Finally, can I take it that you've given me a "final warning"? And if so, may I ask for what specific reason(s)?
Please see this thread for an explanation.
Thanks for the link jroa; read and noted.
One of its proposals reads: "The only people allowed to answer questions are flat-earthers or people giving genuine flat earth responses".
Are you now claiming that my questions regarding the JFK assassination (in response to a FE comment) are inappropriate for the Q&A forum?
Q1. What credible evidence do you have that proves JFK was "heavily involved" with the space program? What does heavily involved mean exactly?
Q2. What evidence do you base your claim on that JFK was "considering" telling the public the earth was (purportedly) flat?
Q3. Why weren't any of the other confidantes of Kennedy silenced as well? Hundreds of technicians would've also been aware of it.
And can you please tell me which forum to post these questions on (for the fourth time LOL) would be more appropriate, or explain why not one FE has attempted to address my questions? There's really not much point in REs posting legitimate questions here if no FE is prepared to provide any sort of answer, other than simply sidestepping the thrust of the thread.
Why are you bringing up JFK questions here? At best you're woefully off topic, at worst, you're arguing with moderation. If you want to complain about moderation then do it in S&C. If you want questions about JFK in regards to a flat-earth, start your own thread.
As for your Question 1: Here are several links from NASAs own website to establish JFKs heavy involvement with the space program.
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/history/features/john_f_kennedy.html#.VzekoGOq6UgIt's Nasa page with photographs and anecdotal evidence of JFKs involvement with NASA; includes 23 photographs from various events that JFK attended with high-ranking nasa officials.
This is also this from NASAs own website, "The Decision to Go to the Moon:President John F. Kennedy's May 25, 1961 Speech before a Joint Session of Congress"
http://history.nasa.gov/moondec.htmlJFK made several public declarations concerning US ability to reach the moon. I consider public declarations as valid proof of being "heavily involved." In my own life, when i make i declaration it signifies that i am completely involved in the fulfillment of that declarations stated terms. That's called honoring your word and for many people their word is worth dying for.
Obviously, quotations don't prove anything beyond circumstantial evidence (Charles Manson was convicted only upon circumstantial evidence), but there are plenty of public statements made by JFK that show he held both a personal and civic investment in winning the space race.
"We set sail on this new sea because there is new knowledge to be gained, and new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for the progress of all people. For space science, like nuclear science and technology, has no conscience of its own. Whether it will become a force for good or ill depends on man, and only if the United States occupies a position of preeminence can we help decide whether this new ocean will be a sea of peace or a new terrifying theater of war." --"Address at Rice University in Houston on the Nation's Space Effort (373)," September 12, 1962, Public Papers of the Presidents: John F. Kennedy, 1962.
"We go into space because whatever mankind must undertake, free men must fully share...I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth." --"Special Message to the Congress on Urgent National Needs (205)," May 25, 1961, Public Papers of the Presidents: John F. Kennedy, 1961.
"This nation has tossed its cap over the wall of space, and we have no choice but to follow it." --"Remarks in San Antonio at the Dedication of the Aerospace Medical Health Center (472)," November 21, 1963, Public Papers of the Presidents: John F. Kennedy, 1963. (The original anecdote from which Kennedy derived this comparison is in Frank O'Connor, An Only Child, London: MacMillan & Co. Ltd., 1961, p. 180.)
“We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win.”
― John F. Kennedy
I don't think any one thing proves JFK was "heavily involved" with NASA but i do know that all of his recorded history is evidence proving he was heavily involved with NASA.
It's my opinion the reason people didn't respond to your 3 silly questions is because they are so easy to debunk; the others probably (i don't have any evidence to prove it) presumed that you hadn't done any research.
The naivete and lack of serious thought behind your post presents you as a troll to many people. I am not gonna judge you because you are unaware of the facts of the case. I do hope i provided you with enough direct evidence to show JFKs involvment with NASA and, specifically, the Apollo space program.
As for Question 2: If he was murdered to keep the secret and it was a secret of such importance it was worth murdering the president, then he probably died with the truth along with the other 50+people who were either associates of jfk or material and/or circumstantial witnesses to the crime and/or subsequent investigation who died under mysterious circumstances within 3 years of the assassination.
As for Question 3: These people are just a few of the many people you will find who were murdered or committed suicide right after JFK died; Grant Stockdale, a close friend of JFK fell from a 13th floor office window 12/2/63; CIA agent Gary Underhill who made public statements that it was an inside job and was murdered on May 8, 1964; Mary Pinchot Meyer, a JFK mistress was murdered on 10/12/64...i believe there are more than 50 people close to either JFK or the investigation who were murdered or committed suicicide in the 3 years immediately following the assassination.
Plus, Kennedy's own brother bobby was publicly assassinated, JFKs own assassin Lee Harvey Oswald was also publicly assassinated immediately following JFKs death (these two murders send very clear messages to anyone involved). Oswald's assassin Jack Ruby had his case overturned on appeal while sitting on death row, but died while still being held on death row while awaiting re-trial.
I really have to ask you what proof you have that it would take "hundreds of technicians" to silence kennedy and keep the secret. Most of your workers in the cia and secret service and space program have specialized tasks and don't oversee every aspect of every launch or every event the president attends. In fact, military and intelligence protocol is to only know what you need to know.
This idea of compartmentalizing work flow systems was one of the most profound changes in American business culture bought about by the industrial revolution because of the development of the assembly line process in manufacturing. In most US companies there is very little cross-training. Colleges and trade schools emphasize specialized fields. And this compartmentalization and specialization of tasks and responsibilities is approached with even greater emphasis in governmental bureaucracies such as the military, secret service, and the like.
Now, I am certain you are an excellent employee and know much more about your employer and the day to day operations of your company than anyone else there. But do you see every garbage can get emptied at your place of employment? Where is the dumpster? What is the name of the person who cleans the toilets? Who unlocked the door this morning? Who locked it last night? How about the boiler room...ever been there? Is your place of employment heated with an immersion heater, pipe heater, circulation heater, cartridge heater, or a duct heater? How much of your supervisor's work are you allowed to supervise? Is everyone at your work allowed to issue payroll checks? Are you allowed in the payroll system if you don't work in payroll? Where does your company get their toilet paper for the restrooms? Who decides how many personal holidays employees are allowed to take each year? Does every one get the same number of holidays? If so, how do you know?
The questions I just asked are not trade secrets or questions of national security. Your company probably has very little to hide. Your company is probably not immersed in a culture of paranoia. Your company is probably not directly or indirectly involved with armed insurgencies in third world countries. Your company probably doesn't have 4 or 5 officially sanctioned intelligence gathering agencies. I mean, within your companies HR department are there committees or specialized fields of intelligence workers who function as equivalents to the FBI, CIA, NSA, Secret Service (does your companies owner(s) travel with armed security detail?).
Most employees in your company probably know little beyond what they do even though there is probably no real reason for the employers to keep any business details from any of the employees. Wouldn't you expect a company like the US federal government to at least require security on the level of ACME Mfg, AnyTown, USA? The first step of corporate security is only allowing employees to know what they need to know. In fact, here is an FBI document on Economic Espionage that states that intellectual knowledge should be confined to a "need to know basis"
https://www2.fbi.gov/hq/ci/economic.htm"How to Protect Your Business from Espionage: 6 steps
1. Recognize there is an insider and outsider threat to your company.
2. Identify and valuate trade secrets.
3. Implement a proactive plan for safeguarding trade secrets.
4. Secure physical and electronic versions of your trade secrets.
5. Confine intellectual knowledge on a "need-to-know" basis.
6. Provide training to employees about your company's intellectual property plan and security."
You, like most people, probably know very little of the day to day operations of your company other than what you need to know.
If you are coordinating a coup and you need a secret service agent to be an unknowing accomplice, you just have on of his superiors tell him to stand at a certain spot. Secret service agents entrusted with guarding the president don't question the command of a superior officer; they have all been rigorously vetted by psychologists to weed out the rebellious types that question authority, so they won't hesitate to protect the president during a crisis. Secret service agents are men who follow orders without question. If the supervisor doesn't tell them he is moving them to accommodate an assassination, they probably won't ask. Any authority will be able to move your coup of agents around with ease by just saying that we need him stationed somewhere else for another security detail. One person with authority could, armed only with that authority, order a few subordinates around with no suspicion.
If you factor in the idea of a manchurian candidate, you don't even need proper authority.