Really? You wonder why there is no evidence?

[RobertEarl]

There have been a lot of things happening in this country that have not been good for the country, its leaders, or the environment.

We look around to see who is pulling the strings to make these things happen, but we find little evidence of any conspiracy. But the bad things keep happening.

A free press, a truly free press, is meant to find the evidence and inform us. Sadly we are lacking a truly free press.

And lets soberly look at what those who conspire might do to cover their tracks and keep evidence from being exposed. First we have a government agency whose purpose is to do things that can't be traced; the CIA. Then there are many corporations that pay big money to keep their tracks covered so they can make more profits.

If you can't see evidence of who is doing wrong, it may be because the wrong doers are getting better than ever at making sure evidence of their wrongs can't be found?

[Spider Jerusalem]

1. No evidence of what?

There's plenty of evidence of other CIA conspiracies. Operation Mongoose. Operation Northwoods. The operation to depose Mossadegh in Iran. CIA involvement in the assassinations of Trujillo and Lumumba and the coup that brought down Diem and in lots of other things besides. Iran-Contra. We have evidence of all of these things and they manage to cover up the assassination of a president? How does that work?

[Pretzel_Warrior]

2. Nice response. But never helpful when dealing with a faith-based CT'er

[RobertEarl]

3. You have all that evidence?

You have all the paper work? Don't kid yourselves. You only know what they want you to know.

And the list of things spider has is like one millionth of what the CIA has done.

Go on believing that they tell you everything and they never lie to you. The rest of us are much wiser.

[dchill]

5. I hear you, RobertEarl.

Some people find it more comforting to "know" than to doubt. Also, it's easier.

[whathehell]

43. What the hell is a "faith based CT'er"...I know of no faith based conspiracy theorists,

and as I said downthread, it's one thing to find conspiracies everywhere -- It's just as silly to think they don't

and can't exist. Believing in the existence of one effing conspiracy hardly makes one a "conspiracy theorist".

[RobertEarl]

4. No evidence of what? Spider asks.

Then spider lays out a few things that they have wanted us to know, or that were exposed by a free press, or by the victims seeking justice. As if that were evidence that spider knows everything the CIA does. Really, spider? You really think they tell you everything they do and they would never lie to you or hide evidence? Really?

As for JFK, a full 75% of DUers don't believe that they have told us everything. That should give any one with a brain pause. We DUers are pretty damn wise.

[Scootaloo]

14. DU'ers aren't all that wise, actually

As a collected body, we're just as dumb as the next clump of bipedal apes.

American pop culture is full of Kennedy conspiracy, to the point where you're considered weird if you don't think it was a freaky international conspiracy. That doesn't mean that it WAS such a conspiracy, just that this is what has been fed into your head for years and years and years.

My feelings on the subject are that fifty years later... it doesn't matter. Sorry, I know that that gets the local "History stopped in the 60's" club clasping their pearls and fainting, but it's the truth. The man is long, long dead, and whoever killed him is either dead with him, or is George H. W. Bush. It's an interesting question, but we're simply far beyond the point where an answer would translate into anything meaningful or productive. we might as well be examining the assassination of Garfield, for all the good it'd do.

[whathehell]

15. I'd suggest you speak for yourself on that, Scootaloo...

Your attitudes toward the JFK assassination are typical of those of your generation...You don't give a shit

because YOU were not alive then, to be hurt and traumatized by it...Some of us WERE, so stop telling people

what they should and should NOT be interested in and what "good" it would do..If you don't care about the JFK

threads, ignore them, but don't expect those of us who were affected and WOULD be positively affected by knowing

the truth, by the way, how we "should" view things. Just run along and pursue whatever it is people in your demographic

are interested in, and leave the rest of us to pursue OUR interests.

[Scootaloo]

16. Golly, what part of "my feelings are..." implied they should be YOUR feelings as well?

If you don't like my opinion, I don't care. Have a nice day

[whathehell]

17. Golly gee, try reading it again...Just about all of it, lol.

"If you don't like my opinion, I don't care. Have a nice day."

No shit, Sherlock...I'd guess your hostile attitude has been noted,

which is why most people here ignore you, lol.

[Scootaloo]

18. Oh dear, we've got a live one.

Nope, friend, I expressed my own opinion on the subject. If you disagree, then that's fine, but if you want to start some generational throwdown shit, we can go there too. I wouldn't recommend it, but if you really want? Sure, why not.

I find it funny that "most people here ignore me" is coming from someone who obviously doesn't. G'wan, join the bandwagon

[whathehell]

24. That would be you, dear...If you were only expressing YOUR opinion, it would have been one paragraph

at best...Unfortunately, it wasn't and you went railing on about it's "importance", how it doesn't "matter", etc.

"If you disagree, then that's fine, but if you want to start some generational throwdown shit, we can go there too. I wouldn't recommend it, but if you really want? Sure, why not."

You wouldn't "recommend it"?...Honey, I've already HAD some "throwdown shit" with you and, sorry to remind you, but,

I CLEANED YOUR CLOCK. Let me remind you, 'cause it was awhile ago...The thread concerned workers and unions.

You started in with your usual arrogant "I'm here to school you" shit about unions and history...You shut up QUICK when

you found out you were definitely talking to the WRONG person, since I'd not only been a union MEMBER but the daughter of a UNION ORGANIZER....So you might want to re-think those "recommendations" once again.

As to being the only person on this thread who did NOT ignore you, guess what?...I AGREE, because in my opinion,

and apparently lots of others, you are decidedly NOT worth the time! Welcome to a well-deserved spot on my ignore list.

[MicaelS]

20. I WAS alive then...

And I say "It is time to let it go". He's dead. So are MLK and RFK. All the men who went to Vietnam are dead. Nothing can ever been done to reverse those deaths.

Those three men were not the first political assassinations in this country, nor around the world, and they won't be the last. It is obvious people have a hard time accepting the fact that the most powerful men in the world can be killed by nobodies. Despite that the assassinations of Garfield and McKinley were by nobodies aka lone gunman. You have the lone nuts who tried to shoot Ford, twice. Did shoot George Wallace. Did shoot Ronald Reagan. Did murder John Lennon. You can argue the point of Lincoln, but excepting Booth, they were all nobodies, and Booth was just an actor. He wasn't a politician, and he had no political power.

If there was a conspiracies to kill JFK / RFK / MLK , most if not all of them are dead. Do you seriously think if the "truth" as you perceive it came out, this country is going to radically change? Do you think the National Security apparatus of the US is going to be dismantled?

If anything makes me personally upset, is the elevation of JFK to Sainthood by people who really believe that we would have had World Peace if JFK had lived. JFK was a flawed human being. He wasn't a Saint.

People have trouble accepting the fact that cataclysmic events can happen without cataclysmic reasons behind them. People have trouble accepting that 9/11 happened because the National Security apparatus of the US totally failed at their duty. Some people still believe that Pearl Harbor was a MIHOP / LIHOP by FDR. Once again, they can't accept the fact that the National Security apparatus of the US totally failed at their duty. Richard Hofstader's The Paranoid Style in American Politics, was written 50 years ago about the Right, but clearly today it could equally apply to the Left as well.

I am perfectly willing to accept that JFK was killed as the result of a Conspiracy provided there was clear incontrovertible evidence that stood up to rigorous scientific scrutiny. Film evidence never before seen. A confession with corroborating evidence. Something that would be accepted in a Court of Law.

The final question I would ask you, and those who believe as you is that:

"What would it take to prove to you, beyond any doubt, that LHO murdered JFK all by himself with no one else invloved?"

[whathehell]

22. You were "alive"...The real question is: How old were you? Were you cognizant?

Because if you were too young to "remember" it, too young to be "cognizant", you may as well have NOT

been alive then.

As to "what it would take", honey, how about getting your facts straight before going on a rant?

A government investigating committee already concluded back in 1979, there "was probably a conspiracy".

[Spider Jerusalem]

27. Concluded there was "probably a conspiracy" based on "evidence" that's since been debunked.

That investigation otherwise confirmed all of the major findings of the Warren Commission (ie, that the shots came from the TSBD and that Oswald was the gunman).

[whathehell]

28. Got a link for that?

[Spider Jerusalem]

29. Several:

http://www.thekennedyhalfcentury.com/pdf/Kennedy-Half-Century-Audio-Research.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictabelt_evidence_relating_to_the_assassination_of_John_F._Kennedy

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/acoustic.htm

And the HSCA findings (including "acoustic evidence" as the basis for "conspiracy&quot :

I. Findings of the Select Committee on Assassination in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy

I.A. Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots at President John F. Kennedy. The second and third shots he fired struck the President. The third shot he fired killed the President.

http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/select-committee-report/part-1a.html

[whathehell]

31. Unfortunately, that was not the last investigation..

There were at least five investigations -- Bill Clinton appointed one in the early nineties.

Believe what you want. Virtually NO one believes Warren Commission's

"lone gunman- magic bullet" theory.

[Spider Jerusalem]

33. The Assassination Records Review Board wasn't an investigation.

And both of the major investigations have concluded Oswald did it. (The HSCA confirmed the "single bullet", as well.)

[MicaelS]

35. Take your patronizing "honey" crap somewhere else.

I was 6 years old. I was in the back seat of my parents 1960 Dodge in Silver Springs, Maryland when the news came over the radio. I spend the next week watching as much of our 19" B&W TV as my parents would let me.

[whathehell]

37. LOL..

Okay, so you were maybe too young, or maybe you just don't care.

That's fine, just don't presume to tell the rest of us what we "should" believe or care about.

[Blue_In_AK]

49. I can't quite figure out your elder hatred.

We get it -- you hate everyone who was born prior to 1955 or so but why? Were you punched out by a hippie?

[cherokeeprogressive]

26. "brain pause"

Yup.

[dchill]

6. Here's my question...

What kind of information has to be classified for 75 years?
My answer: stuff they don't want us to know until they are dead. Plus, I'll bet 75 years is the maximum...

[RobertEarl]

7. That is a good question

And is a question the people who claim to know it all have not even once tried to answer. I have asked many times. Maybe they will now? I doubt it. It might expose them to not be know-it-alls. And that would just make their reputations decline. But hey, dchill, we'll wait and see.

[dchill]

8. Yes, we will...

25 more years. A mere blink.

[colorado_ufo]

9. I might live to see it.

I suppose that the Freedom of Information Act does not apply here.

[dchill]

13. I don't know for sure.

But I do know that many freedom of information requests are denied. National security, you know.

[MicaelS]

21. Stuff that embarasses people and organizations.

I think Oswald was just on the edge of the radar because of his erratic behavior, just enough for some files to be opened, and some legwork to be done and people in power asking and trying to figure out "What is he is really up to?", or "Who is he really working for?"

Then when he shot JFK, TPTB said a giant collective "Oh fuck, this shithead shot the President, and we're going to be blamed for it, because we didn't do something to prevent it. They're going to blame us, and our funding will be cut, some will have to be sacrificial lambs and lose their jobs and benefits and we will be shamed as failures. Let's just pretend we knew nothing, and hide, destroy or classify all the files so no one can see our failure until we're all long dead.."

[The Midway Rebel]

10. This applies to your question.

Richard Hofstadter -- The Paranoid Style in American Politics

"This glimpse across a long span of time emboldens me to make the conjecture—it is no more than that—that a mentality disposed to see the world in this way may be a persistent psychic phenomenon, more or less constantly affecting a modest minority of the population. But certain religious traditions, certain social structures and national inheritances, certain historical catastrophes or frustrations may be conducive to the release of such psychic energies, and to situations in which they can more readily be built into mass movements or political parties. In American experience ethnic and religious conflict have plainly been a major focus for militant and suspicious minds of this sort, but class conflicts also can mobilize such energies. Perhaps the central situation conducive to the diffusion of the paranoid tendency is a confrontation of opposed interests which are (or are felt to be) totally irreconcilable, and thus by nature not susceptible to the normal political processes of bargain and compromise. The situation becomes worse when the representatives of a particular social interest—perhaps because of the very unrealistic and unrealizable nature of its demands—are shut out of the political process. Having no access to political bargaining or the making of decisions, they find their original conception that the world of power is sinister and malicious fully confirmed. They see only the consequences of power—and this through distorting lenses—and have no chance to observe its actual machinery. A distinguished historian has said that one of the most valuable things about history is that it teaches us how things do not happen. It is precisely this kind of awareness that the paranoid fails to develop. He has a special resistance of his own, of course, to developing such awareness, but circumstances often deprive him of exposure to events that might enlighten him—and in any case he resists enlightenment."

[dchill]

12. On the other hand...

sometimes something just smells fishy.

[fadedrose]

25. +++++

[The Midway Rebel]

39. Yup, that's what they said about the Masons.

And the Catholics, and the communist and on and on....Its as American as apple pie.

[whathehell]

46. Um, no, one can't compare ongoing organizations to one horrendous act, like an assassination.

Apples and oranges -- Try again.

[longship]

51. Then, what the hell, you can just make shit up?

Like Geo HW Bush did it.
Or Allen Dulles did it.
Or Castro did it.
Or the KGB did it.
Or the mafia did it.
Or fucking LBJ did it.

Note that all of these are likely mutually exclusive. Yet the JFK conspiracy advocates seemingly embrace them all.

The one thing they can not wrap around their conspiratorial minds is that historical events are often messy affairs and sometimes things just come together for mundane reasons, like from a singular kook in Dallas. That's not big enough for them. So they must make into something really, really big. Hence all the completely conflicting so-called theories on JFK in Dallas.

Don't worry. I am not going to bust any chops about this. I merely want people to understand what they are doing. They can believe anything they want. What people believe is no matter to me. I no longer give a fuck.

People can weave whatever dream they want. Just stop making DU a place that sucks and take this stuff back to the Creative Speculation group where it belongs. Leave the rest of us in peace. There are many of us who are sick and tired of the petty sniping.

Not accusing you personally, just the general demeanor of these threads.

Thanks for taking the time to read this.

[whathehell]

55. The idea that most of us so called "conspiracy theorists" are just "making things up" is bullshit.

Last edited Mon Nov 25, 2013, 01:13 PM - Edit history (1)

and, no, we "JFK consipiracy advocates" -- who represent about 70 to 80 percent of the population, by the way, if you
include those who do NOT believe the the Warren Commission's conculsions, do not "embrace them all", they vary in their opinions, and I think most simply keep their minds open and receptive to incoming data.


Beyond that, if you honestly think that approximately ONE fucking week of speculation on the 50th Anniversary of the assassination of a much loved American president is "making DU a place that sucks" then I'd say that is decidedly YOUR problem. There is no way in Hell that this subject should be marginalized onto the "creative speculation" forum -- You can save that for Alien Abductions.

Here's the deal, longship -- There are many subjects discussed on DU that don't personally interest me -- Do you know what I do? I simply IGNORE them and go onto something else. What I do NOT do is bitch about them and I don't know why you and the rest who, I believe, are probably too young to remember and therefore give a shit, don't do the same.

This is a big site -- If a thread doesn't interest you, I'd suggest you find another that does.

[whathehell]

44. Exactly...One hardly need be a "conspiracy theorist" to believe in one conspiracy.

What should we call people who despite a multi-tude of long-lasting fishy smells, deny even the possibility of a conspiracy?

A "coincidence theorist" I guess.

[sabrina 1]

32. The world, according to this if you are referring to the JFK murder, is overwhelmingly populated

by paranoid people. Something like 70% to 80%.

Or maybe something just doesn't add up combined with the knowledge that the government, shockingly, has told some huge lies to the public.

[The Midway Rebel]

38. Its political style, not a feature of personality.

I am sure you have read this seminal work of American political thought.

[sabrina 1]

40. I'm not sure what 'political style' has to do with a majority of people not believing the WC

findings. Most are ordinary people, and according to polling on the subject, that skepticism crosses partisan lines. Iow, it doesn't seem to matter what political party they belong to, they simply feel something doesn't add up. Many don't even have any theory as to what they believe did happen.

One of the highest polls reflects that approx 89% of the public believe 'we will never the truth'.

I wonder what it means when so many people have a sense that they are not being told the truth?

I'm sure studies have been done on that also. I really don't know.

[The Midway Rebel]

41. You keep bringing up the numbers with me.

Argumentum ad populum is not convincing. This is not a popularity contest.

[YoungDemCA]

47. +1

nt

[The Midway Rebel]

50. This poster does not retreat from this tactic and ignores facts.

I give up with this one on this particular topic.

And although I am on the same side of the fence on many other topics with Sabrina1, this has rupture will make me always question and watch closely for flaws in her reasoning as those flaws may reveal the flaws in my own.

[whathehell]

45. Thank you...Virtually no one believes in the conclusions of the Warren Commision.

I guess we're just a nation of paranoids.

[Spider Jerusalem]

48. America is not the world.

[The Midway Rebel]

52. Lots of people used to smoked cigarettes too.

Some even said it was good for you. Athletes would smoke before a game. Doctors endorsed the product.

But then science, facts, reality. Science has crushed many a myth in a few short centuries. Time marches on.

History has already began to record CTers as a quaint artifact of the 20th century. Trust me. I see it in my young students.

I think more likely there is something in the human condition that favors a paranoid mind frame. Hofstadter sort of hints at it in his essay. I don't think it is evil or pure stupidity, however as practitioner in the humaniites i I do find it curious.

[sabrina 1]

53. This is working in reverse of your theories. More people today doubt the Official Story than they

did in the beginning. Science, release of documents previously held in secret, less trust in general of a government that has lied so often to the people.

Younger people have more access to information that previous generations and are not as innocently trusting of the government as people were in the past.

A recent poll showed that a full 89% of the population answered 'No' to the question: 'Do you think we will ever know the truth about the JFK assassination'.

It's a cold case and we have way more technology today making it possible to solve cold cases, many of them decades old.

When so many people do not believe the results of an investigation, the fact is, and the Deniers may as well accept it, the case has not been made.

Too bad Oswald was so conveniently silenced, we would have had a trial and a jury and maybe a few more suspects had he been able to talk.

I don't agree with the 89% who don't think we'll ever know the truth. We know a whole lot more now than people knew say, 30 years ago.

We know some other interesting things also, eg that Robert Kennedy did not believe Oswald acted alone. Nor did Jackie, after years of the family remaining silent on the issue.

I guess that makes Bobby Kennedy, John Kerry and Jackie Kennedy among others, 'quaint artifacts'?? There are a whole lot of 'quaint artifacts' around in the minds of the Deniers, now very much in the minority.

I never really had much interest in this case until relatively recently when I saw the desperate efforts to stop any discussion of it. That piqued my interest because whenever you see a concerted effort to silence people, the opposite of what they want happens, people suddenly want to know why it is so important to stop any discussion about it.

[The Midway Rebel]

54. I'm from Missouri, you'll have to show me the desperate efforts to stop discussion.

JFK CT is an industry. They actually have conventions. Ask Octafish about them.

Have you seen the number of threads and the participation in them on DU lately? Over 500 books have been published not mention all the movies, videos, docudramas.

You keep talking about this new technology. Would you be willing to hear the results of the latest and best trained experts? High speed video and repeatable experiments? Have you seen the much discussed Cold Case video on Nova where ballistic experts test the Manlicher-Carcano rifle? A trained forensic expert examines JFKs bloody clothes. Slow motion, enlarged, precisely measured frames of the Zapruder film of JFKs head snapping forward indicating a shot from the rear. Eww. My gawd this thing has been done. to. death.

If, as you say, you truly have a piqued interest in the case I suggest you look at what the most recent science indicates. Look at known facts versus unknown facts and paranoia.

Even harder to do would be for you to find a reputable and tenured PhD in history willing to stick his neck on the academic line, so to speak, in support of conspiracy theory woo. Try to find a qualified forensic expert to look at the x-rays of JFKs skull and say "shot form the front."


After that, you might have some other argument rather than this it true because a lot of people believe its true game.

Show me.

[Beartracks]

11. The presence of a black hole is detectable even if you can't directly observe it.

Just sayin'.

======================

[Skinner]

19. A lack of evidence is not an excuse to make stuff up.

This is why so-called "conspiracy theories" are worthless. They are based on wishful thinking. You can provide plenty of excuses to possibly explain the lack of evidence, but in the end you still have a lack of evidence.

Want your conspiracy theories to be taken seriously? Then you need to take evidence seriously. Without evidence you have nothing.

[MineralMan]

23. +100

Too much of conspiracy theory "evidence" is of the "what if..." variety, focusing on things that "might" have happened, but without any evidence that they actually did happen.

[whathehell]

30. and a lack of interest isn't an excuse to trash the ideas or threads, of others. n/t

[RussBLib]

34. kinda like "god"?

Oh, there is lots of evidence for the existence of God, say the believers. Like the Bible.

The Bible? Purely a work of fiction in my opinion. But it's evidence for a lot of people who don't want to look any deeper.

[whathehell]

42. It's one thing to find conspiracies everywhere, It's quite another to acknowledge they exist

and have existed.

Perhaps those who don't believe in their existence would be "coincidence theorists".

[Nuclear Unicorn]

36. There is absolutely no evidence that I did it. Go ahead, look; I dare you. n/t