Recent Posts

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Did LHO meet Castro?
« Last post by Richard Smith on November 23, 2022, 03:12:00 PM »
Photographic proof that LHO was in Mexico City  ;)

If you believe Oswald's trip to Mexico City was a fabrication to somehow frame him for the assassination, why wouldn't the authorities just release a fabricated picture of Oswald instead of someone else? The CIA works in mysterious ways.  Maybe they did have such a picture but didn't want to reveal anything about their surveillance techniques to the Russians or Cubans.  Maybe they were incompetent and didn't actually get his picture.  Whatever the explanation for not having Oswald's picture, it makes no sense to suggest that authorities faked Oswald's presence in Mexico City for some unknown reason but then released a picture of someone else who wasn't Oswald. That doesn't add up as a logical narrative.
If RFK publicly criticized the Warren Report, it would've pretty much ended his political career.

It made no sense for him to do that unless he had a smoking gun or hard evidence of a conspiracy.

My broader point is that its telling that so many people who were close to the Warren Commission or knowledgeable of the intimate details were also not convinced that they were right that Oswald acted alone. That includes Lyndon Johnson, Hale Boggs, Richard Russell, RFK, John Connally, and possibly Gerald Ford (if some quotes attributed to him are true).

So he had no "smoking gun" or "evidence" of a conspiracy but entertained a hypothetical possibility that it happened.  In which case, his opinion is no more relevant than those that frequent this forum.
Of course, you also find the evidence against Oswald lacking.

What evidence would that be? You haven't produced any and as John already said “government said so” is not evidence.

Taking us back to the case being unsolvable.

Really? How do you figure? When you produce the evidence of Oswald's guilt, which you claim exists, that would solve the case, wouldn't it? Or could it be that such evidence simply doesn't exist, after all?

In any event, let's get back to discussing the case, shall we?

As the WC report doesn't contain the information, when will you be producing the evidence for your claims that Oswald was on the 6th floor of the TSBD when the shots were fired and that he came down the stairs unnoticed within 75 seconds after the last shot?

Do you think you will be able to produce this evidence before the end of the year or shall we just conclude that you make foolish claims you can't support with evidence?

Try to follow along.  You do not accept the evidence of Oswald's guilt.  You also suggest that you do not believe it is possible to solve a conspiracy to figure out who was behind it if one existed.  The only implication to be drawn from these claims is that you believe the case is effectively unsolvable.  You have reached the end of the line absent a time machine.  But then you take issue with that and bizarrely suggest that I must "produce" evidence that convinces you.  Mistakenly conflating your fake contrarian doubt with having relevance as to the issue of Oswald's guilt.  No one has to convince you or "produce" any additional evidence to accept Oswald's guilt as a proven fact.  It has been done.  Whether you agree with that is not relevant.  There are many kooks in the world who take issue with established facts.  That is not grounds for doubt.
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Alternate History: JFK
« Last post by Jon Banks on November 23, 2022, 02:34:05 PM »
If JFK wasn’t killed, RFK probably wouldn’t have run for President in 1968 which means he probably wouldn’t have been killed as well.
It's mind-boggling how anyone can be confident that we know what happened despite all the evidence that efforts were made to obscure the truth...


And for anyone to argue that the WC didn’t have an agenda is downright delusional.
Jefferson Morley on what the CIA is hiding:

Yes, There Is a JFK Smoking Gun

A small group of CIA officers was keenly interested in Oswald in the fall of 1963. They were running a psychological warfare operation, authorized in June 1963, that followed Oswald from New Orleans to Mexico City later that year. One of the officers supporting this operation was George Joannides, a career CIA officer whose records I sued for in 2003.

(This 2009 New York Times story on my lawsuit is pretty good.)

The evidence of the undisclosed Oswald operation is found in one partially declassified document from 1963 and 43 additional documents found in Joannides’ personnel file that have been “denied in full,” meaning no portions of them have been made public.

According to a CIA document filed in my Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, these sensitive records concern Joannides’ intelligence methods, his cover (meaning his false identity), and his travel in 1963-64, when he served as the chief of psychological warfare branch of the Agency’s Miami station, and in 1978, when he served as liaison to the House Select Committee on Assassination.

(The CIA’s policy of not revealing the names of living agents and informants does not apply here; Joannides died in 1990.)
Suspicions are not evidence, never were, and never will be…  :-\

Followers of the “Oswald did it” faith should emblazon that on their walls and refer to it often.
You quite obviously don’t grasp the concept….   ::)

Defined as not accepting Willens’ hypocrisy and special pleading.

“Does not preclude” is prosecuting lawyer weasel words. It means nothing.
It's great when you can't keep your story straight.  You took issue with my characterizing of your looney contrarian position on the case as being unsolvable by posting:  "What I actually said is; "In my opinion, if there was indeed a conspiracy, it's highly unlikely we will ever find out who were behind it." HA HA HA.   So it's "unsolvable" according to you if there was a conspiracy.  Of course, you also find the evidence against Oswald lacking.  Taking us back to the case being unsolvable.  You can't articulate any way to move forward but instead circle back to endless commentary and insults.  A vicious rabbit hole circle of lunacy.

Speaking of endless commentary and insults, you have yet to produce a single evidence-based argument about the actual case. Calling somebody’s position “looney” is not an argument.
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Did LHO meet Castro?
« Last post by John Iacoletti on November 23, 2022, 02:39:55 AM »
No one can be "placed" at the crime scene unless a witness confirms their presence at the moment of the crime.  That will come as good news to many criminals.  Typically, it is sufficient for them leave evidence like a weapon and/or prints at the crime scene and have no alibi and maybe even flee the scene.  Sound familiar?

Too bad you don’t have any actual evidence that any particular person “left a weapon”.
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
Mobile View