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

[traxy]

What ”two sets”?

What ”innocuous item”?

Who on earth have suggested otherwise?

This was you I believe - "It seems to be different and contradicting stories of this event. Some say that the arresting officer blocked the firing hammer and some say the gun missfired with a dent in the hull to prove it.

Which one is it?"

What difference does this minor discrepancy make in the overall picture?

 

[CORed]

What. Height. Is. The. White. Blob?

No, the top of the car 6 windshield was not "waist high". You're embarrassing yourself. The top of my windshield is shoulder height on me and I'm 6'5. If the top of the windshield was waist high, that would put the top of the door at your knees, and the bottom of the door in the pavement.

Come on man. Do better.

That must be the height of the windshield on maifesto's car. You know, the one with the peddles.

 

[Pope130]

This was you I believe - "It seems to be different and contradicting stories of this event. Some say that the arresting officer blocked the firing hammer and some say the gun missfired with a dent in the hull to prove it.

Which one is it?"

What difference does this minor discrepancy make in the overall picture?

Is it even a discrepancy? Arresting officer, grasping the gun, and retarding the hammer fall and cylinder rotation, could result in a soft hit on the cartridge. Both witness testimonies are true, describing different perceptions of the same event.

 

[jeffas69]

Is it even a discrepancy? Arresting officer, grasping the gun, and retarding the hammer fall and cylinder rotation, could result in a soft hit on the cartridge. Both witness testimonies are true, describing different perceptions of the same event.

Ouch! Very well done!

 

[manifesto]

Good response. Now please provide some evidence for your wild speculations.

Whatever, dude.

 

[manifesto]

This was you I believe - "It seems to be different and contradicting stories of this event. Some say that the arresting officer blocked the firing hammer and some say the gun missfired with a dent in the hull to prove it.

Which one is it?"

What difference does this minor discrepancy make in the overall picture?

What?

I haven’t even started yet? What ”item” are you talking about?

 

[manifesto]

Is it even a discrepancy? Arresting officer, grasping the gun, and retarding the hammer fall and cylinder rotation, could result in a soft hit on the cartridge. Both witness testimonies are true, describing different perceptions of the same event.

Wait until you read the whole story. It is more. Be patient.

 

[Disbelief]

Wait until you read the whole story. It is more. Be patient.

You keep saying that, but never follow through. Just give us your theory based on the evidence, that way it paves the way to have a better discussion.

 

[Axxman300]

You are the one making the claims above, you are the one who need to substantiate them with supporting evidence.

Do it.

Talking to yourself?

 

[Steve]

Wait until you read the whole story. It is more. Be patient.

You do not have "the whole story" or even part of a story. You have a load of inane and unconnected *what-if's*. You have been asked many times to provide your cohesive narrative. Each time you have either ignored the request or changed the subject. You have no credibility, no story, and no idea of what actually happened in Dallas on November 22 1963.

Prove me wrong. Post your narrative.

 

[Axxman300]

Wait until you read the whole story. It is more. Be patient.

Sure there's more.

The gun they took out of his hand, the gun Oswald admitted to having on him, was the same gun that fired to bullets that killed Tippet. The proved that by matching the slugs from Tippit's body, and matching the strike-marks on the shells recovered from the scene to the gun.

The .38 is literally a smoking gun.

Oswald fries for Tippit alone.

 

[Tomtomkent]

Because it is YOU WHO MAKE THE CLAIM.

No.
I made several posts telling you I didn’t have, and continue not to have, any interest in playing barrister for the prosecution.

You know what the established facts are, as far as this conversation is concerned, because you are familiar, by your own claim, with the WC and the facts.

I don’t need to make a claim.
I don’t want to make a claim.
I don’t even have to pretend the Null is represented by a perfect, water tight case.
I don’t pretend to know the one and only truth.
I know the accepted account is that of the WC.
It is a coherent narrative that matches the best number of evidence points, with fewest caveats or assumptions.

If you disagree with the WC, then state your alternative claims, with supporting evidence.

 

[manifesto]

No.
I made several posts telling you I didn’t have, and continue not to have, any interest in playing barrister for the prosecution.

You know what the established facts are, as far as this conversation is concerned, because you are familiar, by your own claim, with the WC and the facts.

I don’t need to make a claim.
I don’t want to make a claim.
I don’t even have to pretend the Null is represented by a perfect, water tight case.
I don’t pretend to know the one and only truth.
I know the accepted account is that of the WC.It is a coherent narrative that matches the best number of evidence points, with fewest caveats or assumptions.

If you disagree with the WC, then state your alternative claims, with supporting evidence.

Accepted by whom?

 

[BStrong]

Accepted by whom?

People who don't hold world views based on popular fiction.

 

[MicahJava]

 

[traxy]

Sure there's more.

The gun they took out of his hand, the gun Oswald admitted to having on him, was the same gun that fired to bullets that killed Tippet. The proved that by matching the slugs from Tippit's body, and matching the strike-marks on the shells recovered from the scene to the gun.

The .38 is literally a smoking gun.

Oswald fries for Tippit alone.

Precisely.

8 positive identifications as the shooter or man fleeing the scene, attacked more cops when cornered, possessed the gun that killed Tippit, gun ballistically linked to every recovered shell and one recovered slug, full paper trail for the gun (which, let's be honest, you wouldn't even need at this point).

Like I said a few pages back, the greenest prosecutor on the planet would have gotten Oswald the chair.

 

[Tomtomkent]

Accepted by whom?

Historical consensus.
And as the consensus view of this conversation for several threads now. IIRC it was pretty much the OP of the original thread cascade.

 

[Elagabalus]

No. It is lower. Look at Hughes when both car-5 and car-6 is lined up looking from behind.

And, there is no white anything on top of car-6’s windshield.

Here's the link:

http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/report_download.html

Please download the quicktime files and see for yourself where Myers synchs up the footage. If you download the pdf he goes on (at some length) about his synchronization techniques i.e.using not only just car location points but also bystanders waving (even though the image is blurry their hands in the air provide a way to time each sequence).

 

[smartcooky]

No. It is lower. Look at Hughes when both car-5 and car-6 is lined up looking from behind.

And, there is no white anything on top of car-6’s windshield.

Car-6 is a convertible, but the White SS car (Car-5) is a hardtop, and the roof is white. This is one of the things that helps confirm that Car-5 is the car that it visible in both H648 and Z162... you can see the roof in both shots.

There was no other white hardtop in the motorcade.

You can see the white convertible - Car-6 (which was directly behind the white hardtop - Car-5) in the distance in the next shot. Now whatever the white blob is that you are obsessing about, it is NOT Officer HB McLain, because he is here...

... absolutely 100% confirmed by his own testimony and that of his partner, Officer Marion Baker. It is beyond reasonable to expect that these policemen knew where their duty station was in the motorcade.

If you think Officer HB McLain was lying... you have to prove it, with evidence.
If you think officer ML baker was lying, you have to prove it, with evidence.
If you think this is NOT HB McLain, then you have to show who it was, and prove it, with evidence.

 

[smartcooky]

It doesn’t matter where you store your evidence, you have to provide the source, cite the evidence and argue for its veracity.

No, we don't have to do that last bit at all.

What you have to so is argue, and prove the source material is incorrect - burden of proof is on you.