• 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.

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wolrab said:
I'll bet MicahJava is spending his time out going back and reviewing all the questions he has been asked and is formulating well researched answers.
Or...spending another few hours becoming an expert on mortuary practices like he did when he became a firearm expert.

We should get a private betting pool going on what fringe reset he will post when he returns.
Click to expand...

What he will do is a fringe reset using a quote from anywhere between 9 and 15 pages back, and counter it using dribble from a CT website, or book. The fun part will be that his answer has not only been debunked several times on this board already, it has been debunked for decades even by other CTists.

I mean nobody in CT Land quotes David Lifton any more, and haven't since the mid-80's, and the entire 2nd+ gunman theory has been buried by years of recreations of the original shots, and updated ballistics technology. The "Oswald was a Patsy" crowd are the equivalent of the anti-vaxers, flat earthers, and 9-11 was CD crowds.

If there was a conspiracy to kill JFK you won't find it in Dealey Plaza. Oswald was the lone actor, so if he was part of a plot you have to dig into his activities after he returned from Russia... and that's a lot of work that has already been done by some talented researchers.

The sad reality is that we now all know what one guy with a rifle can do, and guys with a mental issue are twice as deadly with their weapons due to their focus on the task. I don't know if anyone has done an updated psyche profile on LHO, but he's a candidate for a list of mental issues including bi-polar, and more likely high-functioning Aspergers Syndrome (this would account for his talent for languages, immersion into specific topics, and social awkwardness). Whatever his problem may have been it gave him an advantage on the day of the assassination because he was probably as calm as he had ever been in his life, something that a mentally healthy person could never understand. This is why it is so hard to believe he could have set up the sniper's nest, made the shots, ditched his rifle, went downstairs, and bought a soda from the lunchroom Coke machine without breaking a sweat.

Oswald doesn't lose control until he runs into Tippet.
 
HSienzant said:
That few? I would have thought it was more.

Hank
Click to expand...

Are you saving your good stuff for later? Because your stuff is very weak.

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/medical_testimony/pdf/Parkland_8-27-98.pdf

Go under "Humes called on Saturday" in the table of contents in the sidebar.

Just the other day, I noticed in the 8/27/1998 ARRB interview of Parkland staff members, Dr. Perry and Mr. McClelland were asked about the timeline of the Dr. Humes phone call. In order to reconcile Perry's previous testimony of a Friday night phone call with Humes' testimony of a Saturday morning phone call, they concede that Humes could have called really quick on Friday night while it was too busy, told Perry he would call him in the morning, and was only later told about the tracheotomy in the second phone call. Although they concede that the tracheotomy phone call happened "in the middle of the morning" (11/23/1963), they still reported the event of a Friday night phone call, AND a separate second phone call. Dr. Perry always testified that he was called by Humes twice, while Humes always only described one single phone call to Perry.

GogoYubariGiggle.gif
 
Last edited:
MicahJava said:
Are you saving your good stuff for later? Because your stuff is very weak.

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/medical_testimony/pdf/Parkland_8-27-98.pdf

Go under "Humes called on Saturday" in the table of contents in the sidebar.

Just the other day, I noticed in the 8/27/1998 ARRB interview of Parkland staff members, Dr. Perry and Mr. McClelland were asked about the timeline of the Dr. Humes phone call. In order to reconcile Perry's previous testimony of a Friday night phone call with Humes' testimony of a Saturday morning phone call, they concede that Humes could have called really quick on Friday night while it was too busy, told Perry he would call him in the morning, and was only later told about the tracheotomy in the second phone call. Although they concede that the tracheotomy phone call happened "in the middle of the morning" (11/23/1963), they still reported the event of a Friday night phone call, AND a separate second phone call. Dr. Perry always testified that he was called by Humes twice, while Humes always only described one single phone call to Perry.
Click to expand...

You've proven there's a difference of opinion about a phone call.

What does that mean in the context of the evidence in hand that establishes LHO as the shooter?
 
The 6th Floor Museum has a new video of a talk with Hugh Aynesworth:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGCI888lDg0

For the grownups in the room who love history, it's worth your time to watch.

Aynesworth was a Dallas Morning News beat reporter who was standing across the street from the TSBD when JFK was shot. What followed was a textbook example of a heads-up reporter getting the job done:

He found the first witness who pointed out the sniper's nest on the 6th floor, and when the witness discovered he was a reporter and not a cop he was cordoned off away from the building. Luckily he was standing next to a police motorcycle when the call about Officer Tippet is made, and he snags a ride with another reporter over to that crime scene. While he is there the call comes over the radio of a suspect entering the Texas Theater, and he hitches a ride with a TV crew over to this final location where he goes inside and witnesses Oswald's capture.

He was at the DPD when Oswald was shot.

This interview is fantastic on a couple of levels; the man himself if fascinating , and he gives perspective on the confusion of those first three days along with the FBI's less than perfect investigation. He was investigated by the FBI because he had obtained Oswald's diary.

His discussion of Jack Ruby was enlightening; Ruby was a guy who liked to self-promote, and would often go to crime scenes, and big fires so he could call the newspapers to tell them what he saw (I'd never heard this, but it makes sense as to why he did what he did).

The best part is his stories about NO DA Jim Garrison's investigation, which was nothing more than a fishing expedition.

He also says Mark Lane was a lying POS.

Aynesworth had a stellar career. He met Castro in Cuba, covered the early Space Program, interviewed Ted Bundy, Henry Lee Lucas(this earned him a Pulitzer Prize for exposing Lucas as a liar, and resulted in his Death Sentence being commuted to life in prison), and the Branch Davidian siege at Waco.

And yes, he knows Oswald acted alone.
 
MicahJava said:
Are you saving your good stuff for later? Because your stuff is very weak.

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/medical_testimony/pdf/Parkland_8-27-98.pdf

Go under "Humes called on Saturday" in the table of contents in the sidebar. (blah blah blah)
Click to expand...

So what?

Humes is the only one who counts in this story because he made the call. What others think they remember is immaterial; there was a lot of confusion before and after the autopsy, and what someone remembers is dependant on what they were doing.

None of this changes the fact that JFK was killed by two 6.5x52mm Carcano rounds fired by Oswald from the 6th floor of the TSBD. These are the only two bullet wounds on the President's body.

Your sideshow is nothing but a lame distraction from the truth.
 
MicahJava said:
Go under "Humes called on Saturday" in the table of contents in the sidebar.

Just the other day, I noticed in the 8/27/1998 ARRB interview ...
Click to expand...

Discussed ad nauseum. This is just another attempt at a fringe reset by you.

Let's not ignore the fact that you're still utilizing 35-year-later recollections to build your case. That's nonsense, and if you re-read all my responses to you (or just search for 'Elizabeth Loftus') you'll maybe finally understand why.

Or maybe you already understand why, but because beggars can't be choosers, you're stuck citing whatever thin gruel you have.

Hank
 
HSienzant said:
Discussed ad nauseum. This is just another attempt at a fringe reset by you.

Let's not ignore the fact that you're still utilizing 35-year-later recollections to build your case. That's nonsense, and if you re-read all my responses to you (or just search for 'Elizabeth Loftus') you'll maybe finally understand why.

Or maybe you already understand why, but because beggars can't be choosers, you're stuck citing whatever thin gruel you have.

Hank
Click to expand...

I think the only thing you've ever read and grasped from my comments is the report button. Since when have I utilized 30+ year old recollections for anything other than to demonstrate how it relates to an original main piece of evidence? Pointing out the date of the interview is not an argument, dude.
 
Last edited:
Axxman300 said:
The 6th Floor Museum has a new video of a talk with Hugh Aynesworth:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGCI888lDg0

For the grownups in the room who love history, it's worth your time to watch.

Aynesworth was a Dallas Morning News beat reporter who was standing across the street from the TSBD when JFK was shot. What followed was a textbook example of a heads-up reporter getting the job done:

He found the first witness who pointed out the sniper's nest on the 6th floor, and when the witness discovered he was a reporter and not a cop he was cordoned off away from the building. Luckily he was standing next to a police motorcycle when the call about Officer Tippet is made, and he snags a ride with another reporter over to that crime scene. While he is there the call comes over the radio of a suspect entering the Texas Theater, and he hitches a ride with a TV crew over to this final location where he goes inside and witnesses Oswald's capture.

He was at the DPD when Oswald was shot.

This interview is fantastic on a couple of levels; the man himself if fascinating , and he gives perspective on the confusion of those first three days along with the FBI's less than perfect investigation. He was investigated by the FBI because he had obtained Oswald's diary.

His discussion of Jack Ruby was enlightening; Ruby was a guy who liked to self-promote, and would often go to crime scenes, and big fires so he could call the newspapers to tell them what he saw (I'd never heard this, but it makes sense as to why he did what he did).

The best part is his stories about NO DA Jim Garrison's investigation, which was nothing more than a fishing expedition.

He also says Mark Lane was a lying POS.

Aynesworth had a stellar career. He met Castro in Cuba, covered the early Space Program, interviewed Ted Bundy, Henry Lee Lucas(this earned him a Pulitzer Prize for exposing Lucas as a liar, and resulted in his Death Sentence being commuted to life in prison), and the Branch Davidian siege at Waco.

And yes, he knows Oswald acted alone.
Click to expand...

Disclaimer: Hugh Aynesworth is a news reporter who called Oswald as the assassin on the first day of the assassination, and has has worked with the CIA, the FBI, and DA Bill Alexander.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom