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

[manifesto]

Can you provide a link to where he stated he did not mean the railroad bridge?

No need. If he meant the railroad bridge, he would have said so. But he didn’t, he said, the railroad tracks.

End of story.

 

[RoboTimbo]

No need. If he meant the railroad bridge, he would have said so. But he didn’t, he said, the railroad tracks.

End of story.

It's more likely he meant the railroad bridge.

 

[RoboTimbo]

, did you ever say why Oswald went on to murder Officer Tippitt after assassinating JFK and then attempt to murder more officers with the same revolver in the theater when they had him cornered?

 

[manifesto]

So, in my theory, those witnesses are unreliable and wrong, because I have all the shots coming from the Depository. Right?

And in your theory, those witnesses are unreliable and wrong, because you have the shots coming from multiple sources, and they only named one source. Right?

Hank

I responded to the statement saying that only 13% of the witnesses thought they heard the shots comming from the knoll, when in fact most of the asked witnesses, 52 of them, said that the shots came from there.

The veracity of any witness is an altogether different topic.

 

[RoboTimbo]

I responded to the statement saying that only 13% of the witnesses thought they heard the shots comming from the knoll, when in fact most of the asked witnesses, 52 of them, said that the shots came from there.

The veracity of any witness is an altogether different topic.

Now you just need compelling evidence for shots other than Oswald's.

 

[manifesto]

I find it amusing how close JFK cranks are to religion. Everything must be taken on faith because what? Faith.

There is nothing one could not believe on the basis of "faith". Nobody has ever come up with anything one could not believe on the basis of "faith". It is the big excuse for intellectual laziness. I have "faith" that there are aliens at area 51 running a yuge operation, therefore there must be such simply because I have faith that it is so. Belief absent evidence. It is simply religion in a tuxedo masquerading.

You are the one masquerading hiding behind the concept of scientific skepticism, while at the same time being a member of the Mighty Curch of the Lone Nut.

Busted.

 

[jeffas69]

The tests was made to see if echoes could confuse the subjects regarding from where a rifle shot was fired in Dealey Plaza. No, it couldn’t.

But according to your theory the 52 supposed knoll direction only witnessess have to be confused. Because according to you the shots came from two directions. These 52 witnessess if they claim shots came from the grassy knoll only are definitely confused.

Doesn't that bother you knowing that? In addition, according to your theory, everyone of the witnessess who heard shots from the TSBD only have to be at least partially correct.

 

[Axxman300]

One assassin. Three shots. From the TSBD. Period.
One assassin. Three shots. From the TSBD. Period.
One assassin. Three shots. From the TSBD. Period.
One assassin. Three shots. From the TSBD. Period.
One assassin. Three shots. From the TSBD. Period.
One assassin. Three shots. From the TSBD. Period.
One assassin. Three shots. From the TSBD. Period.
One assassin. Three shots. From the TSBD. Period.
One assassin. Three shots. From the TSBD. Period.
One assassin. Three shots. From the TSBD. Period.
One assassin. Three shots. From the TSBD. Period.
One assassin. Three shots. From the TSBD. Period.
One assassin. Three shots. From the TSBD. Period.
One assassin. Three shots. From the TSBD. Period.
One assassin. Three shots. From the TSBD. Period.
One assassin. Three shots. From the TSBD. Period.
One assassin. Three shots. From the TSBD. Period.
One assassin. Three shots. From the TSBD. Period.
One assassin. Three shots. From the TSBD. Period.
.....

Wellcome to a brave new world.

That's what the evidence and the science says.

Just once I'd love to log in here to find a clever individual making a sophisticated claim of conspiracy.

You know, tell a story about Oswald meeting a nice Cuban girl at the bus stop who sets him up with a CIA anti-Castro paramilitary cell working with Mongoose. Or make it deeper by having Oswald marked as an easy gimp while he's in New Orleans, and the CIA/Mongoose cell sets him up with a honeytrap that leads him to kill the President in order to escape to Cuba. Give me a story like this cited from a 1970's political newspaper out of Florida, or New Orleans, or another Gulf state; something that I have to research, something that forces me to pick up a phone to call a local library to ask for a photocopy of the newspaper so I can track down the author.

Don't give me multiple gunmen in Dealey Plaza, don't give me a story that has been shot to pieces so many times it's basically a joke today.

 

[traxy]

I see nothing at all. It’s pitch black. Shadow or painted on?

Weird. I see it just fine.

Now we've come to my favorite part of this conversation, insinuating that the Zapruder film has been faked because it doesn't support your argument.. Don't worry, I'll burst that little bubble soon enough.

Do you see the right back of the head in any detail in these films?

Yup, sure do. More than enough detail to know there is no gaping grapefruit sized exit wound back there.

Yes, because ALL OTHER EVIDENCE says it’s there.

Except for every piece of visual evidence, all of which shows definitively that it wasn't.

The speed of forward ejecta is four times the speed of back spatter. The light conditions behind the president is different than from above and from in front. And, that black patch seem suspiciously .... artifical.

HAHAHAHAHA! Utter and complete nonsense.

Answer me two questions manifesto.

Where do you see the exit wound in the Zapruder film?

Where do you see the vast majority of the debris in all 3 films?

 

[Tomtomkent]

No need. If he meant the railroad bridge, he would have said so. But he didn’t, he said, the railroad tracks.

End of story.

Is that what he would mean? Or what you would mean?
Is it that uncommon for people to say they were "near the railway" because of a bridge, being a nice easy landmark for the embankment?
The same logic could be applied in reverse: "If he meant the railway by the knoll, he would have said the knoll, or the goods yards, because those are what it is called!"

 

[manifesto]

But according to your theory the 52 supposed knoll direction only witnessess have to be confused. Because according to you the shots came from two directions. These 52 witnessess if they claim shots came from the grassy knoll only are definitely confused.

Doesn't that bother you knowing that? In addition, according to your theory, everyone of the witnessess who heard shots from the TSBD only have to be at least partially correct.

I say it was probably two factors in play here:

1. Confusion.

2. The way they were asked/not asked.

That said, echoes did not cause the confusion, since they were easy to separate from the original source of the shots.

No matter what caused the confusion, most of the witnesses who was asked, said the shot/s came from the knoll. There is no reason to expect that those witnesses were wrong but those who said that the shots came from TSBD were correct.

On top of that, there is reported instances of witness intimidation and manipulation in favor of only one direction, the TSBD, and in favor of only three shots.

The fix was more or less in from the get go.

 

[Tomtomkent]

I say it was probably two factors in play here:

1. Confusion.

2. The way they were asked/not asked.

That said, echoes did not cause the confusion, since they were easy to separate from the original source of the shots.

No matter what caused the confusion, most of the witnesses who was asked, said the shot/s came from the knoll. There is no reason to expect that those witnesses were wrong but those who said that the shots came from TSBD were correct.

On top of that, there is reported instances of witness intimidation and manipulation in favor of only one direction, the TSBD, and in favor of only three shots.

The fix was more or less in from the get go.

So you are trying to use flawed, inaccurate or inconclusive data, by assuming it validates your view.

 

[smartcooky]

You start counting the shots? One, two, three.. ?

No, that is not how the human mind works. Believe me, I know this from personal experience when being under fire. You don't consciously count the number of shots; you don't think to yourself "Oh, those are gunshots, I had better count them." What happens is that the number and frequency of the shots is imprinted on your brain, even as you are taking cover. Twenty-nine years later, I still remember clearly the number and spacing of the shots when we came under fire near the ceasefire line east of Sulaymaniyah; seven shots in about 5 seconds.... bang......... bang.... babang.... bang.. bang.. bang. I will NEVER forget this; and no training that we did prepared me for the first time I was shot at. It gives me the willies just thinking about it.

 

[manifesto]

Weird. I see it just fine.

Wow. The laser eye-ball-dude.

Now we've come to my favorite part of this conversation, insinuating that the Zapruder film has been faked because it doesn't support your argument.. Don't worry, I'll burst that little bubble soon enough.

1. Almost everyone of the 50 doctors, nurses, SS-agents, FBI-agents, x-ray technicians, from three hospitals and two federal police agencies, that observered JFK’s headwounds close up (including the Harper fragment) halucinated seeing a BIG GAPING WHOLE in the right back of the head, big as a grape fruit. With brain substance including cerebellum oozing out from the wound on the table.

Or:

2. Some of the photographic record or the subject photographed were manipulated in order to conform to the three shots from the TSBD Lone Nut scenario.

Ever heard of Occam?

Yup, sure do. More than enough detail to know there is no gaping grapefruit sized exit wound back there.

Good for you. That leaves you with alternative ”1” and a reasonable explanation of how collective psychosis hit three hospitals and two federal police agencies at the same time at different places with the same hallucination —-> a big gaping wound in the right back of JFK’s head.

Was it a type of virus? Secret enemy brain beam weapons? Hypnosis?

Except for every piece of visual evidence, all of which shows definitively that it wasn't.

Wrong. Except for a tiny amount of photografic record, easy to manipulate.

HAHAHAHAHA! Utter and complete nonsense.

How weired is that for a laughter? Creepy.

Answer me two questions manifesto.

Where do you see the exit wound in the Zapruder film?

I do not see anything in the right back of the head. It’s pitch black.

Where do you see the vast majority of the debris in all 3 films?

Above the exploding head.

- Research of forward blood spatter have shown velocities up to 3.59 times faster than the incomming bullet = hardly visible in a super 8 film from a distance, although there is a couple of bigger whitish fragments traveling in great speed behind the limo detectable in the Z-film.

- The upwards traveling head matter (blood/brain/bone) is caused by a so called ”Kronlein Schuss-effect” where pressure in the cranial cavity creates a bursting mechanism through the fragmented top of the head. This doesn’t show the trajectory of the bullet, though.

- The typical back spatter in front and above JFK’s head = bullet from in front.

- The Harper fragment found by a medical student in the grass south of Elm Street where the shooting took place, the day efter the assassination. Three forensic pathologists (Harper et.al) concluded that the 7 x 5 cm bone fragment was fresh and from occipital (rear head) cranial bone. They wrote their report, photographed the fragment and delivered it to the Dallas FBI never to be seen again.

- JFK’s head violently being thrown back and to the left when hit by the fatal bullet = momentum from an incomming bullet from in front to the right.

Shall I continue?

 

[manifesto]

So you are trying to use flawed, inaccurate or inconclusive data, by assuming it validates your view.

No, I’m showing that:

1. There are no reasons to argue that the ca 52 witnesses hearing shots from the knoll were mistaken while the ca 48 witnesses hearing shots from the TSBD were correct.

2. There are no reasons to expect that witnesses hearing multiple shots from different directions fired tightly spaced in two successive bursts, would be keeping exact count of the exact number of shots and thereafter report it correctly to investigators who were clearly biased in favor of three shots from the TSBD.

3. The very reason for HSCA to hire the two world leading expert teams in the field of acoustic analysis was to scientifically determine the number of shots and from where they were fired, because the witness record was so inconclusive.

 

[Tomtomkent]

No, I’m showing that:

1. There are no reasons to argue that the ca 52 witnesses hearing shots from the knoll were mistaken while the ca 48 witnesses hearing shots from the TSBD were correct.

Other than the ballistics, the wounds caused, the filmed record, all being consistent with the only fire arm we have any evidence for being fired?

2. There are no reasons to expect that witnesses hearing multiple shots from different directions fired tightly spaced in two successive bursts, would be keeping exact count of the exact number of shots and thereafter report it correctly to investigators who were clearly biased in favor of three shots from the TSBD.

So... you ARE trying to suggest that data you considered flawed or inaccurate validates your views.

3. The very reason for HSCA to hire the two world leading expert teams in the field of acoustic analysis was to scientifically determine the number of shots and from where they were fired, because the witness record was so inconclusive.

Was that their remit? Or was their remit to determine if one recording showed evidence of gunshots?
Those would be the teams whose analysis stated their analysis offered a high probability of more gunshots IF AND ONLY IF the recording could be shown to be from a motorbike at locations you have not shown the motorbike to be?

You seem rather blinkered by the idea that there WAS a conspiracy, and are determined to re-frame the evidence in ways that validate your conclusion, instead of letting the evidence lead you to a conclusion.

Is this not exactly what you claim to find so repulsive in "the church" of those who consider the lone gunman explanation the accepted narrative?

 

[abaddon]

You are the one masquerading hiding behind the concept of scientific skepticism, while at the same time being a member of the Mighty Curch of the Lone Nut.

Busted.

You are the one claiming gunsmoke as evidence. That means your claimed grassy knoll shooter was using a musket.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Wow. The laser eye-ball-dude.

1. Almost everyone of the 50 doctors, nurses, SS-agents, FBI-agents, x-ray technicians, from three hospitals and two federal police agencies, that observered JFK’s headwounds close up (including the Harper fragment) halucinated seeing a BIG GAPING WHOLE in the right back of the head, big as a grape fruit. With brain substance including cerebellum oozing out from the wound on the table.

Can you point that out on the Z film?

Or:

2. Some of the photographic record or the subject photographed were manipulated in order to conform to the three shots from the TSBD Lone Nut scenario.

Can you link to where there is evidence of that?

Ever heard of Occam?

Good for you. That leaves you with alternative ”1” and a reasonable explanation of how collective psychosis hit three hospitals and two federal police agencies at the same time at different places with the same hallucination —-> a big gaping wound in the right back of JFK’s head.

Was it a type of virus? Secret enemy brain beam weapons? Hypnosis?

Wrong. Except for a tiny amount of photografic record, easy to manipulate.

Can you link to something showing evidence of that? Not a CT website, of course, since their opinions have zero value.

 

[RoboTimbo]

No, I’m showing that:

1. There are no reasons to argue that the ca 52 witnesses hearing shots from the knoll were mistaken while the ca 48 witnesses hearing shots from the TSBD were correct.

Well, except for all the evidence of Oswald's three shots from the TSBD. And your evidence for a civil war musket somewhere. LOL.

2. There are no reasons to expect that witnesses hearing multiple shots from different directions fired tightly spaced in two successive bursts, would be keeping exact count of the exact number of shots and thereafter report it correctly to investigators who were clearly biased in favor of three shots from the TSBD.

Well, except for having actual evidence for only three shots. Did you CTs (s) ever find evidence for a musket ball having been fired? LOL.

3. The very reason for HSCA to hire the two world leading expert teams in the field of acoustic analysis was to scientifically determine the number of shots and from where they were fired, because the witness record was so inconclusive.

And the National Academy of Science debunked that scientifically and comprehensively due to the HSCA flawed methodology. A person would have to be a CTist who only knows what they are told to think to not know that.

 

[abaddon]

Where might one obtain a silencer for a musket? Anyone?