Debunking process

[John Iacoletti]

Iacoletti,

Maybe there was a plumber or an electrician up there, working during lunchtime, and maybe those two Black guys (Bonnie Ray Williams and Harold Norman) were just looking up there to see if he needed any help!

-- MWT   

PS  Or hey, maybe it was an evil, evil, evil CIA dude who stuck a section of pipe out there while Kennedy was goin' down Elm Street, and then set off a cherry bomb or somethin', just to help frame Oswald after-the-fact!

(I don't suppose Oswald or the Ruskie or Cuban assassin ducked down low so he couldn't be seen by nosey people down at street level before he started a-pullin' the barrel back through the window.)

Maybe sarcasm isn't evidence of anything.

[John Iacoletti]

Is there a point to this nonsense?  Seriously, you don't have bigger fish to fry?  Get a life.

Says the guy spreading misinformation.

[John Iacoletti]

I forget who he was posting to, but he was definitely enthusiastic about the upcoming release... saying something to the tune of making some big progress against the WC findings.

Yet another Chapman "recollection" that can't be cited, no doubt.

I never said anything even remotely similar to that.

[Bill Chapman]

Yet another Chapman "recollection" that can't be cited, no doubt.

I never said anything even remotely similar to that.

I remember, all right. You were positively gleeful at the prospect. Funny how you trust authority at times. You were actually expectlng a bombshell, it seems.

And tell us how to cite something from the hacked version of this forum

[John Iacoletti]

I remember, all right. You were positively gleeful at the prospect. Funny how you trust authority at times. You were actually expectlng a bombshell, it seems.

Sure you do, Bill.   

I remember that time on the hacked version of this forum that you were gleeful about Trump being elected.

[Thomas Halle]

A pretty good answer would be that...a theory is debunked when it is evident that its proponent is less concerned with pursuit of the truth, and more concerned with a "Special Pleading" style support of his pet theory. It is similarly debunked (or "falsified," though I REALLY dislike that particular definition of the word) when the evidence just doesn't support the given conclusion (upon which the theory or hypothesis is based) and/or it is clear that there are many problems with the evidence....and, in this case, the "problems" are legion!!!

You might also like to remember that there were letters from Mr. Hoover and Katzenbach urging that the American public be immediately "sold" on the idea of a lone, crazed assassin, which strongly smacks of a hidden (perhaps duplicitous) agenda of the feds.

[Thomas Graves]

There were letters from Mr. Hoover and Katzenbach urging that the American public be immediately "sold" on the idea of a lone, crazed assassin, which strongly smacks of a hidden (perhaps duplicitous) agenda of the feds.

Thomas,

Have you considered the possibility that they were simply reacting to the WW III Virus that was planted in Oswald's CIA file on October 2, 1963, by KGB triple-agent Ivan Obyedkov, KGB triple-agent Aleksey Kulak (aka Hoover's "protected"-from-CIA "Fedora"), KGB officer Oleg Brykin, mysterious former East German Guenter Schulz (Hoover's "Tumbleweed"), KGB officer Valery Kostikov, himself, and a (probable) Russian impersonator of Oswald (KGB colonel Nikolai Leonov?) over a sure-to-be-tapped-by-CIA Soviet Embassy phone line?

--  MWT