Discussion:
The Men That Don’t Fit In
(too old to reply)
claviger
2018-07-07 12:49:38 UTC
Permalink
PARANOIA
The Conspiracy Reader


The Men That Don’t Fit In:
Interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III
By Joan d’Arc
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/2013/01/the-men-that-dont-fit-in-interview-with-roderick-a-mackenzie-iii/#

Here is what really happened according to mainframetech,
who gives this theory a thumbs up stamp of approval:

Combination of 20 snipers and 4 observers

Thus ended my interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III, although I could
have chatted with the man longer and probably will. I will end this
fantastic tale, with his permission, of the list of the JFK assassination
“killing teams” (from page 71 of The Men That
Don’t Fit In) as told to Roderick A. MacKenzie by Malcolm
“Mac” Wallace in a drunken stupor following the
assassination; take it or leave it, says MacKenzie:

Command area on the second floor of the Texas School Book Depository
(TSBD):
Cliff Carter, Carlos Marcello, Jack Rubenstein, George Reese;

In the alley behind the fence and above the so-called Grassy Knoll:
Clyde Foust, John Ernst, Jack Grimm, Joseph P. Dugan;

Under the bridge in case the president was not shot, and
above the railroad area (these people were never used):
Charles Harrelson, Percy Chauncy Holt, Charles Frederick Rogers,
a man called “Dimitri” from ACCC;

Roof of the County Records Building:
Harry Weatherford, Roger Craig, Richard Scalzetti, Michael Victor Mertz;

Sixth floor of the TSBD
in the nest and other setup areas:
Ruth Ann Martinez, Lee Harvey Oswald (under a spell according to Mac),
Mac Wallace, Lawrence Loy Factor;

The Dal-Tex Building
(the team was supposed to be on top but had problems):
Eugene Hale Brading, Frank Fiorelli (Sturgis), Raphael “Chi Chi” Quintero,
Richard Cain.



As MacKenzie writes in The Men That Don’t Fit In, “When I
read the misinformation about what I saw as a simple killing of an
important person, I wonder at the stupidity of the general public. Perhaps
it’s just that they don’t really care. They are just too
busy scratching out a living and so on to give a shit as to what their
so-called leaders are doing. I would say that it’s by design, and
has been from as far back as history goes. But let’s never say
it’s a conspiracy; despite the fact that whenever two or more
people plan anything it is indeed a conspiracy. Being branded a conspiracy
nut ain’t all that bad. Perhaps it’s paid off for me to
have been looking over my shoulder all these years.”


About the Author

Roderick A. MacKenzie, III is the author of the self-published manuscript,
The Men That Don’t Fit In. He is currently an artist living in
Seattle, WA. This interview was published in PARANOIA: The Conspiracy
Reader, Vol. 1, in April, 2010. To order the book please go to:
www.paranoiamagazine.com

Rod MacKenzie has been interviewed on ConspiraZine at KOWA at 106.5 FM in
Olympia, WA, website www.kowalp.org. The first 2-hour radio interview
with Rod MacKenzie is archived at:
www.radio4all.net/index.php/program/33211. A second interview on PsiOp
Radio with Rod MacKenzie by Mack White and S. Miles Lewis may be found at
http://www.psiopradio.com/2010/05/psiop-radio-115-100516-wguest-rod-mackenzie/
Anthony Marsh
2018-07-08 12:55:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
PARANOIA
The Conspiracy Reader
Interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III
By Joan d???Arc
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/2013/01/the-men-that-dont-fit-in-interview-with-roderick-a-mackenzie-iii/#
Here is what really happened according to mainframetech,
Combination of 20 snipers and 4 observers
Thus ended my interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III, although I could
have chatted with the man longer and probably will. I will end this
fantastic tale, with his permission, of the list of the JFK assassination
???killing teams??? (from page 71 of The Men That
Don???t Fit In) as told to Roderick A. MacKenzie by Malcolm
???Mac??? Wallace in a drunken stupor following the
Command area on the second floor of the Texas School Book Depository
Cliff Carter, Carlos Marcello, Jack Rubenstein, George Reese;
Clyde Foust, John Ernst, Jack Grimm, Joseph P. Dugan;
Under the bridge in case the president was not shot, and
Charles Harrelson, Percy Chauncy Holt, Charles Frederick Rogers,
a man called ???Dimitri??? from ACCC;
Harry Weatherford, Roger Craig, Richard Scalzetti, Michael Victor Mertz;
Sixth floor of the TSBD
Ruth Ann Martinez, Lee Harvey Oswald (under a spell according to Mac),
Mac Wallace, Lawrence Loy Factor;
The Dal-Tex Building
Eugene Hale Brading, Frank Fiorelli (Sturgis), Raphael ???Chi Chi??? Quintero,
Richard Cain.
As MacKenzie writes in The Men That Don???t Fit In, ???When I
read the misinformation about what I saw as a simple killing of an
important person, I wonder at the stupidity of the general public. Perhaps
it???s just that they don???t really care. They are just too
busy scratching out a living and so on to give a shit as to what their
so-called leaders are doing. I would say that it???s by design, and
has been from as far back as history goes. But let???s never say
it???s a conspiracy; despite the fact that whenever two or more
people plan anything it is indeed a conspiracy. Being branded a conspiracy
nut ain???t all that bad. Perhaps it???s paid off for me to
have been looking over my shoulder all these years.???
About the Author
Roderick A. MacKenzie, III is the author of the self-published manuscript,
The Men That Don???t Fit In. He is currently an artist living in
Seattle, WA. This interview was published in PARANOIA: The Conspiracy
www.paranoiamagazine.com
Rod MacKenzie has been interviewed on ConspiraZine at KOWA at 106.5 FM in
Olympia, WA, website www.kowalp.org. The first 2-hour radio interview
www.radio4all.net/index.php/program/33211. A second interview on PsiOp
Radio with Rod MacKenzie by Mack White and S. Miles Lewis may be found at
http://www.psiopradio.com/2010/05/psiop-radio-115-100516-wguest-rod-mackenzie/
Self-published. There's your answer right there. The guy is a kook who
couldn't get any reputable publisher to publish it. So according to him
there are never any conspiracies. Guess we don't need the police or the
FBI then. And Watergate was just an accident, because they were actually
looking for the men's room and got lost! ;]>
bpete1969
2018-07-08 12:55:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
PARANOIA
The Conspiracy Reader
Interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III
By Joan d’Arc
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/2013/01/the-men-that-dont-fit-in-interview-with-roderick-a-mackenzie-iii/#
Here is what really happened according to mainframetech,
Combination of 20 snipers and 4 observers
Thus ended my interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III, although I could
have chatted with the man longer and probably will. I will end this
fantastic tale, with his permission, of the list of the JFK assassination
“killing teams” (from page 71 of The Men That
Don’t Fit In) as told to Roderick A. MacKenzie by Malcolm
“Mac” Wallace in a drunken stupor following the
Command area on the second floor of the Texas School Book Depository
Cliff Carter, Carlos Marcello, Jack Rubenstein, George Reese;
Clyde Foust, John Ernst, Jack Grimm, Joseph P. Dugan;
Under the bridge in case the president was not shot, and
Charles Harrelson, Percy Chauncy Holt, Charles Frederick Rogers,
a man called “Dimitri” from ACCC;
Harry Weatherford, Roger Craig, Richard Scalzetti, Michael Victor Mertz;
Sixth floor of the TSBD
Ruth Ann Martinez, Lee Harvey Oswald (under a spell according to Mac),
Mac Wallace, Lawrence Loy Factor;
The Dal-Tex Building
Eugene Hale Brading, Frank Fiorelli (Sturgis), Raphael “Chi Chi” Quintero,
Richard Cain.
As MacKenzie writes in The Men That Don’t Fit In, “When I
read the misinformation about what I saw as a simple killing of an
important person, I wonder at the stupidity of the general public. Perhaps
it’s just that they don’t really care. They are just too
busy scratching out a living and so on to give a shit as to what their
so-called leaders are doing. I would say that it’s by design, and
has been from as far back as history goes. But let’s never say
it’s a conspiracy; despite the fact that whenever two or more
people plan anything it is indeed a conspiracy. Being branded a conspiracy
nut ain’t all that bad. Perhaps it’s paid off for me to
have been looking over my shoulder all these years.”
About the Author
Roderick A. MacKenzie, III is the author of the self-published manuscript,
The Men That Don’t Fit In. He is currently an artist living in
Seattle, WA. This interview was published in PARANOIA: The Conspiracy
www.paranoiamagazine.com
Rod MacKenzie has been interviewed on ConspiraZine at KOWA at 106.5 FM in
Olympia, WA, website www.kowalp.org. The first 2-hour radio interview
www.radio4all.net/index.php/program/33211. A second interview on PsiOp
Radio with Rod MacKenzie by Mack White and S. Miles Lewis may be found at
http://www.psiopradio.com/2010/05/psiop-radio-115-100516-wguest-rod-mackenzie/
Boy, that Jack Ruby sure gets around.
mainframetech
2018-07-09 14:32:48 UTC
Permalink
On Saturday, July 7, 2018 at 8:49:40 AM UTC-4, claviger wrote:




I'm sure tired of going around correcting all your mistakes!
Post by claviger
PARANOIA
The Conspiracy Reader
Interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III
By Joan d’Arc
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/2013/01/the-men-that-dont-fit-in-interview-with-roderick-a-mackenzie-iii/#
Here is what really happened according to mainframetech,
I do NOT see this as a "theory" like the WCR. It is statements of a
person who has led a full life and now wants to get the story out now that
he has less fear of retribution. Many people interested in the
assassination of JFK have stated a belief that when the get old enough, a
number of people will come out with the truth of that day's events.
Regarding the book, it has the ring of truth. But what Claviger failed to
do was to point out that the story of Dealey Plaza was corroborated by
another old guy in another book.

That other book was "The Men on the Sixth Floor" by Collum and Sample.
It is the statement of an American Indian named Lawrence Loy Factor, who
was paid $10,000 to be part of a shooting team firing on the POTUS at
Dealey Plaza. He was near dying when he was interviewed by the authors,
so it was almost a 'dying declaration'. He verified separately the
shooting team mentioned by the previous book, as to the team members that
were on the 6th floor of the TSBD.

So we have corroboration among 2 men of elder years, of their
participation on the murder of JFK. For years many have invested their
time and energy in denying that there was a plot to murder JFK, but these
facts and many more have shown that it was real. Read the books, and see
if you can be objective enough to accept the facts stated in them.

Chris
Post by claviger
Combination of 20 snipers and 4 observers
Thus ended my interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III, although I could
have chatted with the man longer and probably will. I will end this
fantastic tale, with his permission, of the list of the JFK assassination
“killing teams” (from page 71 of The Men That
Don’t Fit In) as told to Roderick A. MacKenzie by Malcolm
“Mac” Wallace in a drunken stupor following the
Command area on the second floor of the Texas School Book Depository
Cliff Carter, Carlos Marcello, Jack Rubenstein, George Reese;
Clyde Foust, John Ernst, Jack Grimm, Joseph P. Dugan;
Under the bridge in case the president was not shot, and
Charles Harrelson, Percy Chauncy Holt, Charles Frederick Rogers,
a man called “Dimitri” from ACCC;
Harry Weatherford, Roger Craig, Richard Scalzetti, Michael Victor Mertz;
Sixth floor of the TSBD
Ruth Ann Martinez, Lee Harvey Oswald (under a spell according to Mac),
Mac Wallace, Lawrence Loy Factor;
The Dal-Tex Building
Eugene Hale Brading, Frank Fiorelli (Sturgis), Raphael “Chi Chi” Quintero,
Richard Cain.
As MacKenzie writes in The Men That Don’t Fit In, “When I
read the misinformation about what I saw as a simple killing of an
important person, I wonder at the stupidity of the general public. Perhaps
it’s just that they don’t really care. They are just too
busy scratching out a living and so on to give a shit as to what their
so-called leaders are doing. I would say that it’s by design, and
has been from as far back as history goes. But let’s never say
it’s a conspiracy; despite the fact that whenever two or more
people plan anything it is indeed a conspiracy. Being branded a conspiracy
nut ain’t all that bad. Perhaps it’s paid off for me to
have been looking over my shoulder all these years.”
About the Author
Roderick A. MacKenzie, III is the author of the self-published manuscript,
The Men That Don’t Fit In. He is currently an artist living in
Seattle, WA. This interview was published in PARANOIA: The Conspiracy
www.paranoiamagazine.com
Rod MacKenzie has been interviewed on ConspiraZine at KOWA at 106.5 FM in
Olympia, WA, website www.kowalp.org. The first 2-hour radio interview
www.radio4all.net/index.php/program/33211. A second interview on PsiOp
Radio with Rod MacKenzie by Mack White and S. Miles Lewis may be found at
http://www.psiopradio.com/2010/05/psiop-radio-115-100516-wguest-rod-mackenzie/
claviger
2018-07-10 04:00:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by mainframetech
I'm sure tired of going around correcting all your mistakes!
How about correcting your own mistakes. That seems to be a
never ending job you rely on others to do on this Newsgroup.
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
PARANOIA
The Conspiracy Reader
Interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III
By Joan d’Arc
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/2013/01/the-men-that-dont-fit-in-interview-with-roderick-a-mackenzie-iii/#
Here is what really happened according to mainframetech,
I do NOT see this as a "theory" like the WCR. It is statements
of a person who has led a full life and now wants to get the
story out now that he has less fear of retribution. Many people
interested in the assassination of JFK have stated a belief that
when the get old enough, a number of people will come out
with the truth of that day's events. Regarding the book, it has
the ring of truth. But what Claviger failed to do was to point
out that the story of Dealey Plaza was corroborated by another
old guy in another book.
There have been several theories that have "the ring of truth" to
the author but they all can't be right, just like these two theories
that impressed you so much. You look at them as co-supporting
each other but actually they're in competition for credibility.
Post by mainframetech
That other book was "The Men on the Sixth Floor" by Collum
and Sample. It is the statement of an American Indian named
Lawrence Loy Factor, who was paid $10,000 to be part of a
shooting team firing on the POTUS at Dealey Plaza. He was
near dying when he was interviewed by the authors, so it was
almost a 'dying declaration'. He verified separately the shooting
team mentioned by the previous book, as to the team members
that were on the 6th floor of the TSBD.
This is one of the more interesting theories that has a measure
of rational possibility, but includes LHO as a willing participant.
The authors make no mention of several other shots being fired
and wondering who they were. These authors wants to take full
responsibility for all shots fired at the motorcade. So these two
stories you offer as evidence are in competition with each other.
Post by mainframetech
So we have corroboration among 2 men of elder years, of their
participation on the murder of JFK. For years many have invested
their time and energy in denying that there was a plot to murder
JFK, but these facts and many more have shown that it was real.
Read the books, and see if you can be objective enough to accept
the facts stated in them.
Chris
I can be objective about any and all theories, something you find
impossible to do. You have no concept on how to vet your own
proposals and fail to see the internal conflicts so you blunder on
down the road past the "Bridge Is Out" warning signs full speed
ahead.

In this situation you have the mistaken impression these two theories
can coexist. I see the fundamental conflicts, so it is baffling why you
believe they support each other.
mainframetech
2018-07-10 22:45:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
I'm sure tired of going around correcting all your mistakes!
How about correcting your own mistakes. That seems to be a
never ending job you rely on others to do on this Newsgroup.
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
PARANOIA
The Conspiracy Reader
Interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III
By Joan d’Arc
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/2013/01/the-men-that-dont-fit-in-interview-with-roderick-a-mackenzie-iii/#
Here is what really happened according to mainframetech,
I do NOT see this as a "theory" like the WCR. It is statements
of a person who has led a full life and now wants to get the
story out now that he has less fear of retribution. Many people
interested in the assassination of JFK have stated a belief that
when the get old enough, a number of people will come out
with the truth of that day's events. Regarding the book, it has
the ring of truth. But what Claviger failed to do was to point
out that the story of Dealey Plaza was corroborated by another
old guy in another book.
There have been several theories that have "the ring of truth" to
the author but they all can't be right, just like these two theories
that impressed you so much. You look at them as co-supporting
each other but actually they're in competition for credibility.
WRONG!! You apparently didn't listen when I spoke about it before, but
I don't care for "theories" like the WCR depends on. The 2 books that I
referenced corroborated each other, and were the statements of people who
were part of the case. Their statements were of what they saw or knew,
not some silly "theories". And they both separately repeated who was on
the 6th floor of the TSBD firing at the motorcade. Neither said it was
Oswald.
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
That other book was "The Men on the Sixth Floor" by Collum
and Sample. It is the statement of an American Indian named
Lawrence Loy Factor, who was paid $10,000 to be part of a
shooting team firing on the POTUS at Dealey Plaza. He was
near dying when he was interviewed by the authors, so it was
almost a 'dying declaration'. He verified separately the shooting
team mentioned by the previous book, as to the team members
that were on the 6th floor of the TSBD.
This is one of the more interesting theories that has a measure
of rational possibility, but includes LHO as a willing participant.
The authors make no mention of several other shots being fired
and wondering who they were. These authors wants to take full
responsibility for all shots fired at the motorcade. So these two
stories you offer as evidence are in competition with each other.
WRONG again! I'll correct you on your wrong statements. The book
does NOT inform about a "theory". It relates the real experiences of a
person, Lawrence Loy Factor. The authors do NOT take responsibility for
ALL shots in Dealey Plaza, with the exception that they say that a woman
(Ruth Ann Martinez) was using a walkie-talkie to signal other shooters
around the plaza when to fire at the motorcade. The two stories are NOT
in conflict. That was one of your mistakes.
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
So we have corroboration among 2 men of elder years, of their
participation on the murder of JFK. For years many have invested
their time and energy in denying that there was a plot to murder
JFK, but these facts and many more have shown that it was real.
Read the books, and see if you can be objective enough to accept
the facts stated in them.
Chris
I can be objective about any and all theories, something you find
impossible to do. You have no concept on how to vet your own
proposals and fail to see the internal conflicts so you blunder on
down the road past the "Bridge Is Out" warning signs full speed
ahead.
Blundering has been your territory, and was so this time too. I have
answered all your "conflicts", and if you have more, go ahead and try them
out. So far they've all been yours.
Post by claviger
In this situation you have the mistaken impression these two theories
can coexist. I see the fundamental conflicts, so it is baffling why you
believe they support each other.
It's amazing that you can see beyond your nose. You've made (as
usual) a bunch of mistakes, but believed them before you got confirmation
from me. First, there were NO "THEORIES" involved, but real stories being
related by witnesses to the actions and events. Second, the two stories
do indeed coexist. I can see no conflicts, but I'm open to you trying
again. Let me know if I haven't straightened you out this time.

Chris
bigdog
2018-07-12 02:03:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
I'm sure tired of going around correcting all your mistakes!
How about correcting your own mistakes. That seems to be a
never ending job you rely on others to do on this Newsgroup.
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
PARANOIA
The Conspiracy Reader
Interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III
By Joan d’Arc
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/2013/01/the-men-that-dont-fit-in-interview-with-roderick-a-mackenzie-iii/#
Here is what really happened according to mainframetech,
I do NOT see this as a "theory" like the WCR. It is statements
of a person who has led a full life and now wants to get the
story out now that he has less fear of retribution. Many people
interested in the assassination of JFK have stated a belief that
when the get old enough, a number of people will come out
with the truth of that day's events. Regarding the book, it has
the ring of truth. But what Claviger failed to do was to point
out that the story of Dealey Plaza was corroborated by another
old guy in another book.
There have been several theories that have "the ring of truth" to
the author but they all can't be right, just like these two theories
that impressed you so much. You look at them as co-supporting
each other but actually they're in competition for credibility.
WRONG!! You apparently didn't listen when I spoke about it before, but
I don't care for "theories" like the WCR depends on. The 2 books that I
referenced corroborated each other,
Books don't corroborate each other. Books are not evidence.
Post by mainframetech
and were the statements of people who were part of the case.
They were the statements of the authors.
Post by mainframetech
Their statements were of what they saw or knew,
not some silly "theories". And they both separately repeated who was on
the 6th floor of the TSBD firing at the motorcade. Neither said it was
Oswald.
We only have the authors' word for that. Conveniently, they cite dead
people as their source. That way they don't have to worry about their
sources refuting what they write.
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
That other book was "The Men on the Sixth Floor" by Collum
and Sample. It is the statement of an American Indian named
Lawrence Loy Factor, who was paid $10,000 to be part of a
shooting team firing on the POTUS at Dealey Plaza. He was
near dying when he was interviewed by the authors, so it was
almost a 'dying declaration'. He verified separately the shooting
team mentioned by the previous book, as to the team members
that were on the 6th floor of the TSBD.
This is one of the more interesting theories that has a measure
of rational possibility, but includes LHO as a willing participant.
The authors make no mention of several other shots being fired
and wondering who they were. These authors wants to take full
responsibility for all shots fired at the motorcade. So these two
stories you offer as evidence are in competition with each other.
WRONG again! I'll correct you on your wrong statements. The book
does NOT inform about a "theory". It relates the real experiences of a
person, Lawrence Loy Factor.
That' what the authors claimed.
Post by mainframetech
The authors do NOT take responsibility for
ALL shots in Dealey Plaza, with the exception that they say that a woman
(Ruth Ann Martinez) was using a walkie-talkie to signal other shooters
around the plaza when to fire at the motorcade. The two stories are NOT
in conflict. That was one of your mistakes.
The stories are laughable.
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
So we have corroboration among 2 men of elder years, of their
participation on the murder of JFK. For years many have invested
their time and energy in denying that there was a plot to murder
JFK, but these facts and many more have shown that it was real.
Read the books, and see if you can be objective enough to accept
the facts stated in them.
Chris
I can be objective about any and all theories, something you find
impossible to do. You have no concept on how to vet your own
proposals and fail to see the internal conflicts so you blunder on
down the road past the "Bridge Is Out" warning signs full speed
ahead.
Blundering has been your territory, and was so this time too. I have
answered all your "conflicts", and if you have more, go ahead and try them
out. So far they've all been yours.
Post by claviger
In this situation you have the mistaken impression these two theories
can coexist. I see the fundamental conflicts, so it is baffling why you
believe they support each other.
It's amazing that you can see beyond your nose. You've made (as
usual) a bunch of mistakes, but believed them before you got confirmation
from me. First, there were NO "THEORIES" involved, but real stories being
related by witnesses to the actions and events. Second, the two stories
do indeed coexist. I can see no conflicts, but I'm open to you trying
again. Let me know if I haven't straightened you out this time.
You can't even keep your own stories straight.
mainframetech
2018-07-13 01:08:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
I'm sure tired of going around correcting all your mistakes!
How about correcting your own mistakes. That seems to be a
never ending job you rely on others to do on this Newsgroup.
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
PARANOIA
The Conspiracy Reader
Interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III
By Joan d’Arc
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/2013/01/the-men-that-dont-fit-in-interview-with-roderick-a-mackenzie-iii/#
Here is what really happened according to mainframetech,
I do NOT see this as a "theory" like the WCR. It is statements
of a person who has led a full life and now wants to get the
story out now that he has less fear of retribution. Many people
interested in the assassination of JFK have stated a belief that
when the get old enough, a number of people will come out
with the truth of that day's events. Regarding the book, it has
the ring of truth. But what Claviger failed to do was to point
out that the story of Dealey Plaza was corroborated by another
old guy in another book.
There have been several theories that have "the ring of truth" to
the author but they all can't be right, just like these two theories
that impressed you so much. You look at them as co-supporting
each other but actually they're in competition for credibility.
WRONG!! You apparently didn't listen when I spoke about it before, but
I don't care for "theories" like the WCR depends on. The 2 books that I
referenced corroborated each other,
Books don't corroborate each other. Books are not evidence.
You really need to get a check on your understanding. Books in this
case are biographical and are the words said by the person the book is
about. In effect, a report on what that person said. So we have 2 person
saying things that match, and they are coming from different places. So
stick it.

As one guy told you, you're an arguer, and he was a solver. Me, I'm
somewhere in between. I'll do some arguing to help you understand, but
there's a point where I realize you're a hopes case and I give it up.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
and were the statements of people who were part of the case.
They were the statements of the authors.
NO. The books were the reports of the authors as to what the main
characters had to say.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Their statements were of what they saw or knew,
not some silly "theories". And they both separately repeated who was on
the 6th floor of the TSBD firing at the motorcade. Neither said it was
Oswald.
We only have the authors' word for that. Conveniently, they cite dead
people as their source. That way they don't have to worry about their
sources refuting what they write.
Most books in this case are citing dead people, so that's nothing new.
Bugliosi used many dead people.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
That other book was "The Men on the Sixth Floor" by Collum
and Sample. It is the statement of an American Indian named
Lawrence Loy Factor, who was paid $10,000 to be part of a
shooting team firing on the POTUS at Dealey Plaza. He was
near dying when he was interviewed by the authors, so it was
almost a 'dying declaration'. He verified separately the shooting
team mentioned by the previous book, as to the team members
that were on the 6th floor of the TSBD.
This is one of the more interesting theories that has a measure
of rational possibility, but includes LHO as a willing participant.
The authors make no mention of several other shots being fired
and wondering who they were. These authors wants to take full
responsibility for all shots fired at the motorcade. So these two
stories you offer as evidence are in competition with each other.
WRONG again! I'll correct you on your wrong statements. The book
does NOT inform about a "theory". It relates the real experiences of a
person, Lawrence Loy Factor.
That' what the authors claimed.
You mean like the things that Bugliosi claimed?
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
The authors do NOT take responsibility for
ALL shots in Dealey Plaza, with the exception that they say that a woman
(Ruth Ann Martinez) was using a walkie-talkie to signal other shooters
around the plaza when to fire at the motorcade. The two stories are NOT
in conflict. That was one of your mistakes.
The stories are laughable.
As are your many objections.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
So we have corroboration among 2 men of elder years, of their
participation on the murder of JFK. For years many have invested
their time and energy in denying that there was a plot to murder
JFK, but these facts and many more have shown that it was real.
Read the books, and see if you can be objective enough to accept
the facts stated in them.
Chris
I can be objective about any and all theories, something you find
impossible to do. You have no concept on how to vet your own
proposals and fail to see the internal conflicts so you blunder on
down the road past the "Bridge Is Out" warning signs full speed
ahead.
Blundering has been your territory, and was so this time too. I have
answered all your "conflicts", and if you have more, go ahead and try them
out. So far they've all been yours.
Post by claviger
In this situation you have the mistaken impression these two theories
can coexist. I see the fundamental conflicts, so it is baffling why you
believe they support each other.
It's amazing that you can see beyond your nose. You've made (as
usual) a bunch of mistakes, but believed them before you got confirmation
from me. First, there were NO "THEORIES" involved, but real stories being
related by witnesses to the actions and events. Second, the two stories
do indeed coexist. I can see no conflicts, but I'm open to you trying
again. Let me know if I haven't straightened you out this time.
You can't even keep your own stories straight.
Another failure.

Chris
bigdog
2018-07-13 14:55:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
I'm sure tired of going around correcting all your mistakes!
How about correcting your own mistakes. That seems to be a
never ending job you rely on others to do on this Newsgroup.
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
PARANOIA
The Conspiracy Reader
Interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III
By Joan d’Arc
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/2013/01/the-men-that-dont-fit-in-interview-with-roderick-a-mackenzie-iii/#
Here is what really happened according to mainframetech,
I do NOT see this as a "theory" like the WCR. It is statements
of a person who has led a full life and now wants to get the
story out now that he has less fear of retribution. Many people
interested in the assassination of JFK have stated a belief that
when the get old enough, a number of people will come out
with the truth of that day's events. Regarding the book, it has
the ring of truth. But what Claviger failed to do was to point
out that the story of Dealey Plaza was corroborated by another
old guy in another book.
There have been several theories that have "the ring of truth" to
the author but they all can't be right, just like these two theories
that impressed you so much. You look at them as co-supporting
each other but actually they're in competition for credibility.
WRONG!! You apparently didn't listen when I spoke about it before, but
I don't care for "theories" like the WCR depends on. The 2 books that I
referenced corroborated each other,
Books don't corroborate each other. Books are not evidence.
You really need to get a check on your understanding. Books in this
case are biographical and are the words said by the person the book is
about.
Or they are words completely made up by the authors. You have no way of
knowing the difference.
Post by mainframetech
In effect, a report on what that person said. So we have 2 person
saying things that match, and they are coming from different places. So
stick it.
After one author makes up a story, it's easy for the next one to just
enhance it. That doesn't mean the second guy is corroborating the
first.
Post by mainframetech
As one guy told you, you're an arguer, and he was a solver. Me, I'm
somewhere in between.
If you were a solver, you would already know the crime was solved 54 years
ago. You still seem to be buffaloed.
Post by mainframetech
I'll do some arguing to help you understand, but
there's a point where I realize you're a hopes case and I give it up.
Oh, goody.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
and were the statements of people who were part of the case.
They were the statements of the authors.
NO. The books were the reports of the authors as to what the main
characters had to say.
How do you know the main characters told the authors that? How do you know
the authors didn't just make it up to sell books.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Their statements were of what they saw or knew,
not some silly "theories". And they both separately repeated who was on
the 6th floor of the TSBD firing at the motorcade. Neither said it was
Oswald.
We only have the authors' word for that. Conveniently, they cite dead
people as their source. That way they don't have to worry about their
sources refuting what they write.
Most books in this case are citing dead people, so that's nothing new.
Bugliosi used many dead people.
Lots of live ones too.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
That other book was "The Men on the Sixth Floor" by Collum
and Sample. It is the statement of an American Indian named
Lawrence Loy Factor, who was paid $10,000 to be part of a
shooting team firing on the POTUS at Dealey Plaza. He was
near dying when he was interviewed by the authors, so it was
almost a 'dying declaration'. He verified separately the shooting
team mentioned by the previous book, as to the team members
that were on the 6th floor of the TSBD.
This is one of the more interesting theories that has a measure
of rational possibility, but includes LHO as a willing participant.
The authors make no mention of several other shots being fired
and wondering who they were. These authors wants to take full
responsibility for all shots fired at the motorcade. So these two
stories you offer as evidence are in competition with each other.
WRONG again! I'll correct you on your wrong statements. The book
does NOT inform about a "theory". It relates the real experiences of a
person, Lawrence Loy Factor.
That' what the authors claimed.
You mean like the things that Bugliosi claimed?
Has any of the living people Bugliosi used as references disputed they he
said they told him?
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
The authors do NOT take responsibility for
ALL shots in Dealey Plaza, with the exception that they say that a woman
(Ruth Ann Martinez) was using a walkie-talkie to signal other shooters
around the plaza when to fire at the motorcade. The two stories are NOT
in conflict. That was one of your mistakes.
The stories are laughable.
As are your many objections.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
So we have corroboration among 2 men of elder years, of their
participation on the murder of JFK. For years many have invested
their time and energy in denying that there was a plot to murder
JFK, but these facts and many more have shown that it was real.
Read the books, and see if you can be objective enough to accept
the facts stated in them.
Chris
I can be objective about any and all theories, something you find
impossible to do. You have no concept on how to vet your own
proposals and fail to see the internal conflicts so you blunder on
down the road past the "Bridge Is Out" warning signs full speed
ahead.
Blundering has been your territory, and was so this time too. I have
answered all your "conflicts", and if you have more, go ahead and try them
out. So far they've all been yours.
Post by claviger
In this situation you have the mistaken impression these two theories
can coexist. I see the fundamental conflicts, so it is baffling why you
believe they support each other.
It's amazing that you can see beyond your nose. You've made (as
usual) a bunch of mistakes, but believed them before you got confirmation
from me. First, there were NO "THEORIES" involved, but real stories being
related by witnesses to the actions and events. Second, the two stories
do indeed coexist. I can see no conflicts, but I'm open to you trying
again. Let me know if I haven't straightened you out this time.
You can't even keep your own stories straight.
Another failure.
You should be used to your failures by now. A month or two from now you
will have discarded these theories in favor of something new. I guess that
keeps things interesting for you. Meanwhile we LNs are stuck with the same
boring story, year after year, decade after decade.
bigdog
2018-07-10 14:18:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by mainframetech
I'm sure tired of going around correcting all your mistakes!
Post by claviger
PARANOIA
The Conspiracy Reader
Interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III
By Joan d’Arc
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/2013/01/the-men-that-dont-fit-in-interview-with-roderick-a-mackenzie-iii/#
Here is what really happened according to mainframetech,
I do NOT see this as a "theory" like the WCR. It is statements of a
person who has led a full life and now wants to get the story out now that
he has less fear of retribution. Many people interested in the
assassination of JFK have stated a belief that when the get old enough, a
number of people will come out with the truth of that day's events.
Regarding the book, it has the ring of truth.
That's one way of saying that you want to believe it and you don't care if
there is any corroborating evidence.
Post by mainframetech
But what Claviger failed to
do was to point out that the story of Dealey Plaza was corroborated by
another old guy in another book.
Two people telling the same tall tale is not corroboration.
Post by mainframetech
That other book was "The Men on the Sixth Floor" by Collum and Sample.
It is the statement of an American Indian named Lawrence Loy Factor,
No, it is the story of Collum and Sample who have no corroborating
evidence to support what they claim Loy Factor said. Why would they
interview this guy and not record what he was telling them?
Post by mainframetech
who was paid $10,000 to be part of a shooting team firing on the POTUS at
Dealey Plaza.
That's what Collum and Sample told you.
Post by mainframetech
He was near dying when he was interviewed by the authors,
so it was almost a 'dying declaration'.
If only there were some evidence he made that declaration.
Post by mainframetech
He verified separately the
shooting team mentioned by the previous book, as to the team members that
were on the 6th floor of the TSBD.
So Collum and Sample took a story another author cooked up and added their
only elements to it. Some corroboration.

Can you give us an example of an allegation they made which could not have
been just made up out of thin air?
Post by mainframetech
So we have corroboration among 2 men of elder years, of their
participation on the murder of JFK. For years many have invested their
time and energy in denying that there was a plot to murder JFK, but these
facts and many more have shown that it was real. Read the books, and see
if you can be objective enough to accept the facts stated in them.
Isn't it amazing how these books never got published until after the
alleged confessors had kicked the bucket and couldn't refute what was
attributed to them.
mainframetech
2018-07-12 02:43:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
I'm sure tired of going around correcting all your mistakes!
Post by claviger
PARANOIA
The Conspiracy Reader
Interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III
By Joan d’Arc
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/2013/01/the-men-that-dont-fit-in-interview-with-roderick-a-mackenzie-iii/#
Here is what really happened according to mainframetech,
I do NOT see this as a "theory" like the WCR. It is statements of a
person who has led a full life and now wants to get the story out now that
he has less fear of retribution. Many people interested in the
assassination of JFK have stated a belief that when the get old enough, a
number of people will come out with the truth of that day's events.
Regarding the book, it has the ring of truth.
That's one way of saying that you want to believe it and you don't care if
there is any corroborating evidence.
Fortunately, unbeknownst to you, there is corroboration. There is
another book "The Men on the Sixth Floor" by Collum and Sample where the
person it is about had an experience where he went with others up to the
6th floor of the TSBD and fired on the motorcade. His list of people
there matched The first book exactly. It's the same as if 2 people had
separate events they saw and reported on. corroboration.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
But what Claviger failed to
do was to point out that the story of Dealey Plaza was corroborated by
another old guy in another book.
Two people telling the same tall tale is not corroboration.
WRONG! It is the fact that the tale is the same from separate origins
that makes it corroboration. And it takes average intelligence to see
that.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
That other book was "The Men on the Sixth Floor" by Collum and Sample.
It is the statement of an American Indian named Lawrence Loy Factor,
No, it is the story of Collum and Sample who have no corroborating
evidence to support what they claim Loy Factor said. Why would they
interview this guy and not record what he was telling them?
I would think they recorded all they could of what he said. It was
his story, after all.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
who was paid $10,000 to be part of a shooting team firing on the POTUS at
Dealey Plaza.
That's what Collum and Sample told you.
WRONG! That's what Factor said that Collum and Sample repeated to me
through their book.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
He was near dying when he was interviewed by the authors,
so it was almost a 'dying declaration'.
If only there were some evidence he made that declaration.
As usual, you forget that there were 2 witnesses to what was said by
Factor. Collum and Sample.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
He verified separately the
shooting team mentioned by the previous book, as to the team members that
were on the 6th floor of the TSBD.
So Collum and Sample took a story another author cooked up and added their
only elements to it. Some corroboration.
Prove it. Otherwise it stands.
Post by bigdog
Can you give us an example of an allegation they made which could not have
been just made up out of thin air?
Sounds like the SBT in the WCR...:)
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
So we have corroboration among 2 men of elder years, of their
participation on the murder of JFK. For years many have invested their
time and energy in denying that there was a plot to murder JFK, but these
facts and many more have shown that it was real. Read the books, and see
if you can be objective enough to accept the facts stated in them.
Isn't it amazing how these books never got published until after the
alleged confessors had kicked the bucket and couldn't refute what was
attributed to them.
WRONG as usual! "The Men That Don't Fit In" author is still going
along just fine. When will you ever learn?

Chris
bigdog
2018-07-12 20:31:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
I'm sure tired of going around correcting all your mistakes!
Post by claviger
PARANOIA
The Conspiracy Reader
Interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III
By Joan d’Arc
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/2013/01/the-men-that-dont-fit-in-interview-with-roderick-a-mackenzie-iii/#
Here is what really happened according to mainframetech,
I do NOT see this as a "theory" like the WCR. It is statements of a
person who has led a full life and now wants to get the story out now that
he has less fear of retribution. Many people interested in the
assassination of JFK have stated a belief that when the get old enough, a
number of people will come out with the truth of that day's events.
Regarding the book, it has the ring of truth.
That's one way of saying that you want to believe it and you don't care if
there is any corroborating evidence.
Fortunately, unbeknownst to you, there is corroboration. There is
another book "The Men on the Sixth Floor" by Collum and Sample where the
person it is about had an experience where he went with others up to the
6th floor of the TSBD and fired on the motorcade. His list of people
there matched The first book exactly. It's the same as if 2 people had
separate events they saw and reported on. corroboration.
Two people telling the same cockamamie story isn't corroboration. These
authors don't corroborate each other any more than Lifton and Horne do. In
your world, if one person tells a story it is a theory but if two people
tell it, it becomes a proven fact.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
But what Claviger failed to
do was to point out that the story of Dealey Plaza was corroborated by
another old guy in another book.
Two people telling the same tall tale is not corroboration.
WRONG! It is the fact that the tale is the same from separate origins
that makes it corroboration. And it takes average intelligence to see
that.
Tale is a perfect word to describe these theories.

tale
[tāl]

NOUN

a fictitious or true narrative or story, especially one that is
imaginatively recounted.


Using your definition of corroboration, Reclaiming History corroborates
the WCR. But of course we wouldn't expect you to be consistent with the
standards you employ.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
That other book was "The Men on the Sixth Floor" by Collum and Sample.
It is the statement of an American Indian named Lawrence Loy Factor,
No, it is the story of Collum and Sample who have no corroborating
evidence to support what they claim Loy Factor said. Why would they
interview this guy and not record what he was telling them?
I would think they recorded all they could of what he said. It was
his story, after all.
Have you ever heard these recordings or are you accepting them on faith? A
rhetorical question because we all know what the answer is.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
who was paid $10,000 to be part of a shooting team firing on the POTUS at
Dealey Plaza.
That's what Collum and Sample told you.
WRONG! That's what Factor said that Collum and Sample repeated to me
through their book.
How do you know Factor told Collum and Sample that?
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
He was near dying when he was interviewed by the authors,
so it was almost a 'dying declaration'.
If only there were some evidence he made that declaration.
As usual, you forget that there were 2 witnesses to what was said by
Factor. Collum and Sample.
You never fail to provide a good belly laugh. You really think co-authors
can corroborate each other.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
He verified separately the
shooting team mentioned by the previous book, as to the team members that
were on the 6th floor of the TSBD.
So Collum and Sample took a story another author cooked up and added their
only elements to it. Some corroboration.
Prove it. Otherwise it stands.
Typical of your approach. No matter how bizarre a story is, you'll believe
it unless someone disproves it. You don't care if there is any evidence to
support it.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Can you give us an example of an allegation they made which could not have
been just made up out of thin air?
Sounds like the SBT in the WCR...:)
So your answer is NO.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
So we have corroboration among 2 men of elder years, of their
participation on the murder of JFK. For years many have invested their
time and energy in denying that there was a plot to murder JFK, but these
facts and many more have shown that it was real. Read the books, and see
if you can be objective enough to accept the facts stated in them.
Isn't it amazing how these books never got published until after the
alleged confessors had kicked the bucket and couldn't refute what was
attributed to them.
WRONG as usual! "The Men That Don't Fit In" author is still going
along just fine. When will you ever learn?
I was referring to the people these authors alleged told them these
stories. Are any of them alive. Of course not. These authors know that
dead men can't sue them for libel so they can claim these people said just
about anything without fear of repercussions.
mainframetech
2018-07-13 22:25:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
I'm sure tired of going around correcting all your mistakes!
Post by claviger
PARANOIA
The Conspiracy Reader
Interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III
By Joan d’Arc
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/2013/01/the-men-that-dont-fit-in-interview-with-roderick-a-mackenzie-iii/#
Here is what really happened according to mainframetech,
I do NOT see this as a "theory" like the WCR. It is statements of a
person who has led a full life and now wants to get the story out now that
he has less fear of retribution. Many people interested in the
assassination of JFK have stated a belief that when the get old enough, a
number of people will come out with the truth of that day's events.
Regarding the book, it has the ring of truth.
That's one way of saying that you want to believe it and you don't care if
there is any corroborating evidence.
Fortunately, unbeknownst to you, there is corroboration. There is
another book "The Men on the Sixth Floor" by Collum and Sample where the
person it is about had an experience where he went with others up to the
6th floor of the TSBD and fired on the motorcade. His list of people
there matched The first book exactly. It's the same as if 2 people had
separate events they saw and reported on. corroboration.
Two people telling the same cockamamie story isn't corroboration. These
authors don't corroborate each other any more than Lifton and Horne do. In
your world, if one person tells a story it is a theory but if two people
tell it, it becomes a proven fact.
So because the story threatens your view of things, you need to call
the story 'cockamamie'. Typical effort that has little effect on truth.

In the case of Lifton and Horne, you seem to be unaware that Lifton's
story was not only believed by Horne from what he saw while working on the
ARRB, but Horne actually dug up proofs for much of it. They were in
agreement, not at odds with each other.

And as to your random, chaotic guesswork, forget it. It carries no
weight.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
But what Claviger failed to
do was to point out that the story of Dealey Plaza was corroborated by
another old guy in another book.
Two people telling the same tall tale is not corroboration.
WRONG! It is the fact that the tale is the same from separate origins
that makes it corroboration. And it takes average intelligence to see
that.
Tale is a perfect word to describe these theories.
tale
[tāl]
NOUN
a fictitious or true narrative or story, especially one that is
imaginatively recounted.
Using your definition of corroboration, Reclaiming History corroborates
the WCR. But of course we wouldn't expect you to be consistent with the
standards you employ.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
That other book was "The Men on the Sixth Floor" by Collum and Sample.
It is the statement of an American Indian named Lawrence Loy Factor,
No, it is the story of Collum and Sample who have no corroborating
evidence to support what they claim Loy Factor said. Why would they
interview this guy and not record what he was telling them?
I would think they recorded all they could of what he said. It was
his story, after all.
Have you ever heard these recordings or are you accepting them on faith? A
rhetorical question because we all know what the answer is.
Well, Claviger recently announced that they recorded him. Check with
him.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
who was paid $10,000 to be part of a shooting team firing on the POTUS at
Dealey Plaza.
That's what Collum and Sample told you.
WRONG! That's what Factor said that Collum and Sample repeated to me
through their book.
How do you know Factor told Collum and Sample that?
Ho do you know that the Humes told the truth in his Autopsy Report?
After all, there were detractors to his words. And you're a believer in
Brennan even though he admitted he was discredited.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
He was near dying when he was interviewed by the authors,
so it was almost a 'dying declaration'.
If only there were some evidence he made that declaration.
As usual, you forget that there were 2 witnesses to what was said by
Factor. Collum and Sample.
You never fail to provide a good belly laugh. You really think co-authors
can corroborate each other.
Did you see me say they corroborated each other? Or are you making
things up again as you often do? However, their book corroborates
information from another book which you've been told about.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
He verified separately the
shooting team mentioned by the previous book, as to the team members that
were on the 6th floor of the TSBD.
So Collum and Sample took a story another author cooked up and added their
only elements to it. Some corroboration.
Prove it. Otherwise it stands.
Typical of your approach. No matter how bizarre a story is, you'll believe
it unless someone disproves it. You don't care if there is any evidence to
support it.
WRONG as usual, and you know it!
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Can you give us an example of an allegation they made which could not have
been just made up out of thin air?
Sounds like the SBT in the WCR...:)
So your answer is NO.
WRONG again! You didn't see me say that, so it must be more of your
imagination. As an LN, you have an ego to uphold.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
So we have corroboration among 2 men of elder years, of their
participation on the murder of JFK. For years many have invested their
time and energy in denying that there was a plot to murder JFK, but these
facts and many more have shown that it was real. Read the books, and see
if you can be objective enough to accept the facts stated in them.
Isn't it amazing how these books never got published until after the
alleged confessors had kicked the bucket and couldn't refute what was
attributed to them.
WRONG as usual! "The Men That Don't Fit In" author is still going
along just fine. When will you ever learn?
I was referring to the people these authors alleged told them these
stories. Are any of them alive. Of course not.
WRONG! Don't be silly! The author of that book is the person that
lived it. You seem to have logic problems in even the simple things.
Post by bigdog
These authors know that
dead men can't sue them for libel so they can claim these people said just
about anything without fear of repercussions.
How dumb can people get? "The Men that Don't Fit in" is
autobiographical! Think it through! You think he will sue himself?

Chris
bigdog
2018-07-14 20:45:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
I'm sure tired of going around correcting all your mistakes!
Post by claviger
PARANOIA
The Conspiracy Reader
Interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III
By Joan d’Arc
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/2013/01/the-men-that-dont-fit-in-interview-with-roderick-a-mackenzie-iii/#
Here is what really happened according to mainframetech,
I do NOT see this as a "theory" like the WCR. It is statements of a
person who has led a full life and now wants to get the story out now that
he has less fear of retribution. Many people interested in the
assassination of JFK have stated a belief that when the get old enough, a
number of people will come out with the truth of that day's events.
Regarding the book, it has the ring of truth.
That's one way of saying that you want to believe it and you don't care if
there is any corroborating evidence.
Fortunately, unbeknownst to you, there is corroboration. There is
another book "The Men on the Sixth Floor" by Collum and Sample where the
person it is about had an experience where he went with others up to the
6th floor of the TSBD and fired on the motorcade. His list of people
there matched The first book exactly. It's the same as if 2 people had
separate events they saw and reported on. corroboration.
Two people telling the same cockamamie story isn't corroboration. These
authors don't corroborate each other any more than Lifton and Horne do. In
your world, if one person tells a story it is a theory but if two people
tell it, it becomes a proven fact.
So because the story threatens your view of things, you need to call
the story 'cockamamie'.
No, I call the story cockamamie because the story is cockamamie.
Post by mainframetech
Typical effort that has little effect on truth.
In the case of Lifton and Horne, you seem to be unaware that Lifton's
story was not only believed by Horne from what he saw while working on the
ARRB, but Horne actually dug up proofs for much of it. They were in
agreement, not at odds with each other.
I think they call that "the blind leading the blind". Horne provided no
more proof than Lifton.
Post by mainframetech
And as to your random, chaotic guesswork, forget it. It carries no
weight.
Nor does yours.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
But what Claviger failed to
do was to point out that the story of Dealey Plaza was corroborated by
another old guy in another book.
Two people telling the same tall tale is not corroboration.
WRONG! It is the fact that the tale is the same from separate origins
that makes it corroboration. And it takes average intelligence to see
that.
Tale is a perfect word to describe these theories.
tale
[tāl]
NOUN
a fictitious or true narrative or story, especially one that is
imaginatively recounted.
Using your definition of corroboration, Reclaiming History corroborates
the WCR. But of course we wouldn't expect you to be consistent with the
standards you employ.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
That other book was "The Men on the Sixth Floor" by Collum and Sample.
It is the statement of an American Indian named Lawrence Loy Factor,
No, it is the story of Collum and Sample who have no corroborating
evidence to support what they claim Loy Factor said. Why would they
interview this guy and not record what he was telling them?
I would think they recorded all they could of what he said. It was
his story, after all.
Have you ever heard these recordings or are you accepting them on faith? A
rhetorical question because we all know what the answer is.
Well, Claviger recently announced that they recorded him. Check with
him.
I'm not arguing with claviger. How could he be a source that these
conversations were recorded? What does he know that you don't?
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
who was paid $10,000 to be part of a shooting team firing on the POTUS at
Dealey Plaza.
That's what Collum and Sample told you.
WRONG! That's what Factor said that Collum and Sample repeated to me
through their book.
How do you know Factor told Collum and Sample that?
Ho do you know that the Humes told the truth in his Autopsy Report?
His findings have been confirmed numerous times by highly qualified
medical examiners.
Post by mainframetech
After all, there were detractors to his words.
Not from anyone competent to make such a judgement.
Post by mainframetech
And you're a believer in
Brennan even though he admitted he was discredited.
No, YOU claimed he was discredited. Brennan was corroborated by a wealth
of forensic evidence.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
He was near dying when he was interviewed by the authors,
so it was almost a 'dying declaration'.
If only there were some evidence he made that declaration.
As usual, you forget that there were 2 witnesses to what was said by
Factor. Collum and Sample.
You never fail to provide a good belly laugh. You really think co-authors
can corroborate each other.
Did you see me say they corroborated each other?
Yes. You just did.
Post by mainframetech
Or are you making
things up again as you often do? However, their book corroborates
information from another book which you've been told about.
Once again I have to remind you that two different books making the same
unsupported claim is not corroboration. Corroboration requires evidence,
not baseless claims. There is no evidence to support either of these
works.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
He verified separately the
shooting team mentioned by the previous book, as to the team members that
were on the 6th floor of the TSBD.
So Collum and Sample took a story another author cooked up and added their
only elements to it. Some corroboration.
Prove it. Otherwise it stands.
Typical of your approach. No matter how bizarre a story is, you'll believe
it unless someone disproves it. You don't care if there is any evidence to
support it.
WRONG as usual, and you know it!
Tell us what evidence there is that Collum and Sample didn't just make up
the story. Same for Mackenzie.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Can you give us an example of an allegation they made which could not have
been just made up out of thin air?
Sounds like the SBT in the WCR...:)
So your answer is NO.
WRONG again! You didn't see me say that, so it must be more of your
imagination. As an LN, you have an ego to uphold.
I asked you if you could give an example and you failed to do so. I take
that as a NO. However, to be fair I will give you a second chance.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
So we have corroboration among 2 men of elder years, of their
participation on the murder of JFK. For years many have invested their
time and energy in denying that there was a plot to murder JFK, but these
facts and many more have shown that it was real. Read the books, and see
if you can be objective enough to accept the facts stated in them.
Isn't it amazing how these books never got published until after the
alleged confessors had kicked the bucket and couldn't refute what was
attributed to them.
WRONG as usual! "The Men That Don't Fit In" author is still going
along just fine. When will you ever learn?
I was referring to the people these authors alleged told them these
stories. Are any of them alive. Of course not.
WRONG! Don't be silly! The author of that book is the person that
lived it.
We only have the word of the author for that. Just because somebody writes
a book doesn't make it a true story.
Post by mainframetech
You seem to have logic problems in even the simple things.
Irony noted.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
These authors know that
dead men can't sue them for libel so they can claim these people said just
about anything without fear of repercussions.
How dumb can people get? "The Men that Don't Fit in" is
autobiographical! Think it through! You think he will sue himself?
I could write an self published autobiography claiming I had done all
sorts of amazing things. I could claim I had done all the things Walter
Mitty daydreamed about. It would be about as believable as MacKenzie's
offering. There is no evidence to support this work. He himself admitted
the following in an interview:

“keeping secrets in my brain quiet, except for a select close
few.” He explains, “While most of the people that I
associated with around the Cuban Affairs Groups have passed to their
allotted other realms, I have been pretty much left to my own
devices.”

http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/2013/01/the-men-that-dont-fit-in-interview-with-roderick-a-mackenzie-iii/

Further he accuses Mac Wallace of being one of the hit men knowing Wallace
is no longer alive to sue MacKenzie's ass off.

Ace Kefford
2018-07-11 01:42:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
PARANOIA
The Conspiracy Reader
Interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III
By Joan d’Arc
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/2013/01/the-men-that-dont-fit-in-interview-with-roderick-a-mackenzie-iii/#
Here is what really happened according to mainframetech,
Combination of 20 snipers and 4 observers
Thus ended my interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III, although I could
have chatted with the man longer and probably will. I will end this
fantastic tale, with his permission, of the list of the JFK assassination
“killing teams” (from page 71 of The Men That
Don’t Fit In) as told to Roderick A. MacKenzie by Malcolm
“Mac” Wallace in a drunken stupor following the
Command area on the second floor of the Texas School Book Depository
Cliff Carter, Carlos Marcello, Jack Rubenstein, George Reese;
Clyde Foust, John Ernst, Jack Grimm, Joseph P. Dugan;
Under the bridge in case the president was not shot, and
Charles Harrelson, Percy Chauncy Holt, Charles Frederick Rogers,
a man called “Dimitri” from ACCC;
Harry Weatherford, Roger Craig, Richard Scalzetti, Michael Victor Mertz;
Sixth floor of the TSBD
Ruth Ann Martinez, Lee Harvey Oswald (under a spell according to Mac),
Mac Wallace, Lawrence Loy Factor;
The Dal-Tex Building
Eugene Hale Brading, Frank Fiorelli (Sturgis), Raphael “Chi Chi” Quintero,
Richard Cain.
As MacKenzie writes in The Men That Don’t Fit In, “When I
read the misinformation about what I saw as a simple killing of an
important person, I wonder at the stupidity of the general public. Perhaps
it’s just that they don’t really care. They are just too
busy scratching out a living and so on to give a shit as to what their
so-called leaders are doing. I would say that it’s by design, and
has been from as far back as history goes. But let’s never say
it’s a conspiracy; despite the fact that whenever two or more
people plan anything it is indeed a conspiracy. Being branded a conspiracy
nut ain’t all that bad. Perhaps it’s paid off for me to
have been looking over my shoulder all these years.”
About the Author
Roderick A. MacKenzie, III is the author of the self-published manuscript,
The Men That Don’t Fit In. He is currently an artist living in
Seattle, WA. This interview was published in PARANOIA: The Conspiracy
www.paranoiamagazine.com
Rod MacKenzie has been interviewed on ConspiraZine at KOWA at 106.5 FM in
Olympia, WA, website www.kowalp.org. The first 2-hour radio interview
www.radio4all.net/index.php/program/33211. A second interview on PsiOp
Radio with Rod MacKenzie by Mack White and S. Miles Lewis may be found at
http://www.psiopradio.com/2010/05/psiop-radio-115-100516-wguest-rod-mackenzie/
"The men do not fit, because the theory is sh*t."
mainframetech
2018-07-12 02:42:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ace Kefford
Post by claviger
PARANOIA
The Conspiracy Reader
Interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III
By Joan d’Arc
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/2013/01/the-men-that-dont-fit-in-interview-with-roderick-a-mackenzie-iii/#
Here is what really happened according to mainframetech,
Combination of 20 snipers and 4 observers
Thus ended my interview with Roderick A. MacKenzie, III, although I could
have chatted with the man longer and probably will. I will end this
fantastic tale, with his permission, of the list of the JFK assassination
“killing teams” (from page 71 of The Men That
Don’t Fit In) as told to Roderick A. MacKenzie by Malcolm
“Mac” Wallace in a drunken stupor following the
Command area on the second floor of the Texas School Book Depository
Cliff Carter, Carlos Marcello, Jack Rubenstein, George Reese;
Clyde Foust, John Ernst, Jack Grimm, Joseph P. Dugan;
Under the bridge in case the president was not shot, and
Charles Harrelson, Percy Chauncy Holt, Charles Frederick Rogers,
a man called “Dimitri” from ACCC;
Harry Weatherford, Roger Craig, Richard Scalzetti, Michael Victor Mertz;
Sixth floor of the TSBD
Ruth Ann Martinez, Lee Harvey Oswald (under a spell according to Mac),
Mac Wallace, Lawrence Loy Factor;
The Dal-Tex Building
Eugene Hale Brading, Frank Fiorelli (Sturgis), Raphael “Chi Chi” Quintero,
Richard Cain.
As MacKenzie writes in The Men That Don’t Fit In, “When I
read the misinformation about what I saw as a simple killing of an
important person, I wonder at the stupidity of the general public. Perhaps
it’s just that they don’t really care. They are just too
busy scratching out a living and so on to give a shit as to what their
so-called leaders are doing. I would say that it’s by design, and
has been from as far back as history goes. But let’s never say
it’s a conspiracy; despite the fact that whenever two or more
people plan anything it is indeed a conspiracy. Being branded a conspiracy
nut ain’t all that bad. Perhaps it’s paid off for me to
have been looking over my shoulder all these years.”
About the Author
Roderick A. MacKenzie, III is the author of the self-published manuscript,
The Men That Don’t Fit In. He is currently an artist living in
Seattle, WA. This interview was published in PARANOIA: The Conspiracy
www.paranoiamagazine.com
Rod MacKenzie has been interviewed on ConspiraZine at KOWA at 106.5 FM in
Olympia, WA, website www.kowalp.org. The first 2-hour radio interview
www.radio4all.net/index.php/program/33211. A second interview on PsiOp
Radio with Rod MacKenzie by Mack White and S. Miles Lewis may be found at
http://www.psiopradio.com/2010/05/psiop-radio-115-100516-wguest-rod-mackenzie/
"The men do not fit, because the theory is sh*t."
Hmm. Someone woke up without any coffee today!

Chris
Loading...