The BIG UNANSWERED QUESTION: Why was JFK murdered?

[Jeff Carter]

24 minutes ago, Mervyn Hagger said:

That spells money. Big money and big money leaves trails in places and ties to people. Many gang members got their own training in the military. That spells organization and organization creates its own records that touch base with the world at large.

I don’t think a huge amount of money was required for this operation. Sniper teams would have to be located, coordinated and transported in and out of Dallas. An advance team - several men? - would have to work or circulate in Dallas for some weeks. Most of the rest piggybacks onto already existing programs and agencies, which already have their own budgets.

[Robert Burrows]

On 12/15/2020 at 12:41 PM, Mervyn Hagger said:

Chuck, I don't buy your answer. WHO exactly was threatened by this? Forget the "autopsy", stick to item number one: WHY? and then go to WHO? There is no motive. NONE. Look at all of the corresponding variations of policy. JFK and his brother were lying war mongers. A nuclear war with China was even discussed. Robert Kennedy was waging this same war against Cuba - AFTER the Bay of Pigs. People kill for personal reasons and most of them are about money. I want to know WHO was to gain?

A recent post of mine got edited by a moderator because I called Gerald Ford a xxxx, a prevaricator, who admitted his dishonesty in moving the location of JFK's back wound. Why are the moderators allowing Mr. Hagger's post to stand when he calls JFK and RFK "lying war mongers" ?

[Ron Bulman]

JFK saved the US and USSR form a nuclear holocaust during the Cuban Missile crisis.  He was trying to prevent a war by bringing home the advisors in Vietnam as opposed to sending troops in.  He refused to allow official intervention during the Bay of Pigs.  All likely contributing to "why".  A lying war monger  he was not.  Who?  David Rockefeller, the east coast establishment, wall street, big oil, the MIC.

This thread is going off the rails like a . . .

  

[Guest]

28 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

JFK saved the US and USSR form a nuclear holocaust during the Cuban Missile crisis.  He was trying to prevent a war by bringing home the advisors in Vietnam as opposed to sending troops in.  He refused to allow official intervention during the Bay of Pigs.  All likely contributing to "why".  A lying war monger  he was not.  Who?  David Rockefeller, the east coast establishment, wall street, big oil, the MIC.

This thread is going off the rails like a . . .

  

It was never on the rails 🙂

[Michael Crane]

Oh my.I knew I recognized those pants that Ozzy was wearing because I went to that concert with my cousin and best friend Steve in 1983.It was the US Festival at Glen Helen Park in San Bernadino Ca.There was over 300,000 fans that day.

Edited December 17, 2020 by Michael Crane

[Mervyn Hagger]

10 hours ago, Jeff Carter said:

I don’t think a huge amount of money was required for this operation. Sniper teams would have to be located, coordinated and transported in and out of Dallas. An advance team - several men? - would have to work or circulate in Dallas for some weeks. Most of the rest piggybacks onto already existing programs and agencies, which already have their own budgets.

Jeff, all of that spells money. If an ideologue hired snipers then they had to be paid enough to do the job and offset the risks and keep their mouths shut. Even the organization of that would cost money. But why? What was the reason? The real world does not operate in the way you describe, only the world of Marvel Comics et al does that.

[Mervyn Hagger]

9 hours ago, Robert Burrows said:

A recent post of mine got edited by a moderator because I called Gerald Ford a xxxx, a prevaricator, who admitted his dishonesty in moving the location of JFK's back wound. Why are the moderators allowing Mr. Hagger's post to stand when he calls JFK and RFK "lying war mongers" ?

Robert, I don't know what your purpose is in posting that, unless you don't like the topic, because the kind of language you infer has NOT been employed by me.

[Mervyn Hagger]

8 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

JFK saved the US and USSR form a nuclear holocaust during the Cuban Missile crisis.  He was trying to prevent a war by bringing home the advisors in Vietnam as opposed to sending troops in.  He refused to allow official intervention during the Bay of Pigs.  All likely contributing to "why".  A lying war monger  he was not.  Who?  David Rockefeller, the east coast establishment, wall street, big oil, the MIC.

This thread is going off the rails like a . . .

  

Ron, obviously you do not like the topic. Please do not try to cause a disruption by posting items intended to disrupt discussion.

[Mervyn Hagger]

7 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

It was never on the rails 🙂

Chris, obviously the question itself is something that unnerves you. Please keep your remarks to the topic in hand, or just avoid the topic. Thank you.

[Mervyn Hagger]

5 hours ago, Michael Crane said:

Oh my.I knew I recognized those pants that Ozzy was wearing because I went to that concert with my cousin and best friend Steve in 1983.It was the US Festival at Glen Helen Park in San Bernadino Ca.There was over 300,000 fans that day.

Michael, is this your idea of dealing with a topic that unsettles you?

[Mervyn Hagger]

The unanswered question is why was JFK murdered?

A lone gunman carrying out a spur of the moment whim cost no money in organization.

The convenient killing of a policeman that was then blamed on the gunman helped to paint a picture of a deranged mind.

Again, no money, no organization.

But once the story goes beyond that, then problems arise.

Even the senseless act by Jack Ruby in killing LHO is an instance of a lone gunman carrying out a spur of the moment whim without cost to anyone else but his own lifestyle from the moment he pulled the trigger.

Once matters go beyond the point of two lone gunman in two senseless acts, then money takes over to create an organization.

The idea that Marcello was behind the hit does make sense as an act of gangland vengeance.

Marcello had money and such a hit was in keeping with gangland violence.

Now if a common cause was entered into by 'others' with Marcello, then again the cost goes up in terms of money.

There are indeed a lot of unanswered questions in the Warren Report, and there are also a lot of unanswered questions in the weird and deceptive behavior of both JFK and RFK, especially with regards to Manuel Artime Buesa and all of his ilk.

If the leads are followed inwards from Manuel Artime Buesa to RFK, then the CIA base at the southern campus of the University of Miami comes into focus, and from it, more leads radiate to actions undertaken by RFK in support of JFK.

The starting point of my own interest is not Dealey Plaza, but the leads that arrive at Dealey Plaza.

Contrary to what some have attempted to suggest, contributors to this Forum such as Larry Hancock and Gary Murr are among various people who have created their own written works which in turn have provoked my own questions here.

If you don't like the topic, avoid it.

If you wonder what Larry and Gary have written then I suggest you pay more attention to the fine details of what has already been posted by me.

[Robert Burrows]

1 hour ago, Mervyn Hagger said:

Robert, I don't know what your purpose is in posting that, unless you don't like the topic, because the kind of language you infer has NOT been employed by me.

Mr. Hagger, with all due respect, I'm not inferring anything. The below quote is from your response to Chuck Schwartz, it was posted on Tuesday, December 15 at 12:41 PM.

"JFK and his brother were lying war mongers."

 

[Mervyn Hagger]

Just now, Robert Burrows said:

Mr. Hagger, with all due respect, I'm not inferring anything. The below quote is from your response to Chuck Schwartz, it was posted on Tuesday, December 15 at 12:41 PM.

"JFK and his brother were lying war mongers."

 

Robert: Yes, and your point is what, exactly?

I did not use profane or obscene language as did the apparent original writer whose work was then used to attack this thread.

Let us stick to the issues and not get into a personal attack.

I have now outlined in greater detail my own response to this thread, so perhaps you would now care to discuss that as it relates to Marcello; Manuel Artime Buesa; the southern campus of the UM, and two other contributors: Larry Hancock and Gary Murr?

[Robert Burrows]

12 minutes ago, Mervyn Hagger said:

Robert: Yes, and your point is what, exactly?

I did not use profane or obscene language as did the apparent original writer whose work was then used to attack this thread.

Let us stick to the issues and not get into a personal attack.

I have now outlined in greater detail my own response to this thread, so perhaps you would now care to discuss that as it relates to Marcello; Manuel Artime Buesa; the southern campus of the UM, and two other contributors: Larry Hancock and Gary Murr?

My apologies if you mistook my comments for a personal attack. I merely was trying to make a point to the moderators about what I perceived as a double standard in censoring a perfectly good English word. 

As to your argument, I have always believed that if the assassination was the work of organized crime the ensuing 57 year cover-up would have been unnecessary. Why would the government and the corporate media invest so much energy in protecting Carlos Marcello? 

[Mervyn Hagger]

23 minutes ago, Robert Burrows said:

My apologies if you mistook my comments for a personal attack. I merely was trying to make a point to the moderators about what I perceived as a double standard in censoring a perfectly good English word. 

As to your argument, I have always believed that if the assassination was the work of organized crime the ensuing 57 year cover-up would have been unnecessary. Why would the government and the corporate media invest so much energy in protecting Carlos Marcello? 

Thanks Robert. I am curious as which "good English word" you are referring to? "XXXXX"? Surely not.

EDIT: After I posted this the blanking out of the word that begins with 'l' and is followed by 'i' and then by 'a' and then by 'r' and followed by 's' got translated into 5 'x's !

I certainly don't understand that!

It seems that the way I wrote and used that word the first time was okay and it got through the automatic censor. But when I wrote it as spelled out, which is what the other person did, it was not okay. I guess this is what computers do.

As to your response to the issue posted, there is indeed a good explanation for the cover-up and it is one that I have been trying to penetrate for other reasons, and it is the seemingly unrelated chain of events that brought me here - with inspiration from Larry Hancock who apparently got his information from Gary Murr who in turn has become a great contributor to my knowledge base.

It may be of interest for you to know that in this regard Gary wrote to a friend of mine in Norway who I had been assisting with information I have from the archives of Don Pierson. Gary informed my Norwegian friend that he had been investigating the same ship that my Norwegian friend had been investigating and posting on his web site (which is how Gary became involved.)

So several years ago when Gary first made contact, my friend in Norway sent me information about Gary's email. Years went by. Then, very recently, on this Forum Gary very kindly sent me via email attachment, a lot of information he had collected about this ship.

This research project about this ship stretches back to 1985! (Actually, back to 1967!)

It has taken a lot of years to see the connecting dots, and that is why there is such a huge span of time involved in all this. But I did not come to this topic directly because of my interest in the death of JFK. (I lived in the Dallas / Fort Worth area, so I am well aware of the history, etc.)

But this topic is related to the question you have now asked, and the answer is a very unlikely coming together of different interests all tied to big money and business interests and all of it was centered on Houston, Texas (where I also lived for some time.)

It isn't Marcello that is the problem, but these other unrelated business interests that found common cause with the elimination of RFK by getting rid of JFK, and from what I understand, that was exactly what Marcello hoped to achieve.

The lid came down to protect these other interests, and their story has yet be revealed, but it is the story that I am working on.

Edited December 17, 2020 by Mervyn Hagger
Further explanation, see 'EDIT'