Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Jacqueline Kennedy Reportedly Believed Lyndon B. Johnson Behind JFK's Assassination
Foxnews.com ^ | August 08, 2011

Posted on 08/08/2011 8:39:30 AM PDT by US Navy Vet

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-176 next last
To: US Navy Vet

A woman marked by her one talent which was to latch on to rich men.


101 posted on 08/08/2011 10:02:44 AM PDT by Cyman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazlo in PA

Great photo. The Kennedys are scum but JFK obviously is showing some common sense and restraint in the photo.

I always thought it was LBJ. He was the greediest man alive. He got insanely richer off of the Vietnam War. Johnson Fence Company, Brown & Root and all the defense contractors in TX. He got a piece of anything that moved in TX. He was a shareholder in loads of TX companies.

He left office the 2nd wealthiest President. Geo Washington was a billionaire (inflation adjusted) because of his land holdings.

Nixon left office broke. He never made a dime of LBJ/JFK’s Vietnam War.

The same thing is going on today. Muslim in office - 6 meaningless wars with no goal, end game or anything. Just kids dying due to leaked intel by islamic moles in the US govt. War is just a business now.


102 posted on 08/08/2011 10:02:58 AM PDT by John334
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

No it is not. Use your brain and follow the money. Who benefited? Who got insanely richer of Vietnam? Who cooked up The Gulf of Tonkin? Who’s fence company had a contract for every fence at a US base in SE Asia during Vietnam? Who was a major sharholder in Brown & Root?

It was LBJ. No conspiracy theory just who benefitted the most and got insanely richer off the war.


103 posted on 08/08/2011 10:03:11 AM PDT by John334
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

Good analysis, but you left out ol’ J. Edgar Hoover’s part.


104 posted on 08/08/2011 10:07:32 AM PDT by ryderann
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: blueunicorn6

Most of the cops in Dallas knew the word on the street was that Kennedy was going to get killed.


105 posted on 08/08/2011 10:10:39 AM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Durus
I agree, however using occams razor, the most reasonable explanation is that Oswald was not the shooter.

Hardly. He had means, motive and opportunity.

Any explanation that excludes him adds several layers of complexity to the conspiracy theory - which is desirable from the perspective of the conspiracy theorist, not the logician.

106 posted on 08/08/2011 10:11:32 AM PDT by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: NEWwoman

It was also LBJ that convinced Kennedy not to use the bullet proof bubble on the convertable that day


107 posted on 08/08/2011 10:15:13 AM PDT by paul revere is riding (I'm really a Paula.....Go Cain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: John334
The Kennedys are scum

I never equated JFK with LBJ's level of corruption and dishonesty. Kennedy was morally bankrupt and in way over his head for the job. That is also what the Commies thought when they tried to pull the Cuba Missal installations. LBJ was actively involved in every aspect his getting ahead and staying there. I generally don't subscribe to conspiracies, but I give Jackie O a pass for genuinely believing LBJ was involved in this. It seems probable knowing the type of human debris LBJ was.

108 posted on 08/08/2011 10:15:46 AM PDT by Lazlo in PA (Now living in a newly minted Red State.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: mcshot
The book that may be similar has the author teaching Ruby and Oswald how to shoot.
Oswald learned how to shoot in the Marine Corps. No one does it better.
109 posted on 08/08/2011 10:17:57 AM PDT by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Snickering Hound; US Navy Vet
And he wouldn't let Teddy drive his floating car either!

Believe it or not, I saw one of those things at sea, we were returning from Subic in 63 or 64, We must have been near Catalina, Can't remember for sure, but I remember thinking those people are insane.

110 posted on 08/08/2011 10:18:35 AM PDT by itsahoot (--I will still vote for Sarah Palin, even if I have to write her in.--No more traitors.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Durus
using occams razor, the most reasonable explanation is that Oswald was not the shooter.
No, just the opposite - Oswald was the one and only shooter.
111 posted on 08/08/2011 10:22:06 AM PDT by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: ilovesarah2012
Who can explain why men have affairs, or women, for that matter?

I’m not sure that it’s all that difficult to understand. From a very basic position, it’s just another sin and fallen degenerate mankind is born in sin....therefore no surprise that unregenerate people do what comes naturally to them in that state, they sin. There is one basic aspect to affairs though that rarely gets talked about.... while affairs sometimes happen when there is an ongoing sexual relationship between the husband and the wife, I would bet that it much more frequently occurs when that relationship has come unraveled. Always being available sexually to your spouse is a commandment from God.... and if one doesn’t carry out that duty, they are disobeying God’s commandments. Since there is no weight given in scripture (that I’m aware of) concerning the gravity of a sin, this means that the one who has withheld sex from his/her spouse is as guilty of sin as the one who had the affair. You asked “who can explain why men have affairs” but you could just as easily have asked “how can any person withhold a sexual response to their husband or wife”?

112 posted on 08/08/2011 10:23:55 AM PDT by hecticskeptic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

Logically in order for Oswald to be the shooter he needed to be able to make the shots. That is not a reasonable proposition.


113 posted on 08/08/2011 10:27:26 AM PDT by Durus (You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: oh8eleven

Explain your logic.


114 posted on 08/08/2011 10:28:05 AM PDT by Durus (You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: John334

Don’t forget Pacific Architects & Engineers reputedly owned by Lady Bird...


115 posted on 08/08/2011 10:28:34 AM PDT by Wu (Excuse me while I kiss the sky......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: don-o; NEWwoman
Because I am 99.99% sure it was not on live TV.

You are correct: NEWwoman's story is simply not believable.

The inauguration of LBJ was photographed, but not filmed. It was sound recorded as well.

At the time it occurred, all the TV networks were breaking the official news that President Kennedy had succumbed to his injuries.

Far from being broadcast live, it was only made known after the fact and there is no footage.

There were only ten men present at the inauguration besides LBJ.

Other than having been physically present, there is no way to tell what look was in LBJ's eyes, since he is blinking in the only extant photograph of the swearing-in and his eyes are not visible.

116 posted on 08/08/2011 10:35:13 AM PDT by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Durus
By definition - the explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is most likely to be correct.
What could be more simple than Oswald acting alone?
117 posted on 08/08/2011 10:40:52 AM PDT by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: oh8eleven

Military records indicate that Oswald was not a talented marksman, in fact he did quite poorly using a far superior rifle (m1 garand) to that of the carcano he is purported to have used during the assassination.


118 posted on 08/08/2011 10:41:18 AM PDT by Durus (You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: libstripper

You might also recall that a lone teenager with no source of income stalked George Wallace until an opportunity to shoot him arose. George announced his run for President in Texas.


119 posted on 08/08/2011 10:44:39 AM PDT by itsahoot (--I will still vote for Sarah Palin, even if I have to write her in.--No more traitors.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Durus
Logically in order for Oswald to be the shooter he needed to be able to make the shots. That is not a reasonable proposition.

According to his Marine Corps records he was twice rated as a sharpshooter.

If it is unreasonable that a Marine Corps-trained sharpshooter, on a clear and sunny day, got off two out of three good (from his perspective) shots - well then, nothing is reasonable.

120 posted on 08/08/2011 10:45:53 AM PDT by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-176 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson