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

[manifesto]

Ohhh my now using LN okay so you laymen of the sectarian order of the bleeding fruit cake, wireless redemption and multiple invisible shooters will now be known as the SOOCFCWRMS. Sounds about right.

Holy. Mighty.

 

[HSienzant]

I do not know, but I certainly doubt that Bundy was innocent, since I have never seen any suggestion anywhere to the contrary. Have you?

All they actually had on Bundy was a kidnap victim's ID in a lineup (compare to the eight for Oswald), a bite mark on one victim that was claimed to match to Bundy's teeth by the State's expert (compare to all the evidence implicating Oswald), and some credit card purchases that put Bundy in the same town at the same time as many of the murder victims.

Here's the thing, Bundy never professed his innocence. You could look it up. When talking to his friends or the media, his point was that the State didn't have enough evidence to convict him, not that he was innocent. It was almost like he felt he was smart enough to get away with it.

Eventually, however, in his last few days, Bundy started confessing and giving details only the killer could know. He did that to try to bargain for more time on earth. He said he needed more time to confess to all he did. His execution was carried out on time.

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

Wow. How many dollars has he/she earned so far? Eight?

Straw man argument.

It's not how many dollars he's earned ($0) by pirating intellectual property, it's how many dollars he's stolen by pirating intellectual property. He's okay with that.

Are you?

Hank

 

[traxy]

Ever wondered why there is so few independents writing on this forum?

Because most of them are lightweights who give up after seeing how outmatched they are.

 

[smartcooky]

It is. Because of the consilience of the evidence, those wishing to exonerate Oswald must not only argue the money order connecting Oswald to the rifle is wrong, they must argue all the evidence connecting Oswald to the rifle is wrong.

Like the microfilm from Klein's showing he ordered a Carcano rifle.
Like the microfilm from Kleins showing he was shipped the C2766 rifle.
Like the microfilm from Kleins showing the C2766 rifle was shipped to his PO Box.
Like his fingerprints on the rifle.
Like his palmprint on the rifle.
Like the tuffs of fiber traceable to his arrest shirt found in a crevice in the rifle.
Like the photographs of him with the rifle.
Like the film and photos showing his rifle - not a Mauser - was the one discovered at the Depository.
Like Marina's testimony Oswald owned a rifle.
Like Marina's action after the assassination where she led police to the garage and pointed out the blanket where the rifle was normally stored.
Like Michael Paine moving the blanket and getting the impression of something heavy and made of iron within the blanket.
Like Wes Frazier saying Oswald brought a long package to the TSBD that morning.
Like Linnie Mae Randle saying she saw Oswald put a three-foot long package in Wes' car that morning.

And that's just the evidence linking him to the rifle.

CTs must discount all that information, all of it mutually reinforcing, all of it pointing to Oswald. Because if they don't, then they are left with a punk with a gun and a grudge shooting the President.

You either accept that the evidence is legitimate and points to Oswald or you accept that it's ALL faked to frame Oswald - Manifesto is in the second group. But that means more energy was expended by the conspirators to frame Oswald than to remove Kennedy. Which could have been accomplished by simply revealing he was not the faithful family man he was portrayed as and waiting for the next election. Neat, clean, and simple, like a surgical cut. No witnesses to kill, no paper trail to forge, no testimony to change, no body to alter, no bullets to swap... etc. etc. ad nauseum.

Instead, according to CTs, we have this massive conspiracy at the time and still ongoing cover-up, that involves shills posting at forums worldwide to somehow prevent the truth from getting out.

But if their arguments made sense and relied on the evidence, they'd have a lot more converts, one would think. Instead, like in the case of the money order, they are relying on interpretations of something or other (in this case PO regulations about PO money orders) by fellow non-expert CTs to find some reason, any reason, to exclude the evidence that points to Oswald.

It's all sleight-of-hand by CTs whose only goal is to attempt to establish Oswald didn't do it by any means necessary, because of Oswald didn't, someone else did, ergo conspiracy.

Hank

JFK conspiracy theorists (and probably all CTs when I think about it) labour under the misapprehension that evidence forms a chain, and that all they have to do is find one link that is weaker that the rest, and the whole chain can be overturned. However, they are wrong, that is not how evidence works.

Evidence forms a pile (the expression "mountains of evidence" comes to mind). When you take one piece away or call it into doubt, all other pieces in the pile are still there; just as valid and just as damning. The only exception to this is exculpatory evidence, where one single piece can prove that the accused cannot possibly be culpable.

Unfortunately for manifesto, micahjava and their kind, there is not one piece of evidence that exculpates Oswald. There is not a single person who can put him somewhere else when the crime was committed... he has no alibi, and plenty of witnesses who put him in the TSBD at the time the shots were witnessed as having been fired from the 6th floor. They can bleat all they like about shots having been fired from other paces, but there is NO PHYSICAL EVIDENCE of this happening, no bullets, no bullet fragments, no cartridges, no guns. All of the available evidence points to Oswald; all of it, and none of it points to anyone else or anywhere else. Innuendo and suspicions are not evidence; bare assertion and CT opinions are not evidence.

 

[MicahJava]

Straw man argument.

It's not how many dollars he's earned ($0) by pirating intellectual property, it's how many dollars he's stolen by pirating intellectual property. He's okay with that.

Are you?

Hank

How it is stealing when there's an infinite amount? Why should I feel guilty over what is ultimately a failure of capitalism?

 

[MicahJava]

Anatomically higher is meaningless. We can see JFK's head is tilted down at a significant degree just before the bullet impact, not level, so of course the wound exit would appear higher than if his head was level and he was facing forward.

Hank

The HSCA did contend that the beveled exit wound was anatomically level or below their proposed cowlick entry wound. It shows in their drawings.

 

[smartcooky]

Another lie from Hans, the lying adherent to the lying holy Mighty Church of the Looney Nutters.

I have provided linked citation of a regulatory document showing that bank endorsement stamps had to be present on 1963 PMO’s in order for a mailorder purchase to go through.

No. The regulations you posted are only evidence of what is supposed to happen, not of what actually happened. You have shown no evidence that this was normal practice, nor have you shown evidence that every PMO ever issued is always stamped on being banked.

 

[smartcooky]

What part of the phrase: "The act of sending or delivering a cash item to us or to another Federal Reserve Bank will, however, be deemed and understood to constitute a guaranty of all prior endorsements on such item, whether or not an express guaranty is incorporated in the sending bank’s endorsement" didn't you understand? It says the Fed will accept money orders without said endorsement (and pay them) and simply assume said endorsement.
Hank

And the facts are that the Fed DID accept it, otherwise they would not have stamped the file locator number on the top left of the front of the document, and the investigators would not have been able to find it in their system. CTs would then have to add everyone in the Fed involved in handling the document to their ever growing list of conspirators, for first stamping and numbering a fraudulent document, and then allowing it to be filed in their system (the FLN is a sequential number so it must be genuine otherwise there would be a duplicate number that would be very easy to find)

 

[smartcooky]

Whatever the conclusion, skeptics are more enamored with the process of reasoning than by the implications of the conclusions reached. I personally don't care whether Oswald acted alone. I'm more interested in the process by which the competing claims are weighed, and that interest is motivated by fostering a society in which critical thinking is valued. I believe we would all benefit from that.

Personally, I am far more interested in whether there might have been a conspiracy of some kind in the time leading up to 22 NOV 63.

While I firmly believe that Oswald carried out the assassination alone (the evidence pointing to him is overwhelming and would be an open and shut case in any courtroom), I am also open to the idea that he was put up to it by some of the people he associated with in the months leading up to the event. Many of the recently released alphabet soup documents tend to support that conclusion. If the Soviets or the Cubans were involved, then that is still a conspiracy by definition, it just isn't a US Government conspiracy, and the CT loonies just aren't interested if they can't hang it on the Government.

This is a shame, because the possibility of a foreign conspiracy to kill JFK is a far more interesting question for debate than flogging the dead horses of second shooters, grassy knolls, acoustic junk science and a government cover up.

 

[traxy]

Personally, I am far more interested in whether there might have been a conspiracy of some kind in the time leading up to 22 NOV 63.

While I firmly believe that Oswald carried out the assassination alone (the evidence pointing to him is overwhelming and would be an open and shut case in any courtroom), I am also open to the idea that he was put up to it by some of the people he associated with in the months leading up to the event. Many of the recently released alphabet soup documents tend to support that conclusion. If the Soviets or the Cubans were involved, then that is still a conspiracy by definition, it just isn't a US Government conspiracy, and the CT loonies just aren't interested if they can't hang it on the Government.

This is a shame, because the possibility of a foreign conspiracy to kill JFK is a far more interesting question for debate than flogging the dead horses of second shooters, grassy knolls, acoustic junk science and a government cover up.

I think Gus Russo's book touched on this, but the dozens of books I've read on the topic tend to blend into each other and I might be misremembering.

Basically the theory goes that Oswald wanted to defect to Cuba and attempted to do so through Mexico City in September of '63. His request was denied, but somehow Oswald got the notion that assassinating Kennedy would punch his ticket into Cuba. Whether he was promised safe passage by other Cubans, or if the request came from Castro himself, or if Oswald just took it upon himself, who knows.

It makes for interesting discussion anyway.

 

[manifesto]

All they actually had on Bundy was a kidnap victim's ID in a lineup (compare to the eight for Oswald), a bite mark on one victim that was claimed to match to Bundy's teeth by the State's expert (compare to all the evidence implicating Oswald), and some credit card purchases that put Bundy in the same town at the same time as many of the murder victims.

Here's the thing, Bundy never professed his innocence. You could look it up. When talking to his friends or the media, his point was that the State didn't have enough evidence to convict him, not that he was innocent. It was almost like he felt he was smart enough to get away with it.

Eventually, however, in his last few days, Bundy started confessing and giving details only the killer could know. He did that to try to bargain for more time on earth. He said he needed more time to confess to all he did. His execution was carried out on time.

Hank

As I said, I know nothing of the case and have seen nothing suggesting his innocense. Therefore I can have no informed opinion.

That said, I do know that many of the historical high profile convictions should be looked at again considering the mounting evidence of convicted innocent people over the years, especially in the US.


Looks like money and power plays a central role in US judicial process.

 

[manifesto]

Personally, I am far more interested in whether there might have been a conspiracy of some kind in the time leading up to 22 NOV 63.

While I firmly believe that Oswald carried out the assassination alone (the evidence pointing to him is overwhelming and would be an open and shut case in any courtroom), I am also open to the idea that he was put up to it by some of the people he associated with in the months leading up to the event. Many of the recently released alphabet soup documents tend to support that conclusion. If the Soviets or the Cubans were involved, then that is still a conspiracy by definition, it just isn't a US Government conspiracy, and the CT loonies just aren't interested if they can't hang it on the Government.

This is a shame, because the possibility of a foreign conspiracy to kill JFK is a far more interesting question for debate than flogging the dead horses of second shooters, grassy knolls, acoustic junk science and a government cover up.

Ah, name one piece of evidence that conclusively proves that Oswald shot JFK. And remember that a trial in a courtroom includes a defence, vary of provenance, chain of custody, original (not xerox or photo) evidence, cross examination, etc.

Name one.

 

[traxy]

Ah, name one piece of evidence that conclusively proves that Oswald shot JFK. And remember that a trial in a courtroom includes a defence, vary of provenance, chain of custody, original (not xerox or photo) evidence, cross examination, etc.

Name one.

It's not one single piece of evidence, it's a convergence of ALL the pieces of evidence as a whole.

 

[Hans]

I have immense patience.

Sorry no you have an immense amount of intolerance towards those that disagree with you coupled with delusions of your own greatness and a firm self created conviction that no one actually sees you lying about presenting evidence.

 

[HSienzant]

The HSCA did contend that the beveled exit wound was anatomically level or below their proposed cowlick entry wound. It shows in their drawings.

And again, since JFK's head is tilted down at the moment of impact, I would expect nothing less. Do you understand what the word 'anatomically' means? It appears you don't.

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

If the Soviets or the Cubans were involved, then that is still a conspiracy by definition, it just isn't a US Government conspiracy, and the CT loonies just aren't interested if they can't hang it on the [U.S.] Government.

And we saw why from MicahJava earlier today. He hates the U.S.A. and he hates capitalism:

Screw American capitalism and screw their government for their decadely harassment and murder of poor people for profit.

There appears to be more than a bit of bias in his claims about the nature of the wounds and his arguments for a conspiracy and cover-up.

Hank

 

[Hans]

...deleted...

Dismissed as an opinion.

 

[HSienzant]

original (not xerox or photo) evidence...

We've covered this. You're wrong. Copies of business records are fully acceptable. Your source is wrong too, whoever that CT is. Simply echoing falsehoods you picked up on the internet isn't your best approach here. I suggest you start vetting what you read, instead of just repeating what you read.

Hank

 

[Hans]

Yes, lets see som well balanced explanatications from the knights of the Mighty Church, of this little gem.

Yes, lets see made up opinions given as fact from those members of the sectarian order of the bleeding fruit cake, wireless redemption and multiple invisible shooters. In bad standing I might add for saying over and over again that they really added to the collection plate when they didn't.