The Initials Of FBI Agent Elmer Todd Are On CE399 (Hi-Def Photo Proof)

[Martin Weidmann]

But we certainly could never do without yours, right?


And I have never once ever said I was. Ever.


I just follow the actual evidence in the case, Martin. That's all. (You know, that's the stuff that most conspiracists have chosen to mangle, skew, or just plain ignore.)

And just because I choose to believe that the evidence in the case has not all been faked and/or manufactured (and therefore my belief is that Lee Oswald was not "just a patsy"), I am accused of "conducting a bogus propaganda campaign".

Beautiful.




And my OPINION is to be considered a "bogus propaganda campaign", but your OPINION, however, is not to be considered "propaganda" in the slightest way. Is that it, St. Martin?

Beautiful.

PROPAGANDA (noun) --- Information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.

Reprise ---->

----------------------------------------------

Bonus Breath Of Fresh Air....

"It is remarkable that these conspiracy theorists aren't troubled in the least by their inability to present any evidence that Oswald was set up and framed. For them, the mere belief or speculation that he was is a more-than-adequate substitute for evidence." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi

But we certainly could never do without yours, right?

Sure you can.

I just follow the actual evidence in the case, Martin. That's all.

No. You selectively follow the evidence and deliberately ignore all the problems with that evidence.

And just because I choose to believe that the evidence in the case has not all been faked and/or manufactured (and therefore my belief is that Lee Oswald was not "just a patsy"), I am accused of "conducting a bogus propaganda campaign".

And my OPINION is to be considered a "bogus propaganda campaign", but your OPINION, however, is not to be considered "propaganda" in the slightest way. Is that it, St. Martin?

You can believe whatever you want. The difference between your opinion and mine is that I am in no way trying to convince anybody of anything, where you have blogs (where you misrepresent and manipulate other people's postings on forums like this) and You Tube channels to desperately try to convince as many people as you can that there was no conspiracy. That's why you run a bogus propaganda campaign and I don't.

[David Von Pein]

19 or your 21 items of “Oswald killed JFK evidence” are not evidence at all...

And how many of Vincent Bugliosi's 53 pieces of evidence would you say are "not evidence at all"? I'm just a little curious to know if any CTer thinks ANY of The VB 53 qualifies as "evidence" or not. Start with Vincent's first 20 items, which are listed HERE.

PROPAGANDA (noun) --- Information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.

Yep, that describes what you write perfectly.

Look in the mirror, John. It describes what most conspiracy believers write---to a tee. (Particularly the "misleading" part.)

[David Von Pein]

The list shows how straight up desperate whackjob Vince was and [each] of them can be dismissed in 5 seconds by anyone with basic knowledge of the case.

Yeah, I knew that's what all broken-record Internet CTers would say.

Thanks for not disappointing me, Otto. (I hope John does the same.)

You continue the rich CT tradition of Not Getting It.

Like #17: there is zero evidence of Oswald ever boarding a bus to whatever rooming house he allegedly lived at.

Embarrassing to even post that link.

I guess this item qualifies as "zero evidence", eh? (Undoubtedly planted, like everything else, right?)....



And the tradition continues....

[Mark Ulrik]

You can faintly see the "T" in one of the photos on the MFF site.

EDIT: Ah, Pat Speer has posted something similar in the Ed Forum. I'm too slow for this.



EDIT2: I did think my graphic was clearer than Speer's, but judging by the embarrassed silence, I may have been wrong. Is this one better?

[Paul J Cummings]

It's amazing how this piece of evidence with initials just throws everything out the window by some in here. Ignoring the facts about how the WC holes of evidence and testimonies than this single piece of evidence.

[John Iacoletti]

And how many of Vincent Bugliosi's 53 pieces of evidence would you say are "not evidence at all"?

I wrote a post on that before the forum restart.  As I recall, 8 of the 53 were actual evidence.  Bugliosi goes down the rabbit-hole of ridiculousness even more than you do.  His evidence of murder includes Oswald not being chatty with the cab driver and holding up his handcuffed hands to reporters.  Of the 8, some implicated a weapon rather than a shooter, one was fingerprints on boxes which was not at all remarkable given that Oswald's job was literally removing books from boxes, and the remaining were all questionable or tainted in some way (unfair lineups, chains of custody, etc).

[John Iacoletti]

The list shows how straight up desperate whackjob Vince was and ech of them can be dismissed in 5 seconds by anyone with basic knowledge of the case.

Like #17: there is zero evidence of Oswald ever boarding a bus to whatever rooming house he allegedly lived at.

Embarrassing to even post that link.

And even if Oswald did board a bus, how is that evidence of murder?

It's evidence of murder when you don't have actual evidence of murder.