[Ben Holmes]

A question that has been asked many times is: "If the killing of Kennedy was a conspiracy involving many people, how could it possibly have been kept secret all this time? Why hasn't somebody talked?" [Or, as the title of one excellent book put it: "Someone Would Have Talked"]

The answer to that question is simple. A lot of people have talked. The talking started before the assassination and has continued to this day. There are many examples: Carlos Marcello bragged in front of Ed Becker that Kennedy would be killed and described how it would be done; Santo Trafficante, Jr., bragged that Kennedy would be killed; Joseph Milteer, right-wing nut, bragged that Kennedy would be killed and how it would be done; Johnny Rosselli, Sam Giancana's right-hand man, told Jack Anderson (years later) that Ruby was "their man and was ordered to silence Oswald." David Atlee Phillips, suspected of being the mysterious Maurice Bishop and perpetrator of the multiple Oswalds, said before he died that fringe elements of U.S. intelligence may have been involved in the conspiracy. As earlier noted, Lyndon Johnson's mistress, Madeleine Brown; has said that Lyndon Johnson implied before Kennedy was killed that it was going to happen. Marita Lorenz, CIA contract agent, stated n depositions for a courtroom trial that Frank Sturgis told her that he and a group of anti-Castro Cubans had been involved in the Kennedy assassination. And, finally, Sam Giancana's brother, Chuck Giancana, revealed in a recent book Double Cross that his brother Sam Giancana confessed to the entire crime in 1966 (in an hour-long discussion at Chuck Giancana's suburban home in Chicago), just before Sam Giancana was to move to Mexico City.

(Taken from Noel Twyman's book, Bloody Treason, 1997)

[Patrick C]

I find the anti Castro Cuban conspiracy theory probably the most plausible of all of the popular conspiracy scenarios. However I find very little evidence if any, to place more than one shooter in the plaza. The location of the shooter was the 6th floor window and the MC was imo the murder weapon - certainly beyond reasonable doubt imo.

I find it very difficult to accept that a lid could have been kept on a plot over the years and I think we would know now if Oswald had accomplices or indeed if he were framed. Let us face it there are many dozens of people who claim to be behind the assasination - and almost all of them are lying even if there was a conspiracy so we should not take any claim as genuine without supporting evidence and frankly there is non - the Mafia claims are not backed up with any concrete evidence, but there is some hint of suspicion over the FPFCC and the Mexico City trip.

[Ben Holmes]

(08-14-2016, 11:26 AM)Patrick C Wrote:  I find the anti Castro Cuban conspiracy theory probably the most plausible of all of the popular conspiracy scenarios. However I find very little evidence if any, to place more than one shooter in the plaza. The location of the shooter was the 6th floor window and the MC was imo the murder weapon - certainly beyond reasonable doubt imo.

So you simply dismiss the fact that in the first two days - the overwhelming majority of witnesses pointed to the Grassy Knoll as the site of the shooter.

Just as Mark does, I suspect you simply dismiss those statements completely.

(08-14-2016, 11:26 AM)Patrick C Wrote:  I find it very difficult to accept that a lid could have been kept on a plot over the years and I think we would know now if Oswald had accomplices or indeed if he were framed.

Well, it's good that you find it difficult to believe. Fortunately, people HAVE talked... both before and after the assassination.

You can dismiss what they said if you want - but you can't deny that people have spoken of their participation in the assassination.

(08-14-2016, 11:26 AM)Patrick C Wrote:  Let us face it there are many dozens of people who claim to be behind the assasination - and almost all of them are lying even if there was a conspiracy...

A mere assertion on your part.

Fortunately, speculation simply cannot take the place of actual evidence.

(08-14-2016, 11:26 AM)Patrick C Wrote:  so we should not take any claim as genuine without supporting evidence and frankly there is non - the Mafia claims are not backed up with any concrete evidence, but there is some hint of suspicion over the FPFCC and the Mexico City trip.

If one were to base other things on the same standard, you'd be in the closet with Hoover - claiming that there was no such thing as the "Mafia" or organized crime. Where's the "concrete evidence?"

---

Back to what was said... despite the claims of people such as Patrick, that had this been a conspiracy - people would have talked... the sad fact is - MANY PEOPLE DID TALK!
 
And now that Patrick has admitted it, the requirement now is for "concrete evidence"...

Something he absolutely refuses to give to support his faith that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone assassin.

P.S. Let's remember that Patrick is still refusing to retract his lie that the McAdams' tabulation of earwitnesses is "unassailable" - despite his admission that one witness is in the wrong category... Why is it so difficult for Patrick to admit that he went overboard on his characterization?