The Debate is Over
RICLAND
or round. The "Flat Earthers" maintained schools where multitudes of the
privileged sent their sons to learn the intricacies of this ancient
science. At these schools hoary professors scribbled fantastic formulas
and rubics on their black boards proving without question the earth was
no more round than the sun was square.
Christopher Columbus' voyage changed this some, but not much. These
schools continued. The privileged continued paying enormous sums to send
their sons to them. The professors created even more elaborate
calculations to show they were right and Columbus wrong.
The point here is that the debate is over. Like Columbus' voyage the
question is settled. As any criminologist will tell you there's a
critical mass of evidence that when once reached guilt or innocence is
known beyond any reasonable doubt.
The Kennedy Assassination has reached this critical mass. As the flat
eathers did 500 years ago, the Lone Gunmen may well continue their
sophistry for another hundred years or so, but the truth of what
happened that day in Dallas is no longer shrouded in mystery, at least
not the question of conspiracy.
The Kennedy Assassination was most assuredly a conspiracy, either that
or a mass of random coincidences the like the world has never seen
before; either that or the earth is indeed flat and everything we know
to the contrary is random coincidence too.
The debate is over.
ricland
--
"Prof Rahn's site is brilliant.
It only took me 10 visits before I was
able to navigate it just fine."
--cddraftsman
"We probably will never learn the truth about this case."
--Earl Warren, 1964
Who Shot JFK?
http://tinyurl.com/247ybb
Bud
RICLAND wrote:
> About 500 years ago professors still debated whether the earth was flat
> or round. The "Flat Earthers" maintained schools where multitudes of the
> privileged sent their sons to learn the intricacies of this ancient
> science. At these schools hoary professors scribbled fantastic formulas
> and rubics on their black boards proving without question the earth was
> no more round than the sun was square.
The kooks like to bring up the "flat-liners". They think it shows
how theories that are considered ridiculous must be right. What it
really shows is the pitfalls of just claiming something without being
able to support it, like the kooks do with their conspiracy theory .
> Christopher Columbus' voyage changed this some, but not much. These
> schools continued. The privileged continued paying enormous sums to send
> their sons to them. The professors created even more elaborate
> calculations to show they were right and Columbus wrong.
>
> The point here is that the debate is over. Like Columbus' voyage the
> question is settled. As any criminologist will tell you there's a
> critical mass of evidence that when once reached guilt or innocence is
> known beyond any reasonable doubt.
>
> The Kennedy Assassination has reached this critical mass. As the flat
> eathers did 500 years ago, the Lone Gunmen may well continue their
> sophistry for another hundred years or so, but the truth of what
> happened that day in Dallas is no longer shrouded in mystery, at least
> not the question of conspiracy.
How do you declare it a conspiracy, when all the details of this
conspiracy (names, places, actions) of this conspiracy lies out of
your grasp?
> The Kennedy Assassination was most assuredly a conspiracy, either that
> or a mass of random coincidences the like the world has never seen
> before; either that or the earth is indeed flat and everything we know
> to the contrary is random coincidence too.
In other words, you declare it a conspiracy based on the fact that
you can`t reconcile any difficulties that arise in the evidence. It
doesn`t occur to you that this might be explained by the fact that
kooks have no interest in explaining these difficulties, they only
wish to find them to exploit into conspiracy theories? And what of all
the amazing coincidences required in a scenario in which Oz is
innocent. Lets see you propose a scenario that isn`t fraught with
coincidences.
> The debate is over.
True enough, the Warren Commision told people how this thing went
down. Either people will accept the obviousness of their conclusions,
or they won`t.
David Von Pein
Oh, you mean like those incredible "paper bag" type of coincidences
that I discuss here?.....
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/5c8ef2a8a1c40856
Or maybe you're referring to the "SBT"-like "coincidences" that all
CTers are forced to swallow with respect to the wounding of JFK &
JBC...a wounding of 2 men that CTers think occurred not with just a
single bullet...but, instead, with 2 or 3 different bullets/gunshots!
With the end (non-SBT) result being a pattern of wounds on the victims
so incredibly CLOSE to looking like a SINGLE bullet might have done
all this damage that the WC can "create" a pretty decent-looking lie
(per the CTers) known as the "Single-Bullet Theory". (Right down to
the DISAPPEARANCE of all unwanted bullets, except for CE399.)
Is that what you mean by "coincidences", Ric?
Below we have still more incredible, off-the-wall kookshit that CTers
are forced to fully accept in order for the type of conspiracy to
actually exist in the JFK case that virtually all CTers DO cling to
daily......
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/7e70b829247b4a49
So, what was that you were saying again Ricland? Something about "the
Kennedy Assassination most assuredly {being} a conspiracy"??
In order for the kind of conspiracy to exist that you think did/does
exist in this murder case, the Earth would REALLY have to be flat.
That's how utterly impossible such a conspiracy is.
aeffects
David, perhaps you have a photo of the MC in a 27" bag handy? Surely
some Lone Nutter has gone to that extreme, yes?
tomnln
Someone who understands the value of evidence/testimony.
Please explain why the authorities Altered the Walker back yard photo THREE
(3) Times??
http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
news:1176199135.9...@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
David Von Pein
>>> "David, perhaps you have a photo of the MC in a 27" bag handy?" <<<
Why on Earth would that type of silly experiment be required here?
Oswald's rifle was never in a "27-inch bag". That was merely a loose
estimate given by witnesses.
But the weight of all the paper-bag evidence spells out "OSWALD WAS IN
THE S.N. WITH A PAPER BAG AND A RIFLE". That's obviously what the
weight of the evidence spells out to a reasonable researcher that is.
Not to the kooks, of course.
The CT crowd, however, has to have every last loose end and/or
discrepancy stamped "SOLVED TO MY KOOKY SATISFACTION" before a likely
final solution can be arrived at.
Therefore, per those CTers, the case can NEVER be solved, due to the
types of witness discrepancies that can be EXPECTED in every murder
case. Things like: height and weight of a person, hair color, clothing
color, length of an object, or the exact timestamping for a particular
event.
Things like that are always going to vary witness by witness....but
the CT-Kooks keep propping up these things as ironclad proof of a
plot. Why?
The fact that a similarly-fashioned bag (to what Randle and Frazier
saw LHO with) was found in the SN and with Oswald's prints on it
doesn't mean a thing to rabid CTers. Not a thing. This incredible
"OSWALD'S INNOCENT" coincidence is apparently to be EXPECTED by the CT-
Kooks!
IOW....the conspiracy-loving kooks seem to be saying this:
"Why SHOULDN'T an empty paper bag (somewhat similar to what Frazier/
Randle observed on the very same day) with Oswald's prints on it be
found in the Sniper's Nest just after the shooting? That's no big
deal. Oswald, after all, WORKED THERE. His prints were on lots of
things probably. Doesn't mean he shot anybody.
"And why SHOULDN'T Oswald's rifle be found on that same 6th Floor
within an hour of the President's assassination? And why shouldn't it
have some of his own prints on it too? Lots of Texans own rifles.
Doesn't mean he used it to shoot the President on Nov. 22.
"And why SHOULDN'T Oswald have been seen in the window on the 6th
Floor of the TSBD at 12:30 and shortly before then? After all, he DID
work there. There's no crime in just standing around on the floor he
worked on that day, is there? Doesn't mean he shot anybody?
"And why SHOULDN'T a whole bullet from Oswald's rifle be found in the
same hospital where the shooting victims were taken? Doesn't mean
Oswald fired that bullet from that gun that day, does it?
"And why SHOULDN'T two bullet fragments from Oswald's rifle be found
in the limousine? Doesn't mean Oswald pulled the trigger.
"And why SHOULDN'T Oswald have gunned down Officer Tippit just 45
minutes after JFK's shooting? Tippit probably insulted Oswald's
glorious mother, Marguerite. And nobody has to take that crap. Not
even from a policeman! He was just defending his mom. It's obvious!
"And why SHOULDN'T Oswald pull his gun on another policeman in the
theater? Doesn't mean he shot JFK, right? The cops were probably
hassling Lee over the cheap movie ticket he failed to purchase from
Miss Postal. And nobody has a right to sic the cops on a guy just
because of that.
"And why SHOULDN'T Oswald have lied like a dog, time and time again,
after his arrest? It wasn't the cops' business if Oz owned a rifle.
And it wasn't the business of the police if Lee had or hadn't carried
a long package into work on Nov. 22nd. I'd have lied to those rotten
cops too. Serves 'em right!"
================
[End Kook Simulation.]
================
I wonder how much "Oswald Was There In The Sniper's Nest" stuff has to
pile up against the door in order for those "Why Shouldn't" items to
be discarded and in order for the "Oswald Must Have Been There In The
Nest" light bulb to go on in a CTer's head?
I wonder if having Oswald's prints on one or more of the three bullet
shells in the SN would be the thing that would convince the CTers? (Or
would that merely be another item for the lengthy "Why Shouldn't These
Things Have Happened To An Innocent Lee Harvey Oswald?" list?)
Just how many "Oswald Was Here" coincidences DOES it take for CTers to
see the light?
Has anybody counted? It must take quite a few....that's for damn sure.