how about anyone explain these and more, not just "teachers"

It is interesting to note that prior to their deaths, both Lincoln and Kennedy had each undertaken and acting upon initiatives that were counter - anathema, to some of the influences, programs and initiatives be perpetrated on behalf of the most prominent bankers / banking interests of their respective eras. If there is a person capable and willing to explain this mystery, history teacher or no, please come forth and solve this mystery.


Lincoln is quoted to have once made the following demonstration while talking to a person (paraphrased)

"dear person, if I tell you that a horse's tail is a leg, how many legs does a horse have", and the person replied "well Mr President, if you say a horse's tail is a leg, after all, you ARE the President, so obviously this means a horse has five legs", to which Lincoln corrected "no, dear person, a horse only has four legs. Just because I or anybody else tells you a horse has 5 legs, this does not make it so. A horse still has only 4 legs. A horses tail is not a leg just because I told you so".

Likewise, it stands to reason that just because a person or entity, even one deemed to be credible, like a publishing house, or their television network, or news channel, states as though fact that, for instance, ".... Lee Harvey Oswald, who assassinated Kennedy...." does not make it so. Does a mug shot in tee shirt lend credibility to an assertion? This is something else that it would be nice for somebody to explain, a history teacher or any person qualified with knowledge of the answer. It would also be nice to have explained the mystery of why, for instance, the image of a mug shot in tee shirt of Kennedy's limo driver was never placed before the public to be consumed as fact,

While at it, perhaps a knowledgable, history teacher or other, can and will explain how or why people at large have historically exhibited the great propensity to be told things by somebody else.... sometimes seemingly anybody else so long as it is somebody else, to the extent that they then promptly procede through their life with the attitude that they now know as though factual truth whatever it was they were told. Maybe also explained will be the intertwined phenom of how this capacity seems to be increased whenver the telling / informing person/entity is one loosely deemed to be "credible". To take this phenom to another level, does a person/entity telling things to another person become more credible simply because they ahve access to media apparatus that allows them to widely scatter and broadcast the information they want to tell, via the mediums available to them, especially the mediums which have inherently come to be deemed over the years as the familiar, self-serving "credible, independent, unbiased sources", such as print, TV / movies / radio etc? Do such sources genuinely become more credible merely because they frequently air statements to this effect in claiming their own credibility? Does it lend to credibility when these types of sources are able to broadcast the things they tell to people such that they are able to tell upwards to many millions upon millins of people all within the period, the same instant, few minutes and the like? Does the increase in number of people told in and of itself somehow magically make the information told more factual? If this is so, is there a history teacher or other person that would like to take a whack at explaining how this mystery works? .... maybe this is part of what is meant by the old saying "there can be power in numbers". With respect to the power and numbers available via the mediums, the flip side, although seldom said, would seem to hold true as well; there can be loss of power in numbers.

These related mysteries seem on a par deserving explanation as do the core topics that they sprang from - the coincidences by which were arranged the lives and deaths of Abe Lincoln and John Kennedy.

While were at it, as far as this goes, is it required that a history teacher explain these mysteries. What is a "history teacher" in this context? Specifically, what is a history teacher by present standards compared to, for instance, prior to the era of the 1920's when the various philantrophic tax-free foundations at the national level were first getting up to speed in following the directives instructed of them by the Rockefeller empire - such as the Hoover Institute, the Ford Foundation, the Gugenheim, the Carnegie Foundation and the like. In terms of "history teacher", does it matter that this syndicate is on formal & publicly available record of having set about with the purpose of rewriting history, with a major in rewriting American history, to make it be more in line with their unfolding plans for the world? Does it make any differencethat this syndicate, out of the words of their own mouth, describe how they literally hired their own stable of doctorate-level trained "hisorians" who then formed the basis of the latter day American Historical Society?... to quote another phrase "look it up!".

Plus or minus all of that, even when legitimate, why should anyone expect that a history teacher is any more apt to know the answers to worldly mysteries that the people at large have thus far failed to find answers to? Do students trained to be history teachers get special ed that all other students do not? Is there an inherent reason to suspect that a random passer by, a pedestrian, a veritable Joe or Josey on the street will not know the actual answers to such mysteries compared to a history teacher?


It is also interesting that plus or minus the actual characters fostered as "trigger man", in both cases these familiar triggermen left behind enough clues from hidden trails that indicate they were in fact set up to be a guy found holding a smoking gun. There is a common theme to the hidden trails that both Oswald and Booth travelled on to their respective destinies. This common theme is one of great effort having been put forth to cover up as much as humanly possible the existance / revelation of the theme, the theme of trails leading from various people behind other people behind other people leading to these triggermen. These are not ordinary covered over and hidden trails. These are trails that criss cross all over the map domestic and international, often times criss-crossing it's own path many times. In both instances, portions of these otherwise well covered over cold trails have been shown to contain tracks leading from the Vatican among other high places of import. A related mystery here still waiting to be explained is that the masses at large have thus far been fairly consistent in being resistant to the idea of noticing, then acknowledging and finally admitting to having noticed the clues to this common theme. So while we're at it, perhaps we can interest a history teacher, and if not a history teacher, perhaps a banker, and if not a banker, perhaps a news anchor, and if not a news anchor perhaps a Pope, and if not a Pope, perhaps a pedestrian Joe or Joesy so knowledgable and willing to come forth and "explain" these snippets of mystery; Ha Ha. Tweet