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

[RoboTimbo]

No, you have not.

LOL.

 

[RoboTimbo]

You have to PROVE he couldn’t.

Nope. You've been told you won't be allowed to switch the burden of proof.

Are you attempting it because you lack the knowledge necessary to discuss the subject yourself?

 

[traxy]

Prove that Z-150 synchs with H-648.

Start at page 33 of the Myers report. "Synchronizing Zapruder and Hughes"

It's 19 pages with dozens of images.

I've spoon fed this to you enough times now. The films match, there is more than enough reference points between the two clips. The most prominent is the white SS follow up car.

https://imgur.com/a/Hl3Dy5u

Once you have that as a synchronization point and you know the frame rate of both films, you can say with confidence which frames sync up.

 

[RoboTimbo]

No, they are not. They show five rifle shot with a probability less than 1/100 000 for being random noise/static.

Comprehensively and thoroughly debunked multiple times by different sources which you would know if you had any knowledge beyond what your CT sites tell you to think.

 

[traxy]

Wrong. I have to show that he within a reasonable time frame COULD have been at the right spots at the right time.

When are you planning on getting started?

 

[SpitfireIX]

Henri McPhee is to 'Jeffrey MacDonald is innocent' as Manifesto is to 'Oswald is innocent'.

Henri comes to us today courtesy of the "Trials and Errors" section of this Forum.

He must have gotten tired of losing over there and came here for a respite.

He can normally be found arguing that three hippies killed Jeffrey MacDonald's wife and daughters, and unborn son here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=327578

Hank

Actually, he's recently been explaining here how Chamberlain was right to appease Hitler at Munich, because in October 1938 Germany could have bombed Britain into submission in a week, and then gone on to conquer France (and Belgium) by employing the same strategy as in May 1940, while still fighting Czechoslovakia, plus the British Empire and Dominions wouldn't have fought anyway, and how the extra year to "get organized" made all the difference in assuring ultimate Allied victory.

 

[bknight]

Already discussed a couple of pages back. Yes, they were treading a fine line between scientific integrity and their dependence on government funding and orders.

They had all eyes on them. From above and from below from the critical community. Blakey ’persuaded’ them to make compromise, excluding shot number three and move the fatal shot from the front, to the back. To ”please” his congressional overseers.

Still, the science in the report is there, Blakeys presentation of it be damned.

[snip BS]

You have made this allegation a number of times, but have you to cite anything that might prove this.

 

[Axxman300]

The same power that assassinated JFK in a coup d’etat, 22 nov, 1963.

It has many names. The Deep State. The War State. The Military-Industrial Complex. US Security State. The Oligarchs.

Who is it that advertise in Popular Mechanichs? Paying the salaries to its employees? What power are they licking up to?

Same as you do.

Deep State is a Russian social media invention.

War State? Never heard of it.

Military-Industrial Complex, Ike's over-misused phrase which is nothing but a political ghost story.

US Security State - smoking weed makes people paranoid. In this country it is used by Neo-Nazis, and KKK, you'll fit right in.

JKF embraced and expanded the CIA's operation table. JFK expanded the military investing billions in new weapons systems. JFK was enamored with all things espionage.

So why would these forces kill a man who was clearly their lap-dog? How do you not know anything about JFK, Eisenhower, or US history relevant to the early 1960's?

Your theory is foolish.

 

[Axxman300]

I’m not claiming it was a firecracker, I’m claiming a number of withesses that thought it was a firecracker.

You asked how I knew, and I pointed out that 100 citizens of Dallas aren't blind.

A number of witnesses thought that the first loud sound/s was a firecracker or a vehicle back firing, not a rifle shot.

Because they can all sound the same. I live in a town with 2 street gangs, I hear all three on Saturday nights.

No, they are not. They show five rifle shot with a probability less than 1/100 000 for being random noise/static.

This is scientific proof.

No, there is no proof, and you clearly do not understand the scientific method. The HSCA experiment is just like any other initial scientific claim, the paper is issued, and then other scientists look at it, and run their own tests. If the initial work is solid then it stands, but if the work is flawed then it's back to the drawing board.

McLain was not in position for the HSCA's thesis to work. McLain isn't even sure if his radio was left on, and suggests that it was another officer based on the sounds on the tape.

Either way, the acoustic evidence is voided.

What? I’m talking of Jack Ruby being identified at the Houston/Elm intersection minutes after the shooting, by TSBD employee, Victoria Adams. And, that he had no real alibi for the time around the shooting.

She's wrong. Plus six other people saw him in different places in Dealey Plaza before, during, and after the assassination which means nobody really saw him there. The only reliable witnesses are the folks who saw him at the offices of the Dallas Morning News (and everyone at the Morning News knew Jack Ruby, he was a publicity whore).

 

[Axxman300]

They had all eyes on them. From above and from below from the critical community. Blakey ’persuaded’ them to make compromise, excluding shot number three and move the fatal shot from the front, to the back. To ”please” his congressional overseers.

Still, the science in the report is there, Blakeys presentation of it be damned.

Translation: I don't like Blakey because his bogey man is different than my bogey man.

There was two HSCA. The first one under Sprauge and the second one under Blakey. The first one was the real deal, trying to solve the assassination. The second one was compromised from day one, Blakey giving the CIA a carte blanch and veto to deside what could be published.

The fox is investigating the nightly raid in the hen house.

Sprauge was a not-job. He saw phantom gunmen everywhere.

Blakey didn't give the CIA any dispensation; the act of declassifying material is a complex, and lengthy process, and there is a long line of people involved where any single member can veto declassification.

The crowds was sheering the Kennedys, not the press-cars way back in the motorcade.

The gunfire was directed at the Kennedys and not the press cars way back where you've just admitted McLain was riding.

Prove that he had his siren on when driving to Parkland.

Prove he didn't. Prove to us that McLain is the one cop in US history would couldn't wait for any excuse to run his siren.

His ’memory’ are now in severe dispute, and no, there is no reason to believe he could remember a (at the time) trivial episode 15 years later.

No, it has never been in dispute thanks to the photographic evidence.

If he can’t get the memory of Mrs. Kennedy on the limo trunk straight, why expect he could remember having his siren on?

One is memory and the other is reflex.

 

[HSienzant]

What? I’m talking of Jack Ruby being identified at the Houston/Elm intersection minutes after the shooting, by TSBD employee, Victoria Adams. And, that he had no real alibi for the time around the shooting.

No, you were claiming something different here:

Jack Ruby asked some of the employees in the News paper office if they were keen on coming with him to the president motorcade and looking at the ”fire works”, moments before disappearing from the office.Hmm ....

But no matter, you are wrong either way.

You've posted no evidence of the former. I exposed the latter here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12275322&postcount=2038

1.
I'd love to see the testimony from the employees that Ruby said anything about fireworks in the Dallas Morning News offices.

Let me help you out. Here's the testimony of the three people I'm aware of that worked at a Dallas newpaper:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/newnam.htm
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/rea.htm
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/watherwax.htm

I invite Manifesto to read it for the first time. I invite him to tell us where those employees said anything about Ruby mentioning fireworks, at any time.


2.
I'd want to caution everyone again against accepting any claims made by conspiracy theorists anywhere, at any time. There is no documentation in the record that Ruby made any such statement as claimed by Manifesto. Conspiracy theorists never bother to ascertain the facts, nor read the testimony. They are more than happy to repeat some nonsense that is fourth, fifth, or sixth hand speculation mutated into 'fact' as if it's true.

Ruby was at the DNM office on the afternoon of 11/22/63 to revise the ad copy for his night club. No one testified to seeing him prior to 12:40.

Newnam (not Newman) said he first saw Ruby at "approximately 12:40", which is ten minutes after the assassination.

Rea said he first saw Ruby about 1 pm, "within 5 or 10 minutes either way" That is, between 12:50pm and 1:10pm.

Watherwax saw Ruby on 11/23/63, the day after the assassination, "about 5 minutes after 4" in the morning. This was to change his advertisement that his nightclubs would be closed Saturday, Sunday, and Monday nights (11/23 - 11/25) to honor the memory of the late President.

There is absolutely no testimony that Ruby saw any of the Dallas Morning News staff prior to the assassination, nor that he said anything about going to see the parade together, nor anything about fireworks.


Here's the truth:
In 1977, a man with a criminal record, Bob Vanderslice, who was also an IRS informant, told his IRS contact, Arlen Fuhlendorf, that he saw Ruby shortly before the assassination outside the postal annex (at the corner of Houston and Commerce, facing the Depository) and Vanderslice in 1977 said Ruby made that comment about the fireworks.

Fuhlendorf wrote up the claim in a memo, but said he never believed a word of it.

https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/...ory-just-bad-guy-telling-good-guy-great-story

So an undocumented claim, made 14 years after the assassination, with no verification whatsoever, somehow becomes a 'fact' to Manifesto and conspiracy theorists like him, and gets transmuted into the nonsense Manifesto claims.

Along the way, it mutates from one man to several hearing Jack make this claim. It mutates from an undocumented claim made 14 years after the fact by a low-level criminal, a burglar, to being sourced to honest newspapermen.

All to make it appear less specious.

And just in case there's any doubt, he adds the specious "Hmm ...." at the end as if to imply "Think about it. Of course this is suspicious! How could it not be?"

It's still just an unproven claim by Manifesto. He apparently specializes in those.

Hmm ....

Hank

 

[OKBob]

It has many names. The Deep State. The War State. The Military-Industrial Complex. US Security State. The Oligarchs.

Thanks for being specific. I don't recall subscribing or donating to those groups. Why should we listen to you further? First, you don't know the evidence. At least twice in the last two days you've shown ignorance of the basic testimony of Officers Baker and McLean. Second, you're a faith-based CT fundamentalist. Actually, I take back my comparison between you and what Hofstadter was writing about. You're way beyond what he had in mind.

 

[manifesto]

Start at page 33 of the Myers report. "Synchronizing Zapruder and Hughes"

It's 19 pages with dozens of images.

I've spoon fed this to you enough times now. The films match, there is more than enough reference points between the two clips. The most prominent is the white SS follow up car.

https://imgur.com/a/Hl3Dy5u

Once you have that as a synchronization point and you know the frame rate of both films, you can say with confidence which frames sync up.

No. In order to synchronize the two films with ”epipolar geometry” there have two be two overlapping films/photos of exactly the same object at exactly the same time and if the object is moving, one have to know its speed at the time of the epipolar snapshot.

1. There is no undisputed common object filmed at exactly the same time by Zapruder and Hughes and Myers doesn’t use ”epipolar geometry” to establish its (car-5) exact position.

2. The exact speed of, in this case car-5, is not known at the relevant time frame.

That is, adding almost a second for the first shot (Z-175) another one and half for Hughes/car-5’s position and a couple of more seconds adjusting for speed and suddenly you have ample time for McLain to reach the spot for picking up the sound of the first shot.

And, very important, it is YOU who have to prove that McLain couldn’t possibly have had the time to reach said spot within reasonable speed if you want to refute the acoustical evidence.

 

[traxy]

No. In order to synchronize the two films with ”epipolar geometry” there have two be two overlapping films/photos of exactly the same object at exactly the same time and if the object is moving, one have to know its speed at the time of the epipolar snapshot.

The SS car is one of the overlapping objects. I've provided you a capture of it at the same spot in both films.

There are a half a dozen more.

1. There is no undisputed common object filmed at exactly the same time by Zapruder and Hughes and Myers doesn’t use ”epipolar geometry” to establish its (car-5) exact position.

The white SS follow up car. I've provided you the image showing where it syncs in both films. Do you have a specific objection to that image?

That is, adding almost a second for the first shot (Z-175) another one and half for Hughes/car-5’s position and a couple of more seconds adjusting for speed and suddenly you have ample time for McLain to reach the spot for picking up the sound of the first shot.

HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Nice try.

The films sync. I've shown you where multiple times with images. Myers has 19 pages of info where he explains the speed of each individual object, even though that isn't necessary to find a single reference point common to both films. The reference point is the SS follow up car, in the same spot in the Hughes film and the Zapruder film. That's where they synchronize.

You've been shown. Now, explain how McLain traveled 174 feet in 1.5 seconds or you're throwing in the towel. Your constant stalling and deflecting got old a long time ago.

 

[manifesto]

No, you were claiming something different here:



But no matter, you are wrong either way.

You've posted no evidence of the former. I exposed the latter here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12275322&postcount=2038

You are absolutely right and I am admitting my sloppy mistake, when writing from memory without checking the details. My bad.

1. There is witness testimony (FBI informant) saying that Ruby was talking of the president upcoming motorcade as ”fireworks”.

2. There is witness testimony of seeing Ruby on and around the Houston/Elm in the relevant time frame.

3. There are multiple witnesses reporting what they at the time thought were fireworks just before they heard what the thought was the first rifle shot.

4. I’m not claiming that it actually was fireworks, I’m claiming it could be a reasonable probability.

5. I’m claiming it is a possibility that the conspirators used fireworks in order to confuse and divert the public and that Jack Ruby, in case this happened , would be a prime suspect.

 

[carlitos]

You are absolutely right and I am admitting my sloppy mistake, when writing from memory without checking the details. My bad.

1. There is witness testimony (FBI informant) saying that Ruby was talking of the president upcoming motorcade as ”fireworks”.

2. There is witness testimony of seeing Ruby on and around the Houston/Elm in the relevant time frame.

3. There are multiple witnesses reporting what they at the time thought were fireworks just before they heard what the thought was the first rifle shot.

4. I’m not claiming that it actually was fireworks, I’m claiming it could be a reasonable probability.

5. I’m claiming it is a possibility that the conspirators used fireworks in order to confuse and divert the public and that Jack Ruby, in case this happened , would be a prime suspect.

This is really, really stupid. You should turn your computer off now.

 

[manifesto]

This is really, really stupid. You should turn your computer off now.

Lots of witnesses reporting what they thought were fireworks before they heard the rifle shots. Acoustical data showing loud noise before the first shot.

You say that this is stupid? Define stupid.

 

[traxy]

You say that this is stupid? Define stupid.

Creating a diversion that sounds exactly like gunfire right before your assassination attempt on the president!

What if Kennedy suddenly ducks? What if the SS agents are on the ball and get in your line of fire? What if William Greer hammers on the gas petal?

Jesus man, the thought that an assassination team would start throwing firecrackers as a diversion BEFORE THE ASSASSINATION is literally one of the dumbest things I've ever heard a CT say. Like ever.

 

[carlitos]

 

[RoboTimbo]

Define stupid.

Conspirator One: "I know, let's create a diversion by throwing firecrackers under the limo so our 47 snipers will know where to shoot!"

Conspirator Two: "And we can plant a different weapon that shoots a different caliber bullet in the TSBD!"

Conspirator Three: "And we should have them fire five shots and only plant three spent casings from the (wink wink) murder weapon! (snicker)"

Conspirator Four: "And we'll set up a totally innocent harmless ex Marine who wouldn't hurt a fly as a patsy by somehow making him leave the TSBD, murder an unsuspecting officer for no reason and attempt to murder other officers when they corner him in a movie theater!"

Chucklehead: "Sounds reasonable to me."