JFK Conspiracy Theories: It Never Ends

[Walter Ego]

Oswald may have indeed been a part of the conspiracy, Yet no one on this board has been able to incriminate him as one of the shooters.

I think what Robert means here is that Oswald has not be incriminated to his satisfaction. Keep in mind that he has also said he has demonstrated a conspiracy to kill JFK beyond all reasonable doubt (well, in his mind anyway).

Actually, the evidence of Oswald's guilt has been discussed many times on this thread. Robert seems to have forgotten my post #53 which for his benefit I will repost in slightly revised form below. Maybe his computer screen "blurred" the time I posted it like those parts of the Zapruter film which are inconvenient to his conspiracy theories.

----------

Lee Harvey Oswald owned the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository on Friday afternoon, November 22, 1963.

Oswald owned the handgun that was shown to have been used in the murder of Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit.

When arrested Oswald had a fake draft card in the name of "A.J. Hidell" in his wallet. The order form from Klein's Sporting Goods to purchase the mail-order rifle was signed by one "A.J. Hidell" and was positively proven to have been in Oswald's handwriting. The mail to address on the order was Oswald's Dallas post-office box.

Marina Oswald admits to having taken the backyard pictures of Lee with the rifle and handgun. But even if conspiracists wish to think that Marina is a liar, there's the fact that the HSCA (House Select Committee on Assassinations) panel of photo experts authenticated the backyard pictures. (Which confirmed the Warren Commission finding that the photos were authentic.)

Oswald's co-worker Buell Wesley Frazier who gave Oswald a ride to work on the morning of November 22nd, 1963, observed Oswald take a package into the Book Depository Building.

Oswald's claim of "curtain rods" within the package cannot be supported at all. His room needed no curtains, nor rods, and no such rods were ever found in the TSBD or at his residence at 1026 N. Beckley Avenue in Oak Cliff.

Oswald was seen working on the Depository's sixth floor that morning.

Oswald's palmprint is found on his Mannlicher-Carcano rifle after the assassination.

No trace of any bullets/bullet fragments/bullet shells OTHER THAN THOSE COMING FROM OSWALD'S 6.5-MILLIMETER MANNLICHER-CARCANO RIFLE were discovered anywhere in Dealey Plaza, the limousine, the TSBD, Parkland Hospital, or in the victims.

Oswald, in flight from the TSBD, shoots and kills Dallas patrolman J.D. Tippit on 10th Street in the Dallas suburb of Oak Cliff. Multiple witnesses confirm it was Oswald who shot Officer Tippit.

Oswald, just days after acquiring his Carcano weapon, attempts to murder retired General Edwin Walker in Dallas, on April 10, 1963. Marina Oswald herself testifies that "Lee told me...he just shot Walker".

It was also proven that Oswald could have indeed travelled, in 90 seconds or less, the distance across the sixth floor of the TSBD and descended the four flights of stairs in time to have been seen by policeman Marrion L. Baker on the building's second floor.

 

[RoboTimbo]

It's a simple multiple choice 5 part question. The fact that you and your Amen Chorus of Lone Nutters refuse to give an answer speaks volumes as to the validity of your argument.

Bad Robert! You're still slinking away from answering the questions.

Why does the Zapruder film so the massive exit wound on the right front of JFK's head indicating a shot from the rear?

The website about entry/exit wounds and the video showing mass ejecta on the far side of a target, both posted by you, confirm it. You were particularly competent in shooting yourself in the foot with those two. How do you maintain your cognitive dissonance so easily?

Time to start answering questions, Robert.

 

[EventHorizon]

A loaded question?? I've even given you Deep Thinkers the option of offering your own explanation, but so far, I hear only crickets chirping.

Yes, a loaded question. I guess you don't know what that is. I guess you're also choosing to ignore all the explanations that have been given in this thread, but then you seem to be pretty good at ignoring things that are inconvenient to your beliefs.

 

[Tomtomkent]

A loaded question?? I've even given you Deep Thinkers the option of offering your own explanation, but so far, I hear only crickets chirping.

So its not a loaded question... we just have to choose one of your invalid answers?

There is a visible exit wound. Top front of jfks head.

Now stop whining we dont answer your questions and explain why there is also vast exit wound on the top front of JFKs head in the uncropped version of the death stare photo.

Explain why there is no visible exit wound on the back of his head in that photo, on the Z film or in the poloroid.

 

[Tomtomkent]

Tell you what Robert, I will explain why each your five answers are invalid right after you have caught up to date with all the questions YOU ducked:

How matter explode from the "entry wound" on multiple trajectories in an "explosion" of a fragmenting bullet if a teeny tiny entry wound only allows for one direction?
Why is the "entry" ejecta visible on the Z film but no exit wound ejecta visible from the back of the head?
Why is no ejacta visible over the top of the seats or the trunk of the limo in any photographs?
Why does the interview you posted not show any sigs that Jackie had to scoop up any brain?
Why on the death stare photo, when uncropped, is there a large exit wound on the top of the front of the head?
Why is there no exit wound on the back of the head in the z film or poloroid, or the uncropped death stare photograph?
At what point would the vast exit wound become visible on the back of his head?

There are many more, but the point is made.

 

[Tomtomkent]

Why is there no visible exit wound in the Z film???/-- The question answered.

Pick and choose:

1. Because there was no exit wound in the back of the head.All of the doctors, nurses and attendants at Parkland simply lied about that as did the autopsy photographers and film developers. Also Doug Horne of the ARRB simply lied.

2. Because there was no exit wound in the back of the head. All of doctors, nurses and attendants at Parkland were simply mistaken, as well as the autopsy photographers and film developers. Also Doug Horne of the ARRB who was simply mistaken.

3. Because the Z film was just to blurry to show it.

4. Because the Z film, examined frame by frame leaves a whole lot of action missing, and the blow-out occurred between frames.


5. Because the Z film was altered by the conspirators, just like the Backyard photos.

Pick and choose, or add your own fantastical explanation. Or simply duck the question, again.

There is a visible exit wound. Front of the head. There is visible entry wound, behind the ear. The entire question supposes that the shooter had to be infront and ignores what is visisble.
1 and 2 require us to make statements we do not have information or evidence to support. So Iwill state the fact: the quotes you posted are not supported by material evidence. The uncropped deathstare photo conflicts with their statements, as do the poloroid, and zfilm.

3 is invalid the back of the hrad is visible when he slumps forwards, and there is enough clarity to see the head remains convex, no massive exploded hollow. Even if the zfilm was blurry you would have to explain the wound being missing in the.poloroid or deathstare photos.

4 is irrelevant. If the blow out itself was faster than the frame rate the wound itself does not disapear.
5 assumes by necessity that the poloroid and your own deathstare are also fake. And presumes with out valid evidence the backyard photos were faked. This claim alone was resoundingly debunked.

I go for option 6: the bullet entered the visible entry wound behind the ear and the ejecta from the front was the top front exit wound. Exactly as my stance has always been. Now I expect you to hold yourself to your own standard and catch up with every question you ducked.

 

[Robert Prey]

There is a visible exit wound. Front of the head. There is visible entry wound, behind the ear. The entire question supposes that the shooter had to be infront and ignores what is visisble.
1 and 2 require us to make statements we do not have information or evidence to support. So Iwill state the fact: the quotes you posted are not supported by material evidence. The uncropped deathstare photo conflicts with their statements, as do the poloroid, and zfilm.

3 is invalid the back of the hrad is visible when he slumps forwards, and there is enough clarity to see the head remains convex, no massive exploded hollow. Even if the zfilm was blurry you would have to explain the wound being missing in the.poloroid or deathstare photos.

4 is irrelevant. If the blow out itself was faster than the frame rate the wound itself does not disapear.
5 assumes by necessity that the poloroid and your own deathstare are also fake. And presumes with out valid evidence the backyard photos were faked. This claim alone was resoundingly debunked.

I go for option 6: the bullet entered the visible entry wound behind the ear and the ejecta from the front was the top front exit wound. Exactly as my stance has always been. Now I expect you to hold yourself to your own standard and catch up with every question you ducked.

Would it be fair to say that if there was not large blow-out in the back of the head, then the Parkland witnesses were either mistaken or lying? That's not a loaded question, just pure and simple logic. Is that a fair conclusion or is it not?

 

[Robert Prey]

Yes, a loaded question. I guess you don't know what that is. I guess you're also choosing to ignore all the explanations that have been given in this thread, but then you seem to be pretty good at ignoring things that are inconvenient to your beliefs.

Would it be fair to say that if there was not large blow-out in the back of the head, then the Parkland witnesses were either mistaken or lying? That's not a loaded question, just pure and simple logic. Is that a fair conclusion or is it not?

 

[Robert Prey]

I think what Robert means here is that Oswald has not be incriminated to his satisfaction. Keep in mind that he has also said he has demonstrated a conspiracy to kill JFK beyond all reasonable doubt (well, in his mind anyway).

Actually, the evidence of Oswald's guilt has been discussed many times on this thread. Robert seems to have forgotten my post #53 which for his benefit I will repost in slightly revised form below. Maybe his computer screen "blurred" the time I posted it like those parts of the Zapruter film which are inconvenient to his conspiracy theories.

----------

Lee Harvey Oswald owned the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository on Friday afternoon, November 22, 1963.

Oswald owned the handgun that was shown to have been used in the murder of Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit.

When arrested Oswald had a fake draft card in the name of "A.J. Hidell" in his wallet. The order form from Klein's Sporting Goods to purchase the mail-order rifle was signed by one "A.J. Hidell" and was positively proven to have been in Oswald's handwriting. The mail to address on the order was Oswald's Dallas post-office box.

Marina Oswald admits to having taken the backyard pictures of Lee with the rifle and handgun. But even if conspiracists wish to think that Marina is a liar, there's the fact that the HSCA (House Select Committee on Assassinations) panel of photo experts authenticated the backyard pictures. (Which confirmed the Warren Commission finding that the photos were authentic.)

Oswald's co-worker Buell Wesley Frazier who gave Oswald a ride to work on the morning of November 22nd, 1963, observed Oswald take a package into the Book Depository Building.

Oswald's claim of "curtain rods" within the package cannot be supported at all. His room needed no curtains, nor rods, and no such rods were ever found in the TSBD or at his residence at 1026 N. Beckley Avenue in Oak Cliff.

Oswald was seen working on the Depository's sixth floor that morning.

Oswald's palmprint is found on his Mannlicher-Carcano rifle after the assassination.

No trace of any bullets/bullet fragments/bullet shells OTHER THAN THOSE COMING FROM OSWALD'S 6.5-MILLIMETER MANNLICHER-CARCANO RIFLE were discovered anywhere in Dealey Plaza, the limousine, the TSBD, Parkland Hospital, or in the victims.

Oswald, in flight from the TSBD, shoots and kills Dallas patrolman J.D. Tippit on 10th Street in the Dallas suburb of Oak Cliff. Multiple witnesses confirm it was Oswald who shot Officer Tippit.

Oswald, just days after acquiring his Carcano weapon, attempts to murder retired General Edwin Walker in Dallas, on April 10, 1963. Marina Oswald herself testifies that "Lee told me...he just shot Walker".

It was also proven that Oswald could have indeed travelled, in 90 seconds or less, the distance across the sixth floor of the TSBD and descended the four flights of stairs in time to have been seen by policeman Marrion L. Baker on the building's second floor.

As you very well know, most of these assertions were delved into and found wanting. Happy to go over it again, one by one if you wish. So once again, harking back to my very fist post, give your one best piece of evidence again, but be mindful, there were no readable prints, no one had seen Oswald fire a rifle, and the paraffin test of Oswald';s cheek which might have proved he fried a rifle, was negative.

 

[Tomtomkent]

Would it be fair to say that if there was not large blow-out in the back of the head, then the Parkland witnesses were either mistaken or lying? That's not a loaded question, just pure and simple logic. Is that a fair conclusion or is it not?

Nope. Because again you are attempting to force us to make accussations. The factual statement is:

The statements of Parkland staff that you quoted are not supported by material evidence.

Now, how about you stop trying to use leading questions, stop trying to force others into an accusation, and answer the many questions you continue to dodge:

Why is there no exit wound visible on the back of JFKs head in the Z film?
Or the Poloroid?
Or the full image of the "death stare" photograph?
Why is there no splatter across the top of the seats in the car? Or over the trunk? In any photograph?
Why do the Parkland statements not mention the large wound at the top front of JFKs head in the full death stare image?
If you have correctly identified the entry wound, how did ejecta leave JFKs head on multiple trajectories, not confined to the small cone allowed by the entry wound?

 

[Tomtomkent]

As you very well know, most of these assertions were delved into and found wanting. Happy to go over it again, one by one if you wish. So once again, harking back to my very fist post, give your one best piece of evidence again, but be mindful, there were no readable prints, no one had seen Oswald fire a rifle, and the paraffin test of Oswald';s cheek which might have proved he fried a rifle, was negative.

Found wanting? You mean whn you claimed the latent print was left by a dead body? When you claimed shadows were impossible (despite them being recreated for you)? When you stated that the photos had to be fake because a woman said she didn't take them (apart from when she did)?

You mean with your total lack of material evidence?

 

[Tomtomkent]

Tell you what Robert, I will explain why each your five answers are invalid right after you have caught up to date with all the questions YOU ducked:

How matter explode from the "entry wound" on multiple trajectories in an "explosion" of a fragmenting bullet if a teeny tiny entry wound only allows for one direction?
Why is the "entry" ejecta visible on the Z film but no exit wound ejecta visible from the back of the head?
Why is no ejacta visible over the top of the seats or the trunk of the limo in any photographs?
Why does the interview you posted not show any sigs that Jackie had to scoop up any brain?
Why on the death stare photo, when uncropped, is there a large exit wound on the top of the front of the head?
Why is there no exit wound on the back of the head in the z film or poloroid, or the uncropped death stare photograph?
At what point would the vast exit wound become visible on the back of his head?

There are many more, but the point is made.

Just bumping this because I'm sure Robert wouldnt want to be two faced, and accuse others of ducking questions while avoiding them himself. Lost count of how many times he failed to answer these now...

 

[Robert Prey]

Oswald had motive, means and the opportunity to commit the crime. He owned the rifle that actual ballistics experts say is the gun the fired the bullets that struck Kennedy. His subsequent behavior (fleeing the scene, killing Tippit, struggling with the police at the movie theater, his odd, evasive answers to reporters etc.) points to him being somehow implicated in the crime. It is intellectually dishonest to blithely hand-wave evidence as fake simply because it doesn't fit with your theory.

I don't know if it's stubbornness or some sort of cognitive dissonance on your part but you still haven't answered this question:

Why did the conspirators bother even attempting to forge the lone gunman narrative?.




I realize you meant that as some sort of zinger but like most of what you write here it doesn't stand up to close scrutiny. Why is it naive to suggest there are other easier ways to kill Kennedy?

Now I'm going to surprise you and agree with you for probably the first and last time ever. I can just about buy the idea that a group of corrupt members of the government might for whatever reason decide to murder their commander-in-chief and frame a lone patsy. What I can't buy is that they'd deliberately frame a lone patsy by using multiple shooters in multiple locations. Such a plan would be perversely stupid.

Kennedy was not only in poor health (something your shadowy all seeing cabal would know about). He also had several scandalous secrets that he could have been either blackmailed with or raked over the coals with if they had been made public, potentially affecting his chances at reelection.

Why was it so important for the conspirators to kill him?

In plain view of hundreds of witnesses?

By trying to frame one shooter yet using multiple shooters?

This is a small space, and zilliions of words and hundreds of books have been written to cover all of the possibilities, so in the future, please limit your questions to one at a time. Nontheless I'll humor you this once.

"Oswald had motive,"
Not even discussed yet on this board. If he had motive, could you kindly relate as to what that might have been? LHO was repeatedly quoted as admiring Pres. Kennedy. So what was his motive?????

"He owned the rifle"
You don't know that.There is no proof he was the one who picked it up from the post office, and the Post Office records for the transaction, like so many other pieces of evidence was "missing".

"ballistics experts say is the gun the fired the bullets that struck Kennedy. "
Perhaps some, but not all of the bullets.

"His subsequent behavior (fleeing the scene, killing Tippit,"

He didn't "flee" the scene. He was found eating lunch on the 2nd floor. He left when his supervisor said there would be no more work that day.
There is strong evidence that he may not have killed Tippit.

"his odd, evasive answers to reporters etc."

" No sir, I didn't shoot anyone...I'm just a Patsy!"
Does that sound evasive?

"Why did the conspirators bother even attempting to forge the lone gunman narrative?

In the words of Fletcher Prouty, to make everyone look "here" instead of "there.".

"Why is it naive to suggest there are other easier ways to kill Kennedy?"
Name one.

" What I can't buy is that they'd deliberately frame a lone patsy by using multiple shooters in multiple locations. Such a plan would be perversely stupid."

I just don't know how you can logically argue with success. John Wilkes Booth tried it another way and was caught. The attempted assassins of Reagan,FDR, McKinley and Ford tried it another way and were caught. The JFK hit was successful in that via the use of a convenient Patsy, nobody was ever caught.

"Kennedy was not only in poor health (something your shadowy all seeing cabal would know about). He also had several scandalous secrets that he could have been either blackmailed with or raked over the coals with if they had been made public, potentially affecting his chances at reelection."

Kennedy had just what Obama has going for him today, a friendly, indulgent liberal press. They all knew about K's indiscretions, but their liberal bias prevailed and they kept quiet.

Why was it so important for the conspirators to kill him?

CIA: Threat to break up CIA over Bay of Pigs disaster
Cubans within CIA -- Revenge for Bay of Pigs betrayal.
Mafia: Revenge for Bobby's anti-Mafia crusade after the Mafia had helped elect Kennedy.
LBJ: Hatred for Kennedy and lust for power.

 

[Tomtomkent]

in the future, please limit your questions to one at a time. Nontheless I'll humor you this once?

I see no reason why we should. You demand others answer your questions, even when they are leading and invalid. Why should we accept any terms on how many questions we can and can not ask back?

Besides which your answers are all hand waving. We DO know he owned the rifle, he ordered it, he signed for it, he was still carrying the fake ID he used to order it, he had it delivered to his PO Box, he had photographs (which by the way you have in no way proven fake) taken holding the rifle (by somebody who has repeated claims she did take them, and any claim she didn't does not account for the fact they are genuine). Oh and his latent print was on the rifle. In the TBSD. Where the shots originated. So yes, we do KNOW he owned the rifle.

Your hand wave "not all the bullets". Erm... Then supply evidence for a bullet he didn't fire. All the bullets recovered cme from the TSBD, including the one that EXITED through what you claim is an ENTRY wound.

He fled the scene. He stopped for a drink, but not to eat lunch (unless you want to supply evidence otherwise) and there is strong evidence he shot Tippit (again, instead of telling us there is evidence, show it to us, but as it stands: Tippit was shot, by LHO, with the revolver LHO owned, and was carrying when he was arrested after trying to shoot his second cop of the day.

"I'm a patsy".
Wow. He couldn't possibly be telling a lie when he said he didn't shoot anybody. Right after he tried to kill his second cop of the day... That also does not account for other answers he gave that WERE evasive. Or was I not meant to notice that?

"I don't know how you can logically argue with success". Well, he isn't. He is arguing the idea was stupid and would not work. You have yet to prove with anything resembling material evidence that the plan took place and was a success.

The rest of your post is purile speculation based on the strange assumption you have proven there were other gunmen (with no material evidence) and they were part of a conspiracy (that you haven't proven).

 

[Robert Prey]

I see no reason why we should. You demand others answer your questions, even when they are leading and invalid. Why should we accept any terms on how many questions we can and can not ask back?

Besides which your answers are all hand waving. We DO know he owned the rifle, he ordered it, he signed for it, he was still carrying the fake ID he used to order it, he had it delivered to his PO Box, he had photographs (which by the way you have in no way proven fake) taken holding the rifle (by somebody who has repeated claims she did take them, and any claim she didn't does not account for the fact they are genuine). Oh and his latent print was on the rifle. In the TBSD. Where the shots originated. So yes, we do KNOW he owned the rifle.

Your hand wave "not all the bullets". Erm... Then supply evidence for a bullet he didn't fire. All the bullets recovered cme from the TSBD, including the one that EXITED through what you claim is an ENTRY wound.

He fled the scene. He stopped for a drink, but not to eat lunch (unless you want to supply evidence otherwise) and there is strong evidence he shot Tippit (again, instead of telling us there is evidence, show it to us, but as it stands: Tippit was shot, by LHO, with the revolver LHO owned, and was carrying when he was arrested after trying to shoot his second cop of the day.

"I'm a patsy".
Wow. He couldn't possibly be telling a lie when he said he didn't shoot anybody. Right after he tried to kill his second cop of the day... That also does not account for other answers he gave that WERE evasive. Or was I not meant to notice that?

"I don't know how you can logically argue with success". Well, he isn't. He is arguing the idea was stupid and would not work. You have yet to prove with anything resembling material evidence that the plan took place and was a success.

The rest of your post is purile speculation based on the strange assumption you have proven there were other gunmen (with no material evidence) and they were part of a conspiracy (that you haven't proven).

Baloney.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Just thought you should know......


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7774211#post7774211

 

[Walter Ego]

As you very well know, most of these assertions were delved into and found wanting. Happy to go over it again, one by one if you wish. So once again, harking back to my very fist post, give your one best piece of evidence again, but be mindful, there were no readable prints, no one had seen Oswald fire a rifle, and the paraffin test of Oswald';s cheek which might have proved he fried a rifle, was negative.

Robert, you would look less foolish if you would learn the actual meanings of words or technical phrases before you use them. (In the latter case for example "jet effect.")

Assertion (noun)

Something declared or stated positively, often with no support or attempt at proof: a mere assertion; an unwarranted assertion.

Your statement above that no one saw Oswald firing a rifle from the 6th floor of the TSBD on 11/22/63 for example is an assertion and is in fact false. Several spectators in Dealey Plaza saw Oswald in the window with a rifle and one of them actually saw the last shot being fired and the barrel of the gun being withdrawn.

The items in my list of Oswald's guilt could have been presented in court by the prosecution if Oswald had gone to trial and corroborated by physical evidence or witness testimony. The evidence for most of them has been discussed already on this thread.

In your role as Oswald's defense attorney you do not of course have to present any evidence of Oswald's innocence, you merely have to prove the evidence against him is faulty. So far you have not done so.

 

[Tomtomkent]

Baloney.

Well, that about proves the handwave statement.

Be more specific. Is it baloney that you dodge questions? That witnesses and ballistics place Oswald at the scene of tippits death? That a latent palm print was taken from the rifle? That Oswald ordered , took delivery of, and had photographs taken of two murder weapons?

Heres an idea. Supply some material evidence. Then explain why exactly you hold the Parkland statements as true even when the uncropped version of the death stare photograph doesnt support it.

 

[Walter Ego]

Speaking of baloney.

He didn't "flee" the scene. He was found eating lunch on the 2nd floor. He left when his supervisor said there would be no more work that day.

Another of Robert's assertions. I guest that three foot long parcel Oswald took into the building had his lunch in it.

 

[Tomtomkent]

Still now his invalid multiple choice question has been answered, perhaps Robert can catch up on the questions he has ducked:

How matter explode from the "entry wound" on multiple trajectories in an "explosion" of a fragmenting bullet if a teeny tiny entry wound only allows for one direction?
Why is the "entry" ejecta visible on the Z film but no exit wound ejecta visible from the back of the head?
Why is no ejacta visible over the top of the seats or the trunk of the limo in any photographs?
Why does the interview you posted not show any sigs that Jackie had to scoop up any brain?
Why on the death stare photo, when uncropped, is there a large exit wound on the top of the front of the head?
Why is there no exit wound on the back of the head in the z film or poloroid, or the uncropped death stare photograph?
At what point would the vast exit wound become visible on the back of his head?