+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-3.html)
+--- Thread: A hypothetical discussion on the JFK assassination (/thread-2189.html)
Pages:
1
2
A hypothetical discussion on the JFK assassination - Mark Ludwig - 19-09-2009
Hi
After much reading over many years on the JFK assassination I would like to pose a question or two of a hypothetical nature to the good and smart people on this forum who I value their intellect and motivation in discussing matters such as JFK.
hypotheses 1.
LHO was the lone shooter and acted alone and there was no conspiracy in the planning before the advent, he simply acted alone, in support of this, both Teddy and Jackie both said in private and in public that they believed beyond doubt, that he acted alone.
Now lets for a moment take them at their word, could it not be that the true conspiracy was that someone learned that there maybe an attempt on JFK's life (maybe even they knew that LHO was the person who would attempt this) and let it happen.
Now if we adopt this scenario for a sec, two things become apparent (well at least to me)
1 There was nothing to lose for the people/dept/CIA etc etc, that let this happen, if successful, they would get what they wanted (because of personal dislike of JFK and his policies or 'other' unknown agenda's) and it would be extremely easy to cover up, if unsuccessful they could use it as a political wedge for both JFK and the american people.
2 By letting this happen, it could always be used as stick for future presidents to keep them in line as there are always lone nuts who make threats and a smaller percentage that carry them out and if they don't tow the line, they may just let it happen again (Nixon cryptically hints as this) .
3 The warren commission was an inept body who made many mistakes and was manipulated in a way, as a smoke and mirrors trick over the years to mask what had really gone on.
If indeed these scenarios have any foundations at all it would explain how the relevant government bodies can keep saying with a straight face, that LHO acted alone, it can also be used to cover up the real truth and also make many researchers look in all the wrong places. Plus as i've stated before, it can be used a warning for future presidents ALA Clinton who stated publicly before taking office that he would look into the JFK assassination, but went extremely quiet on the matter once in office.
I hope I have made my points clearly as I am a self educated poor arty type
Ps I believe that the world changed forever on 11/22/63 for the worst and JFK and indeed to lesser extent the 60's was the last hope we really had for a LONG LONG time.
As written in the 30's by George Orwell in 1984, "If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever"
Any responses and thoughts no matter how critical, warmly welcomed, from those here.
Yours sincerely
Mark Ludwig
A hypothetical discussion on the JFK assassination - Magda Hassan - 19-09-2009
Hi Mark,
JFK isn't my area but taking all your hypothesis as is I can see a few problems.
Quote:Now lets for a moment take them at their word, could it not be that the true conspiracy was that someone learned that there maybe an attempt on JFK's life (maybe even they knew that LHO was the person who would attempt this) and let it happen.Well, this would need for LHO to have talked about killing Kennedy or wanting him killed and there is no evidence that he did and lots of evidence that he talked favorably about Kennedy. If he had talked in a threatening way about Kennedy the WC, FBI, SS would have jumped all over it and shouted from the roof tops. They didn't because they could find no instances of LHO doing such things. Quite the opposite.
Quote:1 There was nothing to lose for the people/dept/CIA etc etc, that let this happen, if successful, they would get what they wanted (because of personal dislike of JFK and his policies or 'other' unknown agenda's) and it would be extremely easy to cover up, if unsuccessful they could use it as a political wedge for both JFK and the american people.The same can be said if they 'made' it happen. Also it is a sure bet then. Nothing left to chance. Even, if, assuming that they knew LHO was hostile to Kennedy and was hostile enough to kill him, there is no guarantee of when, how, where. He could have not gone to work or quit his job or been fired from his job. he could have slept in and been late. He could have been called over by his boss to do a job while the motorcade was passing. How did they know LHO was going to pull this trick at his work place. Why not at the airport or the Trade Mart lunch? Too many variables.
Quote:2 By letting this happen, it could always be used as stick for future presidents to keep them in line as there are always lone nuts who make threats and a smaller percentage that carry them out and if they don't tow the line, they may just let it happen again (Nixon cryptically hints as this) .Yes, but carries even more menace if the President knows it was his Praetorian Guards that did it rather than a random one in a zillion lone nut.
Quote:3 The warren commission was an inept body who made many mistakes and was manipulated in a way, as a smoke and mirrors trick over the years to mask what had really gone on.The WC did a fine job. Just what it was intended to do.
Quote:If indeed these scenarios have any foundations at all it would explain how the relevant government bodies can keep saying with a straight face, that LHO acted alone, it can also be used to cover up the real truth and also make many researchers look in all the wrong places.The government has no problem lying to the people any time over any matter. They say war is peace. Black is white. Up is down. They have the MSM to show us the news and what is truth de jour.
Quote:...ALA Clinton who stated publicly before taking office that he would look into the JFK assassination, but went extremely quiet on the matter once in office.Yes, you've got to wonder what they tell them or show them once in office. Some seem to change so suddenly.
I don't know all the ins and outs of the Kennedy assassination but I don't buy that LHO was ever a lone nutter. I think he was involved in some way peripherally in the plot. He had way too many connections with intel people indeed they seemed to be his only friends. He wasn't just some guy working in a warehouse who decided to bring his gun to work. And JFK wasn't just unlucky. Both were positioned to be there that time that way.
A hypothetical discussion on the JFK assassination - Charles Drago - 19-09-2009
When does the formulation of a hypothesis cease to assist in the pursuit of truth and instead become an impediment to that quest?
When said formulation is applied to a long-established truth that commonly is denied for sinister purposes by individuals who would suffer grave consequences should said truth gain "official" acceptance within the broader culture.
To hypothesize that LHO acted alone -- or ever discharged a firearm in Dallas, Texas on Friday, November 22, 1963 -- serves no useful purpose other than to keep open the long-settled "debate" on the "who" of the JFK assassination -- which was, is now, and shall remain the first and last line of defense for the assassins and their heirs and willing executioners.
To hypothesize that the Warren Commission was honestly mistaken in drawing its "no conspiracy" conclusion is to deny a body of evidence so painstakingly assembled, meticulously vetted, and eloquently presented as to establish the contrary position -- that the WC's brief was to concoct evidence to support the LN lie -- beyond reasonable doubt and to the degree of metaphysical certitude.
A hypothetical discussion on the JFK assassination - Jack White - 19-09-2009
Charles, you are sew right!
Jack
A hypothetical discussion on the JFK assassination - Myra Bronstein - 19-09-2009
Charles Drago Wrote:...
To hypothesize that LHO acted alone -- or ever discharged a firearm in Dallas, Texas on Friday, November 22, 1963 -- serves no useful purpose ...
Precisely.
A hypothetical discussion on the JFK assassination - Myra Bronstein - 19-09-2009
Jack White Wrote:Charles, you are sew right!
Jack
Giggle, snort!
A hypothetical discussion on the JFK assassination - Charles Drago - 19-09-2009
Of course we're all familiar with the nearsighted seamstress who couldn't mend straight.
A hypothetical discussion on the JFK assassination - Paul Rigby - 19-09-2009
Magda Hassan Wrote:Yes, but carries even more menace if the President knows it was his Praetorian Guards that did it rather than a random one in a zillion lone nut.
Well put. Or, as in this sentence, one of the greatest in the literature of the assassination:
Quote:The warning is clear: like a Sultan surrounded by his Mamelukes, the titular ruler of U.S.A. is to continue to know he must not go too far.
Ivor Montagu, “The Warren Report,” Labour Monthly, November 1964, pp.499-503, & 506-509
http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1251&page=2
A hypothetical discussion on the JFK assassination - Mark Ludwig - 20-09-2009
Ok
I really didn't mean to ruffle any feathers and for what it is worth I don't believe that he acted alone (or at all really) and I believe in a massive conspiracy, I was simply trying to think out the square to further my understanding.
To Mr Drago
Even though your answer was very direct, I see your point.
Thanks all for responding.
A hypothetical discussion on the JFK assassination - Magda Hassan - 20-09-2009
Mark Ludwig Wrote:OkThat's alright Mark. The trick is not to be in the square to start with. That's where they want you - all confined and limited. Don't accept their parameters. They lead nowhere.
I really didn't mean to ruffle any feathers and for what it is worth I don't believe that he acted alone (or at all really) and I believe in a massive conspiracy, I was simply trying to think out the square to further my understanding.
To Mr Drago
Even though your answer was very direct, I see your point.
Thanks all for responding.