jfk/rfk/mlk assassinations - all conspiracies??

The Waiting Trophy ManThe Waiting Trophy Man Posts: 12,158
edited December 2006 in A Moving Train
were they all killed by lone gunmen, or was there a conspiracy involved in any/all of them?? i know a lot more about the kennedy assassination than the other 2, mostly because it was caught on film and he was the most powerful man in the world when he was killed. but i always wondered about the other assassinations. was martin luther king killed by the u.s. government because he was encouraging black men not to fight in the vietnam war?? and was rfk killed because he was going to stop the war if he was elected president?? or were they all really killed by lone nut assassins?? what are the chances, either way?? please discuss seriously.
Another habit says it's in love with you
Another habit says its long overdue
Another habit like an unwanted friend
I'm so happy with my righteous self
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • There have been lots of mystery and disappearing or destroyed evidence and witnesses in these cases. It's pretty interesting to read about to say the least. But, of course, it's hard to have a real discussion about these without the same old name calling bullshit by those who refuse to even read into it.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • chopitdownchopitdown Posts: 2,222
    J.P. Prewitt: "The fashion industry has been behind every major political assassination over the last 200 years. And behind every hit, a card-carrying male model."
    Matilda: "Okay, that's impossible."
    J.P. Prewitt: "Oh, yeah? Listen and learn, sweetness. Abe Lincoln wanted to abolish slavery, right? But, who do you think made the powdered wigs and colored leg stockings worn by our country's early leaders?"
    Derek: "Mugatu!"
    J.P. Prewitt: "Slaves, Derek."
    Derek: "Oh."
    J.P. Prewitt: "Without their free labor, prices on such items would have gone up tenfold. So the powers that be hired John Wilkes Booth, the original male/actor, to do Mr. Lincoln in. I'll go on. Dallas, Texas, 1963. Kennedy had just put a trade embargo on Cuba ostensibly halting the shipment of Cuban-manufactured Sansabelt slacks. Incredibly popular item at the time."
    Matilda: "Lee Harvey Oswald was not a male model."
    J.P. Prewitt: "You're damn right he wasn't. But those two lookers who capped Kennedy from the grassy knoll sure as hell were."

    i realize you wanted serious discussion, but i couldn't resist :)
    make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
  • enharmonicenharmonic Posts: 1,917
    I believe it's too coincidental that their murders were carried out in such a short time span for them to be unrelated events. It's no big secret that the Kennedy's were proponents of racial equality and the civil rights movement, but that might only be the tip of the iceberg.
  • enharmonic wrote:
    I believe it's too coincidental that their murders were carried out in such a short time span for them to be unrelated events.

    do you think all 3 assassins were patsies??
    Another habit says it's in love with you
    Another habit says its long overdue
    Another habit like an unwanted friend
    I'm so happy with my righteous self
  • enharmonicenharmonic Posts: 1,917
    No. I believe that all of them were either involved, or led to believe that they would be involved...which is at the very least makes them all guilty of conspiracy.

    Lee Havey Oswald didn't kill JFK, but he was trying to. His story is pretty intersting if you've done any reading on it. For instance, did you know that he was a CIA operative?

    Another interesting piece of info. Autopsy report asserts that the bullet that killed JFK came from behind, yet if you've ever shot something, you would know that the exit wound is the larger of the two holes. The back of JFK's skull was shot off. Bluuets go in "smooth" and come out all mangled up...often taking bigger chunks of fles and bone with them. That's fairly simple physics.

    Sirhan Sirhan shot RFK from the front, but the autopsy shows that RFK was shot behind the ear.
  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    chopitdown wrote:
    J.P. Prewitt: "The fashion industry has been behind every major political assassination over the last 200 years. And behind every hit, a card-carrying male model."
    Matilda: "Okay, that's impossible."
    J.P. Prewitt: "Oh, yeah? Listen and learn, sweetness. Abe Lincoln wanted to abolish slavery, right? But, who do you think made the powdered wigs and colored leg stockings worn by our country's early leaders?"
    Derek: "Mugatu!"
    J.P. Prewitt: "Slaves, Derek."
    Derek: "Oh."
    J.P. Prewitt: "Without their free labor, prices on such items would have gone up tenfold. So the powers that be hired John Wilkes Booth, the original male/actor, to do Mr. Lincoln in. I'll go on. Dallas, Texas, 1963. Kennedy had just put a trade embargo on Cuba ostensibly halting the shipment of Cuban-manufactured Sansabelt slacks. Incredibly popular item at the time."
    Matilda: "Lee Harvey Oswald was not a male model."
    J.P. Prewitt: "You're damn right he wasn't. But those two lookers who capped Kennedy from the grassy knoll sure as hell were."

    i realize you wanted serious discussion, but i couldn't resist :)
    One of the funniest movies ever.:D

    Matilda: I became...
    Hansel: What?
    Matilda: Bulimic.
    Derek Zoolander: You can read minds?

    On the topic at hand, I can't speak of rfk or mlk but there are reams of documents on the jfk hit that won't available for like another 40 years.
  • enharmonic wrote:
    No. I believe that all of them were either involved, or led to believe that they would be involved...which is at the very least makes them all guilty of conspiracy.

    Lee Havey Oswald didn't kill JFK, but he was trying to. His story is pretty intersting if you've done any reading on it. For instance, did you know that he was a CIA operative?

    Another interesting piece of info. Autopsy report asserts that the bullet that killed JFK came from behind, yet if you've ever shot something, you would know that the exit wound is the larger of the two holes. The back of JFK's skull was shot off. Bluuets go in "smooth" and come out all mangled up...often taking bigger chunks of fles and bone with them. That's fairly simple physics.

    Sirhan Sirhan shot RFK from the front, but the autopsy shows that RFK was shot behind the ear.

    And who's got the brain of JFK? Seriously.

    and how about these:

    At the time of the shooting Kennedy's cabinet was on a flight to Japan. When they learned of the shooting they searched for a codebook which contained encrypted communication with Washington. But the code book was missing.

    The initial Warren Commision Report stated that "A bullet entered his back at a point slightly below the shoulder to the right of the spine." This statement coinfirmed both eye witness accounts and medicial evidence. Representative Gerald ford directed the wording be changed to "A bullet had entered the back of his neckslightly to the right of his spine."

    Witnesses said JFK's body was wrapped in a sheet and placed in a bronze casket. It arrived a Bethesida wrapped in a rubber body bag and a slate gray military casket. The bronze casket was disposed of and GSA officials cliam to not know what happened to it.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • enharmonicenharmonic Posts: 1,917
    A big chunk of JFK's brain was shot out. Youtube for the Zapruder film.
  • HoonHoon Posts: 175
    I'm pretty sure MLK was shot exactly one year to the day later after he gave his Vietnam speech.
    If you keep yourself as the final arbiter you will be less susceptible to infection from cultural illusion.
  • I like how Oswald easily waltzed back into the US after defecting to Russia during the height of the Cold War. He declared himself a communist and supposedly gave military secrets to the Soviets but still miraculously was able to come back to the states without any repercussions for those actions. I'm sure it was just a misunderstanding.
    hate was just a legend
  • enharmonicenharmonic Posts: 1,917
    I like how Oswald easily waltzed back into the US after defecting to Russia during the height of the Cold War. He declared himself a communist and supposedly gave military secrets to the Soviets but still miraculously was able to come back to the states without any repercussions for those actions. I'm sure it was just a misunderstanding.

    He was CIA.

    It would not surprise me if the group that he thought he was involved in here in the U.S. was actually also CIA, running a counter-espionage unit designed to frame him for the assassination. That doesn't make him a patsy, because he truly conspired to kill JFK...though from a ridiculous angle with a rifle that couldn't hit the broad side of a barn.

    The Mannlicher was a POS compared to an M-1 Garand. No way could he have done it with the Mannlicher. With a Garand, he could have done it without breaking a sweat. There are guys that can take these old rifles even today, without modification, and put 3 shots within 2 inches of eachother at 150 yards. That's not too shabby for a gun that hasn't been used since the early days of Viet-Nam.

    The Mannlicher was a great choice for the official story, though. It's an Italian rifle, and WWII was not that long ago in the minds of most people living in the 60s.
  • El_KabongEl_Kabong Posts: 4,141
    enharmonic wrote:
    He was CIA.

    It would not surprise me if the group that he thought he was involved in here in the U.S. was actually also CIA, running a counter-espionage unit designed to frame him for the assassination. That doesn't make him a patsy, because he truly conspired to kill JFK...though from a ridiculous angle with a rifle that couldn't hit the broad side of a barn.

    The Mannlicher was a POS compared to an M-1 Garand. No way could he have done it with the Mannlicher. With a Garand, he could have done it without breaking a sweat. There are guys that can take these old rifles even today, without modification, and put 3 shots within 2 inches of eachother at 150 yards. That's not too shabby for a gun that hasn't been used since the early days of Viet-Nam.

    The Mannlicher was a great choice for the official story, though. It's an Italian rifle, and WWII was not that long ago in the minds of most people living in the 60s.


    not sure how to find it but i watched a video online a few months back about an hour, hour and a half long claiming the cia killed kennedy....he had been pressuring the fbi to shut down all the training camps the cia had in the us training cuban guerillas and was trying to severly limit the power of the cia
    standin above the crowd
    he had a voice that was strong and loud and
    i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
    eager to identify with
    someone above the crowd
    someone who seemed to feel the same
    someone prepared to lead the way
  • what about the assassinations of robert kennedy and martin luther king?? were they killed by cia, or lone gunmen??i'm especially suspicious of rfk's assassination since he was killed at the height of his popularity while running for president. all of a sudden some wacko is going to shoot him??
    Another habit says it's in love with you
    Another habit says its long overdue
    Another habit like an unwanted friend
    I'm so happy with my righteous self
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    I believe the mafia was involved in the JFK assisnation.
  • aBoxOfFear wrote:
    what about the assassinations of robert kennedy and martin luther king?? were they killed by cia, or lone gunmen??i'm especially suspicious of rfk's assassination since he was killed at the height of his popularity while running for president. all of a sudden some wacko is going to shoot him??

    RFK:

    -The autopsy ruled the fatal shot entered behind his right ear at a steep upward angle and came from a distance of less than one inch. Sirhan was never closer than 6 ft in front of the senator.

    -A private security guard, Thane Cesar was however, walking by Kennedy's right side and also carried a .22 caliber pistol. Witnesses saw him draw his pistol during the shooting. Cesar's black neck tie was pulled from his shirt as Kennedy fell and can be seen in photos. When questioned Cesar initially said he had sold the weapon shortly before the shooting but later decided he had sold it after the assassination. The weapon was then traces to it's new owner who said it had been stolen in a burglary shortly after Cesar was questioned.

    -Sirhan carried an 8 shot revolver. Two slugs were removed form Kennedy's body, 5 from other victims, one passed through the ceiling, two were found on the kitchen floor. LAPD officials eventually admitted they destoyed the door and ceiling panels and no one could locate records of tests conducted on these bullet holes.

    -One news photographer had his photos confiscated by the LAPD. He fought for years in court to have them returned. When a court finally ordered his pictures returned, a courier was sent to the state capitol to retrieve them from the state archives. The photos were then stolen from his car. An estimated 2,500 RFK assassination photos were unaccountably destroyed just three months after the event.

    Hmmm
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    aBoxOfFear wrote:
    what about the assassinations of robert kennedy and martin luther king?? were they killed by cia, or lone gunmen??i'm especially suspicious of rfk's assassination since he was killed at the height of his popularity while running for president. all of a sudden some wacko is going to shoot him??


    yes, absolutely some wacko can shoot him. being at the height of his popularity is even more of a reason for a wacko to come out of the wood work.
  • RFK:

    -The autopsy ruled the fatal shot entered behind his right ear at a steep upward angle and came from a distance of less than one inch. Sirhan was never closer than 6 ft in front of the senator.

    -A private security guard, Thane Cesar was however, walking by Kennedy's right side and also carried a .22 caliber pistol. Witnesses saw him draw his pistol during the shooting. Cesar's black neck tie was pulled from his shirt as Kennedy fell and can be seen in photos. When questioned Cesar initially said he had sold the weapon shortly before the shooting but later decided he had sold it after the assassination. The weapon was then traces to it's new owner who said it had been stolen in a burglary shortly after Cesar was questioned.

    -Sirhan carried an 8 shot revolver. Two slugs were removed form Kennedy's body, 5 from other victims, one passed through the ceiling, two were found on the kitchen floor. LAPD officials eventually admitted they destoyed the door and ceiling panels and no one could locate records of tests conducted on these bullet holes.

    -One news photographer had his photos confiscated by the LAPD. He fought for years in court to have them returned. When a court finally ordered his pictures returned, a courier was sent to the state capitol to retrieve them from the state archives. The photos were then stolen from his car. An estimated 2,500 RFK assassination photos were unaccountably destroyed just three months after the event.

    Hmmm


    but why would they have someone shoot him from behind when they are trying to blame it on sirhan sirhan firing from infront?? it's like the assassination of jfk. you have oswald shooting from behind and someone else shooting from the front. it complicates everything. because then you have to kill witnessess, destroy evidence and botch the autopsy. wouldn't it be easier to just pick a location to shoot from and shoot, and blame it on whoever you want to?? or is that how they pulled the assassinations off in the first place?? to complicate them as much as possible, have bullets coming from different directions, confuse the eyewitnesses, and make it so ridiculous that people don't know what to believe??
    Another habit says it's in love with you
    Another habit says its long overdue
    Another habit like an unwanted friend
    I'm so happy with my righteous self
  • aBoxOfFear wrote:
    but why would they have someone shoot him from behind when they are trying to blame it on sirhan sirhan firing from infront?? it's like the assassination of jfk. you have oswald shooting from behind and someone else shooting from the front. it complicates everything. because then you have to kill witnessess, destroy evidence and botch the autopsy. wouldn't it be easier to just pick a location to shoot from and shoot, and blame it on whoever you want to?? or is that how they pulled the assassinations off in the first place?? to complicate them as much as possible, have bullets coming from different directions, confuse the eyewitnesses, and make it so ridiculous that people don't know what to believe??


    Hey, I know. All we can do is look at the evidence and events that unfolded after the shooting. They don't add up but who knows what really happened? I just find it interesting to read about and discuss.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • jlew24asu wrote:
    yes, absolutely some wacko can shoot him. being at the height of his popularity is even more of a reason for a wacko to come out of the wood work.

    why didn't his opponent get shot instead?? why not someone else?? i just find it even more peculiar(such a gay word, i know) that it was another kennedy, especially when running for president. it was a political assassination and it changed the course of america. for some "nobody" like sirhan sirhan to be responsible, it just doesn't seem to fit. there has to be more to it than that, imo.
    Another habit says it's in love with you
    Another habit says its long overdue
    Another habit like an unwanted friend
    I'm so happy with my righteous self
  • bigmuzzbigmuzz Posts: 299
    i read a whole heap of stuff on the net a couple weeks ago about JFK assassination...there is a shitload of evidence that points to the conspiracy theories....and the fact that oswald didnt act alone...

    youtube has HEAPS of stuff from the zapruder footage on it

    check out this site...pretty interesting

    http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/JFK/jfk.html

    it also has stuff on the other assasinations u were talkin bout....

    but really, is anyone ever really gonna know exactly what happened?!?!?!
    Sydney Wed 8 Nov 2006....

    when all are one and one is all, to be a rock and not to roll.........

    see me @ www.myspace.com/bigmuzz

    keep on rockin!.......
  • I think that JFK was done in by our government paving the way for the Vietnam war. I think that there are so many people involved even those who literally pulled the triggers don't know who REALLY killed JFK. I think jlew24asu is right with the mob thinking. JFK pissed of the mob by sleeping with some head mobsters wife/mistress and wanted Kennedy taken out. I think the mob though were only the hitmen, this was far too comlicated for the mob to pull off.

    I think RFK was killed because of him wanting to end the war in Vietnam. If anyone knows a great site to find out more on the RFK/MLK assassinations please post them. I'd be interested in reading into those, I've been into the JFK assassination since I was 9 years old and have always wondered about the others
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    this was far too complicated for the mob to pull off.

    I have read alot of books on the mob. certain hobby of mine.

    I completely disagree. they very much could pull this off.
  • jlew24asu wrote:
    I have read alot of books on the mob. certain hobby of mine.

    I completely disagree. they very much could pull this off.

    Could the mob had the parade route changed? possibly.

    Could the mob had told the Texas National Guard to stand down that day? Not a chance
  • enharmonicenharmonic Posts: 1,917
    aBoxOfFear wrote:
    but why would they have someone shoot him from behind when they are trying to blame it on sirhan sirhan firing from infront?? it's like the assassination of jfk. you have oswald shooting from behind and someone else shooting from the front. it complicates everything. because then you have to kill witnessess, destroy evidence and botch the autopsy.

    You don't have to kill witnesses. It is easier to discredit everyone who is/was a potential witness when you have multiple diversions such that no one is sure of what they saw, or who was the real shooter. Magicians call this type of subtle diversion a feint. It is intentional misdirection.

    Those who know or knew what really happened, would be able to discredit any case brought against them unless they had someone who was directly involved in the staging of the event. For example, Oswald was killed before he could talk...but even if he did talk, there is a very good chance that the only part ofthe plan he had knowledge of was the part that involved him. The "decoy" plan if you will. He would have no knowledge of the other, real plan. That is how he himself would ultimately be discredited had he made it to court. Still, he obviously knew enough to give the people who did it great pause.

    Oddly enough, lots of witnesses at the JFK assassination died either mysteriously, or violently in the years that followed.
  • im suprised someone hasn't 'wacked' bush. do yall think homeland security will knock on my door later?
    you're a real hooker. im gonna slap you in public.
    ~Ron Burgundy
Sign In or Register to comment.