No coffee for Randle, no job for Oswald -- at the TSBD

[Martin Weidmann]

Great, now that's cleared up, you can go on making claims, preferably supported by evidence, and I will continue asking questions.

Asking questions... that's all you do. The hallmark of an avowed contrarian.

Have you ever commenced a Subject on this forum?

Asking questions... that's all you do.

Indeed, that's what people do when they want to learn something or find out if a claim has merit or not.

The hallmark of an avowed contrarian.

That's what people say who make claims they can not support with evidence and can not answer simple questions.

Have you ever commenced a Subject on this forum?

Is there a rule that says I have to? But, yes I actually did several times, but the LNs ignored them.

I have said, more than once, that I feel the WC Report contains conclusions that are not supported by the evidence in the 26 volumes and are very often only assumptions incorrectly presented as "a preponderance of evidence". Does that count?

[John Iacoletti]

The idea that plotters in a conspiracy had him "placed" at the TSBD is impossible. No "placement" means no "plot". There was no conspiracy.

That's a leap of astronomical proportions.  Why was Kennedy required to be assassinated at 12:30 PM (CST) on 22 November 1963?

This is a favorite LN strawman (employed particularly often by "Richard" "Strawman" "Smith").  Assume that a conspiracy necessarily means that every minute detail of what happened that day and every day leading up to it had to be meticulously planned in advance and it could only have happened that way.

[Gerry Down]

That's a leap of astronomical proportions.  Why was Kennedy required to be assassinated at 12:30 PM (CST) on 22 November 1963?

This is a favorite LN strawman (employed particularly often by "Richard" "Strawman" "Smith").  Assume that a conspiracy necessarily means that every minute detail of what happened that day and every day leading up to it had to be meticulously planned in advance and it could only have happened that way.

Well you're veering off point here. Having Oswald placed in the TSBD is not the same as planning the assassination down to the very last minute.

[Martin Weidmann]

Well you're veering off point here. Having Oswald placed in the TSBD is not the same as planning the assassination down to the very last minute.

Well, it's a permanent LN talking point that "placing LHO at the TSBD" would indeed be part of planning the assassination to it's smallest detail.

[John Iacoletti]

The silliness is "no placement, no plot".  Like that's the only possible plot.

[Ross Lidell]

That's a leap of astronomical proportions.  Why was Kennedy required to be assassinated at 12:30 PM (CST) on 22 November 1963?

This is a favorite LN strawman (employed particularly often by "Richard" "Strawman" "Smith").  Assume that a conspiracy necessarily means that every minute detail of what happened that day and every day leading up to it had to be meticulously planned in advance and it could only have happened that way.

You miss the point John... not surprisingly.

Most of the conspiracy books (and internet JFK Conspiracy pundits) posit Lee Harvey Oswald as being placed in the TSBD as an employee by conspirators. This is so he could be framed as the assassin of President Kennedy (on 22 November 1963).

Oswald being an employee due to happenstance (or coincidence if you like) fits with him being the sole shooter who assassinated President Kennedy.

Incidentally: If Oswald does not get a job at the TSBD, President Kennedy leaves Dallas alive. Don't give me that "a backup plan was in the works" nonsense. We can only deal with the historical record. Accordingly, "No coffee for Randle, no job for Oswald -- at the TSBD" means that President Kennedy would have lived to complete his first term and probably would have been elected to a second term as President of the United States.

[Martin Weidmann]

You miss the point John... not surprisingly.

Most of the conspiracy books (and internet JFK Conspiracy pundits) posit Lee Harvey Oswald as being placed in the TSBD as an employee by conspirators. This is so he could be framed as the assassin of President Kennedy (on 22 November 1963).

Oswald being an employee due to happenstance (or coincidence if you like) fits with him being the sole shooter who assassinated President Kennedy.

Incidentally: If Oswald does not get a job at the TSBD, President Kennedy leaves Dallas alive. Don't give me that "a backup plan was in the works" nonsense. We can only deal with the historical record. Accordingly, "No coffee for Randle, no job for Oswald -- at the TSBD" means that President Kennedy would have lived to complete his first term and probably would have been elected to a second term as President of the United States.

After reading this, I asked myself what in the world anybody can do to counter superficial and speculative thinking (if that's what it is) like this, that is not a waste of time?

I don't have the answer. A brick wall would probably understand what John and I have been saying faster than you, but so be it. It does make it easier to understand though why you are a WC defender.... You simply lack the capacity to be anything else....