How many JFKA CT's also endorse other conspiracies, like 9/11, OJ, Moon etc.?

[Martin Weidmann]

Wow, the irony is obviously lost on you, but this relentless harassment from you is the very epitome of bombarding me with your off topic "ammunition", at least I use the evidence in the JFK case whereas you are just a nasty little man who scrapes the gutters to try to gain any advantage.

JohnM

I'm just asking a question that you are afraid to answer. You can stop the so-called "relentless harassment" instantly by answering the question.

And as far as using the evidence in the JFK case, I have to admit that you do indeed use it, but only for all sorts of misrepresentations to allegedly "support" superficial conclusions, bogus claims and utter speculation.

a nasty little man who scrapes the gutters to try to gain any advantage.

As this goes to your mindset, what advantage am I trying to gain, by asking you a simple question?

Oh, and before I forget, why do you need "even more ammunition"?

You seem to be the only one using that word in relation to something you described as "a figurative Weapon of War"

Well Duh!, Fergus said "to hand you a stick so you can then beat them with it" and Robert posted "John is looking for a stick to beat you with."
And in case you didn't know, a "stick" in this context is a figurative Weapon of War, so I simply responded that, I didn't need any more ammunition(sticks) because Kooks like you and your new best mate, have supplied plenty!
Get it now, Einstein?

JohnM

Btw... Fergus actually said;

lol that looks like you are expecting people to hand you a stick so you can then beat them with it on this forum for years to come . this is a jfk assassination discussion forum .

we wouldn't want you to misrepresent what he actually said, would we now?

[John Mytton]

Oswald wasn't the "patsy" at that stage at all. As I said, this theory suggests that Oswald had no connection whatsoever to the conspiracy cell. They were completely unaware of him until his shots rang out. Oswald was framed for the murder after the fact. The WC knew that there was a conspiracy but had to pin it on the LN.
As President Ford told President Giscard D'Estaing in the 70s: “We first concluded that it was not an isolated crime, it was something organized. We were sure that it was organized. But we were unable to find out by who it was organized’

The WC knew that there was a conspiracy but had to pin it on the LN.

I have no doubt that a possible conspiracy was investigated because according to the WC conclusion and Ford's HSCA testimony, Ford says, they tried to find a conspiracy but couldn't find one, but as for the Warren Commission "knowing" there was a conspiracy and having to "pin it on" Lee Harvey Oswald, is simply a product of an over active imagination.

President FORD - There was a recommendation, as I recall, from the staff that could be summarized this way. No. 1, Lee Harvey Oswald was the assassin. Two, there was no conspiracy, foreign or domestic. The commission, after looking at this suggested language from the staff, decided unanimously that the wording should be much like this, and I am not quoting precisely from the Commission staff, but I am quoting the substance. No. 1, that Lee Harvey Oswald was the assassin. No. 2, the Commission has found no evidence of a conspiracy, foreign or domestic. The second point is quite different from the language which was recommended by the staff. I think the Commission was right to make that revision and I stand by it today.
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/jfkinfo/hscaford.htm

Conclusions of the Warren Commission Report

The report concluded that:

1. The shots which killed President Kennedy and wounded Governor Connally were fired from the sixth-floor window at the southeast corner of the Texas School Book Depository.
2. President Kennedy was first struck by a bullet which entered at the back of his neck and exited through the lower front portion of his neck, causing a wound which would not necessarily have been lethal. The President was struck by a second bullet, which entered the right-rear portion of his head, causing a massive and fatal wound.
3. Governor Connally was struck by a bullet which entered on the right side of his back and traveled downward through the right side of his chest, exiting below his right nipple. This bullet then passed through his right wrist and entered his left thigh then it caused a superficial wound.
4. There is no credible evidence that the shots were fired from the Triple Underpass, ahead of the motorcade, or from any other location.
5. The weight of the evidence indicates that there were three shots fired.
6. Although it is not necessary to any essential findings of the Commission to determine just which shot hit Governor Connally, there is very persuasive evidence from the experts to indicate that the same bullet which pierced the President's throat also caused Governor Connally's wounds. However, Governor Connally's testimony and certain other factors have given rise to some difference of opinion as to this probability but there is no question in the mind of any member of the Commission that all the shots which caused the President's and Governor Connally's wounds were fired from the sixth-floor window of the Texas School Book Depository.
7. The shots which killed President Kennedy and wounded Governor Connally were fired by Lee Harvey Oswald.
8. Oswald killed Dallas Police Patrolman J. D. Tippit approximately 45 minutes after the assassination.
9. Ruby entered the basement of the Dallas Police Department and killed Lee Harvey Oswald and there is no evidence to support the rumor that Ruby may have been assisted by any members of the Dallas Police Department.
10. The Commission has found no evidence that either Lee Harvey Oswald or Jack Ruby was part of any conspiracy, domestic or foreign, to assassinate President Kennedy.
11 The Commission has found no evidence of conspiracy, subversion, or disloyalty to the U.S. Government by any Federal, State, or local official.
12. The Commission could not make any definitive determination of Oswald's motives.
13. The Commission believes that recommendations for improvements in Presidential protection are compelled by the facts disclosed in this investigation.

And the HSCA 15 years later came to the same conclusion that Oswald fired three shots, two of which struck the President.

1. Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots at Kennedy. The second and third shots Oswald fired struck the President. The third shot he fired killed the President.

JohnM

[John Mytton]

I'm just asking a question that you are afraid to answer. You can stop the so-called "relentless harassment" instantly by answering the question.

And as far as using the evidence in the JFK case, I have to admit that you do indeed use it, but only for all sorts of misrepresentations to allegedly "support" superficial conclusions, bogus claims and utter speculation.

a nasty little man who scrapes the gutters to try to gain any advantage.

As this goes to your mindset, what advantage am I trying to gain, by asking you a simple question?

Oh, and before I forget, why do you need "even more ammunition"?

You seem to be the only one using that word in relation to something you described as "a figurative Weapon of War"


Btw... Fergus actually said;

we wouldn't want you to misrepresent what he actually said, would we now?

Yawn!

What a Shocker, yet another self serving off topic post, either stick to posting about what's in the Thread Title or push off, because I refuse to be bullied and continually harassed by some insignificant irrelevant grievance that has no connection with the topic at hand.

JohnM

[Jim Hawthorn]

I have no doubt that a possible conspiracy was investigated because according to the WC conclusion and Ford's HSCA testimony, Ford says, they tried to find a conspiracy but couldn't find one, but as for the Warren Commission "knowing" there was a conspiracy and having to "pin it on" Lee Harvey Oswald, is simply a product of an over active imagination.

President FORD - There was a recommendation, as I recall, from the staff that could be summarized this way. No. 1, Lee Harvey Oswald was the assassin. Two, there was no conspiracy, foreign or domestic. The commission, after looking at this suggested language from the staff, decided unanimously that the wording should be much like this, and I am not quoting precisely from the Commission staff, but I am quoting the substance. No. 1, that Lee Harvey Oswald was the assassin. No. 2, the Commission has found no evidence of a conspiracy, foreign or domestic. The second point is quite different from the language which was recommended by the staff. I think the Commission was right to make that revision and I stand by it today.
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/jfkinfo/hscaford.htm

Conclusions of the Warren Commission Report

The report concluded that:

1. The shots which killed President Kennedy and wounded Governor Connally were fired from the sixth-floor window at the southeast corner of the Texas School Book Depository.
2. President Kennedy was first struck by a bullet which entered at the back of his neck and exited through the lower front portion of his neck, causing a wound which would not necessarily have been lethal. The President was struck by a second bullet, which entered the right-rear portion of his head, causing a massive and fatal wound.
3. Governor Connally was struck by a bullet which entered on the right side of his back and traveled downward through the right side of his chest, exiting below his right nipple. This bullet then passed through his right wrist and entered his left thigh then it caused a superficial wound.
4. There is no credible evidence that the shots were fired from the Triple Underpass, ahead of the motorcade, or from any other location.
5. The weight of the evidence indicates that there were three shots fired.
6. Although it is not necessary to any essential findings of the Commission to determine just which shot hit Governor Connally, there is very persuasive evidence from the experts to indicate that the same bullet which pierced the President's throat also caused Governor Connally's wounds. However, Governor Connally's testimony and certain other factors have given rise to some difference of opinion as to this probability but there is no question in the mind of any member of the Commission that all the shots which caused the President's and Governor Connally's wounds were fired from the sixth-floor window of the Texas School Book Depository.
7. The shots which killed President Kennedy and wounded Governor Connally were fired by Lee Harvey Oswald.
8. Oswald killed Dallas Police Patrolman J. D. Tippit approximately 45 minutes after the assassination.
9. Ruby entered the basement of the Dallas Police Department and killed Lee Harvey Oswald and there is no evidence to support the rumor that Ruby may have been assisted by any members of the Dallas Police Department.
10. The Commission has found no evidence that either Lee Harvey Oswald or Jack Ruby was part of any conspiracy, domestic or foreign, to assassinate President Kennedy.
11 The Commission has found no evidence of conspiracy, subversion, or disloyalty to the U.S. Government by any Federal, State, or local official.
12. The Commission could not make any definitive determination of Oswald's motives.
13. The Commission believes that recommendations for improvements in Presidential protection are compelled by the facts disclosed in this investigation.

And the HSCA 15 years later came to the same conclusion that Oswald fired three shots, two of which struck the President.

1. Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots at Kennedy. The second and third shots Oswald fired struck the President. The third shot he fired killed the President.

JohnM

That quotes the WC report which was obviously tailored to frame Oswald. Anyway, you drew the discussion towards all that by by trying to ridiculise my thread about the coincidental, unrelated plots, when all I'd said was - why not start a thread for each of the subjects that you outlined in your OP. It shouldn't have been difficult for you to simply say "Yes, I think I will!".

[Martin Weidmann]

Yawn!

What a Shocker, yet another self serving off topic post, either stick to posting about what's in the Thread Title or push off, because I refuse to be bullied and continually harassed by some insignificant irrelevant grievance that has no connection with the topic at hand.

JohnM

And still no answers to my questions. You are great at making wild claims and saying idiotic stuff, but not so great backing it up with evidence and/or answers.

Are you feeling uncomfortable because you are being called out?

stick to posting about what's in the Thread Title

You mean, just like you did when you said;

Hi Fergus, stop being so paranoid, because your dumbass posts have given me more than enough ammunition to "beat you over the head with a stick".

As I already said, you Kooks "serious researchers" have provided a lifetime of easily refuted garbage, crazy theories and outrageous speculation, so I don't need any more ammunition.

Well Duh!, Fergus said "to hand you a stick so you can then beat them with it" and Robert posted "John is looking for a stick to beat you with."
And in case you didn't know, a "stick" in this context is a figurative Weapon of War, so I simply responded that, I didn't need any more ammunition(sticks) because Kooks like you and your new best mate, have supplied plenty!

Wow, the irony is obviously lost on you, but this relentless harassment from you is the very epitome of bombarding me with your off topic "ammunition", at least I use the evidence in the JFK case whereas you are just a nasty little man who scrapes the gutters to try to gain any advantage.

JohnM

your dumbass posts have given me more than enough ammunition to "beat you over the head with a stick".

a "stick" in this context is a figurative Weapon of War,

to gain any advantage.

What kind of sick individual uses words like "having enough ammunition", "figurative Weapon of War" and "to gain any advantage" on a forum where the JFK murder case is being discussed?

And then starts whining about being bullied and harassed when he is simply asked to explain himself.

Btw; this has become the topic at hand and you are the one who made it so!

[Fergus O'brien]

I have no doubt that a possible conspiracy was investigated because according to the WC conclusion and Ford's HSCA testimony, Ford says, they tried to find a conspiracy but couldn't find one, but as for the Warren Commission "knowing" there was a conspiracy and having to "pin it on" Lee Harvey Oswald, is simply a product of an over active imagination.

President FORD - There was a recommendation, as I recall, from the staff that could be summarized this way. No. 1, Lee Harvey Oswald was the assassin. Two, there was no conspiracy, foreign or domestic. The commission, after looking at this suggested language from the staff, decided unanimously that the wording should be much like this, and I am not quoting precisely from the Commission staff, but I am quoting the substance. No. 1, that Lee Harvey Oswald was the assassin. No. 2, the Commission has found no evidence of a conspiracy, foreign or domestic. The second point is quite different from the language which was recommended by the staff. I think the Commission was right to make that revision and I stand by it today.
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/jfkinfo/hscaford.htm

Conclusions of the Warren Commission Report

The report concluded that:

1. The shots which killed President Kennedy and wounded Governor Connally were fired from the sixth-floor window at the southeast corner of the Texas School Book Depository.
2. President Kennedy was first struck by a bullet which entered at the back of his neck and exited through the lower front portion of his neck, causing a wound which would not necessarily have been lethal. The President was struck by a second bullet, which entered the right-rear portion of his head, causing a massive and fatal wound.
3. Governor Connally was struck by a bullet which entered on the right side of his back and traveled downward through the right side of his chest, exiting below his right nipple. This bullet then passed through his right wrist and entered his left thigh then it caused a superficial wound.
4. There is no credible evidence that the shots were fired from the Triple Underpass, ahead of the motorcade, or from any other location.
5. The weight of the evidence indicates that there were three shots fired.
6. Although it is not necessary to any essential findings of the Commission to determine just which shot hit Governor Connally, there is very persuasive evidence from the experts to indicate that the same bullet which pierced the President's throat also caused Governor Connally's wounds. However, Governor Connally's testimony and certain other factors have given rise to some difference of opinion as to this probability but there is no question in the mind of any member of the Commission that all the shots which caused the President's and Governor Connally's wounds were fired from the sixth-floor window of the Texas School Book Depository.
7. The shots which killed President Kennedy and wounded Governor Connally were fired by Lee Harvey Oswald.
8. Oswald killed Dallas Police Patrolman J. D. Tippit approximately 45 minutes after the assassination.
9. Ruby entered the basement of the Dallas Police Department and killed Lee Harvey Oswald and there is no evidence to support the rumor that Ruby may have been assisted by any members of the Dallas Police Department.
10. The Commission has found no evidence that either Lee Harvey Oswald or Jack Ruby was part of any conspiracy, domestic or foreign, to assassinate President Kennedy.
11 The Commission has found no evidence of conspiracy, subversion, or disloyalty to the U.S. Government by any Federal, State, or local official.
12. The Commission could not make any definitive determination of Oswald's motives.
13. The Commission believes that recommendations for improvements in Presidential protection are compelled by the facts disclosed in this investigation.

And the HSCA 15 years later came to the same conclusion that Oswald fired three shots, two of which struck the President.

1. Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots at Kennedy. The second and third shots Oswald fired struck the President. The third shot he fired killed the President.

JohnM

i hardly think we can use the term unanimous in regard the warren commissioners and their report , not if one wishes to be honest , you do wish to be honest RIGHT ?. so we should inform all those that will read this that senator Russell did not agree with the the main body of the commission on certain things they concluded .and he informed LBJ of this . and is fellow southern contingent on the commission supported him .Russell believed connally and did not accept the single bullet theory as the commission offered it .so Russell dissented and his fellow southern commissioners supported him . yes in the end he signed off on the report as did Cooper and boggs but ONLY because he was told he could get his dissent on record at the final executive session .he was there , he did speak , he believed the stenographer typed what he said . but not one word of what he said appears in transcript of that final executive session . so Russell dissented , and he was deceived into going along with and signing off on the warren report .

Earl warren told us repeatedly from 64 to his death that jfk had an entry wound on the rear of his body , on the right side of the NECK . he knew that was not true . he later admitted seeing atleast one autopsy photo showing the wound in question . we know rankin saw at the least that same photo and he mentioned it in the january 27 (from memory ) sessions .and he knew the wound was not on the NECK as per Spector . and warren himself admitted seeing some autopsy photos . the autopsy photos NOW IN EXISTENCE show a wound not on the right of the neck but lower down on THE BACK . so the commission  deceived the people by falsely stating the wound was on the neck when they knew it was on the BACK . clark panel moved the head entry wound up from the EOP up some 4 to 5 inches up to the crown of the head , where autopsy photos show NO entry wound .the HSCA later would adopt that same deception . they went further and sealed away testimonies / statements about a large right rear head wound . and then wrote on their report THE LIE that all bethesda witnesses agreed with the autopsy findings and contradicted the parkland staff .

so why should we simply accept anything to be true from those that deceive us ? or indeed those that would endorse these deceptions as TRUTH ? .

[Michael T. Griffith]

I just came across a post from a member that says OJ didn't stab anyone and this member has a very unique view of the JFKA

So you badly blunder with the very first sentence of your ridiculous post. My view of the JFK assassination is hardly "very unique." My view is the view shared by 2/3 to 3/4 of the Western world, a view that has been supported by literally hundreds of scholars, including physicists, neuroscientists, wound ballistics experts, forensic pathologists, and firearms experts.

As you note, I do not believe that OJ Simpson killed his ex-wife Nicole and her boyfriend Ron Goldman. Tell me, what have you read about the OJ case? Have you read Alan Dershowitz's book? F. Lee Bailey's book? Joseph Bosco's book? Have you read any of Brian Heiss's research? (Brian Heiss is arguably the leading scholar on the OJ case.) Have you read any of my articles on the OJ case?

https://sites.google.com/site/theojsimpsoncase/

It is ridiculous of you to put the case for OJ's innocence in the same category as the nutty 9/11 and fake-Moon-landing conspiracy theories.

. . . so it got me wondering in how many CT members also support other conspiracies?

Michael T. Griffith is constantly espousing the "scholars" in the JFKA, (that btw, in nearly all cases are underqualified),

False. You have been corrected on this falsehood before. The scholars who support the conspiracy view are just as qualified as, and in some cases more qualified than, the scholars who support your view.

. . . that share his conspiracy mindset so I guess that Griffith would also endorse the plethora of Engineers and Architects that believe in a 9/11 conspiracy. Yes?

LOL! The "plethora" of engineers and architects who believe in the 9/11 conspiracy nuttiness?! Those engineers and architects constitute a tiny, tiny fraction of the engineering and architectural community. Far, far, far more scientists have rejected the 9/11 "Truther" nonsense than have supported it. You manage to blunder even when your main point is valid.

And what exactly is a "conspiracy mindset"? You appear to think that if anyone believes there was a conspiracy in a few famous murder cases or incidents, they must have a "conspiracy mindset." Using your sophomoric logic, one could say that you have a "coincidence mindset," i.e., that you believe that everything that happens is a coincidence. Just because someone believes there was a conspiracy in certain cases does not mean they have a "conspiracy mindset," no more than your rejection of the JFKA conspiracy view means that you believe that conspiracies never happen. Dozens of Americans are convicted of conspiracy every year.

.So CT's and I guess some LNers, let's hear what you believe about the World of Conspiracies, and present your evidence here and let's see where that takes us.

Some starters.

Was building 7's free fall a product of demolition?
Was the Pentagon hit by a missile?
Was thermite or super-thermite found at the 9/11 site?
Where is the wreckage from Flight 93?
Were holograms covering the missiles that struck the WTC?

Was OJ set up by the Police or someone else?
Did they stuff up the DNA evidence?
Why did the original prosecution exclude so much evidence and why did they present such a weak case?

Are the non parallel shadows on the Moon faked?
Why is the flag waving on the Moon with no air?
Where are the stars in the NASA photos?

JohnM

This kind of juvenile strawman polemic is part of the reason you are not credible. If you had bothered to read any of the better pro-conspiracy books on the JFK case, you would know that there are plenty of WC critics who reject the 9/11 and fake-Moon-landing conspiracy theories.

You obviously have not read my book A Comforting Lie: The Myth that a Lone Gunman Killed President Kennedy, in which I rail against the conspiracy theories regarding 9/11, the Moon landings, Princes Diana's death, and John Lennon's murder.

BTW, are you aware that your hero Vincent Bugliosi believed that RFK was killed by a conspiracy?

Finally, regarding the DNA evidence in the OJ case, I dare you to read this six-page article of mine that explains why the DNA evidence was both impossible and fraudulent:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uldjDcebXnGi4VkyxrZWmTUgeHRohyD8/view

[John Mytton]

So you badly blunder with the very first sentence of your ridiculous post. My view of the JFK assassination is hardly "very unique." My view is the view shared by 2/3 to 3/4 of the Western world, a view that has been supported by literally hundreds of scholars, including physicists, neuroscientists, wound ballistics experts, forensic pathologists, and firearms experts.

As you note, I do not believe that OJ Simpson killed his ex-wife Nicole and her boyfriend Ron Goldman. Tell me, what have you read about the OJ case? Have you read Alan Dershowitz's book? F. Lee Bailey's book? Joseph Bosco's book? Have you read any of Brian Heiss's research? (Brian Heiss is arguably the leading scholar on the OJ case.) Have you read any of my articles on the OJ case?

https://sites.google.com/site/theojsimpsoncase/

It is ridiculous of you to put the case for OJ's innocence in the same category as the nutty 9/11 and fake-Moon-landing conspiracy theories.

False. You have been corrected on this falsehood before. The scholars who support the conspiracy view are just as qualified as, and in some cases more qualified than, the scholars who support your view.

LOL! The "plethora" of engineers and architects who believe in the 9/11 conspiracy nuttiness?! Those engineers and architects constitute a tiny, tiny fraction of the engineering and architectural community. Far, far, far more scientists have rejected the 9/11 "Truther" nonsense than have supported it. You manage to blunder even when your main point is valid.

And what exactly is a "conspiracy mindset"? You appear to think that if anyone believes there was a conspiracy in a few famous murder cases or incidents, they must have a "conspiracy mindset." Using your sophomoric logic, one could say that you have a "coincidence mindset," i.e., that you believe that everything that happens is a coincidence. Just because someone believes there was a conspiracy in certain cases does not mean they have a "conspiracy mindset," no more than your rejection of the JFKA conspiracy view means that you believe that conspiracies never happen. Dozens of Americans are convicted of conspiracy every year.

This kind of juvenile strawman polemic is part of the reason you are not credible. If you had bothered to read any of the better pro-conspiracy books on the JFK case, you would know that there are plenty of WC critics who reject the 9/11 and fake-Moon-landing conspiracy theories.

You obviously have not read my book A Comforting Lie: The Myth that a Lone Gunman Killed President Kennedy, in which I rail against the conspiracy theories regarding 9/11, the Moon landings, Princes Diana's death, and John Lennon's murder.

BTW, are you aware that your hero Vincent Bugliosi believed that RFK was killed by a conspiracy?

Finally, regarding the DNA evidence in the OJ case, I dare you to read this six-page article of mine that explains why the DNA evidence was both impossible and fraudulent:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uldjDcebXnGi4VkyxrZWmTUgeHRohyD8/view

As you note, I do not believe that OJ Simpson killed his ex-wife Nicole and her boyfriend Ron Goldman. My view of the JFK assassination is hardly "very unique."

Geez Louise, the World doesn't revolve around you, I was referring to an OJ post by Marjan Rynkiewicz and his unique theory about how JFK was shot by an AR-15 from the follow up Limo but admittedly your ideas about this case and Zapruder and photo fakery in particular, aren't far behind!
And about OJ, I had no idea that you were this easily deceived, but with your twisted perceptions of reality about the JFKA, it's not surprising that you believe in OJ's innocence.

My view is the view shared by 2/3 to 3/4 of the Western world

"of the Western world" LOL!

This incessantly regurgitated statistic from people who have clearly never researched the 60 year old JFK case is pointlessly absurd. Whereas the OJ case was covered much more recently and in depth by the media for months, and you do realize that almost 7/8 of white people and the majority of Black people polled agreed that OJ was guilty! So Griffith, were all those people polled wrong about the OJ case or will you manufacture some new and ridiculous self serving excuse in some insane justification?

It is ridiculous of you to put the case for OJ's innocence in the same category as the nutty 9/11 and fake-Moon-landing conspiracy theories.

I rest my case! Hahahahahaha!

Btw, it won't be long till you succumb to the 9/11 and Moon conspiracies', because being easily led is part of your DNA!

LOL! The "plethora" of engineers and architects who believe in the 9/11 conspiracy nuttiness?! Those engineers and architects constitute a tiny, tiny fraction of the engineering and architectural community. Far, far, far more scientists have rejected the 9/11 "Truther" nonsense than have supported it.

Hilarious, like your outlier "experts" that exclusively endorse your nutty ideas about the JFKA and who aren't even qualified in the appropriate forensic sciences, and just provide "Junk Science" that you warmly embrace! You can't make this up, you're the Dude, Griffith!

JohnM