Maybe they didn't get away with it: The Lincoln-Kennedy assassination parallels. 7 sentences long.

First, four sentences of background: Maybe JFK along with McCain and GWB did not get away with misconduct while in the military because of their powerful families.

What if a grassroots gang prevented the servicemen around them from testifying, which rendered a court martial impossible?

What if their powerful families had actually pleaded with them to face the music and tell what they knew so they wouldn't be owned by a gang?

What if they had to stave off blackmail by starting wars to bring government pork to the grassroots gang?

Now, the point: What if the parallels between the JFK and Lincoln assassinations occurred because Kennedy somehow tried to model Lincoln too closely?

What if the hypothetical grassroots gang selected him because they thought he was handy for the dirty job of starting a war?

What if he had to find a way to be a credible politician no matter what?

I kind of liked Kennedy, he was a decent and well liked president by the majority of the people in our country. But there were some rich and powerful people who did not like him....so he got killed.

Don't know the whole story and it appears the cover up was pretty good because nobody knows for sure around here how broad the whole conspiracy was back then. I was pretty young, but remember getting half a day off school when he was shot. My parents who were conservatives liked Kennedy. Back then there was not all the political division BS like there is today.

Boy has our countries society slid downhill since I was a kid, I used to be a moderate liberal...which liberals would now refer to as a conservative MAGA supporter these days since people voted for the best candidate for the country, local area, or state as a whole back then

originally posted by: rickymousebody knows for sure around here how broad the whole conspiracy was back then. I was pretty young, but remember getting half a day off school when he was shot.

I was referring to the fact that he was the only Navy officer to have lost a ship he was in charge of who was not court martialed for it.

Some sources online have stated the log of the IJN Amagiri did not report any enemy contact on the night it was alleged to have struck PT109.

originally posted by: Solvedit

originally posted by: rickymousebody knows for sure around here how broad the whole conspiracy was back then. I was pretty young, but remember getting half a day off school when he was shot.

I was referring to the fact that he was the only Navy officer to have lost a ship he was in charge of who was not court martialed for it.

Some sources online have stated the log of the IJN Amagiri did not report any enemy contact on the night it was alleged to have struck PT109.

I knew nothing about that incident with the ship. I was pretty young back then and only remember Kennedy getting shot because we got a half day off of school, then of course, everyone in the house watched the news clips about it after that.

My parents were caught up in the conspiracy theories about Kennedy at the time. I was probably around eight or so when he got shot, and I never even knew about that ship sinking incident. Looked it up, it was twenty years before he got shot. Did that happen during the war?

a reply to: Solvedit




man you post some serious disinfo. only one Captain of any ship during world war II was court martialed for the loss of their ship.

Only 317 men out of the crew of 1,196 survived the five-day wait for rescue. McVay survived, only to become the only captain in the Navy's history to be court-martialed for losing his ship. He repeatedly asked the Navy why it took five days to rescue his men, and he never received an answer. The Navy has long claimed that SOS messages were never received because the ship was operating under a policy of radio silence; declassified records now show the Navy lied.

After years of grief-stricken letters from families of his crew, McVay -- haunted by the tragedy and exhausted from family troubles -- shot himself in the chin on his front lawn on Nov. 6, 1968.
Rear Admiral Charles McVay III

ETA: Lieutenant Commander Kohei Hanami captian of the Amagiri claimed that he intentionally turned hard to starboard and deliberately rammed PT-109.

originally posted by: BernnieJGato
a reply to: Solvedit
man you post some serious disinfo. only one Captain of any ship during world war II was court martialed for the loss of their ship.

It seems accounts vary.

Some people confuse court martial with conviction by a court martial.

Being court martialed or having to answer to a board of inquiry is like being tried and is not the same as being convicted by a court martial.

What if the wealthy and powerful wanted to maintain the South as a vacation place?

The sitting president FDR had a vacation retreat home called "Little White House" in Georgia.

a reply to: Solvedit

well then show me a list of the 350 ships lost that their captains faced a court martial.

now maybe they faced a Naval Board of Inquiry or Naval Court of Inquiry , but being court martialed means you had charges against you of some sort brought.

here are the three types of courts martial.

What are the different types of courts-martial? There are three types of courts-martial. Summary courts-martial are streamlined, non-judicial courts-martial that apply to Article 15 violations. The stakes are relatively low in these situations, and service members have more limited rights. Special courts-martial and general courts-martial are formal trials. Special courts-martial cover offenses that are similar to misdemeanors in civilian court, while general courts-martial cover offenses that are similar to felonies in civilian court. A summary court-martial conviction does not result in a criminal record, but a special court-martial or general court-martial conviction does. Since the penalties and other consequences are more serious in these two types of courts-martial, service members have greater protections.
What are the different types of courts-martial?

Kennedy was on more ice than Hunter.

a reply to: rickymouse

a reply to: Solvedit

What if the wealthy and powerful wanted to maintain the South as a vacation place?
The sitting president FDR had a vacation retreat home called "Little White House" in Georgia.

there you go posting disinfo again. fdr bought that place a run down resort in the town of warm springs ga before he even became president. it had warm springs and soaking in them helped ease his pain from polio.he even built a new a place there for polio patients could find some relief like he did.

the little white house was just a small six room house of which were three bedrooms, with two additional houses at first, one for servant's quarters one for as a guest house, and then another built later for Georgia Wilkins the heir of the original owners family. hardly what you call a high pollutin snob.

it's said the people of warm springs loved him for what he did for them and he loved them and the town.



best you quit twisting facts for baseless pseudo speculations.

originally posted by: BernnieJGato
there you go posting disinfo again. fdr bought that place a run down resort in the town of warm springs ga before he even became president. it had warm springs and soaking in them helped ease his pain from polio.he even built a new a place there for polio patients could find some relief like he did.

the little white house was just a small six room house of which were three bedrooms, with two additional houses at first, one for servant's quarters one for as a guest house, and then another built later for Georgia Wilkins the heir of the original owners family. hardly what you call a high pollutin snob.

it's said the people of warm springs loved him for what he did for them and he loved them and the town.

What part of that proves he didn't cherish it?

Could he have thrown a little cash around in the Adirondacks and bought so much loyalty? Wouldn't he have had a much smaller house and bumped elbows with many more neighbors?

To say nothing of trafficking culture.

best you quit twisting facts for baseless pseudo speculations.

You're overplaying your hand.

What an embarrassing amount of bluster for someone who does not realize how nice it must have been for a New York State senator to have a vacation home in the South, with an entire town who was loyal to him?

a reply to: Solvedit

What part of that proves he didn't cherish it?

no where did i say he didn't cherish it, what i said since your to ignorant to see it is, he didn't buy and build it there because he thought it was a nice place and wanted to keep it for himself and be in control it as you speculated. he bought it because it gave him some relief from his polio, and then built a place for others children mostly who had same disease could experience the relief he did, and even built a house for the woman who's family owned before peabody if memory serves. that's a expression of gratitude and sharing.

Could he have thrown a little cash around in the Adirondacks and bought so much loyalty? Wouldn't he have had a much smaller house and bumped elbows with many more neighbors?

no because the Adirondacks didn't have the springs that gave him relief he so desperately searched for before finding the warm springs in GA, nor was his intent to buy loyality.

What an embarrassing amount of bluster for someone who does not realize how nice it must have been for a New York State senator to have a vacation home in the South, with an entire town who was loyal to him?

you should be the one embarrassed twisting facts that have been shown to in every thread you speculate in about the rich, english and the south that your wrong making up lies.

again best you quit twisting facts for baseless pseudo speculations or you will continue to be embarrassed.

originally posted by: BernnieJGato
a reply to: Solvedit

What part of that proves he didn't cherish it?

no where did i say he didn't cherish it, what i said since your to ignorant to see it is, he didn't buy and build it there because he thought it was a nice place and wanted to keep it for himself and be in control it as you speculated. he bought it because it gave him some relief from his polio, and then built a place for others children mostly who had same disease could experience the relief he did, and even built a house for the woman who's family owned before peabody if memory serves. that's a expression of gratitude and sharing.

Bought a town, check.

no because the Adirondacks didn't have the springs that gave him relief he so desperately searched for before finding the warm springs in GA, nor was his intent to buy loyality.

you should be the one embarrassed twisting facts that have been shown to in every thread you speculate in about the rich, english and the south that your wrong making up lies.

again best you quit twisting facts for baseless pseudo speculations or you will continue to be embarrassed.

Thank you, I was going to suggest his reasons may have had to do with trafficking culture before you reminded me.

a reply to: Solvedit

pitifully sad

originally posted by: Solvedit

Some sources online have stated the log of the IJN Amagiri did not report any enemy contact on the night it was alleged to have struck PT109.

It wasn't a ship, it was a 80 foot boat with a big engine, guns and 4 torpedoes. The haul was made up of plywood, so the boat was made to be expendable. I think you are reaching on this one. The boat was cut in half so I don't think a log would do that. 99 out of about 500+ were lost in the war.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Solvedit

Some sources online have stated the log of the IJN Amagiri did not report any enemy contact on the night it was alleged to have struck PT109.

It wasn't a ship, it was a 80 foot boat with a big engine, guns and 4 torpedoes. The haul was made up of plywood, so the boat was made to be expendable. I think you are reaching on this one. The boat was cut in half so I don't think a log would do that. 99 out of about 500+ were lost in the war.

They were made to be maneuverable and fast, not expendable.

I think they were referring to a logbook although I have not been able to find corroboration online regarding the no mention in the log in a few casual searches today.

The boats were wooden but each had three 1500-hp V-12 gasoline engines. They could do 47mph. They could plane like a speedboat.

They counted on speed and maneuverability to avoid gunfire. Only the cockpit was armored against splinters (shell fragments, not direct hits) and machine gun bullets.

Only 7 were lost to enemy naval gunfire and 6 to shore batteries.

The major causes of losses were: (from Wikipedia: )
Accidents, friendly fire, sea conditions – 32
Scuttled to prevent capture – 27


PT122:

originally posted by: Solvedit

Some sources online have stated the log of the IJN Amagiri did not report any enemy contact on the night it was alleged to have struck PT109.

It was cut in two as per the discovery of it in the ocean, so whatever did that.