The Strange Anti-Conspiracy Argument about Which View Is Less Troubling

[Tom Graves]

Yes, you did mention ideologies. We think alike!

I did?

I suspect a second gunsel on Nov. 22, due to the cadence of shots that struck JFK and JBC. (Z-295 and Z-313). The GK smoke-and-bang show suggests another participant as well. The recent Kirk assassination, and the incredible close-miss Trump assassination attempt, destroy suggestions that only a skilled marksman could hit JFK on Nov. 22. Rank amateurs are dangerous, and from greater distances than seen in Dealey Plaza.

We know ad nauseam what you suspect.

Flash-bang and dorsal side of the wrist.

[Lance Payette]

Dear FPR,

You forgot to mention that a big difference between Lone Gunman Advocates and KGB-encouraged, tinfoil-hat Conspiracy Theorists is that the latter require oodles and gobs of evil, evil "Deep State" bad guys for the planning, the "patsy-ing," the planting of evidence, the shooting, the getting-away, the altering of all of the Dealey Plaza films and photos, the altering of all of the Bethesda photos and x-rays, and the all-important (and evidently ongoing!!!) cover up.

-- Tom

Why would I have mentioned that? It's not what the thread is about. I can understand why YOU would mention that, because you are one-note broken record whose psychology spans several of my five categories.

Those who favor elaborate conspiracy theories are inevitably either in category #3, and thus need certain conspirators in order for the JFKA to have the monumental historical and ideological significance they attach to it, or category #4, and thus favor an elaborate, multi-faceted conspiracy because it's simply more fun as a jigsaw puzzle. In both cases, of course, there is considerable overlap with my category #5 - but this is usually fairly obvious and makes those in categories #3 and 4 somewhat more entertaining than they would otherwise be.

I have several little axioms I have developed over the years that guide my forays into the various species of weirdness. One I developed after extensive interactions with Young Earth Creationists, who insist the creation is approximately 6,500 years old. My axiom is, "You don't REALLY believe that. An assortment of social and psychological pressures may have caused you to say you believe that, and at some superficial level you may have even have convinced yourself you believe that, but you don't REALLY believe that. Sorry, but no sane person REALLY believes that." Another, closely related, which I've stated previously here, is, "Just because someone is intelligent, educated, articulate, successful, and seems reasonable about most things, do not assume that there is not some corner of his mind where he is almost COMPLETELY WHACKED and capable of convincing himself he believes utter nonsense about some pet topic." I have other useful axioms I could share with you - indeed, you in particular - but I am saving them for the forthcoming The Sayings of Chairman Lance.

What is kind of depressing to me about the JFKA research community is that pretty much no one seems to have any fun. It's all so grimly serious - very reminiscent of religious debates. Believe me, the Catholics, Southern Baptists, Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses do not regard each other with benign tolerance and realize that the whole enterprise of attempting to explain a deity in human terms is fundamentally absurd and, well ... a hoot. Ditto with the JFKA, or at least that's how it should be. At this stage, there's never going to be a breakthrough, something that changes the verdict of history. There just isn't. That's the reality. There will always be the LN narrative and 5,000 "Where the hell does THIS fit?" puzzle pieces that don't mesh perfectly. Your KGB* stuff, even if it once had a kernel of truth (which my best estimate is that it didn't), has become a comical obsession that has turned you into a tedious crank. Fortunately for you, there are those of us, good-natured and guided by our little axioms, who can see this and find it just part and parcel of what is the goofy Monty Python skit called "JFKA research."

*Now the SVR/FSB. BWAHAHA! 

[Tom Graves]

Why would I have mentioned that? It's not what the thread is about. I can understand why YOU would mention that, because you are one-note broken record whose psychology spans several of my five categories.

Those who favor elaborate conspiracy theories are inevitably either in category #3, and thus need certain conspirators in order for the JFKA to have the monumental historical and ideological significance they attach to it, or category #4, and thus favor an elaborate, multi-faceted conspiracy because it's simply more fun as a jigsaw puzzle. In both cases, of course, there is considerable overlap with my category #5 - but this is usually fairly obvious and makes those in categories #3 and 4 somewhat more entertaining than they would otherwise be.

I have several little axioms I have developed over the years that guide my forays into the various species of weirdness. One I developed after extensive interactions with Young Earth Creationists, who insist the creation is approximately 6,500 years old. My axiom is, "You don't REALLY believe that. An assortment of social and psychological pressures may have caused you to say you believe that, and at some superficial level you may have even have convinced yourself you believe that, but you don't REALLY believe that. Sorry, but no sane person REALLY believes that." Another, closely related, which I've stated previously here, is, "Just because someone is intelligent, educated, articulate, successful, and seems reasonable about most things, do not assume that there is not some corner of his mind where he is almost COMPLETELY WHACKED and capable of convincing himself he believes utter nonsense about some pet topic." I have other useful axioms I could share with you - indeed, you in particular - but I am saving them for the forthcoming The Sayings of Chairman Lance.

What is kind of depressing to me about the JFKA research community is that pretty much no one seems to have any fun. It's all so grimly serious - very reminiscent of religious debates. Believe me, the Catholics, Southern Baptists, Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses do not regard each other with benign tolerance and realize that the whole enterprise of attempting to explain a deity in human terms is fundamentally absurd and, well ... a hoot. Ditto with the JFKA, or at least that's how it should be. At this stage, there's never going to be a breakthrough, something that changes the verdict of history. There just isn't. That's the reality. There will always be the LN narrative and 5,000 "Where the hell does THIS fit?" puzzle pieces that don't mesh perfectly. Your KGB* stuff, even if it once had a kernel of truth (which my best estimate is that it didn't), has become a comical obsession that has turned you into a tedious crank. Fortunately for you, there are those of us, good-natured and guided by our little axioms, who can see this and find it just part and parcel of what is the goofy Monty Python skit called "JFKA research."

*Now the SVR/FSB. BWAHAHA! 

Dear FPR,

What's so "fun" about learning how your "impotent KGB* in benign USSR / Russia" made disinformation hay** from the anomaly-replete JFKA, and in so doing, helped set up the conditions for its installing The Traitorous Orange Bird (rhymes with "Xxxx") as our "president" in 2017 and 2025, and  . . . gag me with a KGB spoon . . . being surrounded by oodles and gobs of highly intelligent but nevertheless zombified by Mark Lane and Oliver Stone and James DiEugenio "useful idiots" in the process?

*Today's SVR and FSB

**You know, like "We live in an evil, evil Military Industrial Intelligence-Community Complex Deep State" -- that sort of thing? (Of course we do now, with The Traitorous Orange Bird -- rhymes with "Xxxx" -- and Stephen Miller and his ilk in power.)

-- Tom

[Lance Payette]

If I actually thought the KGB were capable of all you believe, I would salute them, brush up on my pigeon Russian, and await their complete takeover with unbridled enthusiasm. Alas, my experiences in Belarus more strongly suggest they are pretty much the same bureaucratic clucks one finds at every level of government everywhere. They apparently have been successful, however, in convincing some folks like you that they are Super Boogeymen. Oh, well, I suppose there are folks in Russia who think the same about the CIA. Just the crap I have to go through with Langley to receive my paltry monthly stipend tells me any Super Boogeymen are long gone. I actually had to send an email directly to The Donald last week after Langley shorted me $50 without explanation.

[Tom Graves]

If I actually thought the KGB were capable of all you believe, I would salute them, brush up on my pigeon Russian, and await their complete takeover with unbridled enthusiasm. Alas, my experiences in Belarus more strongly suggest they are pretty much the same bureaucratic clucks one finds at every level of government everywhere. They apparently have been successful, however, in convincing some folks like you that they are Super Boogeymen. Oh, well, I suppose there are folks in Russia who think the same about the CIA. Just the crap I have to go through with Langley to receive my paltry monthly stipend tells me any Super Boogeymen are long gone. I actually had to send an email directly to The Donald last week after Langley shorted me $50 without explanation.

Dear FPR,

The proof is staring you in the face every time Donald J. Trump looks into the camera.

Do you agree with him that the Democrats are to blame for Jan 6?

-- Tom

[Lance Payette]

Dear FPR,

The proof is staring you in the face every time Donald J. Trump looks into the camera.

-- Tom

I suppose he does have that "KGB stooge look" about him, although I thought it was just too many carrots in his diet.

If I haven't previously, I'll share my first experience with the Belarusian KGB (which my wife says is still called the KGB) in 2007: My brother-in-law, who has a Tom Graves-type perspective on the KGB, had filled me full of horror stories and the need to be ultra-careful - to the extent of warning me that KGB super-miscrophones would pick up everything I said in the family car on the Minsk streets. I got off the plane at the Minsk airport and walked through a security gate with my laptop slung over my shoulder, only to encounter a woman in uniform. Attempting to show how cooperative I was, I took the initiative and asked, "Do you want to look at my laptop?" She shook her head and said, "You don't have anything on there I need to see, do you?" - clearly communicating "Just say no, stupid, because I really don't want to go through this silly exercise." That pretty much told me all I needed to know about the KGB. On four subsequent trips, I never gave a thought to the KGB, pretty much acted as though I were on vacation in Illinois, and never had the slightest problem. You do have to register with the Interior Ministry within 24 hours after your arrival, but even that was always much ado about nothing.

Since you are "on to" the KGB and make no bones about it, TG, it's kind of surprising you're still alive. Shouldn't you be a mystery death or something by now? If we hear you suddenly suffered a bad case of spontaneous combustion, I'll take a closer look at this stuff.

The Mysterious Disappearance of Tom Graves. ("Natural causes. Sometimes people just explode." - Agent Rogerz, Repo Man, possibly the greatest movie ever made.)

[Michael T. Griffith]

Personally, I would be totally fine with believing that Oswald was one of the gunmen. After I began researching the case, I entertained the idea that Oswald was one of the shooters. If the evidence pointed to Oswald as the sixth-floor gunman, I would have no problem putting him in the window during the shooting. I just do not buy the case against him. Every single item of so-called "evidence" against him is fraught with problems and smells to high heaven of having been planted.

I think the weight of the evidence shows that Oswald was not on the sixth floor during the shooting. I think any objective analysis of the alleged shooting feat shows that the feat would have been extremely difficult, virtually impossible, even for a world-class rifleman, and that the feat was far beyond Oswald's meager rifle skills.

There is also the fact that the ammo that hit JFK's head behaved nothing like the ammo that Oswald supposedly used.

[Tom Graves]

[...]

Dear FPR,

Do you agree with President Trump and FBI Director Patel, respectively, that the Democrats and the FBI are to blame for Jan 6?

Regardless, speaking of the KGB's* ability to eavesdrop back in the day, we know from what Greville Wynne told his British debriefers after he was released from a Soviet prison for his involvement with the CIA's and MI6's spy, GRU Lt. Col. Oleg Penkovsky, that your beloved humanitarian organization placed such a hi-tech vase-or-ashtray-ensconced "bug" on his and Penkovsky's Moscow restaurant table two weeks after the latter's April 1961 recruitment in London that it was able to pick up, without any background noise, Penkovsky's asking Wynne (or perhaps the other way around) about "Zeph" (short for Stephanie, a London bargirl with whom Penkovsky had been smitten two weeks earlier), and which the Soviets mistook for "Zepp," a possible mole or double-agent penetration of your beloved world-class (pardon the pun) organization.

The interesting thing is that false-defector-in-place in June 1962 in Geneva / false (or perhaps rogue) physical defector to the U.S. in February 1964, Yuri "The KGB Had Nothing to Do with Lee Harvey Oswald in the USSR" Nosenko, asked his primary case officer -- Tennent H. Bagley -- and (probable mole) George Kisevalter about "Zepp" in June 1962 at that CIA safehouse in Geneva.

You can read more about "The Zepp Incident" in my Wikipedia article on Tennent H. Bagley.

*Today's SVR and FSB 

-- Tom