What conspiracy theories do you think are real or are ridiculous?

[PeaceFrogYum]

10 hours ago, kipper said:

Or.....   not riding around in a convertible might have been an even better prophylactic measure.... don't ya think?

One does have to wonder if Kennedy had a death wish. The bubble top was supposed to be on the car but Kennedy insisted, against the protest of his detail, his wife, and Governor Connolly, and the top was removed. He was even informed of an assassination attempt in Chicago which was discovered but he still insisted on the removal of the bubble top. Now who in their right mind would do that?

[SteveAJones]

On 3/23/2020 at 8:36 AM, PeaceFrogYum said:

Really? This is the FBI & Warren Commission's own reports:

The same reports that you yourself stated, "What really puts a massive hole in the JFK lone gunman theory is there appears to be at least two Lee Harvey Oswalds. The accounting of "Oswalds" movements as put forth by the Warren Commission has serious problems as the Lee H Oswald who was arrested was nowhere near about half of the places he was supposed to be however another Lee H Oswald was. The two men look similar in the face but other than that were very different. The one we know, the one who was arrested was about three inches taller, considerably leaner, and had a prominent scar by his left ear from a childhood surgery." 

So on one hand when the reports fail to support a lone gunman theory you discredit them, yet when they seem to support your beliefs about the shots you cite them as gospel. You don't believe Oswald was a lone gunman but you believe the reports accurately present the sequence of the shots? As with most of your posts the logic you apply is so convoluted it just isn't worth the time to explore the dumpster fire further with you.

  

[kipper]

On 3/24/2020 at 9:11 AM, PeaceFrogYum said:

One does have to wonder if Kennedy had a death wish. The bubble top was supposed to be on the car but Kennedy insisted, against the protest of his detail, his wife, and Governor Connolly, and the top was removed. He was even informed of an assassination attempt in Chicago which was discovered but he still insisted on the removal of the bubble top. Now who in their right mind would do that?

A politician.

The Kennedy machine basically stole the 1960 election. Kennedy won the south by including LBJ on the ticket but it was close.  His decision to have the top off was basically to put himself out there and be "among the people" because every person is a potential vote.

[PeaceFrogYum]

8 minutes ago, kipper said:

A politician.

The Kennedy machine basically stole the 1960 election. Kennedy won the south by including LBJ on the ticket but it was close.  His decision to have the top off was basically to put himself out there and be "among the people" because every person is a potential vote.

You're right, Kennedy did steal the election as it was Illinois (Chicago) which put him over the top in one of the closest Presidential races in history. The ma nwho gave Chicago to Kennedy was Sam Giancana, head of the Chicago "Outfit."

 

[kipper]

1 minute ago, PeaceFrogYum said:

You're right, Kennedy did steal the election as it was Illinois (Chicago) which put him over the top in one of the closest Presidential races in history. The ma nwho gave Chicago to Kennedy was Sam Giancana, head of the Chicago "Outfit."

 

Giancana with help from Mayor Daley too.

Actually the best conspiracy tale I ever heard was the assassination was a mop hit meant to take out JFK, but to get Bobby Kennedy (the Attorney General) off the mob's back as they saw Bobby's actions a betrayal to the people who helped elect his brother and who had worked for years with their father Patrick Kennedy.  It was well known that the Kennedy's didn't like LBJ and the feeling was mutual. No JFK and the maybe LBJ would dump Bobby too.

But that is just a good story.  The mob commission was smarter than to do something like that, something like that would be bad for business. Had the mob wanted to take JFK out--  or RFK for that matter they didn't need a bullet. Those two boys couldn't keep their zippers up and any number of political career ending compromising situations could have easily been set up by the mob and their friends in Hollywood.

Which is why the simplistic answer is the best answer.... Lee Harvey was as it turned out a good enough shot.

[JohnOsbourne]

Something to keep in mind:

https://projectunspeakable.com/conspiracy-theory-invention-of-cia/

[Badgeholder Still]

On 3/26/2020 at 12:10 AM, kipper said:

But that is just a good story.  The mob commission was smarter than to do something like that, something like that would be bad for business. Had the mob wanted to take JFK out--  or RFK for that matter they didn't need a bullet. Those two boys couldn't keep their zippers up and any number of political career ending compromising situations could have easily been set up by the mob and their friends in Hollywood.

The mob wasn't in the business of creating gossip rag scandals. The mob used bullets or made people disappear, forever. Just ask Lee Harvey himself. They couldn't have cared less that Jack & Bobby were partying with interns during long lunches in the White House. They cared that their business, their money was being threatened by the U.S Attorney General and the policies he was pushing. RFK and a Kennedy administration were bad for mob business.

On 3/26/2020 at 12:10 AM, kipper said:

Which is why the simplistic answer is the best answer.... Lee Harvey was as it turned out a good enough shot.

It's the best answer for many as the truth, or other plausible scenarios, would keep them up at night.

The idea that both JFK & RFK were killed by lone nuts... with all of the capable political enemies they created who had means, motive & opportunity.. . c'mon.

[kipper]

On 4/4/2020 at 12:22 PM, Badgeholder Still said:

The mob wasn't in the business of creating gossip rag scandals. The mob used bullets or made people disappear, forever. Just ask Lee Harvey himself. They couldn't have cared less that Jack & Bobby were partying with interns during long lunches in the White House. They cared that their business, their money was being threatened by the U.S Attorney General and the policies he was pushing. RFK and a Kennedy administration were bad for mob business.

It's the best answer for many as the truth, or other plausible scenarios, would keep them up at night.

The idea that both JFK & RFK were killed by lone nuts... with all of the capable political enemies they created who had means, motive & opportunity.. . c'mon.

Nah,  don't buy it. And while RFK suddenly became "bad for business" in terms of profits for the mob, it wasn't anything the mob  hadn't dealt with many, many times before and survived. Just because something is bad for business doesn't mean you react by making things possibly even more bad for business.  I think people watch too many movies about the mob and assume they just go off half cocked.  Well, maybe true later on as the commission began to loose some control over operations due to the high profits made by wild catters breaking off and doing their own drug deals. But in the early '60s most mob money was still made from gambling and sweet union deals.

Old mobsters used to operate from a ideology of wanting only "to wet their beak" which was to be happy with a smaller percentage of money and staying under the radar, than doing things which drew a lot of attention.  And this is why the NY outfits really hated the way business was done in Chicago during prohibition. Not that NY didn't do business with Capone and company, but they didn't like the bad press.

If a mob boss had ordered a hit on the president then he would so so at the risk of having others in the mob come after him.

Edited April 9, 2020 by kipper

[JohnOsbourne]

Here's a fun one.  It's well-known that Jim Morrison's father was an Admiral in the USN, it's less well-known that Frank Zappa's father worked in the Army's chemical warfare division.  The counterculture had CIA connections, as has Hollywood for a very long time.

https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/top-news/1960s-anti-warpsychedelic-hippie-movement-created-military-intel/

[PeaceFrogYum]

On 4/4/2020 at 12:22 PM, Badgeholder Still said:

 

The idea that both JFK & RFK were killed by lone nuts... with all of the capable political enemies they created who had means, motive & opportunity.. . c'mon.

The RFK one is even more obvious as a CIA hit as Bobby was, without doubt, going to get the Dem nomination. Bobby had recently changed his mind regarding the US & Israeli relationship insofar as intelligence and supplying arms (the USS Liberty attack was still fresh at the time) and he possibly would have killed weapons sales (50 Phantom jets) to Israel if elected. This was big money being threatened not to mention US interests in the middle east for decades to come. Sirhan claimed he killed Bobby because Kennedy supported the arms sales which he initially did but Kennedy had been having second thoughts. Bobby's death was quite obviously a CIA hit as he was shot in the back of the head even though Sirhan was in front of him the whole time. Sirhan's gun held 8 rounds yet 10 were pulled from the pantry...where did the other two come from? Then there is the mysterious Lady in Red seen by several and which Sirhan originally claimed was his handler.

Edited April 10, 2020 by PeaceFrogYum

[kipper]

11 hours ago, PeaceFrogYum said:

The RFK one is even more obvious as a CIA hit as Bobby was, without doubt, going to get the Dem nomination. Bobby had recently changed his mind regarding the US & Israeli relationship insofar as intelligence and supplying arms (the USS Liberty attack was still fresh at the time) and he possibly would have killed weapons sales (50 Phantom jets) to Israel if elected. This was big money being threatened not to mention US interests in the middle east for decades to come. Sirhan claimed he killed Bobby because Kennedy supported the arms sales which he initially did but Kennedy had been having second thoughts. Bobby's death was quite obviously a CIA hit as he was shot in the back of the head even though Sirhan was in front of him the whole time. Sirhan's gun held 8 rounds yet 10 were pulled from the pantry...where did the other two come from? Then there is the mysterious Lady in Red seen by several and which Sirhan originally claimed was his handler.

I don't buy that theory either Frogman.  First off by 1968 most Americans were very ready to change parties after the total fuck over by the Johnson administration and the Vietnam war. In 1968 Nixon was very likely to win and in fact he won a much larger margin of electoral votes than  Hubert Humphrey ended up with. There was also a HUGE 3rd party spoiler in the mix--- George Wallace-- who carried a large chunk of Southern states pretty much assuring that those votes for Wallace would come out of the Democrat party column.

So with all  of that then looking ahead for the Democratic party, why on Earth would the "CIA" need to assassinate RFK since the political pendulum was already swinging toward the Republicans that year anyway?

Sirhan-Sirhan was a loon. Even more loony than Lee Harvey Oswald. The guy was a disturbed man who target RFK based off whatever squirmy thinking was going on in Sirhan-Sirhan's brain. He is the same type who might do a mass shooting, but in '68 he was dead set on targeting RFK. 

As already stated, the simplest answer is usually the correct answer. A nut with gun.

[PeaceFrogYum]

14 hours ago, kipper said:

I don't buy that theory either Frogman.  First off by 1968 most Americans were very ready to change parties after the total fuck over by the Johnson administration and the Vietnam war. In 1968 Nixon was very likely to win and in fact he won a much larger margin of electoral votes than  Hubert Humphrey ended up with. There was also a HUGE 3rd party spoiler in the mix--- George Wallace-- who carried a large chunk of Southern states pretty much assuring that those votes for Wallace would come out of the Democrat party column.

So with all  of that then looking ahead for the Democratic party, why on Earth would the "CIA" need to assassinate RFK since the political pendulum was already swinging toward the Republicans that year anyway?

Sirhan-Sirhan was a loon. Even more loony than Lee Harvey Oswald. The guy was a disturbed man who target RFK based off whatever squirmy thinking was going on in Sirhan-Sirhan's brain. He is the same type who might do a mass shooting, but in '68 he was dead set on targeting RFK. 

As already stated, the simplest answer is usually the correct answer. A nut with gun.

Glad you asked Kip, and here is the reason: RFK would have released the info about Nixon's team meeting illegally with the South Vietnamese in Paris in July 68'. This was the meeting where Nixon's dirty tricksters convinced the South Vietnamese not to sign the peace deal Johnson's people brokered in June. All parties were going to sign in September of 68' which would have ended the Vietnam War and gave a guaranteed victory to Bobby Kennedy. Johnson was afraid such info would tear the nation apart so never released it and the tapes which prove this happened were not released until the 2000's. The fact that Nixon and his staff were guilty of high treason and are responsible for all deaths in Vietnam post September 1968 is not disputed, it is verified fact. The conspiracy part is if the CIA killed Bobby, I don't know but it is interesting.

Also, how did Sirhan shoot Kennedy in the back of the head when he was in front of Kennedy the whole time? How did Sirhan fire 10 rounds when his gun only held 8?

Edited April 11, 2020 by PeaceFrogYum

[kipper]

On 4/11/2020 at 1:59 PM, PeaceFrogYum said:

Glad you asked Kip, and here is the reason: RFK would have released the info about Nixon's team meeting illegally with the South Vietnamese in Paris in July 68'. This was the meeting where Nixon's dirty tricksters convinced the South Vietnamese not to sign the peace deal Johnson's people brokered in June. All parties were going to sign in September of 68' which would have ended the Vietnam War and gave a guaranteed victory to Bobby Kennedy. Johnson was afraid such info would tear the nation apart so never released it and the tapes which prove this happened were not released until the 2000's. The fact that Nixon and his staff were guilty of high treason and are responsible for all deaths in Vietnam post September 1968 is not disputed, it is verified fact. The conspiracy part is if the CIA killed Bobby, I don't know but it is interesting.

Also, how did Sirhan shoot Kennedy in the back of the head when he was in front of Kennedy the whole time? How did Sirhan fire 10 rounds when his gun only held 8?

I think you are just buying into part of the dirty tricks and thinking they were all Nixon's.  Johnson had a vested interest in rushing a peace deal to help his VP out to possibly win the election, at he same time he (Johnson) was basically looking to throw the South Vietnamese under the bus in a deal that was mostly being pushed and influenced by the Soviet Union--- who were pressuring Hanoi to take the deal.

So it was basically a bad deal anyway. One where the Soviets didn't want to see that old Cold Warrior Nixon win the election. Typical Russian meddling.

The real question to be asked about that time in terms of the Johnson administration is why they didn't seek a peace deal long before the midnight hour in our election year?  So if Nixon was bright enough to see that the so called peace deal was not about anything but politics from the Johnson administration's efforts---and NOT about South Vietnam or all the reason which Johnson claimed to be fighting that war for years. Then why not dirty tricks by Tricky Dick Nixon? He clearly learned his tricks from the Democrats long before '68.

RFK was shot by Sirhan Sirhan and him alone. The fact that there was confusion about the bullet holes in the walls by the LAPD, or that the Los Angeles County coronor Thomas Noguchi--- a guy who had a long history of saying stupid shit and basically GUESSING in many other especially celebrity deaths doesn't surprise me.   LAPD has always been a half ass police agency---- they are NO NYPD or Scotland Yard.

 

[redrum]

I believe that China sent agents all around the world spreading this fucking virus (and with help from Al Qaeda), especially hitting New York, just like they did on 9-11. Wouldn't put anything past the cocksuckers.

[kipper]

On 4/13/2020 at 12:16 AM, redrum said:

I believe that China sent agents all around the world spreading this fucking virus (and with help from Al Qaeda)...

 

[cryingbluerain]

5 hours ago, kipper said:

 

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/schools-childcare/reopening-schools.html

[kipper]

28 minutes ago, cryingbluerain said:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/schools-childcare/reopening-schools.html

 

Yep, but only after November 3rd. I wonder why???

[cryingbluerain]

56 minutes ago, kipper said:

 

Yep, but only after November 3rd. I wonder why???

Ask her, she's the so-called "expert".

[kipper]

I keep reading about some secret society of cannibals out there running the global politics.

 

What next, vampires?

[BobDobbs]

3 hours ago, kipper said:

I keep reading about some secret society of cannibals out there running the global politics.

 

What next, vampires?

Stupid people believe stupid shit.

Case closed.

[Walter]

22 hours ago, BobDobbs said:

Stupid people believe stupid shit.

Case closed.

 

[rm2551]

The conspiracy theory hysteria is off the chain! Has it ever been like this? Has it always been like this???? When I was a pup it was just bigfoot and UFO's and such delivered by the Leonard Nemoy narrated "Great Mysteries of the World". A show I have very fond memories of watching.

[JTM]

Claims of fraud, absolutely riddiculous. Nuff said.

[kipper]

On 1/28/2021 at 1:44 AM, JTM said:

Claims of fraud, absolutely riddiculous. Nuff said.

There is ALWAYS fraud. How much and to what extent is a matter of debate. But always fraud at some level and to some degree.

I'm not going to make a political debate here, not the place for it. But it is important that these things have the confidence of the people, a situation the same in your nation.

I live in Los Angeles county. Most populated county in America. A few years back there was a question of whether or not the voter polls needed to be audited and people purged from the list. The County election board said it wasn't necessary. Others disagreed, believed with number of people who die or move away, it should be audited. County government said no, but eventually a judge ruled that is should happen, so the county begrudgingly agreed to an audit...

1.5 million names ended up being purged from the list. No small number even for a population as large as this county.  Why would the government NOT want to update the polls?  Bias or incompetence, maybe both?

Now, were those used fraudulently, or were they changing the results?  I'm not saying they were, but the system needs have our confidence, after all it ONLY works with 'the consent of the governed.

BTW, my father has been dead several years. His death was recorded as customary and by law with the county hall of records. Yet still, every election a ballot is still mailed to the house, plus he still gets jury duty summonses. So, what would stop me from sending out his ballot and me having "two votes"?  I would never do that, but some do. And in a close election determined by a few thousand votes... well, maybe it could change a result.

 

Edited January 29, 2021 by kipper

[BobDobbs]

44 minutes ago, kipper said:

There is ALWAYS fraud. How much and to what extent is a matter of debate. But always fraud at some level and to some degree.

I'm not going to make a political debate here, not the place for it. But it is important that these things have the confidence of the people, a situation the same in your nation.

I live in Los Angeles county. Most populated county in America. A few years back there was a question of whether or not the voter polls needed to be audited and people purged from the list. The County election board said it wasn't necessary. Others disagreed, believed with number of people who die or move away, it should be audited. County government said no, but eventually a judge ruled that is should happen, so the county begrudgingly agreed to an audit...

1.5 million names ended up being purged from the list. No small number even for a population as large as this county.  Why would the government NOT want to update the polls?  Bias or incompetence, maybe both?

Now, were those used fraudulently, or were they changing the results?  I'm not saying they were, but the system needs have our confidence, after all it ONLY works with 'the consent of the governed.

BTW, my father has been dead several years. His death was recorded as customary and by law with the county hall of records. Yet still, every election a ballot is still mailed to the house, plus he still gets jury duty summonses. So, what would stop me from sending out his ballot and me having "two votes"?  I would never do that, but some do. And in a close election determined by a few thousand votes... well, maybe it could change a result.

 

What would stop you is when your dead fathers ballot was received it would be flagged and you would get a not so friendly knock on your door that's what would happen. Why? Because the secretary of state has the deceased listed in a database which cross-references with all ballots cast. Most people are not aware of it but dead people cannot vote even if a ballot is mailed to them. Ironically it is literally one hand not knowing what the other is doing until the counting begins. Stupid yes bust seriously, if you or anyone else tries this you will get in serious trouble. I know this because I was joking with a friend at dinner who works for the sec of state in my state and told me about this.

Believe me, they have more info on you, me, the dead, etc. than we think. Unless a machine is hacked or, there is an inside job at the highest levels in a state, voter fraud is pretty much impossible. The fact people still think this is a thing in an era where your whereabouts are known 24/7, where they know every little thing you do (for the most part) through your purchasing habits. Then you have cameras everywhere, toll booths which use tracking, etc. The privacy ship sailed a LONG time ago.

I tell ya, its hard to be a pimp these days