Skip to main content

View Diary: John Kennedy smiled at me. Five minutes later, he was dead. (176 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  OTOH, I accept there was probably a conspiracy, (0+ / 0-)

    … because the United States House Select Committee on Assassinations came to that conclusion in the late 1970s.

    I don't know how old you are, but it strikes me that some of the people I meet who most ridicule the notion of a conspiracy weren't old enough to be following politics or weren't even born yet in the late 1970s — let alone in 1963.

    The Dutch kids' chorus Kinderen voor Kinderen wishes all the world's children freedom from hunger, ignorance, and war. ♥ ♥ ♥ Forget Neo — The One is Minori Urakawa

    by lotlizard on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 06:06:04 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  so there was a conspiracy because the government (0+ / 0-)

      says there was---the same government that carried out the assassination and has been covering it up since 1963 . . . right?

      (sigh)

      PS--you should read some of the other technical analyses of the audio tape that were made after the House Committee released its findings . . . . .

      PPS--I reject conspiracy theories because there is no evidence for them.  That remains true whether I am nine years old or ninety.  But I'll bite----I was born in 1961.

      In the end, reality always wins.

      by Lenny Flank on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 06:47:04 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  "The government" = always monolithic in your book? (0+ / 0-)
        the same government that carried out the assassination and has been covering it up since 1963
        Sneering may get people to jump on an emotional bandwagon, but logically I think most people can see the fallacy in your argument there.

        The Dutch kids' chorus Kinderen voor Kinderen wishes all the world's children freedom from hunger, ignorance, and war. ♥ ♥ ♥ Forget Neo — The One is Minori Urakawa

        by lotlizard on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 07:13:57 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  nope (0+ / 0-)

          If it were monolithic,nobody would have spilled the beans about Iran/Contra and COINTELPRO.

          So feel free to explain to me why the "others" in the NON-monolithic government haven't spilled the beans about how the CIA or FBI or Secret Service or flying saucers or wheoever it was, killed Kennedy?

          In the end, reality always wins.

          by Lenny Flank on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 07:35:11 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Besides, *I* didn't say it was "the government" -- (0+ / 0-)

        … YOU did.

        In any case, everyone who wants to be taken seriously on the subject should, at the very least, familiarize themselves with the findings of the United States House Select Committee on Assassinations before making up their minds.

        The Dutch kids' chorus Kinderen voor Kinderen wishes all the world's children freedom from hunger, ignorance, and war. ♥ ♥ ♥ Forget Neo — The One is Minori Urakawa

        by lotlizard on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 07:28:40 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  OK, then it wasn't "the government" (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kpardue

          So who was it.  Who were the conspirators.

          In any case, everyone who wants to be taken seriously on the subject should, at the very least, familiarize themselves with the findings of the United States House Select Committee on Assassinations before making up their minds.
          As I noted before, I not only read the entire Warren Report and the 26 volumes of testimony and exhibits, but also the entire House Report and the 12 volumes of testimony and exhibits--and also corresponded for several months with Congressional members who sat on the committee. And I read the technical reports prepared by the independent audio analysts who looked into the audio tape released by the House Committee, and who found technical flaws in their analysis.

          I also read the entire House report on the MLK assassination and its volumes of testimony too, but that is not really relevant here.

          In the end, reality always wins.

          by Lenny Flank on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 07:40:22 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Can't verify if you've done the reading you claim, (0+ / 0-)

            … but it doesn't matter.

            Basically, you seem to be claiming to be an expert on the JFK assassination now. We should accept that the subject is closed because you're an expert and you say so.

            I'm encouraging everyone to do something a little different. Check out the info that's out there, to whatever extent that is practical for them. Do some of the reading that you claim to have done. Become their own expert. Don't take anyone's say-so. Come to their own judgment on how the killing of JFK, RFK, and MLK fit in to the big picture we see unfolding today.

            The Dutch kids' chorus Kinderen voor Kinderen wishes all the world's children freedom from hunger, ignorance, and war. ♥ ♥ ♥ Forget Neo — The One is Minori Urakawa

            by lotlizard on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 08:11:32 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  um, no. try again (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kpardue
              Basically, you seem to be claiming to be an expert on the JFK assassination now. We should accept that the subject is closed because you're an expert and you say so.
              That's the beauty of science---nobody has to take my word---or anyone else's word--for anything at all, ever.  Anyone, anywhere, at any time, can examine the evidence hijm or her self.

              And therein lies the problem---you have not offered any evidence at all for a conspiracy.  Not a shred. You've given all the standard pseudo-scientific arm-waving about ":open minded blah blah blah" and "possibility blah blah blah", but what you've NOT given us, and never will, is some EVIDENCE. That's because there isn;'t any.  9shrug)

              If you disagree, then quit being coiy and let's see it.  Let's see a statement made by a conspirator explaining how it was done.  Let's see a bullet that didn't come from Oswald's rifle.  let's see a wound that wasn't caused bya  bullet fired from the 6th floor window. Until you do that,. all you have is arm-waving and verbal wankery.  (shrug)

              I'm encouraging everyone to do something a little different. Check out the info that's out there, to whatever extent that is practical for them. Do some of the reading that you claim to have done. Become their own expert. Don't take anyone's say-so. Come to their own judgment on how the killing of JFK, RFK, and MLK fit in to the big picture we see unfolding today.
              I could not agree more. Whether the topic is JFK's assassination, 9-11 truth, evolution, vaccinations, climate change,crashed flying saucers, FEMA concentration camps, or whatever. Learn for yourself. Find the facts.

              Just don't get your information from the equivalent of creationist websites.

              In the end, reality always wins.

              by Lenny Flank on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 08:24:15 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Don't you think your emotion is disproportionate? (0+ / 0-)

                You seem to be trying very hard to flame me and are frustrated because I'm not taking the bait.

                I happen to remark that I accept one of the post-Watergate reports of Congress.

                And then you go off on several extended rants about space aliens, flying saucers, the philosophical basis of science, and now creationist websites.

                The Dutch kids' chorus Kinderen voor Kinderen wishes all the world's children freedom from hunger, ignorance, and war. ♥ ♥ ♥ Forget Neo — The One is Minori Urakawa

                by lotlizard on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 08:38:02 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I am flaming no one (0+ / 0-)

                  I am simply asking for evidence.

                  And not getting any.  (shrug)

                  I happen to remark that I accept one of the post-Watergate reports of Congress.
                  Are post-Watergate reports from Congress somehow better than pre-Watergate reports from Congress?  Should I reject the Congressional report on the Lattimer Massacre because it was written before 1972?

                  You are arm-waving again.

                  In the end, reality always wins.

                  by Lenny Flank on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 08:45:13 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  ps--since the House report is so authoritative, in (0+ / 0-)

                  your view, I'll simply repeat one more time that the House Committee report concluded that ALL of the conspiracy kookery in these diary comment threads--everything from "Dulles killed Kennedy !!!" to "the Secret Service accidentally shot him !!!" to "the government killed all the witnesses !!!" are bullshit.  The House Committee also concluded that only two shots hit, one of them went through both people, and both shots came from Oswald's rifle in the 6th floor window.

                  Goose, say hi to gander.

                  I look forward to all those conspiracy kooks accusing YOU of being part of the coverup conspiracy.  (snicker)

                  In the end, reality always wins.

                  by Lenny Flank on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 08:55:10 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

            •  ps--I notice you didn't answer my question (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kpardue

              again (though you did take the time to bitch at me for answering yours).

              So I'll ask again:

              So who was it.  Who were the conspirators.

              In the end, reality always wins.

              by Lenny Flank on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 08:25:43 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

    •  ppps---there have been plenty of government (0+ / 0-)

      conspiracies----Iran/Contra, COINTELPRO, civilian tests of BW agents, just to name a few.  We know about them because people (especially people who were actually INVOLVED with them) presented EVIDENCE for them--something nobody has done in this case.

      In the end, reality always wins.

      by Lenny Flank on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 06:50:38 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  At least you acknowledge that, often, what started (0+ / 0-)

        … out as "conspiracy theory" turned out to be true.

        Iran/Contra, COINTELPRO, civilian tests of BW agents, just to name a few
        That's way more than many who pooh-pooh everything as CT are able to do.

        And as for EVIDENCE (hey, my caps lock key works too), a lot always depends on precisely who has arrogated to themselves the right to decree for everyone what is, or is not considered EVIDENCE.

        The Dutch kids' chorus Kinderen voor Kinderen wishes all the world's children freedom from hunger, ignorance, and war. ♥ ♥ ♥ Forget Neo — The One is Minori Urakawa

        by lotlizard on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 07:20:49 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I always acknowledge things that are true (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kpardue

          All it takes is evidence and data.

          Iran/Contra had it.

          "The CIA killed Kennedy!!!" doesn't.

          And as for EVIDENCE (hey, my caps lock key works too), a lot always depends on precisely who has arrogated to themselves the right to decree for everyone what is, or is not considered EVIDENCE.
          So you don't know what "evidence" is . . . ?

          Or are we once again back to the "they" planted/faked/altered the evidence thingie . . . .

          If someone else fired a shot that hit one of the people in the car, then there's a bullet or fragments of it somewhere.  Show them to me.

          If someone other than Oswald hit someone in the car, then there's a wound somewhere that didn't come from above and behind.  Let's see it.

          If the FBI or the CIA or the NSA or the space aliens plotted the assassinationb, then there were PEOPLE involved in that plotting, just as there were with Iran/Contra and COINTELPRO.  Show us.  Where are these people, and why, unlike all the other conspiracies that we know about, has not one of them come forward to spill the beans. With Iran/Contra, with COINTELPRO and ewven with the CIA-Mafia attempts to kill Castro, people who were involved have told us exactly and precisely who discussed what with who, in what hotel room onb what date. Yet on the presumed JFK plot we have . . .  nothing. Crickets. Silence.

          Billy Ockham tells me that's because nothing happened. If you want to claim otherwise, then it's up to you to show it. And you can't.

          Even your vaunted House Committee could find zero evidence that there were more than two hits, one of which hit both Kennedy and Connally and the other of which hit Kennedy from above and behind. None.  Zip.  Zero.  Zilch.  nada.  Not a shred.  The ONLY evidence they offered of a conspiracy was ONE acoustical analysis of an audio tape----which was immediately rejected by other independent analyses done after the committee issued its report.

          There's no "there" there.  (shrug)

          In the end, reality always wins.

          by Lenny Flank on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 07:31:09 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  See, this is why I can't take you seriously. (0+ / 0-)
            the space aliens plotted the assassination
            You are trying way too hard to portray anyone who does not share your 100% epistemological certainty that the Warren Commission's Oswald-alone theory is true, as some kind of a kook.

            Where could such a strong emotional drive for absolute certainty be coming from?

            Why not at least respect the possibility that a reasonable person (such as a member of Congress in the 1970s — much closer to first-hand evidence than any of us can possibly be today) need not take the Warren Commission's Oswald-alone theory as gospel truth?

            JFK was a Democrat and a liberal. This is a Democratic site. The John Birch Society hated JFK then and the same kind of people hate us now. We share a common enemy.

            Why is it so hard for you to, as Wikipedia's guidelines for editors would put it, assume good faith?

            The Dutch kids' chorus Kinderen voor Kinderen wishes all the world's children freedom from hunger, ignorance, and war. ♥ ♥ ♥ Forget Neo — The One is Minori Urakawa

            by lotlizard on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 07:52:28 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  see, this is why I can't take YOU seriously (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kpardue
              Where could such a strong emotional drive for absolute certainty be coming from?
              It is called "science".  It's basic tenet is that "evidence matters".  You have none.  Till you do, you have . . . well . . . nothing.  (shrug)

              We keep saying we are "reality-based".  Alas, as this entire comment section shows, too many of us are not. And yes, people who are not reality-based, are kooks. That is the definition of "kook". When the RWNJs argue that FEMA wants to put us into concentration camps, that is being a kook.  And when LWNJs argue that the fascist CIA killed Kennedy, that is being a kook. No difference.

              JFK was a Democrat and a liberal. This is a Democratic site. The John Birch Society hated JFK then and the same kind of people hate us now. We share a common enemy.
              That is an ideological agenda. It has stuff-all to do with anything. Whether the Birchers hated JFK doesn't have a bleeding thing to do with whether there was a conspiracy---EXCEPT to those with an ideological agenda.
              Why not at least respect the possibility that a reasonable person (such as a member of Congress in the 1970s — much closer to first-hand evidence than any of us can possibly be today) need not take the Warren Commission's Oswald-alone theory as gospel truth?
              Because (1) there's not a shred of evidence for that possibility, (2) there's not a shred of evidence for that possibility, and (3) there's not a shred of evidence for possibility.

              Coincidentally, that's why I also reject 9-11 Truthers. If you or anyone else would argue that I should "be open to the possibility that Dubya was behind 9-11 because we are Democrats and Dubya hated us and we hate him", I'd laugh at you just as hard. When anyone starts arguing at that level, then it is no longer an argument over evidence---it is an ideological argument, and those are not amenable to evidence.

              Evidence matters.  Evidence is the ONLY thing that matters.  And you have zero.  (shrug)

              In the end, reality always wins.

              by Lenny Flank on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 08:05:47 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  You're fighting with the mirror. (0+ / 0-)

                Everyone can see how this thread unfolded.

                I simply said that I accept the conclusions of a report of Congress and you come out guns blazing.

                Sure I respect that report, that committee, and its members — not the least because that was an era where Congress had enough integrity, patience, and investigative acumen to expose Watergate and bring down Nixon.

                The Dutch kids' chorus Kinderen voor Kinderen wishes all the world's children freedom from hunger, ignorance, and war. ♥ ♥ ♥ Forget Neo — The One is Minori Urakawa

                by lotlizard on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 08:26:56 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  and I (0+ / 0-)
                  I simply said that I accept the conclusions of a report of Congress
                  simply pointed out the irony of your accepting a report from the same government that is supposed to have carried out and covered up the assassination. I find that rather humorous.

                  Particularly since the earlier report that you reject was ALSO a report of Congress.

                  Watergate, btw, is a great example.  We know about Watergate because of EVIDENCE---mostly evidence presented by the very people who were involved in all the illegalities. (Ditto for COINTELPRO, and Iran/Contra.)

                  Why is it I can't see anything similar in the JFK case?

                  In the end, reality always wins.

                  by Lenny Flank on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 08:34:03 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site