Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories VI: Lyndon Johnson's Revenge

[abaddon]

Of course there is also the issue of MJ's other claim that the shots from the grassy knoll were carried out using a silencer so that nobody could hear them anyway.

 

[smartcooky]

Of course there is also the issue of MJ's other claim that the shots from the grassy knoll were carried out using a silencer so that nobody could hear them anyway.

Hmmm. Claims that directly contradict each other?

I think you and I have both seen this sort of thing over at Apollohoax!

 

[Whip]

surprised the first 35 seconds of this hasn't been used as evidence:

 

[BStrong]

Of course there is also the issue of MJ's other claim that the shots from the grassy knoll were carried out using a silencer so that nobody could hear them anyway.

Here's another Swing! and a miss! from March 2017 -

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11763166&postcount=2639

MJ

BStrong is BS-strong. Just google "silencer", "noise", "opposite direction" and you'll find people on gun forums discussing this well-known phenomenon, to the point of some suggesting it's benefit in hunting. Why do you have to lie instead of honestly debate?

Insecure table pounding noted.

The "phenomenon" you reference is nothing more than the perception of the earwitness and is not related to the use of a suppressor.

Let's review what you posted about suppressors:

Noise suppressors can distort the sound of a gunshot to seem like it came from the opposite direction. But of course, noise suppressors don't make the muzzle blast completely silent.

You are asserting that a suppressor as a device causes an earwitness to believe that the shooter is in the opposite direction from the actual position of the shooter.

This isn't a phenomenon that is caused by the can. As I've pointed out repeatedly, earwitness testimony can be unreliable for a number of reasons.

I posted my most embarrassing moment with my "it's gotta be a shotgun" 911 call and in the example of one of my friends that witnessed the murder, he didn't hear the pistol being fired within ten feet of him and the piece wasn't suppressed. He target fixated on the gun and the victim, saw the thing cycle and eject the empty case but didn't hear the shot.

For the purposes of your fantasy, a ventriloquist suppressor might be a very cool thing, but there is no such thing. People who hear loud noises react to and interpret to those noises in different ways. If a person is untrained they might not even notice the sound of a projectile passing close by, or someone hearing the same projectile at a different point in the projectile's trajectory nearby static objects might interpret that single projectile as being multiple projectiles due to the "crack" as passes them.

Smart well-trained guy might be completely wrong about a sound they heard.

No suppressor needed.

What I'd like to see from you is some evidence of one of these cool ventriloquist suppressors. It would go great with my Hush-a-Bomb.

As far as lying goes. I can't even turn it around on you.

You don't know enough about the subject matter to lie about it. You do confuse fact, fantasy and wish fulfillment, but that's par for the course. And that's why when you're going to stick your baby toe into the ocean of facts concerning firearms in general and this case in particular you're not going to like the bath that you'll end up taking.

A debate requires two or more well informed individuals to participate.

In this arena you do not qualify as being well informed.

 

[HSienzant]

Oh, that is hilarious.

Tell me Hank, do you think being shot down by your own link is anything like being hoisted with your own petard?

I was asking your opinion, given what MicahJava did, i.e. posted a link which pulled the rug out from under his own feet.

I mis-read it then. Apologies.

It's exactly like being hoist with your own petard.

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

Me saying that you couldn't look any more foolish than you already do shouldn't have been taken as a challenge.

[qimg]https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-yLMWjDKSIsE/UrJqUKSRYlI/AAAAAAAAQVY/XCi-cJPI9i0/s1600/13+-+1.gifcrowd.gif[/qimg]

And he takes it as a challenge once more!

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

Excuse me, I was citing the actual data collected by their experiments.

Right you were. But ignoring the expert conclusions derived from that data. You do this repeatedly, on the medical evidence, on the autopsy evidence, on the ballistics, on the handwriting analysis, everywhere we turn, you ignore the expertise of the actual experts and substitute your own.

What does the data show?

That witnesses who are expecting shots from one of two known locations, and only two known locations, can still get it wrong.

The fact that a gunshot creates echoes and reverberations does not mean that it cannot be easy to locate it's general direction. The HSCA acoustics study proved this.

No, that's not the conclusion reached by the experts.
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol8/html/HSCA_Vol8_0077b.htm
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol8/html/HSCA_Vol8_0078a.htm

You don't get to make up your own conclusions, substitute your conclusions for those of the experts and pretend we must accept your conclusions. We are under no such requirement. Your claim has no basis in fact.

If you want to point out the flaws in their methodology, maybe you'd add more crowd noise, more witnesses, more motorcycle backfire, etc. then go ahead but this is actual scientific evidence that acoustics within Dealey Plaza CANNOT be used to explain the grassy knoll earwitnesses.

Except you can't explain the grassy knoll witnesses either -- except by pretending all the witnesses who named only ONE source of the shots (meaning almost all the witnesses) got the source wrong for SOME of the shots.

You have suggested that there were four or more shots from three or more locations (you're never precise when we ask, so we're left to guess at exactly what your theory is).

But the vast majority of witnesses heard only three shots, and more witnesses heard two or fewer than heard more than three.

And the vast majority of witnesses named ONE SOURCE of all the shots they heard, not multiple sources. The knoll witnesses named only the knoll for ALL the shots. The Depository witnesses named only the Depository for ALL the shots. Only four witnesses said they thought the shots came from multiple locations.

Were all but these four witnesses confused? Mistaken? Hearing echoes? What?

So you need to explain why they only heard three shots out of the four or more you conjecture, and why most witnesses named only ONE source for all the shots... And you need to do it without invoking them making any mistakes in what they heard.

Otherwise, you're right here with me ... some of the witnesses were mistaken. While I claim the knoll witnesses were mistaken, you are claiming both the knoll witnesses and the Depository witnesses were mistaken. Your argument says the knoll witnesses were mistaken because they didn't hear the Depository shots, and the Depository witnesses were mistaken because they didn't hear the knoll shots.

And they were all mistaken because none of them heard the shots from the Dal-Tex building or wherever you place the third shooter.

And remember, you tried telling us "the sound of one [shot] would be indistinguishable from the echoes of another [shot]." Given that, aren't you saying the witnesses were confused?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11410716&postcount=912

Good luck with selling that turkey of an argument.

No wonder you suggested mass hallucination.

You alone brought that up. You're great at kicking the **** out of straw men you invent.

We covered all this ground in the past. You're just doing your fringe reset thing again.

For instance:

October of 2017: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12040781&postcount=2039
March of 2017: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11774505&postcount=2851

You just constantly recycle the same unproven arguments... repeatedly!

Hank

 

[RoboTimbo]

And he takes it as a challenge once more!

Hank

Never underestimate the perseverance of a CTist. I have no doubt he will continue to double down.

 

[HSienzant]

surprised the first 35 seconds of this hasn't been used as evidence:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yF3z-Z284o&feature=youtu.be

I think the part starting about 1:41 in explains everything we've seen here far better.

Hank

 

[smartcooky]

And here is another take on this that I have read about before, and which just occurred to me while reading Hank's post #127

Of all the witnesses who claimed that the grassy knoll was the only source of the shots, every single one of the must be wrong. Why? Because we know that shots were actually fired from the the TSBD 6th floor. We know that because

1. That is where the rifle was found, and that rifle was ballistically matched to the bullet and the fragments of bullets that were found.

2. If no shots were fired from there, then the CT nutcases have to explain the gunshot wounds in the back of JFK and JC which could only have been caused by shots from behind the limo.

3. Several witnesses saw Oswald's gun poking out in the window of his sniper's lair on the 6th floor.

4. There was a witness on the 5th floor of the TSBD, who, stated in an FBI interview that he had heard the shots and also heard sound of the bolt action of the rifle and the sound of the empty cartridge cases dropping on the floor above him.

It beggars belief that of every one of those witnesses who said that all the shots came from the Grassy Knoll, NOT ONE OF THEM heard a single one of the known gunshots that originated from the TSBD.

Further, the HSCA's witness tabulation of the ear witnesses records that;
46% of them said ALL of the shots came from the TSBD
20% of them said ALL the shots came from the grassy knoll.
only 4% said they came from two directions

Even known conspiritards put this "two locations" number very low (Stewart Galanor 4.6%, Josiah Thompson 6.3%).

This "two locations" number is exceedingly important. There is overwhelming evidence that at least some shots were fired from behind the motorcade. Several witnesses saw a shooter, or at least a gun in the sixth floor sniper's nest window. The medical evidence is clear that both Kennedy and Connally were hit from behind (regardless of whether either was also hit from the front). Once we understand that at least some shots came from behind, it is hard to see how shots could also have come from the Grassy Knoll without more witnesses reporting shots from more than one direction. It begins to look like some were confused about the direction of the shots." -- John McAdams

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/shots.htm

Now, if shots had been fired from both the TSBD AND the grassy knoll, then there would be a lot more than 4% reporting shots from multiple directions.

 

[Axxman300]

Excuse me, I was citing the actual data collected by their experiments.

Incorrectly it seems.

What does the data show? The fact that a gunshot creates echoes and reverberations does not mean that it cannot be easy to locate it's general direction.

This is wrong.

I live in a neighborhood where gunfire is a weekend event. Sometimes it's down the street, other times it's a mile away. You cannot always tell. When a person is not expecting gunfire their ability to identify direction diminishes greatly from shock, and fear.

Shock, in my view, is a form of brain damage. The brain's self-preservation instinct kicks in, and your world becomes a narrow funnel. The memory kicks out a lot of information to preserve a functional sanity. In 1963, being on the same street where the President was gunned down counts as a catastrophic psychological event.

The HSCA acoustics study proved this.

If you want to point out the flaws in their methodology, maybe you'd add more crowd noise, more witnesses, more motorcycle backfire, etc. then go ahead but this is actual scientific evidence that acoustics within Dealey Plaza CANNOT be used to explain the grassy knoll earwitnesses.

In 1978, with 1978 technology.

Today you can do superior sound evaluation than they could dream of in 1978, hell, your phone has better tech than they had.

I've been in Dealey Plaza, and the second thing I notice there was how bad the echo was there.

 

[smartcooky]

Shock, in my view, is a form of brain damage. The brain's self-preservation instinct kicks in, and your world becomes a narrow funnel. The memory kicks out a lot of information to preserve a functional sanity. In 1963, being on the same street where the President was gunned down counts as a catastrophic psychological event..

This is clearly seen in the videos of the Las Vegas shooting late last year.

Even though the area around the Mandalay Bay and The Strip is nowhere near the kind of echo-chamber Dealey Plaza is, you still have shocked, panicking people running in all directions, including towards the gunfire because they could not tell where it was coming from.

 

[HSienzant]

And here is another take on this that I have read about before, and which just occurred to me while reading Hank's post #127

Of all the witnesses who claimed that the grassy knoll was the only source of the shots, every single one of the must be wrong. Why? Because we know that shots were actually fired from the the TSBD 6th floor. We know that because:

1. That is where the rifle was found, and that rifle was ballistically matched to the bullet and the fragments of bullets that were found.

Desperate CT response: The bullets and fragments were planted or swapped, or both. The rifle was planted or swapped, or both. The shells were planted or swapped, or both. And what about the clip? How come no memos mention the clip until after Oswald was dead? Can you explain how Oswald got to Russia even though there were no direct flights?

2. If no shots were fired from there, then the CT nutcases have to explain the gunshot wounds in the back of JFK and JC which could only have been caused by shots from behind the limo.

Desperate CT response: The Dal-Tex building behind the Depository could be the source. The body was altered. The autopsy doctors were part of the cover-up. The autopsy photos and x-rays were altered. Connally was shot after he had turned his body to face the passenger side door. The shooter was on the right side of the limo, not behind the limo. Besides, why would Tippit's killer drop shells at the scene of the Tippit killing except to frame Oswald?

3. Several witnesses saw Oswald's gun poking out in the window of his sniper's lair on the 6th floor.

Desperate CT response: They saw A gun, not necessarily Oswald's gun. Besides, all the paperwork for the CE139 weapon was a forgery. The photos of Oswald with a weapon are forgeries. His prints on it were planted. Or somebody asked him to pose for those photos. Just because he is shown holding a rifle doesn't mean he owned it. Besides, the rifle found on the sixth floor was a Mauser. Besides, Marina didn't remember how many photos she took. Besides, Marina lied to the FBI so she was lying about the photos. Besides, the witnesses placed the rifle as low as the fourth floor and as high as the sixth. Besides, Amos Euins didn't see a scope and described it as a 'pipe thing". And how come his landlady thought he arrived at the rooming house at about 1:00 o'clock and stayed there three or four minutes? He didn't have time to get to Tenth and Patton!

4. There was a witness on the 5th floor of the TSBD, who, stated in an FBI interview that he had heard the shots and also heard sound of the bolt action of the rifle and the sound of the empty cartridge cases dropping on the floor above him.

Desperate CT response: He was intimidated. This was the south, after all. And Oswald was only pretending to be a communist because his handlers gave him that assignment!

It beggars belief that of every one of those witnesses who said that all the shots came from the Grassy Knoll, NOT ONE OF THEM heard a single one of the known gunshots that originated from the TSBD.

Desperate CT response: They were confused or influenced by the early reports of three shots, all from the Depository. Why would so many Parkland doctors lie about the wound in the back of the head?

Further, the HSCA's witness tabulation of the ear witnesses records that;
46% of them said ALL of the shots came from the TSBD
20% of them said ALL the shots came from the grassy knoll.
only 4% said they came from two directions

Desperate CT response: That proves some shots came from the knoll! And why was Oswald being doubled in and around Dallas in the months preceding the assassination?

Even known conspiritards put this "two locations" number very low (Stewart Galanor 4.6%, Josiah Thompson 6.3%).

Desperate CT response: The truth is not up for vote. These were the very best witnesses. Why do you believe everything the government tells you? You must be a paid shill!

Now, if shots had been fired from both the TSBD AND the grassy knoll, then there would be a lot more than 4% reporting shots from multiple directions.

Desperate CT response: Echoes confused many of the witnesses into thinking there was only one source of all the shots. If there wasn't a conspiracy, I've wasted years of my life looking for one, so there must have been one! Did I mention the bullets and fragments were planted or swapped, or both and the rifle was planted or swapped, or both?

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

I live in a neighborhood where gunfire is a weekend event. Sometimes it's down the street, other times it's a mile away.

Dude, move. Seriously.

Unless you live within a block or two of a licensed gun range.

Move.

Hank

 

[Tomtomkent]

Still no concise location of the wound, consistent on photographs and x-rays?

 

[smartcooky]

Desperate CT response: The bullets and fragments were planted or swapped, or both. The rifle was planted or swapped, or both. The shells were planted or swapped, or both. And what about the clip? How come no memos mention the clip until after Oswald was dead? Can you explain how Oswald got to Russia even though there were no direct flights?

Desperate CT response: The Dal-Tex building behind the Depository could be the source. The body was altered. The autopsy doctors were part of the cover-up. The autopsy photos and x-rays were altered. Connally was shot after he had turned his body to face the passenger side door. The shooter was on the right side of the limo, not behind the limo. Besides, why would Tippit's killer drop shells at the scene of the Tippit killing except to frame Oswald?

Desperate CT response: They saw A gun, not necessarily Oswald's gun. Besides, all the paperwork for the CE139 weapon was a forgery. The photos of Oswald with a weapon are forgeries. His prints on it were planted. Or somebody asked him to pose for those photos. Just because he is shown holding a rifle doesn't mean he owned it. Besides, the rifle found on the sixth floor was a Mauser. Besides, Marina didn't remember how many photos she took. Besides, Marina lied to the FBI so she was lying about the photos. Besides, the witnesses placed the rifle as low as the fourth floor and as high as the sixth. Besides, Amos Euins didn't see a scope and described it as a 'pipe thing". And how come his landlady thought he arrived at the rooming house at about 1:00 o'clock and stayed there three or four minutes? He didn't have time to get to Tenth and Patton!

Desperate CT response: He was intimidated. This was the south, after all. And Oswald was only pretending to be a communist because his handlers gave him that assignment!

Desperate CT response: They were confused or influenced by the early reports of three shots, all from the Depository. Why would so many Parkland doctors lie about the wound in the back of the head?

Desperate CT response: That proves some shots came from the knoll! And why was Oswald being doubled in and around Dallas in the months preceding the assassination?

Desperate CT response: The truth is not up for vote. These were the very best witnesses. Why do you believe everything the government tells you? You must be a paid shill!

Desperate CT response: Echoes confused many of the witnesses into thinking there was only one source of all the shots. If there wasn't a conspiracy, I've wasted years of my life looking for one, so there must have been one! Did I mention the bullets and fragments were planted or swapped, or both and the rifle was planted or swapped, or both?

Yep, all this - an extremely complicated, complex, convoluted scheme involving hundreds, perhaps even thousands of co-conspirators, including ordinary citizens and intimidated witnesses, NOT ONE OF WHOM has come forward and spilled the beans, or left a confession with their lawyer before they died, or....

The simple, uncomplicated truth: Oswald fired three shots from a room on the corner of the 6th floor of the TSBD, killing the President.

Hmm, a tough choice!

 

[Axxman300]

Dude, move. Seriously.

Unless you live within a block or two of a licensed gun range.

Move.

Hank

Love it here.

 

[abaddon]

Hmmm. Claims that directly contradict each other?

I think you and I have both seen this sort of thing over at Apollohoax!

Yeah, there appears to be a CT tactical manual of some sort that they all follow regardless which CT it happens to be.

 

[BStrong]

Dude, move. Seriously.

Unless you live within a block or two of a licensed gun range.

Move.

Hank

My neighborhood the night of June 12th 2017. Gunfire starts at approx. 1:04, automatic weapons fire at approx. 1:35

 

[smartcooky]

My neighborhood the night of June 12th 2017. Gunfire starts at approx. 1:04, automatic weapons fire at approx. 1:35

Those corner apartments across the road are SO San Francisco!!!

You live in the Bay Area?