JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
Let's try to keep our conspiracy theories at least "sorta kinda" rational, eh?
Dan O'meara:
--- Quote from: Lance Payette on August 15, 2025, 04:15:15 PM ---Years ago, a CT lurker at the Ed Forum privately encouraged my efforts to tweak characters like DiEugenio. He said he thought Newman was the last great CT hope “if he can ever bring it all to Dealey Plaza, which I doubt he can.” The two big obstacles for CTers are (1) Oswald the actual man, not the fictional Most Interesting Man in the World of most conspiracy theories, and (2) Dealey Plaza, meaning the actual events that occurred and must be plausibly dealt with.
This would be my humble, off-the-top-of-my-head guide to rational conspiracy theorizing. (I'm stuck at home with a ruptured Achilles and thus have lots of time for this sort of stuff, just in case you were wondering.)
1. As far as Oswald is concerned, the theory has to be basically the LN narrative. An Oswald who wasn’t the sixth-floor gunman is impossible, factually and logically.
2. The theory has to deal with who Oswald actually was – a somewhat angry and bitter, somewhat violent, idealistic, Marxist (by his rudimentary understanding), pro-Castro character with dreams of being taken seriously and fantasies of achieving a place in history. A theory that has to reinvent Oswald (false defector, faux Marxist, right-wing patriot, JVB's boyfriend, Most Interesting Man in the World, blah blah blah) is going nowhere.
3. Real-world conspiracies are as tight and compartmentalized as the conspirators can make them. This was a Presidential assassination – the highest stakes and greatest risks imaginable for the conspirators. A theory that is elaborate and involves numerous participants, who often stumble over their own feet like the Three Stooges and leave all sorts of clues, is impossible.
4. No real-world conspiracy, and certainly not a Presidential one, includes as part of the plan “all the incredibly risky things we’ll do after the event to cover our tracks and create a false narrative.” A theory that involves an elaborate, multi-faceted cover-up is impossible.
5. A conspiracy that has Oswald as a knowing participant is the most plausible. For Oswald to be a knowing participant, it either had to be a pro-Castro conspiracy or Oswald had to be duped into believing it was.
6. A conspiracy that has Oswald as the lone gunman is the most plausible. If there was another shooter and the intent was to frame Oswald as the lone gunman, the shooter had to be in a location where the trajectory would be plausibly attributable to Oswald, the timing of the shots could be carefully coordinated, and the ammunition was not obviously from a different rifle.
7. If the intent was not to frame Oswald as the lone gunman, then one or more other shooters could be anywhere, using any variety of ammunition, but the theory must still be realistic in terms of numbers 1-5 above.
8. Each aspect and step of the conspiracy must at least minimally satisfy the “What sense would that have made?” test. If the proponent can’t convincingly articulate what sense each aspect and step would have made, the theory is going nowhere. If some important aspect or step would clearly have made no sense, adios to the theory.
9. Insisting you’ve shown that some aspect of the LN narrative is “impossible,” or that Oswald “would never have been convicted in a criminal trial,” is not a conspiracy theory.
Let’s be honest: 95% of the conspiracy theories, including the most popular, are preposterous, borderline insane, literally Three Stooges stuff. This is why I had at least some enthusiasm for the Orr/Schnapf theory – the Mafia had the means, the best of all possible motives (hatred and money), and the theory has the gunmen being Oswald and a single pro on the roof of the County Records Building. Or perhaps Larry Hancock’s theory, which seems to be pretty modest in scope, anti-Castro oriented, and might be plausible if he could tie up the loose ends. (One must, however, always keep in mind what Gerry Patrick Hemming said: "I know for a fact there were plans to assassinate JFK, but maybe Oswald just beat them to it.")
I happen to think the LN narrative, warts and all, is the most plausible, realistic and evidence-based. But a conspiracy meeting the above criteria is not impossible, and I’m willing to listen. CTers do themselves a disfavor by focusing on theories that are simply impossible from every angle.
They only hired this guy because Oswald wasn’t available …
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYde7LbQrG4
--- End quote ---
"...I’m willing to listen..."
:D :D :D
You may be deluded but at least you're funny.
Michael T. Griffith:
--- Quote from: Lance Payette on August 15, 2025, 04:15:15 PM ---1. As far as Oswald is concerned, the theory has to be basically the LN narrative. An Oswald who wasn’t the sixth-floor gunman is impossible, factually and logically.
--- End quote ---
This is another one of your dogmatic uninformed and illogical claims. Take a guess who said this:
"We don't have any proof that Oswald fired the rifle, and never did. Nobody's yet been able to put him in the building with a gun in his hand."
The person who said this was none other than the Chief of Police of the Dallas Police Department in 1963, Jesse Curry (https://spartacus-educational.com/JFKcurryJ.htm).
A few other facts:
-- We now know that NAA testing of the paraffin cast of Oswald's right cheek found no traces of nitrates, and that in control testing NAA never failed to detect nitrates in paraffin casts of other men who had fired rifles. The results of the NAA testing on Oswald's paraffin cast were suppressed for many years, for obvious reasons.
-- Voice stress analysis (VSA) of Oswald's declarations of innocence while in police custody indicate he was telling the truth. VSA polygraphs are more effective than traditional polygraphs because they can be administered without the person's knowledge.
-- TSBD eyewitness testimony clearly puts Oswald on the first and second floor during the shooting, a fact confirmed by the Martha Jo Stroud memo. No wonder the WC suppressed the memo. Barry Ernest found the memo in the National Archives in 1999.
WC staffers deliberately changed Vicki Adams' timeline. In her original FBI interview, she said she left the fourth floor no more than 30 seconds after the shooting, but the WC changed "15 to 30 seconds" to 1 minute.
Adams said she arrived on the first floor within 1 minute of the shooting. The WC changed that to several minutes.
The Stroud memo--which, again, the WC suppressed--documents that Vicki Adams' supervisor, Dorothy Garner, reported that she saw Adams go down the stairs before she saw Officer Baker and Roy Truly come up the stairs, blowing to pieces the WC's version of Oswald's movements and proving that Oswald did not go down the stairs after the shooting.
BTW, when Barry Ernest located and interviewed Dorothy Garner, she confirmed the Stroud memo. She told Ernest that she was at the window with Vicki Adams, that Adams left the window immediately, that she followed Adams out of the office and to a point where she could see her going down the stairs, and during that whole time she never saw Oswald.
This explains why WC counsel David Belin, who was in charge of establishing Oswald's movements inside the building, refused to interview Adams' co-worker Sandra Styles, even after (or because) Adams told Belin that Styles would corroborate her account. Thus, it is not hard to understand why Belin buried the Stroud memo. Since he would not interview Styles for fear she would corroborate Adams' account, he wasn't about to let anyone know that Adams' supervisor had confirmed Adams' account.
Royell Storing:
Keep conspiracy theories "rational"? What about the SBT? Knott Lab Forensic SCIENCE has found the SBT, "Is Impossible". And what about LN's now embracing the shooter inside the sniper's nest firing shot #1 while standing straight up and firing almost straight down through a 3/4 CLOSED window? Pot meet kettle.
Tim Nickerson:
--- Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on September 03, 2025, 02:50:31 PM ---This is another one of your dogmatic uninformed and illogical claims. Take a guess who said this:
"We don't have any proof that Oswald fired the rifle, and never did. Nobody's yet been able to put him in the building with a gun in his hand."
The person who said this was none other than the Chief of Police of the Dallas Police Department in 1963, Jesse Curry (https://spartacus-educational.com/JFKcurryJ.htm).
--- End quote ---
Jesse Curry did not say that. That is, he did not say "We don't have any proof that Oswald fired the rifle, and never did."
--- Quote ---A few other facts:
-- We now know that NAA testing of the paraffin cast of Oswald's right cheek found no traces of nitrates, and that in control testing NAA never failed to detect nitrates in paraffin casts of other men who had fired rifles. The results of the NAA testing on Oswald's paraffin cast were suppressed for many years, for obvious reasons.
--- End quote ---
The results of the NAA testing on Oswald's paraffin cast were not suppressed for many years. Why would they be? Oswald tested negative for nitrates on his face. The NAA tests on the cast wouldn't have altered that fact. Oswald's Carcano rifle didn't deposit nitrate residue on the cheek when fired. That a different Carcano rifle did is irrelevant.
--- Quote ----- Voice stress analysis (VSA) of Oswald's declarations of innocence while in police custody indicate he was telling the truth. VSA polygraphs are more effective than traditional polygraphs because they can be administered without the person's knowledge.
--- End quote ---
Voice stress analysis (VSA) of Oswald's declarations of innocence while in police custody indicate he was lying.
https://www.amazon.com/MALCONTENT-Harvey-Oswalds-Confession-Conduct-ebook/dp/B07V9WRRW1/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0
Part II
Oswald's Confession: The Computer Voice Stress Analysis of Lee Harvey Oswald
--- Quote ----- TSBD eyewitness testimony clearly puts Oswald on the first and second floor during the shooting, a fact confirmed by the Martha Jo Stroud memo. No wonder the WC suppressed the memo. Barry Ernest found the memo in the National Archives in 1999.
--- End quote ---
That is FALSE. How could Oswald be on both the first and second floor during the shooting? No TSBD eyewitness testimony puts Oswald on the first or second floor during the shooting.
--- Quote ---WC staffers deliberately changed Vicki Adams' timeline. In her original FBI interview, she said she left the fourth floor no more than 30 seconds after the shooting, but the WC changed "15 to 30 seconds" to 1 minute. Adams said she arrived on the first floor within 1 minute of the shooting. The WC changed that to several minutes.
--- End quote ---
That is FALSE. WC staffers did not change Vicki Adams' timeline. They didn't change her testimony. The WC considered it and weighed it against other evidence. It did not measure up against other evidence.
--- Quote ---The Stroud memo--which, again, the WC suppressed--documents that Vicki Adams' supervisor, Dorothy Garner, reported that she saw Adams go down the stairs before she saw Officer Baker and Roy Truly come up the stairs, blowing to pieces the WC's version of Oswald's movements and proving that Oswald did not go down the stairs after the shooting.
--- End quote ---
That is FALSE. The Stroud document does not say that Dorothy Garner reported that she saw Adams go down the stairs.
--- Quote ---BTW, when Barry Ernest located and interviewed Dorothy Garner, she confirmed the Stroud memo. She told Ernest that she was at the window with Vicki Adams, that Adams left the window immediately, that she followed Adams out of the office and to a point where she could see her going down the stairs, and during that whole time she never saw Oswald.
--- End quote ---
That is FALSE. From Barry Ernest's "The Girl On The Stairs":
Dororthy Ann Garner is important to this case for a couple of reasons:
1/ She confirms that Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles left almost right away. “I remember them being there and the next thing I knew , they were gone. They had left very quickly…within a matter of moments. There was this warehouse or storage area behind our offices, out by the freight elevators and the rear stairway, and I went out there”. Garner went to this area immediately after Adams and Styles had left and although she did not see them enter the stairwell she could hear them as the stairs were very noisy.
--- Quote ---This explains why WC counsel David Belin, who was in charge of establishing Oswald's movements inside the building, refused to interview Adams' co-worker Sandra Styles, even after (or because) Adams told Belin that Styles would corroborate her account. Thus, it is not hard to understand why Belin buried the Stroud memo. Since he would not interview Styles for fear she would corroborate Adams' account, he wasn't about to let anyone know that Adams' supervisor had confirmed Adams' account.
--- End quote ---
Sandra Styles was interviewed by Sean Murphy. She did not corroborate Adams' account. She was adamant that they stayed at the window on the fourth floor for no less that a minute after the shooting. Adams' assertion that she and Styles arrived on the first floor within 1 minute of the shooting has two major problems. 1) She failed to encounter, or even see, Baker and Truly. 2) She testified that she saw Billy Lovelady and Bill Shelley upon reaching the first floor. Lovelady and Shelley had been outside at the time of the shooting and had made a trek westward to the railway tracks after. They never entered the building until several minutes after the shooting.
Lance Payette:
--- Quote from: Tim Nickerson on September 03, 2025, 06:05:27 PM ---Jesse Curry did not say that. That is, he did not say "We don't have any proof that Oswald fired the rifle, and never did."
The results of the NAA testing on Oswald's paraffin cast were not suppressed for many years. Why would they be? Oswald tested negative for nitrates on his face. The NAA tests on the cast wouldn't have altered that fact. Oswald's Carcano rifle didn't deposit nitrate residue on the cheek when fired. That a different Carcano rifle did is irrelevant.
Voice stress analysis (VSA) of Oswald's declarations of innocence while in police custody indicate he was lying.
https://www.amazon.com/MALCONTENT-Harvey-Oswalds-Confession-Conduct-ebook/dp/B07V9WRRW1/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0
Part II
Oswald's Confession: The Computer Voice Stress Analysis of Lee Harvey Oswald
That is FALSE. How could Oswald be on both the first and second floor during the shooting? No TSBD eyewitness testimony puts Oswald on the first or second floor during the shooting.
That is FALSE. WC staffers did not change Vicki Adams' timeline. They didn't change her testimony. The WC considered it and weighed it against other evidence. It did not measure up against other evidence.
That is FALSE. The Stroud document does not say that Dorothy Garner reported that she saw Adams go down the stairs.
That is FALSE. From Barry Ernest's "The Girl On The Stairs":
Dororthy Ann Garner is important to this case for a couple of reasons:
1/ She confirms that Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles left almost right away. “I remember them being there and the next thing I knew , they were gone. They had left very quickly…within a matter of moments. There was this warehouse or storage area behind our offices, out by the freight elevators and the rear stairway, and I went out there”. Garner went to this area immediately after Adams and Styles had left and although she did not see them enter the stairwell she could hear them as the stairs were very noisy.
Sandra Styles was interviewed by Sean Murphy. She did not corroborate Adams' account. She was adamant that they stayed at the window on the fourth floor for no less that a minute after the shooting. Adams' assertion that she and Styles arrived on the first floor within 1 minute of the shooting has two major problems. 1) She failed to encounter, or even see, Baker and Truly. 2) She testified that she saw Billy Lovelady and Bill Shelley upon reaching the first floor. Lovelady and Shelley had been outside at the time of the shooting and had made a trek westward to the railway tracks after. They never entered the building until several minutes after the shooting.
--- End quote ---
Thanks, Tim. I am glad you have taken up the rubber hammer of Whack-a-Mole insofar as Michael is concerned. I simply do not have the patience. As others have pointed out, exposing the untruths in the work of a machine-gunning factoid spewer like Michael is absolutely exhausting and ultimately futile. The good news is, posts like his most recent on the Ruth Paine thread should make clear to even the most casual lurker that this is a genuine crackpot. As with many other prominent CTers, there was a time when silly me actually thought Michael's work was reasonably factual and worth reading; something seems to have happened over the last three or so years to cause these characters to show their true colors - desperation, perhaps?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version