Did LBJ kill the Kennedy brothers?

No. He didn't. It doesn't add up. A man who kills to get the White House doesn't refuse to run for reelection due to popularity concerns. Also, Johnson was concerned about his health having been told by an actuary that he wouldn't likely live past 64. He died at age 64. Also, RFK announced his candidacy middle of March, Johnson said he wouldn't run at the end of March, and RFK was shot in June. Why kill him after you intend not to run?

I get that what actually happened is boring by comparison to a conspiracy theory, but that's how life is. It's often more plain than we want it to be. All it takes is a crazy guy with a rifle to kill a president. That's it.

 

People have trouble accepting that such a monumental event could have been brought about by such a common everyday person.

 

I always figured t was a Cabal of jealous husbands and ex lovers....Funded by Joe Dimaggio after he found out about Marylyn and JFK

 

Ted Williams? Don't you mean Joe DiMaggio?

 

You got in before I realized and corrected my error. Please note tongue firmly planted in cheek

 

To whom it may concern the best book to date on the Kennedy assassination was written by LA Forensic Pathologist, an Asian fellow of some small fame in his own right, some some years back.

 

Agreed

 

One Should Also Read Gerald Posner's work on the Assassination

 

Who are in the shadow government.

 

We made it to the conspiracy theory forum.

 

Like most men in the office, LBJ was just one character in an elaborate play meant to deceive the public, to hide the truth. Nothing unusual about that I suppose, considering the drama associated with holding such office.

He knew JFK was going to be taken out, and cooperated in every way possible, but the Dulles Brothers and their CIA fraternity, and certain figures associated with banking and the Federal Reserve all acted in concert. That's my take.

 

In your opinion. Don't forget that part.

So, when are you going to support your opinion with some actual logic instead of just asserting it as a fact?

 

Sending threads to languish in lightly trafficked subforums based on totally arbitrary and selectively enforced criteria is a form of censorship whether you want to admit it or not.

 

Yes, and that reason is to censor ideas that deviate too much from conventional wisdom.

You mean where no one will actually see or discuss it, AKA, censorship.

And if "conspiratorial discussion" belongs in the "conspiracy theory" subforum, then why have hundreds of "Russian collusion" threads been allowed to be posted all over the main forum? Clearly, some "conspiracy theories" are more equal than others.

And let me guess... you will be the one deciding which issues are worthy of "serious" discussion and which ones are not? Gee, what could go wrong with such a subjective and arbitrary standard?

My opinion is that "bigfoot" probably does not exist. And that aliens probably haven't visited the earth. However, I'm open to discussing both possibilities because I believe in freedom of speech, unlike you.

 

Of the two of us, I'm the only one who has produced any evidence or logic in support of his position. You, on the other hand, have done nothing but throw around childish insults and demand censorship of your opponents. The truth is, you and those who think like you cannot defend your opinions based on their intellectual merits, so you hide behind reverence for authority, groupthink, and censorship.

 

When Connally was accident ly hit, he said: My God, they’re going to kill us all.” Johnson made sure that he was riding in a different car.

 

Putting aside the fact that Oswald was not a common everyday person...

No, they don't. Most people accept the conventional explanation the first time they hear it. It's only when the conventional explanation begins falling apart under scrutiny that people start to question it.

What people actually have trouble accepting is that they're ruled by ruthless, criminal sociopaths who are capable of just about anything. But as hard as it may be for them to accept that, it is a theory supported by mountains of evidence. Just look at how the US government, the "national security" state in particular, operates throughout the world. Death and misery on an unimaginable scale. Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Yemen, etc. How many innocent people do you think have been killed, directly or indirectly, by US foreign policy? Do you even care?

 

So nothing to do with the Secret Service or protocol then.

 

J. Edgar, without a doubt.


Read up, on how J. Edgar and RFK stayed at each other's throat lobbying to JFK & LBJ about the pros/cons of continuing COINTELPRO ops, onto all Black leaders especially MLKJr.

LBJ can't compete with J. Edgar re who was the most-satanic, racist, that took out JFK MLKJr & RFK for drafting/launching the CRA'64 legislation ---which capsized White American Life by handcuffing White Privilege.

 

The Mafia put Kennedy in office, and once in he turned on them.
Bobby went after all the leaders, they grabbed Costallo and flew him to Guatamala, kicked him out broke.
Needless to say they were all pissed.
Then several associates show up on the radar from Costello of New Orleans.
Jack Ruby had connections, and cancer, and maybe sacrificed himself for a big payout for his family.

Nobody knows, there are just too many suspects.

 

The GOP hates successful things?

 

They sure do, if it is not credited to them.