Discussion:
If the Evidence on the 6th Floor was Faked . . .
(too old to reply)
n***@gmail.com
2018-07-29 22:11:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.

Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.

DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT

Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood


DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE

Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster


NEWS MEDIA

Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle

I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.

If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.

It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)

Mark
bigdog
2018-07-30 21:27:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that. Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President. And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it? You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy. Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years. Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.

The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
Anthony Marsh
2018-07-31 20:17:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that. Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President. And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it? You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy. Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years. Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
False. It was just a hoax to blame it on them.
Post by bigdog
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
If true, why would the CIA continue to withhold all those files just to
make themselves look guilty?
Jason Burke
2018-08-02 02:00:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers.  Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that. Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President. And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it? You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy. Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years. Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
False. It was just a hoax to blame it on them.
Post by bigdog
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
If true, why would the CIA continue to withhold all those files just to
make themselves look guilty?
No, Anthony Anthony. The CIA is withholding files ONLY to get your
panties in a bunch.

And it's working.
mainframetech
2018-08-01 03:34:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that.
WRONG as usual! 20 people to begin and 30 on the back end, and those
numbers have not changed in years. And the 20 wee part of the 30. The
typical gimmick of the LNs id to pretend that the numbers have to increase
to unmanageable levels, but they don't. Hoover had the FBI, who would do
whatever he wanted, and there was a good excuse related to WW3 to get them
to do what was wanted. They didn't have to be in on the plot.
Post by bigdog
Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President.
The odds are that they looked for people that wanted JFK out of the
way, and there were plenty of them. And being in on the plot meant that
opening your mouth could get you killed quickly. However, there are some
people that only now are speaking out about having a hand in the killing.
Post by bigdog
And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it?
Knock of the common LN crap. No one would talk in this case, their
life would be forfeit.
Post by bigdog
You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy.
By using a military hospital the avoided any problem with the
prosectors, who were given orders what to find.
Post by bigdog
Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years.
Much was done to make Oswald the 'patsy' so that the plotters could go
about their lives without fear.
Post by bigdog
Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
Yep, finally got something right!
Post by bigdog
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
There are sworn testimonies to much of the scam, and nowadays, some
people are coming out as par of the plot.

Chris
bigdog
2018-08-02 02:36:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that.
WRONG as usual! 20 people to begin and 30 on the back end, and those
numbers have not changed in years. And the 20 wee part of the 30. The
typical gimmick of the LNs id to pretend that the numbers have to increase
to unmanageable levels, but they don't. Hoover had the FBI, who would do
whatever he wanted, and there was a good excuse related to WW3 to get them
to do what was wanted. They didn't have to be in on the plot.
Why don't you list those 20 people for us and the 30 people in the cover
up noting the overlap. Then we can see if you have left out any of the
people you have accused over the years.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President.
The odds are that they looked for people that wanted JFK out of the
way, and there were plenty of them. And being in on the plot meant that
opening your mouth could get you killed quickly. However, there are some
people that only now are speaking out about having a hand in the killing.
Most people find the idea of assassinating a President to be abhorrent no
matter how much they hate him. Americans believe in using lawful
processes, i.e. elections to remove people from office they don't like. We
are not a banana republic. The people who would be willing to go along
with an assassination were few and far between so how would your plotters
find them out without exposing their own intentions.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it?
Knock of the common LN crap. No one would talk in this case, their
life would be forfeit.
Preposterous. Preposterous that nobody would talk and preposterous that
your alleged plotters would count on nobody talking.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy.
By using a military hospital the avoided any problem with the
prosectors, who were given orders what to find.
So how many people from the military do you think you would need to have
involved to control the autopsy process. Do you think these military
people could be intimidated into engaging in a cover up because they
feared for their lives?
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years.
Much was done to make Oswald the 'patsy' so that the plotters could go
about their lives without fear.
That's what you have convinced yourself of, apparently not caring in the
least how ludicrous it is.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
Yep, finally got something right!
Since the early evidence gathering was ALL conducted by local law
enforcement, you have now implicated them in the cover up. Are they among
your "30 on the back end"?
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
There are sworn testimonies to much of the scam, and nowadays, some
people are coming out as par of the plot.
You mean like Loy Factor? <chuckle>

You'll believe anything.
mainframetech
2018-08-03 02:37:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that.
WRONG as usual! 20 people to begin and 30 on the back end, and those
numbers have not changed in years. And the 20 were part of the 30. The
typical gimmick of the LNs id to pretend that the numbers have to increase
to unmanageable levels, but they don't. Hoover had the FBI, who would do
whatever he wanted, and there was a good excuse related to WW3 to get them
to do what was wanted. They didn't have to be in on the plot.
Why don't you list those 20 people for us and the 30 people in the cover
up noting the overlap. Then we can see if you have left out any of the
people you have accused over the years.
I have not "accused" people over the years. I have "suspected" some
of them. The number 20 and 30 are estimates and not guarantees. I have
listed them for you and am surprised that you didn't copy them down and
save them forever. Here's a few: LBJ, Hoover, SS agents Rowley, Greer
and Kellerman, FBI agent Robert Frazier, Firearms expert. Which is not a
complete list. Save them this time.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President.
That's been answered many times and you're repeating yourself.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
The odds are that they looked for people that wanted JFK out of the
way, and there were plenty of them. And being in on the plot meant that
opening your mouth could get you killed quickly. However, there are some
people that only now are speaking out about having a hand in the killing.
Most people find the idea of assassinating a President to be abhorrent no
matter how much they hate him. Americans believe in using lawful
processes, i.e. elections to remove people from office they don't like. We
are not a banana republic. The people who would be willing to go along
with an assassination were few and far between so how would your plotters
find them out without exposing their own intentions.
Oh, stop, I'm getting misty! Birds of a feather flock together.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it?
Knock off the common LN crap. No one would talk in this case, their
life would be forfeit.
Preposterous. Preposterous that nobody would talk and preposterous that
your alleged plotters would count on nobody talking.
The proof is that it worked.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy.
By using a military hospital they avoided any problem with the
prosectors, who were given orders what to find.
So how many people from the military do you think you would need to have
involved to control the autopsy process. Do you think these military
people could be intimidated into engaging in a cover up because they
feared for their lives?
It was easy to get the 3 prosectors and the radiologist to go along
with the scam. They were no doubt told it would help avert WW3 or some
other possible scenario. They wouldn't dare go against the orders and
find themselves in a federal prison.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years.
Much was done to make Oswald the 'patsy' so that the plotters could go
about their lives without fear.
That's what you have convinced yourself of, apparently not caring in the
least how ludicrous it is.
The evidence convinced me. Try it sometime.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
Yep, finally got something right!
Since the early evidence gathering was ALL conducted by local law
enforcement, you have now implicated them in the cover up. Are they among
your "30 on the back end"?
Don't try to speak for me, you haven't a clue what I think. I have
NOT implicated any local cops in the plot. They might take their lead
from the FBI, who got involved close to the beginning of the crime.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
There are sworn testimonies to much of the scam, and nowadays, some
people are coming out as part of the plot.
You mean like Loy Factor? <chuckle>
You'll believe anything.
Strangely enough, he is corroborated in what he says happened on the
6th floor. You of course, will try to pretend it didn't happen and the
WCR is true forever...or 99% anyway.

Chris
bigdog
2018-08-04 23:11:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that.
WRONG as usual! 20 people to begin and 30 on the back end, and those
numbers have not changed in years. And the 20 were part of the 30. The
typical gimmick of the LNs id to pretend that the numbers have to increase
to unmanageable levels, but they don't. Hoover had the FBI, who would do
whatever he wanted, and there was a good excuse related to WW3 to get them
to do what was wanted. They didn't have to be in on the plot.
Why don't you list those 20 people for us and the 30 people in the cover
up noting the overlap. Then we can see if you have left out any of the
people you have accused over the years.
I have not "accused" people over the years. I have "suspected" some
of them. The number 20 and 30 are estimates and not guarantees. I have
listed them for you and am surprised that you didn't copy them down and
save them forever. Here's a few: LBJ, Hoover, SS agents Rowley, Greer
and Kellerman, FBI agent Robert Frazier, Firearms expert. Which is not a
complete list. Save them this time.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President.
That's been answered many times and you're repeating yourself.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
The odds are that they looked for people that wanted JFK out of the
way, and there were plenty of them. And being in on the plot meant that
opening your mouth could get you killed quickly. However, there are some
people that only now are speaking out about having a hand in the killing.
Most people find the idea of assassinating a President to be abhorrent no
matter how much they hate him. Americans believe in using lawful
processes, i.e. elections to remove people from office they don't like. We
are not a banana republic. The people who would be willing to go along
with an assassination were few and far between so how would your plotters
find them out without exposing their own intentions.
Oh, stop, I'm getting misty! Birds of a feather flock together.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it?
Knock off the common LN crap. No one would talk in this case, their
life would be forfeit.
Preposterous. Preposterous that nobody would talk and preposterous that
your alleged plotters would count on nobody talking.
The proof is that it worked.
It didn't work too well. Oswald died two days later. He got away with
nothing.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy.
By using a military hospital they avoided any problem with the
prosectors, who were given orders what to find.
So how many people from the military do you think you would need to have
involved to control the autopsy process. Do you think these military
people could be intimidated into engaging in a cover up because they
feared for their lives?
It was easy to get the 3 prosectors and the radiologist to go along
with the scam. They were no doubt told it would help avert WW3 or some
other possible scenario. They wouldn't dare go against the orders and
find themselves in a federal prison.
It was only a matter of time before you played the WWIII card.

They would not have risked going to federal prison. Military people not
only have a right to refuse to obey an illegal order, they have a duty to
do so. They would have had a perfectly legal defense for refusing to
engage in a cover up by pointing out it would have been an obstruction of
justice. On the other hand, they would have risked criminal liability had
they obeyed an illegal order. That principle was established at the
Nuremberg trials.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years.
Much was done to make Oswald the 'patsy' so that the plotters could go
about their lives without fear.
That's what you have convinced yourself of, apparently not caring in the
least how ludicrous it is.
The evidence convinced me. Try it sometime.
It's hard to take you seriously when you say things like that. Of course
it's always hard to take you seriously.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
Yep, finally got something right!
Since the early evidence gathering was ALL conducted by local law
enforcement, you have now implicated them in the cover up. Are they among
your "30 on the back end"?
Don't try to speak for me, you haven't a clue what I think. I have
NOT implicated any local cops in the plot. They might take their lead
from the FBI, who got involved close to the beginning of the crime.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
There are sworn testimonies to much of the scam, and nowadays, some
people are coming out as part of the plot.
You mean like Loy Factor? <chuckle>
You'll believe anything.
Strangely enough, he is corroborated in what he says happened on the
6th floor. You of course, will try to pretend it didn't happen and the
WCR is true forever...or 99% anyway.
Collum and Sample are not corroborated and they are the source of this
story.
donald willis
2018-08-06 03:10:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that.
WRONG as usual! 20 people to begin and 30 on the back end, and those
numbers have not changed in years. And the 20 were part of the 30. The
typical gimmick of the LNs id to pretend that the numbers have to increase
to unmanageable levels, but they don't. Hoover had the FBI, who would do
whatever he wanted, and there was a good excuse related to WW3 to get them
to do what was wanted. They didn't have to be in on the plot.
Why don't you list those 20 people for us and the 30 people in the cover
up noting the overlap. Then we can see if you have left out any of the
people you have accused over the years.
I have not "accused" people over the years. I have "suspected" some
of them. The number 20 and 30 are estimates and not guarantees. I have
listed them for you and am surprised that you didn't copy them down and
save them forever. Here's a few: LBJ, Hoover, SS agents Rowley, Greer
and Kellerman, FBI agent Robert Frazier, Firearms expert. Which is not a
complete list. Save them this time.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President.
That's been answered many times and you're repeating yourself.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
The odds are that they looked for people that wanted JFK out of the
way, and there were plenty of them. And being in on the plot meant that
opening your mouth could get you killed quickly. However, there are some
people that only now are speaking out about having a hand in the killing.
Most people find the idea of assassinating a President to be abhorrent no
matter how much they hate him. Americans believe in using lawful
processes, i.e. elections to remove people from office they don't like. We
are not a banana republic. The people who would be willing to go along
with an assassination were few and far between so how would your plotters
find them out without exposing their own intentions.
Oh, stop, I'm getting misty! Birds of a feather flock together.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it?
Knock off the common LN crap. No one would talk in this case, their
life would be forfeit.
Preposterous. Preposterous that nobody would talk and preposterous that
your alleged plotters would count on nobody talking.
The proof is that it worked.
It didn't work too well. Oswald died two days later. He got away with
nothing.
Au contraire. The other plotters got away with it. Oswald was not
supposed to get away in the first place.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy.
By using a military hospital they avoided any problem with the
prosectors, who were given orders what to find.
So how many people from the military do you think you would need to have
involved to control the autopsy process. Do you think these military
people could be intimidated into engaging in a cover up because they
feared for their lives?
It was easy to get the 3 prosectors and the radiologist to go along
with the scam. They were no doubt told it would help avert WW3 or some
other possible scenario. They wouldn't dare go against the orders and
find themselves in a federal prison.
It was only a matter of time before you played the WWIII card.
They would not have risked going to federal prison. Military people not
only have a right to refuse to obey an illegal order, they have a duty to
do so. They would have had a perfectly legal defense for refusing to
engage in a cover up by pointing out it would have been an obstruction of
justice. On the other hand, they would have risked criminal liability had
they obeyed an illegal order. That principle was established at the
Nuremberg trials.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years.
Much was done to make Oswald the 'patsy' so that the plotters could go
about their lives without fear.
That's what you have convinced yourself of, apparently not caring in the
least how ludicrous it is.
The evidence convinced me. Try it sometime.
It's hard to take you seriously when you say things like that. Of course
it's always hard to take you seriously.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
Yep, finally got something right!
Since the early evidence gathering was ALL conducted by local law
enforcement, you have now implicated them in the cover up. Are they among
your "30 on the back end"?
Don't try to speak for me, you haven't a clue what I think. I have
NOT implicated any local cops in the plot. They might take their lead
from the FBI, who got involved close to the beginning of the crime.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
There are sworn testimonies to much of the scam, and nowadays, some
people are coming out as part of the plot.
You mean like Loy Factor? <chuckle>
You'll believe anything.
Strangely enough, he is corroborated in what he says happened on the
6th floor. You of course, will try to pretend it didn't happen and the
WCR is true forever...or 99% anyway.
Collum and Sample are not corroborated and they are the source of this
story.
bigdog
2018-08-07 04:39:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by donald willis
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
The proof is that it worked.
It didn't work too well. Oswald died two days later. He got away with
nothing.
Au contraire. The other plotters got away with it. Oswald was not
supposed to get away in the first place.
There is no evidence Oswald had even a single accomplice in the crime. You
can imagine all the nonsense you want and it won't change that simple
fact.
donald willis
2018-08-08 05:51:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by donald willis
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
The proof is that it worked.
It didn't work too well. Oswald died two days later. He got away with
nothing.
Au contraire. The other plotters got away with it. Oswald was not
supposed to get away in the first place.
There is no evidence Oswald had even a single accomplice in the crime. You
can imagine all the nonsense you want and it won't change that simple
fact.
Fritz picked up the shells. Why? In an affidavit, he could neither
confirm NOR DENY that he did. Fritz was an accomplice....
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-09 15:55:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by donald willis
Post by bigdog
Post by donald willis
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
The proof is that it worked.
It didn't work too well. Oswald died two days later. He got away with
nothing.
Au contraire. The other plotters got away with it. Oswald was not
supposed to get away in the first place.
There is no evidence Oswald had even a single accomplice in the crime. You
can imagine all the nonsense you want and it won't change that simple
fact.
Fritz picked up the shells. Why? In an affidavit, he could neither
confirm NOR DENY that he did. Fritz was an accomplice....
Why you ask? Because he was sloppy. Or he didn't know any better. Or he
was impatient thinking that he could catch the criminal before the crime
scene team even got there.
I call him Fritz the Klutz.
Who was the LA detective who took the vials of blood evidence home
instead of directly to the crime lab? Who is the guy who keeps stepping
in the blood at the crime scene and then walking to the suspect's house,
leaving behind a blood trail between the crime scene and the suspects's
house? Who was the numbskull who put the evidence on a display table so
they were all touching each other?
How many DPD fingerprints were left on the evidence?
If Fritz's fingerprints are on the rifle, that means that he was the
shooter, right?
Ace Kefford
2018-08-09 15:58:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by donald willis
Post by bigdog
Post by donald willis
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
The proof is that it worked.
It didn't work too well. Oswald died two days later. He got away with
nothing.
Au contraire. The other plotters got away with it. Oswald was not
supposed to get away in the first place.
There is no evidence Oswald had even a single accomplice in the crime. You
can imagine all the nonsense you want and it won't change that simple
fact.
Fritz picked up the shells. Why? In an affidavit, he could neither
confirm NOR DENY that he did. Fritz was an accomplice....
Right, and by picking up the shells (if he did) HOW did this help the
conspiracy?

Was he an amateur magician who then switched the "real" shells for the
"fake" ones that implicated Oswald? Of course it seems the planners might
have thought of that and done it before fleeing the scene. Was it because
the planted shells weren't in a realistic alignment? But again, why
didn't the shooting team think of that?

Typically ridiculous buff comment.

I'm sure you or another buff will come up with some strained story of how
this claim is important and how it fits into a multi-level elaborate
conspiracy involving dozens of people around that TSBD window evidence
(and to fit the buff's favored approach omits other evidence that proves
that conspiracy story didn't actually happen). Satisfy yourself with that
approach. I'll just stick with reality.
donald willis
2018-08-10 13:29:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ace Kefford
Post by donald willis
Post by bigdog
Post by donald willis
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
The proof is that it worked.
It didn't work too well. Oswald died two days later. He got away with
nothing.
Au contraire. The other plotters got away with it. Oswald was not
supposed to get away in the first place.
There is no evidence Oswald had even a single accomplice in the crime. You
can imagine all the nonsense you want and it won't change that simple
fact.
Fritz picked up the shells. Why? In an affidavit, he could neither
confirm NOR DENY that he did. Fritz was an accomplice....
Right, and by picking up the shells (if he did) HOW did this help the
conspiracy?
A short answer won't do. So, see below. To which I'll just add that to
make the sixth floor seem like it had been the shooting site, Fritz had to
pick up the shells on the FIFTH floor. That's how it helps. Three
witnesses to Fritz's act....


The Omnipresent Oswald

Lee Harvey Oswald seemed to be everywhere just after 12:30pm, Nov. 22,
1963. Depository front entrance (Harry Holmes, as per Oswald). Small
room on the ground floor (Ochus Campbell). First floor (reporter Kent
Biffle, as apparently per Roy Truly). First floor lunch room (Homicide
Capt. Fritz, as per Oswald). Second floor (Officer Marrion Baker &
Truly). Third or fourth floor (Baker's initial affidavit). Fourth floor
(DPD Det. Marvin Johnson, as per Baker, in the Homicide Bureau).

I have to vote for Johnson. (Although the Biffle-Truly connection is
still tantalizing.) If Baker and Truly did not run into Oswald before
reaching the fourth floor, then it follows that Oswald was in no hurry to
get out of the building, and he was supposed to have been. He was, after
all, an employee there. And--more importantly--he had assurances that he
could not be fingered. He was safe--or felt that he was safe.

The key: The baffling, pre-assassination antics of the sniper.
Witnesses Ron Fischer, Carolyn Walther, and Howard Brennan all described a
man behaving very strangely for someone who was about to shoot the
President. Fischer could even see his "sport shirt and slacks" and said
that he was "laying down there or in a funny position anyway"; Brennan
said that the man "sat sideways", at one point, "on the window sill"; Mrs.
Walther said that the man was "leaning out the window with both his hands
extended outside the window ledge". The shooter-in-waiting not only found
himself in the public eye--he seemed to seek it out. Why was he not,
instead, doing his best to conceal himself?

Answer: Because the Dallas Police would, a short time later, need an APB
re a slender white male. And they were not going to get a witness
description to that effect either during or immediately after the
shooting--when the gun could be pinpointed and gunfire could be
returned--when the man would all but disappear into the shadows. The APB
material would have to be gathered BEFORE the shooting. And it could come
from no one and nowhere else. Yes, the key to the assassination of
President Kennedy lay in the minute or two before the assassination. And
that minute or two of performance art betrays coordination, coordination
between this high-wire artist and, at least, the Dallas Police. No
performance, no Fischer, Walther, and Brennan, no basis for the APB, even
in retrospect.

Best to ignore the photos of the depository facade prepared expessly, I
maintain, for the Warren Commisson. Trust more to belatedly pubished
material like the Powell slide. And note, here, that Brennan (counsel
David Belin's star witness) testified that he did not see anyone in the
fifth-floor end window, the window which purported witness Harold Norman
was supposed to have occupied. The Powell reflects Brennan's testimony;
the Dillard telephoto shot does not. Then, note that, although Brennan
came to think that he saw the shooter on the sixth floor, he maintained
that that window was open wide, "just like the windows on the fifth floor,
immediately below". Fischer echoed Brennan when he testified that he
could not have seen as much of the man if the window were not fully open.

Norman's striking absence from the end window on the fifth floor--in
testimony (Brennan) photography (the Powell slide), and Norman's own
account (at least until the next Tuesday, Nov. 26th; before that, he seems
not to have made any statement at all about the fifth floor)--Norman's
absence leaves a vacancy. A suspect at a wide-open end window--described
in the respective testimonies of Brennan, Fischer, and Bob
Edwards--handily fills that vacancy.

It had to happen on the fifth floor. The man who was acting, before
12:30, like he hadn't a care in the world, could do so because he knew
that he was far enough above the crowd to avoid positive IDs, and because
any photograph taken of either him or his rifle would have to be
suppressed: The infamous "sniper's nest", on the sixth floor, would
absorb the world's attention. A photo of a rifle on the fifth floor would
have to be squelched, or there might seem to be TWO "sniper's nests".
The sniper's pre-12:30 antics in the window rule out the sixth floor--no
assurances there for a shooter, whose window-sill antics could have been
photographed, and the photographs published--no problem, at least for the
assassination organizers.

I find myself forced, finally, to reject all first-floor sightings of
Oswald circa 12:31. (If it could be proved that Truly was indeed Biffle's
source, I might have to reconsider.) All he had to do--in that
situation--in order to latch onto an alibi, was to step outside (as
maintained elsewhere) or maybe create a little scene, at 12:31, like he
did in Capt. Fritz's office, later. Or, rushing out, he might happen run
into a cop--or someone looking for a restroom--at the front door, rushing
in. In fact, the cop was apparently Oswald's alibi, as per Holmes. The
conspirators absolutely could not allow for such chance encounters.

In order, then, to be a perfect patsy, Oswald would also had to have been
the fifth-floor shooter, and model for the police apb. It was a
prerequisite.

In a near-surreal incident that day, Oswald all but admitted that he was
the assassin. But Warren Report believers and skeptics alike are
uncomfortable with the admission, because it offers much to both sides.
According to bus driver Cecil McWatters' same-day affidavit, at about
12:45, a man on his bus who resembled Oswald said that the "president was
shot in the temple". McWatters later recanted and named one Roy Milton
Jones as the man. However, Jones told the FBI that he was on a bus which
was boarded by police and held up for an hour--it was not McWatters' 12:45
bus, then, which he was on. In fact, Jones told the FBI that no one on
his bus said anything about anyone being "shot in the temple", while the
phrase was spoken at least twice on McWatters' bus, first by Oswald, then
by McWatters himself. Goodbye, Jones; hello, again, Oswald.

The "temple" speaker, then, was, after all, Oswald, whom McWatters ID'd in
a lineup 11/22/63. At 12:45, very few people could have said what he
said. But this incriminating witness evidence was also--in another part
of the forest--exculpating evidence: If Oswald was on McWatters' bus as
far as Marsalis, in Oak Cliff--and, in his affidavit, McWatters said that
he was--then he could not have gotten there in time to shoot Officer J.D.
Tippit. Guilty on one count, innocent on the other. Cold comfort for
skeptics and believers alike.

And I'll also add: If you don't think that the Dillard--showing TWO
"witnesses" on the fifth floor--is fake, then you must believe that the
Powell is fake: just one "witness": right?

dcw
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-11 21:55:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ace Kefford
Post by donald willis
Post by bigdog
Post by donald willis
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
The proof is that it worked.
It didn't work too well. Oswald died two days later. He got away with
nothing.
Au contraire. The other plotters got away with it. Oswald was not
supposed to get away in the first place.
There is no evidence Oswald had even a single accomplice in the crime. You
can imagine all the nonsense you want and it won't change that simple
fact.
Fritz picked up the shells. Why? In an affidavit, he could neither
confirm NOR DENY that he did. Fritz was an accomplice....
Right, and by picking up the shells (if he did) HOW did this help the
conspiracy?
Was he an amateur magician who then switched the "real" shells for the
"fake" ones that implicated Oswald? Of course it seems the planners might
have thought of that and done it before fleeing the scene. Was it because
the planted shells weren't in a realistic alignment? But again, why
didn't the shooting team think of that?
Typically ridiculous buff comment.
I'm sure you or another buff will come up with some strained story of how
this claim is important and how it fits into a multi-level elaborate
conspiracy involving dozens of people around that TSBD window evidence
(and to fit the buff's favored approach omits other evidence that proves
that conspiracy story didn't actually happen). Satisfy yourself with that
approach. I'll just stick with reality.
I think that their theory is that the shells they found were planted to
frame Oswald and his rifle wasn't even used. But instead someone else
used a better rifle. That theory quickly falls apart when you look at
the bullet recovered and the fragments clearly from a Carcano, Oswald's
Carcano.
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-08 23:00:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by donald willis
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
The proof is that it worked.
It didn't work too well. Oswald died two days later. He got away with
nothing.
Au contraire. The other plotters got away with it. Oswald was not
supposed to get away in the first place.
There is no evidence Oswald had even a single accomplice in the crime. You
can imagine all the nonsense you want and it won't change that simple
fact.
Then explain how Oswald could shoot JFK in the forehead from the front.
Jason Burke
2018-08-09 17:21:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by bigdog
    The proof is that it worked.
It didn't work too well. Oswald died two days later. He got away with
nothing.
Au contraire.  The other plotters got away with it.  Oswald was not
supposed to get away in the first place.
There is no evidence Oswald had even a single accomplice in the crime. You
can imagine all the nonsense you want and it won't change that simple
fact.
Then explain how Oswald could shoot JFK in the forehead from the front.
Wow. You *are* that desperate, Anthony Anthony.
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-11 21:55:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jason Burke
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by bigdog
?????? The proof is that it worked.
It didn't work too well. Oswald died two days later. He got away with
nothing.
Au contraire.?? The other plotters got away with it.?? Oswald was not
supposed to get away in the first place.
There is no evidence Oswald had even a single accomplice in the crime. You
can imagine all the nonsense you want and it won't change that simple
fact.
Then explain how Oswald could shoot JFK in the forehead from the front.
Wow. You *are* that desperate, Anthony Anthony.
FACTS
mainframetech
2018-08-07 04:49:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by donald willis
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that.
WRONG as usual! 20 people to begin and 30 on the back end, and those
numbers have not changed in years. And the 20 were part of the 30. The
typical gimmick of the LNs id to pretend that the numbers have to increase
to unmanageable levels, but they don't. Hoover had the FBI, who would do
whatever he wanted, and there was a good excuse related to WW3 to get them
to do what was wanted. They didn't have to be in on the plot.
Why don't you list those 20 people for us and the 30 people in the cover
up noting the overlap. Then we can see if you have left out any of the
people you have accused over the years.
I have not "accused" people over the years. I have "suspected" some
of them. The number 20 and 30 are estimates and not guarantees. I have
listed them for you and am surprised that you didn't copy them down and
save them forever. Here's a few: LBJ, Hoover, SS agents Rowley, Greer
and Kellerman, FBI agent Robert Frazier, Firearms expert. Which is not a
complete list. Save them this time.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President.
That's been answered many times and you're repeating yourself.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
The odds are that they looked for people that wanted JFK out of the
way, and there were plenty of them. And being in on the plot meant that
opening your mouth could get you killed quickly. However, there are some
people that only now are speaking out about having a hand in the killing.
Most people find the idea of assassinating a President to be abhorrent no
matter how much they hate him. Americans believe in using lawful
processes, i.e. elections to remove people from office they don't like. We
are not a banana republic. The people who would be willing to go along
with an assassination were few and far between so how would your plotters
find them out without exposing their own intentions.
Oh, stop, I'm getting misty! Birds of a feather flock together.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it?
Knock off the common LN crap. No one would talk in this case, their
life would be forfeit.
Preposterous. Preposterous that nobody would talk and preposterous that
your alleged plotters would count on nobody talking.
The proof is that it worked.
It didn't work too well. Oswald died two days later. He got away with
nothing.
Au contraire. The other plotters got away with it. Oswald was not
supposed to get away in the first place.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy.
By using a military hospital they avoided any problem with the
prosectors, who were given orders what to find.
So how many people from the military do you think you would need to have
involved to control the autopsy process. Do you think these military
people could be intimidated into engaging in a cover up because they
feared for their lives?
It was easy to get the 3 prosectors and the radiologist to go along
with the scam. They were no doubt told it would help avert WW3 or some
other possible scenario. They wouldn't dare go against the orders and
find themselves in a federal prison.
It was only a matter of time before you played the WWIII card.
They would not have risked going to federal prison. Military people not
only have a right to refuse to obey an illegal order, they have a duty to
do so. They would have had a perfectly legal defense for refusing to
engage in a cover up by pointing out it would have been an obstruction of
justice. On the other hand, they would have risked criminal liability had
they obeyed an illegal order. That principle was established at the
Nuremberg trials.
Oh, get off your high horse! While military people have a right to
refuse to execute an order that is illegal, expecting a commander (who is
really a little fellow as these things go) to dare to refuse an order that
just might be legitimate and ruin his career and get locked into a federal
prison is not so easy to chance.
Post by donald willis
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years.
Much was done to make Oswald the 'patsy' so that the plotters could go
about their lives without fear.
That's what you have convinced yourself of, apparently not caring in the
least how ludicrous it is.
The evidence convinced me. Try it sometime.
It's hard to take you seriously when you say things like that. Of course
it's always hard to take you seriously.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
Yep, finally got something right!
Since the early evidence gathering was ALL conducted by local law
enforcement, you have now implicated them in the cover up. Are they among
your "30 on the back end"?
Don't try to speak for me, you haven't a clue what I think. I have
NOT implicated any local cops in the plot. They might take their lead
from the FBI, who got involved close to the beginning of the crime.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
There are sworn testimonies to much of the scam, and nowadays, some
people are coming out as part of the plot.
You mean like Loy Factor? <chuckle>
You'll believe anything.
Strangely enough, he is corroborated in what he says happened on the
6th floor. You of course, will try to pretend it didn't happen and the
WCR is true forever...or 99% anyway.
Collum and Sample are not corroborated and they are the source of this
story.
WRONG! The source for this story was Lawrence Loy Factor. His words
about the 6th floor were corroborated by information from the book "The
Men that did Fit in" by Roderick Mackenzie III.

Chris
mainframetech
2018-08-06 04:13:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that.
WRONG as usual! 20 people to begin and 30 on the back end, and those
numbers have not changed in years. And the 20 were part of the 30. The
typical gimmick of the LNs id to pretend that the numbers have to increase
to unmanageable levels, but they don't. Hoover had the FBI, who would do
whatever he wanted, and there was a good excuse related to WW3 to get them
to do what was wanted. They didn't have to be in on the plot.
Why don't you list those 20 people for us and the 30 people in the cover
up noting the overlap. Then we can see if you have left out any of the
people you have accused over the years.
I have not "accused" people over the years. I have "suspected" some
of them. The number 20 and 30 are estimates and not guarantees. I have
listed them for you and am surprised that you didn't copy them down and
save them forever. Here's a few: LBJ, Hoover, SS agents Rowley, Greer
and Kellerman, FBI agent Robert Frazier, Firearms expert. Which is not a
complete list. Save them this time.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President.
That's been answered many times and you're repeating yourself.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
The odds are that they looked for people that wanted JFK out of the
way, and there were plenty of them. And being in on the plot meant that
opening your mouth could get you killed quickly. However, there are some
people that only now are speaking out about having a hand in the killing.
Most people find the idea of assassinating a President to be abhorrent no
matter how much they hate him. Americans believe in using lawful
processes, i.e. elections to remove people from office they don't like. We
are not a banana republic. The people who would be willing to go along
with an assassination were few and far between so how would your plotters
find them out without exposing their own intentions.
Oh, stop, I'm getting misty! Birds of a feather flock together.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it?
Knock off the common LN crap. No one would talk in this case, their
life would be forfeit.
Preposterous. Preposterous that nobody would talk and preposterous that
your alleged plotters would count on nobody talking.
The proof is that it worked.
It didn't work too well. Oswald died two days later. He got away with
nothing.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy.
By using a military hospital they avoided any problem with the
prosectors, who were given orders what to find.
So how many people from the military do you think you would need to have
involved to control the autopsy process. Do you think these military
people could be intimidated into engaging in a cover up because they
feared for their lives?
It was easy to get the 3 prosectors and the radiologist to go along
with the scam. They were no doubt told it would help avert WW3 or some
other possible scenario. They wouldn't dare go against the orders and
find themselves in a federal prison.
It was only a matter of time before you played the WWIII card.
So you were alive during that time. You didn't know that much of the
world was worried that Russia and the USA might get into nuclear war?
The worry was everywhere. Folks were digging bomb shelters.
Post by bigdog
They would not have risked going to federal prison. Military people not
only have a right to refuse to obey an illegal order, they have a duty to
do so. They would have had a perfectly legal defense for refusing to
engage in a cover up by pointing out it would have been an obstruction of
justice. On the other hand, they would have risked criminal liability had
they obeyed an illegal order. That principle was established at the
Nuremberg trials.
Oh Geez! When will you ever use your brain? Yes, the execution of an
illegal order would make that person guilty and have to do time.
However, an officer who knows that there are troubles with Russia and is
told that we need to cover up some of what happened so that there isn't a
riot of the public to attack Russia, will think twice about coming out and
refusing the orders. The penalty is big for not following orders, and
they had no way to know what was right or wrong, and taking a chance like
that to ruin their life from that point on, when they were near
retirement, just wasn't in the cards.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years.
Much was done to make Oswald the 'patsy' so that the plotters could go
about their lives without fear.
That's what you have convinced yourself of, apparently not caring in the
least how ludicrous it is.
The evidence convinced me. Try it sometime.
It's hard to take you seriously when you say things like that. Of course
it's always hard to take you seriously.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
Yep, finally got something right!
Since the early evidence gathering was ALL conducted by local law
enforcement, you have now implicated them in the cover up. Are they among
your "30 on the back end"?
Don't try to speak for me, you haven't a clue what I think. I have
NOT implicated any local cops in the plot. They might take their lead
from the FBI, who got involved close to the beginning of the crime.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
There are sworn testimonies to much of the scam, and nowadays, some
people are coming out as part of the plot.
You mean like Loy Factor? <chuckle>
You'll believe anything.
Strangely enough, he is corroborated in what he says happened on the
6th floor. You of course, will try to pretend it didn't happen and the
WCR is true forever...or 99% anyway.
Collum and Sample are not corroborated and they are the source of this
story.
WRONG! No, the source for the story was Lawrence Loy Factor. It was
told to Collum and Sample, who wrote it up and got it published. And the
events and persons in the 6th floor of the TSBD were corroborated in the
book "The Men that Didn't Fit in" by Roderick Mackenzie III

Chris
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-05 14:27:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that.
WRONG as usual! 20 people to begin and 30 on the back end, and those
numbers have not changed in years. And the 20 were part of the 30. The
typical gimmick of the LNs id to pretend that the numbers have to increase
to unmanageable levels, but they don't. Hoover had the FBI, who would do
whatever he wanted, and there was a good excuse related to WW3 to get them
to do what was wanted. They didn't have to be in on the plot.
Why don't you list those 20 people for us and the 30 people in the cover
up noting the overlap. Then we can see if you have left out any of the
people you have accused over the years.
I have not "accused" people over the years. I have "suspected" some
Mo dissent is allowed here.
Post by mainframetech
of them. The number 20 and 30 are estimates and not guarantees. I have
Only 20 or 30? You're not trying hard enough.
Post by mainframetech
listed them for you and am surprised that you didn't copy them down and
save them forever. Here's a few: LBJ, Hoover, SS agents Rowley, Greer
and Kellerman, FBI agent Robert Frazier, Firearms expert. Which is not a
complete list. Save them this time.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President.
That's been answered many times and you're repeating yourself.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
The odds are that they looked for people that wanted JFK out of the
way, and there were plenty of them. And being in on the plot meant that
opening your mouth could get you killed quickly. However, there are some
people that only now are speaking out about having a hand in the killing.
Most people find the idea of assassinating a President to be abhorrent no
matter how much they hate him. Americans believe in using lawful
processes, i.e. elections to remove people from office they don't like. We
are not a banana republic. The people who would be willing to go along
with an assassination were few and far between so how would your plotters
find them out without exposing their own intentions.
Oh, stop, I'm getting misty! Birds of a feather flock together.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it?
Knock off the common LN crap. No one would talk in this case, their
life would be forfeit.
Preposterous. Preposterous that nobody would talk and preposterous that
your alleged plotters would count on nobody talking.
The proof is that it worked.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy.
By using a military hospital they avoided any problem with the
prosectors, who were given orders what to find.
So how many people from the military do you think you would need to have
involved to control the autopsy process. Do you think these military
people could be intimidated into engaging in a cover up because they
feared for their lives?
It was easy to get the 3 prosectors and the radiologist to go along
with the scam. They were no doubt told it would help avert WW3 or some
other possible scenario. They wouldn't dare go against the orders and
find themselves in a federal prison.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years.
Much was done to make Oswald the 'patsy' so that the plotters could go
about their lives without fear.
That's what you have convinced yourself of, apparently not caring in the
least how ludicrous it is.
The evidence convinced me. Try it sometime.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
Yep, finally got something right!
Since the early evidence gathering was ALL conducted by local law
enforcement, you have now implicated them in the cover up. Are they among
your "30 on the back end"?
Don't try to speak for me, you haven't a clue what I think. I have
NOT implicated any local cops in the plot. They might take their lead
from the FBI, who got involved close to the beginning of the crime.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
There are sworn testimonies to much of the scam, and nowadays, some
people are coming out as part of the plot.
You mean like Loy Factor? <chuckle>
You'll believe anything.
Strangely enough, he is corroborated in what he says happened on the
6th floor. You of course, will try to pretend it didn't happen and the
WCR is true forever...or 99% anyway.
Chris
BT George
2018-08-10 15:25:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that.
WRONG as usual! 20 people to begin and 30 on the back end, and those
numbers have not changed in years. And the 20 were part of the 30. The
typical gimmick of the LNs id to pretend that the numbers have to increase
to unmanageable levels, but they don't. Hoover had the FBI, who would do
whatever he wanted, and there was a good excuse related to WW3 to get them
to do what was wanted. They didn't have to be in on the plot.
Why don't you list those 20 people for us and the 30 people in the cover
up noting the overlap. Then we can see if you have left out any of the
people you have accused over the years.
I have not "accused" people over the years. I have "suspected" some
of them. The number 20 and 30 are estimates and not guarantees. I have
listed them for you and am surprised that you didn't copy them down and
save them forever. Here's a few: LBJ, Hoover, SS agents Rowley, Greer
and Kellerman, FBI agent Robert Frazier, Firearms expert. Which is not a
complete list. Save them this time.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President.
That's been answered many times and you're repeating yourself.
Repeated evidence and logical arguments to the contrary has been shown to
you. It's never stopped you from repeating yourself.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
The odds are that they looked for people that wanted JFK out of the
way, and there were plenty of them. And being in on the plot meant that
opening your mouth could get you killed quickly. However, there are some
people that only now are speaking out about having a hand in the killing.
Most people find the idea of assassinating a President to be abhorrent no
matter how much they hate him. Americans believe in using lawful
processes, i.e. elections to remove people from office they don't like. We
are not a banana republic. The people who would be willing to go along
with an assassination were few and far between so how would your plotters
find them out without exposing their own intentions.
Oh, stop, I'm getting misty! Birds of a feather flock together.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it?
Knock off the common LN crap. No one would talk in this case, their
life would be forfeit.
Preposterous. Preposterous that nobody would talk and preposterous that
your alleged plotters would count on nobody talking.
The proof is that it worked.
Begging the question again.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy.
By using a military hospital they avoided any problem with the
prosectors, who were given orders what to find.
Sure. Happens every day. The Military higher ups take part in bumping
off the POTUS (or at least are aware and want it to go forward) and then
order unquesting underlings to *fake* evidence and *intentionally*
misstate things. And again, these underlings are being asked to do this
while working on the body of the former Commander in Chief of the Armed
Forces.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
So how many people from the military do you think you would need to have
involved to control the autopsy process. Do you think these military
people could be intimidated into engaging in a cover up because they
feared for their lives?
It was easy to get the 3 prosectors and the radiologist to go along
with the scam. They were no doubt told it would help avert WW3 or some
other possible scenario. They wouldn't dare go against the orders and
find themselves in a federal prison.
LOL! Yeah. I'm sure it would never occur to them the damage they could do
to anyone trying to imprison them simply by going public with the
information of who they were taking orders from, nor that that person
wouldn't want to go down alone and would start ratting out the rest of the
chain!
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years.
Much was done to make Oswald the 'patsy' so that the plotters could go
about their lives without fear.
That's what you have convinced yourself of, apparently not caring in the
least how ludicrous it is.
The evidence convinced me. Try it sometime.
In the words of .John "IRONY ALERT!"
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
Yep, finally got something right!
Which puts him infinitely ahead of you in mathematical terms.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Since the early evidence gathering was ALL conducted by local law
enforcement, you have now implicated them in the cover up. Are they among
your "30 on the back end"?
Don't try to speak for me, you haven't a clue what I think.
He's not alone.
Post by mainframetech
I have NOT implicated any local cops in the plot. They might take their lead
from the FBI, who got involved close to the beginning of the crime.
Yep. Lots of clueless people take clues in your plots.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
There are sworn testimonies to much of the scam, and nowadays, some
people are coming out as part of the plot.
You mean like Loy Factor? <chuckle>
You'll believe anything.
Strangely enough, he is corroborated in what he says happened on the
6th floor. You of course, will try to pretend it didn't happen and the
WCR is true forever...or 99% anyway.
Chris
Steve M. Galbraith
2018-08-03 13:53:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that.
WRONG as usual! 20 people to begin and 30 on the back end, and those
numbers have not changed in years. And the 20 wee part of the 30. The
typical gimmick of the LNs id to pretend that the numbers have to increase
to unmanageable levels, but they don't. Hoover had the FBI, who would do
whatever he wanted, and there was a good excuse related to WW3 to get them
to do what was wanted. They didn't have to be in on the plot.
Why don't you list those 20 people for us and the 30 people in the cover
up noting the overlap. Then we can see if you have left out any of the
people you have accused over the years.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President.
The odds are that they looked for people that wanted JFK out of the
way, and there were plenty of them. And being in on the plot meant that
opening your mouth could get you killed quickly. However, there are some
people that only now are speaking out about having a hand in the killing.
Most people find the idea of assassinating a President to be abhorrent no
matter how much they hate him. Americans believe in using lawful
processes, i.e. elections to remove people from office they don't like. We
are not a banana republic. The people who would be willing to go along
with an assassination were few and far between so how would your plotters
find them out without exposing their own intentions.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it?
Knock of the common LN crap. No one would talk in this case, their
life would be forfeit.
Preposterous. Preposterous that nobody would talk and preposterous that
your alleged plotters would count on nobody talking.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy.
By using a military hospital the avoided any problem with the
prosectors, who were given orders what to find.
So how many people from the military do you think you would need to have
involved to control the autopsy process. Do you think these military
people could be intimidated into engaging in a cover up because they
feared for their lives?
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years.
Much was done to make Oswald the 'patsy' so that the plotters could go
about their lives without fear.
That's what you have convinced yourself of, apparently not caring in the
least how ludicrous it is.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
Yep, finally got something right!
Since the early evidence gathering was ALL conducted by local law
enforcement, you have now implicated them in the cover up. Are they among
your "30 on the back end"?
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
There are sworn testimonies to much of the scam, and nowadays, some
people are coming out as par of the plot.
You mean like Loy Factor? <chuckle>
You'll believe anything.
The conspiracy advocates - those who think of a large "C" conspiracy - are
arguing that not only was their a coup that day but a secret one at that.
The coup was planned in secret, carried out in secret, and has been kept
secret for half a century.

There isn't a single coup in history that I am aware of that is remotely
comparable to what is alleged to have happened here. Coups are done
openly, the coup makers seize power in the open, usually seizing radio and
TV stations first to broadcast their actions. This alleged overthrow is
completely different; it was all done secretly? Is that even remotely
possible?

It's just absurd.
mainframetech
2018-08-04 02:50:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that.
WRONG as usual! 20 people to begin and 30 on the back end, and those
numbers have not changed in years. And the 20 wee part of the 30. The
typical gimmick of the LNs id to pretend that the numbers have to increase
to unmanageable levels, but they don't. Hoover had the FBI, who would do
whatever he wanted, and there was a good excuse related to WW3 to get them
to do what was wanted. They didn't have to be in on the plot.
Why don't you list those 20 people for us and the 30 people in the cover
up noting the overlap. Then we can see if you have left out any of the
people you have accused over the years.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President.
The odds are that they looked for people that wanted JFK out of the
way, and there were plenty of them. And being in on the plot meant that
opening your mouth could get you killed quickly. However, there are some
people that only now are speaking out about having a hand in the killing.
Most people find the idea of assassinating a President to be abhorrent no
matter how much they hate him. Americans believe in using lawful
processes, i.e. elections to remove people from office they don't like. We
are not a banana republic. The people who would be willing to go along
with an assassination were few and far between so how would your plotters
find them out without exposing their own intentions.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it?
Knock of the common LN crap. No one would talk in this case, their
life would be forfeit.
Preposterous. Preposterous that nobody would talk and preposterous that
your alleged plotters would count on nobody talking.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy.
By using a military hospital the avoided any problem with the
prosectors, who were given orders what to find.
So how many people from the military do you think you would need to have
involved to control the autopsy process. Do you think these military
people could be intimidated into engaging in a cover up because they
feared for their lives?
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years.
Much was done to make Oswald the 'patsy' so that the plotters could go
about their lives without fear.
That's what you have convinced yourself of, apparently not caring in the
least how ludicrous it is.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
Yep, finally got something right!
Since the early evidence gathering was ALL conducted by local law
enforcement, you have now implicated them in the cover up. Are they among
your "30 on the back end"?
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
There are sworn testimonies to much of the scam, and nowadays, some
people are coming out as par of the plot.
You mean like Loy Factor? <chuckle>
You'll believe anything.
The conspiracy advocates - those who think of a large "C" conspiracy - are
arguing that not only was their a coup that day but a secret one at that.
The coup was planned in secret, carried out in secret, and has been kept
secret for half a century.
There isn't a single coup in history that I am aware of that is remotely
comparable to what is alleged to have happened here. Coups are done
openly, the coup makers seize power in the open, usually seizing radio and
TV stations first to broadcast their actions. This alleged overthrow is
completely different; it was all done secretly? Is that even remotely
possible?
It's just absurd.
You've not considered the situations and their differences. The usual
coup is a takeover of the whole government, and new people running it.
The Kennedy killing was to keep the old government and simply change the
head of it. By keeping all the old ways and laws, the killers had to fit
into the old government form and fill positions in it. To do that, they
had to look innocent, and that meant blaming a 'patsy' who would be killed
soon after the murder of JFK.

Chris
bigdog
2018-08-05 03:38:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mainframetech
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
The conspiracy advocates - those who think of a large "C" conspiracy - are
arguing that not only was their a coup that day but a secret one at that.
The coup was planned in secret, carried out in secret, and has been kept
secret for half a century.
There isn't a single coup in history that I am aware of that is remotely
comparable to what is alleged to have happened here. Coups are done
openly, the coup makers seize power in the open, usually seizing radio and
TV stations first to broadcast their actions. This alleged overthrow is
completely different; it was all done secretly? Is that even remotely
possible?
It's just absurd.
You've not considered the situations and their differences. The usual
coup is a takeover of the whole government, and new people running it.
The Kennedy killing was to keep the old government and simply change the
head of it. By keeping all the old ways and laws, the killers had to fit
into the old government form and fill positions in it. To do that, they
had to look innocent, and that meant blaming a 'patsy' who would be killed
soon after the murder of JFK.
I suppose it would be pointless to ask you to supply evidence for any of
this.
mainframetech
2018-08-06 04:12:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
The conspiracy advocates - those who think of a large "C" conspiracy - are
arguing that not only was their a coup that day but a secret one at that.
The coup was planned in secret, carried out in secret, and has been kept
secret for half a century.
There isn't a single coup in history that I am aware of that is remotely
comparable to what is alleged to have happened here. Coups are done
openly, the coup makers seize power in the open, usually seizing radio and
TV stations first to broadcast their actions. This alleged overthrow is
completely different; it was all done secretly? Is that even remotely
possible?
It's just absurd.
You've not considered the situations and their differences. The usual
coup is a takeover of the whole government, and new people running it.
The Kennedy killing was to keep the old government and simply change the
head of it. By keeping all the old ways and laws, the killers had to fit
into the old government form and fill positions in it. To do that, they
had to look innocent, and that meant blaming a 'patsy' who would be killed
soon after the murder of JFK.
I suppose it would be pointless to ask you to supply evidence for any of
this.
I've supplied it for years, and to you as well. I'm not about to
duplicate all that work.

Chris
bigdog
2018-08-07 04:39:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
The conspiracy advocates - those who think of a large "C" conspiracy - are
arguing that not only was their a coup that day but a secret one at that.
The coup was planned in secret, carried out in secret, and has been kept
secret for half a century.
There isn't a single coup in history that I am aware of that is remotely
comparable to what is alleged to have happened here. Coups are done
openly, the coup makers seize power in the open, usually seizing radio and
TV stations first to broadcast their actions. This alleged overthrow is
completely different; it was all done secretly? Is that even remotely
possible?
It's just absurd.
You've not considered the situations and their differences. The usual
coup is a takeover of the whole government, and new people running it.
The Kennedy killing was to keep the old government and simply change the
head of it. By keeping all the old ways and laws, the killers had to fit
into the old government form and fill positions in it. To do that, they
had to look innocent, and that meant blaming a 'patsy' who would be killed
soon after the murder of JFK.
I suppose it would be pointless to ask you to supply evidence for any of
this.
I've supplied it for years, and to you as well. I'm not about to
duplicate all that work.
As I said, it was pointless asking you for evidence. It always is.
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-06 16:11:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
The conspiracy advocates - those who think of a large "C" conspiracy - are
arguing that not only was their a coup that day but a secret one at that.
The coup was planned in secret, carried out in secret, and has been kept
secret for half a century.
There isn't a single coup in history that I am aware of that is remotely
comparable to what is alleged to have happened here. Coups are done
openly, the coup makers seize power in the open, usually seizing radio and
TV stations first to broadcast their actions. This alleged overthrow is
completely different; it was all done secretly? Is that even remotely
possible?
It's just absurd.
You've not considered the situations and their differences. The usual
coup is a takeover of the whole government, and new people running it.
The Kennedy killing was to keep the old government and simply change the
head of it. By keeping all the old ways and laws, the killers had to fit
into the old government form and fill positions in it. To do that, they
had to look innocent, and that meant blaming a 'patsy' who would be killed
soon after the murder of JFK.
I suppose it would be pointless to ask you to supply evidence for any of
this.
It's also about changing the policies and direction of the government.
Such as changing a pullout frrom Vietnam into an escalation of the
Vietnam War. Billions of dollars at stake.
donald willis
2018-08-04 04:02:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that.
WRONG as usual! 20 people to begin and 30 on the back end, and those
numbers have not changed in years. And the 20 wee part of the 30. The
typical gimmick of the LNs id to pretend that the numbers have to increase
to unmanageable levels, but they don't. Hoover had the FBI, who would do
whatever he wanted, and there was a good excuse related to WW3 to get them
to do what was wanted. They didn't have to be in on the plot.
Why don't you list those 20 people for us and the 30 people in the cover
up noting the overlap. Then we can see if you have left out any of the
people you have accused over the years.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President.
The odds are that they looked for people that wanted JFK out of the
way, and there were plenty of them. And being in on the plot meant that
opening your mouth could get you killed quickly. However, there are some
people that only now are speaking out about having a hand in the killing.
Most people find the idea of assassinating a President to be abhorrent no
matter how much they hate him. Americans believe in using lawful
processes, i.e. elections to remove people from office they don't like. We
are not a banana republic. The people who would be willing to go along
with an assassination were few and far between so how would your plotters
find them out without exposing their own intentions.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it?
Knock of the common LN crap. No one would talk in this case, their
life would be forfeit.
Preposterous. Preposterous that nobody would talk and preposterous that
your alleged plotters would count on nobody talking.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy.
By using a military hospital the avoided any problem with the
prosectors, who were given orders what to find.
So how many people from the military do you think you would need to have
involved to control the autopsy process. Do you think these military
people could be intimidated into engaging in a cover up because they
feared for their lives?
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years.
Much was done to make Oswald the 'patsy' so that the plotters could go
about their lives without fear.
That's what you have convinced yourself of, apparently not caring in the
least how ludicrous it is.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
Yep, finally got something right!
Since the early evidence gathering was ALL conducted by local law
enforcement, you have now implicated them in the cover up. Are they among
your "30 on the back end"?
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
There are sworn testimonies to much of the scam, and nowadays, some
people are coming out as par of the plot.
You mean like Loy Factor? <chuckle>
You'll believe anything.
The conspiracy advocates - those who think of a large "C" conspiracy - are
arguing that not only was their a coup that day but a secret one at that.
The coup was planned in secret, carried out in secret, and has been kept
secret for half a century.
There isn't a single coup in history that I am aware of that is remotely
comparable to what is alleged to have happened here. Coups are done
openly, the coup makers seize power in the open, usually seizing radio and
TV stations first to broadcast their actions. This alleged overthrow is
completely different; it was all done secretly? Is that even remotely
possible?
It's just absurd.
No, it's simply UNIQUE. Actually, maybe not. If there have been OTHER
coups carried out secretly, we wouldn't know about them, would we?
mainframetech
2018-08-05 03:30:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by donald willis
Post by Steve M. Galbraith
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that.
WRONG as usual! 20 people to begin and 30 on the back end, and those
numbers have not changed in years. And the 20 wee part of the 30. The
typical gimmick of the LNs id to pretend that the numbers have to increase
to unmanageable levels, but they don't. Hoover had the FBI, who would do
whatever he wanted, and there was a good excuse related to WW3 to get them
to do what was wanted. They didn't have to be in on the plot.
Why don't you list those 20 people for us and the 30 people in the cover
up noting the overlap. Then we can see if you have left out any of the
people you have accused over the years.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President.
The odds are that they looked for people that wanted JFK out of the
way, and there were plenty of them. And being in on the plot meant that
opening your mouth could get you killed quickly. However, there are some
people that only now are speaking out about having a hand in the killing.
Most people find the idea of assassinating a President to be abhorrent no
matter how much they hate him. Americans believe in using lawful
processes, i.e. elections to remove people from office they don't like. We
are not a banana republic. The people who would be willing to go along
with an assassination were few and far between so how would your plotters
find them out without exposing their own intentions.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it?
Knock of the common LN crap. No one would talk in this case, their
life would be forfeit.
Preposterous. Preposterous that nobody would talk and preposterous that
your alleged plotters would count on nobody talking.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy.
By using a military hospital the avoided any problem with the
prosectors, who were given orders what to find.
So how many people from the military do you think you would need to have
involved to control the autopsy process. Do you think these military
people could be intimidated into engaging in a cover up because they
feared for their lives?
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years.
Much was done to make Oswald the 'patsy' so that the plotters could go
about their lives without fear.
That's what you have convinced yourself of, apparently not caring in the
least how ludicrous it is.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
Yep, finally got something right!
Since the early evidence gathering was ALL conducted by local law
enforcement, you have now implicated them in the cover up. Are they among
your "30 on the back end"?
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
There are sworn testimonies to much of the scam, and nowadays, some
people are coming out as par of the plot.
You mean like Loy Factor? <chuckle>
You'll believe anything.
The conspiracy advocates - those who think of a large "C" conspiracy - are
arguing that not only was their a coup that day but a secret one at that.
The coup was planned in secret, carried out in secret, and has been kept
secret for half a century.
There isn't a single coup in history that I am aware of that is remotely
comparable to what is alleged to have happened here. Coups are done
openly, the coup makers seize power in the open, usually seizing radio and
TV stations first to broadcast their actions. This alleged overthrow is
completely different; it was all done secretly? Is that even remotely
possible?
It's just absurd.
No, it's simply UNIQUE. Actually, maybe not. If there have been OTHER
coups carried out secretly, we wouldn't know about them, would we?
Good point. Just like hacking the vote counts, if no one was caught
and no one figured it out, then the crime didn't happen.

Chris
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-05 14:26:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that.
WRONG as usual! 20 people to begin and 30 on the back end, and those
numbers have not changed in years. And the 20 wee part of the 30. The
typical gimmick of the LNs id to pretend that the numbers have to increase
to unmanageable levels, but they don't. Hoover had the FBI, who would do
whatever he wanted, and there was a good excuse related to WW3 to get them
to do what was wanted. They didn't have to be in on the plot.
Why don't you list those 20 people for us and the 30 people in the cover
up noting the overlap. Then we can see if you have left out any of the
people you have accused over the years.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President.
The odds are that they looked for people that wanted JFK out of the
way, and there were plenty of them. And being in on the plot meant that
opening your mouth could get you killed quickly. However, there are some
people that only now are speaking out about having a hand in the killing.
Most people find the idea of assassinating a President to be abhorrent no
matter how much they hate him. Americans believe in using lawful
processes, i.e. elections to remove people from office they don't like. We
are not a banana republic. The people who would be willing to go along
with an assassination were few and far between so how would your plotters
find them out without exposing their own intentions.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it?
Knock of the common LN crap. No one would talk in this case, their
life would be forfeit.
Preposterous. Preposterous that nobody would talk and preposterous that
your alleged plotters would count on nobody talking.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy.
By using a military hospital the avoided any problem with the
prosectors, who were given orders what to find.
So how many people from the military do you think you would need to have
involved to control the autopsy process. Do you think these military
people could be intimidated into engaging in a cover up because they
feared for their lives?
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years.
Much was done to make Oswald the 'patsy' so that the plotters could go
about their lives without fear.
That's what you have convinced yourself of, apparently not caring in the
least how ludicrous it is.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
Yep, finally got something right!
Since the early evidence gathering was ALL conducted by local law
enforcement, you have now implicated them in the cover up. Are they among
your "30 on the back end"?
As I said before, much more is explained by incompetence rather than
conspiracy. Did someone pay Greer to slow down?
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
There are sworn testimonies to much of the scam, and nowadays, some
people are coming out as par of the plot.
You mean like Loy Factor? <chuckle>
You'll believe anything.
Mark
2018-08-02 02:01:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that. Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President. And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it? You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy. Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years. Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
A really fine, unanswerable, post. Mark
mainframetech
2018-08-03 02:37:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mark
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that. Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President. And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it? You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy. Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years. Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
A really fine, unanswerable, post. Mark
Well, bd's posts are always easily answerable.

Chris
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-05 14:27:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mark
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that. Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President. And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it? You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy. Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years. Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
A really fine, unanswerable, post. Mark
Make sure you don't break your arm patting yourself on the back.
Mark
2018-08-15 15:39:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that. Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President. And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it? You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy. Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years. Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
A really fine, unanswerable, post. Mark
Make sure you don't break your arm patting yourself on the back.
I wasn't referring to what I wrote. I was referring to what David
Emerling posted. Oh never mind. As Felix Unger said to Oscar Madison:
"Tony, Tony, Tony."

Mark
Mark
2018-08-16 02:39:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mark
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
Post by bigdog
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Of course it is far fetched. The idea of assassinating a sitting President
is abhorrent to almost all Americans and to think you could get all the
people needed on board to first carry out the assassination and then
conceal who the true assassins were is a preposterous one. Let's say it
started with a small group of plotters. Doesn't matter if they were inside
the government or not. Now they have to marshal scores of people to set
JFK up for the kill and then control the evidence afterward. How do you go
about doing that. Do you get all these people to agree to go along with it
before hand? How do you do that without the near certainty that at least
one of those people is not going to go along and now you've exposed your
intentions. That one person is not going to just remain quiet if he has
been told that someone is going to assassinate the President. And of
course, there would be a lot more than one person balking at the idea and
therefore blowing the whistle. So let's say this small group of plotters
decides to go ahead on their on and they manage to carry out the
assassination by themselves. That's plausible. But now how do you carry
out the cover up? How do you know that you are going to get so many people
from so many different entities to agree to carry out this cover up and
then keep quiet about it? You've identified the local law enforcement
involved in the initial evidence gathering. You then need the Secret
Service which was at the time under the Treasury Department. The FBI which
was under the Justice Department which was headed by the President's
brother. You need the military on board because they were the ones that
conducted that autopsy. Lastly, the WC utilized other crime labs to get
confirmation of the FBI findings on the fingerprint and ballistic
evidence. All of these various entities returned findings that indicated
Oswald was the assassin. Does anyone think you could get all those folks
onboard after their President has been assassinated and then keep quiet
about it all these years. Does anyone think these alleged plotters would
have counted on such a thing. Also keep in mind that the evidence
gathering began almost immediately so the cover up would have to begin
immediately as well.
The wild card answer the CTs invariably fall back on is that all these
people were willing to go along with the cover up to prevent WWIII. The
only way that argument makes any sense is if the Soviets or the Cubans
were behind the assassination and even then it is pretty lame. Suppose
that were true. Why would all these people maintain their silence about
the cover up for all these years. The Soviet Union and Iron Curtain began
crumbling about 30 years ago. Would anyone think that continuing the cover
up was still necessary to prevent WWIII. Like all things with JFK
conspiracy theories, this makes no sense but they will still cling to this
because it's all they really have.
A really fine, unanswerable, post. Mark
Make sure you don't break your arm patting yourself on the back.
I wasn't referring to what I wrote. I was referring to what David
"Tony, Tony, Tony."
Mark
Make that what BD posted. Mark
donald willis
2018-07-30 21:31:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnso
Thank you for listing these two. In their first statements, neither
mentioned seeing shells in the "nest", though one of them was detailed to
guard the latter. Neither mentions hearing about the discovery of the
rifle, though it was discovered while they were on the 6th floor. The
deputies that found it mention shouting & commotion. Yet Montgomery &
Johnson did not mention any shouting or rifle in their original
statements. They are two of the best witnesses for "faked"....

n, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Sawyer
Sawyer, rather famously, said he got only as high as the fifth floor! He
should not be on any 6th-floor list....


, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill

News photog Tom Alyea has said that Hill was not present at the finding of
the shells.

, J.C. Day, Robert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
Yes, Haygood testified that he saw the shells in the "nest". However, for
the HSCA, he catalogued the several items which he saw there, and he
mentioned everything BUT the shells! You'd think something like that--if
you really saw them--would stick in your memory.
Post by n***@gmail.com
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
And a guy from a third department, the ATF, said the rifle was found on a
floor lower than the 6th! I think his name was Frank Ellsworth.

dcw
n***@gmail.com
2018-08-01 03:37:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnso
Thank you for listing these two. In their first statements, neither
mentioned seeing shells in the "nest", though one of them was detailed to
guard the latter. Neither mentions hearing about the discovery of the
rifle, though it was discovered while they were on the 6th floor. The
deputies that found it mention shouting & commotion. Yet Montgomery &
Johnson did not mention any shouting or rifle in their original
statements. They are two of the best witnesses for "faked"....
Okay . . . And how does their not mentioning something that others did
turn into evidence that they purposely faked it?
Post by donald willis
n, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Sawyer
Sawyer, rather famously, said he got only as high as the fifth floor! He
should not be on any 6th-floor list....
Glad you take Sawyer's word for something. In that case, he shouldn't be
on the list. Thank you.
Post by donald willis
, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill
News photog Tom Alyea has said that Hill was not present at the finding of
the shells.
So what. You're missing the point. He was on the 6th floor at some time
and no doubt was, then or later, aware of the evidence the DPD found
there, including the shells. So I'm not sure what your point is. I mean,
did he ever deny that the shells were found on the 6th floor?
Post by donald willis
, J.C. Day, Robert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
Yes, Haygood testified that he saw the shells in the "nest". However, for
the HSCA, he catalogued the several items which he saw there, and he
mentioned everything BUT the shells! You'd think something like that--if
you really saw them--would stick in your memory.
So "he cataloged the several items which he saw there" but because he didn't mention the shells he . . . I not sure where you want to go with that one. Sounds like he just might have made a mistake. Did he ever deny the shells were found on the 6th floor?
Post by n***@gmail.com
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
And a guy from a third department, the ATF, said the rifle was found on a
floor lower than the 6th! I think his name was Frank Ellsworth.
I'll be damned. Stop the presses! Frank Ellsworth got the floor number wrong. Did he ever subsequently deny the rifle was found on the 6th floor?
Donald, if you were a farmer, I'm thinking you would throw away the
wheat and harvest the chaff.

Anyway, on which side of the ledger should I put these Felonious Cops
who faked the 6th floor evidence, the Conspiracy side or the Cover-up
side?

Mark
donald willis
2018-08-02 02:14:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnso
Thank you for listing these two. In their first statements, neither
mentioned seeing shells in the "nest", though one of them was detailed to
guard the latter. Neither mentions hearing about the discovery of the
rifle, though it was discovered while they were on the 6th floor. The
deputies that found it mention shouting & commotion. Yet Montgomery &
Johnson did not mention any shouting or rifle in their original
statements. They are two of the best witnesses for "faked"....
Okay . . . And how does their not mentioning something that others did
turn into evidence that they purposely faked it?
I didn't mean to imply that THEY faked anything. They simply reported
what they saw and heard, and they saw & heard NOTHING re shells or rifles,
while they were on the 6th floor.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
n, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Sawyer
Sawyer, rather famously, said he got only as high as the fifth floor! He
should not be on any 6th-floor list....
Glad you take Sawyer's word for something. In that case, he shouldn't be
on the list. Thank you.
You're welcome.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill
News photog Tom Alyea has said that Hill was not present at the finding of
the shells.
So what. You're missing the point. He was on the 6th floor at some time
and no doubt was, then or later, aware of the evidence the DPD found
there, including the shells. So I'm not sure what your point is. I mean,
did he ever deny that the shells were found on the 6th floor?
No.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
, J.C. Day, Robert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
Yes, Haygood testified that he saw the shells in the "nest". However, for
the HSCA, he catalogued the several items which he saw there, and he
mentioned everything BUT the shells! You'd think something like that--if
you really saw them--would stick in your memory.
So "he cataloged the several items which he saw there" but because he didn't mention the shells he . . . I not sure where you want to go with that one. Sounds like he just might have made a mistake. Did he ever deny the shells were found on the 6th floor?
He didn't see them. He saw (as per his HSCA testimony)--on the sixth
floor--"cardboard boxes stacked, chicken bones and a soda bottle". JFK
was not killed with boxes, bones, or a bottle. Apparently, at the time
that Haygood got to the "nest" area, Fritz had not yet put down the hulls
there, or rather (if you trust Alyea) had Studebaker put them down.

I think you'd agree that shells would be more significant--more
memorable--than "chicken bones"....

Haygood could not have known where the shells were found, not from
personal knowledge....
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
And a guy from a third department, the ATF, said the rifle was found on a
floor lower than the 6th! I think his name was Frank Ellsworth.
I'll be damned. Stop the presses! Frank Ellsworth got the floor number wrong. Did he ever subsequently deny the rifle was found on the 6th floor?
I don't have a record of him ever saying that it was found on the 6th
floor.

Actually, Ellsworth syncs with Johnson & Montgomery, who heard nothing re
a rifle being found about 1:20 (Weitzman's timing) on the 6TH floor....
And by "synchs" I mean that all three, explicitly or implicitly, rule out
the 6th floor....
Post by n***@gmail.com
Donald, if you were a farmer, I'm thinking you would throw away the
wheat and harvest the chaff.
Anyway, on which side of the ledger should I put these Felonious Cops
who faked the 6th floor evidence, the Conspiracy side or the Cover-up
side?
Fritz is the one who "faked" it, and he goes under Conspiracy....

dcw
Mark
2018-08-04 02:43:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnso
Thank you for listing these two. In their first statements, neither
mentioned seeing shells in the "nest", though one of them was detailed to
guard the latter. Neither mentions hearing about the discovery of the
rifle, though it was discovered while they were on the 6th floor. The
deputies that found it mention shouting & commotion. Yet Montgomery &
Johnson did not mention any shouting or rifle in their original
statements. They are two of the best witnesses for "faked"....
Okay . . . And how does their not mentioning something that others did
turn into evidence that they purposely faked it?
I didn't mean to imply that THEY faked anything. They simply reported
what they saw and heard, and they saw & heard NOTHING re shells or rifles,
while they were on the 6th floor.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
n, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Sawyer
Sawyer, rather famously, said he got only as high as the fifth floor! He
should not be on any 6th-floor list....
Glad you take Sawyer's word for something. In that case, he shouldn't be
on the list. Thank you.
You're welcome.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill
News photog Tom Alyea has said that Hill was not present at the finding of
the shells.
So what. You're missing the point. He was on the 6th floor at some time
and no doubt was, then or later, aware of the evidence the DPD found
there, including the shells. So I'm not sure what your point is. I mean,
did he ever deny that the shells were found on the 6th floor?
No.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
, J.C. Day, Robert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
Yes, Haygood testified that he saw the shells in the "nest". However, for
the HSCA, he catalogued the several items which he saw there, and he
mentioned everything BUT the shells! You'd think something like that--if
you really saw them--would stick in your memory.
So "he cataloged the several items which he saw there" but because he didn't mention the shells he . . . I not sure where you want to go with that one. Sounds like he just might have made a mistake. Did he ever deny the shells were found on the 6th floor?
He didn't see them. He saw (as per his HSCA testimony)--on the sixth
floor--"cardboard boxes stacked, chicken bones and a soda bottle". JFK
was not killed with boxes, bones, or a bottle. Apparently, at the time
that Haygood got to the "nest" area, Fritz had not yet put down the hulls
there, or rather (if you trust Alyea) had Studebaker put them down.
I think you'd agree that shells would be more significant--more
memorable--than "chicken bones"....
Haygood could not have known where the shells were found, not from
personal knowledge....
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
And a guy from a third department, the ATF, said the rifle was found on a
floor lower than the 6th! I think his name was Frank Ellsworth.
I'll be damned. Stop the presses! Frank Ellsworth got the floor number wrong. Did he ever subsequently deny the rifle was found on the 6th floor?
I don't have a record of him ever saying that it was found on the 6th
floor.
Actually, Ellsworth syncs with Johnson & Montgomery, who heard nothing re
a rifle being found about 1:20 (Weitzman's timing) on the 6TH floor....
And by "synchs" I mean that all three, explicitly or implicitly, rule out
the 6th floor....
Post by n***@gmail.com
Donald, if you were a farmer, I'm thinking you would throw away the
wheat and harvest the chaff.
Anyway, on which side of the ledger should I put these Felonious Cops
who faked the 6th floor evidence, the Conspiracy side or the Cover-up
side?
Fritz is the one who "faked" it, and he goes under Conspiracy....
dcw
Where do the other 15 fit in? Mark
donald willis
2018-08-05 03:09:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mark
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnso
Thank you for listing these two. In their first statements, neither
mentioned seeing shells in the "nest", though one of them was detailed to
guard the latter. Neither mentions hearing about the discovery of the
rifle, though it was discovered while they were on the 6th floor. The
deputies that found it mention shouting & commotion. Yet Montgomery &
Johnson did not mention any shouting or rifle in their original
statements. They are two of the best witnesses for "faked"....
Okay . . . And how does their not mentioning something that others did
turn into evidence that they purposely faked it?
I didn't mean to imply that THEY faked anything. They simply reported
what they saw and heard, and they saw & heard NOTHING re shells or rifles,
while they were on the 6th floor.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
n, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Sawyer
Sawyer, rather famously, said he got only as high as the fifth floor! He
should not be on any 6th-floor list....
Glad you take Sawyer's word for something. In that case, he shouldn't be
on the list. Thank you.
You're welcome.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill
News photog Tom Alyea has said that Hill was not present at the finding of
the shells.
So what. You're missing the point. He was on the 6th floor at some time
and no doubt was, then or later, aware of the evidence the DPD found
there, including the shells. So I'm not sure what your point is. I mean,
did he ever deny that the shells were found on the 6th floor?
No.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
, J.C. Day, Robert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
Yes, Haygood testified that he saw the shells in the "nest". However, for
the HSCA, he catalogued the several items which he saw there, and he
mentioned everything BUT the shells! You'd think something like that--if
you really saw them--would stick in your memory.
So "he cataloged the several items which he saw there" but because he didn't mention the shells he . . . I not sure where you want to go with that one. Sounds like he just might have made a mistake. Did he ever deny the shells were found on the 6th floor?
He didn't see them. He saw (as per his HSCA testimony)--on the sixth
floor--"cardboard boxes stacked, chicken bones and a soda bottle". JFK
was not killed with boxes, bones, or a bottle. Apparently, at the time
that Haygood got to the "nest" area, Fritz had not yet put down the hulls
there, or rather (if you trust Alyea) had Studebaker put them down.
I think you'd agree that shells would be more significant--more
memorable--than "chicken bones"....
Haygood could not have known where the shells were found, not from
personal knowledge....
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
And a guy from a third department, the ATF, said the rifle was found on a
floor lower than the 6th! I think his name was Frank Ellsworth.
I'll be damned. Stop the presses! Frank Ellsworth got the floor number wrong. Did he ever subsequently deny the rifle was found on the 6th floor?
I don't have a record of him ever saying that it was found on the 6th
floor.
Actually, Ellsworth syncs with Johnson & Montgomery, who heard nothing re
a rifle being found about 1:20 (Weitzman's timing) on the 6TH floor....
And by "synchs" I mean that all three, explicitly or implicitly, rule out
the 6th floor....
Post by n***@gmail.com
Donald, if you were a farmer, I'm thinking you would throw away the
wheat and harvest the chaff.
Anyway, on which side of the ledger should I put these Felonious Cops
who faked the 6th floor evidence, the Conspiracy side or the Cover-up
side?
Fritz is the one who "faked" it, and he goes under Conspiracy....
dcw
Where do the other 15 fit in? Mark
I had to copy your list for reference:

DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT

Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood


DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE

Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster

I believe that Sawyer's "suspect description" was phony, but I don't know if he knew what it was for, so I might categorize him as CONSPIRACY?? Or maybe not even that since he didn't even know that the perp was in the depository! COVER-UP, though, since he went along with Henslee's phony transcription.

Sims & Boyd were Fritz's Homicide puppets, so they were in on the COVER-UP with their boss. But there was no need for them to know anything ahead of time. Luke Mooney, too: COVER-UP. I think he testified that Vickery & Webster were with him, but I don't remember their making statements or testifying, so ??? Montgomery & Johnson's initial statements rules them out as conspirators. Doesn't everyone agree that Weitzman simply made a mistake? Gerald Hill: COVER-UP, but not the sharpest pin in the cushion: He said at one point (if I recall correctly) that Benavides found THREE shells, and he later admitted he covered up his role in the discovery of the shells. So he was also a CONFESSOR to the COVER-UP.

It has been too long since I looked at the Day story, but I did some articles on him 20 years ago here, if you want to ransack the archives. If you do, I'll go along with whatever you want to label him, or have me label him....

Studebaker: cover-up, if Alyea's story is true, that Fritz gave the shells to Studebaker to put in the "nest". But I doubt it's true. So, neither C-U nor C, at least as regards planting of shells.... Brewer: COVER-UP. Henslee gave him a message or two of Patrolman Hill's in his transcription of the radio logs, & Brewer testified that they were in fact his, when in fact they were not. (See Sgt. Bowles' transcription in JFK First-Day Evidence.) Haygood: COVER-UP, similar to Brewer.

So, you can scratch several of your 15. Then pencil in Henslee, COVER-UP. And I think you left out a few deputy sheriffs, who said that there were remains of chicken in and/or around the "nest". (COVER-UP) Studebaker & Alyea both pooh-poohed that factoid. The chicken was found elsewhere, along with the shells.* I think Harry Weatherford was one of the deputies, along with Mooney and... I forget.

*In fact, Sawyer reported this from the fifth floor, so he was definitely not in the know re the conspiracy! He almost gave away the whole game, until he joined the COVER-UP, at the hearings....

Well, you asked.

dcw
Mark
2018-08-07 04:50:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by Mark
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnso
Thank you for listing these two. In their first statements, neither
mentioned seeing shells in the "nest", though one of them was detailed to
guard the latter. Neither mentions hearing about the discovery of the
rifle, though it was discovered while they were on the 6th floor. The
deputies that found it mention shouting & commotion. Yet Montgomery &
Johnson did not mention any shouting or rifle in their original
statements. They are two of the best witnesses for "faked"....
Okay . . . And how does their not mentioning something that others did
turn into evidence that they purposely faked it?
I didn't mean to imply that THEY faked anything. They simply reported
what they saw and heard, and they saw & heard NOTHING re shells or rifles,
while they were on the 6th floor.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
n, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Sawyer
Sawyer, rather famously, said he got only as high as the fifth floor! He
should not be on any 6th-floor list....
Glad you take Sawyer's word for something. In that case, he shouldn't be
on the list. Thank you.
You're welcome.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill
News photog Tom Alyea has said that Hill was not present at the finding of
the shells.
So what. You're missing the point. He was on the 6th floor at some time
and no doubt was, then or later, aware of the evidence the DPD found
there, including the shells. So I'm not sure what your point is. I mean,
did he ever deny that the shells were found on the 6th floor?
No.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
, J.C. Day, Robert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
Yes, Haygood testified that he saw the shells in the "nest". However, for
the HSCA, he catalogued the several items which he saw there, and he
mentioned everything BUT the shells! You'd think something like that--if
you really saw them--would stick in your memory.
So "he cataloged the several items which he saw there" but because he didn't mention the shells he . . . I not sure where you want to go with that one. Sounds like he just might have made a mistake. Did he ever deny the shells were found on the 6th floor?
He didn't see them. He saw (as per his HSCA testimony)--on the sixth
floor--"cardboard boxes stacked, chicken bones and a soda bottle". JFK
was not killed with boxes, bones, or a bottle. Apparently, at the time
that Haygood got to the "nest" area, Fritz had not yet put down the hulls
there, or rather (if you trust Alyea) had Studebaker put them down.
I think you'd agree that shells would be more significant--more
memorable--than "chicken bones"....
Haygood could not have known where the shells were found, not from
personal knowledge....
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
And a guy from a third department, the ATF, said the rifle was found on a
floor lower than the 6th! I think his name was Frank Ellsworth.
I'll be damned. Stop the presses! Frank Ellsworth got the floor number wrong. Did he ever subsequently deny the rifle was found on the 6th floor?
I don't have a record of him ever saying that it was found on the 6th
floor.
Actually, Ellsworth syncs with Johnson & Montgomery, who heard nothing re
a rifle being found about 1:20 (Weitzman's timing) on the 6TH floor....
And by "synchs" I mean that all three, explicitly or implicitly, rule out
the 6th floor....
Post by n***@gmail.com
Donald, if you were a farmer, I'm thinking you would throw away the
wheat and harvest the chaff.
Anyway, on which side of the ledger should I put these Felonious Cops
who faked the 6th floor evidence, the Conspiracy side or the Cover-up
side?
Fritz is the one who "faked" it, and he goes under Conspiracy....
dcw
Where do the other 15 fit in? Mark
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
I believe that Sawyer's "suspect description" was phony, but I don't know if he knew what it was for, so I might categorize him as CONSPIRACY?? Or maybe not even that since he didn't even know that the perp was in the depository! COVER-UP, though, since he went along with Henslee's phony transcription.
Sims & Boyd were Fritz's Homicide puppets, so they were in on the COVER-UP with their boss. But there was no need for them to know anything ahead of time. Luke Mooney, too: COVER-UP. I think he testified that Vickery & Webster were with him, but I don't remember their making statements or testifying, so ??? Montgomery & Johnson's initial statements rules them out as conspirators. Doesn't everyone agree that Weitzman simply made a mistake? Gerald Hill: COVER-UP, but not the sharpest pin in the cushion: He said at one point (if I recall correctly) that Benavides found THREE shells, and he later admitted he covered up his role in the discovery of the shells. So he was also a CONFESSOR to the COVER-UP.
It has been too long since I looked at the Day story, but I did some articles on him 20 years ago here, if you want to ransack the archives. If you do, I'll go along with whatever you want to label him, or have me label him....
Studebaker: cover-up, if Alyea's story is true, that Fritz gave the shells to Studebaker to put in the "nest". But I doubt it's true. So, neither C-U nor C, at least as regards planting of shells.... Brewer: COVER-UP. Henslee gave him a message or two of Patrolman Hill's in his transcription of the radio logs, & Brewer testified that they were in fact his, when in fact they were not. (See Sgt. Bowles' transcription in JFK First-Day Evidence.) Haygood: COVER-UP, similar to Brewer.
So, you can scratch several of your 15. Then pencil in Henslee, COVER-UP. And I think you left out a few deputy sheriffs, who said that there were remains of chicken in and/or around the "nest". (COVER-UP) Studebaker & Alyea both pooh-poohed that factoid. The chicken was found elsewhere, along with the shells.* I think Harry Weatherford was one of the deputies, along with Mooney and... I forget.
*In fact, Sawyer reported this from the fifth floor, so he was definitely not in the know re the conspiracy! He almost gave away the whole game, until he joined the COVER-UP, at the hearings....
Well, you asked.
I did. That's an awful lot of actors. Again, I marvel that you think their secrets could be kept for close to 55 years.
What if one of them had refused to lie and cooperate in the cover-up of
the murder of a POTUS?

Mark
donald willis
2018-08-08 22:59:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mark
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by Mark
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnso
Thank you for listing these two. In their first statements, neither
mentioned seeing shells in the "nest", though one of them was detailed to
guard the latter. Neither mentions hearing about the discovery of the
rifle, though it was discovered while they were on the 6th floor. The
deputies that found it mention shouting & commotion. Yet Montgomery &
Johnson did not mention any shouting or rifle in their original
statements. They are two of the best witnesses for "faked"....
Okay . . . And how does their not mentioning something that others did
turn into evidence that they purposely faked it?
I didn't mean to imply that THEY faked anything. They simply reported
what they saw and heard, and they saw & heard NOTHING re shells or rifles,
while they were on the 6th floor.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
n, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Sawyer
Sawyer, rather famously, said he got only as high as the fifth floor! He
should not be on any 6th-floor list....
Glad you take Sawyer's word for something. In that case, he shouldn't be
on the list. Thank you.
You're welcome.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill
News photog Tom Alyea has said that Hill was not present at the finding of
the shells.
So what. You're missing the point. He was on the 6th floor at some time
and no doubt was, then or later, aware of the evidence the DPD found
there, including the shells. So I'm not sure what your point is. I mean,
did he ever deny that the shells were found on the 6th floor?
No.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
, J.C. Day, Robert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
Yes, Haygood testified that he saw the shells in the "nest". However, for
the HSCA, he catalogued the several items which he saw there, and he
mentioned everything BUT the shells! You'd think something like that--if
you really saw them--would stick in your memory.
So "he cataloged the several items which he saw there" but because he didn't mention the shells he . . . I not sure where you want to go with that one. Sounds like he just might have made a mistake. Did he ever deny the shells were found on the 6th floor?
He didn't see them. He saw (as per his HSCA testimony)--on the sixth
floor--"cardboard boxes stacked, chicken bones and a soda bottle". JFK
was not killed with boxes, bones, or a bottle. Apparently, at the time
that Haygood got to the "nest" area, Fritz had not yet put down the hulls
there, or rather (if you trust Alyea) had Studebaker put them down.
I think you'd agree that shells would be more significant--more
memorable--than "chicken bones"....
Haygood could not have known where the shells were found, not from
personal knowledge....
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
And a guy from a third department, the ATF, said the rifle was found on a
floor lower than the 6th! I think his name was Frank Ellsworth.
I'll be damned. Stop the presses! Frank Ellsworth got the floor number wrong. Did he ever subsequently deny the rifle was found on the 6th floor?
I don't have a record of him ever saying that it was found on the 6th
floor.
Actually, Ellsworth syncs with Johnson & Montgomery, who heard nothing re
a rifle being found about 1:20 (Weitzman's timing) on the 6TH floor....
And by "synchs" I mean that all three, explicitly or implicitly, rule out
the 6th floor....
Post by n***@gmail.com
Donald, if you were a farmer, I'm thinking you would throw away the
wheat and harvest the chaff.
Anyway, on which side of the ledger should I put these Felonious Cops
who faked the 6th floor evidence, the Conspiracy side or the Cover-up
side?
Fritz is the one who "faked" it, and he goes under Conspiracy....
dcw
Where do the other 15 fit in? Mark
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
I believe that Sawyer's "suspect description" was phony, but I don't know if he knew what it was for, so I might categorize him as CONSPIRACY?? Or maybe not even that since he didn't even know that the perp was in the depository! COVER-UP, though, since he went along with Henslee's phony transcription.
Sims & Boyd were Fritz's Homicide puppets, so they were in on the COVER-UP with their boss. But there was no need for them to know anything ahead of time. Luke Mooney, too: COVER-UP. I think he testified that Vickery & Webster were with him, but I don't remember their making statements or testifying, so ??? Montgomery & Johnson's initial statements rules them out as conspirators. Doesn't everyone agree that Weitzman simply made a mistake? Gerald Hill: COVER-UP, but not the sharpest pin in the cushion: He said at one point (if I recall correctly) that Benavides found THREE shells, and he later admitted he covered up his role in the discovery of the shells. So he was also a CONFESSOR to the COVER-UP.
It has been too long since I looked at the Day story, but I did some articles on him 20 years ago here, if you want to ransack the archives. If you do, I'll go along with whatever you want to label him, or have me label him....
Studebaker: cover-up, if Alyea's story is true, that Fritz gave the shells to Studebaker to put in the "nest". But I doubt it's true. So, neither C-U nor C, at least as regards planting of shells.... Brewer: COVER-UP. Henslee gave him a message or two of Patrolman Hill's in his transcription of the radio logs, & Brewer testified that they were in fact his, when in fact they were not. (See Sgt. Bowles' transcription in JFK First-Day Evidence.) Haygood: COVER-UP, similar to Brewer.
So, you can scratch several of your 15. Then pencil in Henslee, COVER-UP. And I think you left out a few deputy sheriffs, who said that there were remains of chicken in and/or around the "nest". (COVER-UP) Studebaker & Alyea both pooh-poohed that factoid. The chicken was found elsewhere, along with the shells.* I think Harry Weatherford was one of the deputies, along with Mooney and... I forget.
*In fact, Sawyer reported this from the fifth floor, so he was definitely not in the know re the conspiracy! He almost gave away the whole game, until he joined the COVER-UP, at the hearings....
Well, you asked.
I did. That's an awful lot of actors. Again, I marvel that you think their secrets could be kept for close to 55 years.
What if one of them had refused to lie and cooperate in the cover-up of
the murder of a POTUS?
We might not know it if someone DID refuse to cooperate. I have, for
instance, sometimes thought that Patrolman Hill refused to go along with
the cover-up; hence, his 12:37-8 radio transmissions were passed on to
Patrolmen Haygood and Brewer. In which case, Hill did not cooperate, but
neither did he expose the plot.

A pretty clear example of someone who DID refuse, at first, to cooperate,
but later capitulated, is witness Domingo Benavides. He said not one
word, that we know of, in support of his apparent role in the finding of
two hulls at 10th & Patton... not one word, in '63 or '64--until he
testified. Of course, Det. Leavelle did report, on 11/22/63, that
Benavides made out an affidavit, but the latter has never materialized.
Was Leavelle in error, lying, or was that document suppressed? We don't
know. (And LNers don't care.)

Another witness who would not, at first, cooperate, was witness/cabbie
W.W. Scoggins, who went in search of the Tippit killer, with the police,
as per his testimony. This was in the afternoon of the 22nd. In the
evening, three lineups were conducted, but Scoggins did not, apparently,
attend any of them. One would think that someone so pro-active in trying
to track down the killer of Tippit would want to finger the perp as soon
as possible. But Scoggins didnt' get to a lineup until Saturday.

Maybe, yes, he was exhausted by his tracking--on foot, then with fellow
witness Callaway in his cab, then with the police--that he was not able to
get to a lineup on Friday. But his delaying would seem to be a red
flag....

And, of course, you have Sgt. Hill, who CONFESSED to misleading the Warren
Commission....

dcw
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-08 23:02:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mark
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by Mark
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnso
Thank you for listing these two. In their first statements, neither
mentioned seeing shells in the "nest", though one of them was detailed to
guard the latter. Neither mentions hearing about the discovery of the
rifle, though it was discovered while they were on the 6th floor. The
deputies that found it mention shouting & commotion. Yet Montgomery &
Johnson did not mention any shouting or rifle in their original
statements. They are two of the best witnesses for "faked"....
Okay . . . And how does their not mentioning something that others did
turn into evidence that they purposely faked it?
I didn't mean to imply that THEY faked anything. They simply reported
what they saw and heard, and they saw & heard NOTHING re shells or rifles,
while they were on the 6th floor.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
n, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Sawyer
Sawyer, rather famously, said he got only as high as the fifth floor! He
should not be on any 6th-floor list....
Glad you take Sawyer's word for something. In that case, he shouldn't be
on the list. Thank you.
You're welcome.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill
News photog Tom Alyea has said that Hill was not present at the finding of
the shells.
So what. You're missing the point. He was on the 6th floor at some time
and no doubt was, then or later, aware of the evidence the DPD found
there, including the shells. So I'm not sure what your point is. I mean,
did he ever deny that the shells were found on the 6th floor?
No.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
, J.C. Day, Robert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
Yes, Haygood testified that he saw the shells in the "nest". However, for
the HSCA, he catalogued the several items which he saw there, and he
mentioned everything BUT the shells! You'd think something like that--if
you really saw them--would stick in your memory.
So "he cataloged the several items which he saw there" but because he didn't mention the shells he . . . I not sure where you want to go with that one. Sounds like he just might have made a mistake. Did he ever deny the shells were found on the 6th floor?
He didn't see them. He saw (as per his HSCA testimony)--on the sixth
floor--"cardboard boxes stacked, chicken bones and a soda bottle". JFK
was not killed with boxes, bones, or a bottle. Apparently, at the time
that Haygood got to the "nest" area, Fritz had not yet put down the hulls
there, or rather (if you trust Alyea) had Studebaker put them down.
I think you'd agree that shells would be more significant--more
memorable--than "chicken bones"....
Haygood could not have known where the shells were found, not from
personal knowledge....
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
And a guy from a third department, the ATF, said the rifle was found on a
floor lower than the 6th! I think his name was Frank Ellsworth.
I'll be damned. Stop the presses! Frank Ellsworth got the floor number wrong. Did he ever subsequently deny the rifle was found on the 6th floor?
I don't have a record of him ever saying that it was found on the 6th
floor.
Actually, Ellsworth syncs with Johnson & Montgomery, who heard nothing re
a rifle being found about 1:20 (Weitzman's timing) on the 6TH floor....
And by "synchs" I mean that all three, explicitly or implicitly, rule out
the 6th floor....
Post by n***@gmail.com
Donald, if you were a farmer, I'm thinking you would throw away the
wheat and harvest the chaff.
Anyway, on which side of the ledger should I put these Felonious Cops
who faked the 6th floor evidence, the Conspiracy side or the Cover-up
side?
Fritz is the one who "faked" it, and he goes under Conspiracy....
dcw
Where do the other 15 fit in? Mark
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
I believe that Sawyer's "suspect description" was phony, but I don't know if he knew what it was for, so I might categorize him as CONSPIRACY?? Or maybe not even that since he didn't even know that the perp was in the depository! COVER-UP, though, since he went along with Henslee's phony transcription.
Sims & Boyd were Fritz's Homicide puppets, so they were in on the COVER-UP with their boss. But there was no need for them to know anything ahead of time. Luke Mooney, too: COVER-UP. I think he testified that Vickery & Webster were with him, but I don't remember their making statements or testifying, so ??? Montgomery & Johnson's initial statements rules them out as conspirators. Doesn't everyone agree that Weitzman simply made a mistake? Gerald Hill: COVER-UP, but not the sharpest pin in the cushion: He said at one point (if I recall correctly) that Benavides found THREE shells, and he later admitted he covered up his role in the discovery of the shells. So he was also a CONFESSOR to the COVER-UP.
It has been too long since I looked at the Day story, but I did some articles on him 20 years ago here, if you want to ransack the archives. If you do, I'll go along with whatever you want to label him, or have me label him....
Studebaker: cover-up, if Alyea's story is true, that Fritz gave the shells to Studebaker to put in the "nest". But I doubt it's true. So, neither C-U nor C, at least as regards planting of shells.... Brewer: COVER-UP. Henslee gave him a message or two of Patrolman Hill's in his transcription of the radio logs, & Brewer testified that they were in fact his, when in fact they were not. (See Sgt. Bowles' transcription in JFK First-Day Evidence.) Haygood: COVER-UP, similar to Brewer.
So, you can scratch several of your 15. Then pencil in Henslee, COVER-UP. And I think you left out a few deputy sheriffs, who said that there were remains of chicken in and/or around the "nest". (COVER-UP) Studebaker & Alyea both pooh-poohed that factoid. The chicken was found elsewhere, along with the shells.* I think Harry Weatherford was one of the deputies, along with Mooney and... I forget.
*In fact, Sawyer reported this from the fifth floor, so he was definitely not in the know re the conspiracy! He almost gave away the whole game, until he joined the COVER-UP, at the hearings....
Well, you asked.
I did. That's an awful lot of actors. Again, I marvel that you think their secrets could be kept for close to 55 years.
What if one of them had refused to lie and cooperate in the cover-up of
the murder of a POTUS?
Mark
You mean like E. Howard Hunt?
Mark
2018-08-08 06:10:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by Mark
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnso
Thank you for listing these two. In their first statements, neither
mentioned seeing shells in the "nest", though one of them was detailed to
guard the latter. Neither mentions hearing about the discovery of the
rifle, though it was discovered while they were on the 6th floor. The
deputies that found it mention shouting & commotion. Yet Montgomery &
Johnson did not mention any shouting or rifle in their original
statements. They are two of the best witnesses for "faked"....
Okay . . . And how does their not mentioning something that others did
turn into evidence that they purposely faked it?
I didn't mean to imply that THEY faked anything. They simply reported
what they saw and heard, and they saw & heard NOTHING re shells or rifles,
while they were on the 6th floor.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
n, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Sawyer
Sawyer, rather famously, said he got only as high as the fifth floor! He
should not be on any 6th-floor list....
Glad you take Sawyer's word for something. In that case, he shouldn't be
on the list. Thank you.
You're welcome.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill
News photog Tom Alyea has said that Hill was not present at the finding of
the shells.
So what. You're missing the point. He was on the 6th floor at some time
and no doubt was, then or later, aware of the evidence the DPD found
there, including the shells. So I'm not sure what your point is. I mean,
did he ever deny that the shells were found on the 6th floor?
No.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
, J.C. Day, Robert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
Yes, Haygood testified that he saw the shells in the "nest". However, for
the HSCA, he catalogued the several items which he saw there, and he
mentioned everything BUT the shells! You'd think something like that--if
you really saw them--would stick in your memory.
So "he cataloged the several items which he saw there" but because he didn't mention the shells he . . . I not sure where you want to go with that one. Sounds like he just might have made a mistake. Did he ever deny the shells were found on the 6th floor?
He didn't see them. He saw (as per his HSCA testimony)--on the sixth
floor--"cardboard boxes stacked, chicken bones and a soda bottle". JFK
was not killed with boxes, bones, or a bottle. Apparently, at the time
that Haygood got to the "nest" area, Fritz had not yet put down the hulls
there, or rather (if you trust Alyea) had Studebaker put them down.
I think you'd agree that shells would be more significant--more
memorable--than "chicken bones"....
Haygood could not have known where the shells were found, not from
personal knowledge....
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
And a guy from a third department, the ATF, said the rifle was found on a
floor lower than the 6th! I think his name was Frank Ellsworth.
I'll be damned. Stop the presses! Frank Ellsworth got the floor number wrong. Did he ever subsequently deny the rifle was found on the 6th floor?
I don't have a record of him ever saying that it was found on the 6th
floor.
Actually, Ellsworth syncs with Johnson & Montgomery, who heard nothing re
a rifle being found about 1:20 (Weitzman's timing) on the 6TH floor....
And by "synchs" I mean that all three, explicitly or implicitly, rule out
the 6th floor....
Post by n***@gmail.com
Donald, if you were a farmer, I'm thinking you would throw away the
wheat and harvest the chaff.
Anyway, on which side of the ledger should I put these Felonious Cops
who faked the 6th floor evidence, the Conspiracy side or the Cover-up
side?
Fritz is the one who "faked" it, and he goes under Conspiracy....
dcw
Where do the other 15 fit in? Mark
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
I believe that Sawyer's "suspect description" was phony, but I don't know if he knew what it was for, so I might categorize him as CONSPIRACY?? Or maybe not even that since he didn't even know that the perp was in the depository! COVER-UP, though, since he went along with Henslee's phony transcription.
Sims & Boyd were Fritz's Homicide puppets, so they were in on the COVER-UP with their boss. But there was no need for them to know anything ahead of time. Luke Mooney, too: COVER-UP. I think he testified that Vickery & Webster were with him, but I don't remember their making statements or testifying, so ??? Montgomery & Johnson's initial statements rules them out as conspirators. Doesn't everyone agree that Weitzman simply made a mistake? Gerald Hill: COVER-UP, but not the sharpest pin in the cushion: He said at one point (if I recall correctly) that Benavides found THREE shells, and he later admitted he covered up his role in the discovery of the shells. So he was also a CONFESSOR to the COVER-UP.
It has been too long since I looked at the Day story, but I did some articles on him 20 years ago here, if you want to ransack the archives. If you do, I'll go along with whatever you want to label him, or have me label him....
Studebaker: cover-up, if Alyea's story is true, that Fritz gave the shells to Studebaker to put in the "nest". But I doubt it's true. So, neither C-U nor C, at least as regards planting of shells.... Brewer: COVER-UP. Henslee gave him a message or two of Patrolman Hill's in his transcription of the radio logs, & Brewer testified that they were in fact his, when in fact they were not. (See Sgt. Bowles' transcription in JFK First-Day Evidence.) Haygood: COVER-UP, similar to Brewer.
So, you can scratch several of your 15. Then pencil in Henslee, COVER-UP. And I think you left out a few deputy sheriffs, who said that there were remains of chicken in and/or around the "nest". (COVER-UP) Studebaker & Alyea both pooh-poohed that factoid. The chicken was found elsewhere, along with the shells.* I think Harry Weatherford was one of the deputies, along with Mooney and... I forget.
*In fact, Sawyer reported this from the fifth floor, so he was definitely not in the know re the conspiracy! He almost gave away the whole game, until he joined the COVER-UP, at the hearings....
Well, you asked.
dcw
You left out the news media. Where do the two of them fit in? Mark
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-09 15:55:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mark
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by Mark
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnso
Thank you for listing these two. In their first statements, neither
mentioned seeing shells in the "nest", though one of them was detailed to
guard the latter. Neither mentions hearing about the discovery of the
rifle, though it was discovered while they were on the 6th floor. The
deputies that found it mention shouting & commotion. Yet Montgomery &
Johnson did not mention any shouting or rifle in their original
statements. They are two of the best witnesses for "faked"....
Okay . . . And how does their not mentioning something that others did
turn into evidence that they purposely faked it?
I didn't mean to imply that THEY faked anything. They simply reported
what they saw and heard, and they saw & heard NOTHING re shells or rifles,
while they were on the 6th floor.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
n, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Sawyer
Sawyer, rather famously, said he got only as high as the fifth floor! He
should not be on any 6th-floor list....
Glad you take Sawyer's word for something. In that case, he shouldn't be
on the list. Thank you.
You're welcome.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill
News photog Tom Alyea has said that Hill was not present at the finding of
the shells.
So what. You're missing the point. He was on the 6th floor at some time
and no doubt was, then or later, aware of the evidence the DPD found
there, including the shells. So I'm not sure what your point is. I mean,
did he ever deny that the shells were found on the 6th floor?
No.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
, J.C. Day, Robert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
Yes, Haygood testified that he saw the shells in the "nest". However, for
the HSCA, he catalogued the several items which he saw there, and he
mentioned everything BUT the shells! You'd think something like that--if
you really saw them--would stick in your memory.
So "he cataloged the several items which he saw there" but because he didn't mention the shells he . . . I not sure where you want to go with that one. Sounds like he just might have made a mistake. Did he ever deny the shells were found on the 6th floor?
He didn't see them. He saw (as per his HSCA testimony)--on the sixth
floor--"cardboard boxes stacked, chicken bones and a soda bottle". JFK
was not killed with boxes, bones, or a bottle. Apparently, at the time
that Haygood got to the "nest" area, Fritz had not yet put down the hulls
there, or rather (if you trust Alyea) had Studebaker put them down.
I think you'd agree that shells would be more significant--more
memorable--than "chicken bones"....
Haygood could not have known where the shells were found, not from
personal knowledge....
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
And a guy from a third department, the ATF, said the rifle was found on a
floor lower than the 6th! I think his name was Frank Ellsworth.
I'll be damned. Stop the presses! Frank Ellsworth got the floor number wrong. Did he ever subsequently deny the rifle was found on the 6th floor?
I don't have a record of him ever saying that it was found on the 6th
floor.
Actually, Ellsworth syncs with Johnson & Montgomery, who heard nothing re
a rifle being found about 1:20 (Weitzman's timing) on the 6TH floor....
And by "synchs" I mean that all three, explicitly or implicitly, rule out
the 6th floor....
Post by n***@gmail.com
Donald, if you were a farmer, I'm thinking you would throw away the
wheat and harvest the chaff.
Anyway, on which side of the ledger should I put these Felonious Cops
who faked the 6th floor evidence, the Conspiracy side or the Cover-up
side?
Fritz is the one who "faked" it, and he goes under Conspiracy....
dcw
Where do the other 15 fit in? Mark
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
I believe that Sawyer's "suspect description" was phony, but I don't know if he knew what it was for, so I might categorize him as CONSPIRACY?? Or maybe not even that since he didn't even know that the perp was in the depository! COVER-UP, though, since he went along with Henslee's phony transcription.
Sims & Boyd were Fritz's Homicide puppets, so they were in on the COVER-UP with their boss. But there was no need for them to know anything ahead of time. Luke Mooney, too: COVER-UP. I think he testified that Vickery & Webster were with him, but I don't remember their making statements or testifying, so ??? Montgomery & Johnson's initial statements rules them out as conspirators. Doesn't everyone agree that Weitzman simply made a mistake? Gerald Hill: COVER-UP, but not the sharpest pin in the cushion: He said at one point (if I recall correctly) that Benavides found THREE shells, and he later admitted he covered up his role in the discovery of the shells. So he was also a CONFESSOR to the COVER-UP.
It has been too long since I looked at the Day story, but I did some articles on him 20 years ago here, if you want to ransack the archives. If you do, I'll go along with whatever you want to label him, or have me label him....
Studebaker: cover-up, if Alyea's story is true, that Fritz gave the shells to Studebaker to put in the "nest". But I doubt it's true. So, neither C-U nor C, at least as regards planting of shells.... Brewer: COVER-UP. Henslee gave him a message or two of Patrolman Hill's in his transcription of the radio logs, & Brewer testified that they were in fact his, when in fact they were not. (See Sgt. Bowles' transcription in JFK First-Day Evidence.) Haygood: COVER-UP, similar to Brewer.
So, you can scratch several of your 15. Then pencil in Henslee, COVER-UP. And I think you left out a few deputy sheriffs, who said that there were remains of chicken in and/or around the "nest". (COVER-UP) Studebaker & Alyea both pooh-poohed that factoid. The chicken was found elsewhere, along with the shells.* I think Harry Weatherford was one of the deputies, along with Mooney and... I forget.
*In fact, Sawyer reported this from the fifth floor, so he was definitely not in the know re the conspiracy! He almost gave away the whole game, until he joined the COVER-UP, at the hearings....
Well, you asked.
dcw
You left out the news media. Where do the two of them fit in? Mark
Tom Alyea didn't fire any shots.
donald willis
2018-08-09 17:21:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mark
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by Mark
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnso
Thank you for listing these two. In their first statements, neither
mentioned seeing shells in the "nest", though one of them was detailed to
guard the latter. Neither mentions hearing about the discovery of the
rifle, though it was discovered while they were on the 6th floor. The
deputies that found it mention shouting & commotion. Yet Montgomery &
Johnson did not mention any shouting or rifle in their original
statements. They are two of the best witnesses for "faked"....
Okay . . . And how does their not mentioning something that others did
turn into evidence that they purposely faked it?
I didn't mean to imply that THEY faked anything. They simply reported
what they saw and heard, and they saw & heard NOTHING re shells or rifles,
while they were on the 6th floor.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
n, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Sawyer
Sawyer, rather famously, said he got only as high as the fifth floor! He
should not be on any 6th-floor list....
Glad you take Sawyer's word for something. In that case, he shouldn't be
on the list. Thank you.
You're welcome.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill
News photog Tom Alyea has said that Hill was not present at the finding of
the shells.
So what. You're missing the point. He was on the 6th floor at some time
and no doubt was, then or later, aware of the evidence the DPD found
there, including the shells. So I'm not sure what your point is. I mean,
did he ever deny that the shells were found on the 6th floor?
No.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
, J.C. Day, Robert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
Yes, Haygood testified that he saw the shells in the "nest". However, for
the HSCA, he catalogued the several items which he saw there, and he
mentioned everything BUT the shells! You'd think something like that--if
you really saw them--would stick in your memory.
So "he cataloged the several items which he saw there" but because he didn't mention the shells he . . . I not sure where you want to go with that one. Sounds like he just might have made a mistake. Did he ever deny the shells were found on the 6th floor?
He didn't see them. He saw (as per his HSCA testimony)--on the sixth
floor--"cardboard boxes stacked, chicken bones and a soda bottle". JFK
was not killed with boxes, bones, or a bottle. Apparently, at the time
that Haygood got to the "nest" area, Fritz had not yet put down the hulls
there, or rather (if you trust Alyea) had Studebaker put them down.
I think you'd agree that shells would be more significant--more
memorable--than "chicken bones"....
Haygood could not have known where the shells were found, not from
personal knowledge....
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
And a guy from a third department, the ATF, said the rifle was found on a
floor lower than the 6th! I think his name was Frank Ellsworth.
I'll be damned. Stop the presses! Frank Ellsworth got the floor number wrong. Did he ever subsequently deny the rifle was found on the 6th floor?
I don't have a record of him ever saying that it was found on the 6th
floor.
Actually, Ellsworth syncs with Johnson & Montgomery, who heard nothing re
a rifle being found about 1:20 (Weitzman's timing) on the 6TH floor....
And by "synchs" I mean that all three, explicitly or implicitly, rule out
the 6th floor....
Post by n***@gmail.com
Donald, if you were a farmer, I'm thinking you would throw away the
wheat and harvest the chaff.
Anyway, on which side of the ledger should I put these Felonious Cops
who faked the 6th floor evidence, the Conspiracy side or the Cover-up
side?
Fritz is the one who "faked" it, and he goes under Conspiracy....
dcw
Where do the other 15 fit in? Mark
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
I believe that Sawyer's "suspect description" was phony, but I don't know if he knew what it was for, so I might categorize him as CONSPIRACY?? Or maybe not even that since he didn't even know that the perp was in the depository! COVER-UP, though, since he went along with Henslee's phony transcription.
Sims & Boyd were Fritz's Homicide puppets, so they were in on the COVER-UP with their boss. But there was no need for them to know anything ahead of time. Luke Mooney, too: COVER-UP. I think he testified that Vickery & Webster were with him, but I don't remember their making statements or testifying, so ??? Montgomery & Johnson's initial statements rules them out as conspirators. Doesn't everyone agree that Weitzman simply made a mistake? Gerald Hill: COVER-UP, but not the sharpest pin in the cushion: He said at one point (if I recall correctly) that Benavides found THREE shells, and he later admitted he covered up his role in the discovery of the shells. So he was also a CONFESSOR to the COVER-UP.
It has been too long since I looked at the Day story, but I did some articles on him 20 years ago here, if you want to ransack the archives. If you do, I'll go along with whatever you want to label him, or have me label him....
Studebaker: cover-up, if Alyea's story is true, that Fritz gave the shells to Studebaker to put in the "nest". But I doubt it's true. So, neither C-U nor C, at least as regards planting of shells.... Brewer: COVER-UP. Henslee gave him a message or two of Patrolman Hill's in his transcription of the radio logs, & Brewer testified that they were in fact his, when in fact they were not. (See Sgt. Bowles' transcription in JFK First-Day Evidence.) Haygood: COVER-UP, similar to Brewer.
So, you can scratch several of your 15. Then pencil in Henslee, COVER-UP. And I think you left out a few deputy sheriffs, who said that there were remains of chicken in and/or around the "nest". (COVER-UP) Studebaker & Alyea both pooh-poohed that factoid. The chicken was found elsewhere, along with the shells.* I think Harry Weatherford was one of the deputies, along with Mooney and... I forget.
*In fact, Sawyer reported this from the fifth floor, so he was definitely not in the know re the conspiracy! He almost gave away the whole game, until he joined the COVER-UP, at the hearings....
Well, you asked.
dcw
You left out the news media. Where do the two of them fit in? Mark
I myself have not covered that aspect. But check "Secrets from the Sixth
Floor Window". Connie Kritzberg worked for the Dallas Times Herald and
writes that government people had her change her article on, I believe,
JFK's wounds.

dcw
Ace Kefford
2018-08-08 23:06:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mark
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnso
Thank you for listing these two. In their first statements, neither
mentioned seeing shells in the "nest", though one of them was detailed to
guard the latter. Neither mentions hearing about the discovery of the
rifle, though it was discovered while they were on the 6th floor. The
deputies that found it mention shouting & commotion. Yet Montgomery &
Johnson did not mention any shouting or rifle in their original
statements. They are two of the best witnesses for "faked"....
Okay . . . And how does their not mentioning something that others did
turn into evidence that they purposely faked it?
I didn't mean to imply that THEY faked anything. They simply reported
what they saw and heard, and they saw & heard NOTHING re shells or rifles,
while they were on the 6th floor.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
n, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Sawyer
Sawyer, rather famously, said he got only as high as the fifth floor! He
should not be on any 6th-floor list....
Glad you take Sawyer's word for something. In that case, he shouldn't be
on the list. Thank you.
You're welcome.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill
News photog Tom Alyea has said that Hill was not present at the finding of
the shells.
So what. You're missing the point. He was on the 6th floor at some time
and no doubt was, then or later, aware of the evidence the DPD found
there, including the shells. So I'm not sure what your point is. I mean,
did he ever deny that the shells were found on the 6th floor?
No.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
, J.C. Day, Robert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
Yes, Haygood testified that he saw the shells in the "nest". However, for
the HSCA, he catalogued the several items which he saw there, and he
mentioned everything BUT the shells! You'd think something like that--if
you really saw them--would stick in your memory.
So "he cataloged the several items which he saw there" but because he didn't mention the shells he . . . I not sure where you want to go with that one. Sounds like he just might have made a mistake. Did he ever deny the shells were found on the 6th floor?
He didn't see them. He saw (as per his HSCA testimony)--on the sixth
floor--"cardboard boxes stacked, chicken bones and a soda bottle". JFK
was not killed with boxes, bones, or a bottle. Apparently, at the time
that Haygood got to the "nest" area, Fritz had not yet put down the hulls
there, or rather (if you trust Alyea) had Studebaker put them down.
I think you'd agree that shells would be more significant--more
memorable--than "chicken bones"....
Haygood could not have known where the shells were found, not from
personal knowledge....
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
And a guy from a third department, the ATF, said the rifle was found on a
floor lower than the 6th! I think his name was Frank Ellsworth.
I'll be damned. Stop the presses! Frank Ellsworth got the floor number wrong. Did he ever subsequently deny the rifle was found on the 6th floor?
I don't have a record of him ever saying that it was found on the 6th
floor.
Actually, Ellsworth syncs with Johnson & Montgomery, who heard nothing re
a rifle being found about 1:20 (Weitzman's timing) on the 6TH floor....
And by "synchs" I mean that all three, explicitly or implicitly, rule out
the 6th floor....
Post by n***@gmail.com
Donald, if you were a farmer, I'm thinking you would throw away the
wheat and harvest the chaff.
Anyway, on which side of the ledger should I put these Felonious Cops
who faked the 6th floor evidence, the Conspiracy side or the Cover-up
side?
Fritz is the one who "faked" it, and he goes under Conspiracy....
dcw
Where do the other 15 fit in? Mark
I have an idea where they can fit them in!
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-02 17:35:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by n***@gmail.com
Post by donald willis
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnso
Thank you for listing these two. In their first statements, neither
mentioned seeing shells in the "nest", though one of them was detailed to
guard the latter. Neither mentions hearing about the discovery of the
rifle, though it was discovered while they were on the 6th floor. The
deputies that found it mention shouting & commotion. Yet Montgomery &
Johnson did not mention any shouting or rifle in their original
statements. They are two of the best witnesses for "faked"....
Okay . . . And how does their not mentioning something that others did
turn into evidence that they purposely faked it?
Post by donald willis
n, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Sawyer
Sawyer, rather famously, said he got only as high as the fifth floor! He
should not be on any 6th-floor list....
Glad you take Sawyer's word for something. In that case, he shouldn't be
on the list. Thank you.
Post by donald willis
, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill
News photog Tom Alyea has said that Hill was not present at the finding of
the shells.
So what. You're missing the point. He was on the 6th floor at some time
and no doubt was, then or later, aware of the evidence the DPD found
there, including the shells. So I'm not sure what your point is. I mean,
did he ever deny that the shells were found on the 6th floor?
Post by donald willis
, J.C. Day, Robert
Post by n***@gmail.com
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
Yes, Haygood testified that he saw the shells in the "nest". However, for
the HSCA, he catalogued the several items which he saw there, and he
mentioned everything BUT the shells! You'd think something like that--if
you really saw them--would stick in your memory.
So "he cataloged the several items which he saw there" but because he didn't mention the shells he . . . I not sure where you want to go with that one. Sounds like he just might have made a mistake. Did he ever deny the shells were found on the 6th floor?
Post by n***@gmail.com
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
And a guy from a third department, the ATF, said the rifle was found on a
floor lower than the 6th! I think his name was Frank Ellsworth.
I'll be damned. Stop the presses! Frank Ellsworth got the floor number wrong. Did he ever subsequently deny the rifle was found on the 6th floor?
Donald, if you were a farmer, I'm thinking you would throw away the
wheat and harvest the chaff.
Anyway, on which side of the ledger should I put these Felonious Cops
who faked the 6th floor evidence, the Conspiracy side or the Cover-up
side?
Keystone Kops.
Post by n***@gmail.com
Mark
mainframetech
2018-08-01 03:35:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I certainly agree that the evidence on the 6th floor was legitimate.
But I disagree that Oswald was in the window firing into the motorcade.
There are other scenarios which are more possible given all the history up
to that point.

Chris
d***@gmail.com
2018-08-03 02:28:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.

Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!

Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!

What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!

Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!

For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.

By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.

All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.

It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.

In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.

One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.

That's how you do a political assassination!

David Emerling
Memphis, TN
bigdog
2018-08-04 04:02:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
That's how you do a political assassination!
Spot on analysis. I've made the same observation myself. Supplying a patsy
wasn't necessary. All that is necessary for the conspirators to get away
with the crime is to severe any connection between them and the shooters.
They would want the crime to remain unsolved. As Bugliosi astutely pointed
out, if either the CIA or the Mafia had been behind the shooting, a car
would have been waiting for Oswald outside the TSBD to drive him to his
death. It's likely his body would never have been found. Like D.B. Cooper
and Jimmy Hoffa, his fate would have remained a mystery, except of course
to the people who got rid of him.
mainframetech
2018-08-05 03:38:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
That's how you do a political assassination!
Spot on analysis. I've made the same observation myself. Supplying a patsy
wasn't necessary. All that is necessary for the conspirators to get away
with the crime is to severe any connection between them and the shooters.
They would want the crime to remain unsolved. As Bugliosi astutely pointed
out, if either the CIA or the Mafia had been behind the shooting, a car
would have been waiting for Oswald outside the TSBD to drive him to his
death. It's likely his body would never have been found. Like D.B. Cooper
and Jimmy Hoffa, his fate would have remained a mystery, except of course
to the people who got rid of him.
Ah, another one of your gems! "Supplying a patsy wasn't necessary."
Of course, then the pursuit of the killers would never stop. It wouldn't
become a cold case any time soon, because we're talking about the POTUS.
Every amateur detective in the country would be working the case, and
sooner or later the killers would be found. By having a 'patsy' that as
killed, they completely closed all cases that might have tracked down the
killers.

Chris
bigdog
2018-08-06 04:01:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
That's how you do a political assassination!
Spot on analysis. I've made the same observation myself. Supplying a patsy
wasn't necessary. All that is necessary for the conspirators to get away
with the crime is to severe any connection between them and the shooters.
They would want the crime to remain unsolved. As Bugliosi astutely pointed
out, if either the CIA or the Mafia had been behind the shooting, a car
would have been waiting for Oswald outside the TSBD to drive him to his
death. It's likely his body would never have been found. Like D.B. Cooper
and Jimmy Hoffa, his fate would have remained a mystery, except of course
to the people who got rid of him.
Ah, another one of your gems! "Supplying a patsy wasn't necessary."
Of course, then the pursuit of the killers would never stop.
They could pursue it all they wanted. If they couldn't connect the
shooters to the plotters the trail would end there. The surest way to do
the would be to eliminate the shooters and make sure their bodies were
never found.
Post by mainframetech
It wouldn't
become a cold case any time soon, because we're talking about the POTUS.
Many high profile crimes go unsolved. Who killed Jimmy Hoffa? I know law
enforcement had their suspects but they couldn't make a case and they came
to realize they never would. They couldn't even prove he had been murdered
but it's safe bet that he was.
Post by mainframetech
Every amateur detective in the country would be working the case,
I'm sure the plotters would be losing a lot of sleep knowing all you
Clouseaus were on the trail.
Post by mainframetech
and
sooner or later the killers would be found. By having a 'patsy' that as
killed, they completely closed all cases that might have tracked down the
killers.
If the shooters were eliminated, how would you connect them to the
plotters. You Clouseaus can't even prove who these other shooters were?
How are you going to connect them to the plotters.
mainframetech
2018-08-07 04:48:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
That's how you do a political assassination!
Spot on analysis. I've made the same observation myself. Supplying a patsy
wasn't necessary. All that is necessary for the conspirators to get away
with the crime is to severe any connection between them and the shooters.
They would want the crime to remain unsolved. As Bugliosi astutely pointed
out, if either the CIA or the Mafia had been behind the shooting, a car
would have been waiting for Oswald outside the TSBD to drive him to his
death. It's likely his body would never have been found. Like D.B. Cooper
and Jimmy Hoffa, his fate would have remained a mystery, except of course
to the people who got rid of him.
Ah, another one of your gems! "Supplying a patsy wasn't necessary."
Of course, then the pursuit of the killers would never stop.
They could pursue it all they wanted. If they couldn't connect the
shooters to the plotters the trail would end there. The surest way to do
the would be to eliminate the shooters and make sure their bodies were
never found.
LOL! Do you realize that you just outlined how they solved the problem
in the JFK killing? They had the supposed 'shooter' killed!
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
It wouldn't
become a cold case any time soon, because we're talking about the POTUS.
Many high profile crimes go unsolved. Who killed Jimmy Hoffa? I know law
enforcement had their suspects but they couldn't make a case and they came
to realize they never would. They couldn't even prove he had been murdered
but it's safe bet that he was.
Post by mainframetech
Every amateur detective in the country would be working the case,
I'm sure the plotters would be losing a lot of sleep knowing all you
Clouseaus were on the trail.
Post by mainframetech
and
sooner or later the killers would be found. By having a 'patsy' that was
killed, they completely closed all cases that might have tracked down the
killers.
If the shooters were eliminated, how would you connect them to the
plotters. You Clouseaus can't even prove who these other shooters were?
How are you going to connect them to the plotters.
What fools these mortals be! The death of the shooters would be a
crime, and it would be investigated. Giving a greater chance that the
killings of the shooters would be discovered.

And if the tiniest bit of info came out about the killing of Hoffa, it
would open the case wide for years after.

Chris
bigdog
2018-08-08 06:11:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
That's how you do a political assassination!
Spot on analysis. I've made the same observation myself. Supplying a patsy
wasn't necessary. All that is necessary for the conspirators to get away
with the crime is to severe any connection between them and the shooters.
They would want the crime to remain unsolved. As Bugliosi astutely pointed
out, if either the CIA or the Mafia had been behind the shooting, a car
would have been waiting for Oswald outside the TSBD to drive him to his
death. It's likely his body would never have been found. Like D.B. Cooper
and Jimmy Hoffa, his fate would have remained a mystery, except of course
to the people who got rid of him.
Ah, another one of your gems! "Supplying a patsy wasn't necessary."
Of course, then the pursuit of the killers would never stop.
They could pursue it all they wanted. If they couldn't connect the
shooters to the plotters the trail would end there. The surest way to do
the would be to eliminate the shooters and make sure their bodies were
never found.
LOL! Do you realize that you just outlined how they solved the problem
in the JFK killing? They had the supposed 'shooter' killed!
If Oswald was ordered killed by the people who plotted in the
assassination and the person doing the killing was immediately
apprehended, all the plotters would have accomplished was to replace one
possible connection to them with another. The way to do is the way
Bugliosi described it. Have a car waiting for him outside to drive him
away to his death and make sure he was never heard from again. That way
there would be no connection to the plotters.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
It wouldn't
become a cold case any time soon, because we're talking about the POTUS.
Many high profile crimes go unsolved. Who killed Jimmy Hoffa? I know law
enforcement had their suspects but they couldn't make a case and they came
to realize they never would. They couldn't even prove he had been murdered
but it's safe bet that he was.
Post by mainframetech
Every amateur detective in the country would be working the case,
I'm sure the plotters would be losing a lot of sleep knowing all you
Clouseaus were on the trail.
Post by mainframetech
and
sooner or later the killers would be found. By having a 'patsy' that was
killed, they completely closed all cases that might have tracked down the
killers.
If the shooters were eliminated, how would you connect them to the
plotters. You Clouseaus can't even prove who these other shooters were?
How are you going to connect them to the plotters.
What fools these mortals be! The death of the shooters would be a
crime, and it would be investigated. Giving a greater chance that the
killings of the shooters would be discovered.
You don't think the Mafia or the CIA could murder somebody without getting
caught.
Post by mainframetech
And if the tiniest bit of info came out about the killing of Hoffa, it
would open the case wide for years after.
The Hoffa case is a perfect illustration. Hoffa was killed. Nobody knows
who did it and so there is no connection to the people who did the
killing. I'm sure law enforcement has a pretty good idea who ordered the
hit but they couldn't make a case against them because there is no
connection.
mainframetech
2018-08-09 02:06:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
That's how you do a political assassination!
Spot on analysis. I've made the same observation myself. Supplying a patsy
wasn't necessary. All that is necessary for the conspirators to get away
with the crime is to severe any connection between them and the shooters.
They would want the crime to remain unsolved. As Bugliosi astutely pointed
out, if either the CIA or the Mafia had been behind the shooting, a car
would have been waiting for Oswald outside the TSBD to drive him to his
death. It's likely his body would never have been found. Like D.B. Cooper
and Jimmy Hoffa, his fate would have remained a mystery, except of course
to the people who got rid of him.
Ah, another one of your gems! "Supplying a patsy wasn't necessary."
Of course, then the pursuit of the killers would never stop.
They could pursue it all they wanted. If they couldn't connect the
shooters to the plotters the trail would end there. The surest way to do
the would be to eliminate the shooters and make sure their bodies were
never found.
LOL! Do you realize that you just outlined how they solved the problem
in the JFK killing? They had the supposed 'shooter' killed!
If Oswald was ordered killed by the people who plotted in the
assassination and the person doing the killing was immediately
apprehended, all the plotters would have accomplished was to replace one
possible connection to them with another. The way to do is the way
Bugliosi described it. Have a car waiting for him outside to drive him
away to his death and make sure he was never heard from again. That way
there would be no connection to the plotters.
As usual you've left something out. Since Jack Ruby had connections to
the Mafia, when they told him to kill Oswald to clean up after the mistake
of letting him get loose from the TSBD, he really had no choice or they
would make him pay for a long time before they put him away himself. And
he knew it, so he did as ordered. This is my view of why Ruby killed
Oswald. The business of a sleazy strip joint owner being foolish enough
to kill Oswald to save Jackie the grief of a trial when he had no chance
of getting away with it is just plain silly.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
It wouldn't
become a cold case any time soon, because we're talking about the POTUS.
Many high profile crimes go unsolved. Who killed Jimmy Hoffa? I know law
enforcement had their suspects but they couldn't make a case and they came
to realize they never would. They couldn't even prove he had been murdered
but it's safe bet that he was.
Post by mainframetech
Every amateur detective in the country would be working the case,
I'm sure the plotters would be losing a lot of sleep knowing all you
Clouseaus were on the trail.
Post by mainframetech
and
sooner or later the killers would be found. By having a 'patsy' that was
killed, they completely closed all cases that might have tracked down the
killers.
If the shooters were eliminated, how would you connect them to the
plotters. You Clouseaus can't even prove who these other shooters were?
How are you going to connect them to the plotters.
What fools these mortals be! The death of the shooters would be a
crime, and it would be investigated. Giving a greater chance that the
killings of the shooters would be discovered.
You don't think the Mafia or the CIA could murder somebody without getting
caught.
It could go either way.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
And if the tiniest bit of info came out about the killing of Hoffa, it
would open the case wide for years after.
The Hoffa case is a perfect illustration. Hoffa was killed. Nobody knows
who did it and so there is no connection to the people who did the
killing. I'm sure law enforcement has a pretty good idea who ordered the
hit but they couldn't make a case against them because there is no
connection.
There are all kinds of connections, but they just aren't on the
surface. Someone has the information, but is still afraid to talk. They
could open up any time.

Chris
Mark
2018-08-10 02:06:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
That's how you do a political assassination!
Spot on analysis. I've made the same observation myself. Supplying a patsy
wasn't necessary. All that is necessary for the conspirators to get away
with the crime is to severe any connection between them and the shooters.
They would want the crime to remain unsolved. As Bugliosi astutely pointed
out, if either the CIA or the Mafia had been behind the shooting, a car
would have been waiting for Oswald outside the TSBD to drive him to his
death. It's likely his body would never have been found. Like D.B. Cooper
and Jimmy Hoffa, his fate would have remained a mystery, except of course
to the people who got rid of him.
Ah, another one of your gems! "Supplying a patsy wasn't necessary."
Of course, then the pursuit of the killers would never stop.
They could pursue it all they wanted. If they couldn't connect the
shooters to the plotters the trail would end there. The surest way to do
the would be to eliminate the shooters and make sure their bodies were
never found.
LOL! Do you realize that you just outlined how they solved the problem
in the JFK killing? They had the supposed 'shooter' killed!
If Oswald was ordered killed by the people who plotted in the
assassination and the person doing the killing was immediately
apprehended, all the plotters would have accomplished was to replace one
possible connection to them with another. The way to do is the way
Bugliosi described it. Have a car waiting for him outside to drive him
away to his death and make sure he was never heard from again. That way
there would be no connection to the plotters.
As usual you've left something out. Since Jack Ruby had connections to
the Mafia, when they told him to kill Oswald to clean up after the mistake
of letting him get loose from the TSBD, he really had no choice or they
would make him pay for a long time before they put him away himself. And
he knew it, so he did as ordered. This is my view of why Ruby killed
Oswald. The business of a sleazy strip joint owner being foolish enough
to kill Oswald to save Jackie the grief of a trial when he had no chance
of getting away with it is just plain silly.
Once again, you need to open the WCR and read its investigation of Ruby,
and his testimony to the commission. You'll find a lot your conspiracy
books don't tell you.

Mark
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-11 21:56:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mark
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
That's how you do a political assassination!
Spot on analysis. I've made the same observation myself. Supplying a patsy
wasn't necessary. All that is necessary for the conspirators to get away
with the crime is to severe any connection between them and the shooters.
They would want the crime to remain unsolved. As Bugliosi astutely pointed
out, if either the CIA or the Mafia had been behind the shooting, a car
would have been waiting for Oswald outside the TSBD to drive him to his
death. It's likely his body would never have been found. Like D.B. Cooper
and Jimmy Hoffa, his fate would have remained a mystery, except of course
to the people who got rid of him.
Ah, another one of your gems! "Supplying a patsy wasn't necessary."
Of course, then the pursuit of the killers would never stop.
They could pursue it all they wanted. If they couldn't connect the
shooters to the plotters the trail would end there. The surest way to do
the would be to eliminate the shooters and make sure their bodies were
never found.
LOL! Do you realize that you just outlined how they solved the problem
in the JFK killing? They had the supposed 'shooter' killed!
If Oswald was ordered killed by the people who plotted in the
assassination and the person doing the killing was immediately
apprehended, all the plotters would have accomplished was to replace one
possible connection to them with another. The way to do is the way
Bugliosi described it. Have a car waiting for him outside to drive him
away to his death and make sure he was never heard from again. That way
there would be no connection to the plotters.
As usual you've left something out. Since Jack Ruby had connections to
the Mafia, when they told him to kill Oswald to clean up after the mistake
of letting him get loose from the TSBD, he really had no choice or they
would make him pay for a long time before they put him away himself. And
he knew it, so he did as ordered. This is my view of why Ruby killed
Oswald. The business of a sleazy strip joint owner being foolish enough
to kill Oswald to save Jackie the grief of a trial when he had no chance
of getting away with it is just plain silly.
Once again, you need to open the WCR and read its investigation of Ruby,
and his testimony to the commission. You'll find a lot your conspiracy
books don't tell you.
Did the WC analyze Ruby's telephone records? NO.
Did the HSCA analyze Ruby's telephone records? Yes.
Do YOU care about Ruby's telephone records and Mafia contacts? NO!
Post by Mark
Mark
d***@gmail.com
2018-08-13 05:46:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Did the WC analyze Ruby's telephone records? NO.
Did the HSCA analyze Ruby's telephone records? Yes.
Do YOU care about Ruby's telephone records and Mafia contacts? NO!
I think you know that Ruby had an ongoing dispute with the (AGVA) American
Guild of Variety Artists - which was run by the mafia.

Tell us how the fact that Ruby may have known some unsavory characters, in
a business fraught with unsavory characters, has anything to do with the
Kennedy assassination?

That's brilliant research, Tony. You're quite the Sherlock Holmes. Ruby
knew some bad guys. That makes him a bad guy. Therefore, Ruby had some
involvement in the Kennedy assassination/cover-up.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-14 15:30:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by Anthony Marsh
Did the WC analyze Ruby's telephone records? NO.
Did the HSCA analyze Ruby's telephone records? Yes.
Do YOU care about Ruby's telephone records and Mafia contacts? NO!
I think you know that Ruby had an ongoing dispute with the (AGVA) American
Guild of Variety Artists - which was run by the mafia.
Now, now. You're not allowed to admit facts like that.
Prove that ALL his calls were to AGVA. Blakey knew all that and still he
found links to the Mafia.
Post by d***@gmail.com
Tell us how the fact that Ruby may have known some unsavory characters, in
a business fraught with unsavory characters, has anything to do with the
Kennedy assassination?
The term is cutout,
Post by d***@gmail.com
That's brilliant research, Tony. You're quite the Sherlock Holmes. Ruby
knew some bad guys. That makes him a bad guy. Therefore, Ruby had some
involvement in the Kennedy assassination/cover-up.
The HSCA did the research.
Post by d***@gmail.com
David Emerling
Memphis, TN
bigdog
2018-08-10 13:21:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
That's how you do a political assassination!
Spot on analysis. I've made the same observation myself. Supplying a patsy
wasn't necessary. All that is necessary for the conspirators to get away
with the crime is to severe any connection between them and the shooters.
They would want the crime to remain unsolved. As Bugliosi astutely pointed
out, if either the CIA or the Mafia had been behind the shooting, a car
would have been waiting for Oswald outside the TSBD to drive him to his
death. It's likely his body would never have been found. Like D.B. Cooper
and Jimmy Hoffa, his fate would have remained a mystery, except of course
to the people who got rid of him.
Ah, another one of your gems! "Supplying a patsy wasn't necessary."
Of course, then the pursuit of the killers would never stop.
They could pursue it all they wanted. If they couldn't connect the
shooters to the plotters the trail would end there. The surest way to do
the would be to eliminate the shooters and make sure their bodies were
never found.
LOL! Do you realize that you just outlined how they solved the problem
in the JFK killing? They had the supposed 'shooter' killed!
If Oswald was ordered killed by the people who plotted in the
assassination and the person doing the killing was immediately
apprehended, all the plotters would have accomplished was to replace one
possible connection to them with another. The way to do is the way
Bugliosi described it. Have a car waiting for him outside to drive him
away to his death and make sure he was never heard from again. That way
there would be no connection to the plotters.
As usual you've left something out. Since Jack Ruby had connections to
the Mafia, when they told him to kill Oswald to clean up after the mistake
of letting him get loose from the TSBD, he really had no choice or they
would make him pay for a long time before they put him away himself. And
he knew it, so he did as ordered.
Now if you only had some evidence the Mafia ordered Ruby to kill Oswald.
If he had been ordered to kill Oswald, why did he show up just before
Oswald was led out when the transfer was supposed to have taken place much
earlier? Why was he at the Western Union office just minutes before he
killed Oswald? Why did he bring his favorite dog along for the ride if he
planned on killing Oswald?
Post by mainframetech
This is my view of why Ruby killed
Oswald. The business of a sleazy strip joint owner being foolish enough
to kill Oswald to save Jackie the grief of a trial when he had no chance
of getting away with it is just plain silly.
Nobody knows why Ruby killed Oswald although I suspect he acted on the
spur of the moment with little to no forethought. I don't think he had
time to formulate a motive before he decided to act. If he did do it to
spare Jackie grief, that still makes far more sense than anything you have
proposed.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
It wouldn't
become a cold case any time soon, because we're talking about the POTUS.
Many high profile crimes go unsolved. Who killed Jimmy Hoffa? I know law
enforcement had their suspects but they couldn't make a case and they came
to realize they never would. They couldn't even prove he had been murdered
but it's safe bet that he was.
Post by mainframetech
Every amateur detective in the country would be working the case,
I'm sure the plotters would be losing a lot of sleep knowing all you
Clouseaus were on the trail.
Post by mainframetech
and
sooner or later the killers would be found. By having a 'patsy' that was
killed, they completely closed all cases that might have tracked down the
killers.
If the shooters were eliminated, how would you connect them to the
plotters. You Clouseaus can't even prove who these other shooters were?
How are you going to connect them to the plotters.
What fools these mortals be! The death of the shooters would be a
crime, and it would be investigated. Giving a greater chance that the
killings of the shooters would be discovered.
You don't think the Mafia or the CIA could murder somebody without getting
caught.
It could go either way.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
And if the tiniest bit of info came out about the killing of Hoffa, it
would open the case wide for years after.
The Hoffa case is a perfect illustration. Hoffa was killed. Nobody knows
who did it and so there is no connection to the people who did the
killing. I'm sure law enforcement has a pretty good idea who ordered the
hit but they couldn't make a case against them because there is no
connection.
There are all kinds of connections, but they just aren't on the
surface. Someone has the information, but is still afraid to talk. They
could open up any time.
Three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead.
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-11 21:57:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
That's how you do a political assassination!
Spot on analysis. I've made the same observation myself. Supplying a patsy
wasn't necessary. All that is necessary for the conspirators to get away
with the crime is to severe any connection between them and the shooters.
They would want the crime to remain unsolved. As Bugliosi astutely pointed
out, if either the CIA or the Mafia had been behind the shooting, a car
would have been waiting for Oswald outside the TSBD to drive him to his
death. It's likely his body would never have been found. Like D.B. Cooper
and Jimmy Hoffa, his fate would have remained a mystery, except of course
to the people who got rid of him.
Ah, another one of your gems! "Supplying a patsy wasn't necessary."
Of course, then the pursuit of the killers would never stop.
They could pursue it all they wanted. If they couldn't connect the
shooters to the plotters the trail would end there. The surest way to do
the would be to eliminate the shooters and make sure their bodies were
never found.
LOL! Do you realize that you just outlined how they solved the problem
in the JFK killing? They had the supposed 'shooter' killed!
If Oswald was ordered killed by the people who plotted in the
assassination and the person doing the killing was immediately
apprehended, all the plotters would have accomplished was to replace one
possible connection to them with another. The way to do is the way
Bugliosi described it. Have a car waiting for him outside to drive him
away to his death and make sure he was never heard from again. That way
there would be no connection to the plotters.
As usual you've left something out. Since Jack Ruby had connections to
the Mafia, when they told him to kill Oswald to clean up after the mistake
of letting him get loose from the TSBD, he really had no choice or they
would make him pay for a long time before they put him away himself. And
he knew it, so he did as ordered.
Now if you only had some evidence the Mafia ordered Ruby to kill Oswald.
You expect the conspiracy to be out in the open.
Did YOU have evidence in 1962 that the CIA was using the Mafia to try to
assassinate Castro? No answer? Because you know it was Top Secret NODIS.
So are you going to claim you knew all about it at the time?
If not, you can claim that he neved happened. That's how your simple
mind works.
Post by bigdog
If he had been ordered to kill Oswald, why did he show up just before
Oswald was led out when the transfer was supposed to have taken place much
False. He was waiting for Oswald to come down. Not "JUST BEFORE."
You are a font of false information.
What other purpose do you have for being here?
Post by bigdog
earlier? Why was he at the Western Union office just minutes before he
killed Oswald? Why did he bring his favorite dog along for the ride if he
planned on killing Oswald? Comfort. He took Sheba everywhere.
Post by mainframetech
This is my view of why Ruby killed
Oswald. The business of a sleazy strip joint owner being foolish enough
to kill Oswald to save Jackie the grief of a trial when he had no chance
of getting away with it is just plain silly.
Nobody knows why Ruby killed Oswald although I suspect he acted on the
spur of the moment with little to no forethought. I don't think he had
time to formulate a motive before he decided to act. If he did do it to
spare Jackie grief, that still makes far more sense than anything you have
proposed.
He SAID he tried to kill Oswald on Friday. Premeditation.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
It wouldn't
become a cold case any time soon, because we're talking about the POTUS.
Many high profile crimes go unsolved. Who killed Jimmy Hoffa? I know law
enforcement had their suspects but they couldn't make a case and they came
to realize they never would. They couldn't even prove he had been murdered
but it's safe bet that he was.
Post by mainframetech
Every amateur detective in the country would be working the case,
I'm sure the plotters would be losing a lot of sleep knowing all you
Clouseaus were on the trail.
Post by mainframetech
and
sooner or later the killers would be found. By having a 'patsy' that was
killed, they completely closed all cases that might have tracked down the
killers.
If the shooters were eliminated, how would you connect them to the
plotters. You Clouseaus can't even prove who these other shooters were?
How are you going to connect them to the plotters.
What fools these mortals be! The death of the shooters would be a
crime, and it would be investigated. Giving a greater chance that the
killings of the shooters would be discovered.
You don't think the Mafia or the CIA could murder somebody without getting
caught.
It could go either way.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
And if the tiniest bit of info came out about the killing of Hoffa, it
would open the case wide for years after.
The Hoffa case is a perfect illustration. Hoffa was killed. Nobody knows
who did it and so there is no connection to the people who did the
killing. I'm sure law enforcement has a pretty good idea who ordered the
hit but they couldn't make a case against them because there is no
connection.
There are all kinds of connections, but they just aren't on the
surface. Someone has the information, but is still afraid to talk. They
could open up any time.
Three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead.
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-09 15:56:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
That's how you do a political assassination!
Spot on analysis. I've made the same observation myself. Supplying a patsy
wasn't necessary. All that is necessary for the conspirators to get away
with the crime is to severe any connection between them and the shooters.
They would want the crime to remain unsolved. As Bugliosi astutely pointed
out, if either the CIA or the Mafia had been behind the shooting, a car
would have been waiting for Oswald outside the TSBD to drive him to his
death. It's likely his body would never have been found. Like D.B. Cooper
and Jimmy Hoffa, his fate would have remained a mystery, except of course
to the people who got rid of him.
Ah, another one of your gems! "Supplying a patsy wasn't necessary."
Of course, then the pursuit of the killers would never stop.
They could pursue it all they wanted. If they couldn't connect the
shooters to the plotters the trail would end there. The surest way to do
the would be to eliminate the shooters and make sure their bodies were
never found.
LOL! Do you realize that you just outlined how they solved the problem
in the JFK killing? They had the supposed 'shooter' killed!
If Oswald was ordered killed by the people who plotted in the
assassination and the person doing the killing was immediately
apprehended, all the plotters would have accomplished was to replace one
possible connection to them with another. The way to do is the way
Not true. That's why they use cutouts.
Did you prove at the time in 1962 that the CIA was trying to assassinate
Castro? Show me your proof. They used cutouts to contact the Mafia who
then used cutouts to assign the job.
Tradecraft.
Post by bigdog
Bugliosi described it. Have a car waiting for him outside to drive him
away to his death and make sure he was never heard from again. That way
there would be no connection to the plotters.
Very simplistic an maybe that was negated by Baker suddenly running into
the TSBD. You want them to kill Baker too?
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
It wouldn't
become a cold case any time soon, because we're talking about the POTUS.
Many high profile crimes go unsolved. Who killed Jimmy Hoffa? I know law
enforcement had their suspects but they couldn't make a case and they came
to realize they never would. They couldn't even prove he had been murdered
but it's safe bet that he was.
Post by mainframetech
Every amateur detective in the country would be working the case,
I'm sure the plotters would be losing a lot of sleep knowing all you
Clouseaus were on the trail.
Post by mainframetech
and
sooner or later the killers would be found. By having a 'patsy' that was
killed, they completely closed all cases that might have tracked down the
killers.
If the shooters were eliminated, how would you connect them to the
plotters. You Clouseaus can't even prove who these other shooters were?
How are you going to connect them to the plotters.
What fools these mortals be! The death of the shooters would be a
crime, and it would be investigated. Giving a greater chance that the
killings of the shooters would be discovered.
You don't think the Mafia or the CIA could murder somebody without getting
caught.
Post by mainframetech
And if the tiniest bit of info came out about the killing of Hoffa, it
would open the case wide for years after.
The Hoffa case is a perfect illustration. Hoffa was killed. Nobody knows
who did it and so there is no connection to the people who did the
killing. I'm sure law enforcement has a pretty good idea who ordered the
hit but they couldn't make a case against them because there is no
connection.
Of course they know who did it. But they can't prove it.
d***@gmail.com
2018-08-13 05:48:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
That's how you do a political assassination!
Spot on analysis. I've made the same observation myself. Supplying a patsy
wasn't necessary. All that is necessary for the conspirators to get away
with the crime is to severe any connection between them and the shooters.
They would want the crime to remain unsolved. As Bugliosi astutely pointed
out, if either the CIA or the Mafia had been behind the shooting, a car
would have been waiting for Oswald outside the TSBD to drive him to his
death. It's likely his body would never have been found. Like D.B. Cooper
and Jimmy Hoffa, his fate would have remained a mystery, except of course
to the people who got rid of him.
Ah, another one of your gems! "Supplying a patsy wasn't necessary."
Of course, then the pursuit of the killers would never stop.
They could pursue it all they wanted. If they couldn't connect the
shooters to the plotters the trail would end there. The surest way to do
the would be to eliminate the shooters and make sure their bodies were
never found.
LOL! Do you realize that you just outlined how they solved the problem
in the JFK killing? They had the supposed 'shooter' killed!
If Oswald was ordered killed by the people who plotted in the
assassination and the person doing the killing was immediately
apprehended, all the plotters would have accomplished was to replace one
possible connection to them with another. The way to do is the way
Not true. That's why they use cutouts.
Did you prove at the time in 1962 that the CIA was trying to assassinate
Castro? Show me your proof. They used cutouts to contact the Mafia who
then used cutouts to assign the job.
Tradecraft.
No, you're right, at the time, few people knew about the CIA's
coordination with the mafia to assassinate Castro. But we eventually found
out - relatively quickly. It's now common knowledge.

But, with regards to Ruby's connection with the mob in order to "silence"
Oswald, there's been nobody to come forward and prove this in over half a
century - and that's with many mobsters having turned state's evidence and
blabbed about all kinds of wrongdoing by the mob. Yet, none of them knew
of - or heard of - any involvement of the mob in the Kennedy
assassination.

The mob was being wiretapped and caught openly talking about all kinds of
crimes they were committing. It's no accident that the prosecution of
organized crime members was up 700% during the Kennedy administration. The
FBI was all over them! Yet, no recording exists that reveals mafia
involvement.

Now, you might say: "They would never be so foolish to talk about
something like that openly on the phone." Yet, they were foolish enough to
talk about all their other crimes on the phone. Does that make any sense
to you?

David Emerling
Memphis, TN
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-14 15:30:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
That's how you do a political assassination!
Spot on analysis. I've made the same observation myself. Supplying a patsy
wasn't necessary. All that is necessary for the conspirators to get away
with the crime is to severe any connection between them and the shooters.
They would want the crime to remain unsolved. As Bugliosi astutely pointed
out, if either the CIA or the Mafia had been behind the shooting, a car
would have been waiting for Oswald outside the TSBD to drive him to his
death. It's likely his body would never have been found. Like D.B. Cooper
and Jimmy Hoffa, his fate would have remained a mystery, except of course
to the people who got rid of him.
Ah, another one of your gems! "Supplying a patsy wasn't necessary."
Of course, then the pursuit of the killers would never stop.
They could pursue it all they wanted. If they couldn't connect the
shooters to the plotters the trail would end there. The surest way to do
the would be to eliminate the shooters and make sure their bodies were
never found.
LOL! Do you realize that you just outlined how they solved the problem
in the JFK killing? They had the supposed 'shooter' killed!
If Oswald was ordered killed by the people who plotted in the
assassination and the person doing the killing was immediately
apprehended, all the plotters would have accomplished was to replace one
possible connection to them with another. The way to do is the way
Not true. That's why they use cutouts.
Did you prove at the time in 1962 that the CIA was trying to assassinate
Castro? Show me your proof. They used cutouts to contact the Mafia who
then used cutouts to assign the job.
Tradecraft.
No, you're right, at the time, few people knew about the CIA's
coordination with the mafia to assassinate Castro. But we eventually found
out - relatively quickly. It's now common knowledge.
Yes, and eventually we found out about the CIA officer ordering the JFK
assasination and who was involved. You missed the main point that
conspiracies can be covered up for many yeears.
Post by d***@gmail.com
But, with regards to Ruby's connection with the mob in order to "silence"
Oswald, there's been nobody to come forward and prove this in over half a
century - and that's with many mobsters having turned state's evidence and
blabbed about all kinds of wrongdoing by the mob. Yet, none of them knew
of - or heard of - any involvement of the mob in the Kennedy
assassination.
Yes, Trafficante blabbed. So what?
Post by d***@gmail.com
The mob was being wiretapped and caught openly talking about all kinds of
crimes they were committing. It's no accident that the prosecution of
organized crime members was up 700% during the Kennedy administration. The
FBI was all over them! Yet, no recording exists that reveals mafia
involvement.
Because the Kennedys went after the Mafia. LBJ and ever subsequent
administration didn't care.
Post by d***@gmail.com
Now, you might say: "They would never be so foolish to talk about
something like that openly on the phone." Yet, they were foolish enough to
talk about all their other crimes on the phone. Does that make any sense
to you?
What Trump administration member would be so foolish to engage in
insider trading on his own phone while attending a party on the WH lawn.
The word is Hubris.
BTW, I said cutout. Do you know what that is?
Is that a model of an Android phone?
The new LG CUTOUT with 64GB of memory.
Post by d***@gmail.com
David Emerling
Memphis, TN
Mark
2018-08-15 02:04:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
That's how you do a political assassination!
Spot on analysis. I've made the same observation myself. Supplying a patsy
wasn't necessary. All that is necessary for the conspirators to get away
with the crime is to severe any connection between them and the shooters.
They would want the crime to remain unsolved. As Bugliosi astutely pointed
out, if either the CIA or the Mafia had been behind the shooting, a car
would have been waiting for Oswald outside the TSBD to drive him to his
death. It's likely his body would never have been found. Like D.B. Cooper
and Jimmy Hoffa, his fate would have remained a mystery, except of course
to the people who got rid of him.
Ah, another one of your gems! "Supplying a patsy wasn't necessary."
Of course, then the pursuit of the killers would never stop.
They could pursue it all they wanted. If they couldn't connect the
shooters to the plotters the trail would end there. The surest way to do
the would be to eliminate the shooters and make sure their bodies were
never found.
LOL! Do you realize that you just outlined how they solved the problem
in the JFK killing? They had the supposed 'shooter' killed!
If Oswald was ordered killed by the people who plotted in the
assassination and the person doing the killing was immediately
apprehended, all the plotters would have accomplished was to replace one
possible connection to them with another. The way to do is the way
Not true. That's why they use cutouts.
Did you prove at the time in 1962 that the CIA was trying to assassinate
Castro? Show me your proof. They used cutouts to contact the Mafia who
then used cutouts to assign the job.
Tradecraft.
No, you're right, at the time, few people knew about the CIA's
coordination with the mafia to assassinate Castro. But we eventually found
out - relatively quickly. It's now common knowledge.
Yes, and eventually we found out about the CIA officer ordering the JFK
assasination and who was involved. You missed the main point that
conspiracies can be covered up for many yeears.
" . . . we found out about the CIA officer ordering the JFK
assassination and who was involved . . ." This is a new one, even for
you. What CIA officer?, give us a name, and "who" else was involved?
Names?

Mark
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-16 17:19:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mark
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
That's how you do a political assassination!
Spot on analysis. I've made the same observation myself. Supplying a patsy
wasn't necessary. All that is necessary for the conspirators to get away
with the crime is to severe any connection between them and the shooters.
They would want the crime to remain unsolved. As Bugliosi astutely pointed
out, if either the CIA or the Mafia had been behind the shooting, a car
would have been waiting for Oswald outside the TSBD to drive him to his
death. It's likely his body would never have been found. Like D.B. Cooper
and Jimmy Hoffa, his fate would have remained a mystery, except of course
to the people who got rid of him.
Ah, another one of your gems! "Supplying a patsy wasn't necessary."
Of course, then the pursuit of the killers would never stop.
They could pursue it all they wanted. If they couldn't connect the
shooters to the plotters the trail would end there. The surest way to do
the would be to eliminate the shooters and make sure their bodies were
never found.
LOL! Do you realize that you just outlined how they solved the problem
in the JFK killing? They had the supposed 'shooter' killed!
If Oswald was ordered killed by the people who plotted in the
assassination and the person doing the killing was immediately
apprehended, all the plotters would have accomplished was to replace one
possible connection to them with another. The way to do is the way
Not true. That's why they use cutouts.
Did you prove at the time in 1962 that the CIA was trying to assassinate
Castro? Show me your proof. They used cutouts to contact the Mafia who
then used cutouts to assign the job.
Tradecraft.
No, you're right, at the time, few people knew about the CIA's
coordination with the mafia to assassinate Castro. But we eventually found
out - relatively quickly. It's now common knowledge.
Yes, and eventually we found out about the CIA officer ordering the JFK
assasination and who was involved. You missed the main point that
conspiracies can be covered up for many yeears.
" . . . we found out about the CIA officer ordering the JFK
assassination and who was involved . . ." This is a new one, even for
you. What CIA officer?, give us a name, and "who" else was involved?
Names?
Richard Helms, DDP, head of the assassination department.
Frank Bender. Emilio Santana.
Post by Mark
Mark
Mark
2018-08-05 03:29:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
That's how you do a political assassination!
David Emerling
Memphis, TN
Well said, better than I did. I hope Donald, Chris and Tony read it.

Mark
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-06 16:16:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mark
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
That's how you do a political assassination!
David Emerling
Memphis, TN
Well said, better than I did. I hope Donald, Chris and Tony read it.
Mark
Duly noted and it's garbage.
Mark
2018-08-09 15:54:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Mark
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
That's how you do a political assassination!
David Emerling
Memphis, TN
Well said, better than I did. I hope Donald, Chris and Tony read it.
Mark
Duly noted and it's garbage.
IOW, Marsh has no idea how to answer it. Mark
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-07 15:36:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mark
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
That's how you do a political assassination!
David Emerling
Memphis, TN
Well said, better than I did. I hope Donald, Chris and Tony read it.
Mark
Silly.
Mark
2018-08-15 02:11:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mark
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
That's how you do a political assassination!
David Emerling
Memphis, TN
Well said, better than I did. I hope Donald, Chris and Tony read it.
Mark
Donald? Mark
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-05 14:28:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
Silly. When you control the evidence you just alter it or throw it away.
Post by d***@gmail.com
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
No. YOU saw nothing wrong with tampering with evidence.
Post by d***@gmail.com
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
They can't just vanish? They have to leave behind evidence to frame
their patsy.
Post by d***@gmail.com
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
What investigators? The DPD said it was a conspiracy so the FBI stepped
in and took the case away from them and THEY were ordered to NOT find
conspiracy. 3 shots, 3 hits, no misses.
Post by d***@gmail.com
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
Or a crooked President could blackmail the CIA into dropping its
investiation into his crimes. It also helps to plant a couple of CIA
agents in that conspiracy the President wanted covered up.
Post by d***@gmail.com
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
So, you say that there have never been any conspiracies ever.
Guess you never studied History in HS. Hell, you never went to HS.
Probably dropped out of grammar school.
Post by d***@gmail.com
That's how you do a political assassination!
David Emerling
Memphis, TN
donald willis
2018-08-06 16:12:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
Silly. When you control the evidence you just alter it or throw it away.
Like Oswald's bus transfer (under "alter") and the hulls in Oak Cliff
(switch)!
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by d***@gmail.com
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
No. YOU saw nothing wrong with tampering with evidence.
Post by d***@gmail.com
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
They can't just vanish? They have to leave behind evidence to frame
their patsy.
Post by d***@gmail.com
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
What investigators? The DPD said it was a conspiracy so the FBI stepped
in and took the case away from them and THEY were ordered to NOT find
conspiracy. 3 shots, 3 hits, no misses.
Post by d***@gmail.com
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
Or a crooked President could blackmail the CIA into dropping its
investiation into his crimes. It also helps to plant a couple of CIA
agents in that conspiracy the President wanted covered up.
Post by d***@gmail.com
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
So, you say that there have never been any conspiracies ever.
Guess you never studied History in HS. Hell, you never went to HS.
Probably dropped out of grammar school.
Post by d***@gmail.com
That's how you do a political assassination!
David Emerling
Memphis, TN
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-07 15:36:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by donald willis
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
I've always said that there was never any need to conceal a conspiracy.
Ostensibly, some group of people or organization had something to gain by
terminating the Kennedy presidency. If it become known WHO was behind the
assassination, whatever benefits they thought they'd gain would instantly
vanish.
Would the mafia benefit by killing Kennedy if it became known that THEY
orchestrated the assassination? No!
Would the intelligence agency benefit by killing Kennedy if it became
known that THEY orchestrated (or facilitated) the assassination? No!
What about LBJ? Hoover? The pro-Castro Cubans? Would any of them reap
benefits if it became known they were behind the assassination? NO!!
Consequently, the ONLY important thing is to get away with the
assassination WITHOUT being caught. Would it really matter if it became
obvious that Kennedy was a victim of "some kind" of conspiracy as long as
the investigators could never determine WHO was behind it? No!
For instance, let's say bullets from multiple weapons were discovered
involved in the shooting. A certain conspiracy! But if the investigators
Silly. When you control the evidence you just alter it or throw it away.
Like Oswald's bus transfer (under "alter") and the hulls in Oak Cliff
(switch)!
No, like destroying the limousine.
Like altering CE 399.
Like scratching out 3 words on a memo.
Post by donald willis
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by d***@gmail.com
cannot connect the bullets to a specific a shooter who was connected with
a specific organization, knowing that there were multiple gunmen (a
conspiracy) doesn't help that much.
By trying to tamper with the evidence ... by falsifying evidence ... by
altering evidence ... by enlisting the services of multiple people and
organizations to cover it up ... the architects INCREASE the probability
that their involvement will be discovered - thus negating any benefit they
thought they would gain.
No. YOU saw nothing wrong with tampering with evidence.
Post by d***@gmail.com
All the assassination plot needed was a clean, simple kill - then vanish
and have nothing else to do with it. They could sit back and watch the
investigators spin their wheels.
They can't just vanish? They have to leave behind evidence to frame
their patsy.
Post by d***@gmail.com
It's not as if the investigators would automatically assume that there was
no conspiracy. They're going to check into that one way or the other.
Don't give them anything to work with.
What investigators? The DPD said it was a conspiracy so the FBI stepped
in and took the case away from them and THEY were ordered to NOT find
conspiracy. 3 shots, 3 hits, no misses.
Post by d***@gmail.com
In fact, it could actually benefit the assassins if everybody knew that
some kind of conspiracy was involved. Think of how that would intimidate
all subsequent presidents when pressured on certain policies. There's no
Or a crooked President could blackmail the CIA into dropping its
investiation into his crimes. It also helps to plant a couple of CIA
agents in that conspiracy the President wanted covered up.
Post by d***@gmail.com
need to go through all kinds of wild gyrations to blame it on a nobody
like Oswald.
One thing all conspiracy theories have in common are too many moving parts
- any one of which could blow up in their face.
So, you say that there have never been any conspiracies ever.
Guess you never studied History in HS. Hell, you never went to HS.
Probably dropped out of grammar school.
Post by d***@gmail.com
That's how you do a political assassination!
David Emerling
Memphis, TN
Ace Kefford
2018-08-10 15:26:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
If the evidence was fake,
How did Oswald escape?
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-11 21:57:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ace Kefford
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
If the evidence was fake,
How did Oswald escape?
A cop let him go.
If there was a shooter on the grassy knoll, how did he escape?
A cop let him go
donald willis
2018-08-15 23:33:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by n***@gmail.com
The idea that the 6th Floor evidence was faked has many obstacles. This is
just one. Could call this the human problem.
Here is a list of law enforcement (and others) who were on the 6th floor
after the shooting.
DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT
Will Fritz, L.D. Montgomery, Marvin Johnson, Seymour Weitzman, Herbert
Sawyer, Richard Sims, Elmer Boyd, Gerald Hill, J.C. Day, Robert
Studebaker, E.D. Brewer, Clyde Haygood
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Luke Mooney, B.J. Vickery, Sam Webster
NEWS MEDIA
Tom Alyea, Kent Biffle
I know these these lists are incomplete. But that's OK, because additions
will only make my point stronger.
If these people faked or went along with the faking of the boxed-in
sniper's nest, the expended cartridges, the 38-inch paper bag, the rifle,
and Oswald's prints on the rifle and bag, then they are liars and
lawbreakers. Note that we are not talking about one department, but a
second one, and the media.
It seems extremely far-fetched, to say the least, that a conspiracy could
get all these men to either join the conspiracy or get them to cover it
up. (And all that silence for 55 years.)
Mark
Studebaker didn't cover it up; he exposed it. No one listened. The
Unholy Five were not called back to explain their apparent hallucinations:

Three witnesses--Deputy Sheriffs Luke Mooney and Jack Faulkner and press
photographer Tom Alyea--have stated that DPD Homicide's Capt. Will Fritz
picked up the three shells found in the depository, an action which Fritz,
in an affidavit, would neither confirm nor deny.

Two statements by DPD Inspector J.H. Sawyer suggest why Fritz would have
wanted to pick up the shells:

"On the 3rd floor of this book company down here, we found empty rifle
hulls, and it looked like the man had been here for some time." (CE 1974
p176/DPD radio logs 11/22/63 1:11pm)

"Dallas Inspector J.H. Sawyer said, 'Police found the remains of fried
chicken and paper on the fifth floor. Apparently the person had been
there quite a while'." (Stockton Record [AP] 11/22/63 p8)

As it happens, the newspaper report can be seen to be consonant with the
radio report re the floor number: In the depository, the third floor down
was also the fifth floor up. And the note--in both reports--re how long
the person was there indicates that both concern the same person and the
same floor.

Sawyer, then, did in fact report shells found on the fifth floor (up).
Which, if true, was why Fritz would have needed to pick them up--and
transport then to the sixth floor. This much would have been set up
BEFORE the assassination. Fritz and his detectives R.M. Sims and E.L.
Boyd just had to pretend that they did not touch the shells before they
were photographed. (Sims Exhibit A p2) Things were running
smoothly--until Sawyer spoke to reporters.

The shells would be photographed on the sixth floor. Fritz had done his
job. But Sawyer's blabbing complicated matters. He had inextricably tied
the snacking sniper's shells to the fried chicken. Fritz could not have
foreseen that the sniper would leave behind some chicken as well as empty
hulls. The chicken would have to be relocated to the sixth floor some
other way, anecdotally rather than physically.

To this end, several deputy sheriffs and city policemen would attest to
the "fact" that they saw pieces of chicken in the sixth-floor sniper's
"nest"--Deputy Luke Mooney ("on one of these cartons was a half-eaten
piece of chicken"), Deputy A.D. McCurley ("expended shells... along with a
half-eaten piece of chicken that was laying [sic] on a cardboard carton"),
Deputy Harry Weatherford ("a partially eaten piece of chicken on top of
one of the cartons"), Sgt. Gerald Hill ("on top of the larger stack of
boxes... was a chicken leg bone"), and Patrolman E.D. Brewer ("a piece of
chicken [under the SE corner window)".

Unfortunately for Fritz & co., the two photographers in the depository
that day undercut the story of the half-eaten piece of chicken in the
sixth-floor "nest. Alyea: "There definitely were no chicken bones on or
near the barricade or boxes at the window ("Secrets from the Sixth Floor
Window", pp42-3). DPD Crime Scene Detective Robert Studebaker: "[If there
was a piece of chicken partly eaten up on top of one of the boxes], it
ought to be in one of these pictures", the pictures which Studebaker took
of the sixth floor (hearings v7 p147). Unfortunately, again, for Fritz,
he was upstairs when Sawyer, out front, was ruinously linking the hulls
with the chicken remnants. Those loose ends will kill you.

The DPD detectives charged with preserving the scene on the sixth
floor--between about 1:10 and 2:30--did not mention chicken in the "nest",
in their original reports. Det. Leslie Montgomery mentioned a "long brown
paper sack". Det. Marvin Johnson mentioned a Dr. Pepper bottle and a
"brown paper bag which had been used for a lunch sack", which was found
"two aisles... west" of the "nest" (Pictures of the Pain, p527). And
there are photos taken outside the building of Johnson with the lunch bag
and bottle (Pictures of the Pain, p338) and Montgomery with the long paper
sack (ibid, p552). But no photos of either man with pieces of chicken.

The after-the-fact story of the half-eaten piece of chicken on the carton
eventually became a LONG after-the-fact story of pieces of chicken
scattered all over the sixth floor, in the respective testimonies of
Montgomery and Johnson. On April 6, 1964, Montgomery testified that
"there was one piece of chicken on a box and there was a piece on the
floor" (v7p97). Meanwhile, Johnson said, "Now over to the right, which
would be back toward the west of the window, there was a lunch sack--a
brown paper bag--and some remnants of fried chicken, and a pop bottle"
(v7p102).

Despite these yeoman efforts to inject, retrospectively, new pieces of
evidence, or chicken, into their initial reports, the fact remains that
the chicken in question--whether on a box, on the "nest" floor or two
aisles over--seemed to simply evaporate. No one thought to check the
fifth floor. As Johnson testified, "I know we kept the lunch sack and the
Dr. Pepper bottle.... We turned ["the lunch sack"] into the crime lab"
(p105). Counsel David Belin isn't quick enough to ask what happened to
those loose pieces of chicken, ask why they weren't as important,
apparently, as the pop bottle and the lunch bag--only important enough,
now, to mention, in retrospect; not important enough, at the time, to
mention, or to preserve.

In the end, it's one of DPD's own, appropriately, who exposes the DPD,
along with a litter of deputies. Studebaker--who could hardly deny his
own photos--exposes the apparent lies of Hill, Brewer, Mooney, McCurley,
and Weatherford: "It ought to be in one of these pictures." It was not,
thanks to the Fritz/Sawyer crossed wires. Loose ends....

dcw
Loading...