JFK Conspiracy Theories: It Never Ends

[RoboTimbo]

Nonsense.

You've stopped even making an attempt at coherent sentences?

 

[Robert Prey]

So what does page 312 of case closed actually say then?
Or is your claim of nonsense piffle?

"Case Closed" is a piece of garbage written by a dishonest author. Even the Bug Man discredits him.

 

[Robert Prey]

So when you said he was a lunatic you just meant he had a bias? And when you said the witnesses statements were the best evidence, you meant except for when they were wrong?

Hows your hand after all this waving?

Ah, ah, ah... That is a mis -quote. I never called the Bug Man a lunatic. An apology and a retraction, please.

 

[Tomtomkent]

"Case Closed" is a piece of garbage written by a dishonest author. Even the Bug Man discredits him.

That doesn't answer the question. Or discredit the original quote. So you claim the quote was nonsense? Supply a correct quote, or otherwise explain what the quoted text actually said.

 

[Tomtomkent]

Ah, ah, ah... That is a mis -quote. I never called the Bug Man a lunatic. An apology and a retraction, please.

Then perhaps you might want to explain what you meant here:

The Bug Man indicts himself and his own internal sanity by his crusade to indict George W. Bush for War Crimes.

So what exactly did you mean by indicting his internal sanity if you were not implying he was a lunatic?

 

[CurtC]

McClelland is also a friend of Dallas resident Robert Groden, a conspiracy huckster who first presented his bootlegged third-generation print of the Z film in 1976 on Rivera's Good Night America show on ABC, the first time the complete film was seen by the general public.

It's interesting that the things McClelland said about why he believed in a conspiracy all are things that don't have any relation to his expertise as a doctor. Coffins/body bags, three hitmen from Mexico City, his misremembering what he saw when the Zapruder film was first shown. In those matters, his opinion isn't any better than a random misinformed person.

 

[bynmdsue]

Look, you're 'tween a rock and a hard place now. If Parkland witnesses can't be wrong then my theory about Jackie is correct. If they can be wrong then your theory falls apart. Which is it?

 

[Robert Prey]

It's interesting that the things McClelland said about why he believed in a conspiracy all are things that don't have any relation to his expertise as a doctor. Coffins/body bags, three hitmen from Mexico City, his misremembering what he saw when the Zapruder film was first shown. In those matters, his opinion isn't any better than a random misinformed person.

When an experience doctor sees graphic evidence of a shot from the front, when there is other alleged evidence of a shot or shots from the back, it doesn't require any additional l expertise to conclude Conspiracy.
And what 3 hit men from Mex.City has to do with your critique of the doctor is a reflection of your own confusion.

 

[Robert Prey]

Look, you're 'tween a rock and a hard place now. If Parkland witnesses can't be wrong then my theory about Jackie is correct. If they can be wrong then your theory falls apart. Which is it?

Any witness can make a mistake. But when 20 plus trained witnesses view gunshots to the head of the President of the United States, and they all have essentially the same observations, then their credibility quotient must be rated as extremely high by any neutral, unbiased rational person.

 

[bynmdsue]

Any witness can make a mistake. But when 20 plus trained witnesses view gunshots to the head of the President of the United States, and they all have essentially the same observations, then their credibility quotient must be rated as extremely high by any neutral, unbiased rational person.

But they can be mistaken. So we have to weigh their testimony against the physical evidence and that's where it comes up wanting.

Oh, that's right. All the physical evidence is faked.

 

[Walter Ego]

Ah, ah, ah... That is a mis -quote. I never called the Bug Man a lunatic. An apology and a retraction, please.

No, you just said he was insane.

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?

Still need a retraction on that, Robert?

 

[Walter Ego]

Any witness can make a mistake. But when 20 plus trained witnesses view gunshots to the head of the President of the United States, and they all have essentially the same observations, then their credibility quotient must be rated as extremely high by any neutral, unbiased rational person.

The rational thinker versus the paranoid.

The paranoid:

Grabs onto a few pieces of evidence and defends them inflexibly.

Seemingly irrationally seizes onto something and won’t let go.

Will not face evidence that destroys his theory.
Insists on fitting everything into his explanation, often by explaining difficult items as further evidence of conspiracy.
Often seizes single pieces of evidence and blows them out of proportion.

Sticks to preconceived notion regardless of new evidence.
Check, check, check, check, check, check. Next patient, please.

 

[Robert Prey]

The rational thinker versus the paranoid.

The paranoid:

Grabs onto a few pieces of evidence and defends them inflexibly.

Seemingly irrationally seizes onto something and won’t let go.

Will not face evidence that destroys his theory.
Insists on fitting everything into his explanation, often by explaining difficult items as further evidence of conspiracy.
Often seizes single pieces of evidence and blows them out of proportion.

Sticks to preconceived notion regardless of new evidence.
Check, check, check, check, check, check. Next patient, please.

Projection: Psychology
a. The transfer of one's own attitudes, feelings, faults, suppositions or irrational thinking to others

Check, Check, Check, Check and Double Check. Next victim, please.

 

[I Ratant]

So far your responses have been typical of the disorders of the mind detailed in DSM.
Pathetic.
A loser all around.

 

[Tomtomkent]

Projection: Psychology
a. The transfer of one's own attitudes, feelings, faults, suppositions or irrational thinking to others

Check, Check, Check, Check and Double Check. Next victim, please.

And stundie nomination for irony in 5...4....3...2...1

So, care to differentiate between questioning a mans sanity in two posts and the inference he is a lunatic?

 

[bynmdsue]

Okay, so Oswald realizes he's been set up and runs home to get his pistol, kills Tippitt because Tippitt's going to bring him in for a crime he didn't commit, hides out in the Texas Theater then tries to kill another cop who wants to arrest him for the crime(Tippit's murder) that he did commit. Is held for two days by the DPD but does not blab about the people setting him up because the DPD is in on it too. Is silenced by Ruby who is then taken into custody and could spill the beans but doesn't. Ruby still needs to be silenced tho, so after what? 4 years? "they" inject him with cancer which ends up not being what actually killed him.

Is this right?

 

[Tomtomkent]

Oh, and a point to make about the whole "Bug man" sanity issue:

I assume this is a referenct to the book V. Bugliosi published in 2008 "The Prosecution of George W Bush for murder", which forms the case as a prosecutor (which was his day job for many years, bringing the Manson Family to trial) that Bugliosi would have made in a fictional tial on the basis thaat the war in Iraq was knowingly made on false information, and that the deaths of American soldiers were on the hands of the president.

Now the key conceit here is "Fictional". But it is more subtle, RP says he "wants" to see this come to trial, that is different from "if", "should" or "could". We should also consider the fact that there was flawed inteligence before the Iraq War is pretty well established. The question raised is if the orders were signed knowing the inteligence was flawed, or not. But let's put aside what the book may or may not be about, and for the sake of argument assume that Bugliosi actually wants to take the man he thinks caused an illegal war to trial...

Let's assume that Bugliosi believes his case. He wrote a book about it. Hardly insane. He weighed out the evidence and said "Yeah, this is why I believe this is the case." Agree with him, disagree with him, but even if Rob was right as far he wanted a suspected crime he believed he had a case against to go to court and be heard, would that be crazy?

I wonder what Rob thinks should happen when he proves that LBJ, the CIA, FBI and American Intelligence were all part of a whitewash to conspire to cover up the murder of the President of the USA? Proving the conspiracy is great, but expecting charges to be held would be insane? How is it questionable to attempt to prove one conspiracy, but not another? Which line has Bugliosi crossed that Rob is not willing to cross himself?

Are you implying Rob, that if you could prove the conspiracy it would be insane to want to see them face trial? Not to try and make it happen, not to suggest it could or should happen, just to want to?

 

[Noztradamus]

Okay, so Oswald realizes he's been set up and runs home to get his pistol, kills Tippitt because Tippitt's going to bring him in for a crime he didn't commit, hides out in the Texas Theater then tries to kill another cop who wants to arrest him for the crime(Tippit's murder) that he did commit. Is held for two days by the DPD but does not blab about the people setting him up because the DPD is in on it too. Is silenced by Ruby who is then taken into custody and could spill the beans but doesn't. Ruby still needs to be silenced tho, so after what? 4 years? "they" inject him with cancer which ends up not being what actually killed him.

Is this right?

Robert has already disputed that the pistol found in his hand in the Texas Theater was Oswald's.

It may have been a random pistol Oswald picked up while running when he discarded his jacket.

 

[I Ratant]

Disirregardless of the licensed owner of the pistol, it was in the possession of LHOLN when arrested.
His attempt to use it is not a plus in his favor.
Funny story about that arrest... Some years later, the officer involved was demonstrating to a media person how he'd disabled the firing by grabbing the cylinder of the revolver.... and -shot- the media person by mistake!
Kids and guns, ya know...

 

[bynmdsue]

Funny story about that arrest... Some years later, the officer involved was demonstrating to a media person how he'd disabled the firing by grabbing the cylinder of the revolver.... and -shot- the media person by mistake!
Kids and guns, ya know...

Ha! is there a tape of that?

People getting shot accidentally is usually pretty funny, except when its a SS agent accidentally firing his AR-15 into the back of JFK's head. A CT too crazy for Robert to buy into?