Axxman300
Philosopher
Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories VI: Lyndon Johnson's Revenge
- Thread starter BStrong
- Start date
- Status
HSienzant
Philosopher
False. There are reasons. It's called Hard Evidence.
The hard evidence tells us which witnesses are credible and which heard echoes. The only weapon recovered from Dealey Plaza on the day of the shooting was found in the TSBD. The only shells recovered from Dealey Plaza on the day of the shooting was found in the TSBD. And the only fragments traceable to a weapon was found in the limo and traceable to the only weapon recovered from Dealey Plaza on the day of the shooting which was found in the TSBD. NUmerous witnesses also saw a gunman, or a rifle in the window, and reported that within minutes of the shooting.
So the hard evidence tells us those TSBD witnesses are correct.
There is no hard evidence for the shooter on the knoll. NONE. No weapon, no fragments, no shells, no witnesses to a shooter that came forward that day. So we can choose to believe Jean Hill on 11/22/63 when she says she saw no shooter, or can choose to believe Jean Hill years later when she started to invent stories to get invited to conspiracy addict conventions where she could be the star witness and get the adulation she wanted.
Hank
Axxman300
Philosopher
No. You and CTists just need them to be fake because they show the shot came from behind, and proves that you're all fools.
I will say again that YOU HAVE NOT SEEN ALL OF THE X-RAYS AND THEREFORE CANNOT SAY WHAT THEY DO OR DO NOT SHOW.
lol. not only that but gun smoke, like any other smoke, would rise, not 'come down'. good to see he finally admits to posting strawman posts that deserve strawman answers.
Axxman300
Philosopher
Actually we can. There are a half-dozen still photos of the Knoll, a half-dozen more showing that there is mostly a clear field of view on that side of Elm Street, and there are two home movies movies facing the Knoll as JFK is shot.
Guess what's not in them? Gunmen.
Guess what is in the two home movies? People standing on the steps of the Knoll RUNNING UP HILL TO GET OUT OF THE WAY OF THE GUNFIRE COMING FROM THE TSBD.
Again, you fail.
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
I've sourced all of my claims, directing you
to the WCR or the National Academy of Science. You have indicated your ignorance of both.You
need to provide evidence for the things your one CT website told you to think. Evidence for the x-rays being manipulated? You ran away from answering that.HSienzant
Philosopher
We were talking about the videos of Jean Hill years after the assassination claiming her Warren Commission testimony was a lie, but the video of Jean Hill on 11/22/63 exposes her later claims as the lie.
So why are you ignoring that fact and talking about x-rays and the Z-film?
Couldn't rebut the fact your 'star witness' lied?
Hank
Last edited:
HSienzant
Philosopher
As noted above, it's about beliefs with CTs. Not evidence.
And where there's a CT, a logical fallacy can't be far behind. This is the appeal to popularity... if a lot of people believe something, it must be true!
None of this is new. All of it is old hat. Milteer was talking to a police informant who was wired. He was just talking through his hat.
The claims about mysterious deaths throw anybody and everybody into the mix for no good reason except they died and had some relationship to the JFK assassination. The guy who performed the autopsy on David Ferrie died of a heart attack, he's on the list.
The mayor of New Orleans died in a plane crash, he's on the list because Oswald lived in New Orleans.
The brother - Eddie Benavides - of a witnesses - Domingo Benavides - got shot and killed in a bar, and he's on the list. Oswald's rooming house housekeeper is on the list. The guy Oswald once caught a cab from is on the list.
The list is nonsense and there's no rhyme or reason to why people are on the list, except they are dead. And sometimes not even that.
Warren Reynolds is on the list, and he's still alive. Or he was, the last time I looked. His auto dealership is still there. And he's still listed as the owner.
https://www.chamberofcommerce.com/dallas-tx/30725870-warren-reynolds-motors-sales
Hank
Last edited:
HSienzant
Philosopher
No, that's a great example of a straw man argument.
Deliberately Nth generation grainy photograph of bushes illuminated in sunlight offered by conspiracy addicts as bogus support for witnesses reporting seeing steam and mistaking it for gunsmoke.
Steam being seen in the area where steam pipes were? What's coincidental or diabolical about that?
Translation: I got no explanation for all that 'smoke' above the overpass, except an army regiment with muskets or artifact from a Nth generation photo. I can't establish from the grainy photo I posted that's gunsmoke near the knoll and not steam. I can't establish it's gunsmoke and not the top of bushes illuminated in the sun. I can't establish anything I originally claimed. But I got the logical fallacy of ad hominem in my pocket, so I'll play that card and call you 'not really sincere'.
You cited the photo as evidence. It's clear you're now withdrawing it as evidence. You could improve your argument by offering a first generation copy of the photograph or a video of the actual film it came from (I believe it's actually an image capture of a frame from a film taken by a newsman in the motorcade). But you won't do that. You're a captive audience for your conspiracy site.
Yeah, we're done here.
Hank
Last edited:
HSienzant
Philosopher
No. He is describing the decline of US democracy since the assassination of JFK. A peculiar American type of facism.
The type that you are working hard to promote.
HSienzant
Philosopher
And there's your ad hominem again.
In case there's any doubt, I'm citing the evidence which is entirely free of any political leanings.
Hank
HSienzant
Philosopher
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
5. Cigarette or pipe smoke. People smoked a lot more back then than they do now, it was socially acceptable to to smoke in public places and there were no bans on doing so. IMO, this is the most likely answer
To sum it up.
No, there wasn’t ”13%” of the witnesses in Dealey Plaza that heard shot/s from the knoll.
Instead it was most of the ASKED witnesses in Dealey Plaza, 52 individuals, who heard shot/s from the knoll.
Is this proof of shot/s from the knoll? No. Is it strong evidence of shot/s from the knoll? Of course it is.
This in turn has to be added to all the rest of the strong evidence of shot/s from the knoll that taken together are virtually irrefutable.
The only evidence against it are the x-ray photographs.
Ponder that for a while.
No, there wasn’t ”13%” of the witnesses in Dealey Plaza that heard shot/s from the knoll.
Instead it was most of the ASKED witnesses in Dealey Plaza, 52 individuals, who heard shot/s from the knoll.
Is this proof of shot/s from the knoll? No. Is it strong evidence of shot/s from the knoll? Of course it is.
This in turn has to be added to all the rest of the strong evidence of shot/s from the knoll that taken together are virtually irrefutable.
The only evidence against it are the x-ray photographs.
Ponder that for a while.
HSienzant
Philosopher
No, we've already seen how the number is inflated. Anyone who claimed the shots came from the overpass or to the west of the building or the railroad tracks or just ran in that direction to reach the limo is counted as a knoll witness. They are not. They are *assumed* to be knoll witnesses.
And can you name the witnesses who said they saw smoke on the knoll and tell us where they stood at the time, please?
Hank
HSienzant
Philosopher
Can you cite this test and quote the official conclusions of the test?
Or will you punt like Micah Java did when he was challenged on this?
Hank
To sum it up.
The only evidence of a shot from the knoll hitting Kennedy in the head is...nothing. There is no evidence for this.
The evidence AGAINST this is:
The Zapruder film - https://imgur.com/a/6kRQ40z
The Nix film - https://imgur.com/00wJCMH
The Muchmore film - https://imgur.com/2WYYaND
The Moorman Polaroid - https://jfkplayersandwitnesses.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/moorman-full.jpg
The x-rays
The autopsy photos
The autopsy report
The autopsy physicians testimony
The findings of the Clarke Panel pathologists
The findings of the HSCA pathologists
Statements from witnesses in Dealey Plaza
Later statements from the Parkland trauma room personnel - https://vimeo.com/130545091 (start around 30 minutes in and watch the Parkland doctors react to seeing the autopsy photos for the first time)
Ponder that for a while.
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
There well may have been a wider conspiracy to kill JFK. Its possible that we will never know for certain one way or the other.
However what we DO know, with absolute certainty is that on November 23, 1963, in Dealey Plaza, there was ONE and only ONE person shooting... it was Lee Harvey Oswald, and he fired only THREE shots at JFK, the first missed him, the second hit him in the upper back and passed through and hit Governor Connally, and the third hit him in the head and killed him. ALL of the viable evidence fits this, and only this scenario.
There were NO shots from the grassy knoll
There were NO shots from the Dal-Tex Building
There were NO shots any drain pipes in the road
There were NO shots from any of the vehicles in the motorcade
There were NO shots from any other buildings, or places in Dealey Plaza
The ONLY place shots came from was the window of a room in the sixth floor of the south eastern corner of the Texas School Book Depository.
THAT IS ALL
END OF STORY
Tomtomkent
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2010
- Messages
- 8,607
Really. Of all the witnesses interviewed in the WC, what is the precise percentage that actually specify the Knoll?
Meaningless. Fifty two out of how many, by whom, and asked what questions?
Because if the question was "did those shots sound like they came from knoll" the data is bad. They have been led.
If they were asked by anybody but law enforcers, with the legal implications of a statement, to, say, a CT author, then not only is it after the fact, it carries less weight than sworn testimony.
No. It isn't. It is strong evidence for the nature of echoes and sounds in the plaza, and for human nature in the confusion of events.
The evidence you posted has all been refuted.
The crux of your evidence is analysis of sound recordings you have consistently failed to understand, and a probability you have misrepresented.
Okay. Let's ponder it for a while.
The ONLY evidence against it are the X-Rays and photographs that show ONLY wounds consistent with JFK being shot from behind, by Oswald's rifle, the only rifle known to have been fired that day.
The ONLY evidence is for a shot from behind that exited through the throat, and one that enters the back of the head and causes a massive exit trauma consistent with the Z film (whoops, that would be more evidence).
So... on the one hand we have the analysis of the dictabelt, which is only valid if you can show a motorbike was somewhere other than the film footage shows it to be... and a minority of witness statements from people could be honestly mistaken.
On the other we have the autopsy records, autopsy photographs, murder weapons, shells, bullet fragments, prints, the bag the rifle was carried in, photographs of the murderer with his weapons, all of which fit together in an unbroken chain, are measurable, observable, and testable.
Sure we ONLY have the actual evidence... why not...
- Status