Notices
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: JFK Assination Theory

  1. #1 JFK Assination Theory 
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Posts
    101
    Richard M. Nixon - Guilty or Innocent

    Motive: Only the death of JFK would provide the opportunity for Nixon to run for president again after previously losing to JFK in the general elections. The chances of a NIXON presidency was remote at best.

    E. Howard Hunt led the Bay of Pigs invasion on Cuba that wiped out 80% of his commandos after JFK reniged on his promise to provide air cover at the beach head.

    This is the same E. Howard Hunt who led a group of burglars into the democratic headquarters, later to become known as the Watergate Conspiricy and the eventual downfall of NIXON. E. Howard Hunt taking orders from Nixon.

    The Warren commission did a pizz-poor job of investigating the assination and some say it looked like a cover up. Gerald Ford sat on the Warren commission investigating the assination of JFK and as we all know later became NIXON's running mate on the presidential ticket and was elected VP of the US.

    Ford later became president after NIXON resigned and even more establishing his bias for NIXON, Ford immediately pardoned NIXON for any and all wrong doings.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Spiral Agnew, was Nixon's running mate in 1968, not Gerald Ford. Ford became VP, when Agnew resigned over criminal charges. The Constitution had allowed for the President to appoint his/he own VP in such cases, but the new 25th amendment (1964) was used by Congress and Ford was ratified, not favored by Nixon...

    Ford and many others around then, felt nothing good could come from prosecuting or confining an ex-president.

    Conspiracy theory, generally links Fidel Castro or Lyndon Johnson to the death of JFK. Castro for obvious reason. Johnson and Kennedy were not philosophical or ideologically compatible. The combination was a political decision, often done in those days, where a Northeastern would need help in the south or western states, which still happens today.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3 The Denmark Theory 
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Posts
    101
    too young to remember but now that i know Nixon chose Ford to replace Agnew and Ford subsequently was radified, it is more a favor than if he was NIXON's running mate to help win votes outside of the Nixon popularity as it were. Favor or maybe payoff for something.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    "not favored by Nixon" in my post. Nixon really had no choice under the new amendment and was offered none by the house.

    Jackie Kennedy, was the first to think a conspiracy existed or at least publicly speak of it. She was confused by Johnson's attitude, on the plane ride back to Washington, after the assassination, where he was sworn into office. New documents disclosed in Dallas, last week, are adding fuel to all the theories.

    If you want a new angle on this, you might check out J Edgar Hoover, who was the long time head of the FBI, well before, during and after JFK's death. Pay offs were possible even probable, but to whom or from who the mystery... He died in (I think) 1972, probably taking a good many secrets with him.

    History does not need to be lived. There are hundreds of books on every subject, to say nothing of the Internet access. My favorite period is during the founding of our country and the people who managed the process. Unless I am reincarnated, I was not around then...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Yeah, since watching that "Fog of War" documentary, which is just McNamara giving a sort of auto-biography, I tend to favor LBJ as the guy most interested in offing JFK. It's funny how similar such a plot is to, oh say, the Manchurian Candidate plot, except I don't think LBJ was brainwashed.

    LBJ apparently always vocally claimed it was Castro, but that hardly means anything if it was LBJ.

    The main reason I say this is because we almost immediately jumped into Vietnam after JFK died. We were involved already, but nothing on the sort of scale you'd need a draft for. My take is that LBJ wanted to go ahead and do the war, and I'm sure there were others who agreed. (A- greed, I mean.)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Since, I have lived in Texas most of my life, many years not far from the Johnson Ranch, I wish there were good things I could say about the Johnson's. Long story, very short...He epitomized corruption which existed in Texas and particularly South Texas for a generation. Duval County just one item...

    Having said that, Johnson would have to be influenced (brainwashed) to even use a bathroom. Most all his initiatives were from others, War on Poverty to so called Welfare reforms and yes, in my opinion the Viet Nam Actions in total...

    Nixon, was Vice President for all of Dwight Eisenhower's two terms, where his first run ins with Hoover began. Hoover, Director of the FBI from 1924 to his death in 1972, was in a fight with Nixon from day one of his election in 1968, to maintain independence for his FBI. (Hoover given credit for current structure).

    My point, Hoover had ran government via threats and innuendos for years, which he (Nixon) understood all to well. Hoover was also, not fond of the Kennedy's. Bobby in particular. I will add Martin King as well. He could have been instrumental in JFK, King and Bobby Kennedy's death and no telling who else. He did die in 72 and probably why Nixon lived out his life.

    There are things in governing a large nation, with a system as we do have, which I sincerely feel the public should not know. Errors can be easily made, when negotiating with other governments or commitments made to progress some agenda or to eliminate that power in total. This is probably why from the first president to this date, we knowingly overlook that which could have been.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    By reading Major General Smedley Butlers "War is a Racket", his adress on interventions, and his testimony into the Coup attempt in the 30s, you get a different perspective.

    The US Army is not so much the nation's Army as it is the Army of corporate interests. The fact that people did not know this about a pivotal institution then and still dont know now is as important as the situation itself because it reveals the astounding extent to which the information and media are controled.

    Also, the 30's coup attempt was quite informative. Corporate interests wanted to keep Roosvelt as a figurehead/orator/ribbon cuter while the day to day administration would be controled by someone close to the president(secretary, etc) "on behalf" of the insterests. So people would think the visible President was running the show while the whitehouse would be controled by an advisor(someone appearing to be subordinate like vice-president or secretary of state, etc) on behalf of the people pulling the strings while being completly unknown to the public. IF Roosevelt would not play ball then he would be assasinated and replaced by a more cooperative/corrupt figurehead. Its also important to note that the Coup would be preceeded and followed by a media(newspaper articles then) campaign to smooth things over, so even then the media could be greatly influenced to the extent of preparing the way for a replacement of government and covering up any loose ends.

    When I use this perspective to examine JFK, I tend to think that the CIA did it on behalf of the unknown interests (Wall Street / Military Industial Complex) that both controled the secret services and had the means to control/influence the media prior to and following the coup.

    So I dont think that "Nixon" or "LBJ" called any shot, LBJ was likely the cooperative(corrupt) replacement in line.

    I also deduce from the longevity of the coverup (the last documents to be released in 2017? Why not declassify everything in 1990?) that some of the people envolved still hold positions related to or still have influence over the government.

    The wildest theory I found on the net makes Bush senor part of the plot, and although its apeshit farfetched I have to say its quite intriguing.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Major General Smedley, certainly had an admiral military career. Maybe to long. However, many thought in the teens and twenties, the US was entering and did enter WWI, with the influence and/or wishes of the fledgling US Industrial Complex. The counter was simply security of the oceans which was being lost to the Germans, as ships/people were lost.
    We had been financing our allies and for what ever reason we finally did enter that war. I might add here, Smedley was disappointed in not getting a field command on the front lines.

    I am not up on the suggest coup on Roosevelt's Administration, which is scaring to even imagine. Smedley and several others did testify in Congress (think 1933, into the depression and a weakening over all economy), which took no action and of course FDR, served out several additional terms, until his death. Entering WWII, however was never considered as from any influence other than national security.

    During the times 1400-1900, wars were common among nations. Actually hundreds occurred in various degree and the US was involved in any of them. None, were from 'lobbyist', the current word for government influence. Under the US system, the President is Commander in Chief and Congress in charge of the purse strings. This has a reason and no war can be fought w/o some cooperation of both branches and few lobbyist make it into the White House.

    The CIA was formed in 1947, in part to replace FBI authority in foreign affairs. There authority was limited, growing over time...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    I am not up on the suggest coup on Roosevelt's Administration
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7H6J6Wx0t8w

    its a radio documentary but interesting nonetheless
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by jackson33
    Ford and many others around then, felt nothing good could come from prosecuting or confining an ex-president.
    A skilled politician can always come up with a good reason to do something they want to do, even if the actual motive is something else.


    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo
    Also, the 30's coup attempt was quite informative. Corporate interests wanted to keep Roosvelt as a figurehead/orator/ribbon cuter while the day to day administration would be controled by someone close to the president(secretary, etc) "on behalf" of the insterests. So people would think the visible President was running the show while the whitehouse would be controled by an advisor(someone appearing to be subordinate like vice-president or secretary of state, etc) on behalf of the people pulling the strings while being completly unknown to the public. IF Roosevelt would not play ball then he would be assasinated and replaced by a more cooperative/corrupt figurehead. Its also important to note that the Coup would be preceeded and followed by a media(newspaper articles then) campaign to smooth things over, so even then the media could be greatly influenced to the extent of preparing the way for a replacement of government and covering up any loose ends.
    You mean like Dick Cheney?
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •