Why Do So Many Conspiracy Theorists Believe In A JFK Assassination Plot That Could Not Possibly Have Been Successful?
David VP
Who assassinated President John F. Kennedy in 1963? .... Was he killed
as the result of a large-scale conspiracy, as depicted in Oliver
Stone's 1991 motion picture? .... Was Lee Harvey Oswald merely an
innocent "Patsy", being manipulated and handled by a group of evil
conspirators? .... Was it just a small conspiracy involving only two or
three individuals? .... Or did Oswald, all by himself, murder the
President?
One of the most popular theories is that a massive conspiracy took
place in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63, resulting in not only the death of
the American President, but also resulting in so many supposed
conspiratorial loose ends that a cover-up team of thousands probably
wouldn't have provided enough manpower to accomplish the burdensome
task of re-arranging all of the various pieces of evidence surrounding
JFK's murder in order to conceal the true facts and bumbling
inadequacies of the harebrained "Patsy Plot" that many a-CTer advocate.
And yet -- somehow, some way -- that's exactly what a goodly number of
CTers think occurred in 1963. .....
I.E.: Despite the illogic of it all, and despite the massive roadblocks
in the conspirators' path, somehow ALL of the physical evidence that
was actually being created by all of these OTHER KILLERS who were busy
firing away and pelting President Kennedy with rifle bullets in Dallas
on November 22 (physical evidence such as .... guns, bullets, bullet
fragments, bullet shells, and fingerprints) found a way to ALL get
placed on the plate of only Lee Harvey Oswald.*
* = And people think the parting of the Red Sea was a "miracle". Heck,
the Red Sea trick was nothin' compared to what this ultra-clever gang
of infallible assassination plotters and cover-up operatives pulled off
in late '63. Perhaps Moses was in Dallas on November 22, helping out
with this JFK mess after THREE OR FOUR different assassins decided to
take aim at JFK, even though the desired end result of this "plot" was
to frame just ONE LONE PATSY in the Book Depository for the murder.
(~LOL~ at the thought of such a Patsy plot actually be dreamed up in
the weeks prior to 11/22/63.)
It seems to me as though a lot of CTers have never met a conspiracy
theory they haven't fallen in love with and accepted with wide-open
arms, no matter how silly it sounds (the "Zapruder Film Hoax"
balderdash being a prime example, which is one of the Crown Jewels of
"Nutty JFK Theories").
My answer, however, to the "Who Shot JFK?" question is a little less
complicated -- Lee Harvey Oswald murdered JFK and another man (J.D.
Tippit) on 11/22/1963 A.D., in Dallas, Texas, USA. ~Mark VII~
The string of evidence lending credence to Oswald's lone guilt is a
mile-and-a-half long -- particularly with respect to Officer Tippit's
murder, which is a second November 22nd killing that many, many
conspiracy theorists (for some odd reason I've never been able to
figure out at all) seem to think Oswald had nothing to do with. Such
an incorrect notion by CTers only makes me more skeptical about any
other "conclusions" such conspiracists might have reached with respect
to other aspects of the JFK murder investigation as well. Because
Oswald's guilt in Tippit's death couldn't be more obvious, even if Lee
Harvey had been photographed firing the four bullets into the
policeman's body.
And speaking of JFK assassination theories that are deserving of a
large dose of "skepticism" -- I'd like to know what's wrong with
casting a good-sized hunk of doubt upon by far the most-popular and
most widely-accepted-as-fact conspiracy theory in the whole JFK case --
i.e., the "Multi-Gunmen, One-Patsy, Frontal Head Shot" theory?
Every piece of physical evidence in the case supports the Lone-Assassin
conclusion arrived at by the Warren Commission and supports Lee Harvey
Oswald's guilt in the two murders LHO was accused of committing.
Evidence such as: guns, bullets, bullet cartridge casings, JFK's
autopsy report, and fingerprints.
And is it truly reasonable to think that ALL of this stuff pointing
only to Oswald's guilt was "faked" by a bunch of conspirators who were
attempting to frame Oswald? I say no, it is not reasonable, especially
if the CTer(s) making the claim of evidence fakery truly believe(s)
that most or all of the bullet evidence was monkeyed-around-with by
local and federal authorities after the assassination.
Because there is no way on this Earth that all of those various Dallas
cops were "planting" evidence within minutes of JFK's murder (and
Tippit's too), as some CTers seem to think. That notion is not only
nutty and lacking any actual proof that it ever happened, it's also a
rather vile and despicable allegation against such DPD and Sheriff's
Office members like: Eugene Boone, James Leavelle, Luke Mooney, M.N.
McDonald, Gerald Hill, Will Fritz, Jesse Curry, Seymour Weitzman, J.C.
Day, Herbert Sawyer, Bob Carroll, Glen King, and dozens of others as
well.
Given the known physical evidence surrounding the Kennedy case -- and
the fact that a large percentage of this evidence was collected by an
organization (the DPD) which had MANY members who were actively
involved in this evidence-gathering process -- Lee Harvey Oswald is as
guilty as sin.**
** = And the Dallas Police Department couldn't have possibly in a
million years have had on its force that Friday in 1963 nothing but
evil, lying, crooked "cover-up agents" who wanted to frame an innocent
person for the murder of two men .... all the while these many, many
officers apparently don't give a damn that the real killers got off
scot-free for the murder of not only the President of the United
States, but also for the murder of one of Dallas' own police officers,
11-year DPD veteran J.D. Tippit. And if there's one thing that cops
hate with a passion, it's a cop killer. To believe that many different
DPD members would deliberately want to let Officer Tippit's "real
killer" just drift off into the sunset, unpunished, is something too
silly to even talk about.
Given the above common-sense knowledge about the DPD, if the very
popular "Multi-Gun, One-Patsy" conspiracy theory isn't worthy of being
skeptical of, then I don't know what would be. And I have yet to
encounter a single CTer who will admit out loud that the crackpot
"Multiple-Shooter Patsy Plot" they have placed their faith in was,
indeed, the wisest and most well-thought-out of all assassination plans
for this band of Patsy Framers to attempt to carry out in Dealey Plaza.
It's my firm opinion that NOBODY, no matter how insane they might have
been, would have deliberately placed three, four, or five different
riflemen (and possibly a dart-thrower with a loaded umbrella as well,
who was in full view of tons of witnesses [~"LOL!" break~]) in Dealey
Plaza to shoot President Kennedy and somehow expect to pull off a
perfect "framing" of one single "Patsy" named Oswald.
Such a foolish Patsy Plot would never have been considered for even one
solitary minute by any group of people who were concocting some sort of
scheme to rid the world of President John F. Kennedy. Which, in my own
opinion, is the BIGGEST reason of all to know that it never happened
that way on November 22nd, 1963!
Because the ONLY possible way that such a Multiple-Gun, Single-Patsy
pre-planned assassination plot could have been successful is if the
Almighty Himself had a hand in "fixing" every single thing that would
have undoubtedly revealed the conspiracy very quickly afterwards via
such a cuckoo scheme.
There's also this important fact to consider when discussing possible
"evidence tampering" -- If Oswald was framed as a Patsy and if all of
the ballistics evidence had been "planted" and/or "manipulated" by the
authorities in some way to make Oswald look guilty, there would have to
have been THREE separate law-enforcement agencies involved in willingly
falsifying evidence in the "Oswald Frame-Up" (and I'm referring to JUST
the bullet/ballistics evidence alone here).
Why?
Because .... People from three different organizations (two federal
agencies and one local in Dallas) were responsible for collecting the
rifle, the bullets, the bullet fragments, and the bullet shells in the
JFK murder case and placing those items into the official record of the
case. Those organizations being:
1.) The Dallas Police Department .... which initially found the
Mannlicher-Carcano rifle belonging to Lee Harvey Oswald, as well as
having found and collected the three spent rifle shells (from that same
Oswald weapon) in the Depository's Sniper's Nest just after the
assassination.
2.) The U.S. Secret Service .... which was the organization that first
handled "Stretcher Bullet CE399" (a bullet that was positively fired
from Oswald's rifle) after it was handed over to the Secret Service by
Parkland Hospital employee Darrell C. Tomlinson on the afternoon of
11/22/63.
3.) The FBI .... which was responsible for investigating JFK's murder
after taking control of the physical evidence in the case from the DPD.
The evidence that was seized by the FBI shortly after 11/22 included
the Oswald rifle, which means that if the two front-seat bullet
fragments that were initially discovered by the Secret Service on
11/22/63 had been "faked" or "replaced" in some manner to implicate
only Oswald and his weapon, it would have had to have been the FBI who
"faked" these fragments -- because the SS was not in possession of
Oswald's rifle at any point prior to the SS handing over CE567 and
CE569 (the two front-seat limousine bullet fragments) to FBI Agent
Orrin Bartlett. Bartlett then delivered these fragments to FBI Special
Agent Robert A. Frazier at 11:50 PM on the night of November 22, 1963,
in Washington.
Therefore, via the CT-perceived point-of-view of ---> "All Or Most Of
The Authorities Who Came Within A Country Mile Of Any Of The
Assassination Evidence Were All Lying Crooks Who Were Trying Their Best
To Frame An Innocent Young Man By The Name Of Oswald" (which is a
post-assassination posture that has, indeed, been adopted by several
paranoid assassination researchers) --- if a "Frame The Patsy" plot
actually did occur in 1963 with respect to John Kennedy's death, it was
an absolutely PERFECTLY-coordinated, multi-organizational cover-up job,
whose participants in said plot ran the gamut from the DPD, to the
Secret Service, and right on up to the FBI as well.
To think that such a "blanket", across-the-board cover-up and "Oswald
Frame-Up" operation was underway within literally minutes of JFK's
death, and was carried out without a hitch by members of all of the
various entities mentioned previously, is akin to believing in the
tooth fairy. It just simply could not have happened.
And, given the vast amount of physical evidence that would have needed
to be placed into a perfectly-arranged "Lee Harvey Oswald Really Did
This Instead Of These Two Or Three OTHER Assassins Who Were Aiming
Rifles At John Kennedy" basket after the shooting, it's a pretty safe
bet that the following sentence is 100% accurate ---
If the CTers are correct about this "Oswald Was Only A Patsy" business,
then it must have been an act of God that enabled the success of the
conspirators' plot.
Because nothing short of Divine Intervention could have rescued such an
inane assassination plan. Nothing.
Phil Ossofee
up.You are asking why all the time, instead of following the evidence.
Could you have seriously contemplated as an example on Sept. 10 2001,
that the next day four large passenger planes would be hijacked by
Muslim Terrorists, bringing down 2 110 story bldg's & also killing
dozens and dozens of people in the fiery kamikaze style inferno that
ensued at the Pentagon without even being shot down? Nope. Nobody could
conceive of it, and there's the rub.
Phil D.
David VP
pre-planning of what CTers contend is a
"Multi-Shooter-But-Only-One-Patsy" JFK plot to the 9/11 attacks.
Who was supposedly "being framed as the lone patsy" on 9/11?
Your example is nutty.
>> "You are asking why all the time, instead of following the evidence."
After I get my jaw unstuck from the floor after reading such hypocrisy
I'll try to answer the above comment.....
If CTers "followed the hard, physical evidence" in the JFK case, guess
where they'll end up?
aeffects
position as soon as: you show us one DP photo that clearly *ID's*
AZapruder on the pedestal --
Comments from DP eyewitnesses won't work -- we ALL understand how Lone
Neuter 'eye witness' testimony works, don't we, Von Pain?
David VP
Dear sweet Lord in the heavens! Somebody, quick, please tell me
Mr./Mrs. Effects is not serious here.
Is it even POSSIBLE to take a CTer seriously when junk like this is
being spouted by supposedly "serious researchers"?
Even if there were ZERO pictures of Zapruder on his pedestal (and
Sitzman too), your argument is a worthless one. (And I assume your
argument along these lines is: Zapruder wasn't really filming the
motorcade at all, and the whole Z-Film is "Faked" because Mr. Fetzer
and Mr. Livingstone tell me so. Right?)
By this strange logic, even you (as a CTer) must admit that since
there's no photo showing (via a "positive I.D.") any frontal assassin,
then no such assassin could possibly exist in DP.
Anyway....even without a single picture of Zapruder in DP (which, of
course, do exist...and just because you can't make out the color of his
socks means little), there's still the unimpeachable accounts of both
Marilyn Sitzman and Abe Zapruder that verify that Mr. Z was filming the
motorcade from that exact pedestal on 11/22. (Were both Zapruder and
Sitzman "evil conspirators and after-the-fact cover-up agents" too?)
If this is the best you can do to refute my thread-opening comments re.
the wholly-illogical Patsy Frame-Up Plot, then I think it's safe to say
that this LN battle has been won. Because neither you, nor anyone else,
can justify the pre-planning idiocy of the so-called "Patsy Plotters".
No chance.
aeffects
David VP wrote:
> >> "Hard physical evidence, hmm -- I'll consider your comments and your position as soon as: you show us one DP photo that clearly *ID's* A. Zapruder on the pedestal."
>
>
> Dear sweet Lord in the heavens! Somebody, quick, please tell me
> Mr./Mrs. Effects is not serious here.
>
> Is it even POSSIBLE to take a CTer seriously when junk like this is
> being spouted by supposedly "serious researchers"?
put me out of my misery, then -- post a photo that clearly show
AZapruder on the pedestal
> Even if there were ZERO pictures of Zapruder on his pedestal (and
> Sitzman too), your argument is a worthless one. (And I assume your
> argument along these lines is: Zapruder wasn't really filming the
> motorcade at all, and the whole Z-Film is "Faked" because Mr. Fetzer
> and Mr. Livingstone tell me so. Right?)
post a photo that clearly ID's AZapruder on the pedestal
> By this strange logic, even you (as a CTer) must admit that since
> there's no photo showing (via a "positive I.D.") any frontal assassin,
> then no such assassin could possibly exist in DP.
only certified moron's such as yourself conclude such nonsense
> Anyway....even without a single picture of Zapruder in DP (which, of
> course, do exist...and just because you can't make out the color of his
> socks means little), there's still the unimpeachable accounts of both
> Marilyn Sitzman and Abe Zapruder that verify that Mr. Z was filming the
> motorcade from that exact pedestal on 11/22. (Were both Zapruder and
> Sitzman "evil conspirators and after-the-fact cover-up agents" too?)
"...do exist..." then you'll have no problem posting same -- come on
Dude!
> If this is the best you can do to refute my thread-opening comments re.
> the wholly-illogical Patsy Frame-Up Plot, then I think it's safe to say
> that this LN battle has been won. Because neither you, nor anyone else,
> can justify the pre-planning idiocy of the so-called "Patsy Plotters".
"evidence" is your problem Von Pain, ID him (Zapruder) on the pedestal,
then we'll talk theories -- till then your stuck with the WCR, and THAT
I don't envy... you're on stage dude...
> No chance.
Pretty much what I think when it comes to WC...
David VP
verifies Zapruder's existence on the pedestal, plus Zapruder's and
Sitzman's own testimony. (They're both lying plotters, right?)
BTW....Can you "positively identify" Phil Willis or Jim Altgens in the
Zapruder Film? How do you KNOW those men are REALLY photogs Willis and
Altgens? They could be imposters just "posing" as Willis/Altgens. (Get
crackin' on that theory...fast! A book deal awaits.)
And after you crawl back in bed with Fetzer, et al, perhaps YOU can
show us a DP photo that IDs (positively) a "Grassy Knoll shooter". That
shouldn't be too difficult, should it?
aeffects
Likes of you, your fault, EVERYTHING is up for grabs... sheeesh!
GOD, I hope the head of the Lone Neuter corps doesn't stop too quickly
- hate to see your head buried *too* far up his arse
David VP
last hunk of unintelligible nonsense?
Gil Jesus
WAS possible. Sometimes you should read what you're writing. Maybe
you'd realize how assinine your reasoning is.
Tell us of another example where one shooter was possible and multiple
shooters was impossible. I'll be waiting to hear from you.
Anthony Marsh
> There's no NEED to "I.D." Zapruder in photos/films. The film itself
> verifies Zapruder's existence on the pedestal, plus Zapruder's and
> Sitzman's own testimony. (They're both lying plotters, right?)
>
Believe it or not there is even some wacko out there who claims that
Zapruder did not have any film in his camera, but that he used a gun
inside the camera to fire the fatal shot. How else could we explain back
and to the left?
> BTW....Can you "positively identify" Phil Willis or Jim Altgens in the
> Zapruder Film? How do you KNOW those men are REALLY photogs Willis and
> Altgens? They could be imposters just "posing" as Willis/Altgens. (Get
> crackin' on that theory...fast! A book deal awaits.)
>
Shh, that's Jack White's chapter in the next Fetzer book.
> And after you crawl back in bed with Fetzer, et al, perhaps YOU can
> show us a DP photo that IDs (positively) a "Grassy Knoll shooter". That
> shouldn't be too difficult, should it?
The Moorman photo and the Zapruder film.
>
Anthony Marsh
> David VP wrote:
>>>> "Hard physical evidence, hmm -- I'll consider your comments and your position as soon as: you show us one DP photo that clearly *ID's* A. Zapruder on the pedestal."
>>
>> Dear sweet Lord in the heavens! Somebody, quick, please tell me
>> Mr./Mrs. Effects is not serious here.
>>
>> Is it even POSSIBLE to take a CTer seriously when junk like this is
>> being spouted by supposedly "serious researchers"?
>
> put me out of my misery, then -- post a photo that clearly show
> AZapruder on the pedestal
>
>
The Moorman photo.
Gil Jesus
aeffects
someone[s] on the pedestal, that's it -- Frankly, I can't tell whose
standing in front of who in that photo... neither can you!
aeffects
ID'ing Zapruder based on DP photographs/film...
David VP
MY reasoning is asinine? But rationalizing a multi-shooter, ONE-Patsy
plot is perfectly reasonable and rational?
Interesting. And silly.
>> "Tell us of another example where one shooter was possible and multiple shooters was impossible."
What in the heck are you talking about? You have totally misinterpreted
what my first post says. Given the physical evidence in the JFK case,
multiple shooters did not hit JFK. Period. (Do you REALLY believe all
three autopsy doctors were lying cover-up operatives? ALL three of 'em?
THAT'S some great "coercion" there, ya gotta admit. Not one dissenting
doctor. And they keep on a-lyin' for 40+ years too! Amazing
strong-arming tactics indeed.)
But the crux of the "illogic" factor involved in my initial post is, of
course, that nobody with a brain would even ATTEMPT to frame a single
patsy by shooting JFK from several directions.
It's not rocket science, for Pete sake .... it's "Pre-Patsy-Framing
Common Sense 101".
Gil -- Do you think it would be wise to shoot Kennedy from many
directions while at the same time wanting to frame just one patsy?
How anyone could answer "Yes" to that last inquiry is beyond me.
David VP
IOW -- The CT motto applies here (as usual) -- i.e.: "NOTHING & NO ONE
CAN BE TRUSTED & NOTHING IS WHAT IT *SEEMS* TO BE".
Correct?
lazu...@webtv.net
wound was 4 inches higher in the cowlick, meaning their so incompetent
it's unbelievable that 3 Dr.'s would make the exact same mistake, and
nobody at the Autopsy is talking about a nice little perfect bullet hole
in the cowlick that anybody would have noticed. So, once you see the
HSCA and Clark Panel are full of Posner, then you go back to the EOP
with the 3 Doctors. OK, an EOP downward entrance obviously is not going
to do the damage to the top of he head we see inthe Autopsy Photos. No
possible way!
Kenneth A. Rahn
"David VP" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1141080925.2...@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Anybody got a "CT Dictionary" handy so I can decipher A(-Hole)Effects'
> last hunk of unintelligible nonsense?
Don't bother!
Ken Rahn
Kenneth A. Rahn
"David VP" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1141103997.6...@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
By my lights, the reasoning here is extremely simple:
(1) The hard evidence proves that the two men were hit by bullets from a
single shooter.
(2) There is no hard evidence for a second shooter (even after 42 long, hard
years of desperate trying).
(3) Therefore, the probability is extremely low that there was another
shooter.
(4) We cannot exclude that possibility, however.
(5) But it is a logical fallacy to entertain it without hard evidence for
it.
Ken Rahn
Anthony Marsh
> I have no doubt someone is on that pedestal -- my comments concern
> ID'ing Zapruder based on DP photographs/film...
>
Other photographs clearly identify Zapruder as the man when he got down
from the pedestal.