Burgundy LaRue Posted November 27, 2013 Share Posted November 27, 2013 The man was elected in his own right in 1964. He was eligible again in 1968, but chose not to run. Things change in 4 years, most of us know this. Respond however you want. These are theories, no one is presenting them as gospel. We ain't preachers in here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed Posted November 27, 2013 Author Share Posted November 27, 2013 I love how having a motive for killing someone instantly makes you a potential murderer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antacular Posted November 28, 2013 Share Posted November 28, 2013 The man was elected in his own right in 1964. He was eligible again in 1968, but chose not to run. Things change in 4 years, most of us know this. Respond however you want. These are theories, no one is presenting them as gospel. We ain't preachers in here. And it's not as if the 1964 election was so grueling and close that he would be dissuaded from running again. He's so determined to become President he mastermind's one of the greatest conspiracies of all time, wins actual election in a landslide, but then 3 years later decides "Eh, it's not for me." Totally inconsistent. The second part isn't theory, Vietnam deteriorated via the unexpected loss of U.S. lives and the North's resiliency. That's undisputed facts. What's theoretical is WHY the situation deteriorated the way it did, but the actual results aren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgundy LaRue Posted November 28, 2013 Share Posted November 28, 2013 I wasn't talking Vietnam in theory. I was talking the JFK assassination--and LBJ's possible role in it or why he made certain choices post JFK--in theory. The same thing everyone has done for 50 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed Posted November 28, 2013 Author Share Posted November 28, 2013 It wouldn't shock me if LBJ was doing the happy dance when JFK got knocked off, but him outright killing him seems unlikely. Interestingly, a few people have said over the years LBJ went to his grave thinking it with Castro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tabe Posted November 28, 2013 Share Posted November 28, 2013 I love how having a motive for killing someone instantly makes you a potential murderer.Look, the guy was almost undoubtedly involved in another murder. His own attorney says he was behind this one. It doesn't take a giant leap to consider him a suspect*.* - I don't think he did it, FWIW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed Posted November 28, 2013 Author Share Posted November 28, 2013 The reason I think the JFK conspiracy theories are usually unreliable is that most just assume if some person or group had a motive to kill the guy, it's not that much of a leap to say, hey, they did it. But it is a huge leap. He was president. Any president anywhere has a ton of enemies. A motive doesn't mean much. I'm 95% sure Oswald did it and even I couldn't tell you what his exact motive was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now