Are Conspiracy Theories more widely popular than they used to be?
- Thread starter Conway_Stewart
- Start date
Could be but the possibility of conviction would be absolutely zero.
As I keep repeating, flaws with the accepted version is not proof of another theory.
I also clarified by posting this.
No evidence to exonerate Oslwald, no error in law, so all you have left is your belief that the prosecutors are involved in some kind of cover-up.basketcase said:
I am quite engaged at the level of discourse you are providing. I am so glad that you are taking the time to explain your ideas on the topic in a rational manner. I will continue to await your well thought out response.
So what? You don't have a conviction against the alleged lone assassin, but you insist Oswald did it? (In fact, Oswald denied it and claimed he was a patsy).
This is the historical metal plate on what was formerly the Texas School Book Depository. Note the word 'alleged'. Even if you don't believe in any conspiracy, then Oswald is not guilty by principles of fundamental justice.
There are many theories that were overturned due to their flaws, like The Flat Earth Theory, or that the Sun Revolved Around the Earth. Heck, they even tried to prove the Single Bullet Theory (which most 'lone nutters' accept as true), but actual experiments show otherwise.
Who says there's no evidence to exonerate Oswald? There's the Zapruder film, witnesses who saw two persons not one on the sixth floor, people who have talked, scientific analyses, circumstantial evidence of evidence tampering, etc. etc.
No error in law? The law was rendered irrelevant when they killed Oswald before a trial could take place.
Speaking of the law, it was broken in the murder of JFK because Texas law required an autopsy there but the Secret Service, with automatic weapons in hand, forced the body of JFK out of Parkland Memorial Hospital and away from the Chief Coroner, Dr. Earl Rose, who was more competent than the Navy autopsist at Bethesda Hospital in Maryland. (That's a whole other story).
My belief that the prosecutors are involved in some kind of cover up? There were NO prosecutors because there was no trial. The Warren Commission was indeed a cover-up because it relied on the FBI and CIA who withheld information which I already showed by quoting Chief Counsel Blakey above who came to the realization that the CIA lied to them. Don't forget the classified files on the assassination alluded to earlier (if that's not a cover up, then I don't know what is). Then you can read these two articles:
https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Warren_Commission.html Scroll down to A Cover-Up but here's a quote by a U.S. Senator who also said that Oswald had "fingerprints of intelligence".
At the conclusion of a 1976 investigation into how the Commission was served by the FBI and CIA, Senator Richard Schweiker stated on national television that "the John F. Kennedy assassination investigation was snuffed out before it even began," and that "the fatal mistake the Warren Commission made was to not use its own investigators, but instead to rely on the CIA and FBI personnel, which played directly into the hands of senior intelligence officials who directed the cover-up."
And an article by Philip Shenon: http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...tion-john-mccone-warren-commission-cia-213197
Oh and I forgot to say that you don't need to solve a crime to exonerate the accused. Eg. O. J. Simpson
That's a layman's description but a more accurate one is Among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected.
Occam's Razor is not a substitute for evidence but a heuristic tool. Also, it says that one must make a choice between or from among COMPETING THEORIES.
The Single Bullet Theory requires soooo many assumptions, it is laughable.
Lastly, Occam's Razor is not a legal principle used in criminal cases. The JFK murder is a cold case.
Fuji is pretty reasonable. He's said that he doesn't know enough about this case to comment extensively on it.
Insofar as Occam's Razor is concerned, I've confronted those who rely on OR in an attempt to debunk, discount or dispel the JFK assassination conspiracy in one swoop, but it doesn't.
Actually, OR is misstated. Preference for the simplest explanation is the law of parsimony, not OR per se.
OR is best stated as the idea that in trying to understand something, getting unnecessary information out of the way is the fastest way to the truth or to the best explanation.
So what if you are unable to put together a compelling case against anyone else?
Obviously there are questions people have and things that are difficult to explain. There are also questions and unexplained things about bigfoot. You might choose to believe that Oslwald wasn't a lone shooter but there is just as little evidence for it as there is for bigfoot existing.
This post is a prime example. Instead of posting evidence that supports an alternate theory you feel the need to make these 'insightful' posts.
And how does any of that show Oswald isn't guilty? Do you have a different version of the Zapruder film? And even if reports of a second person on the 6th floor was verified, how does that prove that the second person was involved or that Oswald wasn't?
And how does that show an error in law? The only point of that statement is to try and imply that Oslwald's murder is proof of a conspiracy because Ruby was in on a conspiracy.
And once again trying to prove a conspiracy by saying the authorities were in on a conspiracy.
This is what you said.
You just won't stop talking shit will you.
What theory am I supporting that I have to provide evidence for? Feel free to go back in this thread and find it if you can. Quote me if you like.
What is the "bluster" I need to back up?
I'm as patient as you are, I can wait.
I notice it's become a lot more partisan. Back in the day it used to be aliens and other random stuff. You'll still see these kinds of theories today with reptilian people and flat earth stuff, but seems like the most popular ones are politically oriented.
"The government did 9/11" kinds of people are usually liberal. Same with GMO stuff.
Far right people have a crapload of them though. Stuff like jews subverting western culture to try and carry out white genocide through degeneracy, lower white birth rates, and bring in immigrants to breed with. Pretty much every shooting is a false flag or faked according to these kinds of people. Obama is a kenyan born secret muslim. Obama is going to take away everyone's guns and put people into FEMA camps. Obama is going to become a dictator and force a 3rd term.
I'm sure the far left is going to come up with some dumb stuff now that Trump is in power. The Russia stuff needs to be actually resolved before people can pin Trump to it, but lots of liberal sources are already assuming Trump is involved. I'm sure even without evidence there will be people claiming a lot of unsubstantiated things. The antifa attacks on Milo at Berkley were proclaimed to be undercover radical right wing agitators.
It's worrying though because it's just a way to absolve people of guilt. "Oh no, people like me didn't commit those attacks, you committed those attacks, it was a false flag." Too many people believe in it because it's what they want to hear.
"The government did 9/11" kinds of people are usually liberal. Same with GMO stuff.
Far right people have a crapload of them though. Stuff like jews subverting western culture to try and carry out white genocide through degeneracy, lower white birth rates, and bring in immigrants to breed with. Pretty much every shooting is a false flag or faked according to these kinds of people. Obama is a kenyan born secret muslim. Obama is going to take away everyone's guns and put people into FEMA camps. Obama is going to become a dictator and force a 3rd term.
I'm sure the far left is going to come up with some dumb stuff now that Trump is in power. The Russia stuff needs to be actually resolved before people can pin Trump to it, but lots of liberal sources are already assuming Trump is involved. I'm sure even without evidence there will be people claiming a lot of unsubstantiated things. The antifa attacks on Milo at Berkley were proclaimed to be undercover radical right wing agitators.
It's worrying though because it's just a way to absolve people of guilt. "Oh no, people like me didn't commit those attacks, you committed those attacks, it was a false flag." Too many people believe in it because it's what they want to hear.
I'm pressed for time so I must be brief. The same ol' Z film shows evidence of more than one shooter and evidence of a frontal shot.
Reports of others on the second floor don't confirm: 1. Oswald's description, 2. that only one person was there at the alleged scene of the crime or, 3. time placement there.
YOU said that you can only exonerate Oswald, as one example, if there was an error in law, but there is NO error in law regarding Oswald, because NO law was applied to him, since Oswald was killed before a trial could be held. Remember, Oswald was not convicted.
The issue with Ruby is separate. Ruby was later discovered to have significant underworld connections (Carlos Marcello controlled Texas through others). To believe that he silenced Oswald to spare Jackie Kennedy the grief from a trial is ridiculous (ample photographic evidence that Ruby was stalking Oswald at the police station days before he killed him). There are other reports of Ruby being seen with Oswald at his strip joint or near the Tippit killing.
Ruby's statements to the press are interesting here:
I merely proved to you that there indeed was a cover-up (Chief Counsel Blakey, Senator Schweiker, etc.). I didn't say that the "authorities" were in on a conspiracy. However, that doesn't mean that they didn't think there was one, and concealed that fact from the public. (Did you not read the text of LBJ's interview years later that I posted, wherein he didn't think Oswald acted alone?) Some people were merely following orders. Don't forget the classified files. (Where's there's smoke, there's fire)
[Edit]: The cover-up and the murder conspiracy are independent acts. There could be some overlap but on a small scale. Then there could be accessories after-the-fact who knew about stuff but didn't do anything about it.
You still didn't answer my question why the records were sealed for years if Oswald was just a lone nut communist? (Originally, the records were sealed for 75 years, then 25 years from 1992 or after the movie JFK - they should be released October 2017).
Last edited:
It is really interesting seeing what gets under people's skin. With you it seems particularly easy to do. Ever wonder what that says about your personality and self perception?
