• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Moderated JFK conspiracy theories: it never ends III

Status
Not open for further replies.
BStrong said:
Benign is not a synonym for imaginary, which is what Krusch's scenario adds up to.

Rather than grand conspiracy with multiple conspirators, how about good old American Standard Law Enforcement misreporting?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10684302&postcount=1098

Officers make mistakes every day of the week, even in situations with little to no stress and no immediate danger to anyone. The above post is illustrative of that, and I can't begin to imagine how ********** up things must have been in Dallas with multiple agencies, no chain of command and a dead POTUS.

My bet is on Mr. Murphy.
Click to expand...
Yes, I agree on most of your points here, especially since the crime scene was wild west Dallas anno 1963. But with all this in mind, there are evidence of malfeasance of a sort that strongly suggest a pattern of a systematic cover up with CrazyKidOswald as an organizing principle (prime mover).

The people at NARA did not find any of the signatures on the three empty shells which is evidence of criminal fraud, at least by DPD's Lt Day. Why did he lie?

I do not know, but I have a guess.

------

Are you still claiming that "ink pen" was sop for marking bullets and shells at the time of JFK's assassination? They used diamond pens at DPD and the three engravings on the CE-399 from the personel att the FBI lab are also evidence of diamond pen as a marking tool. Do you still believe that SA Elmer Todd could have used an ink pen, explaining why his signature is not on the CE-399 bullet?
 
dudalb said:
Of all the JFK conspiracy theory nonsense, the idea that Oswald could not have made the shots is the dumbest..
Click to expand...

And let me remind us all again that he MISSED. Twice.

There are a lot of ways to think about this. You could say that, as good of a shot he was, it still took him three tries to hit the target.

"Why did Oswald take three shots at the president?"
"Because that is how many it took before he hit him"
 
manifesto said:
The people at NARA did not find any of the signatures on the three empty shells which is evidence of criminal fraud, at least by DPD's Lt Day. Why did he lie?

I do not know, but I have a guess.
Click to expand...

Share with us what your guess is then. Be sure to name names, as you've been asked before.
 
manifesto said:
I find your analogi at best a bit ... puerile, Regnad Kcin.

Try again.
Click to expand...
When you engage my services as a writer then your editorial notes will be considered.

Now then, insofar as you know precisely what I was getting at with my "analogi," [sic] how about we return to the question at hand.
 
Regnad Kcin said:
When you engage my services as a writer then your editorial notes will be considered.

Now then, insofar as you know precisely what I was getting at with my "analogi," [sic] how about we return to the question at hand.
Click to expand...
The "question at hand" remains quite impossible to deal with with the help of your "analogy" I'm afraid.

As I said, try again.
 
manifesto said:
Yes, I agree on most of your points here, especially since the crime scene was wild west Dallas anno 1963. But with all this in mind, there are evidence of malfeasance of a sort that strongly suggest a pattern of a systematic cover up with CrazyKidOswald as an organizing principle (prime mover).

The people at NARA did not find any of the signatures on the three empty shells which is evidence of criminal fraud, at least by DPD's Lt Day. Why did he lie?

I do not know, but I have a guess.

------

Are you still claiming that "ink pen" was sop for marking bullets and shells at the time of JFK's assassination? They used diamond pens at DPD and the three engravings on the CE-399 from the personel att the FBI lab are also evidence of diamond pen as a marking tool. Do you still believe that SA Elmer Todd could have used an ink pen, explaining why his signature is not on the CE-399 bullet?
Click to expand...

Where you see malfeasance, I see actions explainable by human frailty. I wish I could tell you that I know one case where every single thing was done 100% according to sop and nobody slipped up, but I don't know of any case that would qualify - anytime you have 20 or more folks walking around a crime scene you have 20 X infinity the opportunity to make mistakes or mess up physical evidence. Real life is not CSI whatever.

The LE world was much simpler in '63, and what you second guess at a distance isn't necessarily valid for that time and place.

My position on the exemplars is that I'd better get my glasses checked because evidently you and Jay can make out markings on CE 399 and I can't see marking one.

All I can tell you is this: I never once marked a projectile - never - -0- - no questions asked, it wasn't allowed by departmental and DOJ policy, but I came along long after 1963. What the FBI did wrt CE 399 et al is unknown to me, but my above observation stands - there were too many cooks for things not to have gone fugazi.
 
manifesto said:
I find your analogi at best a bit ... puerile, Regnad Kcin.

Try again.
Click to expand...

No, he doesn't have to try again. You do, though. Smack-talking his analogy does not change the increasingly evident conclusion that you do in fact have a belief regarding JFK that you're not willing to share. As long as you keep "just asking questions" on the basis of that carefully-protected belief, we cannot believe the questions are as well motivated as you imply.

Nor does it change the ever-relevant fact that you can't explain the evidence any better than the conventional story. You're deploying the same attack every conspiracy theorist in every conspiracy genre relies upon almost exclusively: trying to erode faith in the conventional narrative by quibbling endlessly over marginalia, while at the same time having absolutely no better idea how to explain the entire body of evidence.

Get used to the idea that everyone here will continue asking you for that better alternative until you provide it and are prepared to defend it.
 
JayUtah said:
Get used to the idea that everyone here will continue asking you for that better alternative until you provide it and are prepared to defend it.
Click to expand...

A better alternative to the JFK shooting?

How about the fact that JFK had Cuisses de Grenouille à la Provençale for dinner several nights before and said meal had dinosaur DNA in it and that caused his head to explode?

The above is marginally better than Manifesto's non theory.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom