JFK Conspiracy Theories: It Never Ends

[Robert Prey]

See if you can think real hard and work that one out for yourself. What would the laws of physics have to do with how bullets act? Or react to striking another object? Or the directions it is possible for ejecta travel in? Or to the distortion of the bullet?

Or are you suggesting bullet wounds and bodies are exempt from physics?

I'm suggesting that you don't know what you are talking about.

 

[Robert Prey]

Bingo!



Although only Brennan positively ID'd Oswald as the shooter, other witnesses in Dealey Plaza saw the shooter, a man fitting Oswald's description, or the rifle on the 6th floor window of the TSBD.

Robert Jackson, a Dallas Times Herald reporter, and Michael Couch, a cameraman, were riding in the presidential motorcade in an open convertible one block behind JFK's limousine.

Jackson: "I saw the rifle... approximately half of the weapon... and just as I looked at it, it was drawn slowly back into the building." (WC Vol. 2 p. 159)

After the third shot, Couch saw "about a foot of rifle being-- brought [back] into the window." (WC Vol 2 pp. 156-157)

Mrs. Earle Cabell, the wife of the Dallas mayor, four cars behind the president saw "a projection out of those windows... on the sixth floor." (WC Vol 2 p. 486)

James Worrell, a nineteen-year-old student standing on the sidewalk in front of the TSBD, saw "the rifle, about six inches of it. I saw about about four inches of the barrel... but it had a long stock," a description exactly matching Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano. Worrel also saw the gun actually being fired. (WC Vol 2 p.193 & p. 200)

Fifteen-year-old Amos Euins saw "what I thought was a pipe" and he saw "the rifle laying across [the sniper's] hand,and I could see his hand on the trigger." After the third shot, Euins remembered the sniper "pulled the gun back into the window." (WC Vol. 2 page 204)

Euins recalling what he saw on 11/22/63 in Dealey Plaza:

There is no dispute that someone had a rifle and was shooting from the TSBD. A number of witnesses attesting to that hardly is an ID of the shooter. Obviously.

 

[Tomtomkent]

I'm suggesting that you don't know what you are talking about.

Well I know I'm talking about Newtonian Physics. Everybody else seems to be aware of the laws of physics. It seems you are the one who doesn't know some fundamental principlesevery body esle would take for granted.

A bullet wound is the product of physics. It obeys the law of physics. The ejecta of an exit wound travels down range. In the same direction as a bullet. Blood stains and splatter obey the laws of physics. They are unchanging and universal laws.

 

[Robert Prey]

Interesting that you would label Obama a "Marxist goof" but will go to any extreme, no matter how absurd, to exonerate Lee Harvey Oswald, a Marxist double murder.

(But then you have admitted you are completely ignorant of Oswald's biography and psychology so perhaps you didn't know he was a Marxist.)

Also John Wilkes Booth was a lone gunman (another term you don't understand) only in the sense that he killed Lincoln without the assistance of one of his co-conspirators. The Lincoln assassination was part of a larger conspiracy to aid the Confederacy by killing Lincoln, Secretary of State William H. Seward and Vice President Andrew Johnson.

What you seem to be saying here is that lone gunman get caught but conspirators get away with it, a ridiculous idea but no dumber than many things you've said on this long and increasingly pointless thread.

Oswald claimed to be a Marxist, but actually was a loyal patriotic American who loved his country, loved his president, was a former US Marine, worked for Naval Intelligence, as well as an operative for CIA and FBI, was sent to USSR after having been sheep dipped as a disloyal American, but never revoked his citizenship, was apparently sent to language school so that he could speak fluent Russian, then sent to USSR so that he could spy for the US. While he made a big splash with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, he was also working with anti-Castro groups at the same time. Someday, when the full truth is accepted, he should be posthumously awarded the Medal of Freedom.

 

[Tomtomkent]

A witness with bad eyesight who thinks he saw somebody from a distance but couldn't ID him up close, and then changes his story time and again, is not a credible witness. Obviously.

What about somebody who is admiting to having lied to the WC? Is a liar a credible witness? What about somebody who changes their claim back and forth?

Compared to those a guy who could not 100% identify the suspect (but admitted being fairly sure) then went from fairly sure to possitive later, is a good witness. He is not claiming any form of superhuman observational skills or recall.

But please Robert, be consistent, are witness statements the best evidence or are they fallible?

 

[Tomtomkent]

Oswald claimed to be a Marxist, but actually was a loyal patriotic American who loved his country, loved his president, was a former US Marine, worked for Naval Intelligence, as well as an operative for CIA and FBI, was sent to USSR after having been sheep dipped as a disloyal American, but never revoked his citizenship, was apparently sent to language school so that he could speak fluent Russian, then sent to USSR so that he could spy for the US. While he made a big splash with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, he was also working with anti-Castro groups at the same time. Someday, when the full truth is accepted, he should be posthumously awarded the Medal of Freedom.

So he was not the same Lee Harvey Oswald who argued on television that he was a marxist, but not a Lenonist? Eta: and how do you who he loved and what he felt? He revelled in giving different people different stories

Besides which being loyal, patriotic, and loving somebody does not conflict with the personality to murder somebody. This is conjecture and wishfull thinking.

 

[Tomtomkent]

There is no dispute that someone had a rifle and was shooting from the TSBD. A number of witnesses attesting to that hardly is an ID of the shooter. Obviously.

Witnesses seeing THE rifle Oswald ordered, signed for, had himself photographed with and left his palm print on. At least one of whom identified Oswald. Your opinion of his credibility doesn't matter. You said nobody had, but somebody had. Whoops.

 

[Robert Prey]

Witnesses seeing THE rifle Oswald ordered, signed for, had himself photographed with and left his palm print on. At least one of whom identified Oswald. Your opinion of his credibility doesn't matter. You said nobody had, but somebody had. Whoops.

Seeing a man in a window you couldn't ID in a line up on the same day, is not a witness that saw one Lee Harvey Oswald with rifle. Nor is any of your other bilge true, not signed for in his own hand, not photographed, and no palm print as you very well know.

 

[Robert Prey]

So he was not the same Lee Harvey Oswald who argued on television that he was a marxist, but not a Lenonist? Eta: and how do you who he loved and what he felt? He revelled in giving different people different stories

Besides which being loyal, patriotic, and loving somebody does not conflict with the personality to murder somebody. This is conjecture and wishfull thinking.

No. It's what Marina has stated as a fact.

 

[Robert Prey]

What about somebody who is admiting to having lied to the WC? Is a liar a credible witness? What about somebody who changes their claim back and forth?

Compared to those a guy who could not 100% identify the suspect (but admitted being fairly sure) then went from fairly sure to possitive later, is a good witness. He is not claiming any form of superhuman observational skills or recall.

But please Robert, be consistent, are witness statements the best evidence or are they fallible?

First hand close up witnesses independently corroborated by many other close up first hand witnesses is far more credible than one lone witness with bad eyesight who claims seeing one thing from afar, then another, repeatedly contradicting himself.

 

[Tomtomkent]

No. It's what Marina has stated as a fact.

It is what she has stated as her opinion. But how can we know the fact of what somebody is thinking? Perhaps you are unaware of the difference between fact and opinion.

 

[Tomtomkent]

First hand close up witnesses independently corroborated by many other close up first hand witnesses is far more credible than one lone witness with bad eyesight who claims seeing one thing from afar, then another, repeatedly contradicting himself.

And yet you havent commented on other witnesses your case relies on. The man who claims to have lied to the WC? Or the one who repeatedly changed her mind about which photos she took? How about people who claim to see a wound on the back of the head on a body laying on its back, not moved to reveal the back of the head? A wound not there in the photographs or film of the man immediately after the shooting?

But again, to be clear, are eye witnesses fallible or not? Are you no longer claiming that an eye witness with no reason to lie is the best evidence? Or is it only the witnesses convenient to you who are best evidence? Even if they conflict with material evidence?

Do you understand material evidence by the way? Your previous posts have suggested annectdotes and drawings to be material evidence.

 

[Robert Prey]

How about people who claim to see a wound on the back of the head on a body laying on its back, not moved to reveal the back of the head? A wound not there in the photographs or film of the man immediately after the shooting?

When 20 or so witnesses claim to have seen a large blow-out in the back of the head it is reasonable to assume that actually saw the back of the head. Obviously. As to your other un-named "witnesses" I don't know what you are fantasizing about.

 

[Walter Ego]

There is no dispute that someone had a rifle and was shooting from the TSBD. A number of witnesses attesting to that hardly is an ID of the shooter. Obviously.

So it was not Oswald on the 6th floor shooting at JFK? So how come none of the employees of the TSBD noticed a strange man with a gun running around inside the building? Or was that a normal occurrence?

All the employees gave statements to the police or to the Warren Commission. The only mention of man inside the building who was not an employee was in the statement of Danny Arce who said an elderly man with "kidney trouble" showed up at the front door shortly before the assassination asking to use the bathroom. Was he the shooter?

 

[EventHorizon]

As demonstrated by Robert, the mental gymnastics you have to go through to believe in a conspiracy are astonishing.

 

[Tomtomkent]

When 20 or so witnesses claim to have seen a large blow-out in the back of the head it is reasonable to assume that actually saw the back of the head. Obviously. As to your other un-named "witnesses" I don't know what you are fantasizing about.

Oh dear. You had no idea that Marian admitted, then denied, then admitted taking the back yard photos? You were not aware that one of your sources in the "final nail" post was claiming to have seen one thing but testified another to the WC?

Are you now claiming that of the annectdotes and witnesses you quoted only the parkland ones should be considered as evidence? Very well... when did the exit wound to the back of JFKs head become visible? Why is it not visible on the poloroid? Or the Z film? Or the uncropped version of the death stare photo?

Untill you explain why the wound was not there before reaching parkland, and not there by the time of the autopsy, why should we believe any number of witnesses at all?


And are you ever going to tell us if witness testemony is best evidence or not? Or is it only cherry picked witnesses you endorse as best evidence? Despite the anamolous exit wound that we have no material evidence for some how appearing AFTER the shooting and not being there at the autopsy? Should you not be explaining the material evidence that does NOT back up the stories rather than relying on more stories,

 

[RoboTimbo]

I'm suggesting that you don't know what you are talking about.

That isn't much of a suggestion coming from someone who has more bullet holes in his feet than there were shooters at Kennedy.

Answer the question, Robert. Are all physicists lying or mistaken about the physics of entry/exit wounds and in contradiction to the video and website you shot yourself in the foot with posted?

Someday, when the full truth is accepted, he should be posthumously awarded the Medal of Freedom.

Do you normally revere the murderers of police officers and presidential assassins like that?

 

[bynmdsue]

Hey! did anyone catch JFK:The Lost Bullet on NatGeo last night? Great stuff, hi-def Zapruder(well as hi-def as possible) and Nix films, Amos Euins and James Tague back down in the plaza and an interesting theory on Oswald's missing bullet.

 

[bynmdsue]

Oswald claimed to be a Marxist, but actually was a loyal patriotic American who loved his country, loved his president, was a former US Marine, worked for Naval Intelligence, as well as an operative for CIA and FBI, was sent to USSR after having been sheep dipped as a disloyal American, but never revoked his citizenship, was apparently sent to language school so that he could speak fluent Russian, then sent to USSR so that he could spy for the US. While he made a big splash with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, he was also working with anti-Castro groups at the same time. Someday, when the full truth is accepted, he should be posthumously awarded the Medal of Freedom.

Damn, I said stupid **** like that too when I was fifteen

 

[Walter Ego]

A Stundie Emeritus Medal For Robert?

Oswald claimed to be a Marxist, but actually was a loyal patriotic American who loved his country, loved his president, was a former US Marine, worked for Naval Intelligence, as well as an operative for CIA and FBI, was sent to USSR after having been sheep dipped as a disloyal American, but never revoked his citizenship, was apparently sent to language school so that he could speak fluent Russian, then sent to USSR so that he could spy for the US. While he made a big splash with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, he was also working with anti-Castro groups at the same time. Someday, when the full truth is accepted, he should be posthumously awarded the Medal of Freedom.

Stunning. And if John Hinckley ever gets out of psychiatric prison we can present him with a medal awarded on live television jointly presented by Yoko Ono and Jodie Foster... and an award to you at the same time for making so many false statements in a single paragraph.

Oswald's Russian was self-taught and not "fluent" as members of the Dallas Russian émigré community could have told you. His refusal to let Marina learn English was, in part, so his barely adequate Russian wouldn't deteriorate. (And, speaking of Maria, was wife beating of her was part of his "cover"?)

And he was such "big slash" with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee (the leadership of which told him not to try to organize in New Orleans) that he had to have Marina sign the name of his alias A. Hidell on a membership card so it would look like there was more than one member besides himself in his New Orleans "chapter." And his clumsy attempts to infiltrate anti-Castro groups were more or less proof that he was not an intelligence operative.

(Oswald was in fact such a pathetic **** up that the KGB would not touch him with a ten foot pole when he was in Russia and did not believe the CIA would employee him. Or was being a pathetic **** part of the "cover" too?)

And while we're on the subject of multiple murders, is there anyone else you would care to praise and reward with a medal? Charlie Manson perhaps? Maybe he was a patsy. Can you prove he wasn't?