I have no idea what's his (her?) background or objective but no one who fanatically spends 24/7 responding to every single minutia that contradicts the official narrative to defend that narrative is for real. The pattern is similar to 9/11 in many ways. First, there's the big surprise, no one knew, the stand down and the US government failing to do what they're being paid to do, DEFEND. Then, there are the many convenient and impossible coincidences that helped make the act a 100% success. Then there's the coverup, including the destruction of evidence, the fake good old boys "investigation", complete with the compromising of eyewitnesses (some murdered) and the official fairy tale peddled to the public as fact. And of course the massive amount of forever "classified" documents and other evidence. All of that supported by the MSM.
Hell, an investigation by congress disputes it ! You are out of your league here, not being familiar with the information surrounding this conspiracy. Here... Unspecified conspiracy. So, it has been questioned and incoherence was found in the report. So the conspiracy analysts, are on just as firm ground as your denial is. Your certainty here is self manufactured, nothing more. http://www.history.com/topics/warren-commission
I already did, facts, parallels and importance, take off the blinders. If you refuse to acknowledge all of the above, there's nothing much to discuss, is there?
No, you did not make the connections. Do you believe in conspiracy theories, such as the govt dropped the towers?
Like I said, there's nothing to discuss if you have your blinders on. If you're asking me if I believe that conspiracy theories exist, it's a fact that conspiracy theories exist, whether anyone wants to believe they exist or not. It's also a fact that some conspiracy theories become conspiracy fact. If you're asking me if I believe the US government as a whole "dropped" the towers on 9/11, no I do not believe the US government did that. If you're asking me if I believe it's possible that elements within the US government planned and orchestrated or are complicit with the destruction of the 3 towers on 9/11, yes I believe it's absolutely possible and it certainly isn't impossible. This is a similar parallel to the JFK assassination. In fact some of the suspects are similar as well, the CIA, FBI and the Executive (VP LBJ).
Agreed. It’s pretty much a slam-dunk as far as deductive reasoning goes. >>> Scenarios that are physically impossible, dates that don’t match up, distances that do not calculate, trajectory physics that defy the laws of nature, etc. … and that only applies to Oswald’s alleged culpability. Then we have the various theories pointing to government involvement, each of which is extremely plausible. So what are we left with? 1). The official Warren Commission Report offering details of how it was carried out is impossible. It goes against both science and nature. No one is capable of carrying it out. Suggesting Oswald did is ridiculous. 2). Every possible scenario put forward includes the US government as being at the centre of the assassination, either acting on its own initiative or in conjunction with a periphery force. 3). All signs of guilt point to the US government because of (as you say) cover-ups, destruction of evidence, murdered eyewitnesses, classified information, and the Warren Commission’s outrageous postulations. Its obligation is to the defence of the guilty party. THE BOTTOM LINE: Oswald could not – did not - shoot Kennedy and any realistic explanation (so far) is that the government did the job or facilitated its implementation.
I agree with everything you posted except I will not say that Oswald could not or did not shoot JFK. I will just say that it is a US government accusation that Oswald was the lone gunman and it has never been proven. Who is/are the actual assassin(s)? We will probably never know the answer to that question as we will probably never know the answer to the question as to who planned and/or orchestrated 9/11.
I'm saying it's inconclusive on both counts. We simply don't know and don't have any answers other than JFK was murdered and it all has the effect of a coup d'etat. If I had to choose a possibility, I would lean toward that Oswald was just a patsy who never shot at JFK and was set up.
I'm sure that Secret Service Agents get confused & frequently get conflicting orders all the time but when combined with other events makes it worthy of scrutiny. Re: "the smell test": I think I've listed most of the things that are suspicious about JFK's assassination throughout this thread beginning with Kennedy's route its self which was ideal for snipers. Oswald, himself is a curiosity reputed to be a poor shot with a very unusual background & CIA connections. The rifle wasn't sighted in, JFK's head snaps to the rear, Oswald failed the paraffin test. Oswald openly declared to be a "patsy" & he, himself was immediately assassinated presumably to be silenced. The combination of these tests, events & conditions are a few of the things that make JFK's assassination suspicious to me.
I don't believe so. I remember a photo of Oswald at the USMC target range with an M1 Garand. That is not to say that he may not later have had to requalify with the delightful M-14 but I find that unlikely. I remember in the late 1960s initially qualifying in Basic Training with the M-14 & later the M-16 that had among other pejorative nicknames "Plastic Fantastic."
rre It is not a documentary it is a fictional you tube clip. Try some evidence which you ignore and never present.
No you have that quite wrong. The House select committee on assassinations found no incoherence at all with the Warren Commission report and their first conclusion stated this. The second conclusion was based on a new piece of evidence which was the sound recording from a motorcycle cops radio. The Committee accepted this as evidence before it could be properly analyzed and in fact it was later determined that the recording was no even made in Dealey plaza. Unfortunately that fact was revealed after the committee disbanded. The conspiracy analysts have no firm ground at all as they are completely lacking in evidence so be specific and state what you find wrong about the Warren Commission report. My certainty is based on hard evidence which no one has challenged effectively.
Yes and what scrutiny exactly? Are you claiming they lied and it was really a stand down? All of those things on that list have been scrutinized and they amount to nothing. Declaring oneself a patsy means nothing as most people accused of a crime deny their guilt in one way or another. HE had no previous CIA connections. The route was simply the best way to get to the intended destination. What do you have?
\Yet you can never provide evidence of this claim. You can only repeat it ad nauseum without a shred of supporting evidence
At this point you are simply willfully denying facts. We have shown on this thread that there is no evidence that it was impossible. So be specific and state why it was impossible. No evidence supports any of your claim and repeating it in bold type is not authoritative. What evidence do you have as ALL OF THE EVIDENCE seen so far proves you wrong?
