Posted on 11/24/2008 12:59:19 PM PST by AJKauf
Two massive books by Lamar Waldron and Thom Hartmann, most recently Legacy of Secrecy have me going back to the Mob hit theory although I just don’t buy their unnecessary post-assassination cover-up theory which involves a supposed coup against Castro. Like that was more shameful than the murder of a president. But they’ve done a service by digging up the deepest, darkest, most disturbing archival evidence to support their Mob hit theory.
Anyway, I’m interested: what do people think, those of you who still think about it? Some may say, who cares we’ll never know, it’s old news, but I’m not satisfied with that. Historical truth means a lot to me. At one point LBJ said nuclear war was at stake. I want to know if there was someone behind Oswald and why. It’s more important than how Yale could allow Harvard to score two touchdowns (and two two-point conversions) in 42 seconds–though I still can’t reconcile myself to that either...
(Excerpt) Read more at pajamasmedia.com ...
A theory that I have not seen recently is that Oswald was really after John Connally because Connally had refused Oswald’s application to have his undesirable Marine Corps discharge cleared up. Presumably he saw an opportunity too good to miss when he realized he could get the drop on Connally and have JFK thrown in too. It’s sometimes forgotten that Oswald is believed to have taken a shot at General Edwin Walker through his Dallas area window some months earlier. Walker was a John Birch Society member who was not in favor with communists. Not sure of sources for this, but probably Marina Oswald, after the JFK assassination.
“but there must have been two”
Why?
“There were TWO gunmen, totally unknown to each other, totally unconnected to each other. It was a “hit” by Oswald and some other unknown that just happened to select the same place because of its location and ease of use. The other may have been CIA or whoever, but there must have been two..........”
AAAAAh, makes perfect sense, since the 1992 movie had competing theories .... IT WAS BOTH OF THEM. That means the two parties were the Mob and a Cuban assassin.
Bush’s Fault + Global Warming.
Your brother-in-law’s middle name isn’t “Wayne” is it?
That Jack Ruby was some kind of long range thinker, huh?
Most likely: lone nut—Oswald—shot JFK.
There’s a ton of evidence that says he did (he had the means, the opportunity and behaved as if he was guilty—murdering police officer Tippett—and very little that says he didn’t.
Bugliosi’s book covers it all pretty well in 1500 pages.
“there was a little noticed article about a local Mafia don, Carlos Marcello, who was scheduled to go on trial for deportation the next day, the 22nd. I’m sure it is just a coincidence.”
Please explain how shooting the president would help Marcello’s chances. Was JFK lead prosecutor?
Forty-Five years later who really cares?
Someone shot him dead. The end.
C.G.B. Spender
“For more reasons than I have the time to explain here I am 100% convinced that the Zapruder film shows the fatal head shot from in front.”
From frame 312 to frame 313, when the bullet hits, you can clearly see the president’s head move forward. Plus, how do you explain the fact that the right front of Kennedy’s head explodes while the back of his skull appears to stay completely intact?
“and then the mob’s guy off’d Oswald so he couldn’t talk.”
You mean after Oswald had been interrogated by the police for two days? Yeah, they surely shut him up.
My theory is the Dallas Police Department was run by a bunch of yahoos.
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.