Jump to content
The Education Forum

Jools Gallagher

Members
  • Content Count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Jools Gallagher

  • Rank
    Member
  1. Thanks Jim, some interesting comments. Do you think it is possible that anyone who is still involved in the cover up of the assasination would have individuals looking at sites such as this to perhaps maybe - see how far the researchers are getting?? Do you think there is a chance something sinister would be done if anyone was to reveal something particularly sensitive? Or do you think that these forums are dismissed are mere speculation and not taken as a serious threat to the maintance of the cover up?
  2. Indeed. Quote taken from his letter to Garrison.
  3. What do the researchers on this site say to this comment from Prouty, especially the bold bit? "The whole story of the POWER of the Cover-up comes down to a few points. There has never been a Grand Jury and trial in Texas. Without a trial there can be nothing. Without a trial it does no good for researchers to dig up data. It has no place to go and what the researchers reveal just helps make the cover-up tighter, or they eliminate that evidence and the researcher. " Thanks Jools
  4. Thank you Ron, a very decent and plausible answer - I can buy into that, it certainty seems logical. Still leaves a few niggles in my understanding though. Oswald was set up as a patsy, but as you say when then plan to get him to Cuba failed - he was eliminated. Ruby shot Oswald in broad daylight, in public - knowing he we going to be caught, and sentenced to prison or worse. Therefore making Ruby part of the operation - as a hit man on Oswald so that he couldn't talk and reveal any info about his knowledge of the conspiracy. This I understand. However, if Ruby was willing to risk all
  5. Thank you for your responses. I still don't feel satisfied though. If the conspirators or "the forces of power" wanted to make a public statement, to send out a message saying - we have the power, connections and audacity to publicly execute the president of the United States and we can get away with it! Who was this message to? The public, the government, rival organisations? If it is the public - then remaining anonymous and not claiming the murder would not serve much purpose. Usually an act of terrorism if it is pre-meditated and carried out by a group - will be claimed, sending a message
  6. Thank you for your responses. I still don't feel satisfied though. If the conspirators or "the forces of power" wanted to make a public statement, to send out a message saying - we have the power, connections and audacity to publicly execute the president of the United States and we can get away with it! Who was this message to? The public, the government, rival organisations? If it is the public - then remaining anonymous and not claiming the murder would not serve much purpose. Usually an act of terrorism if it is pre-meditated and carried out by a group - will be claimed, sending a m
  7. In reading recent posts about the suspicious deaths involving members of the CIA, (William Colby), and various other witnesses to the events of the JFK assassination, it seems that the powers that be are more than capable of orchestrating hits on people and making it look like an accident, or some other kind of plausible, albeit untimely death. Why is it then that the assassination of JFK occurred in such an open forum, with masses of potential for it to go wrong, requiring an enormous cover up that could leave the USA government embarrassed for decades if exposed. This leading to the potent
  8. Again forgive my ignorance if this question has been asked before, and again it is devils advocate... In reading recent posts about the suspicious deaths involving members of the CIA, (William Colby), and various other witnesses to the events of the JFK assassination, it seems that the powers that be are more than capable of orchestrating hits on people and making it look like an accident, or some other kind of plausible, albeit untimely death. Why is it then that the assassination of JFK occurred in such an open forum, with masses of potential for it to go wrong, requiring an enormous cove
  9. Thank you all for your interesting comments. John made a point : "Although most of us believe there was a conspiracy to kill JFK, we very much disagree about who was responsible". Being a novice and seeking the experience of the many knowledgeable contributors to this forum, it would help me greatly if one of the more experienced members who has read all of the different theories and ideas would be able to list in bullet points, the "key elements" of the assassination itself and the cover up that are universally, (within the researchers in this forum), agreed upon. Thanks Jools
  10. Before I get inundated with with posts from irate historians and researchers, utterly aghast that I could be suggesting that there was no conspiracy surrounding the assassination of JFK, let me first point out that I am a great player of devils advocate and will quite often argue the other side of topic even though I agree with the people I am arguing with. It makes for a more interesting and healthy debate. Being a relative newcomer to this topic, I cannot possibly compete with the wealth of knowledge that exists between the members of this forum, nor will I attempt to. I will however ment
  11. A 28 year old Investment Banker working in the city of London with a passion for travelling and a newly acquired interest in history. Firstly let me say what a real treasure it was to stumble upon your Spartacus website whilst trying to learn a bit about the Vietnam war recently. It was a detailed, yet concise account of the situation and I really learned a lot from it. From reading this I was directed to links about JFK and from here the assassination forum. For many years I have been fascinated by the assassination and the forum offers some unique insights by some very dedicated people. I
×
×
  • Create New...