Jim Fetzer & Conspiracies

[Redwood]

It would only be relevant if someone took him seriously.

It's like a second grader saying that the world is flat and everyone else is wrong.

Who would actually bother to sue him?

IANAL, but I understand that it's a legitimate defense in a libel case to argue that the supposed libel lacks any credibility. I don't know if that means you can argue that the supposed libeler lacks any credibility, hence the libelous claim lacks credibility.

If you can, Fetzer is probably off the hook, on grounds that he himself lacks any credibility - his lawyer would surely bring up his moon-landing denialism and his 9/11 "no planer" claim and his claim of nuclear demolition of the Twin Towers, though I doubt his ego would react well to that...

 

[DGM]

IANAL, but I understand that it's a legitimate defense in a libel case to argue that the supposed libel lacks any credibility. I don't know if that means you can argue that the supposed libeler lacks any credibility, hence the libelous claim lacks credibility.

Way before this, the person who was the subject of the attack would need to consider the threat to be a threat to his credibility or reputation. Why would he even pay attention to this or go through the effort to fight something said by someone no one considers credible? It's a no win.

 

[HSienzant]

+1

For example:

Among "mainstream" truthers the idea that the World Trade Center was destroyed by pre-planted explosives is an article of faith. Fetzer, however, supports Judy Wood's claim that the towers were destroyed by directed energy weapons, which is at least an order of magnitude crankier.

On the JFK assassination, Fetzer believes:

o JFK's body was altered to disguise the fact that JFK was shot from the front.
o The Zapruder film was altered the evening of the assassination as were other films to disguise the fact the limo stopped during the shooting.
o Any evidence pointed to Oswald was planted or forged (like his rifle being found in the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD)). Or like the infamous 'backyard' photos of Oswald holding that rifle taken by his wife.
o Fetzer believes there were two people interchangeably using the identity of Oswald over the years since Oswald was a young man. This also means two women interchangeably using the identity of Marguerite Oswald, Oswald's mother. This is a theory first advanced by John Armstrong in his book "Harvey and Lee".
o Oswald was inadvertently photographed in the doorway of the TSBD by Associated Press photographer "Ike" Altgens, and a mobile photo lab was parked nearby so this photo (and others) could be intercepted and altered on the spot to conceal the evidence of Oswald being seen on the steps of the TSBD.
o Fetzer believes the newspapers in existence from the afternoon of 11/22/63 that show the Altgens photo was published on 11/22/63 are later CIA creations, and were never actually published on 11/22/63. He believes the first legitimate publication of the Altgens photo was on 11/23/63, after it was altered. The problem for Fetzer is that if the photo appears on the afternoon of 11/22/63, there isn't sufficient time to alter the photo. So he declares any contrary evidence of earlier publication a fake.

Many if not most 'mainstream' JFK conspiracy theorists believe the photo shows a co-worker of Oswald's known as Billy Lovelady. They believe that issue was settled decades ago. Only an minority believe the photo shows Oswald. Fetzer is in that minority.

In fact, on many if not most JFK assassination issues, Fetzer has the most extreme position and is in the minority.

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

I also found this interesting:

For what it's worth, what you quote was written by long-time JFK conspiracy theorist Martin Schackelford.

The issue has always been one that at some point, JFK conspiracy theorists must confront: Almost all the evidence points to Oswald committing the assassination.

So at some point JFK conspiracy theorists MUST claim the evidence is faked.

Fetzer is no different, just more vocal.

Hank

 

[Brass]

Fetzer also believes the FDNY was involved in bringing down WTC7 on 9/11, soooo....yeah....

 

[HSienzant]

If you side with the fringe in order to become famous, it's only a matter of time before you become as notorious as they are. Fetzer may have stepped just a little too deeply in the crazy this time.

To quote Kurt Vonnegut, you are what you pretend to be.

 

[Matthew Cline]

On the JFK assassination, Fetzer believes:

o JFK's body was altered to disguise the fact that JFK was shot from the front.

What sort of body modifications could be made that would fool a coroner about the entry and exit wounds of a gunshot? Wouldn't it be easier to just have the coroner and mortician be in on it?

o The Zapruder film was altered the evening of the assassination as were other films to disguise the fact the limo stopped during the shooting.
o Oswald was inadvertently photographed in the doorway of the TSBD by Associated Press photographer "Ike" Altgens, and a mobile photo lab was parked nearby so this photo (and others) could be intercepted and altered on the spot to conceal the evidence of Oswald being seen on the steps of the TSBD.

So they had in place some method of finding everyone who took a photo or film, coercing them all into handing over the negatives, and coercing them into never revealing the truth for the rest of their lives?

It would seem that, in Fetzer's world, conspirators do things in a way that maximizes how much they have to fake and how much could go wrong, rather than minimize it.

 

[trustbutverify]

Fetzer also believes the FDNY was involved in bringing down WTC7 on 9/11, soooo....yeah....

As well as the Sandy Hook attack being a US black op (so the government can more easily disarm the public), and Jews are universally despised because they infect host populations with cultural diseases.

 

[quadraginta]

As well as the Sandy Hook attack being a US black op (so the government can more easily disarm the public), and Jews are universally despised because they infect host populations with cultural diseases.

That's a new one to me.

What are some example diseases?

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

That's a new one to me.

What are some example diseases?

Communism used to be the big one, and the neocons who drove us into the brick wall of Iraq were "all Jews."

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

So they had in place some method of finding everyone who took a photo or film, coercing them all into handing over the negatives, and coercing them into never revealing the truth for the rest of their lives?

The same methods were used on 9/11 to hide that "noplanes" hit the towers.

It would seem that, in Fetzer's world, conspirators do things in a way that maximizes how much they have to fake and how much could go wrong, rather than minimize it.

Try pointing that out to Fetzer or Yankee451. The response is predictable.

 

[HSienzant]

What sort of body modifications could be made that would fool a coroner about the entry and exit wounds of a gunshot? Wouldn't it be easier to just have the coroner and mortician be in on it?

Some CTs argue that.

Better yet, since they had Oswald's rifle to supposedly plant, why not just get a good shooter to shoot JFK from behind and then you don't need to alter anything... just leave the rifle behind.

Of course they argue that wasn't really Oswald's weapon, but one he was framed for owning, so then the question becomes, why frame him for owning a supposedly inadequate rifle? If you're going to the trouble of framing him for owning a rifle, why not frame him for owning a good rifle fully capable of making those shots without any question?

So they had in place some method of finding everyone who took a photo or film, coercing them all into handing over the negatives, and coercing them into never revealing the truth for the rest of their lives?

It would seem that, in Fetzer's world, conspirators do things in a way that maximizes how much they have to fake and how much could go wrong, rather than minimize it.

They (conspiracy theorists in general, and of course, Fetzer in particular) are stuck there because so much evidence implicates Oswald (and ties back to each other piece) that they either have to admit Oswald did it or argue all the evidence is altered or faked.

Hank

 

[Ranb]

Some CTs argue that.
....If you're going to the trouble of framing him for owning a rifle, why not frame him for owning a good rifle fully capable of making those shots without any question?

Beats me. Just about anyone who owns a Carcano knows they are capable of the shots Oswald was supposed to have made that day. Should we also believe that Lindburgh should have used the more well known Wright WB-2 instead of the nearly unknown Ryan if we were expected to believe he flew from NYC to Paris?

The only people who claim the Carcano was not up to the job are those who wish to remain ignorant and those experienced shooters who prostitute themselves to support a conclusion they have no rational reason to believe.

Ranb

 

[Hans]

Beats me. Just about anyone who owns a Carcano knows they are capable of the shots Oswald was supposed to have made that day. Should we also believe that Lindburgh should have used the more well known Wright WB-2 instead of the nearly unknown Ryan if we were expected to believe he flew from NYC to Paris?

The only people who claim the Carcano was not up to the job are those who wish to remain ignorant and those experienced shooters who prostitute themselves to support a conclusion they have no rational reason to believe.

Ranb

Suggest they put themselves in the position JFK was and let a marine shoot at them with a Carcano....they shouldn't be in any danger should they?

 

[abaddon]

Beats me. Just about anyone who owns a Carcano knows they are capable of the shots Oswald was supposed to have made that day. Should we also believe that Lindburgh should have used the more well known Wright WB-2 instead of the nearly unknown Ryan if we were expected to believe he flew from NYC to Paris?

The only people who claim the Carcano was not up to the job are those who wish to remain ignorant and those experienced shooters who prostitute themselves to support a conclusion they have no rational reason to believe.

Ranb

Sigh.

Mannlicher Carcano 6 shots in 5.1 seconds...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4c5Zr7hzzA
Just one of many demonstrations to be found.


Oswald's weapon was more than equal to the task. Any CT claims to the contrary are simple fantasy/denial.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

Suggest they put themselves in the position JFK was and let a marine shoot at them with a Carcano....they shouldn't be in any danger should they?

We had former Marines in our National Guard unit. I wouldn't want those guys shooting at me with Nerf gun. They were scary good.

 

[FromBelgiumWithLove]

Oswald's weapon was more than equal to the task. Any CT claims to the contrary are simple fantasy/denial.

What always gets me is how irrelevant both the quality of the weapon involved, and the quality of Oswald's marksmanship, are in this matter. If anyone points a rifle in the general direction of the person they intend to kill, and knows enough about the use of the weapon to fire it, they might just score a lucky killing shot, purely by chance. However bad their rifle allegedly is, or however bad the scope on top of it allegedly is, or however bad their marksmanship skills allegedly are.

One characteristic of conspiracy theorists is that they refuse to believe anything bad can ever happen through coincidence and sheer bad luck (or through sheer good luck, depending on which side you're on).

 

[turingtest]

What sort of body modifications could be made that would fool a coroner about the entry and exit wounds of a gunshot? Wouldn't it be easier to just have the coroner and mortician be in on it?



So they had in place some method of finding everyone who took a photo or film, coercing them all into handing over the negatives, and coercing them into never revealing the truth for the rest of their lives?

It would seem that, in Fetzer's world, conspirators do things in a way that maximizes how much they have to fake and how much could go wrong, rather than minimize it.

That's what happens when you reverse-engineer contingency into a purely normative conspiracy- you end up, through your own effort, with a maximized pile of things you need to explain away, with no evidence that these things actually happened, only your necessity for them to support your "theory." If you disbelieve the autopsy report which shows that all shots came from behind, you need to invent a scenario in which the body is (somehow) altered on the plane, another scenario where there are (somehow) shooters in front, another scenario where Oswald is (somehow) framed (for both JFK and Tippit), etc., etc...You've reasoned backward from a conclusion unsupported by anything but scenarios, certainly no evidence for them, and the "somehows" are simply taken for granted, since it's a given property of conspiracies that, whatever they need to do to be a conspiracy, they are able to do; the more you make up, the more you need to make up, until the whole thing is a pile of "explanations" resting, like an inverted pyramid, on the point of the conclusion, instead of a conclusion resting on a foundation of evidence. Or, to put it another way- conclusions are properly a sum of evidence; in CT methodology, the "evidence" is the conclusion multiplied by itself over and over and over and...

 

[Wolrab]

If only there was a member of these forums that could answer all of our questions...

 

[I Ratant]

Beats me. Just about anyone who owns a Carcano knows they are capable of the shots Oswald was supposed to have made that day. Should we also believe that Lindburgh should have used the more well known Wright WB-2 instead of the nearly unknown Ryan if we were expected to believe he flew from NYC to Paris?

The only people who claim the Carcano was not up to the job are those who wish to remain ignorant and those experienced shooters who prostitute themselves to support a conclusion they have no rational reason to believe.

Ranb

.
ISTR that InterArmco in Alexandria VA had barrels full of foreign rifles about that time... Former Egyptian Army weapons, dropped only once, some sand in the barrels was the ad.
Previous to the JFK shooting, who had even heard of a Mannlicher-Carcano?
All foreign military rifles were by fiat "Mausers", one version of which resembled the Carcano.
1888 Carbine. It used a stripper clip. The cartridges in a stripper clip are pushed out of the clip into the magazine, and the clip ejected from the action when the bolt is closed.
The Carcano uses the en-bloc clip, the clip with the bullets is pushed into the magazine, and when all the bullets have been removed by the bolt, will fall out the bottom of the magazine well... usually when the next clip is inserted.
The clip for the LHOLN Carcano can be seen in this image of Lt. Day taking that rifle from the TSBD.
I had to shake my Carcano to get the clip to fall out when empty, the inner surface of the magazine were barely finished wood, and held it loosely.