JFK Assassination Computer Analysis Video!

[Tom Graves]

That's what one might think but arguments against that would be:

1. If a very large number of witnesses were killed very early on, it would blow the whole operation as it would be so clear that a dramatic cover-up would be underway.
2. Other, less visible methods of silencing would be use where possible, such as blackmail, threats to family or bribery.
3. Awareness of others being disposed of would be a powerful tool to pressurise.

Therefore, the expectation would be that only a fraction would be killed and spread over a length of time, when needs must.

I see.

LOL!

[Tom Graves]

Conspiracy believers simply start with their conspiracy belief ("Oswald couldn't have done this!!") and then select that information that supports their theory.

It's worse than that.

Thanks to Joachim Joesten, Thomas G. Buchanan, Mark Lane, Paese Sera newspaper (RIP), Jim Garrison, Oliver Stone, and Stone's JFKA guru, Jim "I Never Met a Communist I Didn't Absolutely Cherish" DiEugenio, et al. ad nauseum, they start out convinced that the evil, evil, evil CIA murdered JFK, and then they select the (oftentimes-KGB-provided) information that supports their theory.

[Patrick Davies]

You are right. To determine probable cause you must not start with any preconceptions or desired outcomes. In any forensic investigation you must have an open mind. A scientific approach is not concerned with belief.

[Dan O'meara]

Conspiracy believers simply start with their conspiracy belief ("Oswald couldn't have done this!!") and then select that information that supports their theory. This is, they reverse engineer a theory. Theory first and then fit the facts to support that theory. The assassination, then, is really a mirror, a Rohrschach test that reveals who the conspiracy believer disfavors.

It's why there are so many different theories as to who was behind the act: viz., the CIA, the Pentagon, the mob, anti-Castro Cubans, Birchers, the Mossad, LBJ, rich Texas oilmen, Castro, the Soviets, the South Vietnamese (for the killing of Diem). It's a long list. Heck, they can't even agree on a basic question as to who Oswald was.

Why are there so many widely different theories after 60 plus years? Conspiracists never seem to want to ask that question.

Why are there so many widely different theories after 60 plus years? Conspiracists never seem to want to ask that question.

Like all LNers, you don't seem to be aware that Oswald-Did-It is also a theory.
Like all LNers, you have somehow convinced yourself that you are dealing with a fact and that everyone else has a theory.
You are a Non-Conspiracy Theorist - an NCTer

[Tom Graves]

Why are there so many widely different theories after 60 plus years? Conspiracists never seem to want to ask that question.

Like all LNers, you don't seem to be aware that Oswald-Did-It is also a theory.
Like all LNers, you have somehow convinced yourself that you are dealing with a fact and that everyone else has a theory.
You are a Non-Conspiracy Theorist - an NCTer

Either sharpshooting, psychologically disturbed, self-described Marxist Lee Harvey Oswald did it (with possible encouragement or logistical support from the KGB, the DGI, or Buell Wesley Frazier), or the evil, evil, evil CIA-Mafia did it and oodles and gobs of bad guys and bad gals were involved in the planning, the "patsy-ing," the shooting, and the all-important cover up.

Which do you think (sic) is more probable, O'meara?

[Tom Sorensen]

Either sharpshooting, psychologically disturbed, self-described Marxist Lee Harvey Oswald did it (with possible encouragement or logistical support from the KGB, the DGI, or Buell Wesley Frazier), or the evil, evil, evil CIA-Mafia did it, and oodles and gobs of bad guys were involved in the planning, the "patsy-ing," the shooting, and the all-important cover up.

Which do you think (sic) is more probable, O'meara?

Beware of false dichotomies.

[Tom Graves]

Beware of false dichotomies.

Beware of brainwashed-by-KGB-disinformation Zombies on the Internet.