Why didn't the CIA use the heart attack gun on JFK? (Or any other assination method thats quieter)

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


That picture is completely misleading. The doctors and surgeons who worked on JFK in Dallas have all said they recall a portion of the skull missing from the back of the head. Your picture shows a portion missing from the top of the head and I do not think there is ANY evidence at all from any side of the issue that makes that claim.

Anyone who feels that Oswald acted alone is a fool who has not been paying attention. Once the House Select Committee on Assassinations released their finds which said JFK was very likely killed as a result of a conspiracy, that by definition blows the theory of Oswald acting alone out of the water. It takes more than one individual in order to have a conspiracy to murder another.

Because they didn't do it genius. Why question the actions of a myth? Make sure it's a fact before you question actions within.

Originally posted by MrWendal
That picture is completely misleading. The doctors and surgeons who worked on JFK in Dallas have all said they recall a portion of the skull missing from the back of the head. Your picture shows a portion missing from the top of the head and I do not think there is ANY evidence at all from any side of the issue that makes that claim.

and that would completely corroborate the
autopsy photos I saw which is why I made
my original post of 3 inch hole in rear and
a half inch hole over his right eye in front.
The only way that would be possible for
Oswald to make that shot from the depository
was the bullet making a u-turn.

star 4 u

Originally posted by MrWendal
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

That picture is completely misleading. The doctors and surgeons who worked on JFK in Dallas have all said they recall a portion of the skull missing from the back of the head. Your picture shows a portion missing from the top of the head and I do not think there is ANY evidence at all from any side of the issue that makes that claim.

If you go to the link it explains that the "exploded" pieces from the picture remained attached to the body with skin flaps, and they are "removed" on the picture solely to show the extent of the damage and the path of the bullet.

But hey - by all means don't actually review the information offered.....

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
But hey - by all means don't actually review the information offered.....

I read the whole page of the link u provided
and found it completely false from the autopsy
photos of JFK.

reply to post by kaoticf8

If you want to send a message what better way to do it than for it to be public and bloody. Just like that quote from the movie Law Abiding Citizen, "Lessons not learned in blood are soon forgotten" wasn't JFK trying to end the Vietnam war at the time and bring the soldiers home? It made a point and showed that it does not matter if you are the president you are still our puppet

That's exactly what I was going to say only several people beat me too it. It was a warning to future presidents to tow the line or else. If they can get away with a public and bloody murder for nearly 50 years they can get away with anything.

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
But hey - by all means don't actually review the information offered.....

I read the whole page of the link u provided
and found it completely false from the autopsy
photos of JFK.

What - like these ones - JFK autopsy photos

I'm not sure how you can find the detailed autopsy report "completely false" from some pretty damned rough photos

reply to post by balon0

Here are some of the links that Rising Against provided in the discussion

Wow, I wish someone told me about this thread. Especially as my name is being used more than once in it. Something the OP hadn't even bothered to ask me about.

Anyway, It's an interesting theory but in reality, there isn't exactly evidence to believe It holds a great deal of truth (other than It was seemingly available at the time - but so were many guns and many witnesses died from gunshot wounds too). The only reason, as far as I'm aware, that It's considered is because many of the witnesses had died from a heart attack in close proximity to each other (mainly in 1976 and 1977), and others proposed the heart attack gun theory. That seems to be all. It then snowballed and the rest is history..

You see, It's an out there theory and there doesn't seem to be much evidence for it having a great deal of truth as far as I'm aware. Just coincidence or speculation.

I'm also writing up a long analysis of all the shots fired for a new thread right now. Hopefully I can show reason to believe Kennedy was shot by assassins with rifles as opposed to any other means such as a gun causing a heart attack or anything else also. From what I have so far, I think I can produce enough "evidence".

OP Quotes:

Were they trying to get get more attention or a bigger reaction from the public?

You seem to be forgetting that we should have no video evidence of the assassination of the president. If memory serves me correct, most of the media were waiting for the president further along the route. We only have video evidence due to witnesses wishing to capture the events here and these video's weren't released till well after the assassination had taken place.

It isn't like today where video evidence is captured of literally everything. And everyone who did capture a video of the dealey Plaza while the president was here either had there film taken away, or edited shortly afterwards also. (which I'll show in my next thread).

CIA had calculated that was the best time to kill JFK because he was about to abolish the secrecy act (ultimately would shutdown CIA).

I presume the heart attack gun would not be accurate on long range. It also indicated CIA might not have insider to do the job quick enough.

The mainstream media and public still believed the outsider sniper did it.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

What - like these ones - JFK autopsy photos

I'm not sure how you can find the detailed autopsy report "completely false" from some pretty damned rough photos

This may be slightly off-topic to what you guys were discussing but I suggest you watch the fascinating work of the great researcher Bob Harris. It's an interesting video - one I'm watching as we speak. It's not in great detail but It's enlightening still as It proposes a theory as to why the damage to the presidents skull really occurred (I subscribe to this theory also):



*ignore the music from this video*

Originally posted by jonnywhite
Lee Harvey Oswald did it. If you examine the conspiracies the inevitable conclusion is that they're a dead end. I can't remember the show, I think it was the history channel,

Here's one short (and there are many of them) video's debunking some of the results from this heavily contentious show...



If you look into the case a lot more you'll understand that Oswald was in no way solely responsible for the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Just do some research.

JFK wasn't assassinated by the CIA. They shot him in the head. That's execution, not assassination. They publicly executed one of the most popular presidents the US has ever had and with that they sent a powerful message. I mean, what's beyond that? If they can go as far as publicly executing the president, is there anything they won't do?

Wouldn't be the same thing if JFK was found dead on the bathroom floor with his pants down.

reply to post by henriquefd

JFK wasn't assassinated by the CIA.

Correct, It was most probably the mafia whom actually did the deed, not the CIA.

Could have been Johnnie Roselli who fired the fatal bullet, could have been Jim Braden from the Dal Tex building, Who knows. One thing we do know is that Carlos Marcello admitted to a secret tape while in jail that he ordered the assassination personally.

Marcello's words: “I had the little [SNIP] killed. And I would do it again! He was a thorn in my shoe.”

Sam Giancana, Chicago outfit boss, also I believe was said to have helped in making it happen.

Originally posted by Tnewguy
Because the point was to make an example out of him. Not just get rid of him.

Not only that, but also to shock those on Capital Hill into compliance with the new order that was emerging. Kennedy would have issued interest free money, and did release some, and he would have told the American people everything known at the time about the ET problem. Kennedy was a war hero and a wildcat, and would not obey orders like some who have held that seat in recent years. There is a hidden hand behind government, one that cannot easily be seen, whether one tends to believe it or not.

Originally posted by Rising Against
reply to post by henriquefd

 

JFK wasn't assassinated by the CIA.

Correct, It was most probably the mafia whom actually did the deed, not the CIA.

Could have been Johnnie Roselli who fired the fatal bullet, could have been Jim Braden from the Dal Tex building, Who knows. One thing we do know is that Carlos Marcello admitted to a secret tape while in jail that he ordered the assassination personally.

Marcello's words: “I had the little [SNIP] killed. And I would do it again! He was a thorn in my shoe.”

Sam Giancana, Chicago outfit boss, also I believe was said to have helped in making it happen.

I don't know who did it. If it was a common crime, like some dude shot his neighbour because his dog was barking too loud, than I would give a lot of credit to that taped confession. But admission of guilt in cases like JFK's, I dunno man. I gotta be honest with you. A confession from a scape goat doesn't satisfy me. I work around politics. I know corruption first hand. I know people who have order other people killed. I know how much dirt goes behind the scenes, and not because I read on the newspapers.

IF, some secret agency, the CIA, FBI, majestic 12 or whatever or whomever ordered JFK's public execution, getting a scape goat to admit guilt is a piece of cake.

Did the CIA do it? I dunno. Do I believe they were capable of doing it? Sure.Wouldn't doubt the mob did it either.

If you value your life, don't mess with someone else's family, money and power. In no particular order. Because before being civilized humans, we are animals and we are territorial. We have canine teeth, animal instinct and boy, do we have a knack for destruction. One of the first tools created by man was a weapon, not a hugging pillow. And we have built everything else from there.

So, anyone can kill anyone. But it is not just the killing. You have to be able to kill the POTUS, get away with it and pull more strings than a puppet version of Cirque Del Solei.

As one poster said, to make an example out of him... But also, because it would be WAY to obvious that it was not just some lone nut... If he were killed by some top secret classified weapon...

if the CIA killed him, you think they would want people to know? No, they would not... So they would have to frame a lone nut....

Without getting into the conversation of who did it (it was definitely NOT a lone gunman), I believe he was made a public example of because of the banks.

Every single president who has spoken out against big banking and/or hidden government factions has at the very least had an assassination attempt made on them.