Posted on 01/10/2009 12:11:06 PM PST by gusopol3
new, heavily researched book on John F. Kennedy's murder and its investigation sees links with a bagful of sensational stories, including the killing of Martin Luther King Jr. The links connect with the main contention in "Legacy of Secrecy/The Long Shadow of the JFK Assassination" (Counterpoint, 848 pages, $33), by Lamar Waldron with Thom Hartmann, that the assassination was engineered by Carlos Marcello, longtime Mafia boss in New Orleans.
(Excerpt) Read more at philly.com ...
I bet Halliburton did it.
Let me guess, the VRWC.
Dueling political mobsters?
Space aliens were responsible. Arrest ET.
all of Michael Moore's stuff is heavily researched, also, but it doesn't make it true
I still say it’s our government that did it. They are the only ones that have the means to do it.
if any government assisted the commie, Lee Harvey Oswald, it was Castro, IMHO.
We need the photo of the not this *hit again. Somebody please post it.
naw - the new agers did it.
Probably all tied in; but the government is the only one that had the means to really cover it up.
Think about your assertion:
The government carries off 3 high profile hits with each implication only going one person deep?
No, this was Mafia work.
They’re much more capable of cleaning up trails of dirty laundry than the government.
I do find it plausible that the mob had a hand in the JFK assassination. The Kennedys happily accepted assistance from the mob in getting JFK elected, and then double-crossed them. I suspect old Joe would have advised against RFK’s attack on the mob had he not been incapacitated by a stroke. Old Joe was a scoundrel, but he wasn’t stupid.
That’s exactly who I was thinking of! lol
I also found the book DoubleCross to be very believable. I believe the mob was involved in some way.
So assassinations got to be kind of a hobby for Carlos Marcello? That's a little too hard to believe.
But why would this guy have King killed? I still think it was Marilyn Monroe’s ghost getting even for the Kennedy’s having bumped her off.
Oswald had the means.
There should be a tinfoil hat usage requirement to read this article
They all had the means; but the government is the only one that has the full ability to coverup.
He did? What were they?
But it’s not covered up. The crime was solved at the time.
The Kennedys had ties to both the mafia and the government. I still say our government had the complete means of covering this up. The others may be involved; but the government is the only one that could carry the coverup out.
What else did he need?
I am sure they are.
Sure it was. Maybe in some circles; but not the ones we are privy to.
Oswald took his rifle to work and shot the President. It's one of the most documented events in history. There are many details. But that is the bottom line.
Maybe; but is it the truth?
The Kennedys had ties to the government? I did not know that!
Of course, then, it had to be a government conspiracy.
It all makes sense now.
This book was given to me as a Christmas present... At first I thought "why this title?", as I had expressed no interest in further study of the assassination... But after flipping the book open to the middle just to see how it was written and then finding myself having covered 40 pages without putting it down, I thought "Wow, go back and start at the beginning... These guys have done their homework!" As it turns out, it was 30 years worth of homework...
The book is very hard to put down once you start it... The authors are tying things together with facts discovered through their research of documents in the U.S and Russia, along with interviews of former Castro confidants that left Cuba. One interview was with Rolando Cubela Secades, who help Castro with the revolution only to feel betrayed by Castro when Castro turned to communism. Cubela stayed with the revolution with hopes of taking out the Castro brothers and bringing true democracy to Cuba.
Many people don't understand that the revolution wasn't originally communist, but was instead "anti-Batista." It wasn't until after Batista's overthrow and after much pushing by Raul [always the more devout communist than Fidel] that Fidel publicly stated that he was a "Socialist". I always found it offensive for Castro to call himself a "socialist" since I was taught in high school that the chief difference between socialism and communism is that socialism comes about through gradual change, while communism comes about through violent revolution...
Raven6
Exactly. What this means is the author had to cover up his lies with piles of “What Ifs” “Could Bes” or May Haves” The truth is usually simple.
Oh and that the author has no social life beyond mommy's basement and the library...
the elite media has been shielding Castro for almost 50 years, throwing a cloak of “good intentions” over him, That’s why the notion that it’s only been recently that we’ve gotten away from journalistic objectivity or balance is such a howler. And that goes for Watergate and the readily accepted concept that Nixon was some kind of sinister aberration from politics as usual.
There's more evidence that Oswald was not the shooter, than evidence that he was.
Maybe he did; but our government can keep the lid on. They are the only ones that can.
I wonder if there weren't TWO shooters present that day who weren't in any way involved with one another or even aware of one another’s presence. There is pretty good enhanced photographic evidence (BBC'S ‘The Men Who Killed The Kennedys’’) that another shooter was behind a fence (on the knoll?) Between the two (Oswald and Anonymous) they may have represented some combination of lone nut/Castro/Mob. This would cut the number of people actually in on the plans down to a very small number, all the while creating confusing evidence that naturally hinted at some kind of Big Plot. I have always had trouble believing any conspiracy involving a lot of people would have been kept quiet.
It is one of the strongest murder cases there ever was. There is no doubt about Oswald's guilt. The only thing that makes people doubt it is the 45 years of conspiracists trying to convince people otherwise by misrepresenting the evidence. Just like they try to do now with 9-11.
JFK deservered just what he recieved that fateful November afternoon in Dallas.
And there was no coverup.
"He worked at the place the shots were fired from. He owned a rifle. He took it to work that day and used it. His rifle fired the bullets."
All of the points you make are open to debate.
Not really. Not to rational debate anyway. People can make any claim about anything. That's not the same thing as being open to debate.
"For example, when his wife Marina was questioned, she was unable to identify the rifle as Oswald's."
Citation?
"She later changed her testimony in this, as in many other matters."
Marina has consistently said that Oswald did it. Even now, when conspiracists have surrounded her for years and convinced her that something else was going on, she still insists that Oswald did it. Because she was there and she knew the facts, and knew him.
"There's more evidence that Oswald was not the shooter, than evidence that he was."
No there isn't. Show me some evidence that Oswald was not the shooter. Again, someone making a claim is not evidence.
That’s pretty harsh.
There is no photographic evidence of a second shooter. "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" is a joke. Worse than a Michael Moore movie. Even the rational and well-informed conspiracists know it is garbage.
Nonsense. For the price of a couple bullets and an unobstructed shot, any nut can shoot a president.
In fact, six nuts have done it.
Maybe.
Never said it was a conspiracy.
Maybe
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.