Coincidence?
I think NOT!
Them sneaky Swiss are behind everything.
Posted on 11/22/2013 6:50:32 PM PST by ReaganÜberAlles
Edited on 11/22/2013 7:58:21 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
FIFTY years ago this week President John Kennedy was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald, a Castro-supporting communist who had learned to shoot straight while in the US Marines. Half a century later, 61% of Americans believe in a conspiracy. Amazingly, this is the lowest level since the late 1960s.
Poster comments: There was no second gunman. There was no conspiracy.
There also was not a herd of pink elephants walking in the Reflecting Pool in DC, but I can't prove there wasn't. See the point?
Coincidence?
I think NOT!
Them sneaky Swiss are behind everything.
not only a bystander, but a shot missed everyone completely and hit a curb. The curb was still fully functional and fine, but they dug it up and replaced it.
Yes, it does.....AFTER it suddenly moves forward.
Addition of the scope brought the price to just under $20.
Oh boo hoo.
I bet you won’t name a sufficient number of Western leftist idiots forcibly stayed put in Moscow. Most of them were failed intelligence assets and had zero interest to get back home to be prosecuted.
They haven’t even killed their own dissidents after 1956, mostly deporting them abroad (Alex Solzhenintsyn, Joseph Brodsky, Nathan Sharansky to name just some of them).
There was no Soviet interest to kill Kennedy. Bay of Pigs disaster is not a sufficient reason because it did favour to both Castro and Soviet diplomacy ridiculing United States. It was also effectively used by Castro to purge his opponents.
But even if they really wanted to kill Kennedy it was beyond stupid to use Oswald who had obvious Soviet ties. In 1963 KGB had numerous uncompromised assets in US who could do the job just fine
What was in the Soviets’ interests in 1963, we don’t know any better than all of the Western Sovietologists knew in the 1980s of the state of Soviet Union. You will recall than none predicted the fall of the Soviet Empire. None! Claiming to know what the Soviets’ thinking was in the 1960s is as about the same as believing the domestic psychics on late night television. We know they were paranoid. We know they were murderous and arranged assassinations all over the world, especially in the Third World.
We’ll never know what was Oswald’s and Marina’s job for their beloved Soviet Union when they were let go in an unprecedented move by the KGB. Perhaps they were to be sleepers. Perhaps not.
>>What was in the Soviets’ interests in 1963, we don’t know any better than all of the Western Sovietologists knew in the 1980s of the state of Soviet Union. You will recall than none predicted the fall of the Soviet Empire. None!<<
>>We’ll never know what was Oswald’s and Marina’s job for their beloved Soviet Union when they were let go in an unprecedented move by the KGB. Perhaps they were to be sleepers. Perhaps not.<<
Exactly. “We don’t know”, “perhaps not” and “none” is that leaves no grounds for a version of commie involvement.
>>We know they were paranoid. We know they were murderous and arranged assassinations all over the world, especially in the Third World.<<
Why haven’t they killed McCarthy or Reagan?
I’m not sure how those would set Texans off. Was there an Earl Warren quotient to this? I remember as a kid seeing Impeach Earl Warren signs all over Texas.
I’m not sure how that would set Texans off. Earl Warran may have been a JFK appointment, and that may have angered them. As I told another FReeper, as a kid I remember seeing impeach Early Warran signs all over Texas.
Warren was appointed by Eisenhower.
Check this out:
He is best known for the decisions of the Warren Court, which ended school segregation and transformed many areas of American law, especially regarding the rights of the accused, ending public-school-sponsored prayer, and requiring "one-man-one vote" rules of apportionment. He made the Court a power center on a more even base with Congress and the presidency especially through four landmark decisions: Brown v. Board of Education (1954), Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), Reynolds v. Sims (1964), and Miranda v. Arizona (1966).
Kennedy was not very popular for the desegregation, and coupled with some of the other things listed above, Texans very will could have been furious with him on these issues.
Not saying that would set Texans off...Saying the Fed. Reserve does not want to be audited. The federal reserve has never been audited. The federal reserve is as federal as federal express. Oh darned. I brought me back to Jeckyl Isle.
Just because he was killed in Texas, does not mean that Texas killed him.
We will know in the end. For now it is fun to put puzzle pieces together.
OMG what film are you optically impaired or mentally challenged people watching? OK, look at the spray, what you immediately see is the head explode and all the blood and stuff go straight up and onto Jackie. Had that shot come from behind, all that would have covered Conally, not Jackie.
And alot more would have gone down, not up. Remember all the shots you’re alleging coming from Oswald came from 6 stories up.
This post is exactly the way I see it! Thanks!
Seriously: Go get your pipes cleaned and lay off.
You have no idea what my full opinion is (mine is the same as yours, lol) and I’m not going to debate someone attacking me like a liberal troll.
If you don’t like the latter then go back and read your comments and self-analyze.
fini
Now I don't get that at all. If a man was so anxious to make himself important he behaved exactly opposite after the assassination occurred. He allegedly snuck out of the building, killed a cop and then got subdued in a theater. He had a black eye the next day when he was murdered by Ruby during his transfer and all along he denied doing it and complained bitterly about his rights.
Someone looking to be so important would more likely take credit for the murder.
Examining other presidential assassinations and attempts, I believe all of them were cases where the shooter was identified (Booth) if not outright caught immediately: (Fromme, Hinckley, Guiteau and many others) Hinckley trying to impress Jodi Foster fessed up, right up front from the very beginning and it would seem to me that Oswald was even more desperate for attention by all accounts of people making the argument that this was strictly all about Oswald's ego and that's all there is to it.
Check this out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_assassination_attempts_and_plots
No, not buying it. That dog just won't hunt!
Okay..., I can see where that might cause some folks to be upset, but generally speaking those would be insiders. I don’t think the general public would get upset about it.
My original question was why Texans were upset with Kennedy. At the time it was widely accepted they were.
Thanks. It was not my contention that a Texan killed Kennedy.
Kennedy was warned by a lot of people to avoid Texas. He didn’t.
He was warned because it was accepted he was not very popular at all down there during that period.
I was merely trying to figure out what he had done that was so unpopular with Texans.
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.