Create-A-Theory

[Guest Mark Valenti]

Use this visual aid to mix 'n match your theory against others.

[Tim Gratz]

Interesting idea, Mark.

Definitely (I THINK!) Johnny in the first row.

Definitely the "Mafia Kingfish" In the third row.

And certainly JR, JH and ST in the last row.

But you left out my friend Fidel. And where pray tell is LHO? (Well, I guess no one would vote for him except Mr. Purvis but is this really being fair to Tom?)

Re the rest of the people, probably mostly innocent, certainly no evidence to even put them on any kind of "watch list".

The CIA ought to give me a bonus for this post, don't you think? Actually, I'm still waiting for my FIRST check!

Edited August 14, 2007 by Tim Gratz

[Ron Ecker]

This is not a theory, but I think that everyone pictured is dead, except for Files (who had nothing to do with the assassination), Judyth Baker (who claims she had something to do with Oswald), and Ruth and Michael ("We both know who was responsible") Paine. Or is Michael deceased?

[Tim Gratz]

Modest suggestion to Mark: You will need John's help, but change the name of the thread to "The Usual Suspects".

[William Kelly]

Use this visual aid to mix 'n match your theory against others.

Actually, what happened at Dealey Plaza only happened one way, and the only "theory" that counts is the currect one. Let's figure that out.

BK

[Tim Gratz]

Excellent point, Bill.

But I think Mark's idea is to get people to state who they think was and was not involved--with photos.

I think it is a good idea because I think some members would just point to everyone, which simply means they really have no idea. Which in a way is good since there is no evidence whatsoever to connect most of the people photographed to the murder.

[Guest Mark Valenti]

Actually, what happened at Dealey Plaza only happened one way, and the only "theory" that counts is the currect one. Let's figure that out.

We'll never get there if we don't once-and-for-all-time eliminate the ridiculous, the far-flung and the historically coincidental.

The JFK murder did indeed happen only one way. But there have been so many "we've almost solved it" theories over the years. It's like those Armageddonists - the end of the world is near!! but then the sun comes up the next day. Most of these theories are fascinating but at their center they are dry husks.

[William Kelly]

Actually, what happened at Dealey Plaza only happened one way, and the only "theory" that counts is the currect one. Let's figure that out.

We'll never get there if we don't once-and-for-all-time eliminate the ridiculous, the far-flung and the historically coincidental.

The JFK murder did indeed happen only one way. But there have been so many "we've almost solved it" theories over the years. It's like those Armageddonists - the end of the world is near!! but then the sun comes up the next day. Most of these theories are fascinating but at their center they are dry husks.

Well, It's the job of the journalist, historian and independent researcher to at least try to determine the truth and present what happened honestly, even if it is from different perspectives.

I think if you eleminate all the theories that try to pin a psychological motive on LHO and accept the fact that whatever happened at Dealey Plaza was a covert operation, and the motive for the murder was elemination, then that discards a big percentage of the bullcrap.

When I first started dealing with Ken Rahn he told me to put together an hypothesis that fits what we know about the assassination, but he didn't like my conclusions.

To me, it's now pretty simple. The Dealey Plaza operation was originally planned, approved and trained to attack Cuba and maybe even kill Castro and was redirected to JFK, an operation that began at JM/WAVE, and had the tacit knowledge and approval of RFK.

This anti-Castro operation was a maritime operation, meaning it involved boats, and Cuban nationals who could be portrayed as either pro-or-anti-Castro, or double-agents, like Cubella or those commandos who were captured by Castro, whose true loyalities are unknown.

Now the suspects number in the dozens rather than thousands.

I don't know how long it will take to narrow it down even further, but I know what must happen before the whittiling can begin - Congressional Oversight hearings on the JFK Act and the destroyed, missing and still withheld records, positive result of the Morley vs. CIA case, either official ruling or embarrising the CIA to give up what they got, and sitting grand jury to evaluate the evidence.

If those things don't happen in the next two years they probably will never happen, or happen to late to make a difference due to attrition of witnesses and suspects.

Mark is the one who seems frustrated at not being able to grasp the most significant developments in the case - the exciting state of the research - and where it seems to be going.

Rather than help take the research further, it seems Mark wants to be told what others are finding out so he can try to debunk that too.

The most significant new research is not on the internet, and for good reason.

BK

[Guest Mark Valenti]

Mark is the one who seems frustrated at not being able to grasp the most significant developments in the case - the exciting state of the research - and where it seems to be going.

Rather than help take the research further, it seems Mark wants to be told what others are finding out so he can try to debunk that too.

Well Bill, as someone who has been compelled by the myriad details of the JFK murder - and the theories - for thirty years, I don't think my threshold for credulity is any higher than, say, the average member of a sitting Grand Jury. My greatest frustration is in circular reasoning that assumes too much as holy writ which then poisons every subsequent revelation. If you believe it's not helpful to have interested observers vetting theories as they arise, then by all means, you and your Sancho Panzas should continue on your quest unmolested. But my scrutiny is gnat-like compared to the churning you're apt to endure if you don't move into the general public forum with an impregnable theory.

[William Kelly]

Mark is the one who seems frustrated at not being able to grasp the most significant developments in the case - the exciting state of the research - and where it seems to be going.

Rather than help take the research further, it seems Mark wants to be told what others are finding out so he can try to debunk that too.

Well Bill, as someone who has been compelled by the myriad details of the JFK murder - and the theories - for thirty years, I don't think my threshold for credulity is any higher than, say, the average member of a sitting Grand Jury. My greatest frustration is in circular reasoning that assumes too much as holy writ which then poisons every subsequent revelation. If you believe it's not helpful to have interested observers vetting theories as they arise, then by all means, you and your Sancho Panzas should continue on your quest unmolested. But my scrutiny is gnat-like compared to the churning you're apt to endure if you don't move into the general public forum with an impregnable theory.

No, I don't mind you and Tim and others being gadflys to conspiracy theories. The only impregnable theory is the one that is correct.

I was just making a distinction between what researchers do - take what is known a step further and learn more, and debunkers who close doors, set up roadblocks, head off witnesses at the pass and spin new docs and info. Most of the independent researchers on the assassination beat were originally debunkers of the official version of events. Now, as the real version of events is uncovered, the debunkers seem to want to muddy the waters more rather than make things more clear, as they should be.

I too distain such conspiracy theorists as Blakey, Waldon, Russo, etc. and hope that real independent researchers are even beyond conspiracy theories, but are zooming in on the real nut crackers in the case.

And evidence and witnesses that get to a grand jury are vetted a lot more than by internet debunkers.

I wish the real Debunkers and Disinfo guys - amateurs like Dale Myers, Gus Russo, Mcia, and the polished pros like Max Holland, Priscilla Johnson McMillan and Thomas Powers would participate, but alas, they won't join the discussion.

BK

aka Sancho Panza?

[John Dolva]

Robert: (from other topic) "...the murder of a President; who could have been voted out of office quite readily, if he was as bad as some Texan's were saying he was."

Well reasoned, IMO.

BK: "...The Dealey Plaza operation was originally planned, approved and trained to attack Cuba and maybe even kill Castro and was redirected to JFK, an operation that began at JM/WAVE, and had the tacit knowledge and approval of RFK."

One must not forget the world and its opinions and influence in such actions. Even the assassins in this scenario would have had some idea of that. By inference, a flawed scenario, or the assassins were just plain stupid.

Stupid enough to have evaded Justice for half a century?

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Actually, what happened at Dealey Plaza only happened one way, and the only "theory" that counts is the currect one. Let's figure that out.

We'll never get there if we don't once-and-for-all-time eliminate the ridiculous, the far-flung and the historically coincidental.

The JFK murder did indeed happen only one way. But there have been so many "we've almost solved it" theories over the years. It's like those Armageddonists - the end of the world is near!! but then the sun comes up the next day. Most of these theories are fascinating but at their center they are dry husks.

Yep!

And then, there are those CIA operatives who have inflitrated the forum and are merely attempting to further confuse everyone with the facts!

Which, it would appear, is certainly working on many!

[Kathleen Collins]

For some reason, I cannot see any photos. I don't know why that happens. But here's my theory: you asked for it.

There were 2 Oswalds, one named Lee and one, Harvey. Harvey did not know about Lee. Lee shot at the President from the TSBD and Harvey who worked there got framed. It is possible that Lee and Harvey were cousins. They shared a resemblance, at least in photos. Supposedly, a LHO went to Russia to live. But if someone actually defected, another man came back. A lookalike. The voice on the tape from Russia, where Harvey is supposedly teaching another man English, was the same as Harvey's. It started off a bit British, but by the time he "came back," he spoke English well. And it was the same voice that had stammered over the English he was reading aloud. So Harvey was not an American, imo.

Who killed Kennedy? Curtis Le May and Lymen Lemnitzer from the military ordered it. The oil barons funded it. The CIA trained the Cuban Exiles to carry out the assassination, which may have included a Mafia hit man. The Secret Service allowed it to happen. And Johnson gained from it; at least at first.

Kennedy was shot at from all sides. He was never going to escape alive. For someone so beloved all over the world, he had the worst enemies. J. Edgar Hoover knew it was going to happen, as did Nixon and -- according to members of the Baptist religion -- Cardinal Spellman knew it was going to take place and did absolutely nothing to prevent it; as did other high-ranking Catholics, imo. Kennedy was seen as too liberal.

Kathy Collins

[Myra Bronstein]

Actually, what happened at Dealey Plaza only happened one way, and the only "theory" that counts is the currect one. Let's figure that out.

We'll never get there if we don't once-and-for-all-time eliminate the ridiculous, the far-flung and the historically coincidental.

The JFK murder did indeed happen only one way. But there have been so many "we've almost solved it" theories over the years. It's like those Armageddonists - the end of the world is near!! but then the sun comes up the next day. Most of these theories are fascinating but at their center they are dry husks.

Well, It's the job of the journalist, historian and independent researcher to at least try to determine the truth and present what happened honestly, even if it is from different perspectives.

I think if you eleminate all the theories that try to pin a psychological motive on LHO and accept the fact that whatever happened at Dealey Plaza was a covert operation, and the motive for the murder was elemination, then that discards a big percentage of the bullcrap.

When I first started dealing with Ken Rahn he told me to put together an hypothesis that fits what we know about the assassination, but he didn't like my conclusions.

To me, it's now pretty simple. The Dealey Plaza operation was originally planned, approved and trained to attack Cuba and maybe even kill Castro and was redirected to JFK, an operation that began at JM/WAVE, and had the tacit knowledge and approval of RFK.

This anti-Castro operation was a maritime operation, meaning it involved boats, and Cuban nationals who could be portrayed as either pro-or-anti-Castro, or double-agents, like Cubella or those commandos who were captured by Castro, whose true loyalities are unknown.

Now the suspects number in the dozens rather than thousands.

I don't know how long it will take to narrow it down even further, but I know what must happen before the whittiling can begin - Congressional Oversight hearings on the JFK Act and the destroyed, missing and still withheld records, positive result of the Morley vs. CIA case, either official ruling or embarrising the CIA to give up what they got, and sitting grand jury to evaluate the evidence.

If those things don't happen in the next two years they probably will never happen, or happen to late to make a difference due to attrition of witnesses and suspects.

Mark is the one who seems frustrated at not being able to grasp the most significant developments in the case - the exciting state of the research - and where it seems to be going.

Rather than help take the research further, it seems Mark wants to be told what others are finding out so he can try to debunk that too.

The most significant new research is not on the internet, and for good reason.

BK

I don't see anything wrong with an informed hypothesis being put forth for debate.

That leads to discussion of facts and research, either supportive or debunking, and it's the scientific method.

BK, do you think it's critical for researchers to attend the annual JFK assassination forums to stay apprised of significant new research?

[Tim Gratz]

Ms. Collins' post is just so out of the ballpark I cannot believe it!

Baptists? Cardinal Spellman?

Bugliosi can do a supplement to his book that just reproduces many of the posts here. Then we can all fold our tents and go home. All serious assassination research will be destroyed.