Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Dennis Prager :: Townhall.com Columnist
From JFK to 9/11: Why People Believe in Conspiracies
by Dennis Prager
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Vincent Bugliosi's remarkable 20-year work on who killed John F. Kennedy has just been published. Containing about a million and a half words and thousands of footnotes, "Reclaiming History" is probably the most detailed examination of one moment in time ever written. It reconfirms that a man named Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in killing the American president.

As one who never doubted the original U.S. government report that Oswald acted alone, I am deeply grateful to Bugliosi for the service he has rendered our country. But I also regret that he had to.

Why did he have to? Because it was necessary to definitively refute all those who believe, despite bipartisan government reports and excellent books such as Gerald Posner's "Case Closed," that there was some conspiracy to kill President Kennedy and that Oswald was not the only shooter.

There is not a shred of evidence that there was a conspiracy to kill John F. Kennedy, but that is entirely irrelevant to those who choose to believe that there was one. The lack of evidence only reinforces their belief that a conspiracy has been hidden.

One would think that someone would have come forward in the last 44 years to tell the world about the conspiracy. He or she would become a major figure in history, not to mention the likelihood of becoming very wealthy. But somehow, despite the fact that the government can rarely hide for months even what it wishes to hide, both Democratic and Republican administrations acting in cooperation with each other have hidden these facts.

As Bugliosi pointed out to me, it would in fact have had to be a double conspiracy -- first, the plot to assassinate, and then the plot by a much larger group, including many honorable people involved in the investigation, to cover up the original conspiracy.

Likewise, given the vast amount of planning and implementation -- and the large number of people -- that would have been involved in arranging the 9/11 destruction of the World Trade Center towers and part of the Pentagon, not one person has come forward -- not one American or foreigner, not one leftist or rightist -- to reveal a U.S. government plot to murder thousands of Americans and bring down two of the tallest buildings in the world.

Why, then, do people believe in these and other conspiracies? (Of course, there are known conspiracies -- Osama bin Laden and others conspired in the 9/11 plot -- but there are no successful hidden conspiracies. I cannot think of one in my lifetime.) There are at least six major reasons:

1. Many people find it impossible to believe that a few utterly unimpressive individuals can do so much damage. Lee Harvey Oswald, a man who can best be described as simply a loser, could change history all by himself? It doesn't seem to make sense.

2. Many people want to blame those they loathe for as much of what they do not like as possible. Just about everyone who believes in hidden conspiracies attributes those conspiracies to those they hate. People who hate President George W. Bush blame him and his administration for 9/11. Egyptians who hate Israel have blamed AIDS on Israeli prostitutes. Indeed, attributing to Jews hidden conspiracies -- the "world Jewish conspiracy," the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" -- is the oldest and most common belief in a hidden conspiracy.

3. One should never underestimate the power of boredom -- and the subsequent yearning for excitement -- to affect people's thinking and behavior. Belief in a hidden conspiracy is far more exciting than accepting prosaic truths. Figuring out the "mystery" of who killed JFK is a much bigger thrill than accepting that one jerk was responsible. Deciphering who was "really" responsible for 9/11 is a lot more interesting than accepting that 19 Arabs with box cutters did it.

4. People who feel powerless over their own lives are far more likely to believe that some invisible force controls their fate than people who believe that they are the masters of their lives.

5. There is, apparently, a great yearning among many people to believe that there is hidden knowledge and that they have access to it. It makes them feel special, perhaps even superior to the rest of us who do not have access to this hidden knowledge.

6. In Western societies, it appears that secular people are more likely to believe in hidden conspiracies than the more religious. It may be that the religious already believe in an invisible power that governs the universe -- God -- and therefore seem to have much less of a psychological or emotional need to believe in invisible powers on earth.

Whichever reason or reasons apply, the bottom line about those who believe in hidden conspiracies is this: They choose to believe in them. Their psyche, their emotions, and/or their political agenda bring them to their belief in a hidden conspiracy. Never the facts.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Dennis Prager is a radio show host, contributing columnist for Townhall.com, and author of 4 books including Happiness Is a Serious Problem: A Human Nature Repair Manual.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Dennis Prager's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
two words

Zapruder film.

The more we uncover, the harder it is
to hide the rest. WE KNOW THE TRUTH! All we have to do is find that ONE SHRED of evidence you overlooked... one tiny piece that will bring the whole thing down around you....
(No, Doctor, I took my meds. I am just emailing a few friends.)
We only have to be right ONCE! You have to be right ALL THE TIME. Sooner, or later.
(Yes, Doctor. It is my bedtime. Just One more minute...)
WE WILL PREVAIL!


And that sums up my idea of these 'conspiracies.'

But please, don't get me started about aliens who are not illegals...

Mr. Prager
You said:

"there are no successful hidden conspiracies. I cannot think of one in my lifetime."

Well, I imagine you would have trouble thinking of a successful HIDDEN conspiracy on account of the fact they have been successfully HIDDEN.

Timothy McVeigh is Alive
Forget JFK. I have a cool idea!

Let's start a conspiracy theory involving the bombing of the Murrah Building by Timothy McVeigh. Here's the plot. An out of control Clinton Justice Department gets a "crazy soldier" from Desert Storm and sets him up as the patsy for the bombing. We all know from the old FBI TV show that crazy Vietnam vets were good psycho killers. The formula is a proven winner.

The alleged motive is to build public support for an all-out assault on organized militia groups and gun owners in general. The administration had little interest in chasing Islamic groups after the first WTC bombing anyway, since it would have conflicted with their ambitions in Yugoslavia.

With the help of BATF and other agencies, McVeigh blew up the Murrah Building. Then the Feds stage a mock execution and whisk him off to some tropical island to disappear.

There's lots of cool unanswered questions to pose, like how did McVeigh drive both the rental truck and getaway car to Oklahoma City by himself? Why did they execute him in such record time? The list of questions could go on forever. Even if there are plausible responses, we can ask the same questions over and over of Clinton administration Democrats.

I think that it's at least a plausible as the Bush administration destroying the WTC and a whole lot easier to pull off. Since the Murrah Building was a government building, one could plant extra charges and do things that would have aroused suspicion at the WTC.

The JFK thing is just so yesterday. Geez, I'm pretty old and I was just a first grader when the assassination occurred. Most of the possible perps are already dead, so what fun is there to keep asking the questions?

Some conspiracies are real
Conspiracy theories around 9/11 do not make sense, and would have to envolve too many people for it to remain hidden.

Hidden consipracies about covering up the real reasons in the cases of The Murray Building and TWA800 are possible.

The CFR, Trilateral Commission, Buldebergers, U.N., etc. are not really hidden conspiracies. It is just that many people do not want to believe these people have as much influence in our government as they do have, so they paint those that are alarmed about this influence as being simple minded conspiracy nuts.

Just because there are a few people out there that see conspiracies everywhere does not mean that some conspiracies do not exist.






all conspiracy theories
come out of universities—either from right-wing think tanks or from loopy, left-wing loners, or from Arts faculties. In all cases, they are designed to subvert society or to persuade credulous dopes that the world is not a figment of others’ imaginations...

Loneliness!!!
The other day on CNN (I know, I know) a young guy was on talking about why everyone seemed interested in Paris Hilton (and others) and his explanation was "loneliness." Somehow that word resonated with me. I think conspiracy theorists are lonely. Perhaps we should go over to their houses and keep them company, thereby making them un-lonely.

Anyway, if you want to know all the buzz about Sarah Palin, not a celebrity (yet) come to my comfy site. You can get there by clicking on my name. If you don't like Sarah, then go back to Paris, Britney, and Lindsay -- see if I care.

Proving a Negative
I suppose the readers are all familiar with logic, have participated in serious debate at university and understand the workings of law and the burdens of proof. No? My, what a surprise.

1- You cannot prove a negative.
2- The burden of proof is upon him who makes the assertion.
3- The truth lies where all evidence is in agreement.

Need I continue? I don't think so. Mr. Prager stated his case and it holds up.

Thank you.
Happy Dae
http://www.ShoeStringGenealogy.com/ssg1.htm

I Smell a Conspiracy!
To all those who do believe in conspiracy theories, I have a solution: wear your tinfoil hats indoors and outdoors. Dennis means that no supposed conspiracies have ever been proven to be such. Alger Hiss doesn't count, because he was proven to be a Com. spy. Dennis' point is that there is no evidence that Lee Harvey Oswald didn't act alone. No as in none, nada, zippo. People believe in conspiracies, including the nut jobs above, because they don't accept the obvious: the randomness of so much in life.

Thus, Dennis and I win, and all y'all lose. (I love winning.)

steve

Big mistake, Dennis...
When you "revealed" that you never doubted the original government report, you probably lost all credibility with those who remain JFK conspiracy theorists. Like it or not, your statement made you appear closed-minded from the outset and obviously that was not your intention.

I'm sure what you meant to say was that you actually kept an open mind as you evaluated all the information as it became available over time, and on a momemt-by-moment basis concluded that there wasn't sufficient substance to believe in a conspiracy.

But you made your bed this time, so don't be surprised if you have absolutely no impact on the thinking of conspiracists due to your mistake in this column.

You know better than to make a slip like this, but it must be hard to write as many colums as you do.

Better luck next time, Dennis.


Unfortunate political spin
As is so typical of the current-day Dennis Prager- not the one I so admired back in the 1980's when he was a self-described "passionate moderate"- Prager starts out with a sound idea but cannot help tarnishing it with unwarranted politicization.

As a liberal, I've always thought conspiracy theories- from JFK to Art Bell on aliens from outer space, from flouridated water to the survivalists and their "one world government"- were dopey nonsense. And I agree with Prager on how important it is to debunk such ideas.

But you cannot really do this if you imply, as Prager does, that conspiratorialists are "secular" and Liberal". Why does Prager pick as his only example of a modern conspiracy theory the silliness about Bush being involved in bringing down the Twin Towers? Why couldn't he balance it with, say, the equally ridiculous theories about Bush's conspiracy" to form a "north American union", "evidence" of which is a "secret" plan to build a "North American Superhighway"? Because the proponents of this theory are on the right, not the left. And the current version of Prager has lost the ability to think through issues critically and come up with an analysis not supporting his "right-good-left-bad" world view.

BTW this is not true of all conservatives. michael Medved for example is quite astute at pointing out rightist tomfoolery. He does it because it is harmful to his conservative cause by making it look silly. Which is exactly why I condemn these absurd Bush conspiracy theories.

The thing is, Prager has lost all of the credibility he once had amongst liberals. So, to debunk the twin towers idiocy, I point fellow libs not to him but to the Popular Mechanics article, which was scientific and utterly apolitical. Bugliosi is credible to liberals because of his brilliant deconstruction of the 2000 election debacle.

Dennis once wrote a book called "Think a Second Time". It was a serious attempt to engage people on my side of the aisle. It is very sad that that this Prager no longer exists.

What about the experiments with audio?
I saw a documentary on the History Channel or Discovery Channel that was VERY interesting. It took all the available audio records and plotted the locations of the motorcycle officer (he left his mic open), etc.

I still don't pretend to know what happened the day that Kennedy was assassinated, but as the CSI types evaluate the tapes and videos, I'm leaning toward Oswald as a single shooter. For a long time I just kept an open mind and was kind of in limbo. But Dennis makes a very good point... why hasn't anyone involved "cracked" and spilled the beans?

Was Kennedy's assassination the result of a conspiracy? Was Lincoln's?

Today's CSI is getting so good and cams are so prevalent that I'm not sure any conspiracy could succeed. Even if conspirators could beat today's technology, I have to agree with Dennis that it's very unlikely that such a secret could be kept from the public over so many years.

Conspiracy Theory as Political Tool
Most conspiracy theories are nothing but tools that one group uses to cast suspicion upon another for political gain. The real conspiracy is that government grows like an organism with every generation and limits your personal liberty by dividing you into small, competing interest groups.

Oh, wait. That happens in plain sight and most of the electorate can't seem to break away from the TV to see it.

Nice post, laborlawyer
Laborlawyer... I come from a conservative viewpoint whereas you are a self-described liberal. But you make some good points.

Evidence--particularly "scientific" evidence--should trump conspiracy theories.

But come on, baby... don't be too hard on Dennis. The Twin Towers conspiracy has been so thoroughly trashed, why wouldn't Dennis resort to it as a perfect example of a conspiracy theory gone bad? I read the Popular Mechanics article, too, and it's a great example of science trumping paranoid delusions, isn't it?

What I really like is when someone begins with an opposite view of a situation, investigates it scientifically, and ends up reluctantly embracing the opposite view.

Studies have shown that people who are raised in any given religious orientation who go through a questioning phase (and even go through a period of agnosticism or atheism)end up far more committed to their eventual religious beliefs than those who never questioned their religion of birth.

I think that belief in conspiracies shares that in common with religion.

Prager is right
Whether he's right or wrong about a specific case, his premise is correct. Everyone is focused in on Kennedy, but tha was just an example. More importantly, he hit the mark when he said that people need to believe that hidden forces control their lives. It allows them to pretend that it didn't matter that they slipped off behind the gym to fire up a fat one instead of going to math class when they were in school. That's the reason for conspiracy theories.

Half right
More often than most would like to admit the "conspiracies" are by cooincidence. Independant groups with a common goal but different reasoning for them arrive at a simillar conclusion that happens to cooincide.
Since there isn't any contact between groups conspiracy seems to be hidden.

The JFK Assassination Is Different
Sorry, Mr. Prager, but this time, you are way, way off target with your meditation sparked by the the Buglosi book, which does not establish anything as to the JFK assassination. I am no conspiracy theorist but a litigation lawyer of 31 years experience. The JFK assassination is different; the Warren Commission is wrong; the belief that there was a conspiracy with respect to the JFK assassination is held by many prople, including myself, because that is what is required to make sense of the data regarding the assassination. I truly wish it were otherwise.

Addendum
As some of you know from my posts, I am very much a conservative. Among other things, I think that the "truthers" concerning the World Trade Center Towers are lunatics. Keep that in mind when considering my 7:15 AM post.

Just a couple of points
Before I head off to run errands.

Knowknownoshki;

"Recreational shooters"? Oswald was a fully-qualified Marine rifleman. Three shots on a slow-moving target at under 100 yards in under three seconds? The amazing thing is that he (a) took that long to do it, and (b) didn't do more damage. Probably due to the Carcano's bolt throw being longer than the Springfield he trained with, in addition to the M-1 semiauto.
I've put that many rounds out, in aimed rapid, with the Carcano 6.5mm in tests back in the Seventies, and I've never even been a Marine. If a maladroit like me can do it, Oswald probably wasn't even working up a sweat.

DevilsPaintBrush;

I can't tell from your post whether you're "pro" or "anti" conspiracy, but four words;

Back brace.

Thorburn's reaction.

(See Posner's book.)

All;

As for Oswald's motive, it was simple. Oswald was a wannabee Communist. He admired Castro and Khruschev. JFK had embarrassed both of them. He wanted payback. The opportunity came his way, and he took it.

"Kismet", as Lord Nelson said, dying aboard the Victory at Trafalgar.

Q.E.D.


cheers

eon


Single shooter
I recall an episode of "Mythbusters" wherein the hosts, Jamie and Adam, went to considerable pains to recreate the single shooter scenario, and were able to recreate the carnage nearly exactly. I do not offer this as proof of anything, just as an indication of plausibility.

Ranking the conspiracy theories
The JFK conspiracy theory makes much more sense than the 9/11 does (not that I'm endorsing it). Consider:

1. 9/11 was preceded by (and followed by) many other, similar events, including an attack on one of the towers back in 1993, so there's no need to conjure up a government conspiracy. Kennedy's assassination came out of the blue.

2. We knew about Osama bin Laden before 9/11. He, and Muslims generally, had a track record. We didn't know anything about Lee Harvey Oswald. He may have been framed, for all we knew.

3. For a witness to claim that there was no one shooting from the grassy knoll would be rather remarkable. It would invite questions such as, "How do you know that someone wasn't concealed in some way?" It's quite different with the plane flying into the Pentagon, which a number of people saw very clearly.

4. The number of people involved in the JFK conspiracy would be much smaller than those involved in the 9/11 conspiracy. Entire plane-loads of people have to disappear for the 9/11 nutjobs, and this requires the collusion of many.

5. No one has ever admitted killing JFK, while OSB claimed credit for 9/11.

6. The JFK-conspiracy theorists are more modest than the 9/11-conspiracy theorists. Many of the former professed not to know who was in the conspiracy, but would simply suggest various possibilities (a faction within the government, Castro, the mafia). But for the 9/11 crowd, it has to be the government.

Hey, 9/11 conspiracy theorists, give it up.

#2 and #5 - Very much so
As far as conspiracy theorists are concerned regarding 911, those two categories absolutely apply.

Dennis, you opened the flood gates to the Tin Foil Hat Brigade.

By the way, it was also noted that Bigfoot was involved in 911. Did you see the picture of the Dancing Bigfoots outside of the WTC when they fell? Their foot prints were found at the scene. This is completely classified but if you read up on it, you will know that Bush and Bigfoot are working hand and paw together which dates back when Bush was governor of Texas. They've been seen together at many public functions.

island
Thank you for demonstrating the tinfoil hat wearing, black helicopter pilot's favorite illogical device, the infamous double negative proof. Any time one of these intellectual giants(?) is confonted with irrefutable facts that blow their conspiracy theories out of the water, they respond with "Well, you can't prove it isn't true". It's kind of like saying you can't prove that the Easter Bunny doesn't exist.

About Posner's Book
Speaking of Posner's book, I knew and was friends with Gerry Posner when we were both associates at the New York City law firm of Cravath, Swaine & Moore in the late 1970s. His book "Case Closed," which came out in the early 1990s, was another attempt at establishing that Oswald was a lone gunman. The trouble is that the case was not closed, and we have another attempt now in Buglosi's book. Periodically, I suppose there will be such books, but they all have and will have one thing in common: they are wrong.

Gerry Posner spent a lot of time on Oswald and his supposed mentality; Oswald was, of course, about 30 years dead by then. Putting aside that Oswald was reported to be a poor shot (not all Marines are good shots), tested negtaive for gunpowder residue after the Kennedy shooting, was seen drinking a Coke in the first floor Texas Book Depository Building cafeteria 90 seconds after the shooting and no one saw him go from the sixth floor, supposedly used a mis-sited gun with which no expert could duplicate the needed firing sequence, supposedly shot as the JFK Lincoln was travelling away from him down the hill (toward the grassy knoll) and called himself a patsy before being killed in the arms of Dallas policemen, you have to have JFK's fatal head shot coming from the rear. Don't give me that nonsense about a massive neuromuscular reaction to the head shot that just happened to duplicate how a shot from the front from the grassy knoll (where about 50 witnesses thought they shots came from) would impact the President; it was too fact and too pronounced for a neuromuscular reaction. And don't give me the nonsense about the "magic bullet" either. And top of it all, a botrched autopsy -- please.


Prager's premise proved

Prager's premise as to why people believe in conspiracy theories are borne out by the posted pro conspiracy comments above.


Shells, :>

You left out a reason
Mr. Prager, your list of six major reasons people believe in conspiracies left out the most important one: political leaders routinely lie to those they are leading or representing. If they are so quick to misrepresent the facts about something that is fairly obvious, like, say, the immigration bill ("it's not an amnesty" "it fixes a system that's broken"), why wouldn't they misrepresent the truth when the facts are less obvious and the stakes much higher?
Of course, the biggest argument against conspiracy theories about things like 9-11 and the JFK assassination is their very complexity. Too many people would have to be involved for such a conspiracy to succeed and, as we all know, the more people who share a secret, the less the likelihood that it will remain a secret.

Hey Island!?
I think you forgot to mention a few others the list of conspiracy's. How about the Rothchilds, Rockefellers, and most importantly, The Illuminati?

Open your eyes
We can all see a real conspiracy at work today in the collusion of Republicans and DhimmicRATs in re. "immigration reform"

Nurse Ratchet Where Are You?
Nothing brings out the loons like a Prager column.

Is there a federal law that mandates mental patients have access and the ability to post comments on all of Prager's articles?

On Bugliosi
I've heard this guy on just about every right wing radio show in the country.

Why is it that right wing talk show hosts are so enamored of this man? They seem to bow down to him as if his word were the very word of God on the subject.

From what I've heard, his evidence isn't all that compelling. He goes into a lot of speculation about psychological motives of various people. He seems to think that he actually can read all of the minds of the various characters.

And I love how impressed everyone is with the size of the book. The size of the book is irrelevant. Indeed, it's a time honored rhetorical technique to throw out so much information that it confuses people.

Personally, I don't know if there was a conspiracy to kill Kennedy or not. But I sure would like to see those records unsealed. The very idea that they sealed those records for so long seems suspicious to me. Maybe it would be in the best interest of the public to have Bush issue an order to unseal the records.

I wonder if Prager would support that.


Scary conspiracies!
After reading all of these posts, I'm a convert. Full speed ahead on the conspiracy express! Hillary and Bill killed a bunch of people, Cheney fired from the grassy knoll, and Paul Wolfowitz is the one digging up my garden every morning before I go to work. It all makes perfect sense.

Dennis made an interesting point about the conspiracy nuts' desires for secret knowledge. Coupled with his assertion that today's conspiracy nuts seem to be more secular, I'd disagree a bit and say that these conspiracies actually act as a sort of religion for them. All of this talk about secret knowledge, cabals, and intricate plots reminds me of ancient Roman and Persian mystery religions, and even the Gnostic heretics that infected the early church. We're just seeing a twenty-first century reheated version of such things.

Hey Phylo ...
How is it that you've "heard this guy on just about every right wing radio show in the country." As a leftist, why do you spend so much time listening to "right wing radio"? You aren't one of those closet sicko stalkers are you? Give your sensibilities a break and throw down some of your favorite narcotic by visting Kos of StreetProphets or something of the like. Go easy on yourself, man.

RE: AZgirl
azgirl wrote: “...you probably lost all credibility with those who remain JFK conspiracy theorists.”

I SURE Dennis’s heart is breaking right now ... listen ...*snap*...There it went…

Nothing brings out the wide eyed, fever-swamp freaks like saying you think their ‘theory’ is rubbish. Which in both cases here JFK and 9/11, they are. Seriously its approaching madness at this point don’t you think?

WHO CARES if you have ‘credibility’ with kooks? They are KOOKS! Their credulity is wasted on planet X and moon landing hoaxes and warehouses where Space ships are kept and introducing bills to the house to make it against the law to use mind control rays on Americans.

Frog
Phylo complains about using a "time honored rhetorical technique", but he uses one himself.

By starting with, "I've heard this guy on just about every right wing radio show in the country"..it's supposed to lend credibility to his opinion on the author.

However, I could use the same tactic...I've read Phylo's comments on just about every policy or issue in this country and have determined he is a moonbat.

Phylo
Size matters.

Magnificus out

Rob
ROFL

You want some fun?
Go to the UFO museum in Roswell NM

http://www.roswellufomuseum.com/

An industry built on a conspiracy theory.

Phil Byler
We have disagreed about other things, but this may be one where we agree.

I wonder how much of the JFK situation is due to the lack of information.

What I mean by that is when President Kennedy was assassinated much of the actual information was immediately sealed by the government, not to be released for 20 years after his death.

I'm not up on the situation, but I thought that some of the information has yet to be released.

Various reasons are cited.

Given that scenario alone, isn't it hard to get people to come to a mutual agreement on the situation? You are always going to have people who say that the government is withholding various information to protect . . .

Icedog and Packrat have it right...
...they all come out when JFK comes up.

One of my favorites was the one where a magazine(the name of which escapes me)came out about ten years after the incident and claimed they have proof Oswald didn't assinate kennedy.It seems that scientists invented a machine that could tell when a person was lying just by inflections in his voice.

Well,they tested the voice of Oswald from the video saying that he "didn't kill anybody".The machine proved he was telling the truth!

The thing that made me laugh out loud was Oswald did at least kill someone that day:a policeman questioning him on the street.He then ran and entered a theater,as sworn to by witnesses.The cops entered the theatre and arrested him,but not before he pulled a pistol,the same pistol used to kill the cop! He also just happend to work at the book warehouse and was seen on the right floor and owned the rifle used in the assination.

However, he was innocent because the magic machine PROOVED he was telling the truth.Of course,we haven't heard about this lie detector since.


I'm laughing
There are a few on here twisting this around to Bush. Those that buy into this dribble are looking for comfort to cope. I wonder how many on here listen to Coast to Coast? They are masters at grand conspiracy theories. their latest is LBJ had the CIA kill Kennedy. Koolaid anyone?

JFK record are sealed to protect...
...frank testimony.

I mean COME ON! The president had just had his gourd blown off! Mistakes had to be admitted under oath! The blame game was flying around! Just face it - there was plenty of blame to spread around without any of the ‘accused’ being involved in any conspiracy.

Watch the Zapruder film . . .
It just doesn't make sense that Oswald could have done it alone. All you have to do is watch the Zapruder fulm. President Kennedy's head is blown backward by the hit (showing that the bullet came from his front where the grassy knoll was located). A bullet from the book depository would have caused his head to move violently in a different direction.

The Warren Commission's effort to head off a conclusion that could have shown that there was more than one gunman was out of fear that the cold war could have easily become a hot war with nuclear missiles going in all directions.

Nothing else other than the presence of two gunmen -- literally nothing -- makes sense. I don't know who was behind the assasination, but there had to be more than one gunman.

LBJ!
Next, why not analyse why some people are so gullible to believe the government's white wash immediatly.

Just because some conspiracy theories are hogwash doesn't mean that there are no conspiracies. The "9/11 was an inside job" theory is obvious hogwash. There were no "black helecoptors" from the UN waiting to take over the US. However the facts of one false thoeory doesn't mean that sinister plots have never happened.

I have one now retired acquaintance who for 30 years had a frong job with the US government but who's real job was leading teams on secret covert operations of the very sort that conspiracy theorists love. A wise man neither believes everything he hears nor dismisses everything. A wise man sorts the wheat from the chaff, believes what is true and discards the fiction. Sure some people love fiction, but some stories are true.

Some apparently real conspiracies:

Someone or some group paid for the killing of M L King.

The CIA was actually sponsoring in the Bay of Pigs invasion

It was no coincidence that JFK was killed in LBJ's home town. LBJ had the most to gain from the death of JFK, and LBJ was in charge of the "investigation." He had means, motive, and opportunity. In November 1963 I believed that LBJ was involved somehow, and nothing I've seen since has convinced me that I was wrong.

The FBI did send secret agents to spy on Randy Weaver, and they did murder his dog, his son, and his wife.

There were other real conspiracies aimed at Fidel Castro, none of which worked.

Most of the real conspiracies are never reported and you never hear about. One of the reasons people believe in conspiracies is that sometimes the public hears about the real ones. Bay of pigs, Randy Weaver's son and wife, assinate Castro, and the MKL killing were real conspiracies that came to light. We know that the governemnt conducts many more which we never hear about. We know that our government lies all the time. It fuels speculation and fiction.

While some conspiracies are real, the public loves fiction. There is no "mystery" in the so-called "Bermuda Triangle." There is no "Lost Atlantis."

Bob

Catch more of The World according to Bob at: http://bobstruth.blogspot.com/





The "Feds" are as dumb as you and me
Really! I know many of these people, we've attended social functions where they have all the tact of a tack! Shoot straight? I'd be very afraid to "arm" some of them.

Intelligent? Snarky and "brown-nosing" is more like it. My dear husband has supervised (between his military career and his Federal civilian employment one) a few that by "some act of God" (and a foolish political appointee) rose to the top of the heap and sprouts "wisdom" on terrorists. (The guy is smoking "wacky weed")

These are the guy that "Hollywood" protrays as "ruthless" and coldblooded "robots." Not likely. Those of us that served in uniform (mostly under Bill Clinton) are not too eager for more of the same "dirty tricks" there are lots of morally upright and NOT self-serving in all levels of Federal employment, in and out of uniform.

The wackos and crazies that "might," (yes Virginia, they DO exist, in "The Office" and outside fo TV sitcoms and screen dramas) lucky for the rest of us, they lack brains and patience too. Robert Hanssen got away as long as he did because of old fashioned "patience" most of the "ME" generation that has replaced men like him (AND the men and women who hunted him) lack the patience needed and the desire for anonymity.

This is the age of "instant celebrity" very few people would take GREAT risks for no fame.

Oh I believe in conspiracy theories, just I didn't think it's US planning them. Islamic based Terrorism HAS the patience to wait us out. It's THEIR plots and plans I am concerned about.

Admit to a guilty little pleasure
I admit to a guilty little pleasure whenever I read a Dennis Prager (one of the smartest men I've ever read) column on Townhall: clicking on the "Full Article and Comments" link to laugh at the moonbats. Ahhhh, the tinfoil brigade. What would my mornings be without you...

Excellent article, Dennis! Agreed and agreed.

Phil Byler
I too was sceptical about the Warren Commission's findings of there being a lone gunman - Oswald. Until...

About 1 year ago, TLC or Discovery Channel had an experiment held by Austrailian students, in which the precise measurements of everything on that day in Dallas, were put to the test. The speed of the motorcade, the exact distance from the 6th floor of the School Book Depository building, the EXACT positions of Pres. Kennedy and Governor Connelly -- NOTING THAT GOVERNOR CONNELLY WASN'T DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF KENNEDY, BUT SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER, AND SLIGHTLY TO THE LEFT. These students took models of Kennedy and Connelly, that had been fashioned to look as close to the two humans as is now scientifically able, and set their findings up to scale.

They employed an expert marxman (sp), to first practice the distance shooting, also some shooting through gellatin, to simulate the damage to a bullet as it pierces flesh. They then positioned their shooter up a scaffold to the exact height of the 6th floor window, and started their experiment.

The results were astounding. The bullet went the same route as the bullet on Nov. 7th, 1963. The Kennedy model's head was shot out, and the bullet found it's way in AND OUT of the Connelly model's leg -- in near pristine condition.

I don't have this Discovery or TLC Documentary's name, but that Australian experiment on tape, to all who wanted to watch, made a non-conspiratory theorist out of me. See if you can find it, or maybe another Townhall poster will remember the name of it.

It's the Jim-Bobians, you fools!
As was discussed in the last column on this jubject, it was evil Republican J-O-O aliens from the planet Jim-Bob that killed JFK and destroyed the WTC! Sheesh, how can you guys be so dumb!

...

Hey, makes AT LEAST as much sense as the kooky "Thousands of firefighters, police officers, military personel, demolition experts, structural engineers, and everyone else involved with the rescue, recovery, and investigation of the 9/11 events all got together with the evil Zionist J-O-O Boosh Republicans in order to cover up what really happened so they could start a war for oil!" garbage you morons keep repeating.

conspiracies
Gee, I wonder why you haven`t heard about secret conspiricies? Its a far out idea but just maybe because its .... secret. Any one (not in our government) who wants to keep a secret of this magnitude would not reveal it, to anyone. That would also include a foreign government. The Warren commisions report was too quick to actually do an investigation. You don`t think our government wanted the populace to realize that another government to be known? I bet I could come up with any number of reasons, and some could be true. Just stick your head back in the sand adn the world will just go on its merry way.

If all of these conspiracies are hidden?
How in the world did you and your fellow conspiracy conspiracists find out about them and why haven't you been able to convince others of the veracity of your evidence. Is there a FBI/CIA/Mossad/LBJ Govment conspiracy against you too?

I have worked for the Army, the government and the private sector for 40 years and one thing I know, if a secret exists too many people are anxious to write a book about it for it to be a secret. If they can't make money writing a book about real things, they can just make it up and folks like many of you above will buy it to feed your theory.

Tinfoil Hat Brigades out in force
It never fails. Bring up the JFK assassination, or 9/11 these days and out come the conspiracy nuts. Aside from the fact that these bozos are generally not firing on all thrusters, apparently none of them has ever heard of Occam's Razor either.

Bugliosi was by no means the first to debunk the JFK "conspiracy". Posner's book has already been mentioned. Even SeeBS, on the 30th anniversary of the assassination, did a three hour program on the killing, and proved to nine decimal places that Oswald could very easily have made those shots. And anyone who thinks for one minute that Dan Rather and CBS would have kept quiet had they found one scintilla of evidence that a conspiracy had existed, especially if it had involved the government in any way, is even more delusional than I thought.

Yes, boys and girls, the shots did come from behind (I've seen a slowed down, blown up and computer-enhanced version of the relevant Zapruder footage, and it's quite clear to anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together what happened, aside from being very gruesome; I would not want to watch that again, once was quite enough), and the "magic bullet" was not magic at all (Connally was sitting on a jump seat in the limo, which was offset from, and lower than, the seat JFK was in, putting him right in line to take that round).

No, what we had here was one loony Communist named Lee Harvy Oswald who did the deed. By no means are all of the JFK conspiracy nuts "secularists", but most are, for the simple reason that they don't want to have to admit that "one of their own", that is, the Communist Oswald, did the deed. So they come up with all sorts of elaborate theories involving all the usual leftwingnut bugaboos like the CIA, FBI, LBJ, the military industrial complex, the DAR, Martians (Republican, of course), etc, ad nauseam.

I have long believed that the source of these silly ideas comes from a selective overabundance of credulity. It is sad but true that, from time to time, some headcase or two will go into a restaurant, school, or the like and shoot or blow the place up, killing a bunch of people. No one has a problem accepting that tragedies like this can happen, and no elaborate "conspiracy theories" are promulgated as a result.

Yet if such an event has any kind of a POLITICAL component, even though the perpetrators are fundamentally no different than the loon who drives his truck through the front of a Luby's cafeteria and shoots a bunch of people, well now, that's different. Then it becomes a conspiracy, involving everyone from the CIA to the CFR to the Elders of Zion and everyone in between.

Maybe it is lonliness or boredom that causes this sudden reduction in rational thought in some people.

Take 9/11. Some people wonder how a handful of Muslim terrorists could get away with flying three airliners into some buildings armed with nothing more than box cutters. The answer is simple. For decades, ever since the whole airliner hijacking thing started, both airline crews and passengers have been conditioned to be passive in these cases. Don't rattle the hijacker's cage, go where he tells you and you stand a much better chance of living through the experience. And that's exactly what they did. The passengers and crews of the first three planes were no doubt clueless as to what was about to happen to them until the last few seconds before impact.

Not so Flight 93.

That plane was behind the others, and the passengers got wind of what was going on, and decided they were not going to go quietly into that good night, so they took the terrorists down. No doubt the muzzie Alfa Hotel flying the plane knew his part in the Grand Plan to strike at the Great Satan was well and truly out the window. But he was bound and determined to kill some infidels that day and so get his 97 virgin goats in Paradise, so he noses the plane over and still makes a smoking hole in the ground. But in an empty field in Pennsylvania, not DC.

The point here is that 9/11 was a one-shot. It won't happen again, at least not like this.

But what really makes me laugh about all these 9/11 conspiracy theories is how the e-vil McChimpy Bushitler Rove Cheney Halliburton cabal know ahead of time just exactly where those planes would hit the buildings so as to set those demolition charges at just the right spot; that is, the buildings would start collapsing at the exact points where the planes struck. And never mind how they protected those charges from going off prematurely in the intense fires happening all around them.

But hey, this is the maniacal BUSHCO. They are complete idiots, but are also so smart that they can pull off such an elaborate hoax just so the US can invade the peaceful, inoffensive nation of Iraq (look at all those kites flying and flowers blooming) so that their pals at Halliburton can steal all that oil. Yeah, baby.

So for all you conspiracy nuts, as my darling bride likes to say, "You make me tired"...:)

Hard to keep secrets
There is a saying that if more than one person knows about it, it's not a secret.

I would assume that this is doubly true in government circles. Imagine how many people would need to be involved in the JFK assassination. Even if it were only ten, it's too many to keep everyone absolutely silent for over forty years.

Plus, I think that conspiracy theorists are giving too much credit to the politicians that they so quickly decry. These politicians can't keep Social Security solvent, can't (or won't) enforce national borders, and can't control federal spending. But they're smart enough to pull off daring assassinations and engineer the destruction of skyscrapers in the nation's largest city? And on top of that, they can then shut up about every aspect of it?

People are desperate to dig for roots where there aren't any. The truth is often too clear to accept.

Beowulfe
Haven't You Heard? EVERYONE involved in The 09/11 Conspiracy is hiding out in the studio where they filmed Neil Armstrong walking on the moon!

Just because you are Paranoid,


Does not mean that people aren't out to get you.

typical...
Vincent Bugliosi's effort to reap yet further profit from the horror that was Dallas is every bit as American as apple pie and conspiracy theory.

Kennedy was murdered by the money laundering suits behind Sam Giancana's international drug mob and who did not want to be exposed at the congressional hearings on organized crime for fear of implicating very important and sensitive people.

Bugliosi is saying that Oswald had a magic bullet that boomeranged back into Kennedy's forehead and left out of the rear of his head leaving a gaping exit wound and a four-inch flap of scalp dangling there. He is saying that small time hood and strip club owner Jack Ruby was a patriot who acted out of gut feeling. He is saying that the people who worked at those levels of enforcement and beaurocracy were squeeky clean and loyal Americans with no ties to organized crime and the people who really ran the show, the same people who got Kennedy elected in the first place and who felt betrayed when Joe sr. absconded and his sons started railroading the mob.

Bugliosi landed on this planet yesterday, because he obviously hasn't been around all these decades.

5 out of 6
This is one of the best Prager columns that I've read in while. He absolutely right about the JFK assasination (really, anyone who watches Mythbusters should have already known this), but he shines in his reasons why so many people believe in crazy conspiricies (especially the one about being lonely - not one I would have expected, but it holds up). But why the attack on non-religious people? Is he basing this in reseached facts or is he basing it on his group of friends (he probably has one crazy conspiracy nut friend who is non-religious too)? I've been an Atheist my entire life and by my very nature I am skeptical about almost everything. I have never believed in a conspiracy (unless there is solid evidence for one), nor have an other Atheists I know.

Of course, maybe he just meant non-religious and not neccesarily Atheists (there is a difference). It just seemed out of place and entirely unprovable.

Heard of the USSR? Steath aircraft etc.?
Has there ever been such a thing as a conspiracy? Have there ever been a conspiracies which involved numerous people, some informed, some mis-informed, some committed but ignorant?

Is it possible to engage in a conspiracy, sometimes for decades, without the details of nor the personnel involved becoming known? At least for decades?

If you state that it is not possible and have not occurred, further study of history is in order. It is possible and has happened.

One of the reasons our current crop of of conspiracies exist, is because we seem incapable of presenting evidence, which is both scientific and logical, which debases the semi-scientific, semi-logical conspiracy theories.

At least we don't seem to be able to refute them point for point, in the mass media and would then seem to be relying upon the trust of the public.

And therein lies our critical problem. They have been lied to so often by so many, that they no longer believe the truth when they hear it. They don't know what the truth is or who to believe.

This is because we accept self-serving liars, cheats, thieves, charlatans of all persuasions among us and honor and principled behavior no longer have any place among us. In fact if you behave in such a manner, you will not be tolerated and are marked for destruction upon discovery.

The causes are not hard to identify but do require one to drop their preconceptions, long enough to examine the subject matter with a clear and unjaundiced eye, and then be willing to entertain the notion, that just possibly, at least one conspiracy, exists.

Having examined numerous issues over the years I can only say that I don't believe everything I hear nor see, nor every theory postulated. There are however certain issues, which when examined with that unjaundiced eye, cause me to ask that age old intelligence question, why?

Coupling this with the odds of chance would indicate to a reasonable person, that enough evidence exists to believe that there is a greater chance of something being amiss, than not.

Lies have a way of causing people to ask questions. Question which are not answered sufficiently or ignored have the effect of destroying trust. Conspiracy theories are often fabricated to fill in the blanks and sometimes by self-serving persons or others of a different cause.

Just occasionally, they have merit.

more
agree with cavebear

If you have seen the Zapruder film in slow motion, youy see the brain tissue spraying out of the FRONT of JFK's head.

As other posters have pointed out, Connaly was left and below JFK.

I also saw the Discovery Presentation with digital reconsrtuction,
try this:

http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100sbt.html

If a tree falls
in the forest, does it make a sound? Curiosity killed the cat.

If several CFR members are in a conference deciding how to plot the overthrow the government of Iran, do they make a sound?

And if they do, who would be able to guess what sounds they made? OK, make an assumption, they are neo-cons who put pressure on third world nations that will not comply with UN treaty NPT--does that sound like a conspiracy theory? Yes, they can sell another WMD story to the world and we'll buy it because "I'm-a-Wack-Job" in Iran says he's developing nuclear_____[fill in the blank].

Point is that we are not mind readers. Just as we do not know how many trees fell in the forest, we do not know what goes on behind closed doors. There has to be some tangible, factual evidence that points to those who are directly responsible for the actions, words, that are true.

CFR, TRI, and BB are REAL organizations, with REAL documentations and treaties, and connected with REAL organizations
designed for world domination--World Bank, IMF, BIS, World Court, ACLU, and the ultimate manipulative organization--The United Nations, where all the signatures are evidence that NWO is not a hidden conspiracy theory, it is there for all to see in any chosen language (read "Blacked Out--Government Secrecy in the Information Age" by Alasdair Roberts, and "Hope for the Wicked" by Ted Flynn). And so what if the documentation released by our government is lined out when searching FOIA for truth--some truths we will never see.

The 'What-ifers'(conspiracy theorists) don't count as telling us the truth, only pure fiction or inferences that are missing the most important truth--logic. And once in a great while they get lucky and stumble over a fact that points to conspiracy, maybe one in a hundred, just about the same odds of your average fortune teller.

Realize that there were those that were arrested and killed for believing that the world was round. Realize that there was a man named Copernicus that discovered the earth revolved around the sun. But those that were persecuted in the Dark Ages found truth, not popular for the times, just as we in today's Dark Age, find lies in conspiracies, yet we are not persecuted, allowed by the first amendment to lie to support more lies. Just the fact that the word 'theory' is included in 'CT' should give any conspiracy theory significant 'doubt' as to its validity, just like Al Gore's theories about global warming (of
course he says the theory is not to be argued, just like the other conspiracy theorists would like to think that their
theories are not arguable--rather absolute truths).

Truth is stranger than fiction, the Kennedy assassination is easier to understand as a conspiracy theory rather than believe the simple truth that Oswald got really lucky, and that was very unfortunate for our nation. Those who choose to rewrite
history are doomed to repeat the true lessons of failure that conspirators choose to become blinded to, which has led to our nation's ultimate demise. And yes Rosie, steel melts under heat...

Incredible these young people..under 65?
Its incredible how many of you seem to think that one man could not, for example, drive a rental truck and a get-away car between any two cities. These people either never travel or fail to see all the rental trucks towing cars. Have our schools failed this badly?

Yes, you will never know of a conspiracy that is still a secret, but Prager was making a different point- we have never uncovered an elaborate conspiracy a long time after it happened and was executed. Involved stuff is too hard to hide. To say that the White House staff could arrange a way to find out how, where, and when to arrange for planting of demolition explosives without anyone outside knowing is just preposterous to any reasonable mind, but obviously not to minds lacking in any means of forming critical judgments. That is the price we pay for a nation that is full of illiterates who believe they looked at pictures to replace reading as the means by which critical thinking is learned!


Mac
You stated, "One of the reasons our current crop of of conspiracies exist, is because we seem incapable of presenting evidence, which is both scientific and logical, which debases the semi-scientific, semi-logical conspiracy theories."

You exposed the very flaw in your entire post. We will NEVER be able to present evidence to debunk EVERY logical or semi-logical theory....this is the key! I can say Castro caused 9/11 or the Chinese killed JFK and you will never be able to completely disprove my whacky theory.

The burden of proof is on the person making the allegation, not the person defending the accepted truth.

The Real Conspiracy...

...is that there are no conspiracies. Only a tragedy of errors that, in hindsight, appear conspiratorial but are actually nothing more than accumulated chance.

Conspire not to conspire
I enjoy the JFK conspiracies. Some are entertaining, some are thought provoking, some are just plain stupid.

But the fun part is figuring out who plotted the conspiracy.

Why is that when the word "conspiracy" is used it's automatically assumed that the government is envolved?

JFK, like every President before and since, proposed and upheld policies that pissed off some one.

In the realm of the possible, it is completely believable that a group of people conspired to assassinate him. Not necessarily the Government or individuals in the Government, but some one else.

The best part is that it will never be answered. At least not until the mythical time machine is invented and people from the future can return to the place and time of the crime and witness it as it happens.

Those who believe it was the Freemasons will alway believe it was Freemasons. Those who belive it was Oswald and Oswald alone will always believe that.

Personally, I believe it was it was aliens from Alpha Centauri.

Thank you Dennis
Dennis, thank you for this article. I've always been annoyed at people who believe in hidden conspiracies and talk about them as if they were fact. It's impossible to have a rational debate with a conspiracy theorist. Your six points helps me understand the conspiracy theorist mindset, so next time someone tries to tell me that the USA owns Cuba or some other far fetched conspiracy, I will breathe a little easier knowing where they might possibly be coming from.

AZgirl
I can answer your question from a while back. The Lincoln assassination WAS a conspiracy. I read a book called "Manhunt" about tracking down JW Booth for 12 days. In fact, he and two confederates (no pun intended) went out that Friday. Booth went to Ford's Theatre, and the other two were supposed to go to Andrew Johnson's residence and (I think) SecState Sweard's house. The one simply lost his nevere and never attacked Johnson; the other went to Seward's house and stabbed him, nearly fatally, as well as some of his family members.


More Oswald
As far as JFK, I've always been interested in this case. I think the physical evidence is believable, pointing to Oswald (who was a very good shot, as I recall). I've been to the 6th floor and it would have been a relatively easy shot. The car would have been moving slow after the last wide turn.

As far as Oswald being downstairs drinking a Coke 90 seconds later in the same building, what about it? If I were 22 years old and skinny, I could go from the first floor to the 6th in less than that, and of course it's easier the other direction.

Now, I suppose you could make a case that Oswald was the lone shooter BUT someone else hired him, like LBJ. I'm no LBJ fan and wouldn't put anything past him, so that is farfetched but not impossible. The conspiracy problem is harder because a massive plan would involve a lot of people. It's now been over 43 years, with not a single deathbed confession or mention of anything in a will.

Finally, someone a while back asked why the right was so enamored of Mr Bugliosi. I think it's because he was the prosecutor who got Manson convicted and (originally) sentenced to death.


Phil Byler
I generally agree -- in fact, very much -- with your comments on foreign affairs and US foreign policy, so please take this as a friendly inquiry.

You describe yourself as a litigation lawyer. Something about your comments on the JFK assassination suggests to me that you feel you have succeeded in throwing "reasonable doubt" on the government's theory of the crime. Those pieces of information seem coherent to me, as I view your position.

My question is: do you have an alternate theory of the crime? Having read your posts, I suspect any theory you have will at least not be a self-reinforcing "conspiracy" theory. I'm interested in what it may be.

(I'm a career Naval intelligence officer myself, and in my world, "reasonable doubt" is interesting but not conclusive. As long as the political leadership has identified ANYONE as either an enemy, or just suspicious, simply leaving things at "reasonable doubt" is not an option. Assessments are pretreated with suitable caveats, but assessments there must be.)

I understand if you don't have time or don't feel like elaborating a theory here. Just curious.

Ransom
You made a very interesting point indeed about conspiracies serving as a kind of religion.
You might enjoy this column:
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/avi/shafran_american_idols.php3


Rejecting a simple explanation in favor of a much more comples and unlikely one is an odd thing, but there are many people who can't sem to accept the mysteries of traditional faith, yet are drawn to the occult. There are others who reject anything they deem scientifically unexplainable who nevertheless worsip at the altar of some "ism".

Icedog
I merely point out that the issue is one of trust, violated continually and other issues such as an 'active' media.

There are additional things which we as normal people, don't like to examine and discuss in too much depth.

The issue of The President's head shot, is an example of information which can be validated and proven to be, an autonomic reaction to a bullet strike in the CNS. You only have to show other examples and causation become immediately apparent.

Most of us are uncomfortable viewing such things and I suppose that this is the reason why, more evidence in this regard wasn't shown.

There will always be those who require more convincing than others. I'm one of them and have good reasons for being so. Paranoia and suspicion have their place and are good friends who have served me well.

To dogjudge & rightmindedmom
I don't think that either the fact that there are sealed files or that there was Australian study serve to prevent us from concluding that from what we do know, there was almost certainly a conspiracy or multiple conspiracies -- which is NOT a conclusion that I wish to reach. Let me go through some points of the evidence.

Start with viewing the Zapruder film with the understanding that when JFK was shot, the Texas Book Depository Building is in the area of the Lincoln in which JFK was riding and the grassy knoll was to the front to the right of the car facing the direction of the car toward the underpass. What you see is JFK getting shot three times, first on the right side of the neck (causing JFK to straighten up with his hands to go up to his neck, then in the back (causing JFK to bend forward) and then on the right side of the head (causing JFK's head and body to snap dramatically backward to his left). What you see is consistent with there having been a gunman shooting from the grassy knoll hitting JFK in the neck and head and a gunman in the rear.

Then consider the statements of the Parkland Hospital personnel, particularly the attending resident, who wrote a book about his experience. What the Parkland doctors said in a taped interview at the time is that the shots came from the front. What the attending resident wrote is that he treated plenty of gunshot wounds at Parkland, he knows what he saw and what JFK had was a wound of entry in the right temple, a wound of entry in the right side of his neck and a wound of exit in the back of his head having been blown off. (Remember that Jackie grabbed a piece of JFK's skull when she reached out behind to the back of the car right after the shooting.) The wounds described are consistent with what he see on the Zapruder film. Also, the neck wound was widened by the nurses at Parkland in order to put in a tube, but was small (a wound of entry) when JFK got to the hospital.

Then consider that there were about 50 witnesses who said that they thought the shots came from the grassy knoll area. Pictures right after the shooting show people pointing to or running up the grassy knoll. One of the witnesses was a railroad employee who from the overpass said he saw a what appeared to be a gun flash from the behind the picket fence on the grassy knoll.

Then consider the improbability or impossibility of the "magic bullet." You cannot have a bullet making the freakish movement as the Warren Commission asserts, seriously wounding both Governor Connally and JFK, and then coming out pristine. I am not convinced by that Australian study purporting to show it was possible. It required too much in the way of right angle movement and too much damage to two adult men for a bullet not to have been disfigured and yet do the damage done.

Then consider some of the problems with Oswald as a lone gunman: Oswald tested negative for gunpowder residue after the Kennedy shooting; he was seen drinking a Coke in the first floor Texas Book Depository Building cafeteria 90 seconds after the shooting and no one saw him go from the sixth floor; he supposedly used a mis-sited gun with which no expert could duplicate the needed firing sequence (you have to use the same gun for a valid test); he supposedly shot not as the Lincoln approached the Texas Book Depository (where he would have had a clear shot) but rather as the JFK Lincoln was travelling away from him down the hill (toward the grassy knoll); and he called himself a patsy before being killed in the arms of Dallas policemen.

You can try to rationalize pieces of the evidence with strained argument. For example, the 1978 congressional committee on the JFK assassination considered the possibility of a massive neuromuscular reaction to explain what we see on the Zapruder film to explain the head shot. I say possibility because the language of the congressional report referred to such a reaction being not inconsistent with JFK's head snap -- wishy washy language that seems to indicate the possibility of an explanation which in fact was not really possible in this case. The head snap here was too fast, too pronounced and just happened to duplicate what would happen if JFK were shot in the right temple as if he were shot from the grassy knoll. In short, rationalizing pieces get you nowhere.

You will note that I approach the subject by analyzing the evidence; that is how I have approached the subject. The conclusion of a conspiracy is based first on the apparent fact that there was gunfire from different directions.

When Mr. Prager writes that there is no evidence of a conspiracy and then does not write about the evidence, then I think that what Mr. Prager has done is to be carried allong with Buglosi's flawed argument because that is what Mr. Prager wants to believe -- Mr. Prager admits that he always accepted the Warren Commission report. But I don't shy away from a different conclusion based on the evidence.

All this proves is that
the Kennedy Assassination Team have gotten to Prager and this Bugliosi guy, too.

Errata
The word "area" in line 2 of the second paragraph should be "rear."

JFK acted alone
I suggest that Mr. Prager ask Oswald's daughters if they think their dad did it alone.

LOL
I find it amusing that the right thinks they have no conspiracy theories. Then when global warming comes up all they talk about is those scientists driving around in gold plated Bentleys paid for by government grants. (Oh and they're communists.)

Always good for a luagh.


Discovery-DVD
Unsolved History: JFK - Conspiracy DVD

can be found at:

http://shopping.discovery.com/stores/
servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10000&
storeId=10000&productId=54765&langId=-1
&search=Y&searchKey=459621995

Byler
Interesting analysis. Like I said, I've been in the depository. For part of the time, the JFK car was 'behind' Oswald as it proceeded forward after turning onto Elm Street ( I can never remember if the last turn was a left or a right; can you help me with this?).

I think the relative seat positions of Connally and Kennedy explain the "magic bullet" away. As far as Oswald claiming he was a patsy, James Earl Ray confessed - and recanted - to killing MLK Jr, and changed his story about every momth for a while. So a killer saying he didn't do it is not really proof of anything. And we know he was willing to kill, since he killed a cop the same day.

I've always thought maybe JFK's head appeared to snap back because the car was moving forward. He would have been resisting the wind with his neck while alive, then not after the third shot.

I re-read your post - I thought Oswald missed entirely with the 2nd shot. Did he hit his neck?

If there are "50 wintnesses" regarding the grassy knoll, where did they all go? This actually makes me believe the conspiracy less than I would, because a truly well-thought out conspiracy wouldn't have been exectued so sloppily (i.e., with 50 witnesses seeing the "other guy"). It was an interestnig case. I think it was probably a punk little Communist acting alone, but I haven't ruled out other possibilities.




Judging by the ....
...unconstructive and fundamentally baseless criticism toward Dennis alone, the article demonstrates how conspiracy loving people need their fantasies as part of their "religion of the self". According to them, Dennis has committed heresy, and now he must pay by being a target of ridicule and scorn.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm meeting with Elvis for lunch.

jfk assassination
Those that doubt a conspiracy should read Craig Zirbels Texas Connection, Jim Marrs Crossfire, or any of Harold Weisbergs books e.g. Whitewash. Those that call the backward motion of JFK's head a neuro-muscular reaction alone never deal with the fact that a motorcycle rider in the security detail is hit with bone and brain matter in the face. That man was officer Hargis and he was hit with such force while trailing JFK that he thougt he had been shot. I enjoyed Bugliosi's book Outrage very much. He states that there is a lot of incompetence in this world-particularly by the Simpson prosecution. But, he does not hold the same standard to the Dallss police, the secret service, the parade route organizers, etc. Anyone looking at an aerial map of Dealey plaza would never pick the route actually driven. There are many sniper lairs there. They should have at least put several undercover police near the grassy knoll area among other areas. Why was the JFk limo going so slow-about 10-12 mph. It should have been going well over 40. The gunfire lasted at least 6 seconds. Why did the driver Greer not react appopriately-if he had the vehicle would have been going 50 to 60 mph at the time of the fatal head shot-and been nearly at the triple underpass.

Castro did it
There are enough Castro connections all over the case for another 1000 page book.

Plus the fact that the left continues to try to hang the murder in every other direction tends to reinforce that notion.

Plus the fact that LBJ response was to suspend all plans to kill Castro.

The Cuban lead has never been properly followed.

Conspiracy
Prager says there are no successful hidden conspircies. That does not mean there are none. If they are truly successful they would not be known.

As to the Kennedy case, I too believe that Oswald probably acted alone. But, I have always wondered why the shot to Kennedy's head caused the side of his head to peel backward, as if shot from the front. I have never heard any explanation of this.

Marlin
Tell Elvis I said hello. Also, I wouldn't order the fried peanut butter and banana sandwich if I were you.

Thigh
That opens way too many questions. The "why" has been addressed many times - the CIA was mad at him, LBJ wanted his job, the mob was furious at Joe Kennedy, Castro wanted him dead, etc. Let's not revisit all that. there was no shortage of suspects.

Stach
I think the limo slowed down because it was huge, and had just turned onto Elm (I asked earlier if it was a left or right turn, and I still don't know, but I think it was a left).

Also, with a crowd that size, who wanted to see the president, you wouldn't just tear through there like a NASCAR driver.

As far as not speeding up, imagine driving a big limo, with lots of crowd noise, plus the wind. You MIGHT hear a pop from the rear. Nobody would react quickly to that, then before you know it, maybe you hear a second pop. Now, assuming you heard these and reacted, how fast can a 5000-lb car (I'm estimating the weight) accelerate? So none of those arguments really convince me of much. Now, if there was clear-cut evidence of an entry wound to the front of the head, that I would have a hard time discounting.

Conspirators=Theorist=Left
As we all know, the definition of conspiracy is,"two or more persons engaged together for an unlawful or evil purpose." A theorist is,"one who draws speculative conclusions based on unproven,abstract,principles."The left,or leftist,is a political party "holding extreme radical views;socialist;communist;opposed to rightist." So by actual definition,the six reasons,Dennis Prager uses,can be combined in one. The ConTHeoLeft!

Another point
Just wanted to expound on your third point Dennis:
Once someone has devoted so much time to something (originally caused by some sort of boredom as per your point), they gain a sense of ownership of that viewpoint they've spent so much time with. Eventually it becomes a cause to believe in.

Republicans poisoned JFK
According to Rosie O’Donnell, there is no doubt that the Republicans killed JFK. The idea that a piece of lead from a high-power rifle killed him cannot be backed up with science. It would be the first time in history that metal penetrates human flesh.

ThighMaster
Hey, I agree with you! I think the most liely explanation is that Oswald was unhinged, wanted to be famous, and he did in fact become famous...and lived for about 48 hours to enjoy it.

To AZPhil
1. A shown on the Zapruder film, the head snap backward to JFK's left is in reaction to being shot in the right temple -- that is why there is an impact that shows a bit of red. To say otherwise, I am sorry, just is not what the film shows. What the Zapruder file shows in JFK being shot in the right temple is what the attending resident at Parkland Hospital said was a wound of entry in the right temple and ocnsistent with what eyewitnesses thought was gunfire from the grassy knoll.

2. According to the Warren Commission, Oswald missed his second shot; thus, there was a need for Kennedy and Connolly to be hit by one "magic bullet." I, however, don't say that Oswald missed. I don't say that Oswald was even a shooter. I say only that it appears from the evidence that JFK was hit once in the back.

3. The relative seat positions of JFK and Connolly do NOT make possible the "magic bulet" theory. You have to walk it through the details; you need a bullet somehow making right turns and doing the damage it supposedly did and yet, according to the Warren Commission, come out pristine.

4. The 50 witnesses have been identified. Witnesses with statements were identified in an appendix to the Warren Commission report and were compiled elsewhere back in the 1960s when one of the first questions people had was "Where did the shots come from?" (One of the not well known facts about the Warrren Commission report is that there was plenty of evidence compiled in the appendix that contradicted the report's conclusions, which I don't think the evidence supports.) An interview of the railroad employee was taped.

5. The conspiracy may have been sloppy in certain respects, but so what? You have to deal with and make sense of the evidence; and you have plenty of people who disparage the thought that there was a conspiracy, not a lone gunman.

Hound
I'm just waiting for the libs to pin this on the Bush family. George W. would have been 17 by my reckoning, and in Texas. Can he account for his whereabouts? If you think that's too young, wasn't Oswald only 23 or so? I think Congress should investigate this. Is patrick Fitzgerald busy?

To AZPhil: Addendum
Beware of relying upon psychoanalysis of Oswald. This is not a brief for him, just: (i) a recognition that you are psychoanalyzing someone who is dead for 44 years; (ii) no one saw Oswald shoot JFK; and (iii) spending time purporting to psychoanalyze a dead man takes you away from looking at the hard evidence that I review above.

PROVE IT'S NOT TRUE
Go ahead. PROVE there wasn't a conspiracy to kill JFK. PROVE the Pentagon wasn't hit by a missle. PROVE FEMA wasn't the master mind behind the 9/11 plot.

Oh wait, it's up to the supporters of a conspiracy theory to prove their theories. It's not up to the unbelievers to disprove a theory. (Been done time and time again, but the conspiracy theorists simply reject and "facts" that don't support their theories).


Byler
Based on everything I've seen and read, the Oswald acting alone theory fits the best. It doesn't make any other solution impossible.

However, when you say "I don't say that Oswald was even a shooter.", well, then you're straying a little too far from reality. He was seen in that building (TBD),which the Zapruder film also shows people pointing to and screaming, 90 seconds after the shots. The TBD isn't that big, so disputing what floor he was on is ridiculous. And he shot a cop who stopped him. I've been stopped by cops a few times for speeding, and I have yet to shoot one. So if Oswald was just miding his own business sprior to that, wouldn't shooting a cop be an overreaction for an innocent guy?

Can you help me with the left turn/right turn thing? I say the last turn the motorcade made was a left. Please help me with this.

Conspiracies fill a void
Not for me, no I'm not confounded by conspiracy theories, but some folks seem to try to fill a void by coming up with grandious ideas of why things happen the way they do.

There just must be some secret society, just ploting while black helicopers circle just looking for a weakness. Any opening.

But, some people like to make sense of things, when things just can't and don't make sense, from the "vast" right wing conspiracy, to the plot on JFK, there is always someone/something bigger to blame than just a sole perpertrator or group.

As usual thought provoking stuff.

PB
I'm not trying to psycholanalyze the guy. But there is such a thing as knowing his past. He was a good shooter, he was a Communist, and many statements over the years by his family are not exactly supportive of his mental well-being.

No one saw anyone shoot JFK. The rifle barrel was stuck out the window. More hard facts are that the rifle was in the TBD (with Oswald's fingerprints on it, if I recall) and so was Oswald. Muzzle flashes were seen coming from the sixth floor. Oswald was downstairs in the TBD 90 seconds later, in a building no one had left or entered.

AZPhil
It was a nice, cool November fall day, and quail season was in full swing in Dallas. Dick Cheney was seen near the grassy knoll with a rifle. Hmmmmm.

RE
stach @ 1317;

Yes, Officer Hargis was hit by cranial matter. So was Mrs. Kennedy. And the driver of the limousine, Governor Connally, his wife, Clint Hill (the Secret Service agent who jumped on the back of the car), and a couple of bystanders on the street. No matter what you see on TV or in the movies, this is entirely consistent with a high-velocity bullet hitting the cranial cavity. Small entry wound, huge exit, especially if the bullet disintegrates upon first hitting the heavy skull bones (compressing the jacket around the core) and then entering the softer brain tissue (releasing the pressure on the jacket and core). The bullet tends to explode like a miniature fragmentation grenade. (Even military full-metal-jackets can do this, never mind the Geneva Convention.) The excess pressure pops the skull open like a balloon. A very messy balloon. High velocity + skull penetration= boom. All over the place.

And the biggest hole is always on the side away from the entry, somewhere in an arc of about 120 degrees in both vertical and horizontal axes. Exactly where on that arc it falls depends on things like; exact angle of bone entry, bullet mass, bullet diameter and length relative to bone thickness, exact velocity at impact, exactly which way the bullet yaws as it hits the brain tissue, its tumble rate before materiel' failure, and several other factors that are best worked out with a computer running serious failure-analysis software.

Hollywood routinely gets it wrong. The Warren Commission's artwork got it wrong, too, simply because they assumed the bullet had to be on a straight continuation of its "base course" or "flightpath" after entry, and exiting intact. Nope, that rarely happens; but in 1965, "wound ballistics" barely even existed as a branch of forensic pathology. The major work wasn't done until a decade later, post-Vietnam, notably by Dr. Martin Fackler at Walter Reed Army Hospital and Aberdeen Proving Ground. We know a lot more about how bullets behave inside the body now than we did 44 years ago. And what we know now says that JFK's gruesome demise is entirely consistent with a shot from behind.

(BTW, once upon a time, I was present at a few autopsies for professional reasons. And a couple of them involved head shots from high-powered firearms, namely rifles. The results tracked pretty closely with what you see on the Zapruder film.)

AZPhil;

It was a left turn. And you're right, the low speed was to allow the president to be seen by the crowd. SOP for parades, as you surmised.


cheers

eon

AZPhil
The limo was making a sharp left that it was forbidden to make by the security guidelines. These security guidelines also stated that the vehicle s/b going 40 mph or above. I know it is a huge car but it still could have accelerated much quicker. It was in a straight away part of Elm st. But, as previously stated it should never had made that slow difficult turn onto Elm street-JFK's advance team were very opposed to this route, and rightly so.
As to a frontal injury-have you seen the Altens photo-the original? The limo is almost under the TSBD -you can see the TSBD sign thru the tree-which block Oswald's aim. JFk is reacting by having his elbows splayed up near his throat and Jackie is graspiing his forearm with concern. This is one of the first things one sees from the Zapruder film-after the limo emerges from the Stemmons freeway sign. Some speculate that it is Oswald in the left side of the TSBD entry-Oswald or Lovelady it is unclear. The Parkland doctors also testifed to a small (read entry) wound to his throat. Oswald could not have done this at that angle.

Conspiracy
I am not a 'conspiratorialist' (is that even a word?) but anyone who does not think we can be deceived in this day and age is fooling himself.

Remember those "news" films of the pickups that 'exploded' which were proven to be completely fake.

In this day and time of manipulated news, photoshoped photos etc, I think a little skepicisim is a good thing.

A few years ago I thought the One World Government 'conspiracy' was the funniest thing I had ever heard. That was before a Texas governor tried to push trough plans for a Trans Texas Highway before the people of Texas had even heard of it and before a President from Texas started allowing President Fox to dictate our foreign policy. (We have Texas law officers in prison for doing their job, know drug runners given immunity to testify against them, wounded criminals sueing the government.)

I would like for the officials to explain their thinking to us. Just how is this good for the people who voted for them?

conspiracies and a guilty conscience
Excellent article, but I believe Mr. Prager overlooked one more reason for a belief in conspiracies, although it is a corollary of reason number six. Those unwilling to consider the possibility that personal sin exists in everyone’s life, from a need to dismiss the possibility of it existing in their own lives, have a need to dichotomize their worldview to where they can imagine that only a certain portion of people are responsible for all the evilness in the world.

I think this is reflected in the preposterous beliefs about human nature that are necessary to believe in conspiracies. Does the average person believe that if he or she went to work one day and the boss said forget about sitting down to your computer; I want you to go out and kill someone, that he or she would mindlessly do it? Ignoring for a moment all the cynical assumptions of all the atheists out there, is it consistent with the realities of human nature to believe that masses of people can bury their consciences totally and forever at a moment’s notice and never look back.

re: why?
Those who of you are prepared to accept that Oswald did not act alone but are puzzled as to who might have a motive for killing Kennedy should read the Sam Giancana story on the Crimelibrary.com web site. Then you will know.

Incidentally, I explained it in an above post.

read, dammit.

To AZPhil
1. What makes you think Oswald was a good shooter? Not every Marine is a good shooter, and Oswald's recorded marksmanship marks were not high. What makes you think he was a Communist? There are indications in his record that he might have had a CIA affiliation. My point is that ii is hard to tell what the truth is about Oswald, who has been dead now for 44 years, having been killed while in the custidy of the Dallas police. I think you have to be very careful about what we supposedly know about Oswald and cannot base any conclusions about the assassination on Oswald's supposed background information.

2. You are correct that no one saw Oswald shoot. A police officer did, however, see him in the first floor cafeteria 90 seconds after the shooting, and no one saw him go from the sixth floor to the first floor. From the back wounds of Connolly and JFK, there appears to have a shooter from the rear of the car, which would be consistent with anyone seeing a gun flash in the Texas Book Deposuitory Buildiing, just as the railroad employee seeing a gun flash from behind the picket fence on the grassy knoll is consistent with a shooter from the grassy knoll.

3. Dealy Plaza is not very large; however: (i) there is no way the President should have been driven through the Plaza in the way he was; (ii) most of the pictures we see of people pointing are pointing at the grassy knoll; and (iii) where JFK was hit was near the grassy knoll, not in front of the Texas Book Depository.

4. The Oswald is a lone gunman scenario doesn't work. As discussed above, the Zapruder film, the Parkland statements and eyewitnesses indicate that JFK was shot twice from the front, once on the right side of the neck and once in the right temple in a way consistent with those shots coming from the grassy knoll. Those shots did not come from behind the car where the Texas Book Depository was situated at the time of the shooting.

Cave Bear
I agree with some of your basic points. But you'd be a lot more credible if you'd be equally critical of the "Clinton Murders" folks, the anti-government survivalist wackos, the "North American Union" theorists, and other rightist tinfoil brigaders.

JFK, the movie
was actually good-
But seriously... even Al Gore thought that the director took a few liberties....

Another book and 100 plus posts to prove:
What a crime-and what a riddle...


To thighmaster
No, thighmaster, the phyical evidence does not link to LHO alone. You are ignoring too much, but I am not going to repeat myself today.

Stach
I need to watch the Zapruder film again. I have the enhanced version at home. Is it possible JFK looked to the right after the first shot or two? Most people would instinctively. Then the entry wound would have been more toward the front.

As far as Oswald, I've seen documents that say he was a good marksman. You are right - Dealey Plaza is small. I don't think you'd have to be one of the ten best marksman in the world to do what he did.

As far as no one seeing Oswald go from six to one, they were probably all perched by the windows (or outside) to get a view of the president. You think he couldn't get down five flights of stairs in 90 seconds?

More in a minute...

Steve
"...don't accept the obvious: the randomness of so much in life. "

Maybe that explains the "randomness" of the bullet that is accredited with taking a zig zag pattern and even a U-TURN, through flesh and bone, and still comes out as pristine.

Thanks for explaining that to me, Steve. I understand it all now.

Stach
Ok, let's review:

"The limo was making a sharp left that it was forbidden to make by the security guidelines. These security guidelines also stated that the vehicle s/b going 40 mph or above. I know it is a huge car but it still could have accelerated much quicker. It was in a straight away part of Elm st. But, as previously stated it should never had made that slow difficult turn onto Elm street-JFK's advance team were very opposed to this route, and rightly so."

We both know that sometimes PR rules decisions, not security. I don't dispute any of what you say. If you go to a 4th of July parade, the cars COULD go by doing 50, but who would enjoy that? The people wanted to see the President, not a blur. In retrospect, it was dumb, but so are a lot of decisions, in retrospect. For example, I think his riding in an open car was dumb. But almost 20 years later, the Pope got shot doing the exact same thing, and then the Vatican learned the same lesson. Who made the bad decision? who knows? But people make bad decisions every day.

Yes, it could have accelerated quicker (maybe), but there would have to be a reason. Meaning,
the driver's reaction time is more important than the engine size at that point. If he was unaware of the danger (because of all the other commotion and noise), he wouldn't have gunned the car just to gun it. the shooting was all over in six seconds, remember.

I'm going to look for the Altens photo right now...



Re JFK the Movie

I hear Oliver Stone is going to do a movie about
Humpty Dumpty, Oliver has proof he was pushed by one of the king's men.

Mr. Prager,
Thank you for taking the bait...

methinks you are a part of a "vast right wing conspiracy."

When a physician wants to innoculate a person from a deadly virus, he/she may inject into your body the cells of that very virus...

While you are apparently earnest in your desire to craft an anti-conspiratorial archetype that misguided dominionist conservatives like yourself can fling at others, it may be prudent for you to KNOW that you are full of sh*t.

Saudi Royal Family 9/11 Conspiracy
In the mid nineties I was working in Boston's Faneuil Hall at a pushcart. There were a couple of what I thought to be hispanic gang bangers hanging around. When one eventually wanted to buy something I surprise as this sort never usually purchased anything. I stuck up a conversation and remarked on his lack of an accent. It turned out he was not in fact hispanic, they were very wealthy saudis who were going to a very exclusive prep school north of Boston.They were dressing up in "street" clothes to be cool-very baggy black bell bottomed jeans with the chains and all dangling, something I associated with hispanic gang members of that time. When I heard they were saudi's I decided to also express a little anger at the first attempt to take down the WTC. I belittled him at how inept and foolish the conspirators were for getting caught. In the ensuing conversation he related how a passenger jet would have been much more effective and easier. I was flabbergasted and tried to tell him that a plane had flown into the Empire State Building in the thirties or forties and the building withstood it with only localized damage. At no point was the building in danger of collapsing. He then related to me how modern jet fuel is one of the most powerful explosives, more powerful that the gasoline and nitrogen fertilizer mix. He related how all they would need to take over the plane was a box cutter since Americans are coached to "co-operate" with hijackers. I asked him how he knew any of this to be true and he related how the male members of his very wealthy, very elite saudi family sit in circles discussing just this sort of thing.His brother or cousin, meanwhile, was adamantly trying to tell him something in Arabic, which now I understand was probably to shut the hell up. All of this is true. This mans family is probably a good friend of our betrayer in chief.
I was faced with a choice after hearing all this, to report what I just heard to the police or choose to believe that it was utter foolishness. The more I thought about it the more foolish it seemed. Clinton was president at the time and I realized that any authority was more likely to charge me with a crime for making a report that to take it seriously, especially since the kid was sure to deny it. I chose to believe that it was foolish, they would never dare do anything so stupid. I was wrong. In the end it wouldn't have mattered, the military had an intelligence operation that had identified the very men who perpetrated that atrocity. Because of "walls" and other bureaucratic nonsense erected by the clinton administration, they were allowed to carry out their plan. I was wrong about the saudi's daring to do such a thing but I was right that reporting it would be futile.

Hound
Come on, you know Cheney prefers shotguns:)

Stach
Well, the umbrella man is interesting. I actually think the reason people are suspicious is because the investigation appears to be pretty roughshod.

I just have a problem with the fact that this "conspiracy", if it existed, spirals out of control. FBI, CIA, Dallas PD, Parkland Hospital Staff, etc, and NOT ONE person has ever fessed up aftr four decades? That doesn't add up.

so...
anyone with a 9/11 conspiracy theory that involves anything other than what actually happened, Islamic terrorists flying passenger jets into the WTC , can go to hell. The people who did it told me they were going to do it years before it happened. In my eyes the people who blieve in 9/11 conspiracy theories have to be some of the biggest losers on the planet.

Packrat
Oliver Stone is about as useless as teats on a boar.

Barabbaberry
Well, some people just can't be reached. 911 conspiracy weirdos are among them. There are people who still believed we faked all the moon landings. In a population this big, you can't reach everyone.

The main problem with the 9/11 conspiracy people is explaining where the people on the plane which hit the Pentagon are. OK, our own government blew up the Pentagon and a plance didn't? So, none of the passengers or crew had a problem with being sighted alive afterwards? Or missed their wives/husbands/kids/jobs? That, and that alone, makes the whole thing ridiculous. Or did some black helicopters force the plane out over the ocean and crash it? At some point, the obvious explanation really is the right one.

Prager=Right
(RANT)
See, this is what Dennis was talking about. Can't believe he mentioned one conspiracy, and a hundred are launched right here on this website.

The conspiracies don't change the fact that our nation could not protect the president on that day, nor could they prevent the Ford shooter from pulling the trigger, nor the Reagan shooter, nor 1993 WTC bombings, nor 9/11.

The people's right to know, which came right out of the MSM left's mouth, is not the people's right to manipulate fact to fit your agenda/propaganda, but it could be depending on your spin of lies-or who's video from the MSM you believe. It is meaningless, there are more important issues to deal with, like the WOT and the border. Don't be deceived into deceiving one another, its just lies on top of more lies.

The Serenity prayer says it best, "...and the wisdom to know the difference."

Dennis is right. Now you can continue the ignorance that exists on the left...I'm done posting.(/RANT)

Thigh
Right. I could have believed it in 1963, and maybe up until the turn of the millennium, but nobody coming out with the truth is against human nature.

Now, I do have more respect for this conspiracy theory than 9/11. They are like night and day -modern video equipment in one case, blurry video and still shots in the other. And even having the Zapruder film was just dumb luck. So with some strange occurrences during the investigation, I can understand the skepticism of the American peeople.

9/11 is completely different. Anyone who believes that was anything but an attack by fanatical Arabs is about as off base as they were. The Arabs had already been attacking us for two decades (WTC the first time, Khobar Towers, USS Cole, etc). 9/11 was merely the logical next step (for them).


Packrat: Humpty Dumpty Theory
Oliver Stone is incorrect regarding his theory about Humpty Dumpty being pushed off the wall by the king's men. Oliver Stone had been fanatically anti-royalty for years, why can't you see that?!

Humpty didn't fall...That's what they WANT you to believe.

Humpty Dumpty's wall was detonated, which caused Humpty to fall. It was planned by none other than Bush. By knocking down that wall and making the king's men look like they did it would only gain Bush more power and land in Far Far Away.

And......Did you notice the Dancing Bigfoots by the wall rubble? See......it all comes together....


The fact you don't know this only proves to me that you're not as smart as me!!!!!

:)

Red Dwarf
I apologise for being frivolous, but if we are talking conspiracy theories:

In the UK comedy Red Dwarf, President Kennedy travelled back in time and shoots himself from the grassy knoll as an act of self-sacrifice to preserve the US public from the knock-on effects of his future impeachment.

http://www.tv.com/red-dwarf/tikka-to-ride/episode/10981/summary.html

It must have shown on PBS....

HERE'S a reason to believe
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html

it is herr bush's plan to become dictator. not a conspiracy, this is REAL and you wingnuts are all good germans.

read and quiver at the fact that...

"(6) The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government"

in the case of "emergency" not defined... could be anything....

this is a bad bad bad

Thigh
I agree with you: "But no one can keep their mouth shut for over 40 years if they know one of the biggest secrets in American history". But, if you believe in a big conspiracy in 1963, it's worse than you said. It means EVERYONE kept their mouths shut for forty years!!! Statistically, those odds are too small to calculate.

And I call Loose Change "Loose Screws". Warning - do not get on here and start arguing with a 9/11 conspiracy disciple. You may blow a blood vessel.

Mishaz
Good satire, I hope.

"it is herr bush's plan to become dictator" Hmm...I thought he had to leave ofice on Jan 20, 2009. Dictators don't have a term end.

"(6) The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government"

What? the president is going to ensure that we have a constitutional government? That Tyrant!!!
Impeach him now!



Thanks for a good laugh - intentional or otherwise.


How they start
Conspiracies start with questions that either cannot be answered or are answered with absurdity - such as the case with so many current and historical events..

Two such questions for a conspiracy:

1. What was on the documents Sandy Berger took from the National Archives?

2. Why don't we enforce our boarders?

Until you stand in the sixth floor of the Book Depository you are not able to understand JFK.

We know so little and have such little control over so much. Conspiracies are fun to ponder over lunch and then move on to bigger issues like the World Series prospects of the Angels.

and shells
...weren't the King's men illegal and/or undocumented workers????
This is all starting to stink...Oliver, that's a NO film! Don't do it!

packrat-thanks the the directors name,O.Stone,
it had escaped me!


azphil
didnt you read the link to the directive?

you WOULD laugh... ignorance is bliss...

conspiracies
It's a CEE-OH-EN-SPIRACY

There have been conspiracies that have gone on for quite some time.

Witness it is only in recent years that prosecutors have been able to bring charges against and get convictions against former Klan members who were involved in some of the civil rights murders that happened back in the 60's.

And it's a good bet that some of those guys were not as so-fist-i-cated as more educated folks.

I'm not saying I'm buying into the JFK or 9/11 conspiracies, just that it is possible for folks to keep some deep dark secrets for a long time.

Mishaz
Many of us dislike george bush and think he is a threat to this country's sovereignty. That is a far cry from believing the moonbat theories of 9/11. Please don't ask us to believe anything other than 19 moslem hijackers hijacked those planes and flew them into those buildings. Nut cases like yourself have come up with all sorts of nonsensical alternate scenarios. People who still cling to them are tiresome losers who always tell people to "go read this" or "go read that". When one does one finds finds your brilliant "proofs" to be tiresome drivel and rhetoric that isn't worthy of a grade schooler. You know mental illness is nothing to flaunt, you may want to keep a lid on things.

Mishaz
I read it, and I have read it before. It's not too alarming - there is a contingency plan for operations in the event of a disaster. It's signed by the current president. What is different than ever?

In the military, we have contingency plans for if A happens, we do B. This is far preferable to running around looking confused. For example, there is a classified plan detailing what to do if the North Koreans come south again. Would you prefer having people in charge who, when something bad happens, they stand around screaming "What do we do?" There are contingency plans for forest fires, riots, and natural disasters (among other things), at all levels of government.

Everyone above 8th grade understands this instinctively. What if I'm driving to work, there's a big wreck, and my normal route is closed? Do I a) go home because I can't get there the normal way, or b) go around some other way? I'd like to see the look on my boss' face if I chose the former.

What if I'm a pilot? Most of the time, I take off and land uneventfully. But if there's a bird strike or lightning wrecks my electronics, do I just crash, or do you think I have a checklist?

Regardless of whether you like this president, the one before him, and the next president, and the one after that, had/will have similar documents to plan as much as possible for disasters such as 9/11. Not having these would be dereliction of duty.

Regarding the "Bush becoming a dictator" thing, how is this going to happen? he must leave office Jan 20, 2009. Can you say the same of Castro? Or Gaddafi? If Bush is trying to be a dictator, he's doing a poor job of it.

so now its 19 moslem hijackers?
did we forget, or block out, that the hijackers were funded by the saudi's? allies of the us? it is the problem of not asking questions that is a mental illness.

and speaking of 9/11, where's osama? oh, he's probably in pakistan, another us allied nation.

i bet you'd vote for giuliani, too. ask him why he scooped all the remains of the 9/11 victims and dumped the in a landfill.

to not question anything that one side does and to believe all that the other side tells you.

Mishaz
Yes, it was 19 muslim hijackers. No one disputes this.

I haven't forgotten where they came from. bin Laden is Saudi as well. Our "allies" in the Middle east are tenuous at best. Also, Charles Manson and Timothy McVeigh come from the United States, but that doesn't make us the bad guys.

Asking questions is okay. when every single source clearly shows an event (planes crashing into skyscrapers), including TV stations, average people on the street with cell phones, and the government, at some point the conspiracy would have to be so big that you would literally be the only person not in on it. That's when asking questions has no real point.

And spreading the "Bush wants to be dictator" myth, when we know exactly the year, month, day, and hour he will leave office (barring dying in office) doesn't make you look inquisitive. It just makes you seem like you're not a very good listener.

JFK conspiracy
If only one other person is involved it becomes a conspiracy and I am not convinced Oswald acted totally alone.

I was on duty in the director's chair at Ch13 in Stockton, CA when the first videos were shown on ABC. I saw one of the lead motorcycle patrolmen race toward the famous "Graasy Knoll". obviously (to my mind) trying to get to where he saw at least one shot fired from. He couldn't manage to jump the curb and lost his bike. That shot was never shown again!

Oswald must have had TWO "magic bullets" -- one that took a rather circuitous route thru two people and another that made part of JFK's brain fly out backwards! I don't believe that's possible.

Oswald was not a good enough rifleman to fire three shots in the measured time with a bolt action rifle and hit the mark or even close to it after the first shot. Proof of that conclusion came from the vaunted Walter Cronkite himself. In one of his four nightly hour presentations on the Warren Commision Report, he showed video of scale recreation of the shooting with an expert Marine rifleman and he couldn't do it in the alloted time ... and they tried it several times. Still, the Most Trusted Man in TV insisted the commision was right in it's assessment that Oswald acted alone.

If you can show me reasonable and accurate proofs to counter those things, I'll have to give up.

thank you captain obvious
everybody saw what happened on that day and nobody denies actual events.

so no comment on rudi? or the fact that the us is conducting saudi foreign policy? or that osama, a business partner of bush is still alive in a country that's not iraq?

your comment on these forgotten 'right wing conspiracy theories?

i'm just here asking questions the corporate media wont, that's all.

bush quote w/ video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNo0_klKzis

i think i heard that, and i AM listening...

Mishaz
First off, some do deny these events. I have heard of people who say the Twin Towers were ignited by the U.S. government, and people who say a plane never even crashed into the Pentagon at all (because there wasn't enough rubble for them).

What about Rudi?

The U.S. has agreements with many countries, including Saudi Arabia. Do these countries harbor terrorists? I don't know for sure. My opinion is that some countries brazenly fund terrorists (like Syria for years), and others know it goes on but turn a blind eye.

Would you be happier if bin laden was alive in Iraq? I'd be happy to see him dead regardless of where he is.

The "corporate media" is blatantly left-wing. They even admit to voting Democrat 90% of the time, and that's assuming they're telling the truth. To insinuate that they would somehow give Bush a break is comical. He is their archenemy; Dan rather even resorted to making up lies about about him when he couldn't find any real dirt. What a joke.

Mishaz
I can't get Youtube stuff at work.

Phil Byler - I Agree

I have to agree with everything you said. I remember seeing the events on TV over and over again wondering how could this happen. I recall the visual evidences and the 'coincidences' that were never explained. And then the Warren Commission, instead of giving a believable scenerio, the Commission railroaded the evidence to a pre-decided conclusion.

The conspiracy wss not whether there were one or multiple assassins but whether there was collusion among some people in powerful positions.

There was one, James File, that confessed and implicated organized crime. Discount the confession if you want but that puts doubt on the Warren Commission's findings.

There was mention of a bullet that missed. There was a fresh bullet scar on a nearby curb. Every extra shot that is mentioned or proven puts greater weight against the lone gunman statement from the Commission.

At the time it happened, I could not believe that the police moved LHO through a crowd of people. It was as if some power meant for him to die before any truth could be ascertained.

I could not believe the autopsy was botched so badly that all evidence was destroyed.

Too many 'coincidences' to suit me. Too many unanswered questions.

I believe there was a cover-up which in itself implies a conspiracy.

Birdman
Who was in on the cover-up?

AZPhil

Don't know. That makes it hidden isn't it?

If we knew, we could charge them with murder.

Birdman
No ideas? How many people do yuo think are in on it? Half a dozen? 375?

Where did the bullet scar go? No one at Parkland remembers anything? Where did the 50 witnesses on the grassy knoll go?

Technically, I think it wold only be conspiracy to commit murder, not to nitpick or anything.

mishaz for president!
What really makes me laugh about people like "mishaz" is that they make it literally impossible for the president to do ANYTHING right!
If he's reading to children on 9-11...HE DOESN'T KNOW WHAT TO DO! LOOK! HE'S AN IDIOT!!
If he prepares a contingency plan to handle an emergency...LOOK!! HE WANTS TO BE A DICTATOR! THIS IS BAAAAD!
For the love of God...please GROW UP!
I'd like to see any of you moonbats assume the responsiblity of POUTS for one week.
(Not really, but I think you get my point).
Hell, most of you probably can't decide what to make for dinner...imagine dealing with domestic and international policy 24/7.
Like I said...PLEASE GROW UP.

Re the gunshot witnesses
Try this
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/shots.htm

Seems to disagree with the claims of the theorists

Infamy, they've all got it infame ...
People who believe in conspiracies obviously don't appreciate just how bone idle and shambolic the world actually is ...

So they see coincidencies, and incompetency, and assume the worst.

In reality, it's a bloomin' miracle anything gets done properly, but somehow we all bumble through.

(Of course, all you need to have is a lapse of memory and before you know it you're in prison these days ...)

I know who has the answer
The reason they took Rosie O'Donnell off The View is that she was going to tell everybody who "really" killed JFK.

Got your head buried
In the sand on this one Dennis.


You say:
"One would think that someone would have come forward in the last 44 years to tell the world about the conspiracy. He or she would become a major figure in history, not to mention the likelihood of becoming very wealthy."

People have come forward, and recently E Howard Hunt.

Unreal how naive you can be Dennis believing everything is out and up front and nothing is ever done in secret.

The people who have come forward you and Buglosi shut down with your hands over your ears, calling them "conspiracy nut cases".

You're nuts if you think Oswald acted alone and it was his plan only.

It took 100 years
For all of the information regarding President Lincolns assasination to be made public. 100 YEARS!! Turns out several members of his cabinet were implicated... Now THAT was a conspiracy AND a cover-up that worked despite the number of people involved.

Packrat
You're close...
The reason they took Rosie off "The Spew" is that she landed a consulting job with US Steel.
They are interested in her formula for fire resistance.

Here ya go Dennis
Add these people to your "conspiracy nuts" list.


"The real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over city, state and nation. Like the octopus of real life, it operates under cover of a self created screen....At the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller Standard Oil interests and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both political parties." -New York City Mayor John F. Hylan, 1922

"There exists a shadowy Government with its own Air Force, its own Navy, its own fundraising mechanism, and the ability to pursue its own ideas of the national interest, free from all checks and balances, and free from the law itself."

-Senator Daniel K. Inouye

"The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one-world government combining super-capitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control.... Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent."

-Congressman Larry P. McDonald, 1976, killed in the Korean Airlines 747 that was shot down by the Soviets

"Today the path of total dictatorship in the United States can be laid by strictly legal means, unseen and unheard by the Congress, the President, or the people. Outwardly we have a Constitutional government. We have operating within our government and political system, another body representing another form of government - a bureaucratic elite." -Senator William Jenner, 1954

The people do not have the government they think they do, but one that's masquerading as something legitimate. Fortunately (or unfortunately - however you want to look at it) for us, Congress still has some power left because is has to be made to seem real. Otherwise the system breaks down and too many people start asking questions. That's where you come in.

The global Collectivists want their New World Order, they want to take over America and rest of the sovereign nations of the world, they want us to live in compact cities, they want us micro-chipped, dumbed down, and complacent. They want a global population reduction of several billion people and will go about it by ruthless means. They want global control of the entire human population, so they, the "elite" can rule the flock with ease and minimal effort, taking advantage of the secret advanced technology (such as zero-point free energy and life extension) they possess through research our tax dollars paid for. Or, more likely, that their illegal drug trade paid for since our unconstitutional tax dollars are laundered to foreign banks to pay the interest on the federal debt (quietly admitted by the Grace Commission convened under President Ronald).


AZPhil
What's the AZ for - Arizona?

How many people were in on the disappearance of Jimmy Hoffa? 4, 12, 100? Where is Hoffa today? Why hasn't anyone spoke up?

Just because you say people can't keep their mouths shut does not mean that people can't.

And what happens to someone who just might speak up? What was the name of Clinton's lawyer - Foster? - who committed suicide and then dragged his own dead body into a remote parking lot sans car? Dead men tell no tales.

People can keep quiet one way or another.

The great thing about opinions is that everyone has one.

JFK
Hey yo Tony Saprano did it ok you mugs.

JFK
Hey yo JFK and dead him and I are porkin' Marilyn (she's alive too) and drinkin' beers.

Alone
Oswald acted alone. That's obvious to anybody who has studied the assassination in depth, as I have, over the past 25 years.

To believe otherwise is simply not logical, considering the facts.

To thighmaster
I am back from the baseball field. I missed your 3:21 PM post in which you say I have been blathering on about what I have no evidence. Excuse me, but if anyone takes the time to re-read my 7:15 AM, 7:18 AM, 8:07 AM, 12;44 PM, 2:04 PM, 2:08 and 3:02 PM posts, they will see that I have been discussing the evidence of the assassination and that your comment is nonsense.

To dyerje
I missed your 12:21 PM post in which you ask if I have an alternative theory to the Warren Commission report which I do reject. I assume you mean more than that there was a shooter behind the picket fense on the grassy knoll and a shooter in a building, probably the Texas Book Depository, behind the President's car when JFK was shot.

I understand why you ask, I don't like being non-responsive, but I am no conspiracy addict. The problem is that when you try to define what happened in order to account for everything, including a botched autopsy in Washington D.C., then you are in the world of speculation and what you get into sounds wild and all over the place by its nature. I first said this back in the 1980s when I was discussing the subject with a bunch of New York City lawyers with whom I was litigating a case.

I will say that I don't think it was organized crime. I have speculated that there was a rogue group in the CIA, and after the fact, there was a decision to cover up. I have speculated that it could have been worse. But I really need more information to do better.

To Yankee
No, you are the one not being logical by asserting that Oswald acted alone and that anyone who says otherwise is not being logical. It is easy to say summarily what you do, but you do not explain one iota what is an unsupportable asertion. I have been posting all day to review the problems of the evidence and dealing with it logically.

Phil Byler
Having now read your posts between my original query and your response, I understand where you're coming from. It certainly isn't a "tinfoil hat" activity to analyze data and events, and come to a conclusion about them that is different from the official one. One thing I've learned in my military career path is how much of that underlies everything we think we know, or think we have established.

Identifying inconsistencies in the official analysis isn't, by a long stretch, the same thing as making heroic assumptions on thin evidence and positing grand conspiracies. One may get to a point where inconsistencies are not really actionable, as I suspect we have with the JFK assassination. But I think you've made a valid point that it's not "conspiracy theory" per se to question the official findings of the Warren Commission.

Blabbermouths
I don't believe in conspiries because Americans are the biggest blabbermouths the world has ever known. Look at how well Pres Nixon was able to cover up Watergate, and in the beginning of the cover-up only about 10 people knew.

More On Conspiracies
Once the lawyers are involved the cover-up is over, remember who spilled the beans during Watergate.

Oil For Food