JFK Conspiracy Theories: It Never Ends II

Status
Not open for further replies.
'Photographic evidence......"
I couldn't get to Dallas,... who would want to... and found that others who did live there couldn't bestir themselves from the conspiracy covens to do this simple feat.
Recreate the backyard photographs.
Being of Level Magnificent in models, I made the backyard come to me.
Today, I dusted off the model and photo'd it again..
The model uses a scale soldier for LHOLN, and a wire outline for Marina and the camera...
 

Attachments

  • BackyardPhotos (1).jpg
    BackyardPhotos (1).jpg
    114.6 KB · Views: 5
  • BackyardPhotos-CE133A.jpg
    BackyardPhotos-CE133A.jpg
    111.5 KB · Views: 10
Jay Utah:

As well as patently absurd. If the claim is that Wallace was in Dallas to kill Kennedy on the Vice President's orders, then that's just about the stupidest way for Johnson to do away with Kennedy that I can possibly think of. More so that just about anyone who could be ascribed a motived to kill Kennedy, Johnson had the access to do it in a way that wouldn't involve hundreds of witnesses, a ginormous investigation, and -- ya know -- obvious evidence that it was a murder and not just an "accident."

^with this simple statement, Jay has summed up just about every CT under the sun^
 
BStrong said:
with this simple statement, Jay has summed up just about every CT under the sun
Click to expand...

Just about. There are those who argue that Kennedy was killed gruesomely in public in order to send a message... of some kind... to someone. Not all conspiracy theories necessarily require the President simply to be done away with, such that tidiness would be a virtue.
 
JayUtah said:
Just about. There are those who argue that Kennedy was killed gruesomely in public in order to send a message... of some kind... to someone. Not all conspiracy theories necessarily require the President simply to be done away with, such that tidiness would be a virtue.
Click to expand...

Conspiracies work in mysterious ways, their wonders to perform.
 
Photos of JFK boinking some woman other than Jackie... Kills his presidency and his future.
Other than losing 1/2 his community property, no harm done.
And the gal gets to be famous!
 
supposenot said:
Again, you fail to address the Wallace print ID. That is hard forensic evidence, not nit-picking over eyewitness testimonies.

Care to talk about that?
Click to expand...

It's interesting that the same folks who refuse to give any credence to the Wallace fingerprint ID adamantly accept the validity of the Oswald latent palmprint, even though there are massive problems with the latter. Indeed, the Wallace print is far less open to dispute than the latent palmprint.
 
bobtaftfan said:
It's interesting that the same folks who refuse to give any credence to the Wallace fingerprint ID adamantly accept the validity of the Oswald latent palmprint, even though there are massive problems with the latter. Indeed, the Wallace print is far less open to dispute than the latent palmprint.
Click to expand...

It's interesting that there are certain folks that seem to want pimp their websites, and other people who seem to want to fixate on alleged "evidence" so far removed from the incident in question that the discussion is moot, and that still other folks simply repeat what somebody else said that has no experience with the subject matter, so ignorance is passed along w/o question.

Anybody want to talk about impossible feats of marksmanship?
 
bobtaftfan said:
It's interesting that the same folks who refuse to give any credence to the Wallace fingerprint ID adamantly accept the validity of the Oswald latent palmprint, even though there are massive problems with the latter. Indeed, the Wallace print is far less open to dispute than the latent palmprint.
Click to expand...

I won't pretend to speak for anyone else here, but, for me, it's not so much a question of the "credence" given to the Wallace fingerprint on its own as it is whether there's any other evidence to corroborate what it's supposed to show in context. The comparison with the LHO palmprint is just the usual CTist tactic to make an equivalence between a body of evidence for LHO's guilt (hint- it's not just that palmprint that's involved here) and a single wobbly piece of evidence for some other unspecified conclusion.
 
Last edited:
BStrong said:
It's interesting that ...
Click to expand...

...that in your absence quite a bit of discussion has occurred on the points you raised previously. And while your comments on the fingerprint issue are reasonably a propos, your negligence of other topics you've recently raised make it unlikely that any comment on your accusation of double standard will net a profitable discussion.

What about the marksmanship?
 
bobtaftfan said:
It's interesting that the same folks who refuse to give any credence to the Wallace fingerprint ID adamantly accept the validity of the Oswald latent palmprint, even though there are massive problems with the latter. Indeed, the Wallace print is far less open to dispute than the latent palmprint.
Click to expand...


Hardly, the Wallace fingerprint wasn't identified until years later, and wasn't on the weapon that did the killing, while LHO's were.

Given that no one saw Wallace there that day, and LHO was how is the print relevant, and if so, what if anything does it prove?
 
bobtaftfan said:
It's interesting that the same folks who refuse to give any credence to the Wallace fingerprint ID adamantly accept the validity of the Oswald latent palmprint, even though there are massive problems with the latter. Indeed, the Wallace print is far less open to dispute than the latent palmprint.
Click to expand...

Fine example of an excluded middle ground fallacy.
Nobody has claimed the palm print is perfect or beyond dispute. But it certainly passes scrutiny, given the disputes are relatively minor in nature. Even the WR recognised the limitations of the print. But they also supported it with other evidence and did not rely only upon the print (which in itself is a far more solid bet than the fingerprint).

Latent prints are not a binary quality. Each has their own issues. They are not perfect or flawed. There are many shades of grey. The shade of the palm print is somewhat more useful than speculation about the fingerprint.
 
And, of course, one can only marvel at the strained attempts to explain away the compelling evidence that someone was impersonating Oswald in Mexico City. We now know that the HSCA Mexico City investigator, Ed Lopez, concluded Oswald was being impersonated, and we know, thanks to LBJ's phone recording system, that J. Edgar Hoover advised LBJ that Oswald was being impersonated because they had the recording of Oswald's call but the voice was not Oswald's. This is covered in some detail in former Army Intelligence officer John Newman's book Oswald and the CIA.
 
JayUtah said:
...at how quickly and desperately you change the subject. Do you plan any discussion on points you've already raised? Or are you simply going to favor us with an endless stream of seagull posts?
Click to expand...

I will never understand why these guys think a Gish Gallop would work on the Internet. Live debate? Sure, blather away and overcome your opponent with the quantity, if not the quality, of your argument. But in this setting, we can see where the discussion has been and where it still needs focus.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom