THE JFK REMOVAL WILL NEVER BE SOLVED:

[bobspez]

I think for most members of the group the question has been solved long ago. The how and the who is less important than the why, and the why is easy to figure out by seeing who benefitted after JFK was gone. The biggest beneficieries were the military industrial complex who got a 10+ year payday. Same as 911. The biggest beneficieries were the military industrial complex who got a 15+ year payday. Eisenhower was such a hypocrite. Warning the country about the military industrial complex that he supported through the nuclear arms race during his entire presidency. By the time we had 16,000 nuclear war heads and delivery systems, that source of revenue was drying up. So another war against "communism" was needed to get the profits rolling again. One man stood in the way of that happening. JFK.

[Tom Bigg]

I agree with most of the reasonable conspiracy theories about Dallas.I found the hatchet job against the Douglass book disgusting: https://www.washingtondecoded.com/site/ ... awful.html

[bobspez]

I'm not sure what the political bias is of the book reviewer but it's easy to be a critic without putting forth any alternative theories or solutions. The review is basically a rewrite of history as far as I can judge. The reviewer is making a case for the theory that JFK wanted to stay in Vietnam and win the war. This seems patently absurd in light of official documents that indicate a planned withdrawal was in the works. The only question that would logically follow would be then why was JFK killed? And the reviewer ignores the scale of the US involvement under Kennedy versus the scale of involvement under LBJ. The reviewer seems to mock the idea that there is a military industrial complex. I guess Ike coined the phrase and he should know. The reviewer proposes that RFK believed JFK would have supported LBJ's all out war in an attempt to save Asia and even India from becoming communist (the old domino theory). If that was so, then why was RFK a peace candidate in 1968 and why was he killed? Sure there was a cold war going on and it was recognized by JFK and RFK and they weren't opposed to fighting a cold war. They were against fighting a hot war. The reviewer fails to make those distinctions.Tom Bigg wrote:I agree with most of the reasonable conspiracy theories about Dallas.I found the hatchet job against the Douglass book disgusting: https://www.washingtondecoded.com/site/ ... awful.html

[Jim Carney]

I think it’s been solved; you just have to pick the right parts of people’s writings to put the puzzle together. It’s not complex as everyone makes it out to be with all these different conspiracy theories and possible villains. So much time is spent trying to name who the shooters were and where they were firing from. It doesn’t matter who shot him and from where. What matters is who paid to have it done and why. Carlos Marcello and Santos Trafficante. RFK and JFK had been dragging their asses over the coals for years and they had finally had enough; RFK was going to deport Marcello and RFK brought Trafficante’s wife into the mix which was strictly forbidden. Over about a year’s period they planned the hit on JFK. Marcello was asked why not just kill Bobby and Marcello said if we kill Bobby, Jack would send the National Guard after them. We kill JFK and he is replaced and his replacement will get rid of RFK. What I have read is that they brought in shooters from Europe to do the hit. Three books that bring out the facts are: Mafia Kingfish by John H. Davis, The Hidden History of the JFK Assassination by Lamar Waldron, and Mob Lawyer by Frank Ragano and Selwyn Raab.