• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hey Manifesto, here is the clip proving McLain wasn't where the HSCA said he was when the "shots" on the dictabelt were fired.

https://youtu.be/thSPu57vaWg

Anything else?
Hey, Traxy. The first faulty statement is (2.44): ”four gun shots on the dictabelt.”

This is wrong. The BBN team discovered five rifle shots on the dictabelt. Why should I continue looking at a video who makes such a critical error in the early part of their filmed investigation?

Is it getting better further in the video?
 
Hey, Traxy. The first faulty statement is (2.44): ”four gun shots on the dictabelt.”

This is wrong. The BBN team discovered five rifle shots on the dictabelt. Why should I continue looking at a video who makes such a critical error in the early part of their filmed investigation?

Is it getting better further in the video?

So you dismiss Barger then, because he talked about finding the grouping of 4 shots.

So where was McLain. Show us your video analysis
 
What specific material evidence, allegedly showing what, are you refering to?

It was your claim originally and I'm not about to scroll back 30+ pages to see your original question among your "lets play twenty questions" mode of posting.

So the question still stands provide evidence that a chain of custody was not accomplished properly?
 
So you dismiss Barger then, because he talked about finding the grouping of 4 shots.
Barger was pressured by Robert Blakey to exclude the third shot found on the recording and the HSCA’s (Blakey) stated reason was:
"The entry in Table II that occurred at 140.32 sec is a false alarm, because it occurred only 1.05 sec later than earlier correlations also obtained from the TSBD. The rifle cannot be fired that rapidly. Since there are three correlations plausibly indicating the earlier shot, the one occurring 1.05 sec later must be a false alarm."​
Begs the question doesn’t it.


So where was McLain. Show us your video analysis
He must have been where his stuck mike picked up the sounds from the three detected rifle shots.

There is no direct photographic evidence from any of the five spots where the mike picked up the rifle shots, but there is indirekt photographic evidence showing that McLain was the only MC officer who COULD have been on the five spots att the right time.

Given the strength of the acoustic evidence this is enough to conlclude he must have been there.

If you disagree you have two options:

1. Refute that McLain COULD have been on the right spots at the right time.

2. Refute the acoustical evidence that if true, says that McLain was at the spots at the right time.
 
I'd suggest something else: ezplain why it matters? Suppose there was a break in the chain of custody. And? What is manifeato implying happened?

This is not a trial. It's not a question if trying to manufacture reasonable doubt. We trying to figure out what happened. It's not enough to say "there is reasonable doubt that it was LHO" (if there were; there isn't of course)

I understand your reasoning however I'm trying the same tactic used by manifesto to smear the wall of text with 20 questions that in his mind are unanswered or answered incorrectly
If the claim is that the evidence can't be trusted because of the lack of the chain of comnand, tell us what's wring with it. Has it been doctored? That must be the claim because if it wasn't doctored, then there is nothing wrong with it. If it was doctored, who did it abd how did they doctor it?

Stop with the stupid attempts at gotcha games. Figure out what happened best we can.

And stop playing dumb. Jaynes's and Myers's photo/film analyses of where McLain was has been presented. Stop acting as if it hasn't.

And that image presentation shows McLain in the wrong place according to the acoustic array that BBN used in their interpretation of the dictabelt.
 
I’m saying he is not proven guilty.

Oh yes, the Warren Commission determined he was guilty. Are you sure you've read anything about the assassination? I suspect you lack any knowledge of it beyond what your CT website told you to think. Pretty typical for CTists.
 
Given the strength of the acoustic evidence this is enough to conlclude he must have been there.
The acoustical evidence has been comprehensively debunked.

If you disagree you have two options:

1. Refute that McLain COULD have been on the right spots at the right time.
Done.

2. Refute the acoustical evidence that if true, says that McLain was at the spots at the right time.
Done.

I think you'll agree that a CT would be lying to say otherwise. Do all CTs just stick their fingers in their ears and shout "LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" as loudly as they can?
 
The ”CT” name calling serves a purpose. To discredit everyone who suspects the US Government of doing evil deeds. If you consider its track record, it is a very well founded suspicion.

It only discredits those who make allegations without proof.

Proven psychological warfare against its own population is a case in point.

Over-stated, and the results were poor.

Dumping billions of dollars worth of cocaine/heroine on its minority groups in the urban ghettoes is a case in point.

Over-stated, and based on out-of-context allegations never supported by evidence in most cases. In the cases where it did happen WE KNOW ABOUT IT BECAUSE THE CIA REPORTED THAT IT HAPPENED.

Lying to the American people to get its permission to wage illegal wars on millons of defenceless civilians all over the globe, is a case in point.

Lying about what to fight where exactly?

Having jailed a higher percentage of its afro-population than aphartheids South Africa in its heyday, is a case in point.

The prison population in this country is a reflection of the will of the American people. Every few months new laws are enacted in every state to make something illegal, and that put people in prison. Where I live, every November the people of the state of California vote in new laws which are poorly thought out, and have draconian effects on the state's budget, and target low income people regardless of race. California is also as close to a communist state as the US can get (not without trying).

The fact that you don't understand the US belies your bigotry. Those laws were not dictated to us by the Federal Government, instead they were enacted by people we all voted for, and most of those laws only passed because they had popular public support.

So yes, I doubt everything coming out of from US officaldom.

Why shouldn’t I?

If you want to be taken seriously as someone who is intellectually honest you have to look at each case on its own. To link every act of the CIA/ US Government together as part of a larger conspiracy is lunacy.

In the case of the JFK Assassination there is zero evidence that the CIA or FBI or any other Federal entity was involved. The fact is that the CIA and FBI are staffed by average Americans, and there is no way to keep something this big a secret. Documents thought destroyed just as often resurface later, people talk, people make copies of things, people take notes.

The only reason you know about any of the CIA's misdeeds is because someone at CIA talked.

The best resource for viewing all of the files about the CIA's misdeeds is the CIA itself: https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/home

Something you're leaving out of this conversation is that your friends at the KGB/FSB had successfully penetrated the CIA, and they would have happily revealed the truth to the world by now.
 
So, your are still clinging to your Guilty until proven innocent-axiom. Texas justice?

Nope.

His rifle, his bullets, fired from his place of employment. Flees the scene of his crime, shoots Officer Tippet, attempts to kill a second DPD officer in the theater. Lies during his initial interrogation.

I'd take that case to court any day.

Fun evil?

In this case yes.
 
OK, the specific claim is that Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots at President John Kennedy, hitting him twice and causing the death of JFK.

The evidence for this is the Warren Commission report and the accompanying volumes of exhibits, the HSCA report*, the Clark report, the Rockefeller report, and the ARRB report.
Ok. My claim is that Pope Paul VI killed JFK with magic and the evidence of this is in the Vatican Library.

Go seek.

What evidence are you referring to as "SO CALLED"? Do you have any evidence supporting your claims, or is it the standard conspiracy theorist handwave of "If it doesn't support my belief, it must be fake!"?
Evidence is so called evidence until proven being legitimate evidence. Calling something ”evidence” doesn’t magically make it so. You also have to show that this is the case.

Example:

DPD’s Lt. Day said sworn under oath to the WC that he could see his initials on two of the cartridges allegedly found on the floor in the so called ”snipers nest”.

If I tell you that these initials are nowhere to be found on said cartridges, what are you conclusion from this?

Still evidence? For what?

Done and done by multiple posters. Just because you insist on sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" doesn't mean that other posters aren't reading and understanding the rebuttals to your claims.
What a strange comment. Are you sure that scientific scepticism is something you really want to pursue? It takes a little discipline and commitment to the truth.

Are you up to it?

*The HSCA is a particularity fascinating case because the Chief Counsel, Robert Blakey, was a committed conspiracy theorist
No he was not. He was chosen to replace Sprauge because they knew he would not stir up some dirt pointing to the CIA and US Security State.

When confronted with the results from the acoustical evidence he did this:

- He convinced Barger that in order for his Congressional overseers to bye a shot from the knoll = conspiracy, they had to do a little editing of the scientific findings. Exclude one of the four shots from behind as a ”false alarm” and move the knoll-shot from number 4 (of 5) to number 4 (of 4). Why? Because it did not threat the official mythology of Oswald as the killer of JFK.

This little maneauver created a tremendous confusion which still reins to day, 40 years later.

I’m here to set the record straight.

of the "Mafia did it" faction
A completely harmless position visavi the US power elite, yes.

and spent his entire tenure desperately driving his staff to find something, anything that pointed to a conspiracy.
Wrong. He spent his entire tenure to stear away from everything that pointed to the real culprits, the US power elite and their errand boys in the CIA.

The fact that the best he could do with the full power of a Congressional investigation behind him was the quickly debunked acoustic evidence says volumes about the lack of any evidence showing a conspiracy. It's about as close as you can get to proving a negative.
You seem to know very little of what really happened inside HSCA before and after Blakey took over.

This is a good primer from the inside: https://www.amazon.com/Last-Investi...446314&sr=8-1&keywords=the+last+investigation

I suggest you read it.
 
Given the strength of the acoustic evidence this is enough to conlclude he must have been there.

If you disagree you have two options:

1. Refute that McLain COULD have been on the right spots at the right time.

Done and done. Dale Myers did the heavy lifting for us. McLain wasn't where he needed to be. The photographic record proves it, and reinforces what McLain said from minute one.
 
Done and done. Dale Myers did the heavy lifting for us. McLain wasn't where he needed to be. The photographic record proves it, and reinforces what McLain said from minute one.
Did he now. Where in your video do Myers show that McLain couldn’t have been on the bike with the mike?
 
And yet you are clearly bigoted against the Irish, talking about us as if we lack self-control,
That is a lie.


and are all walking around barely containing homicidal rage due to things that happened centuries ago on the other side of the Atlantic.
Greers own son said that his father did not like JFK because of his ethnicity. You are unaware of the ethnic conflict between protestants and catholics on Ireland for centuries?

You are clearly not interested in the truth,
The Truth is the only thing I really care about.

and you only care about human rights for those humans you deem worthy.
Human rights are per definition all humans rights.

You have been shown being wrong so many times these last days that the only thing you have left is trash talking your opponent telling lies and attack ad hominem.

No substance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom