the private corporation known as the Federal Reserve is the culprit. the rest is a smokescreen. check out executive order 11110 - kennedy was doing what lincoln did - issuing US treasury money - going around the central bankers debt based trap. same result - head shot.....and then their heads put on coins the bankers also killed mckinley, garfield, and louis mcfadden. tried to kill andrew jackson - but he lived to put them out of business. they also shot reagan in the head (see grace commission report). he got back in line after taking the bullet. since reagan no president has had the balls to challenge their web of debt. dont take my word for it - check out each assassination or attempted assassination. every case involves the prez fighting the central bank. btw - who is most of the US's debt owed to? right. the federal reserve. ron paul has a massive set --- taking on the murderous cabal
Reagan was not shot in the head. Whether or not each of them fought a central bank is irrelevant. Each president is a politician and politicians always have enemies. Your claim is lame and no evidence supports it.
I would say it was the Military Industrial Complex, and the tribe of international bankers is certainly a major portion of that mix,. I would say your post is right on.
All of those assassinated were moving against the international bankers that now control the Federal Reserve...To suggest that this is irrelavent is ridiculous. The OP is right on target. Your name suits you perfectly, as you are a shill for the usurous nazi banksters and corporate war profiteers here on this forum in every instance. What on earth compels you to be a tool in defense of a cabal of murderers and theives? Cheers
The only person defending murderers here is YOU. It is irrelevant because every president has political enemies , whether those enemies are banks, business interests, the opposing party which he defeated to get elected. not to mention millions of common Americans who oppose his administration and polices regardless of which party he comes from. You need more than this to prove a murder case. In other words you have very vague and unspecific MOTIVE but nothing else you have no means or opportunity. For that matter you do not even have a name other than " NAXI BANKERS ". None of which have a name but are merely a boogey man you dream up. Unfortunately for you the evidence proves Oswald killed JFK and further proves there was no conspiracy. You on the other hand have no evidence but choose to defend a man who committed murder by insisting others committed his crime.
"If you look at a copy of EO 11110 you will find that it does not order the issuance of Silver Certificates. It orders an amendment to EO 10289. If you then look up EO 10289, you will find that it says: "The Secretary of the Treasury is hereby designated and empowered to perform the following-described functions of the President without the approval, ratification, or other action of the President." Those functions did not include the power to issue Silver Certificates. The purpose of EO 11110 was to add that power to the list. The exact wording of the Order was: "Executive Order No. 10289 of September 19, 1951, as amended, is hereby further amended (a) By adding at the end of paragraph 1 thereof the following subparagraph (j): (1) 'The authority to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury.'" "EO 11110 did not order the printing of Silver Certificates. It ordered the amendment of a previous executive order so that the United States Code would authorize or "empower" the Secretary of the Treasury to issue Silver Certificates if the occasion should arise. The occasion never arose. According to the Comprehensive Catalog of U.S. Paper Money by Gene Hessler, and also the Blackbook Price Guide to United States Paper Money, 33rd edition, the last issuance of Silver Certificates was in 1957. That was five years prior to Kennedy's EO 11110." - Edward G. Griffin. That being said, it is difficult to ignore the strong correlation between U.S. President's who messed with the banking establishment and their assassination or attempted assassination. Personally, I suspect that JFK was assassinated due to the Bay of Pigs fiasco and the fall of Cuba to the Soviets. The resulting Cuban Missile Crisis was probably the last straw. If there is one thing that will motivate the Powers That Be to kill their king it is self-preservation. JFK's interference with strategic foreign policy plans for Cuba, which were established during the Eisenhower Administration, and which JFK did not really understand he when took office, nearly resulted in a thermonuclear war with the USSR. For little people such as we, the outbreak of an all-out nuclear exchange seems so beyond our control that it might as well be an act of God. However, people of real power and influence do not have this perspective. For them, the Kennedy Administration, in the wake of the Cuban Missile Crisis, might have seemed like a bumbling gang of arrogant upstarts who were going to get everyone killed if they were not removed from the Oval Office.
That is all speculative and no evidence supports a conspiracy. The evidence proves Oswald murdered him however.
Considering that the conspirators got away with it, have likely passed away due to old age, and that any evidence which may have existed to indict them posthumously has long been destroyed, speculation is all we have. The lone gunman idea was believable for a time, even after the alleged assassin was suspiciously murdered before trial. But then, on June 5, 1968, the conspirators had to go and stick their finger in our eyes. It is the assassination of Robert Kennedy which makes it nearly impossible for any thinking person to believe that Oswald acted alone, and that the assassination of JFK was not the product of a cabal. What are the odds of a king (or a president) being assassinated by a crazed lone gunman, and then, at the very moment when it appears that his brother will ascend to the throne, he too is assassinated, also by a crazed lone gunman? To say the very least, the idea that the mediums involved with these two assassinations are completely unrelated strains credulity. The more you look at it, the more this case stinks of conspiracy. And while it may be impossible to scientifically prove otherwise, only the most gullible fool could be convinced that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone.
The odds of such two separate murders happening without conspiracy is in fact very high especially in a society such as the USA where anyone can get a gun and many people hate the government. The case does not stink of conspiracy, instead people want there to be a conspiracy because it is so entertaining compared to one lone nut getting lucky and then another one doing the same later. When you refer to the idea that it stinks of conspiracy you are stating pinion and not evidence. Once again no evidence supports such a claim however tons of evidence argues against it. For example the staple of conspiracy theorists is that Oswald was silenced by Ruby ( which even Ruby denied until he died ). However like many you are now linking RFK's death to the conspiracy and ignore the obvious question. Why was Sirhan Sirhan not silenced as Oswald was? He is still in prison. For that matter why was Ruby not Silenced but allowed to linger in prison for years? Sure he finally died in prison but you do not let such a sensitive member of a conspiracy wait for years to die of illness. Your claim that the conspirators are now dead of old age implies that you know who they were. So who were they? And do not evade by giving the same old faceless boogey men such as " the mafia " or the " CIA " or " The Military Industrial Complex ". These are the sort of methods used to make an accusation without responsibility. No individual with a name or face has ever been identified. Essentially you are engaging in circular logic. When asked for evidence you claim the conspirators hid the evidence or covered it up or destroyed it etc. How do you know this? Because there was a conspiracy therefore the lack of evidence becomes the evidence. The final fact which undermines any conspiracy theory is the one the theorists have the hardest time with. People in general are not effective at keeping secrets. Especially criminal secrets. two or three people can keep such a secret only if one or two of them are dead. In all these years no one has come forward with the fact in exchange for immunity. No one has written a tell all book to get rich. No one has come forward in their last months of life as even Deep Throat did. No one has gotten angry at others profiting more and decided to tell all to get even out of spite and hatred for their fellow conspirators. Human being simply do not work this way. The government knows full well that few if any secrets can be kept for long which is why anyone granted access to secret information must sign several pages of threats and warnings about the consequences of revealing such information. The government knows that sooner or later someone WILL reveal them. Even the Manhattan project was compromised and its secrets discovered by Japanese and German agents who developed their information from sources within. The saving grace was that few people understood what the hell atomic physics meant in the 1940s. So once again where is the evidence?
Money? Or just the caveman urge to back up his fellow tribesmen? That's mainly what motivates these people, they want to be on a winning team (as if life is a sport).
"If they have found another assassin, let them name names and produce their evidence." - Warren Commission member Allen Dulles in response to Warren Commission critics, Look magazine, 1966
This is a list of all the JFK books in my library here at home. It goes without saying that I've read each and every one of them, some twice, some thrice, some more. I've been to Dealey Plaza several times, been inside the TSBD several times, seen the house on Beckley, the Texas theater, the Payne's old house, even visited Lee Harvey's gravesite at Rose Hill. Troll? Not hardly. Serious denial? No, just the realization after almost 50 years that there was no conspiracy to assassinate John F. Kennedy. It wasn't the CIA, it wasn't the Cubans, it wasn't the Mafia, or the military-industrial complex - it was Lee Harvey Oswald. Granted, there are some things that don't add up. Granted, the investigation was rushed, and they should have taken more time and done a more thorough job. Agreed, there was a cover-up of some material by the CIA and the FBI - but that doesn't prove there was a conspiracy. So if you want to be Don Quixote and joust at windmills, be my guest. I'll just sit here, drink my lemonade, and smile to myself.
He was not the main overseer Earl Warren was in charge of it hence the name WARREN commission. Obviously you know nothing about the entire affair and are only programmed by a bad fictional movie to believe fiction because to you the little box is reality
