1815 users online now!   CONTACT US | ADVERTISE | REGISTER       

About this Page -- This is a discussion on who do you think shot jfk?. within the forum Politics. we are doing a report in history class on this right now and i thought it was kind of interesting. ...


Go Back   VolNation > Off Topic Forums > Politics

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-18-2006, 06:48 PM   #1 (permalink)
VN GURU
 
vols kick balls's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 15,503
we are doing a report in history class on this right now and i thought it was kind of interesting. so i was just wondering if any of you guys had any opinions on who did it.
__________________

vols kick balls is offline   TOP Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2006, 06:51 PM   #2 (permalink)
VN GURU
 
hatvol96's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 40,313
I agree with Beavis and Butt-Head, it was Donnie and Marie's father, Lee Harvey Osmond.
hatvol96 is online now   TOP Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2006, 06:56 PM   #3 (permalink)
Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 10,554
This is so easy.


Chuck Norris shot JFK.
checkerboard_charly is offline   TOP Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2006, 08:10 PM   #4 (permalink)
No Post For You!
 
OWB's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 41,395
I don't know, but I bet he was a Republican.
__________________

OWB is offline   TOP Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2006, 08:17 PM   #5 (permalink)
Senior Member

Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,645
W did it, always blame W. :biggrin2:
smokedog#3 is offline   TOP Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2006, 08:20 PM   #6 (permalink)
No Post For You!
 
OWB's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 41,395
Quote:
Originally Posted by (smokedog#3 @ May 18, 2006 9:17 PM)
W did it, always blame W. :biggrin2:
Now that you mention it..
__________________

OWB is offline   TOP Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2006, 09:56 PM   #7 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
surrealvol's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7,307
Not sure, but I have always felt like there was another shooter in addition to Oswald.
surrealvol is offline   TOP Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2006, 09:59 PM   #8 (permalink)
Trophy Mod
 
LadyinOrange's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 24,344
Send a message via AIM to LadyinOrange Send a message via Yahoo to LadyinOrange
I would say Freaky did it, but he's too young.
LadyinOrange is offline   TOP Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2006, 10:43 PM   #9 (permalink)
MY sources say...
 
CSpindizzy's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Posts: 7,838
Not W......it was GHWB....training for his future CIA job.
CSpindizzy is offline   TOP Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2006, 10:51 PM   #10 (permalink)
D-line consultant
 
dan4vols's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: bleak plains state
Posts: 8,215
I thnk in 2029 when all the facts are made public we'll see that he was taken out by his own government in the intrest of national security.
dan4vols is offline   TOP Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2006, 10:53 PM   #11 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
tidwell's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 22,314
I'm with dan on this.
__________________
<img src=http://picjoint.com//files/4/vols.gif border=0 alt= />
tidwell is offline   TOP Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2006, 07:47 AM   #12 (permalink)
VN GURU
 
orange+white=heaven's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 21,323
It was DiMaggio, he was peeved about losing Marilyn to a presidential playboy.
orange+white=heaven is offline   TOP Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2006, 09:01 AM   #13 (permalink)
MY sources say...
 
CSpindizzy's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Posts: 7,838
J Edgar......he was caught wearing one of Marilyn Monroe's dresses.
CSpindizzy is offline   TOP Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2006, 10:03 AM   #14 (permalink)
LEISURE MANAGEMENT GURU
 
OrangeEmpire's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Delaware, OH
Posts: 42,448
Since you asked, was it the mob, or was it Castro?

In 1964 the Warren Commission, appointed by President Lyndon Johnson to investigate the JFK assassination, concluded in its official report that Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone, murdered President Kennedy. Oswald was hardly in a position to defend himself from this accusation, since he had been murdered while under arrest in a police station by Jack Ruby on Nov. 24, 1963, two days after JFK's assassination.

The deficiencies of the Warren Commission's investigation and the weak, circumstantial nature of its case against Oswald are now well-recognized; nowadays hardly any reputable scholar seriously defends the notion that Oswald by himself carried out the assassination, and a majority of the reputable scholars express doubt that Oswald had anything to do with the assassination, except perhaps serve as the scapegoat for the actual killers. But for 15 years, the verdict of the Warren Commission was the official policy of the United States government.

In 1979 the Select Committee on Assassinations of the House of Representatives, which in 1978-79 reinvestigated JFK's death, issued its final report, concluding that President Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The Committee was unable to identify the member of the conspiracy. It did rule out as possible members of the conspiracy Castro's Cuba, anti-Castro groups, the national syndicate of organized crime as a group, and the FBI, CIA, and Secret Service. However, the Committee also acknowledged that the available evidence did not preclude the possibility that individual members of either anti-Castro groups or of organized crime participated in the conspiracy.

The Committee also concluded by implication that it could not rule out the possible involvement of military intelligence agents in the conspiracy-a truly sensational development overlooked by the press.

For nearly a decade, the official view of the government, as embodied in the House Committee report, has been that JFK was slain by a conspiracy, but that the conspirators, including the triggermen who actually shot and killed the president, are unknown.

Although the government for 15 years claimed that JFK was killed by one person acting alone, the polls showed almost from the beginning that a majority of the American public has believed a conspiracy was behind JFK's death. Today, the most popular conspiracy theory is the view, reflected in such new books as David E. Schein, The Mafia Murder of President John F. Kennedy (1988), and John H. Davis, Mafia Kingfish: Carlos Marcello and the Assassination of John F. Kennedy (1989), that organized crime-what used to be called the Mafia-killed JFK.

Carlos Marcello, the aging mob chieftain formerly headquartered in New Orleans and now serving a federal prison sentence for racketeering, is one of the organized crimes leaders alleged to have had Kennedy killed. Santos Trafficante, a now dead mob chieftain from Tampa, is also claimed to have had JFK murdered.

The notion that the Kennedy assassination was an organized crime "hit," a contract killing by professional murderers, has been gaining ground ever since G. Robert Blakey, a law professor, former prosecutor, and a national expert on organized crime, was appointed chief counsel for the House Assassinations Committee in 1978. Blakey focused the Committee's investigation on possible mob involvement, and made sure that one of the volumes published by the Committee was a thick compilation of reports on organized crime. Blakey is co-author, with Richard N. Billings, of a book entitled The Plot to Kill the President (1981).

Blakey was not the first to seriously raise the question of whether mobsters were involved in the Kennedy killing. As far back as 1973 Peter Noyes, a TV newsman and author, wrote a book, Legacy of Doubt, based on painstaking personal investigation, in which he detailed persuasive evidence that organized crime figures might indeed have been involved to some extent.

Honorable mention should also be given to journalist Seth Kantor for his book Who Was Jack Ruby? (1978), which chillingly details Jack Ruby's membership in the mob and his long, close association with members of the mob. The Warren Commission, needless to say, ignored much evidence of Ruby's involvement with organized crime, downplayed evidence it could not ignore, and brazenly denied the existence of Ruby's obvious mob ties. This is one of the reasons why the House Committee in its final report rebuked the Warren Commission for having failed to investigate adequately the possibility of conspiracy to assassinate JFK.

Based on evidence accumulated over the years, there are suspicious connections between certain mob figures and the assassination. Space limitations prevent a detailed recitation of these connections, but the following can be said.

First, evidence is plain that Jack Ruby was a gangster-type with organized crime connections, to say the least. Second, an individual named Jim Braden with a lengthy criminal record and mob ties was in or near Dealey Plaza (where the assassination occurred) at the time of the assassination; a few minutes later Braden was arrested in a building across the street from the Schoolbook Depository, later being released without charges or serious investigation. Third, some of the shady characters with whom the gregarious Oswald associated, such as the mysterious David Ferrie (who was Carlos Marcello's personal airplane pilot) did have links to organized crime.

And this is not all. Undoubtedly, some organized crime leaders did at one time or another, probably in exasperation, utter threats against JFK or his brother Robert. Undoubtedly the mob was mad at both Kennedy brothers for their initiation of the war on organized crime in the early 1960's. Undoubtedly, the mob would have had the resources to carry out a presidential assassination, if it really wanted to commit such a murder.

Nonetheless, the House Committee was almost certainly correct when it found that, although individual organized crimes members could have been involved in the conspiracy to kill the president, organized crime as a syndicate probably did not plot the assassination. In other words, most likely the mob did not kill the president.

Organized crime does not have a history of assassinating high public officials in the United States, as a staff report for the House Committee acknowledged in these words: "The evidence shows that organized crime has judiciously avoided using force against law enforcement officers, [and] other government officials... There is no precedent in the United States [for organized crime] violence directed at a high-level public official." The mob has from time to time murdered certain low level public officers-state legislators, crusading prosecutors, corrupt policemen-but it would be wholly out of character for the mob to kill a President of the United States.

The truth is that organized crime had far more to lose than to gain by killing the president; for if, as the mob would certainly realize, mob involvement in murdering a president were ever exposed, the outrage that would follow such an exposure would result in a governmental hounding of the mob far exceeding anything Robert Kennedy's Justice Department had ever done to fight organized crime.

Furthermore, the murder of a president is a very unpatriotic act and yet-whatever is said about organized crime-the mob is not unpatriotic. It may be a criminal organization, but there is not evidence that it is an unpatriotic organization, or that individual mobsters are unpatriotic. If the mob is unpatriotic, why did Naval Intelligence approach mob leader Lucky Luciano and ask him and other gangsters to help protect American ports and shipping from Axis spies and saboteurs during World War II? And why did the CIA approach the mob in the early 1960's with the request that the mob try to kill Castro? (Both requests were granted.)

Moreover, as the House Committee had to acknowledge, "the method of the President's assassination did not resemble the standard syndicate killing." This is a weighty consideration, even though admittedly the killing of a president is not a routine mob rub-out and different methods of operation might be necessary. Vincent Bugliosi, the noted prosecutor of the Manson case, has been quoted on TV saying that the murder of JFK does not bear the earmarks of a gangland slaying. (The murder of Oswald, on the other hand, was typical of gangster killings.)

Finally, there are weaknesses in much of the so-called evidence of mob involvement. Take the case of Jack Ruby. Evidence of Ruby's ties to organized crime are undeniable, but Ruby did not kill JFK; and if Ruby himself was a member of a conspiracy to kill Oswald, as he likely was, it was not necessarily the same as or even connected to the conspiracy that assassinated the president. Also, evidence in the form of breathless revelations from informers or undercover agents that they heard mob leaders threaten to kill Kennedy or claim credit for the assassination, as well as other evidence resting on the word of such persons, must be viewed skeptically.

Much of the rest of the evidence of alleged mob involvement appears to be unreliable or suspect because it is based on rumor or innuendo, or speculation.

If, as the House Committee thought possible, certain individual members of the mob, acting on their own, did join a conspiracy to kill JFK, they were probably joining with anti-Castro Cubans, renegade intelligence agents, ultra-rightists, racists, and other reactionary elements who hated Kennedy and wanted him dead. But to say that certain individuals involved in organized crime might have been or were part of the conspiracy is not the same thing as saying the Mafia killed Kennedy.

There is still another twist. Even if it could be proved that organized crime as a syndicate was involved in the Kennedy killing, a new question would crop up: was the mob acting on its own or was it (as when it plotted to murder Castro for the CIA) acting at the request of someone else? And if it was acting in behalf of someone else, who?
__________________
Yoskilleeohdoh!

OrangeEmpire is offline   TOP Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2006, 10:10 AM   #15 (permalink)
I'm nutz, that's why
 
hohenfelsvol's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Oviedo, FL
Posts: 30,011
You just wrote his report for him. Damn good write up. Can't wait to see how this ends. Kind of like LOST. Stay tuned.
hohenfelsvol is offline   TOP Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Do we have a shot at this guy? GoBlGOrange Tennessee Vols Recruiting 17 05-26-2008 06:42 PM
Top DT we have a shot at. LittleDTO Tennessee Vols Recruiting 17 04-11-2008 09:34 AM
UAB had a shot at OU volinbham Sports Forum 17 09-05-2006 02:19 PM
Best shot ever? yes or no? sportsman06 Sports Forum 9 03-16-2006 06:45 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:20 PM.

 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.3.2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26