Does Barb J. Believe Oswald Had a 'Double'?
Chuck Schuyler
In an exchange at another thread with David Von Pein, Barb J. has argued
that the identification of Oswald as the TSBD shooter by Howard Brennan
was suspect. DVP noted the ridiculous CT notion that there may have been
two Oswalds...a fairly mainstream train of thought in JFK CT circles. Barb
wrote:
"... and personally, I know of very few CTs who promote an Oswald double.
Perhaps you can name some who do for me."
Barb, if you do not believe Oswald was firing a weapon from the TSBD, you
believe Oswald had a double. Inconsistencies aside, Brennan reported a man
that looked remarkably similar to Oswald firing a rifle from the TSBD.
So was it Oswald, or was it an Oswald double?
Pick one.
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
Neither. To me, a "double" means someone able to masquerade as someone
else. i do not believe that to be the case.
The general desription was quite nondescript. And other witnesses
described the person ... or persons ... they saw in the window before
the shooting differently. They didn't become the darlings of the WC
though.
Barb :-)
>
>Pick one.
Chuck Schuyler
>
> - Show quoted text -
You're really walkin' the tightrope on this one.
Where do you suppose this 'nondescript' person disappeared to after
the shooting?
Why would the plotters stick a sniper in the TSBD who DIDN'T look
like Oswald?
Wasn't the idea to frame Oswald?
And would it best be accomplished by having someone in the 6th floor
window who looked like Oswald (a 'double'), or someone who didn't?
Your own protestations aside, you believe Oswald had a double...the
double didn't need to be his clone, but he needed to be an above
average Oswald look-a-like to guarantee a close match if the public
saw the shooter, or if an AP photographer or home movie enthusiast
captured the shooter on film. The very real possibility of having the
shooter caught on film needed to be considered by the plotters. There
is no middle ground. Oswald fired the rifle, or someone who looked
remarkably similar to him did.
I think you are in the Oswald double crowd.
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
You've got quite a theory going there.
You are entitled, but it isn't mine ... and I'm not interested.
Bests,
Barb :-)
Anthony Marsh
> In an exchange at another thread with David Von Pein, Barb J. has argued
> that the identification of Oswald as the TSBD shooter by Howard Brennan
> was suspect. DVP noted the ridiculous CT notion that there may have been
> two Oswalds...a fairly mainstream train of thought in JFK CT circles. Barb
> wrote:
>
The Two Oswald Theory is a fringe, not mainstream.
> "... and personally, I know of very few CTs who promote an Oswald double.
> Perhaps you can name some who do for me."
>
> Barb, if you do not believe Oswald was firing a weapon from the TSBD, you
> believe Oswald had a double. Inconsistencies aside, Brennan reported a man
> that looked remarkably similar to Oswald firing a rifle from the TSBD.
>
No, that is illogical. Do not make the mistake of relying on eyewitnesses.
Chuck Schuyler
>
> - Show quoted text -
Nice dodge.
Anthony Marsh
Why would the plotters bother if no one could see the shooter behind the
window pane?
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
No dodge. I answered your questions. You don't believe me. I said I am
not interested. And I am not.
No reason to belabor a discussion I am not interested in in the first
place further....especially since it appears a good deal of time would
be spent untying knots of your assumptive making. And straw makes me
sneeze. Other fish frying at the moment.
Barb :-)
Chuck Schuyler
> Why would the plotters bother if no one could see the shooter behind the
> window pane?
Huh?
Brennan saw a man in the TSBD with a rifle. He gave a pretty nifty
description to the police within a few minutes. It's certainly a close
enough match to Oswald.
Was this an Oswald double, Oswald, or a third possibility-always good to
have extra fantastic scenarios when dealing with CTers-an unknown man who
happened to be sticking a longish object that resembled a rifle out the
window right when the motorcade glided by?
I think that just about covers things-unless we add in the unlikely
possibility of life sized puppets, cardboard cut-outs, CIA induced
hypnotic trances on Brennan, and so on.
So did Oswald shoot at the President from the TSBD, or did a man closely
resembling Oswald shoot at the motorcade while Oswald sipped a soft drink
on the second floor, no doubt day-dreaming about his next phenomenal
lovemaking session with Judyth Baker in Cancun, or did an unknown,
unrelated "lone nut" stick a longish object out the TSBD?
Take your pick.
A.) Oswald.
B.) Oswald look-a-like/double planted by the evildoers.
C.) Unrelated/never identified individual sticking a longish object (maybe
a rifle, but let's leave the door of possibilities open) out the window.
Heck, mix-and-match for extra CT fun.
Brennan saw something, right?
Right????
Chuck Schuyler
No straw.
No response on your part needed or expected.
Sounds like I hit a nerve, though.
You're being too clever by half. Oswald fired from the TSBD, or
someone resembling him did. I'll call it an Oswald double, you can
split hairs.
Go fry your fish. Marsh will reflexively add to the posts since he
can't help himself.
I'll put one of these little things at the end of my post now just to
show I mean no real harm. ;-)
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
Plenty.
>
>No response on your part needed or expected.
Well, THAT is true enough ... you don't need responses, ignore them
anyway and/or twist them into some new meaning scenario of your
choice.
>
>Sounds like I hit a nerve, though.
I realize you'd like to think so, but it's not the case, not as has
anything to do with the case anyway.
More of a "Oh, spare me, he's another one of *those*, ick" things.
Some girls might just swoon at your sweet mumblings to me and those to
others that foretell such well reasoned discussion to follow ...
things like....
"Was this an Oswald double, Oswald, or a third possibility-always good
to have extra fantastic scenarios when dealing with CTers- ...."
and
"...possibility of life sized puppets, cardboard cut-outs, CIA induced
hypnotic trances on Brennan, and so on."
and
"Heck, mix-and-match for extra CT fun."
and, I tell you I do not believe in any Oswald "double" and why ...
and you come back and tell me I do. And lay down a whole new bed of
straw.
Like I already told you, this girl is not interested. Not charmed in
the least. Certainly not intrigued by the kind of discussion you are
apparently have to offer.
>
>You're being too clever by half.
And you are not clever at all. Just apparently full of yourself ...
and full of nothing but disdain for anyone who believes in conspiracy.
So much so, that you can't engage in discussion without poniting it
out constantly....thinking you are just so clever, I suppose.
Again, not interested in the topic, and given your demonstrated
discussion "technique", not interested in wasting my time discussing
with you.
>Oswald fired from the TSBD, or
>someone resembling him did. I'll call it an Oswald double, you can
>split hairs.
>
>Go fry your fish. Marsh will reflexively add to the posts since he
>can't help himself.
>
>I'll put one of these little things at the end of my post now just to
>show I mean no real harm. ;-)
I'm glad you don't mean harm, because your commentary is impotent for
causing anything but a shake of the head and a few Chuckles. :-)
This will be my last response in this thread. Get it now?
Barb :-)))))))))))))))
Anthony Marsh
> On Nov 7, 7:23 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Why would the plotters bother if no one could see the shooter behind the
>> window pane?
>
> Huh?
>
> Brennan saw a man in the TSBD with a rifle. He gave a pretty nifty
> description to the police within a few minutes. It's certainly a close
> enough match to Oswald.
It was certainly close enough to match 100,000 other people.
>
> Was this an Oswald double, Oswald, or a third possibility-always good to
> have extra fantastic scenarios when dealing with CTers-an unknown man who
> happened to be sticking a longish object that resembled a rifle out the
> window right when the motorcade glided by?
>
Then what explains Euins identifying a black man as the shooter?
> I think that just about covers things-unless we add in the unlikely
> possibility of life sized puppets, cardboard cut-outs, CIA induced
> hypnotic trances on Brennan, and so on.
>
How about prodding from the cops?
> So did Oswald shoot at the President from the TSBD, or did a man closely
> resembling Oswald shoot at the motorcade while Oswald sipped a soft drink
> on the second floor, no doubt day-dreaming about his next phenomenal
Who said he was sipping a soft drink on the second floor at that time?
No one. Oswald said he was in the Domino Room on the first floor.
> lovemaking session with Judyth Baker in Cancun, or did an unknown,
> unrelated "lone nut" stick a longish object out the TSBD?
>
No one stuck a longish object out of the TSBD.
Chuck Schuyler
>
> - Show quoted text -
You're smooth, Barb! And a little full of yourself, too.
I'd have any easier time nailing jello to the wall.
Humph all you want, but you either believe Brennan saw Oswald in the
window with a rifle, or he saw a man whose description he relayed to the
police that can't exclude Oswald. Call this person a look-a-like, double
or whatever. I guess another option is that Brennan didn't see a man in
the TSBD with a rifle.
I don't see the strawman argument. The thread was a response to your claim
with DVP that very few CTers believe Oswald had a double. If Brennan's
description is correct, a slender man approximately Oswald's height was
pointing a rifle out of the TSBD.
Wouldn't the plotters try and hire a person that resembles Oswald fairly
closely (a 'double') to fire those shots from the TSBD?
Second Oswalds, Oswald look-a-likes, etc. is pretty mainstream JFK buff
stuff.
Please keep your promise not to respond!
Anthony Marsh
Brennan's initial description is vague enough that it could match
thousands of people. It was not specific to Oswald. And little details do
not match.
> I don't see the strawman argument. The thread was a response to your claim
> with DVP that very few CTers believe Oswald had a double. If Brennan's
> description is correct, a slender man approximately Oswald's height was
> pointing a rifle out of the TSBD.
>
The fact remains that only a very small percentage of conspiracy
researchers believe the Two Oswald Theory. No one was holding a rifle out
of the TSBD.
> Wouldn't the plotters try and hire a person that resembles Oswald fairly
> closely (a 'double') to fire those shots from the TSBD?
>
No. Just by random chance the shooter could look like Oswald from a
distance. Just as random chance placed Billy Lovelady on the steps to the
TSBD and fooled some people. I am sure that there must be some wacky
conspiracy theorists who claim that Lovelady was hired because he was an
Oswald look-alike.
> Second Oswalds, Oswald look-a-likes, etc. is pretty mainstream JFK buff
> stuff.
>
No, it isn't. And your attempts at smearing the research community in
this way reveal your agenda of cover-up.
> Please keep your promise not to respond!
>
Others will. Don't think you're getting away with your nonsense. We are
onto you.
Chuck Schuyler
It's also specific enough to include Oswald as a possible suspect.
>
> > I don't see the strawman argument. The thread was a response to your claim
> > with DVP that very few CTers believe Oswald had a double. If Brennan's
> > description is correct, a slender man approximately Oswald's height was
> > pointing a rifle out of the TSBD.
>
> The fact remains that only a very small percentage of conspiracy
> researchers believe the Two Oswald Theory. No one was holding a rifle out
> of the TSBD.
I'm not arguing that someone like yourself-or Barb-actually believe that
an exact physical match, capable of withstanding close scrutiny, fired
from the TSBD. Stunt doubles in Hollywood don't need to be precise matches
for an actor for the few moments they are on film in an action sequence.
If someone other than Oswald fired from the TSBD, the plotters most
certainly would've taken some steps to ensure that their shooter resembled
Oswald-a double. The evildoers would've needed to prepare for the
possibility that their shooter would be photographed or filmed by one or
more of the many civilians and press people armed with still/ movie
cameras.
>
> > Wouldn't the plotters try and hire a person that resembles Oswald fairly
> > closely (a 'double') to fire those shots from the TSBD?
>
> No. Just by random chance the shooter could look like Oswald from a
> distance. Just as random chance placed Billy Lovelady on the steps to the
> TSBD and fooled some people. I am sure that there must be some wacky
> conspiracy theorists who claim that Lovelady was hired because he was an
> Oswald look-alike.
Strawman. Lovelady in the doorway is a random event. The assassination was
premeditated. The plotters would've taken steps to keep the lid on their
Oswald as patsy narrative. If Oswald wasn't up there shooting, a man
resembling him close enough not to rule Oswald out, was. An Oswald double.
Picked by the evildoers to shoot at Kennedy and help frame Oswald.
>
> > Second Oswalds, Oswald look-a-likes, etc. is pretty mainstream JFK buff
> > stuff.
>
> No, it isn't. And your attempts at smearing the research community in
> this way reveal your agenda of cover-up.
Many, many JFK CT researchers believe Oswald had imposters in the weeks
preceding the assassination. Heck, a good percentage of the "research
community" can't even admit Oswald shot Tippit (although I understand you
at least have enough commonsense to realize LHO killed JDT). This
necessitates another "Oswald double", in my opinion, because most of the
descriptions of Tippit's killer are a dead ringer for Oswald, and these
witnesses identified him in pictures and line- ups.
>
> > Please keep your promise not to respond!
>
> Others will. Don't think you're getting away with your nonsense. We are
> onto you.
Nonsense is denying how common Oswald doubles, look-a-likes, impostors,
etc. is in the JFK CT "research community", which was the challenge Barb
had for DVP that I responded to. It is a common thread in CT books,
websites, magazine articles, etc. Eddowes convinced people to dig up LHO's
body to prove his wacky Oswald double theory. Your denying this simple
truth is, um...nonsense.
Anthony Marsh
Yes, Oswald was a suspect. He was not the only suspect.
>>> I don't see the strawman argument. The thread was a response to your claim
>>> with DVP that very few CTers believe Oswald had a double. If Brennan's
>>> description is correct, a slender man approximately Oswald's height was
>>> pointing a rifle out of the TSBD.
>> The fact remains that only a very small percentage of conspiracy
>> researchers believe the Two Oswald Theory. No one was holding a rifle out
>> of the TSBD.
>
> I'm not arguing that someone like yourself-or Barb-actually believe that
> an exact physical match, capable of withstanding close scrutiny, fired
> from the TSBD. Stunt doubles in Hollywood don't need to be precise matches
> for an actor for the few moments they are on film in an action sequence.
>
> If someone other than Oswald fired from the TSBD, the plotters most
> certainly would've taken some steps to ensure that their shooter resembled
> Oswald-a double. The evildoers would've needed to prepare for the
Did the plotters take steps to ensure that an Oswald double was standing
in front of the TSBD to provide him with an alibi for the time of the
shooting?
> possibility that their shooter would be photographed or filmed by one or
> more of the many civilians and press people armed with still/ movie
> cameras.
>
So what if the shooter were photographed? The grassy knoll shooter was
photographed and filmed and he still got away.
>>> Wouldn't the plotters try and hire a person that resembles Oswald fairly
>>> closely (a 'double') to fire those shots from the TSBD?
>> No. Just by random chance the shooter could look like Oswald from a
>> distance. Just as random chance placed Billy Lovelady on the steps to the
>> TSBD and fooled some people. I am sure that there must be some wacky
>> conspiracy theorists who claim that Lovelady was hired because he was an
>> Oswald look-alike.
>
> Strawman. Lovelady in the doorway is a random event. The assassination was
Ok, if it was a random event then another random event has a shooter
than looks as much like Oswald as Lovelady. I know you won't believe me,
but I've actually talked to real live people who still believe it was
Oswald seen in the Altgens photo in front of the TSBD.
So, if it was really Oswald, where was Lovelady they wonder? Up on the
sixth floor shooting the President.
> premeditated. The plotters would've taken steps to keep the lid on their
> Oswald as patsy narrative. If Oswald wasn't up there shooting, a man
> resembling him close enough not to rule Oswald out, was. An Oswald double.
> Picked by the evildoers to shoot at Kennedy and help frame Oswald.
>
Wow, you really have a vivid imagination for your conspiracy theories.
>>> Second Oswalds, Oswald look-a-likes, etc. is pretty mainstream JFK buff
>>> stuff.
>> No, it isn't. And your attempts at smearing the research community in
>> this way reveal your agenda of cover-up.
>
> Many, many JFK CT researchers believe Oswald had imposters in the weeks
> preceding the assassination. Heck, a good percentage of the "research
> community" can't even admit Oswald shot Tippit (although I understand you
Some believe that the CIA had an impostor who did not really look much
like Oswald down in Mexico.
> at least have enough commonsense to realize LHO killed JDT). This
> necessitates another "Oswald double", in my opinion, because most of the
> descriptions of Tippit's killer are a dead ringer for Oswald, and these
> witnesses identified him in pictures and line- ups.
>
>>> Please keep your promise not to respond!
>> Others will. Don't think you're getting away with your nonsense. We are
>> onto you.
>
> Nonsense is denying how common Oswald doubles, look-a-likes, impostors,
> etc. is in the JFK CT "research community", which was the challenge Barb
> had for DVP that I responded to. It is a common thread in CT books,
You as an outsider are not in a position to declare what the research
community thinks. We did have a conference at which we voted on various
scenarios. For example, out of an audience of about 500 people, only one
person, David Lifton, claimed that absolutely no shots came from behind.
Very few people believe in all the Oswald double nonsense.
> websites, magazine articles, etc. Eddowes convinced people to dig up LHO's
> body to prove his wacky Oswald double theory. Your denying this simple
> truth is, um...nonsense.
>
Eddowes never did represent the research community.
>
Chuck Schuyler
He was the only suspect who left his rifle on the 6th floor of the
TSBD-tied to the crime scene and Oswald in multiple ways. He was also
the only suspect inside the building at the time shots were fired who
left without an excuse, moments later. And he told lie after lie after
lie when he was arrested.
>
> >>> I don't see the strawman argument. The thread was a response to your claim
> >>> with DVP that very few CTers believe Oswald had a double. If Brennan's
> >>> description is correct, a slender man approximately Oswald's height was
> >>> pointing a rifle out of the TSBD.
> >> The fact remains that only a very small percentage of conspiracy
> >> researchers believe the Two Oswald Theory. No one was holding a rifle out
> >> of the TSBD.
>
> > I'm not arguing that someone like yourself-or Barb-actually believe that
> > an exact physical match, capable of withstanding close scrutiny, fired
> > from the TSBD. Stunt doubles in Hollywood don't need to be precise matches
> > for an actor for the few moments they are on film in an action sequence.
>
> > If someone other than Oswald fired from the TSBD, the plotters most
> > certainly would've taken some steps to ensure that their shooter resembled
> > Oswald-a double. The evildoers would've needed to prepare for the
>
> Did the plotters take steps to ensure that an Oswald double was standing
> in front of the TSBD to provide him with an alibi for the time of the
> shooting?
The issue is Oswald doubles, look-a-likes and imposters, and this is a
very common theme among CTers. Barb denies it. You seem to be showing
examples of it when you talk about the wacky Argosy magazine/Lovelady
stuff.
> > possibility that their shooter would be photographed or filmed by one or
> > more of the many civilians and press people armed with still/ movie
> > cameras.
>
> So what if the shooter were photographed? The grassy knoll shooter was
> photographed and filmed and he still got away.
So what? So what??? Surely you jest. Hindsight is so convenient for
you people. It is so easy to construct your fantasy theories when you
ignore the fact that real plotters would've been doing everything
possible to avoid detection. Otherwise, just strap a bomb to your
waist and detonate yourself from the curb on Elm when the limo rolls
by.
As far as the knoll shooter being photographed, I thought that died
out years ago, unless you're sticking by 'Badgeman'. The supposed
acoustics evidence was discredited years ago.
>
> >>> Wouldn't the plotters try and hire a person that resembles Oswald fairly
> >>> closely (a 'double') to fire those shots from the TSBD?
> >> No. Just by random chance the shooter could look like Oswald from a
> >> distance. Just as random chance placed Billy Lovelady on the steps to the
> >> TSBD and fooled some people. I am sure that there must be some wacky
> >> conspiracy theorists who claim that Lovelady was hired because he was an
> >> Oswald look-alike.
>
> > Strawman. Lovelady in the doorway is a random event. The assassination was
>
> Ok, if it was a random event then another random event has a shooter
> than looks as much like Oswald as Lovelady.
More straw.
I know you won't believe me,
> but I've actually talked to real live people who still believe it was
> Oswald seen in the Altgens photo in front of the TSBD.
> So, if it was really Oswald, where was Lovelady they wonder? Up on the
> sixth floor shooting the President.
...and now we're back to the Oswald double, which you and Barb are
arguing against.
>
> > premeditated. The plotters would've taken steps to keep the lid on their
> > Oswald as patsy narrative. If Oswald wasn't up there shooting, a man
> > resembling him close enough not to rule Oswald out, was. An Oswald double.
> > Picked by the evildoers to shoot at Kennedy and help frame Oswald.
>
> Wow, you really have a vivid imagination for your conspiracy theories.
Oswald alone!
>
> >>> Second Oswalds, Oswald look-a-likes, etc. is pretty mainstream JFK buff
> >>> stuff.
> >> No, it isn't. And your attempts at smearing the research community in
> >> this way reveal your agenda of cover-up.
>
> > Many, many JFK CT researchers believe Oswald had impostors in the weeks
> > preceding the assassination. Heck, a good percentage of the "research
> > community" can't even admit Oswald shot Tippit (although I understand you
>
> Some believe that the CIA had an impostor who did not really look much
> like Oswald down in Mexico.
See? Another Oswald 'double', impostor, whatever...it's very common
with you folks.
>
> > at least have enough commonsense to realize LHO killed JDT). This
> > necessitates another "Oswald double", in my opinion, because most of the
> > descriptions of Tippit's killer are a dead ringer for Oswald, and these
> > witnesses identified him in pictures and line- ups.
>
> >>> Please keep your promise not to respond!
> >> Others will. Don't think you're getting away with your nonsense. We are
> >> onto you.
>
> > Nonsense is denying how common Oswald doubles, look-a-likes, impostors,
> > etc. is in the JFK CT "research community", which was the challenge Barb
> > had for DVP that I responded to. It is a common thread in CT books,
>
> You as an outsider are not in a position to declare what the research
> community thinks.
I'm in a position to say anything I want that doesn't offend the
moderators or stray too far off topic. Who died and left you King of
the Conspiracists?
We did have a conference at which we voted on various
> scenarios.
A vote! Lovely!
For example, out of an audience of about 500 people, only one
> person, David Lifton, claimed that absolutely no shots came from behind.
> Very few people believe in all the Oswald double nonsense.
Collectively, many of you believe in Oswald doubles, impostors and
look-a-likes, including Lifton.
>
> > websites, magazine articles, etc. Eddowes convinced people to dig up LHO's
> > body to prove his wacky Oswald double theory. Your denying this simple
> > truth is, um...nonsense.
>
> Eddowes never did represent the research community.
Please list the researchers you feel are part of the "research
community" (I'm sure you'll include yourself...after all, you were the
first researcher to prove the Zfilm was authentic) and I'll make sure
to differentiate the elites from the wanna-be's.
Anthony Marsh
He was not the only suspect connected with a rifle.
And again you beg the question by assuming that Oswald left his rifle in
the TSBD.
> the only suspect inside the building at the time shots were fired who
> left without an excuse, moments later. And he told lie after lie after
> lie when he was arrested.
Again, not true. Others left the TSBD. They were not arrested. Some were
brought in for questioning.
>>>>> I don't see the strawman argument. The thread was a response to your claim
>>>>> with DVP that very few CTers believe Oswald had a double. If Brennan's
>>>>> description is correct, a slender man approximately Oswald's height was
>>>>> pointing a rifle out of the TSBD.
>>>> The fact remains that only a very small percentage of conspiracy
>>>> researchers believe the Two Oswald Theory. No one was holding a rifle out
>>>> of the TSBD.
>>> I'm not arguing that someone like yourself-or Barb-actually believe that
>>> an exact physical match, capable of withstanding close scrutiny, fired
>>> from the TSBD. Stunt doubles in Hollywood don't need to be precise matches
>>> for an actor for the few moments they are on film in an action sequence.
>>> If someone other than Oswald fired from the TSBD, the plotters most
>>> certainly would've taken some steps to ensure that their shooter resembled
>>> Oswald-a double. The evildoers would've needed to prepare for the
>> Did the plotters take steps to ensure that an Oswald double was standing
>> in front of the TSBD to provide him with an alibi for the time of the
>> shooting?
>
> The issue is Oswald doubles, look-a-likes and imposters, and this is a
> very common theme among CTers. Barb denies it. You seem to be showing
> examples of it when you talk about the wacky Argosy magazine/Lovelady
> stuff.
>
No, the Lovelady thing is not related to the Oswald double theory.
I was making fun of the Oswald double theory.
>>> possibility that their shooter would be photographed or filmed by one or
>>> more of the many civilians and press people armed with still/ movie
>>> cameras.
>> So what if the shooter were photographed? The grassy knoll shooter was
>> photographed and filmed and he still got away.
>
> So what? So what??? Surely you jest. Hindsight is so convenient for
> you people. It is so easy to construct your fantasy theories when you
> ignore the fact that real plotters would've been doing everything
> possible to avoid detection. Otherwise, just strap a bomb to your
> waist and detonate yourself from the curb on Elm when the limo rolls
> by.
>
No guarantee that would be successful. Remember that the bomb plot
against Hitler failed.
The conspirators were quite successful in getting away with it.
> As far as the knoll shooter being photographed, I thought that died
> out years ago, unless you're sticking by 'Badgeman'. The supposed
> acoustics evidence was discredited years ago.
I have pointed out that Badge Man is an optical illusion.
The man in the HSCA's acoustical position is photographed in the Moorman
photo behind the fence and on the Zapruder film. Coincidence?
>>>>> Wouldn't the plotters try and hire a person that resembles Oswald fairly
>>>>> closely (a 'double') to fire those shots from the TSBD?
>>>> No. Just by random chance the shooter could look like Oswald from a
>>>> distance. Just as random chance placed Billy Lovelady on the steps to the
>>>> TSBD and fooled some people. I am sure that there must be some wacky
>>>> conspiracy theorists who claim that Lovelady was hired because he was an
>>>> Oswald look-alike.
>>> Strawman. Lovelady in the doorway is a random event. The assassination was
>> Ok, if it was a random event then another random event has a shooter
>> than looks as much like Oswald as Lovelady.
>
> More straw.
>
No, just as likely as the other random event.
> I know you won't believe me,
>> but I've actually talked to real live people who still believe it was
>> Oswald seen in the Altgens photo in front of the TSBD.
>> So, if it was really Oswald, where was Lovelady they wonder? Up on the
>> sixth floor shooting the President.
>
> ...and now we're back to the Oswald double, which you and Barb are
> arguing against.
Lovelady is not part of the main Oswald double theory. A few wackos may
have such a theory.
>>> premeditated. The plotters would've taken steps to keep the lid on their
>>> Oswald as patsy narrative. If Oswald wasn't up there shooting, a man
>>> resembling him close enough not to rule Oswald out, was. An Oswald double.
>>> Picked by the evildoers to shoot at Kennedy and help frame Oswald.
>> Wow, you really have a vivid imagination for your conspiracy theories.
>
> Oswald alone!
>>>>> Second Oswalds, Oswald look-a-likes, etc. is pretty mainstream JFK buff
>>>>> stuff.
>>>> No, it isn't. And your attempts at smearing the research community in
>>>> this way reveal your agenda of cover-up.
>>> Many, many JFK CT researchers believe Oswald had impostors in the weeks
>>> preceding the assassination. Heck, a good percentage of the "research
>>> community" can't even admit Oswald shot Tippit (although I understand you
>> Some believe that the CIA had an impostor who did not really look much
>> like Oswald down in Mexico.
>
> See? Another Oswald 'double', impostor, whatever...it's very common
> with you folks.
Some does not equal common. I could have most, but it is not most.
>>> at least have enough commonsense to realize LHO killed JDT). This
>>> necessitates another "Oswald double", in my opinion, because most of the
>>> descriptions of Tippit's killer are a dead ringer for Oswald, and these
>>> witnesses identified him in pictures and line- ups.
>>>>> Please keep your promise not to respond!
>>>> Others will. Don't think you're getting away with your nonsense. We are
>>>> onto you.
>>> Nonsense is denying how common Oswald doubles, look-a-likes, impostors,
>>> etc. is in the JFK CT "research community", which was the challenge Barb
>>> had for DVP that I responded to. It is a common thread in CT books,
>> You as an outsider are not in a position to declare what the research
>> community thinks.
>
> I'm in a position to say anything I want that doesn't offend the
> moderators or stray too far off topic. Who died and left you King of
> the Conspiracists?
>
> We did have a conference at which we voted on various
>> scenarios.
>
> A vote! Lovely!
>
> For example, out of an audience of about 500 people, only one
>> person, David Lifton, claimed that absolutely no shots came from behind.
>> Very few people believe in all the Oswald double nonsense.
>
> Collectively, many of you believe in Oswald doubles, impostors and
> look-a-likes, including Lifton.
Some is not the same as many. As I just pointed out Lifton does not
represent the mainstream of the research community.
>>> websites, magazine articles, etc. Eddowes convinced people to dig up LHO's
>>> body to prove his wacky Oswald double theory. Your denying this simple
>>> truth is, um...nonsense.
>> Eddowes never did represent the research community.
>
> Please list the researchers you feel are part of the "research
> community" (I'm sure you'll include yourself...after all, you were the
> first researcher to prove the Zfilm was authentic) and I'll make sure
> to differentiate the elites from the wanna-be's.
>
The list of the attendees at all the major research symposia.
>
Chuck Schuyler
<snip>
I wrote:
> > Please list the researchers you feel are part of the "research
> > community" (I'm sure you'll include yourself...after all, you were the
> > first researcher to prove the Zfilm was authentic) and I'll make sure
> > to differentiate the elites from the wanna-be's.
Tony wrote:
>
> The list of the attendees at all the major research symposia.
Does this include James Fetzer? There is very little that Fetzer has
ruled out-other than Oswald acting alone.
How about David Healy (aka affects)? He has attended major conferences
before, and has made presentations on Zfilm alteration. Healy is also
an advocate of the "two Zapruders" theory.
The entire point of this thread was to point out how common Oswald
doubles, look-a-likes, etc. is in the JFK CT research community. Barb
challenged DVP on this issue.
I think it's axiomatic that if Brennan's description of the shooter he
saw firing from the TSBD is accurate...a slender male, around 30,
5'10", 165lbs, then the logical conclusion if you are a CTer is that
the evildoers planted a guy who looked similar to Oswald up in that
window to help frame Oz as the patsy-an Oswald double or look-a-like.
What is so controversial about that, if you believe Oswald didn't fire
at the motorcade that afternoon? Why would the plotters pick a sniper
who didn't look like Oswald?
There is a very large contingent of CTers who do not believe Oswald
killed Tippit-another Oswald double, apparently, as numerous
eyewitnesses picked Oswald out of a line-up or police photos that day/
weekend as the shooter or as the man they saw fleeing the Tippit
murder scene.
The Oswald double/impersonator/look-a-like is very common in the JFK
CT research community. Even among the list of attendees at all the
major research symposia.
Anthony Marsh
> On Nov 13, 11:01 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> I wrote:
>
>>> Please list the researchers you feel are part of the "research
>>> community" (I'm sure you'll include yourself...after all, you were the
>>> first researcher to prove the Zfilm was authentic) and I'll make sure
>>> to differentiate the elites from the wanna-be's.
>
> Tony wrote:
>> The list of the attendees at all the major research symposia.
>
> Does this include James Fetzer? There is very little that Fetzer has
> ruled out-other than Oswald acting alone.
>
Unfortunately it does and even Lifton.
> How about David Healy (aka affects)? He has attended major conferences
> before, and has made presentations on Zfilm alteration. Healy is also
> an advocate of the "two Zapruders" theory.
>
Not sure which ones he attended. Do you have a link to his theory?
> The entire point of this thread was to point out how common Oswald
> doubles, look-a-likes, etc. is in the JFK CT research community. Barb
> challenged DVP on this issue.
>
Again, it is not common.
> I think it's axiomatic that if Brennan's description of the shooter he
> saw firing from the TSBD is accurate...a slender male, around 30,
> 5'10", 165lbs, then the logical conclusion if you are a CTer is that
Why should it be accurate? Was the guy in his 30's? Brennan was not even
looking at the TSBD at the time of the shots. He may have seen a
different person before and after the shots.
> the evildoers planted a guy who looked similar to Oswald up in that
> window to help frame Oz as the patsy-an Oswald double or look-a-like.
Don't tell me what straw man conclusions I must accept when I have
argued against them for 40 years.
> What is so controversial about that, if you believe Oswald didn't fire
> at the motorcade that afternoon? Why would the plotters pick a sniper
> who didn't look like Oswald?
>
I never said anything like that.
> There is a very large contingent of CTers who do not believe Oswald
> killed Tippit-another Oswald double, apparently, as numerous
Yeah, very, very large, like maybe 6 out of 2,000. I am not impressed by
WC defenders pretending to speak authoritatively for the research community.
> eyewitnesses picked Oswald out of a line-up or police photos that day/
> weekend as the shooter or as the man they saw fleeing the Tippit
> murder scene.
>
> The Oswald double/impersonator/look-a-like is very common in the JFK
> CT research community. Even among the list of attendees at all the
> major research symposia.
>
Sure, like 20 people out of 500. BFD. There is even one guy who claims
that Zapruder did not have any film in his camera, only a gun so he
fired the head shot. BFD.
>
Chuck Schuyler
> Chuck Schuyler wrote:
> > On Nov 13, 11:01 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > <snip>
>
> > I wrote:
>
> >>> Please list the researchers you feel are part of the "research
> >>> community" (I'm sure you'll include yourself...after all, you were the
> >>> first researcher to prove the Zfilm was authentic) and I'll make sure
> >>> to differentiate the elites from the wanna-be's.
>
> > Tony wrote:
> >> The list of the attendees at all the major research symposia.
>
> > Does this include James Fetzer? There is very little that Fetzer has
> > ruled out-other than Oswald acting alone.
>
> Unfortunately it does and even Lifton.
>
> > How about David Healy (aka affects)? He has attended major conferences
> > before, and has made presentations on Zfilm alteration. Healy is also
> > an advocate of the "two Zapruders" theory.
>
> Not sure which ones he attended. Do you have a link to his theory?
He's attended and presented at lone conference that I know of in Duluth,
Mn with the esteemed Mr. Fetzer back in the late 90's. Ask Healy at acj.
about his Two Zapruders theory. He'll be thrilled that someone is showing
any interest in it.
>
> > The entire point of this thread was to point out how common Oswald
> > doubles, look-a-likes, etc. is in the JFK CT research community. Barb
> > challenged DVP on this issue.
>
> Again, it is not common.
Yes, it is. Dozens and dozens of books, websites, articles, etc. Major
books authored by Marrs, Groden, Livingstone, Lifton...it's a long list.
>
> > I think it's axiomatic that if Brennan's description of the shooter he
> > saw firing from the TSBD is accurate...a slender male, around 30,
> > 5'10", 165lbs, then the logical conclusion if you are a CTer is that
>
> Why should it be accurate? Was the guy in his 30's? Brennan was not even
> looking at the TSBD at the time of the shots. He may have seen a
> different person before and after the shots.
So you have a Three Oswald's double theory? Oswald innocently wandering
somewhere in the TSBD while two different slender males, approximately 30,
5'10", 165lbs took turns peppering shots at the motorcade? You actually
think Brennan may have seen two different people in the window?
>
> > the evildoers planted a guy who looked similar to Oswald up in that
> > window to help frame Oz as the patsy-an Oswald double or look-a-like.
>
> Don't tell me what straw man conclusions I must accept when I have
> argued against them for 40 years.
What strawman? If it wasn't Oswald in the window with a rifle, it was a
man who probably was selected to fire the shots in part based on a
resemblence to Oswald. The plotters would've had no way of knowing who
would or wouldn't be glancing up at the window, filming or snapping
pictures.
>
> > What is so controversial about that, if you believe Oswald didn't fire
> > at the motorcade that afternoon? Why would the plotters pick a sniper
> > who didn't look like Oswald?
>
> I never said anything like that.
Well, what are you saying? Get to the point.
>
> > There is a very large contingent of CTers who do not believe Oswald
> > killed Tippit-another Oswald double, apparently, as numerous
>
> Yeah, very, very large, like maybe 6 out of 2,000. I am not impressed by
> WC defenders pretending to speak authoritatively for the research community.
Barb is part of the research community, and she thinks it is "most likely"
Oswald fired the Tippit shots. If it wasn't him, it was a double. I don't
know where you get your data, but even a 6 out of 2,000 figure is
embarassing.
>
> > eyewitnesses picked Oswald out of a line-up or police photos that day/
> > weekend as the shooter or as the man they saw fleeing the Tippit
> > murder scene.
>
> > The Oswald double/impersonator/look-a-like is very common in the JFK
> > CT research community. Even among the list of attendees at all the
> > major research symposia.
>
> Sure, like 20 people out of 500. BFD. There is even one guy who claims
> that Zapruder did not have any film in his camera, only a gun so he
> fired the head shot. BFD.
4% (20 out of 500) is even embarrassing, and I'll bet your figure is
low. Dozens of years studying this, and up to 4% of "serious
reseachers", by your estimation, believe in Oswald doubles.
Can you tell me why the plotters would hire a guy to fire from the
TSBD who didn't look like Oswald? What would be the reasoning?
Anthony Marsh
Wow, two dozen out of 1,000. That's pretty common.
>>> I think it's axiomatic that if Brennan's description of the shooter he
>>> saw firing from the TSBD is accurate...a slender male, around 30,
>>> 5'10", 165lbs, then the logical conclusion if you are a CTer is that
>> Why should it be accurate? Was the guy in his 30's? Brennan was not even
>> looking at the TSBD at the time of the shots. He may have seen a
>> different person before and after the shots.
>
> So you have a Three Oswald's double theory? Oswald innocently wandering
> somewhere in the TSBD while two different slender males, approximately 30,
> 5'10", 165lbs took turns peppering shots at the motorcade? You actually
> think Brennan may have seen two different people in the window?
>
Never said anything like that.
But Brennan may have seen two people up there.
>>> the evildoers planted a guy who looked similar to Oswald up in that
>>> window to help frame Oz as the patsy-an Oswald double or look-a-like.
>> Don't tell me what straw man conclusions I must accept when I have
>> argued against them for 40 years.
>
> What strawman? If it wasn't Oswald in the window with a rifle, it was a
> man who probably was selected to fire the shots in part based on a
> resemblence to Oswald. The plotters would've had no way of knowing who
> would or wouldn't be glancing up at the window, filming or snapping
> pictures.
>
No, anyone at random could look like Oswald, just as Lovelady did.
>>> What is so controversial about that, if you believe Oswald didn't fire
>>> at the motorcade that afternoon? Why would the plotters pick a sniper
>>> who didn't look like Oswald?
>> I never said anything like that.
>
> Well, what are you saying? Get to the point.
>>> There is a very large contingent of CTers who do not believe Oswald
>>> killed Tippit-another Oswald double, apparently, as numerous
>> Yeah, very, very large, like maybe 6 out of 2,000. I am not impressed by
>> WC defenders pretending to speak authoritatively for the research community.
>
> Barb is part of the research community, and she thinks it is "most likely"
> Oswald fired the Tippit shots. If it wasn't him, it was a double. I don't
> know where you get your data, but even a 6 out of 2,000 figure is
> embarassing.
>
What's embarrassing is watching you back out of your wild-ass claims.
Even 6 is embarrassing, but it is not "a very large contingent" as you
claimed. There may be only 1 here who believes in the Oswald double theory.
>>> eyewitnesses picked Oswald out of a line-up or police photos that day/
>>> weekend as the shooter or as the man they saw fleeing the Tippit
>>> murder scene.
>>> The Oswald double/impersonator/look-a-like is very common in the JFK
>>> CT research community. Even among the list of attendees at all the
>>> major research symposia.
>> Sure, like 20 people out of 500. BFD. There is even one guy who claims
>> that Zapruder did not have any film in his camera, only a gun so he
>> fired the head shot. BFD.
>
> 4% (20 out of 500) is even embarrassing, and I'll bet your figure is
> low. Dozens of years studying this, and up to 4% of "serious
> reseachers", by your estimation, believe in Oswald doubles.
>
Again, embarrassing, but not the same thing as your wacky claim that it
represents "a very large contingent."
> Can you tell me why the plotters would hire a guy to fire from the
> TSBD who didn't look like Oswald? What would be the reasoning?
>
Easy to dispose of. Expertise. Willingness.