JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate

Are there any "researchers" here who started out as LNs but who are now CTs?

<< < (3/3)

John Corbett:

--- Quote from: Larry Baldwin on Today at 03:39:28 PM ---Spoken like a true narrow minded and condescending LN.

--- End quote ---
The time for being open minded about Oswald's innocence expired a long time ago. He was the assassin as the evidence clearly proves.

--- Quote --- 
There are many researchers that have "educated themselves" and have come to the conclusion that there is overwhelming reasonable doubt.

--- End quote ---
My experience has been those are people who are really, really bad at weighing evidence. 

--- Quote ---I have "educated myself" enough to conclude that LHO never fired a shot on November 22, 1963.

--- End quote ---
Case in point.

--- Quote --- 
And I didn't need the "myriad conpiracy books" (sic) or Oliver Stone's JFK to do so.  There is plenty of evidence that proves as much.

--- End quote ---
Such as?

--- Quote --- 
However, it could never be accepted by the LN that soley relies on their own "Textus Receptus" (i.e. the WC) or Bugliosi's thinly argued 53 points  of which all have been argued against throughout this forum (at least it was prior to the forum reset).

--- End quote ---
The WC got it right from the start. It has made far more sense than any conspiracy book I've read or all the arguments I've read online over the past 35 years combined. Bugliosi's book was an affirmation of the WCR, swatting down all the silly alternative theories that had been made up to that point.

Joffrey van de Wiel:

--- Quote from: John Corbett on Yesterday at 03:54:57 AM ---Vincent Bugliosi's book Reclaiming History addresses every criticism leveled at the WCR (at least the ones invented up to the time his book was published)_ He does a thorough job of demolishing every one of them. There are two absolute truths of the JFKA. One is the evidence is overwhelming that Oswald fired the shots that killed JFK and seriously wounded JBC. The other is there is no credible evidence he had even a single accomplice in the crime. Since CTs have no evidence, their only avenue to establishing a conspiracy is to tear down the findings of the WC rather than present any positive evidence there was a conspiracy. If people applied as much skepticism to criticisms of the WCR as they do to the WCR, there would be a lot fewer CTs. 

To paraphrase Yogi Berra, if people don't want to believe the WCR, nothing is going to stop them.

--- End quote ---

The predicament for people like me is that there is no neutral ground to dwell on; one either qualifies as a LN or a CT, an objective, open minded approach is very hard to maintain. Yes, I am critical of the Report but also of many of the conspiracy books.

The 'overwhelming evidence' you say convinced you that Oswald assassinated the President hasn't convinced me. At least not completely. The unfortunate fact that the Dallas police allowed the suspect to get lynched prevented a trial, during which many of the questions I have could have been cleared up.

Take for instance Oswald's supposed motive. If I remember correctly, the Warren Commission stated that Oswald resented all authority and wanted to make a name for himself and go down in history like John Wilkes Booth. I am unfamiliar with any evidence that proves this supposition.
Wouldn't it be odd for an individual who disliked authority to try to gain entry into the USSR via Cuba, where the authority of the government(s) is a major element of the organization of the state and part of everyday life of the citizens?

Another issue that puzzles me is the fact that Oswald himself, during his interrogation, and his acquaintances told the law enforcement officials that he liked President Kennedy. The various (would-be) assassins that tried to kill President Trump have not, to my knowledge, made similar statements - the same goes for the creepy weirdo who shot Charlie Kirk.

An angle that was explored in a documentary on the Discovery Channel was the 'Cuban connection.' This story first popped up out of Mexico City right after the assassination. A red-headed Negro supposedly handed Oswald $6000 to eliminate the President. I think the evidence for this is flimsy if non-existent, but the Discovery Channel reinvigorated the story, albeit based on different 'evidence.'

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page