Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Any merit to Simkins "suite 8F" theory ?
#1
I must admit that my curiosity was raised when i first saw his posts on it at the now deceased education forum.

The only problem is that i have seen nothing written on it anywhere else that backs it up.

And for anyone thats not familiar the theory is that a group of rich oil people and businessmen could have been part of the assassination plot. They use to meet on a regular basis in Suite 8F of the Lamar hotel in Houston and they had strong reasons for opposing Kennedy. The oil depletion allowance theory plays into this idea because these rich oil men would have a motive because they wanted to prevent JFK from removing their allowance.
Reply
#2
At the facilitator (e.g. funding) level, I'd say it is very likely that some of them were involved.
Reply
#3
R.K. Locke Wrote:At the facilitator (e.g. funding) level, I'd say it is very likely that some of them were involved.

Speaking of funding i wonder what the cost would have been. Are we talking a few million or would this have been a major expense ( like over 100 million ).
Reply
#4
They couldn't control the Secret Service, the CIA, the FBI, the cover-up, the autopsy 'tricks', the setting up of Oswald as the Patsy; Mexico City; the removal of the launch codes, the phone outage in D.C., and one could go on for another 30-50 such. By the end of the process [just before the assassination] various groups had been brought 'on board', IMO, including some Oil Barons, some anti-Castro Cubans, Some 'off-the-shelf' and some standard CIA, some FBI, some MI, some Police, some Secret Service, some of the Military - up to its very highest ranks, some JCS, some politicians up to very high ranks, some foreign and some domestic mechanics, some Mafia, some ultra-right as well as others [and most of the persons used in these seemingly different groupings had previous connections or ongoing connections]. Someone initiated this and someone coordinated it from the top, down; and eliminated and/or controlled leaks, infiltrators, double-agents, defectors from the plot - and the massive ongoing cover-up. That central initiator nor control was not the 8F suite. They may have paid some hundreds of millions; an entire operation like that would have taken a billion, IMO, in 1963 - and MUCH more as time went on [for the cover-up and to buy continued silence, take care of problems, do the propaganda work, etc.]. Must be in the hundreds of billions by now. IMO. It was, after all, a secret coup d'etat of the world's most powerful nation...and ongoing still.
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply
#5
Peter

If were going to include the coverup that happened after the assassination ( including the hits on the witnesses ) i dont think we could ever put a cap on the cost.

I suppose i should have specified that i was thinking only in terms of the assassination itself and maybe the cost of getting the assassins out of the country if they ever made it out alive.
Reply
#6
Steve Minnerly Wrote:Peter

If were going to include the coverup that happened after the assassination ( including the hits on the witnesses ) i dont think we could ever put a cap on the cost.

I suppose i should have specified that i was thinking only in terms of the assassination itself and maybe the cost of getting the assassins out of the country if they ever made it out alive.

With respect, I think your conceptualization of the entire scenario, and thus the initial question, is a bit over-simplified. I'm not sure you have a full spectrum view of all that happened....moving the Cabinet out of the Country, moving people like Prouty to Antarctica [he was in New Zealand when it happened]; the fake SS men in DP; the years of threatening and elimination of witnesses...et al., ad nauseum. Add to that the several previous attempts [or practice runs or dodges to confuse?] in Chicago and in Florida [either 1 or 2]; the spying on and interference with the Garrison Trial; The SS spying on JKF, physically, in the months before...and again I don't care to attempt to list it all that happened before; during; after...it takes LOTS of reading the better books to begin to get the full view - and I don't claim to have learned it all, nor remember all I've read without consulting notes. Only 911, IMO, was more complex. Your 'assassination itself', to me, has not much meaning - it was a plan that, yes, involved the public murder of the President, but it was much more - to take over the USG more completely by a hidden power group and reverse certain directions JFK was heading or planning to head. The preparations [over years] and the cover-up [for 50 years] cannot, IMO be separated out from the 'assassination', unless you're only curious what a sharpshooter mechanic got paid for his days' work [many were subsequently eliminated if there was any hint they would talk or be discovered by researchers or nosy investigators]. And what about Nigel who was being controlled by both the CIA and the KGB? It was all part of the massive [and clever/complex] operation [with false trails and halls of mirrors built into the plans - and more added later]. I'm not sure what was behind your question. Have you read JFK and the Unspeakable? If not, I'd suggest starting there for the quickest coming up to speed on the basic motivations and actions. I'm no fan of Simkin [FAR from it!], but I don't even believe he thinks the Suite 8F alone was involved or even centrally involved/coordinating.....if he does, he's really got no clue or has an 'agenda'. Yes, they were involved - but many groups were, and each group was lured in by using their own private/selfish reasons to have JFK 'be gone'. The Central Power Group behind it all had all those individual reasons and more - control of the USA [from a hidden position] and permanent plans for endless wars; rule by hidden Oligarchy; mega MEGA profits; massive propaganda and control mechanisms; and heading toward neo-Feudalism/neo-Fascism, with a not-so-gradual dismantling of what was left of Constitutional Democracy. They have all but succeeded. The 'cost' to our liberty, National (and World) security and polity/rule of law is infinitely more important, IMO, than any dollar amounts. JFK's plans to control and subvert the Fed - perhaps do away with it eventually, was yet another reason for his demise...and a clue to another group involve. To simplify the event, is to not do it justice - and to make it impossible to see what was happening, motivating, and by whom.
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply
#7
The truth is that you really could say i have no conceptualization of the assassination. I ve always been a fan of that Shakespeare quote where he said that he realized he really didnt know very much.

I believe the assassination could have been small or it could have been much much larger than even you believe. I simply dont know. All i was trying to do was open up a area of debate as to the cost of it. I dont think ive ever seen that point discussed.

I also believe its possible that you come very close to the truth in your estimation of the cost. The only thing i really believe about the assassination is that tge lone nut theory is wrong but im willing to admit i could be incorrect about that too.
Reply
#8
Steve Minnerly Wrote:The only thing i really believe about the assassination is that tge lone nut theory is wrong but im willing to admit i could be incorrect about that too.

No, you couldn't.

Anyone with reasonable access to the evidence in this case who does not conclude that JFK was killed by conspirators is cognitively impaired and/or complicit in the crime.

No doubt. Not any more.

But perpetuation of doubt is the ultimate goal of the cover-up's Facilitators and the Sponsors who pull their strings.

Many questions remain unanswered.

The "conspiracy or LN?" question is NOT among them.
Reply
#9
Charles Drago Wrote:
Steve Minnerly Wrote:The only thing i really believe about the assassination is that tge lone nut theory is wrong but im willing to admit i could be incorrect about that too.

No, you couldn't.

Anyone with reasonable access to the evidence in this case who does not conclude that JFK was killed by conspirators is cognitively impaired and/or complicit in the crime.

No doubt. Not any more.

But perpetuation of doubt is the ultimate goal of the cover-up's Facilitators and the Sponsors who pull their strings.

Many questions remain unanswered.

The "conspiracy or LN?" question is NOT among them.

Steve. Your knowledge re. deep matters is very low. That you even consider the lone nut "theory" makes me wonder why you choose this forum.
It's one thing to be a newbie but you should be aware that the LN position is not sanctioned here.
I don't like to come down on new members but you really need to do some serious reading.
As Peter points out there are many fine books from which you can know the truth.

Dawn
Reply
#10
Charles Drago Wrote:
Steve Minnerly Wrote:The only thing i really believe about the assassination is that tge lone nut theory is wrong but im willing to admit i could be incorrect about that too.

No, you couldn't.

Anyone with reasonable access to the evidence in this case who does not conclude that JFK was killed by conspirators is cognitively impaired and/or complicit in the crime.
.

I do conclude that jfk was killed by conspirators. Matter of fact id say that i am 99.999999999% sure. I have never believed that i am 100% correct about anything including the idea that you or i exist.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  A Theory On The Genesis Of The Plot Peter Lemkin 2 9,839 05-06-2018, 10:15 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  Dulles and the Alien Presence - A Rant and a Theory Dean Bernard 2 2,444 04-01-2017, 04:37 PM
Last Post: Albert Doyle
  Air force suite for jackie, bombed.. Bernice Moore 0 1,830 05-09-2011, 02:23 PM
Last Post: Bernice Moore
  A new theory James Lewis 10 5,798 21-08-2011, 01:34 PM
Last Post: Gary Severson
  The ‘magic bullet’ theory and a coup d’etat in America James H. Fetzer 15 6,634 29-04-2010, 06:53 AM
Last Post: Phil Dragoo
  A new theory of the assassination James Lewis 27 8,875 08-04-2010, 11:05 PM
Last Post: Phil Dragoo
  The Elevator Escape Theory Phil Dragoo 0 3,015 Less than 1 minute ago
Last Post:
  There seems to be some confusion, I did not abandon the back seat lead car theory. 0 240 Less than 1 minute ago
Last Post:
  Peter Dale Scotts new GUT [Grand Unification Theory] Peter Lemkin 0 5,200 Less than 1 minute ago
Last Post:
  Bill O'Reilly and the LN -- Lone Nailer -- Theory Charles Drago 0 1,659 Less than 1 minute ago
Last Post:

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)