I think I owe everyone on this site an apology. It appears I've spoiled everyone's delusional dreams of conspiracy by breaking the two cardinal rules of conspiracy believers everywhere: I've asked for evidence to back up your ridiculous claims and I've asked the conspiracy nuts to actually ANSWER questions based on real evidence.

I know very well that this throws a bucket of cold water on all the fun very quickly and the conspiracy crackpots disappear like cockroaches when a light is turned on. I posed my ten questions several days ago and Linda has not been heard from since. Of course USA Taxpayer will never be heard from because he has nothing of substance to offer to the conversation anyway.

But again, I am sorry for ruining everyone's fun. But I'd like to make a prediction if we EVER DO hear from Linda and the other nuts out there. Here is my prediction:

NO ONE WILL RESPOND TO THE TEN QUESTIONS I POSED WITH ANY EVIDENTIARY BACKING...INSTEAD THEY WILL ASK COUNTER QUESTIONS OF ME TO RESPOND TO.

This is the oldest trick of those with no evidence on their side. Just keep ASKING questions and that way you won't have to ANSWER questions.

There is a time-tested saying among historians (of which I am one) and lawyers (of which I am not) that goes like this: They who have the EVIDENCE on their side talk about the EVIDENCE...those with the LAW on their side talk about the LAW...and those with NEITHER will just ask a lot of questions of others.

I think we know where the conspiracy nuts on this site are don't we?

I hope all future visitors to this site will take a note that before I came along there were postings every few days of one wacky conspiracy theory after another. Once I challenged the nuts out there to respond to the actual evidence they all disappeared.

I think there is a lesson to learn here.

USA Tax Payer, I would love to respond to your comments but you didn't say anything that can be rebutted.

1. You never talked of ANY evidence.

2. You didn't make a single provable claim.

3. You made a bunch of nonsense general statements that didn't prove a single thing.

4. There wasn't a single fact to take issue with.

Sorry, but with nothing to work with I cannot work.

Thank you Taxpayer, I have not heard of that book and will find it and read it.

The main reason Robert Kennedy could not fight the government at that time is that he himself was involved in a CIA operation to assassinate Fidel Castro. Within days after his brother's killing, he called one of the head men of the operation and said "one of your guys did it". The same people that were being used in Operation Mongoose participated in the assassination of JFK.

LBJ knew of the plot in advance. He had the most to gain by the assassination as he was about to be indicted along with Billy Sol Estes and Bobby Baker in a huge financial scam that had unraveled in Texas. JFK had plans to drop him from the 64 ticket as he had become too much of a liability.

LBJ's main role was the Warren Commission. He handpicked the participants and strong armed them into doing what he wanted and stopping the Dallas Police investigation. Many of LBJ's recorded White House converstations have been released. I listened to one in which he bullied a certain member into being on the commission.

JFK had been pissing off everyone from the Federal Reserve to the CIA to the Military Industrial Complex to the Mafia. He had already begun printing money that was independent of the Federal Reserve, which he considered to be a criminal enterprise run by a wealthy elite bunch of bankers and politicians.

The government will NEVER investigate itself. That is why the three most important political hits of the 60's all came out with the conclusion of "lone nut assassins" and all of these cases are now unraveling as we see that the media, law enforcement, and politicians were manipulated, bullied, and forced to fabricate evidence, change eyewitness testimony, and virtually ignore hard physical evidene that directly contradicted the government's case in all three killings.

They could never count on J.Edgar Hoover for any type of honest investigation. He hated the Kennedy's with a passion and was probaby also going to be replaced.

Even LBJ himself admitted to Walter Cronkite in his last interview before his death that he thought there "might be a conspiracy" in JFK's death. Then he called the president of CBS news and insisted they leave out his remarks. Cronkite talked of this in an interview on camera.

Linda,

I have dealt with literally hundreds and hundreds of conspiracy nuts just like you through the years and I know that acquainting you with the actual evidence won't make one bit of difference at all but it is still fun to show how incorrect all of your allegations are so here goes. Since many of the comments you made didn't refer to any actual evidence and were just blind general statements I will ignore those, I will only respond where you missated the facts in this case:

1. "First of all, many murders are solved and people convicted for murder without a weapon or a body, it has happened many times throughout history in this country."

Steve: Please list a few of these cases for me so I can read about the evidence myself. YOU said you know of many examples so please share some of these cases solved with NO body and NO murder weapon. I will anxiously await your examples.

"In the early 60's we were in the height of the Cold War with the Soviet Union. Oswald defected to Russia, renounced his American citizenship, yet was allowed back in this country no questions asked. I can assure you Steve, there is NO WAY any citizen of this country would have been allowed to do that unless they were connected with the government in some way. And he is not only allowed back he brings a wife and child."

Steve: Already you've confused yourself haven't you? This comment backs you into a corner and you don't even know it. Are you implying that the United States government was behind the assassination of Kennedy? If so you are in a logical bind, because Kennedy was one of the most strident and active Cold Warriors of the post-War era. Why would the U.S. Government be behind assassinating a president that was FIGHTING the Russians in the Cold War if that was the goal of the U.S. government? What is the reason to eliminate him? Wasn't he doing exactly what a Cold War president should have been doing?

And if you are implying the Russians were behind Kennedy's murder, then how was the Russian government able to manipulate the State Department to allow a known-defector as Oswald back into the United States when he was living in a country with which we were at war? What evidence do you have that Oswald was in contact with the Russian government after he returned to the United States? (Don't tell me...let me guess...hmmm...NONE)

You see, as with all conspiracy theories under close scrutiny your innane comments don't make sense. You are making statements that sound important to shallow thinkers and conspiracy nuts but upon closer examination they are totally ridiculous and often contradictory.

"A Dallas police officer said on camera in The Men Who Killed Kennedy that he was on duty at the switchboard the night before Oswald was shot. He got a call from a man whose voice he recognized but could not quite place who said the following, "if you do not change the procedure for moving Oswald tomorrow, we are going to kill him". He called this officer by name so the officer knew it was someone he knew. After Oswald was shot, he immediately realized it was Ruby who had called the police department the night before."

Steve: Please give some solid information here. WHO was the officer, WHEN did he first tell this story, WHAT evidence can be found to support his claim? This is totally heresay with not one shred of evidence to support it. I will not even respond to this claim.

You are ignoring Jack Ruby's own words, when he said, "there are people who had so much to gain by putting me in the position I am in." "They will never allow the true facts to come above board to the public."

Why did he say that? He is essentially telling the world as he did on camera that he was forced into killing Oswald.

Steve: If, what you say is true, then why didn't Ruby simply spill all? He was sitting on death row; what reason did he have to keep secrets? Why make cryptic comments alluding to some vast conspiracy? Again, Ruby's comments are taken by conspiracy nuts to imply he part of a vast conspiracy when in fact he wasn't. I'll tell you what...you provide your evidence that Ruby was "forced" to murder Oswald and I will respond point by point to your pieces of evidence. (I know you will ignore this request because you won't be able to fand any hard evidence linking Ruby to any plot.)

And the "fingerprints" found on the MC rifle? They had not one print until a middle of the night visit by the FBI to the Miller Funeral Home in Fort Worth. Paul Groody, who embalmed Oswald and prepared him for burial said on camera they asked to see the body alone, and when they left there was ink all over Oswald's hands which he had to remove before the burial. Why did they have to fingerprint Oswald after he was dead?

Steve: You've watched "JFK" one to many times. This is total nonsense. You clearly need to read that actual evidence in this case more often and lay down the conspiracy books. Here is what REALLY happened. When Oswald's rifle was found in the TSBD right where Oswald hid it after shooting Kennedy and Connally there was seen by Lieutenant J.C. Day a fingerprint on the trigger housing, and Day then dusted it for the prints. Later that afternoon--NOT after Oswald's death as you falsely stated--the prints was were examined more closely and Day felt confident they belonged to Oswald (who had already been arrested, booked, and fingerprinted.) A conclusive match could not be made but the ridges and the pattern was very similar to Oswald's. What is important here is that those prints did NOT resemble ANYONE else's prints. And they were found hours after the assassination--NOT after Oswald's death as Oliver Stone convinced you of. Later that night (Oswald was still alive, Linda) another print was found; this time a palm print underneath the wooden stock. Additionally, there were NO other person's prints on the rifle. ONLY OSWALD'S. Incidentally when the rifle was flown to FBI headquarters in Washington D.C. late that night, Sebastian Latona, the FBI fingerprint expert assigned to the case, also saw the prints PRIOR to Oswald's death.

SO much for your "planted" fingerprint story, NONE of which has any hard evidence to support it anyway.

Why does the government still refuse to release thousands of documents involving the assassination?

Steve: Always the documents huh? You conspiracy nuts always think there are some hidden documents that will finally reveal a conspiracy but as years pass and documents are being released all the time nothing ever comes up does it? Sadly, you conspiracy nuts are chasing the end of a rainbow that you will never reach. In 1992 when the ARRB was formed and hundreds and hundreds of thousands of pages of previously classified documents began pouring onto the open research market, the conspiracy nuts were salivating to read all about their imagined conspiracy. But between 1992 and 2008 NOTHING has come up to support the delusional dreams of the nuts out there. NOTHING. Incidentally the chief counsel of the HSCA Robert Blakey, (a confirmed conspiracy nut by the way) has stated publically on many occasions that he has seen ALL of the documents that are still under wraps and he has sadly admitted that there is NOTHING in there to support conspiracy beliefs. So from someone that HAS peaked behind the veil of secrecy, there ain't nuthin' there. It's nice to dream thought isn't it Linda?

Why were 5 movie scripts stolen from Oliver Stone during the making of JFK, something that had never been done in the history of movie making?

Steve: I don't know. Probably because someone found out they were going to be as bad and ridiculous as JFK. It's too bad they didn't steal the JFK script while they were at it isn't it?

You will see the same cast of characters in Watergate that you saw in the Kennedy killing. E. Howard Hunt and Frank Sturgis to name a few.

Steve: Oh really? Please explain what role Hunt and Sturgis played in the Kennedy assassination. And please, PLEASE Linda make the claim they were two of the tramps. PLEASE say that so I can rip your claims apart point by poiont. PLEASE!!!! I can hardly wait to disembowel your ridiculous theory.

Why was the Zapruder film locked away for decades from the American public?

Steve: Clearly you are in way over your head on this one Linda. Are you implying that the government locked up the Zapruder film? Have you read ANYTHING about this case at all? The government was not the owners of the Zapruder film, Time-Life was in possession of it. Now, you've cornered yourself again and you don't even know it.

1. If the Zapruder film proved a conspiracy had taken place and revealed multipal gunmen, then please explain why today you conspiracy nuts claim that the Zapruder film has been altered? Why would the film have been altered if it ALREADY proved a conspiracy had taken place?

OR

2. If the Zapruder film proved that all shots came from behind, thus bolstering the government's case against Oswald, what possible reason would the "government" (as you incorrectly claim) want it suppressed?

3. The suppression of the evidence issued by President Johnson didn't include the Zapruder film any way.

So on every point your claims don't make sense, are not historicaly accurate, and are filled with inconsistencies.

Why were so many witnesses films and cameras confiscated that day in Dealey Plaza?

Steve: Please name ONE person's film or camera that was confiscated. After you provide an example I will respond. (I can't wait for this one...)

Why were there so many people running around Dealey Plaza before and after the assassination flashing badges claiming to be FBI, Secret Service, and CIA when there were none there except in the motorcade?

Steve: False. There weren't. After you give me some specific examples of which witnesses said they encountered Secret Service Agents I will respond to each one, one at a time. Since you just made an uninformed generalizatoin you got from the movie JFK I can't really respond, can it. But don't worry, if you ever do list specific witnesses who made that claim (and you won't) then I will tell the whole story behind each claim you make. Don't worry Linda, I've done MY research.

The Dallas doctors have ALL stated on camera that the wound in the President's throat was a wound of entry. They also said the wound in the back of his head is an exit wound.

Steve: False. Where did you get this nonsense? The ONLY doctor to speak of the front wound as an entrance was Dr. Malcolm Perry, and he qualified his remarks to include that it could have been either an entrance or an exit wound. Here are a few questions for you dear concerning your frontal wound?

1. Exactly WHERE was this assassin located when he fired the frontal shot?

2. Why wasn't there an exit wound on the back of Kennedy's neck, back, or head? Are you aware that ALL doctors agree that the bullet passing through Kennedy's back/neck did not strick any bones. Knowing this explain where this bullet went after it "entered" Kennedy's throat. Good luck sweety.

3. Please explaini why Kennedy's clothing was pushed INWARD on his back and OUTWARD on the front. Explain how an entrance wound to the front would push Kennedy's clothing fibers INWARD.

Good luck sweety.

The majority of the eye and ear witnesses in Dealey Plaza that day all describe seeing gunsmoke and hearing at least one shot fired from behind the fence.

Steve: False. Geez...I'm starting to believe that you haven't read a real book on this case at all have you? The amount of incorrect information in your head is amazing. Here is the actual evidence as to locatino of gunshots.

First concerning the alleged gunsmoke:

1. Oswald's rifle fired smokeledd gunsmoke which when tested only emitted a small whisp of gray smoke. It is highly unlikely that anyone would have been able to see light gray smoke on a brightly-lit afternoon in the first place.

2. Only two witnesses claimed to have seen gunsmoke at the time of the assassination and they cannot agree on where they saw it. S.M. Holland, standing on the railroad overpass said he saw it near the pregola, in FRONT of the stockade fence, and he said he saw it at the time of the first shot. Are you implying that it was the FIRST shot that struck Kennedy in the head? Please be aware that Kennedy was still back in front of the TSBD at the time witnesses heard the first shot (Z frame 160) at which point Governor Connally was seated in front of Kennedy blocking him from a gunman on the Grassy Knoll. Sorry, Linda, this claim doesn't hold water.

3. Also please be aware that of ALL the witnesses that said they knew where the shots came from only 4% said they came from two different locations. 96% said that all shots came from ONE locaton and not two. If you were to bet your home on whom you would believe would you place the deed to your hom on the side of 96% or the side of %4?

This one Steve is another one of those "if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and acts like one you call it what it is.

Now let's turn the tables. I'll will ask ten questions and let's see how YOU do when faced with the REAL evidence in this case. You must provide REAL evidence to support your claims. I've learned in the past that conspiracy nuts like you don't do very well when it comes to ANSWERING questions, you folks love asking question much more since it is so easy to ask questions. Let's see how many ANSWERS you can provide:

1. What happened to Oswald's rifle stored in the Paine's garage?

2. What did Oswald being into work with him the morning of the assassination in that long brown paper bag?

3. Who did Howard Brennan see in the Se corner window with a rifle in his hand at the time of the assassination?

4. Why were fibers from Oswald's shirt he wore on the day of the assassination found in the metal butt plate on the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle when it was later found?

5. Why did ALL bullets and bullet fragments only match Oswald's rifle and no one elses rifle?

6. If Oswald's didn't fire all of the shots that day, please explain what happened to the other bullets.

7. Why does the Zapruder confirm that ALL shots came from behind with NO evidence of any shots originating from the front?

8. Why, if there WAS a conspiracy, would the conspiracy organizers have their gunmen fire from TWO different locations, immediately revealing that there was a conspiracy? Wouldn't they want to keep their conspiracy a secret and then frame Oswald for the murder? Wouldn't they have had both gunmen fired from the same location so that there would not be evidence found later of a second gunman? Hmmm....

9. Why, if hs is innocent, did Oswald flee the scene of the assassination within 2 minutes of the crime?

10. If Oswald was innocent and was an unwitting part of a conspiracy, why didn't he spill the beans and implicate his co-conspirators after he was arrested?

Good luck, sweety. I am sitting here with twitching fingers awaiting your reply.

It was obvious then and now that the US Government formed the Warren Commission as a PR manuever to stabilize the country after the assination to protect the CIA.

In the Hidden Years of the Kennedy Brothers by Talbot it becomes clear that JFK was moving toward peace, failed to support the CIA 100% and in direct conflict with the CIA on many fronts (rightly or wrongly).

The CIA (Helms) and his rogue associates were responsible and covered it up by making it appear as a conspiracy using Oswald, mob figures etc...There was no conspiracy, just a power hungry, unmanaged CIA that was able to manipulate anyone and everyone.

Robert Kennedy new he could not prosecute the case until he was President as the CIA was to strong to take on prior to becoming the president. Each time the CIA was going to be exposed a person who was exposing them was eliminated. In addition, Oswald, Ruby and the many mafia people afiliated with the assination had CIA ties and were used by the CIA to appear as a conspiracy.

Robert Kennedy new that if the America public found out its own government had done this there would be rioting in the streets.

LBJ and many Washington insiders all suspected but were to afraid of the CIA.

America, we need manage our government. That was the end of the innocense.

Read the book if you get the chance. Don't take my word or the governments word for it either.

Steve,

You give Oswald and Ruby both way too much credit. And you are also leaving out alot of facts conveniently just as Mr. Bugliosi does in his book Reclaiming History. (which in my opinion should be titled Reframing Oswald). First of all, many murders are solved and people convicted for murder without a weapon or a body, it has happened many times throughout history in this country.

You also need to have more of a historical perspective to understand things absolutely could not have happened the way the Warren Commission said they did.

In the early 60's we were in the height of the Cold War with the Soviet Union. Oswald defected to Russia, renounced his American citizenship, yet was allowed back in this country no questions asked. I can assure you Steve, there is NO WAY any citizen of this country would have been allowed to do that unless they were connected with the government in some way. And he is not only allowed back he brings a wife and child.

A Dallas police officer said on camera in The Men Who Killed Kennedy that he was on duty at the switchboard the night before Oswald was shot. He got a call from a man whose voice he recognized but could not quite place who said the following, "if you do not change the procedure for moving Oswald tomorrow, we are going to kill him". He called this officer by name so the officer knew it was someone he knew. After Oswald was shot, he immediately realized it was Ruby who had called the police department the night before.

Why would a Dallas police officer say this if it were not true? This officer also stated he did not believe the shooting of Oswald was anything other than a "planned" event.

Secondly, you are ignoring Jack Ruby's own words, when he said, "there are people who had so much to gain by putting me in the position I am in." "They will never allow the true facts to come above board to the public."

Why did he say that? He is essentially telling the world as he did on camera that he was forced into killing Oswald.

And the "fingerprints" found on the MC rifle? They had not one print until a middle of the night visit by the FBI to the Miller Funeral Home in Fort Worth. Paul Groody, who embalmed Oswald and prepared him for burial said on camera they asked to see the body alone, and when they left there was ink all over Oswald's hands which he had to remove before the burial. Why did they have to fingerprint Oswald after he was dead?

And if the Warren Commission is an open and shut case, why did the FBI bug Jim Garrison's office in New Orleans while he was conducting an investigation into the assassination? What were they afraid of?

Why does the government still refuse to release thousands of documents involving the assassination?

Why were 5 movie scripts stolen from Oliver Stone during the making of JFK, something that had never been done in the history of movie making?

What is everyone afraid of Steve? If this is an open and shut Oswald did it case, why the secrecy? Why bug someone's office? Why sneak into a funeral home in the middle of the night for fingerprints?

This doesn't pass the "smell test" that is why. Oswald never confessed to the killing and they had no real proof he shot JFK.

I strongly suggest anyone with an interest in this case do alot of research and use many different sources, not just the American media.

You will see the same cast of characters in Watergate that you saw in the Kennedy killing. E. Howard Hunt and Frank Sturgis to name a few.

These cases are very much connected.

You also must give the Parkland Hospital doctors credit for being the first ones to see the body of the President after the shooting. The Warren Commission members never saw a damned thing, they were NOT THERE as witnesses to the assassination. They made up facts, and fabricated evidence to suit their own agenda.

Why was the Zapruder film locked away for decades from the American public?

If the government's case is strong why was this film not released?

Why were so many witnesses films and cameras confiscated that day in Dealey Plaza?

Why were there so many people running around Dealey Plaza before and after the assassination flashing badges claiming to be FBI, Secret Service, and CIA when there were none there except in the motorcade?

The Dallas doctors have ALL stated on camera that the wound in the President's throat was a wound of entry. They also said the wound in the back of his head is an exit wound.

That's TWO bullets that came from the front.

Who are you going to believe? A bunch of politicians with an agenda who never saw the body of the President, never heard a single shot, and weren't anywhere near Dallas that day or are you going to believe trained medical doctors in a trauma center who are used to seeing gunshot wounds every day?

The majority of the eye and ear witnesses in Dealey Plaza that day all describe seeing gunsmoke and hearing at least one shot fired from behind the fence.

This one Steve is another one of those "if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and acts like one you call it what it is.

"If you say it was clearly Oswald who killed JFK and no one else, please give a reason as to WHY you think he killed the President? What was his motive?"

This is a good question...however it is irrelevant. In ANY criminal case motive is irrelevant. The prosecution doesn't need to prove motive simply because we don't know WHY people do things. But, as I say, it doesn't matter why. If it can be proven that they did it then the reason WHY they did it is moot. Of course motive helps and in many cases when a clear motive is known it is added as evidence, but when there is no known motive it doesn't weaken the case at all. For instance, if a gunman enters a McDonalds and opens fire with a high powered weapon and kills fifteen innocent people and then runs out of the McDonalds after he runs out of bullets and is apprehended, it is not necessary to prove WHY he did it. If the physical evidence proves that he did it then that is sufficient to convict him. No jury would let that man go simply because the defense stood up and said, "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, my client was witnessed shooting the customers at McDonalds, he was proven to have owned the murder weapon, he was proven to have purchased the murder weapon, his prints and ONLY his prints were found on it, he was apprehended while trying to flee the scene, and he even tried to shoot a police officer during his arrest (see any similarities here?) BUT we don't know WHY he did it because he denies it was him that did the shooting. Therefore we MUST let him go. Without the motive we MUST ignore all of the physical evidence linking him to the crime and set him free."

Such a thought of course is ridiculous. No jury would let him go because of a lack of evidence. It doesn't matter WHY he did it--they can see he DID it. Therefore: GUILTY. It is the EVIDENCE that links a person to a crime with or without any motive.

"And why did Ruby then kill Oswald?"

This one is an easy one. Ruby stated himself on several occasions why he killed Oswald. But I'll get to that in a minute. Again, you've brought up a red herring. What possible difference (concerning OSWALD'S guilt)would it make to determine Ruby's motive in murdering Oswald? Ruby's motive wouldn't affect Oswald's motive two days earlier when he murdered President Kennedy. Even if we never learned Ruby's motives at all, how would that affect the case against Oswald?

But I'm letting common sense and logic take up too much time. It appears from his own mouth why Ruby killed Oswald.

1. Ruby thought that by killing Oswald he would be a hero with the American people and especially with the Jews of America. Ruby himself stated that he did it to prove that a "Jew's got guts".

2. During World War II Ruby even hatched a hare-brained scheme to travel to Germany to assassinate Hitler for the same reason--to be a hero. So Ruby's murder of Oswlad was 100% in harmony with his personality of proving himself to the world. Ruby simply wanted to be big shot.

3. Ruby stated that he thought that if he murdered Oswald that Jackie Kennedy would then be spared the heartache of having to return to Dallas for a lenghty trial. There is no good reason to doubt these explanations. Also keep in mind that throughout his life he denied that he ever knew Oswald prior to shooting him that morningin the Dallas City jail. And there is no evidence linking Oswald and Ruby in ANY way prior to that weekend. YOU certainly don't have any evidence linking them, do you?

"Murders are not always solved through physical evidence."

No offense intended here, but this comment may be one of the most ridiculous statements I've ever heard an adult make (assuming you are an adult--of course I don't know anything about you.) In the real world, the world in which we all live, ALL murders, ALL rapes, ALL crimes are solved by collecting, analyzing, and weighing the physical evidence. That is HOW crimes are solved. Not by theories, or hunches, or rumors, or feelings, or dreams, they are solved by a substantial amount of physical evidence. This evidence includes, but is not limited to: fingerprints, rifles, blood, bullets, bullet holes, semen, skin, hair, carpet fibers, photographs, films, videos, DNA, etc... It is physical evidence that establishes WHO did WHAT in all crimes.

"You must also look at the totality of the political murders of the 60's."

No you don't. Later crimes had no bearing on this crime at all. Are you implying that Kennedy was murdered because these so-called conspirators knew that Martin Luther King and Robert F. Kennedy were going to be assassinated years later? That thought is ridiculous. Incidentally, you are not implying that the assassination of President Kennedy, the assassination of Martin Luther King, and the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy were all carried out by the same people are you? There isn't even any evidence that more than one gunman fired at Kennedy. Since ALL hard evidence links Oswald to Kennedy's murder, and Oswald was himself murdered two days later, how could Oswald have been responsible for the murders of Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King? I would LOVE to see your evidence of this ridiculous claim. There isn't a single speck of credible evidence linking even two of these murders with one another.

"It was just determined recently that Sirhan Sirhan could not have killed Robert Kennedy. RFK was killed by a shot from behind, Sirhan was in front of him. Ballistics evidence shows more bullets were fired than Sirhan had room for in his gun."

What in the world does this claim (which I don't believe is valid by the way) have to do with Oswald's assassination of President Kennedy? They having nothing to do with one another. Nothing.

"Then we have Dr. King."

Again, irrelevant, unconnected, immaterial. The murders of Robert Kennedy and Dr. King do not have one thing to do with the assassination of President Kennedy.

"Do you not think the same political motives were at play in ALL of these killings?"

Absolutely not. Oswald's didn't have clear political motives. He hated the American free market system that had kept him out of wealth, success, and fame. Oswald didn't hate President Kennedy, he hated what the Kennedy's represented--America. Oswald didn't have a clear political agenda he hoped to accomplish by killing Kennedy.

Sirhan Sirhan's motives are still unclear, but the best historians agree that Sirhan was angry at America's position in supporting Israel in the 7-Days war the previous year. What in the world did Sirhan Sirhan and Lee Harvey Oswald share in idealogies? Oswald wan't anti-Semitic, nor pro-Palestine. NOTHING is in common here. And James Earl Ray's motives for killing Martin Luther King had nothing to do with either Zionism, anti-semitism, Marxism, or Communism, they were based on racism and hatred for all King was accomplishing.

Think about it.

"Clearly I have."

Steve,

If you say it was clearly Oswald who killed JFK and no one else, please give a reason as to WHY you think he killed the President? What was his motive?

And why did Ruby then kill Oswald?

Murders are not always solved through physical evidence.

You must also look at the totality of the political murders of the 60's. It was just determined recently that Sirhan Sirhan could not have killed Robert Kennedy. RFK was killed by a shot from behind, Sirhan was in front of him. Ballistics evidence shows more bullets were fired than Sirhan had room for in his gun.

Then we have Dr. King.

Do you not think the same political motives were at play in ALL of these killings??

Think about it.

All these conspiracy suspicions are ridiculous and without serious merit.

1. There is NO evidence Oswald was on the first floor at the time of the shooting. None.

2. The ONLY rifle found that day was proven to belong to LHO and no one else.

3. ONLY Oswald's prints were found on the rifle.

4. ALL bullets recovered that day were matched to Oswald's rifle. There were NO mysterious bullets nor fragments found that led to any other weapon.

5. ALL fragments were found to the FRONT of Kennedy--none were behind and to the left. Therefore NO frontal shot.

7. Kennedy's clothing was pushed inward on the back and outward on the front--therefore NO frontal shot.

8. Oswald's prints were found around the sniper's nest.

9. The paper bag Oswald used to smuggle the weapon into work had Oswald's printa and NO ONE else's on it.

10. Oswald was the ONLY employee to flee the scene after the assassination and never return later that day. The only one.

11. Oswald was seen at the window of the SE corner of the TSBD within minutes of the assassination and DURING the shooting by five witnesses.

12. Fibers from Oswald's clothing were found in the butt plate of the rifle found later that afternoon on the 6th floor of the TSBD.

(tell me when you want me to stop)

13. Oswald fled the scene and ran seven blocks to catch the very bus that was scheduled to make a regular stop at the corner of Elm and Houston. Why didn't Oswald quietly wait across the street to catch his bus?

14. Oswald was photographed by Marina hold the the very weapon he used to murder Kennedy and brandishing a revolver thought to be the one used to murder Officer Tippit.

15. Oswald lied repeatedly during his interrogation--revealilng clear evidence of guilt and an attempt to hide his guilt from police.

And I could go.

Give the conspiracy fears a rest. You haven't produced a single speck of logical evidence of ANY conspiracy or of any multiple gunman.

Geeeez....people will believe ANYTHING it seems.

At no time before, during, or after the Kennedy motorcade were there any FBI, military, CIA, or Secret Service anywhere in Dealey Plaza except for the SS men riding in the car directly behind the President's limousine. Anyone flashing badges before, during, or after were there to run people out of the area not to protect the President, but to keep them from seeing the shooters and to confiscate people's films, intimidate witnesses, and collect and destroy any evidence that may have been left in the area.

An Army regiment that was supposed to have been there prior to check the area for potential shooters was told specifically NOT to come, that it was already taken care of which of course was not true.

In most motorcades in other cities, the press was usually much closer to the front of the motorcade in order to take advantage of photo opportunities, in Dallas they were deliberately put far to the back of the motorcade. Many of them did not even know the President had been shot until the motorcade sped up and headed to Parkland Hospital.

I've found that About 20 people saw shooters on the lawn with fbi badges and all of them died due to "accidents"

in the 18 months after his death.

Has anyone heard the name E. Howard Hunt when researching the assasination of Kennedy? Check it out!

Many people think that the House Select Committee on Assassinations convened based on acoustical evidence alone. This is not true. Follow the link below to see that Rose Cheramie, told doctors at a hospital in Louisiana 3 days before the assassination that Kennedy was going to be killed in Dallas. All of this has been documented and checked out and it is a true story. True, she was an unsavory character who had been on drugs, but that doesn't necessarily make her story false.

http://www.ctka.net/pr799-rose.html

If people choose not to believe conspiracy theories, that is their own opinion. However, consider this. The interview with Jack Ruby on national television which has been replayed numerous times really tells the story. I don't know why people do not pay more attention to what he was saying which was: "There are people who had so much to gain by putting me in the position I am in. They will never allow the true facts to come above board to the public." The reporter then asks: "Are these people in high positions, Jack?"

Ruby answers: "Yes."

Now----does that sound like a guy who shot Oswald to spare Jackie from a trial? It sure doesnt' to me. He also asked several times to be taken to Washington because he feared for his life, and well he should, he knew what happened to Oswald would also happen to him.

It amazes me how people just ignore this man's words. He says this right on

camera for all the world to see, yet people still choose to believe there was no conspiracy.

In my opinion, there is no dount that there was a conspiracy. Firstly, the car made a 110 degree turn, which was forbidden in any CIA protocole. And I still think there was more then 3 shots, if 51 witnesses said that they heard them, also testifying that they heard a shot come from the Grassy Knoll. Then there is the fact that the FBI and/or CIA took the body by force from the Dallas morgue to do their own investigation, breaking local laws, and at the same time forgeting to take his CLOTHES for further examination (would't you think that wouldbe a priority is your investigating any murder, let alone the presidents??). After that Johnson ordered the car the be completely cleaned and rebuilt. This to me is the most obvious cover up: why would you willingly destroy a crime scene and erase all proof?? Oh, and they also sent Connally's clothes to the dry cleaners, because that priority, right?! Not to mention that Jackie's suit is stored in the National Archives building, away from the public's sight.

Anyway, let's hope to find out the truth soon, in 2038 when the report will be published (if it ever is...)

It is really important that anyone who studies the assassination of JFK read about Lee Harvey Oswald and how he came to be who he is. Follow the link below and you will see that this man clearly is an FBI/CIA created composite of two different men. It explains alot of the confusion about witnesses' conflicting descriptions of him. You can see plainly in the government issued photos that these are two different men. John Armstrong's book is one of the most well researched books in history covering the accused assassin, and has some 40 years worth of extensive research.

http://home.wi.rr.com/harveyandlee/

The Assassination Records Review Board was formed after the House Select Committee convened. Much has been uncovered in these released documents that proves that the government did not tell the truth about Oswald's FBI connections. They may have succeeded in the initial cover-up through the Warren Commission, but there was no way they could control all the paperwork, and much of it tells a different story.

The most recent finding is what was found in the Dallas County DA's safe. The authorities have already begun the "spin" on the supposed "movie script" that they say DA Henry Wade was working on with a movie company. The only problem is that the date on this "script" is October 4,1963. How could the DA be working on a movie for an event that had not happened yet? There is also a document uncovered showing that there was in fact a witness to a conversation between Jack Ruby and Lee Oswald before the assassination. Quite a number of witnesses came forward who had seen Oswald in the Carousel Club, and some of them died under mysterious circumstances. The HSCA was not just convened on the acoustic evidence, it was much evidence that had been uncovered after the Warren Report had been published. A number of witnesses who were to testify at the HSCA hearings also died under mysterious circumstances before their testimony could be heard.

Myth Busters had an hour long show on the single bullet theory and proved it was very possible. Remember it was a 6.5mm full metal jacket military round at 1950 ft per sec, the experts were not surprised at all. Regards

the magic bullet thery is a load of crap there is no posibal way that 1 bulet could turn and kill 2 people omg witness say that they heard 3 bangs the last time i check one bult makes one boom

As for the motorcade route, you can not get on the Stemmons Freeway from Main street, thus the right on Houston, left on Elm and straight on the freeway. Regards