Well, someone already mentioned that criminal that went in and killed the assassin. That's kind of weird, don't you think? A sudden burst of murderous patriotism?
The eyewitness accounts and the film of the event that simply don't seem to match with the explanation.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist or some JFK know-it-all. It just seems sketchy, to say the least. If you want to find about more about it I'm sure it's not hard.
Because Robert Kennedy was waging the biggest war against organized crime that America has ever seen, and the Mafia families of Chicago, Tampa, and Louisiana were under incredible pressure. Rosselli’s boss was under “lockstep surveillance” by the FBI, and even Trafficante’s family members were being prosecuted. Marcello himself was put on trial by Robert Kennedy’s prosecutors the day before the Chicago attempt.
This is interesting too:
Quote:
Will we ever find a definitive answer to this mystery? Is there anyone alive who was involved and could provide important information?
The answer to both questions is “yes” and “yes.” NBC News and a government watchdog group, OMB Watch, both reported that well over a million documents remain secret, possibly until the year 2017.
Location: Chiefs Kingdom, Yankees Universe, C of Red.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotHotHeat
Lots of Americans believe it was mob related.
One conspiracy theory. The US crime syndicate wanted to kill Bobby Kennedy because of his efforts to eliminate organized crime. (JFK's father Joe Kennedy made his fortune bootlegging during Prohibition in the 1920's and had ties to the Sicilian Mafia. It is rumored that Kennedy had help in the 1960 Federal Election from the Mafia. The 1960 Federal Election was the closest in US history. One conspiracy is that the Mafia fixed the vote in the State of Illinois which was very close. Kennedy won the state and the election) Santo Trafficante, the mafia boss in Tampa, said that if you want to kill the tail you need to chop off the head (If you want to take power away from Bobby. Kill his brother who is really in charge).
Conspiracy theorists believe Trafficante subsequently joined with Cuban exiles and American Mafiosi in a plot to assassinate President John F. Kennedy. Trafficante was no fan of Kennedy's, but he vehemently denied involvement in the assassination. One informant insisted to federal investigators that Trafficante predicted the Kennedy assassination six months before it occurred. The mob boss was known to have a connection to Dallas's Jack Ruby, who shot and killed alleged JFK assassin Lee Harvey Oswald before a hearing could be held.
Well, someone already mentioned that criminal that went in and killed the assassin. That's kind of weird, don't you think? A sudden burst of murderous patriotism?
The eyewitness accounts and the film of the event that simply don't seem to match with the explanation.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist or some JFK know-it-all. It just seems sketchy, to say the least. If you want to find about more about it I'm sure it's not hard.
I'm not a know-it-all in this case either. I know that the two shooter theory doesn't make sense. I don't know enough about the Mafia aspect to comment on any specific details. So I can really only speak in generalities. But the problem with these things is that they are so, so very complex that it would be practically impossible to execute the plan.
What makes more sense? One lone nut planning and following through with the assassination. Or hundreds, or even thousands of people possibly from different countries conspiring to kill the most important man of the most powerful country and no one found out and no one was able to stop it and only one person was billed with the murder? Occam's razor anyone?
Back to Obama. IF (that's a big if) someone was planning to kill him, it would be the lone nut, not some intricate scheme involving countless people from different affiliations. Why? Because it would be impossible to orchestrate without someone finding out.
I'm not a know-it-all in this case either. I know that the two shooter theory doesn't make sense. I don't know enough about the Mafia aspect to comment on any specific details. So I can really only speak in generalities. But the problem with these things is that they are so, so very complex that it would be practically impossible to execute the plan.
What makes more sense? One lone nut planning and following through with the assassination. Or hundreds, or even thousands of people possibly from different countries conspiring to kill the most important man of the most powerful country and no one found out and no one was able to stop it and only one person was billed with the murder? Occam's razor anyone?
The mafia is essentially one large ongoing criminal conspiracy and those people know how to keep a secret. I don't know why hundreds or thousands of people from all over the place would have to be involved though.
I believe a few gangsters fessed up to being involved eventually, though that might have been just to sell books.
But whatever... I don't know if they were involved or not. I don't know who was, if anyone other than Oswald. All those people said they saw something other than the official story. The film and the story don't match. To put it simply, they say he got shot from behind, but the film sure looks like it didn't come from behind him.
Location: Chiefs Kingdom, Yankees Universe, C of Red.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burninator
Back to Obama. IF (that's a big if) someone was planning to kill him, it would be the lone nut, not some intricate scheme involving countless people from different affiliations. Why? Because it would be impossible to orchestrate without someone finding out.
A lone nut would have a very hard time getting around the Secret Service. I think the only way an individual gets close enough to make an attempt on Obama. Would be if a Secret Service Agent or Agents were involved somehow.
^ I think we should test this theory by hurling Oiler fans at the Secret Service one by one. Perhaps we could tell them that it's Obama's fault the Oilers lost in '06?
Certainly. The people that would pull of such an act require an incredible level of devotion to an ideology which sometimes causes their ability to reason to completely disappear. You mentioned the majority of them in your post. Some Evangelicals (nee: the religious right) are fanatical (they bomb abortion clinics and call for the assassination of foreign leaders). Organizations such as the Aryan Brotherhood and the Klu Klux Klan have that same level of devotion to be self sacrificing. Frankly, they're all a bunch of whack jobs just waiting for the right motivation to completely lose it and do something stupid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burninator
What makes more sense? One lone nut planning and following through with the assassination. Or hundreds, or even thousands of people possibly from different countries conspiring to kill the most important man of the most powerful country and no one found out and no one was able to stop it and only one person was billed with the murder? Occam's razor anyone?
Well, since I've been labelled the resident conspiracy theorist/nut I'll jump in here.
There's a lot to the "conspiracy". I won't go into too many of the details, but the inconsistencies with the Warren Commission report are incredible, even more spectacular than the 9/11 Commission report.
* Oswald was not a competant shooter and would have had to got off three perfect shots, with a poorly manufactured bolt action rifle in less than 6 seconds. That at a moving target.
* The whole magic bullet theory, that the Commission report relies upon, has the killing shot traveling through Kennedy (twice) and then hitting John Connolly. Surprisingly, the bullet some how found its way onto the autopsy table in pristine condition.
* Many people were eye witnesses to seeing and hearing shots from the grassy knoll. The grassy knoll was the perfect locations for a military style triangulated three person shot. The location of the motorcade was in this triangulated kill zone when the fatal shot was fired.
* There was physical evidence of more than three shots being fired.
* Oswald was never told what he was arrested for and never got to speak to an attorney.
* Jack Ruby (a known mobster) in turn assassinated Oswald before he had a change to speak to proper authorities (the FBI).
Most interestingly, if this was a single shooter scenario, with Oswald doing the damage from the Texas School Book Despository, his best shot would have been at the motorcade coming straight down the street. Instead, he waited for the car to make the turn and have to make an almost impossible series of shots that no one to this day has been able to reproduce in endless recreations.
Certainly. The people that would pull of such an act require an incredible level of devotion to an ideology which sometimes causes their ability to reason to completely disappear. You mentioned the majority of them in your post. Some Evangelicals (nee: the religious right) are fanatical (they bomb abortion clinics and call for the assassination of foreign leaders). Organizations such as the Aryan Brotherhood and the Klu Klux Klan have that same level of devotion to be self sacrificing. Frankly, they're all a bunch of whack jobs just waiting for the right motivation to completely lose it and do something stupid.
Typical of you trying to lump the religious right with the KKK and Aryan Brotherhood. Conservatives, especially religious conservatives won't vote for Obama because of his stance on abortion. If you viewed abortion as murder you certainly wouldn't embrace a canidate who supported it regardless of his other positions. If they don't end up voting for McCain it will because of some long standing mistrust that goes beyond his stance on Immigration. Race isn't an issue with the religious conservatives.
A lone nut would have a very hard time getting around the Secret Service. I think the only way an individual gets close enough to make an attempt on Obama. Would be if a Secret Service Agent or Agents were involved somehow.
Race isn't an issue with the religious conservatives.
Race isn't an issue with some religious conservatives and most are smart enough that if it is an issue they will claim that it isn't and that some other issue, be it aborion or gay marriage or gun control is their 'hot button'.
Do not forget that the KKK is a religious organization, the burning cross symbolises the light of Jesus spreading out over the world. Also, let us not forget the fine folks of the Westboro Baptist Church - undeniably religious conservatives, who protest military funerals because of America's 'tolerance' of homosexuality.
Yes, the abortion debate is probably the number one issue for most Social/ Religious conservatives, and they tend to vote republican en masse. But John McCain - though he favours the reversal of Roe v. Wade - doesnt' favour it on 'right-to-life' grounds, but rather because he feels it is an overstepping of federal and judicial authority. If individual states want to allow abortions, he has no particular problem with that, so he can't count on their support this cycle.
Conservatives, especially religious conservatives won't vote for Obama because of his stance on abortion. If you viewed abortion as murder you certainly wouldn't embrace a canidate who supported it regardless of his other positions.
Yet they'd vote for a guy who just gives lip service to the issue .
Roe vs. Wade has stood through 4 different Republican Presidents, and it is very likely it will survive the next one as well.
Race isn't an issue with some religious conservatives and most are smart enough that if it is an issue they will claim that it isn't and that some other issue, be it aborion or gay marriage or gun control is their 'hot button'.
Do not forget that the KKK is a religious organization, the burning cross symbolises the light of Jesus spreading out over the world. Also, let us not forget the fine folks of the Westboro Baptist Church - undeniably religious conservatives, who protest military funerals because of America's 'tolerance' of homosexuality.
Yes, the abortion debate is probably the number one issue for most Social/ Religious conservatives, and they tend to vote republican en masse. But John McCain - though he favours the reversal of Roe v. Wade - doesnt' favour it on 'right-to-life' grounds, but rather because he feels it is an overstepping of federal and judicial authority. If individual states want to allow abortions, he has no particular problem with that, so he can't count on their support this cycle.
Yes both the KKK and the Aryan Brotherhood are religious groups. The difference between the two being that the KKK are more of a secret tag along religion. Their like the Masons in that you could be a baptist or a methodist on Sunday and be a member of the KKK or Masons on whatever night they meet.
Probably these fringe religious groups would vote independent normally if at all. The religious right had no problem with Collin Powell or his replacement: Condola(sp) Rice. I'm sure the KKK and Aryan Brotherhood did.
John McCain would put Constitutional originalists into the Supreme Court which would in turn overturn Roe verses Wade. After that it would be a State issue. So I don't see his unwillingness to pass laws against abortion as being a negative. I think the issue is trust. He is seen as someone who will compromise his convictions for expedience sake.
Yet they'd vote for a guy who just gives lip service to the issue .
Roe vs. Wade has stood through 4 different Republican Presidents, and it is very likely it will survive the next one as well.
The Supreme court has to over turn Roe verses Wade; Not the President. It is believed that this court over stepped their constitutional authority when making their original ruling. The constitution didn't tell the court that human life doesn't begin until the child leaves the womb. They were/are only suppose to interpret the Constitution; Not add to it.
The Supreme court has to over turn Roe verses Wade; Not the President. It is believed that this court over stepped their constitutional authority when making their original ruling. The constitution didn't tell the court that human life doesn't begin until the child leaves the womb. They were/are only suppose to interpret the Constitution; Not add to it.
Indirectly through the appointment of SC judges does the president have control. 4 republican adminstrations stretching ~24 years and nothing has been done during that time since Roe vs. Wade.
The Supreme court has to over turn Roe verses Wade; Not the President. It is believed that this court over stepped their constitutional authority when making their original ruling. The constitution didn't tell the court that human life doesn't begin until the child leaves the womb. They were/are only suppose to interpret the Constitution; Not add to it.
How is Roe v. Wade NOT an interpretation of the Constitution? How would striking Roe v. Wade NOT infringe upon the individual rights and freedoms of women across the country? Unbelievable.
How is Roe v. Wade NOT an interpretation of the Constitution? How would striking Roe v. Wade NOT infringe upon the individual rights and freedoms of women across the country? Unbelievable.
The stance that McCain takes, is that Roe v. Wade is ultra vires. That the courts never had the power to make legislation.
In which case, its not about infringing upon rights and freedoms, but ensuring laws are made by the right people, with the hope that they "make the right decision"... whatever that is. While I have a fairly liberal view on abortion (that being first trimester is acceptable, as well as rape and for the mother's health), a lot of people don't believe that abortion is a constitutionally guaranteed right to begin with. Futhermore they'd state that the founding fathers would under no circumstances acquiesce to an interpretation that would "allow women to kill their unborn babies."
Clearly, opening this debate again is "courageous" at best. While I agree with McCain that the judiciary shouldn't make laws, this one might be best left alone.
