JFK Conspiracy Theories: It Never Ends

[RoboTimbo]

Because it is a totality of evidence. A concept that Robert Prey has failed to understand throughout this thread.

Oh, he understands it. That's why he:

Why else would he keep asking for a single piece of magical evidence?

And he keeps asking for a single piece of evidence knowing that he has no evidence for his own hypothesis.

Or fail to simply propse a single coherent case he thinks he has evidence for? None of his allegations form any kind of a totality. None of them connect at all.

I have a feeling that "FAIL" is a word we'll be using with Robert a lot.

That's why he has promised us his Final Parting Shot Tail Between His Legs Post. All theatrics, no substance.

 

[Tomtomkent]

That's why he has promised us his Final Parting Shot Tail Between His Legs Post. All theatrics, no substance.

That seems a better explanation than research to gather citations and sources, or even a coherent explanation of his case. The last time he promised to reveal all he gave us two words. What, he expected us to do the googling for him? So if we fail to be wowed we obviously aren't smart enough to uncover the truth?

If he is trying to look smart he is going about it entirely the wrong way, and seems to be ignoring all the people who tell him EXACTLY what would convince them of his argument.

 

[I Ratant]

Yes, let us go to the Youtube for all our facts..... (I crack me up! )

Real Aliens Evidence of Greys Reptillians
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-jKtpWSAJk

The reptilians are a harsh race which are known to shape shift also they are speculated to still be on earth Among us they are said to be part of the Illuminati which is a satanic cult known with it's pyramid with the eye in the middle many think that the elites who would be the richest of the rich are actually reptilians said by both David Icke and Jim mars along side many more researchers.

 

[Walter Ego]

Because it is a totality of [the] evidence [against Oswald]. A concept that Robert Prey has failed to understand throughout this thread. Why else would he keep asking for a single piece of magical evidence?

Why indeed.

The conspiracy community regularly seizes on one slip of the tongue, misunderstanding, or slight discrepancy to defeat twenty pieces of solid evidence; accepts one witness of theirs, even if he or she is a provable nut, as being far more credible than ten normal witnesses on the other side; treats rumors, even questions, as the equivalent of proof; leaps from the most minuscule of discoveries to the grandest of conclusions; and insists that the failure to explain everything perfectly negates all that is explained.
Bugliosi; Page xliii

 

[tsig]

Again, wrong. You are the confused person here, and you are trying to cover that fact with arrogance and one line quips.

I'll take the time to explain:

You have been claiming that 'there is evidence' (there isn't, but we'll let that slide for now) that the DPD or the FBI took the Carcano to the morgue and, like a scene out of that awful JFK movie, put the gun in Oswald's dead hand to get the palm print.

Problem with that theory is that fingerprints like that are made by oils on the hand - oils that are caused by sweat.

The dead do not sweat.

After being told this several times you foolishly posted a pdf link about getting identification prints off of a dead body. A completely different process and purpose from the 'they put his prints on the rifle at the morgue' theory you've been repeating.

Confusion - you.

Although I don't think you are confused so much as you are deliberately trying to obfuscate.

He's not confused but he's doing his best to confuse everyone else.

 

[bynmdsue]

In the Odio incident where exactly is the conspiracy? When "Leopoldo" tells Sylvia that they don't want to have anything further to do with "Leon" because he's "loco" and "insincere"? Or that the plot they had in mind was sneaking "Leon" into Cuba thru the underground to kill Castro?

 

[tsig]

You truly are confused. I never made the claim that a rifle was taken to the morgue. That would not be necessary to make a forgery.

Then how did the gun and the palm meet up?

 

[Dave Rogers]

Yeah, well all of that is just more of your continued ad hominem attack which you seem to prefer to discussing the evidence he presents as to b/y photo forgery. But I guess that's all you've got.

The Bug man will try anything to discredit those who bear evidence contrary to his point of view which is just more ad hominem attack in place of a critique of the evidence. The usual tac on this board as well. Boring.

Along those same lines, are you completely sure of the sanity of the Bug man? You know of course that he has been attempting to get Former President George W. Bush prosecuted for war crimes. Sound pretty sane to you?

So ad hominem attacks are a bad thing, Robert?

Dave

 

[Tomtomkent]

So ad hominem attacks are a bad thing, Robert?

Dave

Only when it suits. This is the inconsistancy that is undermining his possition.

He makes such a palava out of there being no evidence LHO never had the rifle in his hand taking making the shot, yet expects us to believe the Back Yard Photographs (or some of them) were faked because somebody says so. Then for added hypocracy we can't believe they were genuine when the same witness says so. He can choose what is truth or a lie with out evidence and insists on a unobtainable evidence from everybody else.

Are we expecting him to set the same standard for his own claim for a second shooter? If mere ballistics and forensic evidence is not enough to "prove" Oswald did it in his eyes we can only assume the second shooter was caught red handed. After all he wont accept a sum total of evidence for one suspect, therefore he must have accepted no less for his own.

Or he could be a hypocrite. Time will tell.

 

[catsmate]

NO. I am simply indicting the statement that national leaders are only murdered by Lone Nutters. And if the South had won the Civil war, John Wilkes Booth would have been regarded as a national hero.

Really? Firstly you do know that Lee's surrender occurred before Booth killed Lincoln? Secondly if the Confederacy had won, why would Booth have kiled Lincoln? The proximate cause, Lincoln's speech promoting black voting rights wouldn't have occurred.
And finally, even if Booth has killed Lincoln in the face of a successful Confederate secession, he, Atzerodt, Powell et al would be looked at as a bunch of murderous idiots.

The assassination of Abraham Lincoln took place on Good Friday,[1] April 14, 1865,


"The last battle of the American Civil War was the Battle of Palmito Ranch in Texas on May 12 and 13. The last significant Confederate active force to surrender was the Confederate allied Cherokee Brig. Gen. Stand Watie and his Indian soldiers on June 23. The last Confederate surrender occurred on November 6, 1865, when the Confederate warship CSS Shenandoah surrendered at Liverpool, England.[6] President Andrew Johnson formally declared the end of the war on August 20, 1866." -- Wikapedia

Irrelevant. Lee surrendered the last significant Confederate field force. A few hundred men were insignificant. Even WW2 had skirmishes after the official German surrender.

 

[catsmate]

So you don't believe in Euclidian geometry either? That seems to be a basic requirement for JFK conspiracy theorists.

Dave

Not just JFK nuts, the truthers and moon-hoax loons aren't much good at it either.

 

[Noztradamus]

~~~~

Irrelevant. Lee surrendered the last significant Confederate field force. A few hundred men were insignificant. Even WW2 had skirmishes after the official German surrender.

I seem to recall it was some time after that big ceremony on the deck of the USS Missouri that the last of the Japanese military surrendered.

 

[I Ratant]

RP is merely excerpting quotes from other people's work.
When looking at the wildly differing "facts" the novelists come up with, getting a coherent tale from these sources will be damn near impossible.

 

[kookbreaker]

I seem to recall it was some time after that big ceremony on the deck of the USS Missouri that the last of the Japanese military surrendered.

Some folks never got the memo.

 

[I Ratant]

I got to go to the Missouri and tour it when it returned from Japan and visited New York.

 

[Robert Prey]

In the Odio incident where exactly is the conspiracy? When "Leopoldo" tells Sylvia that they don't want to have anything further to do with "Leon" because he's "loco" and "insincere"? Or that the plot they had in mind was sneaking "Leon" into Cuba thru the underground to kill Castro?

It happened when the anti-Castro Cubans partnered with a guy who discussed assassinating the President.

 

[Robert Prey]

Why indeed.

The totality of the "evidence" is a house of defective cards. so that when you examine each one individually, they all turn out to be jokers.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Why indeed.

The conspiracy community regularly seizes on one slip of the tongue, misunderstanding, or slight discrepancy to defeat twenty pieces of solid evidence; accepts one witness of theirs, even if he or she is a provable nut, as being far more credible than ten normal witnesses on the other side; treats rumors, even questions, as the equivalent of proof; leaps from the most minuscule of discoveries to the grandest of conclusions; and insists that the failure to explain everything perfectly negates all that is explained.
Bugliosi; Page xliii

Bingo! The conspiracy community is so predictable.

 

[Robert Prey]

No, you dishonestly ignore any refutations. Answer the question:

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/267444eb6b1e9325ca.jpg[/qimg]

What times are it? LOL.

What you have here is a single shadow that cannot be compared to any other. In 133B you have the shadow of the man, the shadow of the rifle and the shadow of outstretched hands while the live figure has vertical hands none of which is consistent. If you want to prove 133B genuine, then duplicate IT.

 

[Robert Prey]

No, it was a valid quesiton with your typical juvenile response. Have you calmed down enough to try to answer it now?


No, there is no question that Oswald bought and owned the rifle and no question that his print was on it in an area that would only be accessible when the rifle was broken down. Why would you think there was any question about that at all?


Yes, the totality of the evidence does that. Why don't you want to see it?

Sorry, but I won't dialogue with someone who cannot accept the truth of known basic facts. There is serious question as to who bought the rifle, there were no readable prints on it, and serious questions as to where it was found. Plus, no evidence that LHO had fired it or fired any weapon.