Without evidence for the claim, I'll avoid believing conspiracy theories.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Who killed JFK?
- Thread starter Stevicus
- Start date
It turns out the Mafia was behind it...since the heroic Robert Kennedy was fighting it.
And since I am from that country...I have read enough criminology books to know how these criminals operate.
James Files claims he killed John F Kennedy as he prepares for his release - People's Daily Online
The Kennedys definitely angered certain segments of America. Their support of civil rights, integration, and racial equality certainly made them a lot of enemies in various sections of America, including Dallas. They also appeared to be soft on communism, which also angered the hard-liners.
One person who really hated RFK was J. Edgar Hoover, and that's not the kind of man you wanted as an enemy if you wanted to have a job in Washington DC.
The situation is often portrayed as the Kennedys being young liberal idealists who were too naive to know what they were up against and perhaps too cavalier about their own personal safety. Going into a hostile city like Dallas in an open motorcade like that seems poor judgment.
Of course. And MLK was murdered too...let us not forget that.
As I was just saying, the Mafia was hired to do the job in both murders.
Even if from those murders so many people benefitted.
Who probably implicitly okayed the murders.
Last edited:
Yes. I just don't understand this:
Oswald said : " it was not me. I am just the patsy ".
And they told him : " no, you are a liar"
James Files said : " It was me and Nicoletti who killed JFK. "
And they told him : " no you are a liar".
But it is either/or. Tertium non datur.
So I do think that people will believe what they wanna believe.
No videos for me at the moment.
Aye, people will believe what they want.Yes. I just don't understand this:
Oswald said : " it was not me. I am just the patsy ".
And they told him : " no, you are a liar"
James Files said : " It was me and Nicoletti who killed JFK. "
And they told him : " no you are a liar".
But it is either/or. Tertium non datur.
So I do think that people will believe what they wanna believe.
I'll remain agnostic about how deep the plot goes.
Very well, but I'm surprised you never heard the magic bullet theory.
I tend to not remember some loopy conspiracy details.
"Magic bullet" has the ring of something not memorable.
(I have much experience with bullets. Magic never happened.)
In this case, the loopy detail in question was endorsed by the Warren Commission, the same ones who said there wasn't a conspiracy.
Careful. I could be an FBI informant. Or even a spy for the CIA!Do you trust the FBI of that time?
I do not
Or not.
And I was nowhere near the grassy knoll in 1963. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.
The FBI & other organizations can be judged somewhatDo you trust the FBI of that time?
I do not
by the Snowden standard, ie, the occurrence of credible
whistle blowers. What has come up that is a cromulent
refutation of their reporting?
BTW, I don't know about any such refutations. I'm just
pointing out a useful standard. Applied to things like
claims of faked Moon landings & 9/11 truthers, the
government line is far & away the more credible than
the conspiracy theorists.
Who killed JFK?
I can guarantee it wasn't me beyond that, who knows?
I can guarantee it wasn't me beyond that, who knows?
Thou doth protest muchly.
Aww come one, i wasn't even a twinkle in my dads eye then
That's how deep the plot goes.
Modern penal science is almost exclusively based upon Non-juridic sciences like psychology.
The culprit's psyche is studied thoroughly to understand motives...which help a jurist understand the crime as phenomenon.
Honestly...I am not interested in being right. I can be wrong, and I hope to be wrong.
But I did study this case for years, because criminology is my passion (also helped by my colleagues).
"Conspiracy" is an overused term...I believe...because anything in penally relevant facts is a conspiracy. Like in the case of fraudulent bankruptcy..the entrepreneur accused of that crime, could think he is victim of a "conspiracy".
Last edited: