Historian explains the mind of Conspiracy Nuts - CBS 1967

[Walt Cakebread]

No, that would be the ad populum fallacy. A claim doesn’t become true just because a bunch of people have the same opinion about it.

Reality....that which can be proven by immutable law of physics.....  ie; water will always flow from a higher elevation or pressure to a lower elevation or pressure....

or daylight and darkness are opposites.

[Walt Cakebread]

So the WC covered it up. The HSCA covered it up. The other investigations covered it up? The Washington Post investigated the shooting and determined Oswald killed JFK. Hugh Aynesworth investigated it and said the evidence for him was that Oswald shot JFK. PBS investigated the event - "Who was Lee Harvey Oswald" - and they concluded Oswald alone killed JFK. Bugliosi said Oswald acted alone. Posner said Oswald acted alone.

All of this was a coverup? The people who covered it up for the government - some still alive like Slawson and Willens - are still covering it up?

As Commager pointed out, conspiracists won't accept anything that doesn't show their conspiracy. In fact, anything that shows there was no conspiracy is another conspiracy designed to coverup the original conspiracy.

It's like a bizarre religious cult.

So the WC covered it up..... 

That's right....They thought they were doing the right thing.   They realized that there are many weak individuals who live in Fantasy Land who can't handle the truth.   So in the name of national stability and security they created the big lie.

Perhaps they were right....   If we had known that Hoover and Johnson were at the pinnacle of the conspiracy, who could predict what action the stupid piss ants would take..... They lied to us for our own good....

Many Lner's accept their perfidy .....  It just makes me mad as hell.

[Bill Chapman]

Mr Commager's most undeniably accurate insight is: "...the conspiracy mentality will not accept ordinary evidence"

Ordinary evidence
'Ordinary' equates with 'sinister' in conspiracy-monger territory

Oswald fled from the place where shots were fired (TSBD) that killed President Kennedy
Little Prick#1 had a movie to catch

Oswald lied about his superior informing him that there would be no more work (at the TSBD) due to the assassination
Sociopaths don't have superiors. Additionally, Oswald (AKA Dirty Harvey/Alex Hidell/O.H.Lee) said it, so it must be true

Oswald returned to his residence to fetch a revolver
It's what boys do

Oswald was identified as using a pistol to kill Officer JD Tippit
He was only firing warning shots, but missed. Poor dumb cop.
     
Oswald was identified as the man seen running away from the scene of the Tippit murder holding a pistol in his hand
Oh-oh..

Oswald attempted to shoot Officer N.M. McDonald with a revolver as he (Oswald) was about to be arrested
Nope. He was only attempting to give up his revolver. After all, he said he wasn't resisting arrest, so it must be true

That's circumstantial evidence which cannot logically be attributed to framing by cunning conspirators. Oswald acted  independently without guidance or manipulation by others
Wrong: Oswald had help:
1) Alex Hidell was in charge of armament procurement
2) O.H. Lee was in charge of safe-house procurement
3) Dirty Harvey was in charge of making Oswald a somebody

[Jack Trojan]

So the WC covered it up..... 

That's right....They thought they were doing the right thing.   They realized that there are many weak individuals who live in Fantasy Land who can't handle the truth.   So in the name of national stability and security they created the big lie.

Perhaps they were right....   If we had known that Hoover and Johnson were at the pinnacle of the conspiracy, who could predict what action the stupid piss ants would take..... They lied to us for our own good....

Many Lner's accept their perfidy .....  It just makes me mad as hell.

Yes, most of the WC thought they were doing the right thing in covering up the truth. But not Allen Dulles. He was the architect of the Big Event. Why else was he even on the WC? Warren himself was a stooge and their job was to NOT implicate the Rooskies for fear of WW III. They had already averted the Cuban Missile Crisis and blaming Khrushchev for the Big Event was not an option. That was the whole reason behind the "lone nut" narrative.

Otherwise, Johnson was compliant, Hoover was more involved because the FBI was the backbone of the Big Event. Dulles' good bud James Angleton used the compromising photo of Hoover to bring him into the fold, but he was already "in" since he was as corrupt as they came. To all you LNers who think that Dulles, Angleton, Johnson and Hoover were too noble and righteous to pull off a coup, get real. Hoover was the defacto mob boss back then and Johnson is rumored to have offed his own sister. Wake up and smell the coffee and stop with the "crazy conspiracy theories" bullshit. Was the HSCA a bunch of crazy CTs? The LN hypothesis is the fringe theory. You need to stop ignoring damning evidence and live with the facts.

[John Iacoletti]

So the WC covered it up. The HSCA covered it up. The other investigations covered it up? The Washington Post investigated the shooting and determined Oswald killed JFK. Hugh Aynesworth investigated it and said the evidence for him was that Oswald shot JFK. PBS investigated the event - "Who was Lee Harvey Oswald" - and they concluded Oswald alone killed JFK. Bugliosi said Oswald acted alone. Posner said Oswald acted alone.

Oh brother....

What “investigation” did Hugh Aynesworth do? I think you’re confusing taking other people’s word for things with investigation.

Which is what the WC did to begin with.

[John Iacoletti]

For example,  the HSCA photographic experts say the rifle in the BYP was the rifle found in the sniper's nest.

This is blatantly false. You don’t help your argument any by spreading misinformation.

[Mitch Todd]

This is blatantly false. You don’t help your argument any by spreading misinformation.

"the rifle in these photographs can be positively identified as the same rifle that is presently in the custody of the National Archives."
(Report of HSCA photographic panel, HSCA, VI Appendix D, PP 240)

This is from Kirk and McCamy's testimony:

"Mr. FITHIAN. Then I take it, it is your testimony that the chip or the defect is sufficiently unique, with the corners or whatever, that spotting it in each of the pictures at least gives you the confidence that that rifle you are holding is the rifle that was photographed?
Sergeant KIRK. When I match that up with the scientific data Mr. McCamy has obtained from measuring it, this has to tilt the scales in the direction, yes, indeed it is the same rifle"

"Sergeant KIRK. As a random pattern. You can expect this weapon, just as you can expect all those TV cameras, to receive certain amounts of damage when it is handled. If you were to examine those cameras, even though they are the same, you would not find dents and chips out of the surface in precisely the same area.
Just as the chances of a tire running over the same pieces of glass to cut the tread would be exactly the same. We have examined this chip out of the forestock and we have determined it is quite old, some attempt is made to sand it down, and it was finished the same color as the stock.
It was probably damaged in one of two ways. It received a shock on the top of the forestock that knocked off the chip, which means the top forestock has been replaced, or the stock was damaged as it was taken apart.
It is my opinion that this is unique and unto itself. As you can see here, we photographed the duplicate weapon that was purchased from the distributor of this rifle, the one who allegedly sent it to Dallas, which is photographed here on the top, and it does not show any of the damage that the second photograph does.
I have made a photographic enlargement of the chip out of the forestock.
We have here a United Press International photograph taken of the rifle being displayed outside of the homicide office in the Dallas police department headquarters. A photographic enlargement shows the same chip out of the stock in precisely the same location, going in the same direction, and same dimensions." [dropped the wrong quote in here, fixed]