JFK Conspiracy Theories: It Never Ends

Status
Not open for further replies.
HSienzant said:
Except it wasn't. The rifle in the National Archives in 1978 was the same weapon photographed in place by Detective J.C.Day of the Dallas Crime Lab on the afternoon of the assassination on 11/22/1963 where it was found on the sixth floor of the TSBD. The HSCA photographic panel studied the rifle, archival film and photographs of the rifle, and determined that was Oswald's rifle, to the exclusion of all other rifles in the world.

Hank
Click to expand...


Baloney.
 
Robert Prey said:
D'ja ever know of an LEO who ID'ed a Carcano bearing the imprint "Made Italy, Cal 6.5" as a Mauser 7.65 corroborated by 3 other LEO"s and then affirm that fact in a sworn affidavit???
Click to expand...

No, I have a worse example than that:

http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/hunt/Chinn-Perjury-2001-03-30-ExhibitC+D.pdf

Other than his own name, this officer got every fact wrong, as noted by the judge.

ETA - I couldn't find a link to another case where Chinn arrested an individual for selling "Machinegun Receivers" at a gun show, and the case was later thrown out due to Chinn (while claiming he was an expert in the firearm type involved) mis-identifiing a trigger housing as a receiver - even in the face of refutation from the actual manufacturer of the firearm involved.

Like I said, mistakes are made wrt firearms, and cops are no exception, sometimes they're the worst source you could find.
 
Robert Prey said:
Baloney.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately for you it would appear to be well documented baloney supported by documentarry and physical evidence.

Unlike your after the fact claim. I can't even find a citation for the rifle being identified by any marking or manufacturers name on the rifle, and you offer no citation. Hmmm.

What is the EARLIEST documentation you have for the rifle being identified by the words "Made in Italy". And no "It happened in '63" is not the right answer. When was that first mentioned in a source you can cite?

Stories of sworn statements by the way, dont count. The statements themselves would have to be cited.
 
HSienzant said:
Robert,

If you truly believe there were multiple guns found in the TSBD, please explain why they would do this. Your argument on its face makes absolutely no sense.

Wouldn't it make more sense to you to just shoot the President from behind with the weapon provably ordered by the "Lone Nut Patsy", rather than to shoot the President from multiple locations with multiple weapons, none of which are the Lone Nut's, and then have to spirit away the real weapons and plant the fake one (or leave them behind to be discovered by Weitzman and Powell, among others), and then also alter the x-rays, the autopsy photos, the Zapuder film, and other films taken in Dealey Plaza at the time of the shooting?

Hank
Click to expand...

If you want to make sure the President ends up dead, you do not leave the job to a lone nut shooter with a bad rifle and checkered accounts of his shooting expertise. You make sure the assassination is successful by having more than one shooter in diverse locations. And to make sure you throw the public off the track from demanding a thorough investigation,, by the frame up of a patsy and then make sure he quickly ends up dead before he has a chance to defend himself and shed light on the real perps.
Obviously.
 
I used to believe in the JFK conspiracy. I *wanted* to believe it.

But then, in 2003, I saw a documentary on the BBC that explained the magic bullet theory. How Kennedy and Connally where *not* sitting in front and on the same level of each other, but that Connally was sitting lower and more to the left than Kennedy. The BBC showed the assassination in CGI, showed how the bullets traveled, undisprovable evidence.

At first I was angry, but then slowly it settled in... JFK was *indeed* killed by Lee Harvey Oswald.
 
Robert Prey said:
If you want to make sure the President ends up dead, you do not leave the job to a lone nut shooter with a bad rifle and checkered accounts of his shooting expertise. You make sure the assassination is successful by having more than one shooter in diverse locations. And to make sure you throw the public off the track from demanding a thorough investigation,, by the frame up of a patsy and then make sure he quickly ends up dead before he has a chance to defend himself and shed light on the real perps.
Obviously.
Click to expand...

And you learned this at Quantico or some other similar training facility, maybe AMTU?

Oswald would love the fact that people know his name and debate his guilt - he got what he wanted - there's more talk about him than about JFK.
 
Robert Prey said:
If you want to make sure the President ends up dead, you do not leave the job to a lone nut shooter with a bad rifle and checkered accounts of his shooting expertise. You make sure the assassination is successful by having more than one shooter in diverse locations. And to make sure you throw the public off the track from demanding a thorough investigation,, by the frame up of a patsy and then make sure he quickly ends up dead before he has a chance to defend himself and shed light on the real perps.
Obviously.
Click to expand...

But the person who wanted the President dead was Oswald.

Even if what you state was anywhere close to an informed opinion, Oswald only had his rifle. He only had his oppertunity. Oswald didn't have any of the other fantasies and fictions you have claimed and failed to support with evidence.
 
Tomtomkent said:
Unfortunately for you it would appear to be well documented baloney supported by documentarry and physical evidence.

Unlike your after the fact claim. I can't even find a citation for the rifle being identified by any marking or manufacturers name on the rifle, and you offer no citation. Hmmm.

What is the EARLIEST documentation you have for the rifle being identified by the words "Made in Italy". And no "It happened in '63" is not the right answer. When was that first mentioned in a source you can cite?

Stories of sworn statements by the way, dont count. The statements themselves would have to be cited.
Click to expand...

That fact is not in dispute. Do you have a point???
 
Bell said:
I used to believe in the JFK conspiracy. I *wanted* to believe it.

But then, in 2003, I saw a documentary on the BBC that explained the magic bullet theory. How Kennedy and Connally where *not* sitting in front and on the same level of each other, but that Connally was sitting lower and more to the left than Kennedy. The BBC showed the assassination in CGI, showed how the bullets traveled, undisprovable evidence.

At first I was angry, but then slowly it settled in... JFK was *indeed* killed by Lee Harvey Oswald.
Click to expand...

That documentary is a classic example of a Red Herring Diversion. An alleged proof of a single bullet theory has no relation to the fatal shot that blasted the President's head leaving a large blow-out in the back of his head as affirmed by 40 plus onthescene medical witnesses. I've seen a whole lot of documentaries on the subject with the possible exception of "TMWKK" none of them deal with The Very Best Evidence, namely the wound to the head.
 
Robert Prey said:
That fact is not in dispute. Do you have a point???
Click to expand...

Yes. That the fact IS in dispute. That I can find no records from the initial investigation that, as your post described, the model of the rifle was identified by text stamped upon it.
 
BStrong said:
And you learned this at Quantico or some other similar training facility, maybe AMTU?

Oswald would love the fact that people know his name and debate his guilt - he got what he wanted - there's more talk about him than about JFK.
Click to expand...

If that were true, then it hardly makes sense that he would cry out to the reporters:

"I didn't shoot anybody -- I'm just a Patsy!"
 
Robert Prey said:
That documentary is a classic example of a Red Herring Diversion. An alleged proof of a single bullet theory has no relation to the fatal shot that blasted the President's head leaving a large blow-out in the back of his head as affirmed by 40 plus onthescene medical witnesses. I've seen a whole lot of documentaries on the subject with the possible exception of "TMWKK" none of them deal with The Very Best Evidence, namely the wound to the head.
Click to expand...

Actually your problem is that they DO deal with the best evidence. The wound. As recorded in material evidence.

What they don't deal with are the CLAIMS you keep harping on about. In fact not even the CLAIMS support what you say, with few exceptions that are provably wrong.

Just a reminder folks: Very few of the 40 witnesses Rob has cited described the wound he claimed, or indeed were medical witnesses.

For full details of why their statements simply don't say what Rober claims, and do not support his conclusions browse the rest of this thread at your leisure.
 
Robert Prey said:
If that were true, then it hardly makes sense that he would cry out to the reporters:

"I didn't shoot anybody -- I'm just a Patsy!"
Click to expand...

Assuming facts not in evidence.

I believe Oswald was starved for attention.

He defected, nobody cared for very long.

He came back, nobody cared at all.

He was stuck in Shitsville Texas, and nobody noticed him.

He tried to plug Gen. Walker, missed, and nobody paid much attention to it.

He shot JFK, and we're discussing it in 2012.
 
Tomtomkent said:
Actually your problem is that they DO deal with the best evidence. The wound. As recorded in material evidence.

What they don't deal with are the CLAIMS you keep harping on about. In fact not even the CLAIMS support what you say, with few exceptions that are provably wrong.

Just a reminder folks: Very few of the 40 witnesses Rob has cited described the wound he claimed, or indeed were medical witnesses.

For full details of why their statements simply don't say what Rober claims, and do not support his conclusions browse the rest of this thread at your leisure.
Click to expand...

Baloney.There were more than forty.
 
Robert Prey said:
...of which you have zero evidence. According to Marina, Oswald loved President Kennedy.
Click to expand...

Which means what? Fred West loved his daughter and his ex, Bith ended up buried in a field. You do know people are capable of killing those they love? BECAUSE they love them? That is ignoring the fact that Marina could be wrong. You have even posted quotes of her contradicting your own story about the "fake" photos, proving she is as unreliable as any other human. You know "opinion" is not evidence?


Even IF (and what a big IF that is) you were correct about there being "zero evidence" for Oswald (again, please see the rest of this thread to be reminded why that is wrong), would you care to shoulder the burden of proof?

You have yet to offer any evidence for anybody else fitting the bill either. Perhaps you are (still) unaware but "No evidence for Oswald" is not the same as "evidence for anybody else".
 
Robert Prey said:
Baloney.There were more than forty.
Click to expand...

The list YOU posted of the "40+" included non medical witnesses.

Regardless, they were debunked at length, showing exactly what was "baloney". Your claims for example were prize winning baloney. Why do you insist on parroting the claim over and again? Whom are you expecting it will convince?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom