Moderated JFK conspiracy theories: it never ends III

[Tolls]

One last thought. Although we might legitimately assume that Oswald was guilty, we have no logical reason to also assume that he acted alone. So, as skeptics, why don't we summon all the objectivity that we can muster, and evaluate the evidence with an open mind?

Parsimony.
If there's no evidence of another shooter (and there isn't) then why presume there is.

We have the gun Oswald bought (and evidence of him buying it), found in a position suitable for producing the three shots seen.
That gun matches the bullets found.
We have sufficient evidence to place Oswald in that building, along with a mechanism for him arriving there with the rifle.

Circumstantially we have Oswald's actions after the shooting, including the murder of Tippit, and his attempted shooting of another officer in the theatre where he was arrested.

Nothing in that lot requires an accomplice.

 

[Belz...]

Hi, RoboTimbo,

I am new to this forum, but I do have some experience in researching the JFK case, and I feel confidant that that although Oswald was probably involved in the attack, he didn't act alone.

And I feel confident that although you think you're knowledgeable on this issue, it'll turn out that you're quite ignorant, instead.

Let's wait and see.

 

[Belz...]

Who exactly, fired those shots? What is his name?

QED.

 

[abaddon]

Who exactly, fired those shots? What is his name?

It's 6 shots from a Carcano in 5.1 seconds. It matters not a whit if the guys name is Quazimodo.

And how did he corroborate his time?

With some relish handing this back to a CT proponent...Watch the video.

I encountered "Mag30th" several years ago. He threatened to send his relatives down to Florida to beat me up, and in another post said he wanted to jam his rifle up my rectum.

I don't care about your unsupported claims even if true. It doesn't change the fact that 3 shots in 8 seconds is easily done. Your personal spat with some other internet denizen is exactly that. Your personal spat. Nothing to do with me. Nothing to do with the matter at hand.

I reported him to both the Los Angeles and Pinellas county police.

Good for you. I still don't care.

He's a bonafied lunatic.

So you claim. Evidence? Didn't think so.

Why would you cite something like this as "evidence", especially since, we have legitimate, verified tests by the FBI and the HSCA??

Citation required.

The HSCA recruited 8 sharpshooters from the Washington DC police department,who along with 2 others, attempted to fire an accurate shot within 1.66 seconds. They tried repeatedly, firing with and without the scope, but they failed every time.

Citation required.

And they were firing at oversized targets, considerably closer to them than the limo was to Oswald at frame 313.

Citation required.

They DID fire faster when they reloaded and fired blindly, with no attempt to acquire a target, but it is absurd to believe that Oswald or anyone else, fired the shot at 313, the one perfect shot of the day, at the greatest distance, without aiming, especially since the limo had slowed to about 8 mph at that point.

Nailing 1 out of three attempted headshots is not exactly brilliant

FBI supervisor Frasier testified that when he brought his time down to 2.3 seconds, he was firing,

"as fast as the bolt can be operated, I think."

Demonstrably wrong.

Keep in mind too, that these guys tried over and over and over again to bring their time down. The guy who fired the 313 shot, only had ONE chance. It is just insane to think that Oswald could have outperformed all of them.

Demonstrably wrong.

 

[uk_dave]

..but it is absurd to believe that Oswald or anyone else, fired the shot at 313, the one perfect shot of the day, at the greatest distance, without aiming, especially since the limo had slowed to about 8 mph at that point.

.

What is the significance of the highlighted part? Is it your contention that the vehicle slowing made it harder to hit the target?

 

[Robert Harris]

Parsimony.
If there's no evidence of another shooter (and there isn't) then why presume there is.

We don't presume anything. We evaluate the evidence.

We have the gun Oswald bought (and evidence of him buying it), found in a position suitable for producing the three shots seen.

Yes, that's why I think he was guilty.

That gun matches the bullets found.

I'm afraid it doesn't as we will soon see.

We have sufficient evidence to place Oswald in that building, along with a mechanism for him arriving there with the rifle.

Yes, that's probably because he took part in the attack.

Circumstantially we have Oswald's actions after the shooting, including the murder of Tippit, and his attempted shooting of another officer in the theatre where he was arrested.

Nothing in that lot requires an accomplice.

There is a great deal which requires an accomplice.

 

[Robert Harris]

What is the significance of the highlighted part? Is it your contention that the vehicle slowing made it harder to hit the target?

I don't see that highlighting in my original post.

 

[uk_dave]

I highlighted it. What is the significance of the vehicle slowing down?

 

[Tolls]

I'm afraid it doesn't as we will soon see.

Is it time for an advert break then?

There is a great deal which requires an accomplice.

Well, no one else has managed to come up with a convincing argument for an accomplice yet, so good luck, but I won't be holding by breath.

 

[Border Reiver]

We don't presume anything. We evaluate the evidence.

What evidence then points to a second shooter, or other accomplice?

Yes, that's why I think he was guilty.

So far so good.

I'm afraid it doesn't as we will soon see.

What evidence is there that the weapon recovered from the TBD did NOT make the shots?

Yes, that's probably because he took part in the attack.

Being the only known perpetrator - he made the attack.

There is a great deal which requires an accomplice.

Not seeing it.

Creation of the sniper's nest - one person job.
Ordering of the rifle - one person job (and we have the evidence that LHO did it himself)
The shooting - three shots fired, three casings at the sniper's nest. Shots are most easily made from the sniper's nest. Proposed alternate locations are too exposed, have a far more challenging angle for the shooting and do not match the ballistic evidence.
Shooting of Officer Tippet - one person job
LHO using buses to make the escape - one person job.

What happened that required LHO to have an accomplice?

 

[RoboTimbo]

I'll be happy to answer any question, but let's take them one at a time.

Ok, first. What is your competing alternative hypothesis for the events surrounding the JFK assassination? Remember that your hypothesis must account for all of the evidence.

Do you think Oswald acted alone and if so, why?

I do but the burden of proof for that has already been met. Skeptics don't have a continuing burden of proof.

As to who Oswald's accomplices were, I do not have a list of names for you, although I am extremely suspicious of James Braden, who was on the third floor of the Daltex building, had connections with David Ferrie and Carlos Marcello, who confessed to an FBI informant that he ordered the assassination, and was at the Cabana hotel with Jack Ruby, the night before the assassination.

How was Braden in communication with Oswald during the assassination?

He also lied in his HSCA testimony, claiming he was with his parole officer during the assassination - a claim the parole officer flatly denied.

But a list of names is not required, to demonstrate that Oswald could not have fired all the shots. Tests conducted by the FBI and the HSCA, confirmed both the amount of time required to recycle and aim the weapon and how loud it would have been to the ears of the limousine passengers.

No, a carcano can certainly be fired in the time. I would hope that's not what your whole hypothesis hinges on.

There is quite a bit more to this, and I will posting it in a more complete article here, a bit later.

I look forward to you putting forward your entire hypothesis so we can discuss it. The last CTists were too cowardly to do so.

 

[Robert Harris]

It's 6 shots from a Carcano in 5.1 seconds. It matters not a whit if the guys name is Quazimodo.

I'm afraid it does. Would you like me to make a video for you, "proving" that the MC can be fired 50 times in 5 seconds?

With some relish handing this back to a CT proponent...Watch the video.

I did. How did you confirm that it was legitimate?

And if it was, how many times did he hit the target?

And finally, even if he did outperform all of the HSCA and FBI shooters, how does that prove that Oswald could have done the same?

I don't care about your unsupported claims even if true. It doesn't change the fact that 3 shots in 8 seconds is easily done.

Of course it is. Why are you changing the subject?

This is not about the total time required to fire three shots. It's about whether Oswald could have fired faster and more accurately than a multitude of FBI and HSCA experts.

And in the outrageously unlikely possibility that he could, why would he? The limo was slowing down then. He had no reason to rush and the result of that shot, tells us rather convincingly that he didn't.

Your personal spat with some other internet denizen is exactly that. Your personal spat. Nothing to do with me. Nothing to do with the matter at hand.

This is not about a "spat". It's about a raving lunatic who was fanatical about the LN theory, to the point that he was willing to threaten violence to support it.

And this is your star witness.

So you claim. Evidence? Didn't think so.

You got me there.

Tell me "Adaddon", on a scale of 1-10, exactly how objective do you think you are?

Citation required.

I haven't relocated the whole report yet, but I have this for you. It is laughably ironic, that they are claiming success in supporting their acoustic evidence, even though every one of their shooters failed every single time, firing with both the scope and with the scope off.

It is apparently DIFFICULT, but not
*impossible--at least with only minimal practice
*with the firearm used--to fire 3 shots, at least
*two of which score "kills," with an elapsed time
*of 1.7 seconds or less between any two shots, even
*though in the limited testing conducted, NO SHOOTER
*ACHIEVED THIS DEGREE OF PROFICIENCY.
*(8 HSCA 185, emphasis added)

Keep in mind, that they were firing at oversized, stationary targets, which were closer to the shooter than the alleged sniper's nest was to the limo at 313. That's because they were considering much earlier shots.

It is less than ridiculous to think that Oswald outperformed all of these experts and even if your Youtube "expert" is legit, he never proved that he could match a 313 strike with 1.5 seconds of reload time, did he?

In fact, to the best of my knowledge, NO ONE has fired a MC rifle that quickly and accurately, in over 50 years.

But here is a question for you.

Let's say that by some miracle, Oswald DID fire the shots at 285 and 313. Now you have one left.

Are you going to claim that there was not a shot at 223, or that there was no shot prior to 223??

I agree with Posner, Bugliosi and pretty much every nutter on the planet that there were at least, two early shots, and like them, I see a great deal of visual evidence to confirm that.

Are you claiming four shots now, or are you claiming that all of your friends are full of poop?

 

[Robert Harris]

Is it time for an advert break then?

No, I need to get to 15 posts before I can link a URL.

Well, no one else has managed to come up with a convincing argument for an accomplice yet, so good luck, but I won't be holding by breath.

What you mean is, that unlike most people, you have not seen evidence that convinces you. Isn't that correct?

 

[Robert Harris]

I highlighted it. What is the significance of the vehicle slowing down?

Good question!

The significance is that the sniper would have felt no compulsion to rush. And considering the result, it's obvious that he didn't.

 

[Robert Harris]

OK, 15 posts. Let's see if I can link a URL now. I wrote this article specifically for LN advocates. It explains in detail, that there was a shot circa frame 285-288, which was no more than 1.5 seconds prior to the fatal headshot.

http://jfkhistory.com/WebArticle/article.html

 

[RoboTimbo]

Do you think Oswald acted alone and if so, why?

Yes, because no other competing hypothesis has been able to address the preponderance of evidence as well as the conventional one. Did you have a competing hypothesis that can?

But a list of names is not required

Without a competing alternative hypothesis that addresses the preponderance of evidence better than the conventional one, most here won't be very interested in your burden-of-proofless negative arguments. Chipping away at inevitable anomalies is every other CTist. Don't be them.

to demonstrate that Oswald could not have fired all the shots.

And yet Oswald demonstrably did fire all three shots. To satisfy the CTists, he even missed one.

Tests conducted by the FBI and the HSCA, confirmed both the amount of time required to recycle and aim the weapon and how loud it would have been to the ears of the limousine passengers.

So to disprove this factoid which your entire (as yet unstated) hypothesis hinges on would only take one example of showing a person firing a Carcano in the required time?

 

[uk_dave]

Good question!

The significance is that the sniper would have felt no compulsion to rush. And considering the result, it's obvious that he didn't.

What?

Okay, maybe I'm having a problem comprehending your argument.

It looked to me as if you was trying to make a claim that hitting the target in the time available was difficult if not impossible.

You then went on to say that:

absurd to believe that Oswald or anyone else, fired the shot at 313, the one perfect shot of the day, at the greatest distance, without aiming, especially since the limo had slowed to about 8 mph at that point.

"Especially since the limo had slowed to about 8 mph"

So, he didn't rush because the limo had slowed, and so he got the fatal shot, but it's absurd to believe this?

WTF are you talking about?

 

[pgwenthold]

And yet Oswald demonstrably did fire all three shots. To satisfy the CTists, he even missed one.

Actually, he missed twice. It's not like he was aiming for the JFK's back.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Actually, he missed twice. It's not like he was aiming for the JFK's back.

Good point!

 

[Robert Harris]

Ok, first. What is your competing alternative hypothesis for the events surrounding the JFK assassination? Remember that your hypothesis must account for all of the evidence.

Patience grasshopper. We need to take issues one-at-a-time. But my conclusions are the product of the evidence. There will be no contradictions.

I do but the burden of proof for that has already been met.

It has??

Sorry, I didn't know that. Please tell me how it was proven that Oswald acted alone.

Skeptics don't have a continuing burden of proof.

You do if you want to promote a particular theory, especially a minority theory that contradicts the government's latest investigation.

How was Braden in communication with Oswald during the assassination?

I doubt that he was.

No, a carcano can certainly be fired in the time. I would hope that's not what your whole hypothesis hinges on.

Read the article I recently linked. It will explain a lot of this.

This is not about the total time required to fire three shots.

I look forward to you putting forward your entire hypothesis so we can discuss it. The last CTists were too cowardly to do so.

There really is a great deal to this - too much to put into a single post. As we go along, I think you will understand.