PDA

View Full Version : Who really killed JFK?



LebonJaymes
06-06-2010, 10:57 AM
I want to know.

There are conspiracy theories that the mob plotted the assasination

CardiacCavs
06-06-2010, 11:19 AM
Aliens.

cavsfanforever12
06-06-2010, 11:20 AM
Chuck Norris

DonGilbert
06-06-2010, 11:21 AM
This Guy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1RtcTb5F9g

MikeOC33
06-06-2010, 11:39 AM
Good question. After hours of careful study of all available film and documents, it looks to me like it was a clear case of suicide. The pressure got to him, poor fella...:(

Maximus
06-06-2010, 11:41 AM
George Bush

CardiacCavs
06-06-2010, 11:42 AM
This Guy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1RtcTb5F9g

Was she really crying? really?

MYoung23
06-06-2010, 12:01 PM
Military industrial complex in collaboration with elements of the mob.

Chardon
06-06-2010, 12:27 PM
Barrack Obama.

Typhoon
06-06-2010, 12:44 PM
The Comedian from Watchmen

The Voice
06-06-2010, 12:47 PM
Lee Harvey Oswald

Chardon
06-06-2010, 12:53 PM
Why do they always use Middle Names when somone assasinates someone.
John Wilkes Booth (Lincoln)
Lee Harvey Oswald (JFK)
Mark David Chapman (Lennon)
James Earl Ray (MLK Jr.)

The Voice
06-06-2010, 12:58 PM
Why do they always use Middle Names when somone assasinates someone.
John Wilkes Booth (Lincoln)
Lee Harvey Oswald (JFK)
Mark David Chapman (Lennon)
James Earl Ray (MLK Jr.)

Good movie, but you're leaving out the following to support your evidence:
1. Leon Czolgosz (William McKinley)
2. Sirhan Sirhan (Bobby Kennedy)
3. Charles J. Guiteau (James Garfield) <<<<--- What's the J stand for?
4. Thomas Hagan (Malcom X)

Cratylus
06-06-2010, 01:25 PM
You need to watch two things:

1) Oliver Stone's "JFK"
2) "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" documentary

gourimoko
06-06-2010, 01:46 PM
George H.W. Bush

Fixed.

I'm not saying he pulled the trigger (one of many triggers), and I don't think he did. But I believe he was involved, even if only tangentially. I don't think anyone can prove who did what because the cover-up was done so meticulously; however, I don't think it unreasonable to reject the findings of the Warren Commission and look elsewhere for other evidence.

Where was he the day of the assassination? What city? Where was he going the next day?
Where was he employed? (name of the company)
What was the name of the Bay of Pigs operation?
Where are the SEC records for this company from 1960 to 1967?
What happened to them, and what is the official explanation?
Was Bush in the CIA at the time?
When Bush was appointed director of CIA, did he say he had any CIA experience prior?
How about when he ran for President?
Did Bush have any involvement with anti-Castro Cubans?
According to the FBI, who called their Dallas office to suggest a lead in the assassination 1 hour after it happened?

Hmm...

Any takers are welcome..

cdt
06-06-2010, 02:05 PM
Good movie, but you're leaving out the following to support your evidence:
1. Leon Czolgosz (William McKinley)
2. Sirhan Sirhan (Bobby Kennedy)
3. Charles J. Guiteau (James Garfield) <<<<--- What's the J stand for?
4. Thomas Hagan (Malcom X)

Sonofabitch I thought Tom was strictly a lawyer and Consigliere to Don Corleone?

Lord Mar
06-06-2010, 02:09 PM
The terrorists.

Ayatolla of Slamola
06-06-2010, 02:37 PM
Fixed.

I'm not saying he pulled the trigger (one of many triggers), and I don't think he did. But I believe he was involved, even if only tangentially. I don't think anyone can prove who did what because the cover-up was done so meticulously; however, I don't think it unreasonable to reject the findings of the Warren Commission and look elsewhere for other evidence.

Where was he the day of the assassination? What city? Where was he going the next day?
Where was he employed? (name of the company)
What was the name of the Bay of Pigs operation?
Where are the SEC records for this company from 1960 to 1967?
What happened to them, and what is the official explanation?
Was Bush in the CIA at the time?
When Bush was appointed director of CIA, did he say he had any CIA experience prior?
How about when he ran for President?
Did Bush have any involvement with anti-Castro Cubans?
According to the FBI, who called their Dallas office to suggest a lead in the assassination 1 hour after it happened?

Hmm...

Any takers are welcome..

"That's how a conspiracy works. Them boys on the Grassy Knoll they were dead within three hours, buried in the damned desert, unmarked graves out past Terlingua."

KCOTT
06-06-2010, 03:40 PM
the reptilians

Coyote850
06-06-2010, 04:21 PM
While Oliver Stones JFK is a good movie is is not very good as far as facts. The discovery channel has had several documentaries on the death of JFK, they are the best things to watch for the actual facts.
Some facts about the happenings of that day:

The route JFK took was changed at the last minute, without Secret Service approval.
Yes one bullet hit both JFK and Gov Connaly and it was not a magic bullet. When you line up how everyone was sitting, its clear that the bullet did all the damage.
Oswald was an expert shot, (exact opposite of whats said in "JFK".") He easily could have made the kill shot. And in fact I'm suprised it took him 3 shots to make the kill. In the one documenatry it shows Oswalds USMC score cards for qualifiying with a rifle. The guy could shoot extremely well.
Personally I think Oswald made the shot, but he had help and did not act alone. In the end he was set up to take the fall and Ruby made sure he stayed quiet.

Marcus
06-06-2010, 04:54 PM
Personally I think Oswald made the shot, but he had help and did not act alone. In the end he was set up to take the fall and Ruby made sure he stayed quiet.


This, right here. I do believe that LHO was the lone shooter. However, there's no possible way he was acting alone. The identities of the other conspirators probably died with Ruby and Oswald, however.

afireinside7710
06-06-2010, 06:01 PM
Fixed.

I'm not saying he pulled the trigger (one of many triggers), and I don't think he did. But I believe he was involved, even if only tangentially. I don't think anyone can prove who did what because the cover-up was done so meticulously; however, I don't think it unreasonable to reject the findings of the Warren Commission and look elsewhere for other evidence.

Where was he the day of the assassination? What city? Where was he going the next day?
Where was he employed? (name of the company)
What was the name of the Bay of Pigs operation?
Where are the SEC records for this company from 1960 to 1967?
What happened to them, and what is the official explanation?
Was Bush in the CIA at the time?
When Bush was appointed director of CIA, did he say he had any CIA experience prior?
How about when he ran for President?
Did Bush have any involvement with anti-Castro Cubans?
According to the FBI, who called their Dallas office to suggest a lead in the assassination 1 hour after it happened?

Hmm...

Any takers are welcome..

lulz, thanks for the laugh

gourimoko
06-06-2010, 06:03 PM
lulz, thanks for the laugh

But couldn't answer any of the questions?? ....I guess we made each other laugh.. lol!

afireinside7710
06-06-2010, 11:00 PM
But couldn't answer any of the questions?? ....I guess we made each other laugh.. lol!

oh sure, i could ask a whole bunch of different questions about other high ranking officials (Johnson??) at the time, doesnt mean there is any correlation between them and JFK's murder

kevinoc0
06-06-2010, 11:15 PM
Why do they always use Middle Names when somone assasinates someone.
John Wilkes Booth (Lincoln)
Lee Harvey Oswald (JFK)
Mark David Chapman (Lennon)
James Earl Ray (MLK Jr.)

I heard World Wide Wes was working behind the scenes.

kevinoc0
06-07-2010, 12:19 AM
Was she really crying? really?

Considering the kid has a twisted spine due to scoliosis, I guess some would consider a "heart-warming" story.

gourimoko
06-07-2010, 12:28 AM
oh sure, i could ask a whole bunch of different questions about other high ranking officials (Johnson??) at the time, doesnt mean there is any correlation between them and JFK's murder

So you still won't answer the questions? Just humor me... lol...

I mean, it's silly to say there's no correlation without even exploring the possibility. Why assume it's false without even taking a second to look into it?

afireinside7710
06-07-2010, 12:31 PM
So you still won't answer the questions? Just humor me... lol...

I mean, it's silly to say there's no correlation without even exploring the possibility. Why assume it's false without even taking a second to look into it?

ridiculous questions don't need answering. Thats like me stating that pigs can may actually fly and then asking the following:

1) Who was was there to make sure pigs couldnt fly?
2) Where were you when you heard pigs couldn't fly?
3) Where did the phrase "When pigs fly" originate? (perhaps from PIGS THEMSELVES??? making sure they have the upper hand)
4) Some say pigs are too fat to fly, well i have heard of another very large animal that can fly, ever heard of a DRAGON?!?!?!?
5) If feet smell, and pigs smell, is there any correlation?
6) If bush lied, did people REALLY die?


on a more serious note, how the fuck could I answer your questions? Can you answer your own questions and provide proof??

gourimoko
06-07-2010, 01:29 PM
ridiculous questions don't need answering. Thats like me stating that pigs can may actually fly and then asking the following:

1) Who was was there to make sure pigs couldnt fly?
2) Where were you when you heard pigs couldn't fly?
3) Where did the phrase "When pigs fly" originate? (perhaps from PIGS THEMSELVES??? making sure they have the upper hand)
4) Some say pigs are too fat to fly, well i have heard of another very large animal that can fly, ever heard of a DRAGON?!?!?!?
5) If feet smell, and pigs smell, is there any correlation?
6) If bush lied, did people REALLY die?


Ugh.. If you had bothered to actually answer the questions, even to yourself you wouldn't have posted something so blatantly off-topic and stupid. Either you're lazy or unable to do so, so I'll answer them for you.


on a more serious note, how the fuck could I answer your questions?

Google.


Can you answer your own questions and provide proof??

Sure.

1) Where was he the day of the assassination? What city? Where was he going the next day?

The FBI states that Bush was in Houston the day of the assassination. He phoned the FBI office in Houston at 1:45, approx. one hour after Kennedy was shot to advise the FBI and Secret Service that a man named James Milton Parrott a member of the Texas Young Republicans had been overheard stating he would kill the President when he came to Houston. Bush told the FBI he would be travelling to Dallas the following day on business.


"At 1:45 p.m. Mr. GEORGE H. W. BUSH, President of the Zapata Off-Shore Drilling Company, Houston, Texas, residence 5525 Briar, Houston, telephonically furnished the following information to writer. .. BUSH stated that he wanted to be kept confidential. .. was proceeding to Dallas, Texas, would remain in the Sheraton-Dallas Hotel."

2) Where was he employed? (name of the company)

Zapata Off-Shore Company; founded by himself as well as several relatives and Skull and Bones members.

3) What was the name of the Bay of Pigs operation?

Operation Zapata. This is not merely a coincidence, it is known that the Zapata Corporation (Zapata Off-Shore) played a key role in staging the invasion, as well as selling boats and supplies to the CIA and anti-Castro Cubans.

4) Where are the SEC records for this company from 1960 to 1967?

Destroyed.

5) What happened to them, and what is the official explanation?

Records from 1960-1966 were accidently destroyed in either 1981 or 1983.. When Bush became Vice President.


The commission's records officer stated that the records were inadvertently placed in a session file to be destroyed by a federal warehouse and that a total of 1,000 boxes were pulped in this procedure.

6) Was Bush in the CIA at the time?

According to J. Edgar Hoover he was. Hoover wrote two memos with George Bush's name in them detailing his involvement with the anti-Castro Cubans. Bush was then sent by CIA to "debrief" Hoover regarding the sentiment of the anti-Castro Cubans (militants) with regards to the Kennedy assassination. It can be surmised that Bush's function was to voice the official CIA position regarding the investigation of the Cubans..

7) When Bush was appointed director of CIA, did he say he had any CIA experience prior?

Bush was made director in 1976. He told Congressional hearings that he had never served in CIA prior to that date (a lie).

8) How about when he ran for President?

Bush stated that his only involvement with CIA was when he was the Director of CIA operations. When presented with the Hoover memos by the press, he initially stated he didn't make any phone calls to the FBI about the assassination. Several days later when it was revealed the memo identifies "George H.W. Bush of Zapata..." he changed his story and stated he simply didn't recall making any allegations. Concerning the second memo written by Hoover himself detailing a visit from George Bush of CIA concerning anti-Castro Cubans, the Bush campaign rejected it outright, saying it must be referring to another George Bush. Later they fingered George William Bush of CIA, who stated himself that he was only a clerk and wasn't even in the area at the time. This is important because Bush continually lied about his involvement with CIA, even when it was clearly documented. Most importantly, Bush was a member of CIA when he ran for Senate in Texas in 1964 (while in the CIA), and was elected to the House in 1966 (probably still CIA).

9) Did Bush have any involvement with anti-Castro Cubans?

Obviously. Read above. Beyond what's already been stated, Zapata Offshore was a staging point for the CIA's Cuba operations. Bush was directly involved with the anti-Castro Cubans and almost certainly an agent with CIA.

10) According to the FBI, who called their Dallas office to suggest a lead in the assassination 1 hour after it happened?

Now you know, don't you?

Look, we can do this song and dance all day, but before you post again just do an ounce of research. If you dispute any of the facts above, then tell me which number you'd like citations for and I'll be happy to post then. If you have evidence to the contrary of what I've stated above then post that. And just for clarity, I've stated that I'm not suggesting Bush was directly involved, but perhaps only tangentially. I do believe the CIA was involved, I do believe they used their anti-Castro Cuban militants they trained for the Bay of Pigs operation, and I do know that Bush was acting in an administrative capacity with regards to those operations. Hence the connection.

afireinside7710
06-07-2010, 01:47 PM
i asked for proof, and yet, got no credible proof. CREDIBLE Websites? Books? Eyewitness accounts? You copy/paste things from websites, and quote a "FBI memo" "Seriously, conspiracy theories make me laugh so hard. I bet you also think the US did 9/11, we didnt land on the moon, and that the JFK assassination was a huge coverup, and the guy who would eventually become head of the CIA and then the President was really behind it (that sounds familiar......)

also http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/bush.htm is not a credible site. This is where i found your 'FBI memo' picture where the word "FBI" does not appear and the word "Memorandum" looks superimposed, i.e. color around the word doesnt match the color of the paper. Also if this is such an important document that stirs suspicion around H.W. then why was it 1) declassified and 2) not destroyed as well since it is soooo incriminating

gourimoko
06-07-2010, 01:57 PM
i asked for proof, and yet, got no credible proof. CREDIBLE Websites? Books? Eyewitness accounts? You copy/paste things from websites, and quote a "FBI memo" "Seriously, conspiracy theories make me laugh so hard. I bet you also think the US did 9/11, we didnt land on the moon, and that the JFK assassination was a huge coverup, and the guy who would eventually become head of the CIA and then the President was really behind it (that sounds familiar......)

also http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/bush.htm is not a credible site. This is where i found your 'FBI memo' picture where the word "FBI" does not appear and the word "Memorandum" looks superimposed, i.e. color around the word doesnt match the color of the paper. Also if this is such an important document that stirs suspicion around H.W. then why was it 1) declassified and 2) not destroyed as well since it is soooo incriminating

Okay, first, I've asked you to detail which pieces of evidence you disputed, rather than me putting up citations for each, it's simpler that way and also puts you on the hook because you're obviously not doing anything but talking without researching anything, not even to disprove anything I've said.

Secondly, you're disputing this memo here:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/52/Bush_Sr_tip_on_JFK_1963.jpg

The source for that memo is The U.S. National Media Archive. It's validity has never been in dispute even during Reagan's Presidential campaign when it was first brought to light. This is why I said I wanted you to detail what evidence you disputed so I could demonstrate that you've neither researched this topic or have the inclination to do so.

Look, you can believe what you want, but don't criticize others more knowledgeable on the subject than you are. I knew you would say something about the most solid piece of evidence available, the memo. That's why I asked you to research first, then post. Please don't clutter the thread until you can back up anything you've said with more than just your opinion.

RchfldCavRaised
06-07-2010, 02:04 PM
Sigh... Gour still kicks some ass

I swear I would pay to put you in a debate with Jon and find something both of you passionately disagree about where both sides are equipped with all documents supporting your case.

gourimoko
06-07-2010, 02:05 PM
Sigh... Gour still kicks some ass

I swear I would pay to put you in a debate with Jon and find something both of you passionately disagree about where both sides are equipped with all documents supporting your case.

speaking of which I still gotta post in the Israel thread... thx

afireinside7710
06-07-2010, 02:09 PM
Okay, first, I've asked you to detail which pieces of evidence you disputed, rather than me putting up citations for each, it's simpler that way and also puts you on the hook because you're obviously not doing anything but talking without researching anything, not even to disprove anything I've said.

Secondly, you're disputing this memo here:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/52/Bush_Sr_tip_on_JFK_1963.jpg

The source for that memo is The U.S. National Media Archive. It's validity has never been in dispute even during Reagan's Presidential campaign when it was first brought to light. This is why I said I wanted you to detail what evidence you disputed so I could demonstrate that you've neither researched this topic or have the inclination to do so.

Look, you can believe what you want, but don't criticize others more knowledgeable on the subject than you are. I knew you would say something about the most solid piece of evidence available, the memo. That's why I asked you to research first, then post. Please don't clutter the thread until you can back up anything you've said with more than just your opinion.

Listen, you have the right believe whatever you want to believe, just as i have the right to think that its moronic. I asked you to provide proof, something you have yet to do. Posting the picture was a nice touch, however you have yet to show how it was an FBI memo like you quoted it being. Also when debating, one should provide proof that one's statements are true, otherwise the statements are false (much like my flying pig joke). You show me (the stupid and ignorant non-believer) that what you say is true, and I will thank you for enlightening me about such lies I have apparently been fed.

gourimoko
06-07-2010, 02:29 PM
Listen, you have the right believe whatever you want to believe, just as i have the right to think that its moronic. I asked you to provide proof, something you have yet to do.

Let's start with the memo as proof of Bush's involvement with CIA. Remember, my argument is that Bush was involved with anti-Castro Cubans as an agent of the CIA at the time. You thus far have disputed that. You've stated I have no proof, yet I provide two memos, one from Hoover himself detailing his involvement with the assassination. First by making an allegation an hour after the assassination, without disclosing his position with CIA; and the second memo, detailing a briefing given to Hoover by Bush on behalf of the CIA's anti-Castro Cuban militants.

You say I've provided you with no proof, how? So far you have yet to state how these memos don't fit that criteria. You claimed they were forged off-top, without even researching them. Then you rely on the "Conspiracy Theory" boogeyman to scare off debate. C'mon.


Posting the picture was a nice touch, however you have yet to show how it was an FBI memo like you quoted it being.

"U.S. National Archives; Assassination Records Review Board, Series 4: Research and Analysis; Box 122: 4.50 Wrap Up Memos Hoover, J. Edgar's file"

Requests for copeies can be made at the website: http://www.archives.gov/


Also when debating, one should provide proof that one's statements are true, otherwise the statements are false (much like my flying pig joke).

Only if those facts are in dispute. I've attempt to establish the premises for a logical argument, those premises being necessary to exact a conclusive statement. Premises are initially either accepted prima facie, or if disputed, another separate argument is made to establish the validity or truth of the premise in question. That's how you debate.


You show me (the stupid and ignorant non-believer) that what you say is true, and I will thank you for enlightening me about such lies I have apparently been fed.

That's not my goal. My goal is to show the government's case is not airtight. That G.H.W. Bush lied about not being CIA, that he lied about having no involvement with anti-Castro Cubans, and that future administrations as well as FBI reports detail a possible involvement with the anti-Castro Cuban militants and the Kennedy assassination.

I'm not doing anything that hasn't been done before. That's why I told you to do your homework before coming to class.

kevinoc0
06-07-2010, 03:37 PM
Dude, Gour just busted a dialectic nut all over you.

afireinside7710
06-07-2010, 03:53 PM
i will whole heartedly agree that I didnt do my homework. sure i could have done more research about your theory, however after debating 9/11 with dumbasses for so long, i have come to find out that its funnier (for me) to try to get the other person riled up, pissed off, etc. Unfortunately, you didnt take the bate, no loss. Continue with your thoughts and ideas, at least you are thinking (which is more than I can say about most other people on the internet). You may be right, you might be completely off, who knows.



Dude, Gour just busted a dialectic nut all over you.

is that what that puff of air was?? ;)

RchfldCavRaised
06-07-2010, 07:11 PM
i will whole heartedly agree that I didnt do my homework. sure i could have done more research about your theory, however after debating 9/11 with dumbasses for so long, i have come to find out that its funnier (for me) to try to get the other person riled up, pissed off, etc. Unfortunately, you didnt take the bate, no loss. Continue with your thoughts and ideas, at least you are thinking (which is more than I can say about most other people on the internet). You may be right, you might be completely off, who knows.


In other words... to translate this last paragraph from you

OWNED

bcort
06-07-2010, 07:12 PM
So, uh.. it seems Gour is proving Bush was CIA (ok, I'll bite, I would bet a lot of guys in the CIA would say they weren't. Shocker.), but you really haven't shown me much that Bush is responsible for the assassination. You talk about the Bay of Pigs. Ok. If Bush was CIA, then it seems realistic that the name could have some relation to him. You talk about him calling in about a suspect. Ok. If he was CIA, they could have had leads about assassination plans. I don't get how you think this means he did it (or is responsible for it).

eighter08
06-07-2010, 07:47 PM
"That's how a conspiracy works. Them boys on the Grassy Knoll they were dead within three hours, buried in the damned desert, unmarked graves out past Terlingua."

You know this for a fact?
Still got the shovel...

afireinside7710
06-07-2010, 09:14 PM
In other words... to translate this last paragraph from you

OWNED

lol you didnt have to be a douche about it. Here i was trying to be a troll and was unsuccessful. Bite me :king:

gourimoko
06-07-2010, 10:05 PM
So, uh.. it seems Gour is proving Bush was CIA (ok, I'll bite, I would bet a lot of guys in the CIA would say they weren't. Shocker.), but you really haven't shown me much that Bush is responsible for the assassination. You talk about the Bay of Pigs. Ok. If Bush was CIA, then it seems realistic that the name could have some relation to him. You talk about him calling in about a suspect. Ok. If he was CIA, they could have had leads about assassination plans. I don't get how you think this means he did it (or is responsible for it).

You're precisely correct. I don't think he's responsible. I think he's involved "even tangentially." But I see where you're going, and it makes perfect sense. Just because Bush was CIA doesn't mean he was involved with the Kennedy assassination. There were hundreds of agents in CIA at the time and all of them certainly were not involved.

But you're correct, there's no smoking gun to show Bush was directly responsible. All I can do is suggest that Hoover, and Nixon (as well as close advisors) believed there was a conspiracy to kill President Kennedy. It was also believed by Nixon that the CIA operatives (not necessary agents, or even Americans, but anti-Castro Cubans) could have been directly involved. The same anti-Castro Cubans, and same CIA who felt betrayed after the Bay of Pigs invasion.

There's plenty of my own conjecture in my last statement, but it is founded on several eye witness accounts including H. R. Haldeman's account of Nixon wanting the Watergate tapes suppressed at all costs; even his Presidency. They contained references to "the Bay of Pigs thing," which alluded to the Kennedy assassination.




I was puzzled when he (Nixon) told me, 'Tell Ehrlichman this whole group of Cubans is tied to the Bay, of Pigs.'

After a pause I said, 'The Bay of Pigs? What does that have to do with this?'

But Nixon merely said, 'Ehrlichman will know what I mean,' and dropped the subject.

After our staff meeting the next morning I accompanied Ehrlichman to his office and gave him the President's message. Ehrlichman's eyebrows arched, and he smiled. `Our brothers from Langley? He's suggesting I twist or break a few arms?'

'I don't know. All he told me was "Tell Ehrlichman this whole group of Cubans is tied to the Bay of Pigs".'

Ehrlichman leaned back in his chair, tapping a pencil on the edge of his desk. 'All right,' he said, 'message accepted.'

'What are you going to do about it?'

'Zero,' said Ehrlichman. 'I want to stay out of this one.'

He was referring to an unspoken feud between C.I.A. Director Richard Helms and Nixon.. The two were polar opposites in background: Helms, the aloof, aristocratic, Eastern elitist; Nixon the poor boy (he never let you forget it) from a small California town. Ehrlichman had found, himself in the middle of this feud as far back as 1969, immediately after Nixon assumed office. Nixon had called Ehrlichman into his office and said he wanted all the facts and documents the CIA had on the Bay of Pigs, a complete report on the whole project.

About six months after that 1969 conversation, Ehrlichman had stopped in my office. 'Those bastards in Langley are holding back something. They just dig in their heels and say the President can't have it. Period. Imagine that! The Commander-in-Chief wants to see a document relating to a military operation, and the spooks say he can't have it.'

'What is it?'

'I don't know, but from the way they're protecting it, it must be pure dynamite.'

I was angry at the idea that Helms would tell the President he couldn't see something. I said, 'Well, you remind Helms who's President. He's not. In fact, Helms can damn well find himself out of a job in a hurry.'

That's what I thought! Helms was never fired, at least for four years. But then Ehrlichman had said, 'Rest assured. The point will be made. In fact, Helms is on his way over here right now. The President is going to give him a direct order to turn over that document to me.'

Helms did show up that afternoon and saw the President for a long secret conversation. When Helms left, Ehrlichman returned to the Oval Office. The next thing I knew Ehrlichman appeared in my office, dropped into a chair, and just stared at me. He was more furious than I had ever seen him; absolutely speechless, a rare phenomenon for our White House phrase-makers. I said, 'What happened?'

'This is what happened,' Ehrlichman said. 'The Mad Monk (Nixon) has just told me I am now to forget all about that CIA document. In fact, I am to cease and desist from trying to obtain it.'

When Senator Howard Baker of the Evrin Committee later looked into the Nixon-Helms relationship, he summed it up. 'Nixon and Helms have so much on each other, neither of them can breathe.'

Apparently Nixon knew more about the genesis of the Cuban invasion that led to the Bay of Pigs than almost anyone. Recently, the man who was President of Costa Rica at the time - dealing with Nixon while the invasion was being prepared - stated that Nixon was the man who originated the Cuban invasion. If this was true, Nixon never told it to me.
In 1972 I did know that Nixon disliked the CIA Allen Dulles, the CIA Director in 1960, had briefed Jack Kennedy about the forthcoming Cuban invasion before a Kennedy-Nixon debate. Kennedy used this top secret information in the debate, thereby placing Nixon on the spot. Nixon felt he had to lie and even deny such an invasion was in the works to protect the men who were training in secret. Dulles later denied briefing Kennedy. This betrayal, added to Nixon's long-held feeling that the agency was not adequately competent, led to his distrust and dislike.


Bush was CIA during the Bay of Pigs invasion. Bush was CIA after the invasion failed, and after Kennedy fired Director Allen Dulles. Bush debriefed Hoover regarding any possible involvement of the anti-Castro Cubans in the Kennedy assassination, because who else would be qualified enough to report to the F.B.I. director than the administrative head of Operation Zapata himself. His report to Hoover more or less ended the investigation in the anti-Castro Cubans, all of whom were CIA operatives.

My point is that it's believed, even by Nixon and his advisors, that those involved in the Bay of Pigs operation, Operation Zapata, had some involvement, foreknowledge, planning, what have you, in the Kennedy assassination.

Note, I'm not arguing about a bullet, I'm not arguing about Oswald's ability to aim that bullet; hell he could have been a lone gunman, the point of the matter is, he probably was not acting alone. My intent is to establish reasonable suspicion that the CIA was involved in the Kennedy assassination. If I could prove it beyond a doubt, we wouldn't be having this conversation. :cool:

Marcus
06-08-2010, 12:09 AM
Gourimoko once again demonstrates why I would never, EVER entertain the thought of getting into even the most lighthearted of debates with him.

TJ Detweiler
06-08-2010, 01:10 PM
Me.

Chardon
06-08-2010, 11:50 PM
http://i45.tinypic.com/dg0ab6.jpg
Zaprudu.

lawrencederk
07-02-2010, 01:31 AM
I think someone farted so hard that it blew his head off. My advice for finding the killer? Get dogs to sniff him out.