Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?  (Read 6013 times)

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #60 on: March 17, 2018, 12:40:39 PM »

But only the CIA, the FBI or the police would not know what form to recreate. They donít know how Klein's Sporting Goods stores its records. They donít know where in the Kleinís Sporting Goods records to insert such paperwork.

Even if the CIA did insert this paperwork, they wouldnít know if that company keeps an index list of purchases. It would look bad if there was paperwork for other rifle orders, which also appeared on the index list. But not Oswaldís order.

No, to pull this off, to have the Kleinís Sporting Goods Company to go through itís records and find this paperwork, you would need the Kleinís Sporting Goods Company involved with the conspiracy. If not the entire company, the CIA would somehow have to make inquires to identify the key people who know what paperwork is kept and then recruit them.

Since Oswald had a rifle and seemed to be obeying the orders of this alleged conspiracy (be sure to bring a long object wrapped in a paper bag on the morning the President drive by) it would seem simpler to just instruct Oswald to order himself a rifle, rather than recruit the Kleinís Sporting Goods company into the conspiracy and have them create a fake paper trail.


Can you provide me with link to the paperwork Paul Bentley filed that day? I would be curious to know what else was missing from that paperwork.

I donít know how through the Dallas Police department was with immediate paperwork. And what need is there since the fake ID is being stored? I donít know of any need, unless Bentley was afraid that people were suspecting that they were creating a false case against Oswald and so he needs to carefully itemize everything to help deflect this. But I donít know if that had ever occurred to him on that day.

And all this seems to be nothing more than needlessly postulating a conspiracy that does everything at the last second. Planning this assassination for weeks and it isnít until immediately after the assassination that it occurs to them that they need to make a fake ID and get some fake paperwork from Kleinís Sporting Goods before the weekend is over.

But so far, Martin, you are dodging my main question. Why canít a CTer provide a list of the evidence that was probably fake and a rough count of who was involved?

Had you attempted such a list, would you have remembered to include the Kleinís Sporting Goods Company?

I can only think that CTers donít provide such a list because it would be like providing a list of all the grains of sand to be found on a certain beach.


But only the CIA, the FBI or the police would not know what form to recreate. They donít know how Klein's Sporting Goods stores its records. They donít know where in the Kleinís Sporting Goods records to insert such paperwork.

Even if the CIA did insert this paperwork, they wouldnít know if that company keeps an index list of purchases. It would look bad if there was paperwork for other rifle orders, which also appeared on the index list. But not Oswaldís order.


You don't get it. There wouldn't be a need to recreate and/or insert paperwork anywhere. Anybody can fill out a faked order form and send it by mail. The normal business procedure by Klein's would do the rest.

No, to pull this off, to have the Kleinís Sporting Goods Company to go through itís records and find this paperwork, you would need the Kleinís Sporting Goods Company involved with the conspiracy. If not the entire company, the CIA would somehow have to make inquires to identify the key people who know what paperwork is kept and then recruit them.

That's only what you want to believe so you can hang on to your strawmen argument. Fact of the matter is that the rifle purchase basically only required a faked order form. The order would be processed by Klein's in the normal manner, producing the remainder of the paperwork, which would lay dormant in their files for whenever it would be needed. If there was a conspiracy at the highest level they could have done the same thing for several people all over the country and we would only ever find out about the one concerning the individual ultimately selected as the patsy.

Since Oswald had a rifle and seemed to be obeying the orders of this alleged conspiracy (be sure to bring a long object wrapped in a paper bag on the morning the President drive by) it would seem simpler to just instruct Oswald to order himself a rifle, rather than recruit the Kleinís Sporting Goods company into the conspiracy and have them create a fake paper trail.

True, that's more or less the same as what I am saying, but if Oswald was manipulated in doing it himself even the order form wouldn't be fake. It would just be the story behind it that would need to change to morph into the official narrative.


Can you provide me with link to the paperwork Paul Bentley filed that day? I would be curious to know what else was missing from that paperwork.

I don't think he filed any paperwork that day at all. After arresting Oswald he went to the hospital for his injury. The first time he re-appears in public is the next day when he gives a television interview. My take on this is that had Bentley filed a report that mentioned finding the Hidell alias, we would have known about it by now. As it stands he wasn't even called to testify for the WC.

I donít know how through the Dallas Police department was with immediate paperwork. And what need is there since the fake ID is being stored? I donít know of any need, unless Bentley was afraid that people were suspecting that they were creating a false case against Oswald and so he needs to carefully itemize everything to help deflect this. But I donít know if that had ever occurred to him on that day.

So, by your reasoning, there was no need to file a report about finding a fake ID in Oswald's wallet, yet other officers filed extensive reports about all sorts of everything. Remarkable.

And all this seems to be nothing more than needlessly postulating a conspiracy that does everything at the last second. Planning this assassination for weeks and it isnít until immediately after the assassination that it occurs to them that they need to make a fake ID and get some fake paperwork from Kleinís Sporting Goods before the weekend is over.

Where did you get the idea that a conspiracy did everything at the last second. They could have been planning for months, having all sorts of scenarios in place and selecting at short notice which scenario to impliment.

But so far, Martin, you are dodging my main question. Why canít a CTer provide a list of the evidence that was probably fake and a rough count of who was involved?

Had you attempted such a list, would you have remembered to include the Kleinís Sporting Goods Company?


Why should a CT provide such a list? When you, as LN, present a piece of evidence it's on you to show it is authentic. But if I had made such a list (which I haven't and won't) I most certainly would have no reason at all to include Klein's in it.

I can only think that CTers donít provide such a list because it would be like providing a list of all the grains of sand to be found on a certain beach.

Of course you would think that. That's why you asked to question to begin with. Another strawmen argument to be shot down!

« Last Edit: March 17, 2018, 01:43:07 PM by Martin Weidmann »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #60 on: March 17, 2018, 12:40:39 PM »


Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1901
Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #61 on: March 17, 2018, 03:44:39 PM »
Lee Harvey Oswald did not kill John F. Kennedy.

Lee Henry Oswald did.

Or Harvey Lee Oswald did.

I can never keep them straight.

Steve Thomas

A bitter, mentally-deranged pipsqueak wanted to make a name for himself
Smith, Wesson, and Lee: Dirty Harvey.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2018, 03:49:33 PM by Bill Chapman »

Offline Steve M. Galbraith

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 271
Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #62 on: March 17, 2018, 09:04:51 PM »
Colin, I'm have no idea curious as to why this is being asked? What's the purpose here?

CT is simply short hand - an acronym - used for those who believe/theorize/know that JFK was killed in a conspiracy. CT = conspiracy theorist.

It's clearly inaccurate in that it includes people who both theorize or believe there was a conspiracy as well as people - like the late Gaeton Fonzi - who say they "know" there was one.

But LN is inaccurate too since there are people who think Oswald acted without help but he that wasn't "nuts."

CT and LN are just figures of speech, shorthand that we use.

At least that's what my paymasters at Langley tell me to say.





« Last Edit: March 18, 2018, 02:46:59 PM by Steve M. Galbraith »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #62 on: March 17, 2018, 09:04:51 PM »


Offline Jack Trojan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 368
  • Thomas Arthur Vallee
Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #63 on: March 18, 2018, 02:06:40 AM »
To me a CTer is a person who insists, beyond a reasonable standard of proof, that Oswald needed help

That's your problem. A CTer is a person who looks at all the circumstantial evidence re the JFK assassination and leans toward Oswald likely not acting alone. CTers represent the majority of the world who give a damn. And for that the fringe LNers label CTers as tin foil hat wearing kooks. Go figure.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2018, 02:41:48 AM by Jack Trojan »

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4750
Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #64 on: March 20, 2018, 08:50:21 PM »
How is it this evidence does not prove this?

Because the only part of your "paper trail" that connects Oswald personally to a Klein's rifle order is unscientific handwriting "analysis" of 2 block letters on a photograph of a microfilm copy of a 2-inch order coupon.

No fakery is necessary -- just a questionable conclusion based on the actual available evidence.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #64 on: March 20, 2018, 08:50:21 PM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4750
Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #65 on: March 20, 2018, 08:59:03 PM »
This is where you fail, isn't the criteria "reasonable doubt by a reasonable person" and you have repeatedly shown yourself not to be a reasonable person, therefore in my estimation you would not be picked to be on a jury and thus your repeated use of "reasonable doubt" is simply self serving nonsense!

The problem is that you define "reasonable person" as someone who agrees with your unsubstantiated claims and assumptions.  Your position has nothing to do with reason.


Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1310
Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #66 on: March 24, 2018, 02:17:39 AM »
Lee Harvey Oswald did not kill John F. Kennedy.

Lee Henry Oswald did.

Or Harvey Lee Oswald did.

I can never keep them straight.

Steve Thomas

What about Lee Harold Oswald? Let's not forget him.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #66 on: March 24, 2018, 02:17:39 AM »


 

Mobile View