No coffee for Randle, no job for Oswald -- at the TSBD

[Martin Weidmann]

...angry insults along with your trademark unjustified speculation

Not an ad hominem attack: That's a description of your inept debating technique. Okay, I concede that it's a criticism.

Where and when did I claim to have an open mind?

What happened at the end of your reply? No reply!

Where and when did I claim to have an open mind?

You don't have to claim it when you show that you don't have one with every post you write...

What happened at the end of your reply? No reply!

For some reason the post went on line when I was still writing it. Probably pushed the wrong button...

[John Iacoletti]

Let's put it another way. If you disagree with the historic record in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, you must believe that Lee Harvey Oswald did not do it alone.

Bzzzt.  Thanks for playing.

[John Iacoletti]

Your protestations do nothing to disprove my conclusion that you are a determined contrarian.

Spoken like someone who just doesn't like his claims to be questioned.

You either agree or disagree. If you disagree: Explain how Lee Harvey Oswald would have obtained a job at the TSBD without Linnie May Randle's presence at the "Robert's house" coffee klatch--the first week in October 1963?

Irrelevant, unless you want to leap to the conclusion that JFK could only be killed by Oswald from the TSBD.

[John Iacoletti]

That's so unlikely, it's not a plausible claim. Unless you can describe how, where and when Oswald would (or could) have became aware of a job at the TSBD: That's just "defensive" nonsense used to persist with your contrarianism.

   Merely labeling something "unlikely" doesn't make it unlikely.  Hypothetically?  Oswald runs into Frazier in the neighborhood on a weekend visit.  Asks him where he works and says hey, do you have any openings down there?  What's so "unlikely" about that?  Or how about this?  The Texas Employment Commission sends him over to the TSBD to see if he can find work there.

I loved "loaded" questions.

Not surprising since you love to ask them and don't understand what logical fallacies are.

The entire premise of the Subject [No coffee for Randle, no job for Oswald -- at the TSBD] is to make clear something that many people don't realize: Coincidences are more common than conspiracies.

Here's the thing that you don't realize.  Oswald getting a job at the TSBD (or anywhere else) could be a coincidence, and he still could have been set up as a patsy. One does not require the other.

Many times, I've made a statement in conversation and received new information that conflicted with my premise. My usual reply is something like: "I never knew that. Yes I see your point etc.".

Perhaps so, but I've never seen you do that here.  Even once.

[John Iacoletti]

It's beyond dispute, that you never make a meaningful contribution to the JFK Assassination Forum. You don't start a Subject: You just argue obstinately against the historical record without providing any proof to refute it. Contrarianism.

Let's take a look at the meaningful topics that Ross has started, shall we?

- A photo of the Tippit plaque at 10th & Patton
- This silly topic
- A claim that another 6th floor shooter would also be required to escape within 75-90 seconds
- 4 different topics consisting of interview clips from CBS news specials about the Warren report
- A letter congratulating Jack Ruby for killing Oswald
- A criticism of Jesse Ventura.

[Joe Elliott]

The circumstances of Lee Harvey Oswald getting a job at a building on the route of President Kennedy's motorcade (5 weeks later) was just happenstance.

Probably true.

The idea that plotters in a conspiracy had him "placed" there is impossible.

Indeed... nobody knew at that time that Kennedy would come to Dallas and pass by the TSBD

No "placement" means no "plot". There was no conspiracy.

That's just jumping to a conclusion way too fast... You assume that Oswald's job at the TSBD was a vital part of a conspiracy simply because it turned out to play a prominent role in the assassination. What if the conspirators (if there were any) just improvised and played the hand they were dealt? Why couldn't they have arranged their plans around the location of the patsy rather than place the patsy somewhere weeks in advance? And besides, who knows what other options were available to them?

This is one of the main problems in your "logic". You relate everything back to the events that actually happened, when that could well have been only one of several scenarios. If there was a conspiracy, it's purpose would have been to remove a President from power. That's not something a couple of guys decide to do over a beer in a local bar. If there was a conspiracy, it would have involved serious players in high places and they wouldn't leave much to chance.

If Mrs Randle decides to stay home or go somewhere else instead off across the street to Mrs Roberts house for coffee: Lee Oswald never learns about the job at the TSBD. He never gets a job there and is never in a position to assassinate President Kennedy at 12:30 PM (CST), 22 November 1963.

So, Mrs Randle is to blame for the assassination. Got it.

Martin’s scenario is possible. They prepared the patsy the be the fall guy. He shows his support for Castro in public. Then, by total luck, he gets a job that puts him in a perfect position to assassinate the President. At a place along a motorcade route that had been used before. In a tall building. In a tall building that is not used as a busy office, as most buildings in Dallas are, but in an old warehouse, with a good chance there would be a floor without nobody (except possibly Oswald) on it. What a perfect coincidence. It would be natural for conspirators to take advantage of such a lucky break.

The problem is, I don’t believe in coincidences. Bad theories commonly have to rely on them. There was a lucky coincidence that made it extra easy or pin Oswald with the crime, making it look like no conspiracy got him in position to commit the crime, because there was no need to. Innocent friends and neighbors had already arranged for that.

Or how about another coincidence. The plotters planted CE-399 to frame Oswald. But they planted it on the wrong stretcher. They didn’t even plant it on a stretcher on the right floor. But they got lucky because someone brought the Connally stretcher downstairs and of all places, parked it next to the stretcher with CE-399. What a lucky coincidence. Now it would be easy to claim the person who brought down the stretcher got the two stretchers confused, which sounds plausible. But wouldn’t sound plausible if Connally’s stretcher was still in another part of the hospital.

False conspiracy theories seem to generate and require lucky coincidences for the conspirators.

[Martin Weidmann]

Martin’s scenario is possible. They prepared the patsy the be the fall guy. He shows his support for Castro in public. Then, by total luck, he gets a job that puts him in a perfect position to assassinate the President. At a place along a motorcade route that had been used before. In a tall building. In a tall building that is not used as a busy office, as most buildings in Dallas are, but in an old warehouse, with a good chance there would be a floor without nobody (except possibly Oswald) on it. What a perfect coincidence. It would be natural for conspirators to take advantage of such a lucky break.

The problem is, I don’t believe in coincidences. Bad theories commonly have to rely on them. There was a lucky coincidence that made it extra easy or pin Oswald with the crime, making it look like no conspiracy got him in position to commit the crime, because there was no need to. Innocent friends and neighbors had already arranged for that.

Or how about another coincidence. The plotters planted CE-399 to frame Oswald. But they planted it on the wrong stretcher. They didn’t even plant it on a stretcher on the right floor. But they got lucky because someone brought the Connally stretcher downstairs and of all places, parked it next to the stretcher with CE-399. What a lucky coincidence. Now it would be easy to claim the person who brought down the stretcher got the two stretchers confused, which sounds plausible. But wouldn’t sound plausible if Connally’s stretcher was still in another part of the hospital.

False conspiracy theories seem to generate and require lucky coincidences for the conspirators.

Or how about another coincidence. The plotters planted CE-399 to frame Oswald. But they planted it on the wrong stretcher. They didn’t even plant it on a stretcher on the right floor. But they got lucky because someone brought the Connally stretcher downstairs and of all places, parked it next to the stretcher with CE-399. What a lucky coincidence. Now it would be easy to claim the person who brought down the stretcher got the two stretchers confused, which sounds plausible. But wouldn’t sound plausible if Connally’s stretcher was still in another part of the hospital.

Or how about this; the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was never at Parkland Hospital. Tomlinson found a bullet on an unrelated stretcher and allegedly gave it to O.P. Wright. I say allegedly, because there is also a story of Tomlinson giving the bullet directly to a Secret Service agent as witnessed by an OTIS repair man. Anyway, O.P. Wright is on record saying that the bullet he got from Tomlinson and gave to Johnson was pointed. When shown a photograph of CE399 he actually denied it looked anything like the bullet he had handled on 11/22/63.

Tomlinson is on record saying that he was shown a bullet once, for identification, but that was by FBI SAC Shanklin about a week after the murder, yet the FBI claimed that SA Odum had shown CE399 to Tomlinson and Wright in april 1964 and that both men couldn't identify it. Strangely enough, when Odum was asked about this he denied ever having shown any bullet to anybody at Parkland Hospital and/or ever having CE399 in his possession.

The first four persons in the chain of custody could not identify CE399 as the bullet they had handled on 11/22/63. Only SA Todd and SA Frazier indentified it from their markings on the bullet, but those two men didn't get the bullet until after it arrived at Washington.

It is completely possible that an unrelated bullet, found by Tomlinson, was substituted for a bullet fired by the MC rifle (which also was in Washington hours after the bullet arrived) to ensure a "match" between the bullet now in evidence and the rifle now in evidence.

Oh, and btw O.P. Wright's wife was a nurse who attended Connally on 11/22/63. When he heard a piece of metal fall to the ground, Mrs Wright picked it up and found it was a bullet. And Nurse Hill is on record saying that she saw a bullet lying next to Kennedy's head. That bullet mysteriously disappeared as apparently did the bullet that Mrs Wright handled.... It could of course all be coincidence, but then, you don't believe in coincidence, right?