into buildings and so many people come up with crap about controlled demolitions it shows how silly all the JFK stuff is.

There are all these JFK documentaries that say stuff like 'damn if only that camera had run for another few seconds' or 'imagine the resolution on a particular film was high enough to show some people on the knoll.'

Imagine on 9-11 the two planes hit within a minute of each other in say Chicago and there was no footage of the planes hitting the buildings. Can you imagine the cuntspiracy theories?

The 'magic bullet' was a bit odd but shit happens. Scientifically it's like saying 'What are the chances of the water in a pothole in the road exactly fitting the shape of the hole'. Just because an unlikely thing happened doesn't make it untrue unless you can prove that something else happened.

Noone has.

It's a million to one that anyone ever wins the national lottery but they do obviously.

The key thing to me is this crazy idea that government agencies are spectacularly brilliant and competant when it comes to conspiracy theories but shit at everything else.

Most conspiracy theories are based on crazy extrapolation of incompetance giving some hidden agenda. No they were just a bit crap.

Cheers!

:gulp:

[hideyoursheep]

http://i147.photobucket.com/albums/r316/smeghiggins/badgemanandco.jpg

After having studied this photo closely for decades, there is but one
obvious conclusion as to who "badgeman" is......


















http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f80/heinzk057/kevinbacon.jpg

[Warham]

The key thing to me is this crazy idea that government agencies are spectacularly brilliant and competant when it comes to conspiracy theories but shit at everything else.


Bingo.

[LoungeMachine]

Documents relating to JFK assassination revealed for 1st time in decades




Associated Press - February 18, 2008 12:33 PM ET

DALLAS (AP) - Long-hidden items and documents relating to the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy are being revealed for the first time in decades.

Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins presented the items at a news conference Monday. Watkins says they were locked in a safe for nearly two decades and that investigators had made him aware of them after he took office in 2006.

Among the items are documents relating to Kennedy assassin Lee Harvey Oswald and his killer, Jack Ruby, including a transcript of a purported conversation between them about killing the president. Curator Gary Mack of the Sixth Floor Museum near where the president was shot hasn't seen the transcript but doubts it is real.

The items also include Ruby's brown leather gun holster, two brass knuckles found on Ruby when he was arrested and a movie contract former Dallas District Attorney Henry Wade signed.

http://www.wbay.com/Global/story.asp?S=7887963

[thome]

"Dufrane ........party of two."

[Baby's On Fire]

Originally posted by Seshmeister
I used to watch these things and whatever and thought that there was something really fucking dodgy about it.

Now after seeing people fire the shots in the relevant time, finding out the little counter intuitive shit like how a bullet wound to the head from the front makes the head move forward etc etc I think the conspiracy shit is just shit.

Apart from the fact that every new really convincing documentary that comes out with a definative theory always gets shot down in flames the 9-11 shit has convinced me that it's all a crock. Stone's stuff for example is just nonsense.

Watching all of the 1000 ludicrous 9-11 conspiracies shows how these things develop. If you can have live footage of planes crashing into buildings and so many people come up with crap about controlled demolitions it shows how silly all the JFK stuff is.

There are all these JFK documentaries that say stuff like 'damn if only that camera had run for another few seconds' or 'imagine the resolution on a particular film was high enough to show some people on the knoll.'

Imagine on 9-11 the two planes hit within a minute of each other in say Chicago and there was no footage of the planes hitting the buildings. Can you imagine the cuntspiracy theories?

The 'magic bullet' was a bit odd but shit happens. Scientifically it's like saying 'What are the chances of the water in a pothole in the road exactly fitting the shape of the hole'. Just because an unlikely thing happened doesn't make it untrue unless you can prove that something else happened.

Noone has.

It's a million to one that anyone ever wins the national lottery but they do obviously.

The key thing to me is this crazy idea that government agencies are spectacularly brilliant and competant when it comes to conspiracy theories but shit at everything else.

Most conspiracy theories are based on crazy extrapolation of incompetance giving some hidden agenda. No they were just a bit crap.

Cheers!

:gulp:

The actual assassination logistics is not what is indicative of a conspiracy.

The fact is, the Secret Service broke every rule there is in protecting the president. There's no way they would allow a convertible in a motorcade to slow down to such a low speed in a curve, and especially not have the buildings overlooking the section of the street swarming with agents.

The breach of standard protocol is the sign of a conspiracy.

[thome]

Originally posted by Baby's On Fire
The actual assassination logistics is not what is indicative of a conspiracy.

The fact is, the Secret Service broke every rule there is in protecting the president. There's no way they would allow a convertible in a motorcade to slow down to such a low speed in a curve, and especially not have the buildings overlooking the section of the street swarming with agents.

The breach of standard protocol is the sign of a conspiracy.

What a silly post ....qualifies an FL jumble, good job.

If you want the answer you should have read my post that was deleted it's all there for anyone with half a brain.

[Terry]

The SS breach of protocol is a sign of unprofessional conduct, but that in and of itself is not proof of a conspiracy.

The Mannlicher-Carcano was more powerful than any carbine rifle used by the US Army.

Why did Oswald shout "This is it!" in the Texas Theater, if he didn't expect to be arrested for a crime. Why did he attempt to shoot a policeman there?

Why did he lie to police during his detention?

Why did Oswald, by his own admission, return to his rented room after the assassination and leave with his pistol? Why did he conceal the weapon? Who was he running from?

One is entitled to think what they want. However, innuedo, conjecture, discrepancies, pointing out possibilites (as opposed to probabilities) and allusions aren't conclusive proof. When someone has conclusive proof as to the identity of the other supposed assassins or the nature of the conspiracy, I'll be highly interested.

Self-styled 'critics' like Groden, Lifton and the like have a vested interest in propagating conspiracy theories. That vested interest would be $.

[ace diamond]

I SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING FILM FOOTAGE FOR EVERYONE'S REVIEW

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/4DwKK4rkeEM&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/4DwKK4rkeEM&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

[ace diamond]

VIDEO PART 2:
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/9g04cDIu7EI&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/9g04cDIu7EI&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

[ace diamond]

MY FINAL VIDEO ENTRY FOR YOUR REVIEW,
THE ZAPRUDER FILM, STABLIZED.

I URGE YOU TO WATCH THIS VERY CLOSELY.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ozx4_4DZp38&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ozx4_4DZp38&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

[ace diamond]

LEE HARVEY OSWALD DID NOT ACT ALONE, BUT HE DID FIRE THE FATAL SHOT TO KENNEDY'S HEAD THAT KILLED HIM.

[stringfelowhawk]

I saw a doc on HBO not long ago with Dr. Michael Baden who was asked to review the evidence for the Congressional hearings into the conspicracy surrounding JFK's death. The hearings took place in the 70's. He said there was a breakdown in nearly every procedure performed during an autopsy. The only evidence he had were the film, photos, and first hand accounts by the people who were in the room during the actual autopsy. It was rushed, they did not have a forensics photographer take the pictures which left few that were helpful. They conducted a lot of experiments with regard to which direction the headshot came from and it was conclussive that it did not matter because the head was just as likely to go backwards as it was forwards after being shot from either direction. He also said the brain couldn't be located to analyze because it had been buried in secret with the body when he was laid to rest. It was interesting. I'm on the fence on this one.
He also made me reevaluate my opinion of the OJ case when explained that Dr. Henry Lee and himself had examined blood evidence in photos that could not have been either Ron Goldman's or Nicole Simpson's because of its location and shape. To paraphrase he basically said they had conclusive evidence that would have proven without a doubt either OJ was guilty, innocent, or there was another party involved but was destroyed by the incompetence of the police in preserving it. It had to come from someone other than the two victims.
I'm not saying I believe he's innocent only that its possible he's not guilty or he didn't act alone.

[Grant]

Originally posted by Terry
Why did Oswald shout "This is it!" in the Texas Theater, if he didn't expect to be arrested for a crime. Why did he attempt to shoot a policeman there?

Why did he lie to police during his detention?

Why did Oswald, by his own admission, return to his rented room after the assassination and leave with his pistol? Why did he conceal the weapon? Who was he running from?

It's these precise actions by Oswald, coupled with the discovery of his Carcano on the 6th Floor, that have drawn suspicion much deeper to him. Even though I don't think that it was Oswald who pulled the trigger on the 6th Floor - due to the extreme lack of physical evidence to connect him to that notion, along with other discrepancies - I certainly don't rule out the possibility that he was part of an alleged plot in the assassination. Sometimes I wonder that after Oswald's flight from the Depository in the aftermath of the assassination, he was due to be flown out to an undisclosed location (perhaps by pilot David Ferrie whom he apparently associated with) but then the Tippet shooting resulted in his immediate arrest.


Originally posted by Terry
One is entitled to think what they want. However, innuedo, conjecture, discrepancies, pointing out possibilites (as opposed to probabilities) and allusions aren't conclusive proof. When someone has conclusive proof as to the identity of the other supposed assassins or the nature of the conspiracy, I'll be highly interested.

I don't think there'll ever be conclusive proof of a conspiracy in this case, just as there isn't with the Warren Commission's verdict. It's probably destined to remain in limbo, sadly.