Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Things Ct's can do to prove a conspiracy.  (Read 25636 times)

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Things Ct's can do to prove a conspiracy.
« Reply #56 on: April 12, 2018, 03:19:58 PM »
Advertisement
Who's "they"?

That's a copout to make up for your lack of compelling evidence.  You're basically saying that people should accept your opinion for no good reason by inventing a strawman of what it would take to convince the people who disagree with you.  When every bit of what little evidence you have is full of reasonable doubt.

It's pretty much impossible to prove a negative.  You can't even seem to prove a positive!

"every bit of what little evidence you have is full of reasonable doubt."

Actually a KEY piece of evidence is negated and provably false.....   Several witnesses on the street saw a man who was wearing LIGHT COLORED clothing on the sixth floor before and during the shooting.....

Lee Oswald was NOT wearing light colored clothing.......

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Things Ct's can do to prove a conspiracy.
« Reply #56 on: April 12, 2018, 03:19:58 PM »


Offline Brian Walker

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 72
Re: Things Ct's can do to prove a conspiracy.
« Reply #57 on: April 12, 2018, 03:39:29 PM »
And what would be the reason that the general standard  should change? I find it odd that there would not be agreement, or even enthusiasm, for exploring ideas that are significant in providing evidence Trying to pin the onus on one side seems more of a polemic than a joint effort towards evidence

 Further it seems like a dangerous precedent, especially in the assassination of a President, that we would lower the standard simply because a suspect is killed One cannot easily deny that an assassination where the prime suspect is killed should be a potential cause to create suspicion instead of time to relax  To lower the the threshold of certainly in such cases should indeed encourage those governments, or elites of  a given society, to utilize such a strategy since, as you suggest, the standard of evidence should be lowered, or as you imply reversed for proving any given suspect guilty

 Maybe you might want to consider this argument in terms of a third world country Would you really want to suggest it is the interest of such societies to allow assassination subjects to be killed, and then to lower the standard of evidence tha tthe given suspected killer was actually guilty? Would you say the case is different since other governments can be known to be more prone to corruption than our own?


I don't know why this is so difficult for some.

This is not a courtroom. IF someone believes that nobody could do the shooting then that is something that is provable obviously. They could set it up and prove that it cannot be done. IF they could do this the case is closed and they win.

There is no benefit to proving that someone could do the shooting. That does not close the case. Why would LN bother with that? IF there was a shooting exhibition that could prove Oswald did it, it would have been done long ago,.


The pushback makes no sense.  There is a group of people who's life work is basically to prove a conspiracy and if they believe the shots could not be made then they have a way to end the debate. What are they waiting for?

« Last Edit: April 12, 2018, 03:58:01 PM by Brian Walker »

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: Things Ct's can do to prove a conspiracy.
« Reply #58 on: April 12, 2018, 08:33:56 PM »
Do we have film of Ruby shooting Oswald? Where is it? I'd like to see it.

Tim has a habit of being deliberately obtuse and making false equivalencies because he can't actually prove who killed JFK.


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Things Ct's can do to prove a conspiracy.
« Reply #58 on: April 12, 2018, 08:33:56 PM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: Things Ct's can do to prove a conspiracy.
« Reply #59 on: April 12, 2018, 08:36:52 PM »
This is not a courtroom.

Then why are you guys always on about how you think some questionable piece of evidence or other would still be admitted in court?

Quote
IF someone believes that nobody could do the shooting then that is something that is provable obviously.

Why do you think this is even provable?  But who in the world ever claimed that "nobody could do the shooting"?  Obviously somebody somewhere did some shooting.

Offline Matt Grantham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 902
Re: Things Ct's can do to prove a conspiracy.
« Reply #60 on: April 12, 2018, 09:13:24 PM »

I don't know why this is so difficult for some.

This is not a courtroom. IF someone believes that nobody could do the shooting then that is something that is provable obviously. They could set it up and prove that it cannot be done. IF they could do this the case is closed and they win.

There is no benefit to proving that someone could do the shooting. That does not close the case. Why would LN bother with that? IF there was a shooting exhibition that could prove Oswald did it, it would have been done long ago,.


The pushback makes no sense.  There is a group of people who's life work is basically to prove a conspiracy and if they believe the shots could not be made then they have a way to end the debate. What are they waiting for?

 The point was for the general case. It was not about Oswald in particular Apparently you are unwilling to go there

 As for no benefit for the LN, Examination of the verfiability of evidence is not based on whether it benefits a particular 'side'

 If it meaningless why did CBS spend so much effort on it It comes up as one of the main questions but one you somewhat idiosyncratically consider unimportant

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Things Ct's can do to prove a conspiracy.
« Reply #60 on: April 12, 2018, 09:13:24 PM »


Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Things Ct's can do to prove a conspiracy.
« Reply #61 on: April 12, 2018, 09:18:06 PM »

I don't know why this is so difficult for some.

This is not a courtroom. IF someone believes that nobody could do the shooting then that is something that is provable obviously. They could set it up and prove that it cannot be done. IF they could do this the case is closed and they win.

There is no benefit to proving that someone could do the shooting. That does not close the case. Why would LN bother with that? IF there was a shooting exhibition that could prove Oswald did it, it would have been done long ago,.


The pushback makes no sense.  There is a group of people who's life work is basically to prove a conspiracy and if they believe the shots could not be made then they have a way to end the debate. What are they waiting for?

What are they waiting for?

A government that will conduct an honest investigation......

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Things Ct's can do to prove a conspiracy.
« Reply #62 on: April 20, 2018, 01:02:26 PM »
It will never happen.

Are you saying that Americans lack the courage of Russians?

Why are there monuments to Hoover and LBJ in the US?   ....But no monuments to Lenin or Stalin in Russia? ..or  Hitler in Germany... or  Saddam Hussein in Iraq

The Russians faced the facts that Stalin was simply a brutal mass murderer and removed any monument.... Do we Americans lack the brains and guts to face reality?
« Last Edit: April 20, 2018, 01:04:34 PM by Walt Cakebread »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Things Ct's can do to prove a conspiracy.
« Reply #62 on: April 20, 2018, 01:02:26 PM »


Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Things Ct's can do to prove a conspiracy.
« Reply #63 on: April 20, 2018, 06:08:17 PM »
The government is never going to run an honest investigation. I don't think they know how to.

Do we really need "government experts" ( at blowin smoke) to tell us what we can see with our own eyes? ie;.. That the Warren report is one of the biggest crocks in history.

Any person who has the guts to face the facts and can be honest with himself doesn't need government "experts" to think for him.