Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?

[BT]

Wrap your head around GWB sharing the same exalted status as Richard Milhouse Nixon.  We know he's headed down that road already.

Nixon apparently was brought down from the inside. What makes you think "shots" haven't been fired at GWB?

[sirs]

Logic and facts are good, sirs.  I'm still waiting to see you use either of them.

Been there, done that.  We'll keep the porch light on for you, when you decide to try it yourself.  Fact is, you're still using your idea of "coincidences", again devoid of any hard FACTS, to substantiate your continued nefarious neo-conservative conspiratorial rantings

[Michael Tee]

<<. . . again devoid of any hard FACTS, to substantiate your continued nefarious neo-conservative conspiratorial rantings>>

LMFAO.  The "hard FACTS" are the assassinations themselves, the LOGIC is the utter improbability of coincidence being at work here and the "rantings" are your own ridiculous bullshit that all this HAS to be some unprecedented series of coincidence that never happens to occur in any other civilized nation on earth.

[BT]

Perhaps "they" knew that Gore wouldn't do Iraq and that's why he had the election stolen from him?

There is strong evidence that if Gore were elected we would be much more heavily involved in Latin America. Specifically Columbia and Venezuela.

To the "Masters" does it matter where the war is fought as long as the profits are made?

Perhaps the Masters are competing factions like Coke and Pepsi and it is all about buying market share.

Did Nixon get toppled because he was a Pepsi guy and Carter was Coke?

[Amianthus]

the LOGIC is the utter improbability of coincidence being at work here

Logic does not require a disbelief in coincidence.

[sirs]

Let's decipher this nonsense real quick.

The "hard FACTS" are the assassinations themselves,

Show us these "hard facts" of the U.S government assasinating those you opine that they have

the LOGIC is the utter improbability of coincidence being at work here

There can be plenty of coincidences without proving a specific point.  Happens all the time

the "rantings" are your own ridiculous bullshit that all this HAS to be some unprecedented series of coincidence that never happens to occur in any other civilized nation on earth.

And we'll chalk that unadulterated rant to perhaps not enough food, or lack of sleep perhaps.  Good thing it's Thangsgiving.  Don't hold back on the intake, Tee

[Brassmask]

Let's decipher this nonsense real quick.

The "hard FACTS" are the assassinations themselves,

Show us these "hard facts" of the U.S government assasinating those you opine that they have

the LOGIC is the utter improbability of coincidence being at work here

There can be plenty of coincidences without proving a specific point.  Happens all the time

the "rantings" are your own ridiculous bullshit that all this HAS to be some unprecedented series of coincidence that never happens to occur in any other civilized nation on earth.

And we'll chalk that unadulterated rant to perhaps not enough food, or lack of sleep perhaps.  Good thing it's Thangsgiving.  Don't hold back on the intake, Tee

People in government killed Kennedy, not necessarily EVERYONE IN or the whole of government.

You like to take the crackpot stances and apply that instead of asking questions and seeking truth.  You might try it for fun.

[Plane]

What was the CIA trying to do when Reagan was shot?

Or when Ford was shot at?

Or Garfeild?

[Brassmask]

What was the CIA trying to do when Reagan was shot?

Or when Ford was shot at?

Or Garfeild?

Who said they were?

[sirs]

People in government killed Kennedy, not necessarily EVERYONE IN or the whole of government.  You like to take the crackpot stances and apply that instead of asking questions and seeking truth.  You might try it for fun.

That's 1 opinion.  Amazing how the most likely and simple scenario of Oswald taking the fatal shot just can't be accepted.  It just can't....because, well, you know how evil those RW neo-conservatives are

[Michael Tee]

<<Let's decipher this nonsense real quick.>>

Just watch me.

First bit of sirs' nonsense deciphered "real  quick"

1.  sirs  quotes me:  <<The "hard FACTS" are the assassinations themselves.>>
2.  sirs "rebuts" me:  << Show us these "hard facts" of the U.S government assasinating those you opine that they have>>
3.  sirs' nonsense deciphered real quick:  He has confused the evidence (a.k.a. the hard facts) with the conclusion drawn from the application of logic to fact.

Note:  I could also quibble with sirs' apparent assumption that to prove a conspiracy one must show that it was "the U.S. government" which assassinated JFK and the others.  I don't think anyone claims it was an official government act.  It was most likely high-placed elements at or near the top of one or more government "security" agencies acting with equally high-level cover-up, some or all of which cover-up may have been initiated after the fact.  In order to keep the debate focused, I have assumed that sirs meant the same thing that I do when he referred to "the U.S. government."

Second bit of sirs' nonsense deciphered "real  quick"

1.  sirs quotes me:  <<the LOGIC is the utter improbability of coincidence being at work here>>

2.  sirs "rebuts" me:  <<There can be plenty of coincidences without proving a specific point.  Happens all the time>>

3.  3.  sirs' nonsense deciphered real quick:  Every time a court of law convicts on fingerprint or DNA evidence, it has (in effect) deciphered sirs' nonsense real  quick.  Sure, somebody else could have similar DNA or prints.  Sure, the experts make mistakes now and then  So could the crime have been committed by somebody with similar or identical DNA or prints and/or could this be one of the times the experts are making a mistake in fingering the accused before them?  Sure it could be a couple of unfortunate coincidences, but [b]in fact[/b], a court which would adopt sirs' "logic" - - "plenty of coincidences happen without proving a specific point.  Happens all the time.  Don't mean a God-damn thing" - - with all due respect, now that would be a court of fucking idiots and raving lunatics. 

Third  bit of sirs' nonsense deciphered "real  quick"

1.  sirs quotes me:    <<the "rantings" are your own [i.e., sirs'] ridiculous bullshit that all this HAS to be some unprecedented series of coincidence that never happens to occur in any other civilized nation on earth.>>


2.  sirs "rebuts" me:  <<And we'll chalk that unadulterated rant to perhaps not enough food, or lack of sleep perhaps. >>

Brilliant rebuttal.  Sharp.  Factual.  Well-reasoned.  To the point.  Just what we've come to expect from our friend.  Well done, sirs!!   THAT should set the standard for intelligent debate and witty repartee in this club for the next hundred and ten years.  Not.  But there's more . . .

<<Good thing it's Thangsgiving.  Don't hold back on the intake, Tee>>

Uhh, sirs, Canadian Thanksgiving came and went about a month ago.  But don't let it stop you from enjoying the holiday.  When they pass round the turkey, ask if you can have the brains.  Ya never know, sirs.  Ya never know.

[Lanya]

http://blogfiles.wfmu.org/KF/0512/zapruder_-_stable.mov

Stabilized version of the Zapruder film.  (WARNING: GRAPHIC.) 

[Michael Tee]

<<What was the CIA trying to do when Reagan was shot?

<<Or when Ford was shot at?>>

Thank you.  Now I hope you can see the difference between a REAL "lone nut" or "gang of crazies" and the professional hits that took out the Kennedy brothers and MLK.

<<Or Garfeild? >>

That was just for practice.

[Plane]

<<What was the CIA trying to do when Reagan was shot?

<<Or when Ford was shot at?>>

Thank you.  Now I hope you can see the difference between a REAL "lone nut" or "gang of crazies" and the professional hits that took out the Kennedy brothers and MLK.

<<Or Garfeild? >>

That was just for practice.


I don't see the diffrence really , the assination of Lincon really did include a set of colaborators , but the plan did not kill all of the intended victims , plans go oft awry.

[sirs]

1.  sirs  quotes me:  <<The "hard FACTS" are the assassinations themselves.>>
2.  sirs "rebuts" me:  << Show us these "hard facts" of the U.S government assasinating those you opine that they have>>
3.  sirs' nonsense deciphered real quick:  He has confused the evidence (a.k.a. the hard facts) with the conclusion drawn from the application of logic to fact.

So, apparently according to Tee's logic....Fact is the sun rises in the east & sets in the west.  Application of Tee's logic to that fact, undoubtedly a conclusion of a master nefarious neo-Conservative plan, with obvious capitalistic intentions for big oil & big business buddies of Bush

You're 1st go around with the turkey tray didn't particularly do the trick yet.  Maybe tomorrow will be better