JFK Assassination Forum

But it's totally rational to ignore signed affidavits as mistakes.

Paul, you are making the classic “epistemological” (thinking) error that CTers make. I would refer you to my last post on MTG’s “Fragile House of Cards” thread.

No one is ignoring the identification of the rifle as a Mauser. The Carcano’s action is very similar to a Mauser’s. In the context of the evidence as a whole, the identifications were simply good-faith mistakes (with the possible exception of Craig, who became increasingly erratic). Weitzman admitted as much.

Given the huge body of evidence that Oswald’s Carcano was found on the sixth floor and fired the shots, “the gun was actually a Mauser” is not a rational conclusion. “The witnesses were mistaken” is the rational conclusion (Craig being an outlier whom, I believe, was simply lying in his post-JFKA days).

As I point out on the “Fragile House of Cards” thread, you are doing what CTers do: In MTG’s terms, “If the gun was a Mauser … the lone-gunman narrative collapses!” First, the LN narrative is not a single piece of evidence; it is a vast body of evidence, reasonable inferences and logic. Weighed against that vast body, the claim that the gun was a Mauser simply isn’t credible. “The witnesses were mistaken” is what’s credible. Indeed, “the gun was actually a Mauser” would raise an entire host of problems in its own right as to what happened to the Mauser and so forth.

In my “Beginner’s Guide to the Conspiracy Game,” I pointed out that if three eyewitnesses say the hit-and-run car was “dark,” “bluish” and “reddish,” then in Conspiracy World there were three cars and a garden-variety hit-and-run becomes a conspiracy. When a suspect is later arrested in a maroon car, the CTers will forever insist he was a patsy or at best only one of the three conspirators.

It simply isn’t rational to attach significant weight to the Mauser identification – but this is the sort of flawed reasoning in which MTG specializes and CTers engage all the time. Literally, all the time. Up is really down, white is really black, the Carcano was really a Mauser.

Instead of bandying about terms like "serious researcher," folks should challenge kooky Newman as to why he self-publishes and, despite his academic connections, has NEVER submitted ANYTHING for peer review. Just ONE "Oswald CIA" nugget, pal, just ONE.

Dear Sonderführer Storing I mean Fancy Pants Rants,

It's "Oswald and the CIA," not "Oswald CIA."

Regardless, Tennent H. Bagley earned a PhD in political science from the University of Geneva, and his 35-page article, "Ghosts of the Spy Wars," was published in the International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence in 2014.

Why are you afraid to read it?

Is it because your wife doesn't want you to?

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08850607.2014.962362#d1e141


The International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence is a quarterly academic journal about intelligence studies and responses to intelligence activities. All articles submitted to this journal undergo editorial screening and review.[1] The journal was established in 1986[2] and is published by Routledge. The editor-in-chief is Dr. Jan Goldman (The Citadel).[3] -- Wikipedia

Another International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence article that's pro-Bagley and anti-Nosenko is Alan W. Messer's 2013 "In Pursuit of the Squared Circle: The Nosenko Theories Revisited," in which he posits the idea that Nosenko was -- as Bagley says in "Spy Wars" -- a false defector-in-place in Geneva in June 1962, sent to the CIA there to discredit what a recent true defector, Anatoliy Golitsyn, was telling James Angleton about possible KGB penetrations of the CIA, the FBI, and the intelligence services of our NATO allies -- but instead of a false physical defector to the U.S. in February 1964, he was a rogue one whose bona fides the KGB had no choice but to support through its moles in the CIA and its Kremlin-loyal triple agents like Aleksei Kulak (J. Edgar Hoover's shielded-from-CIA FEDORA at the Bureau's NYC field office).

Here's the blurb on Messer:

W. Alan Messer joined the Central Intelligence Agency in 1972 after serving in the U.S. Army and earning an M.A. in International Affairs from the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. For nearly sixteen years he was an analyst on Soviet defense economics, including strategic missile production assessments, in the Agency's Directorate of Intelligence. After a two-year stint in the Directorate of Science and Technology, serving as a program manager in its Mobile Missile Assessment Center, Mr. Messer joined the Directorate of Operations as an operations officer on operational counterintelligence, specializing in the Soviet/Russian intelligence services. He retired from the CIA in 2003.

It's a great read, but unfortunately it costs $56 at Taylor & Francis Online.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08850607.2013.757994?needAccess=true


-- Tom




 

And you're an asshole who will be ignored from here on in. Go find some KGB agents TG.

Dear Paul,

The witting ones have pretty much all been uncovered by now whereas the "useful idiot" ones like you and Michael T. Griffith are legion, like a horde of locusts.

-- Tom

None of which is tied to LHO. You just keep regurgitatig the Warren Commission. I guess affidavits don't mean shit to you when both Weismann and Craig said it was a a Mauser. Harold Norman never identified LHO. I'm done and clearly the only homework you've done is via the Warren Commission.

"If you studied this case and come to the conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone, you're either ignorant to the facts or lying." J. Gary Shaw

1. Oswald had no verifiable alibi, so your conclusion is not supported by evidence.

2. The sizable bullet fragments recovered from the Limo and Parkland ALL came from Oswald's rifle which was recovered from the 6th floor!

3. "Just after the President passed by, I heard a shot and several seconds later I heard two more shots. I knew that the shots had come from directly above me, and I could hear the expended cartridges fall to the floor. I also could here(sic) the bolt action of the rifle. I saw some dust fall from the ceiling of the fifth floor and I felt sure that whoever had fired the shots was directly above me."
Harold Norman affidavit from the 4th day of December, 1963.
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/norman_1.htm

4. Oswald immediately flees from the crime scene and kills a cop and then tries to kill more cops at the Texas Theatre. If Oswald wasn't in flight from committing murder then why the need to kill cops?

5. Oswald while in custody said numerous provable lies about the rifle and associated events concerning the rifle.

I could go on but it's getting late and I've had enough of the CT BS for one day.

JohnM

Gurvich testified to the Grand Jury twice and brought nothing.

https://jfk.boards.net/post/7065