Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Do JFKA CTs have a psych. or ideological need to believe it was a conspiracy?  (Read 184 times)

Online Tom Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4303
Do JFK assassination conspiracy theorists have a perverse psychological or ideological need to believe the assassination was a conspiracy?

It sure seems that way to me.

Online John Corbett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2290
I think it is more of a desire than a need. They want the story to be more interesting than the one we learned on day one.

I remember coming home from school and being surprised to learn Oswald was already in custody. I don't know why, but I was expecting there to be a manhunt. First they would have to figure out who did it, then they would have to find him. I wasn't expecting either of those things to happen in the first few hours.

From the time I first saw him on TV, I never had any reason to doubt the cops got the right guy. Even for that brief period in the 1980s when I believed there was a conspiracy, I always believed Oswald had fired the fatal shot. That was pretty damn obvious.
« Last Edit: Today at 12:15:48 AM by John Corbett »

Online Benjamin Cole

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 978
JC--

The WC LNT, fabricated to meet LBJ's directive to avoid any finding that might trigger a nuke war, never even suffered a legal test in a trial, let alone met some sort of scientific standard of proof.

The WC was the first official investigation into the JFKA, 1964.

The second official investigation, the HSCA, 1979, found that a JFKAC was likely.

The LNT fails to explain what Sam Holland saw (smoke on the GK), why there was gunsmoke in the GK area in the immediate aftermath of the JFKA, why so many witnesses heard gunshots from the GK, or why there was a man flashing a fake Secret Service credential in the GK, also in the immediate aftermath of the JFKA.

That above is all fact.

My layman's take on the Z-film is that Gov JBC is shot at Z-295 and JFK at Z-313. That sequence lines up with many witnesses who said they heard a "bang....bang-bang" cadence of audible gunshots.

Connally: I was knocked over, just doubled over by the force of the bullet. It went in my back and came out my chest about 2 inches below and the left of my right nipple. The force of the bullet drove my body over almost double and when I looked, immediately I could see I was just drenched with blood. (1 HSCA 42)

The LNT version requires that Gov. JBC makes a 180-degree turn in his seat to check on JFK after being shot through his chest, and that JBC holds onto his Stetson hat, after being shot through the wrist.

The CT's and LNT's have their adherents. As to which camp has the most nuts...well, that's a toss-up. 

I have reasonable doubts about the LNT. And many CT's.

Online Tom Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4303
The second official investigation, the HSCA, 1979, found that a JFKAC was likely.

Based on its faulty analysis of a late-arriving Dictabelt recording and its misidentification of the police motorcycle that was responsible for it.

And, of course, Blakey's uncontrollable urge to somehow blame the assassination on THE MAFIA.
« Last Edit: Today at 03:22:41 AM by Tom Graves »

Online Benjamin Cole

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 978
TG-

I can't make heads or tails of the acoustic evidence in the JFKA, but at least I admit it.

Tink Thompson did a re-do on the acoustics, and said he accepts the acoustic evidence. Who knows? Not me.

Blakey, indeed a Mob-hunter, also said the acoustics evidence was not requisite to the HSCA conclusion.

The fact remains: based on evidence it asssembled, the second official investigation into the JFKA, the HSCA's, concluded there likely had been a JFKAC.

Were there flaws in the HSCA investigation? Sure.

Were there flaws in the WC investigation? Even more so.

In one a "nut" to subscribe to the HSCA...or the WC?

Caveat emptor, and draw your own conclusions.




Online Tom Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4303

I can't make heads or tails of the acoustic evidence in the JFKA, but at least I admit it.

Tink Thompson did a re-do on the acoustics, and said he accepts the acoustic evidence. Who knows? Not me.

Blakey, indeed a Mob-hunter, also said the acoustics evidence was not requisite to the HSCA conclusion.

The fact remains: based on evidence it asssembled, the second official investigation into the JFKA, the HSCA's, concluded there likely had been a JFKA conspiracy.

Were there flaws in the HSCA investigation? Sure.

Were there flaws in the WC investigation? Even more so.

In one a "nut" to subscribe to the HSCA...or the WC?


In a nutshell, you have a typo.
« Last Edit: Today at 04:30:11 AM by Tom Graves »

Online Benjamin Cole

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 978
I am one nut. You caught me.