info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
A Nutter Fallacy
159 views
Skip to first unread message
Robert Harris
Sep 4, 2014, 4:34:15 PM9/4/14
to
One of the most outrageously illogical nutter arguments goes something
like this:
Oswald couldn't have had accomplices because the motorcade passed in front
of his workplace.
I'm not distorting or exaggerating their position. That is precisely it.
It is usually prefaced by the equally ridiculous claim that it was
incredibly unlikely that the motorcade would do that.
The motorcade was deliberately routed through the most densely populated,
commercial part of Dallas. It probably passed more tall building than it
didn't. It was certainly no million-to-one shot that it passed by the
depository. It probably wasn't even a 2 to 1 shot:-)
This argument is contingent on the belief that if the President had not
passed through Dealey plaza, the assassination would never have taken
place. Of course, that is also preposterous.
Even if Oswald had been working alone, he would simply have positioned
himself elsewhere to shoot at the President - just as he did when he
apparently, shot at General Walker.
Obviously, it *was* a coincidence that the motorcade passed by the
depository, but not a very big one. In fact, the Daltex building which
housed Dallas Uranium & Oil, (apparently, a Braden-style scam operation)
was probably a bigger attraction to the killers than the depository was.
Robert Harris
like this:
Oswald couldn't have had accomplices because the motorcade passed in front
of his workplace.
I'm not distorting or exaggerating their position. That is precisely it.
It is usually prefaced by the equally ridiculous claim that it was
incredibly unlikely that the motorcade would do that.
The motorcade was deliberately routed through the most densely populated,
commercial part of Dallas. It probably passed more tall building than it
didn't. It was certainly no million-to-one shot that it passed by the
depository. It probably wasn't even a 2 to 1 shot:-)
This argument is contingent on the belief that if the President had not
passed through Dealey plaza, the assassination would never have taken
place. Of course, that is also preposterous.
Even if Oswald had been working alone, he would simply have positioned
himself elsewhere to shoot at the President - just as he did when he
apparently, shot at General Walker.
Obviously, it *was* a coincidence that the motorcade passed by the
depository, but not a very big one. In fact, the Daltex building which
housed Dallas Uranium & Oil, (apparently, a Braden-style scam operation)
was probably a bigger attraction to the killers than the depository was.
Robert Harris
tims...@gmail.com
Sep 5, 2014, 9:29:19 AM9/5/14
to
Informative Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
*...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.
And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0144a.htm
X marks the spot where Mark Lane lied!
ps I guess there COULD one or two others... TB
David Von Pein
Sep 5, 2014, 11:39:56 AM9/5/14
to
ROBERT HARRIS SAID:
One of the most outrageously illogical nutter arguments goes something
like this: Oswald couldn't have had accomplices because the motorcade
passed in front of his workplace.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
One of the most outrageously illogical nutter arguments goes something
like this: Oswald couldn't have had accomplices because the motorcade
passed in front of his workplace.
Name just ONE LNer who has ever said anything like that, Bob. I'll bet you
can't name one. I've certainly never heard that silly argument
before--from anybody.
If you're talking about the precise DATE when Oswald got his Depository
job, then that's a slightly different matter....with there being virtually
no room to wedge any pre-planned "conspiracy" into the manner and timing
of Oswald getting hired at the TSBD.
But I've never heard any LNer phrase it the way you did above -- i.e.,
"Oswald couldn't have had accomplices because the motorcade passed in
front of his workplace."
Nobody has ever suggested such a thing (that I'm aware of).
front of his workplace."
bigdog
Sep 5, 2014, 11:42:02 AM9/5/14
to
it would have been silly for Marcello or any other Mafia figure to recruit
Oswald while he was living in New Orleans to do a hit in Dallas during a
presidential trip that hadn't even been planned.
Ace Kefford
Sep 5, 2014, 6:09:39 PM9/5/14
to
Anthony Marsh
Sep 5, 2014, 6:13:29 PM9/5/14
to
It's not like they were rich enough to own their own plane and have their
own pilot who was Oswald's lover fly him to Dallas!
BT George
Sep 5, 2014, 8:36:10 PM9/5/14
to
Else it means that *chronic* COMPREHENSION problems are now starting to
show up in concert with the *severe* MEMORY problems he's becoming
legendary for displaying daily on this NG. :-)
BT George
Robert Harris
Sep 5, 2014, 9:25:05 PM9/5/14
to
In article <400b531b-347d-495b...@googlegroups.com>,
to understand their convoluted "reasoning" requires one to wade through
a bit of gobbledegook. Let's look at this thread, by nutter, BT George,
entitled,
"Calling Robert Harris Re. Oswald's Part in the Mob Plot"
In that thread, nutters claimed that it was not possible for Oswald to
team up with other shooters, anywhere other than Dealey Plaza. BT said,
"Any hopes of repositioning him would have probably been been futile if
the motorcade route had taken *any* other course than it did. He had
*NO* business in any other building during the workday and probably no
access to anywhere that would be a good place to be shooting from."
Bigdog, reinforced that idea, apparently thinking that no one would give
Oswald a ride:-)
"All kinds of logistical problems with that idea, never mind that Oswald
couldn't drive and would have had to conceal his rifle and smuggle it
into some other building where he would have been a perfect stranger.
You can't just set up a sniper's nest any old place and not be
discovered."
OK, so now we know that Oswald couldn't shoot at anybody unless they
drove by his workplace. (If only LHO had heard their brilliant
reasoning, I'm sure he would never have shot at Walker:-)
Bigdog sums up with this conclusion, which clearly reflected the same
pitch the others were selling.
"The timing of the announcement of the motorcade route coupled with the
fact Oswald had been hired at the TSBD about a month earlier indicates
this was not a plan that had been in the works for some time but simply
a crime of opportunity. Had another site been selected for the luncheon
that would have caused the motorcade route not to pass within rifle
range of the TSBD, it is unlikely most of us would have ever heard of
LHO."
Obviously, ALL of this was based on the fact that the shooting took
place as the limo passed in front of Oswald's workplace. Had it happened
elsewhere, then all of their arguments evaporate (as if they didn't
anyway:-).
BT also argued that the mob only had 3 days notice that the motorcade
would pass through DP. And since they had no way of knowing that it
would pass by the *ONLY* place where Oswald could be used as a patsy
(remember, he can't be moved), they didn?t have time to plan their
conspiracy. (I told you it was convoluted:-)
Ergo, they were claiming that there was no conspiracy, precisely because
the limo passed in front of Oswald's workplace.
Robert Harris
David Von Pein <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
> ROBERT HARRIS SAID:
>
> One of the most outrageously illogical nutter arguments goes something
> like this: Oswald couldn't have had accomplices because the motorcade > passed in front of his workplace.
>
>
> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
> Name just ONE LNer who has ever said anything like that, Bob. I'll bet you
> can't name one. I've certainly never heard that silly argument
> before--from anybody.
You need to pay closer attention what what your buddies are saying. But
> ROBERT HARRIS SAID:
>
> One of the most outrageously illogical nutter arguments goes something
> like this: Oswald couldn't have had accomplices because the motorcade > passed in front of his workplace.
>
>
> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
> Name just ONE LNer who has ever said anything like that, Bob. I'll bet you
> can't name one. I've certainly never heard that silly argument
> before--from anybody.
to understand their convoluted "reasoning" requires one to wade through
a bit of gobbledegook. Let's look at this thread, by nutter, BT George,
entitled,
"Calling Robert Harris Re. Oswald's Part in the Mob Plot"
In that thread, nutters claimed that it was not possible for Oswald to
team up with other shooters, anywhere other than Dealey Plaza. BT said,
"Any hopes of repositioning him would have probably been been futile if
the motorcade route had taken *any* other course than it did. He had
*NO* business in any other building during the workday and probably no
access to anywhere that would be a good place to be shooting from."
Bigdog, reinforced that idea, apparently thinking that no one would give
Oswald a ride:-)
"All kinds of logistical problems with that idea, never mind that Oswald
couldn't drive and would have had to conceal his rifle and smuggle it
into some other building where he would have been a perfect stranger.
You can't just set up a sniper's nest any old place and not be
discovered."
OK, so now we know that Oswald couldn't shoot at anybody unless they
drove by his workplace. (If only LHO had heard their brilliant
reasoning, I'm sure he would never have shot at Walker:-)
Bigdog sums up with this conclusion, which clearly reflected the same
pitch the others were selling.
"The timing of the announcement of the motorcade route coupled with the
fact Oswald had been hired at the TSBD about a month earlier indicates
this was not a plan that had been in the works for some time but simply
a crime of opportunity. Had another site been selected for the luncheon
that would have caused the motorcade route not to pass within rifle
range of the TSBD, it is unlikely most of us would have ever heard of
LHO."
Obviously, ALL of this was based on the fact that the shooting took
place as the limo passed in front of Oswald's workplace. Had it happened
elsewhere, then all of their arguments evaporate (as if they didn't
anyway:-).
BT also argued that the mob only had 3 days notice that the motorcade
would pass through DP. And since they had no way of knowing that it
would pass by the *ONLY* place where Oswald could be used as a patsy
(remember, he can't be moved), they didn?t have time to plan their
conspiracy. (I told you it was convoluted:-)
Ergo, they were claiming that there was no conspiracy, precisely because
the limo passed in front of Oswald's workplace.
Robert Harris
BT George
Sep 6, 2014, 12:15:54 AM9/6/14
to
I am moving this weekend and no time to answer Bob at length. The CENTRAL
point of my argument is exactly as BD called out above that I already
commented on.
As for the rest, it's based on the belief that Bob needed his
"Patsy-shooter" to be where he was to be written off as a lone-nut.
Apparently, Bob envisions a somewhat different role for
LHO-as-Patsy-shooter.
It TOO has some issues from what I've seen of his ideas, but as I told him
over in that thread, he needs to address the CENTRAL problematic issue
first before we bother with the other nuances of his particular theory.
BT George
point of my argument is exactly as BD called out above that I already
commented on.
As for the rest, it's based on the belief that Bob needed his
"Patsy-shooter" to be where he was to be written off as a lone-nut.
Apparently, Bob envisions a somewhat different role for
LHO-as-Patsy-shooter.
It TOO has some issues from what I've seen of his ideas, but as I told him
over in that thread, he needs to address the CENTRAL problematic issue
first before we bother with the other nuances of his particular theory.
BT George
Bud
Sep 6, 2014, 5:38:11 PM9/6/14
to
On Thursday, September 4, 2014 4:34:15 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
> One of the most outrageously illogical nutter arguments goes something
>
> like this:
>
>
>
> Oswald couldn't have had accomplices because the motorcade passed in front
>
> of his workplace.
>
>
>
> I'm not distorting or exaggerating their position. That is precisely it.
No, it isn`t. If it was you would address the arguments where they were
>
> like this:
>
>
>
> Oswald couldn't have had accomplices because the motorcade passed in front
>
> of his workplace.
>
>
>
> I'm not distorting or exaggerating their position. That is precisely it.
in context. You brought your poor interpretation of the ideas expressed in
the other thread here and produced what amounts to a strawman.
For what it`s worth I do think Oswald would have tried to kill Kennedy
anywhere in Dallas, even if he had to step off a curb with his handgun to
do it. Say what you will about Oswald, he had brass balls. Kennedy coming
this close was too much for him to resist. I suspect if Kennedy did the
other Texas stops without going to Dallas Oswald would have went to one of
those. He was just that much of a murderous political fanatic.
Robert Harris
Sep 7, 2014, 9:54:15 PM9/7/14
to
In article <e01af5bb-b3eb-405b...@googlegroups.com>,
they appeared.
And you are also wrong in denying that they claimed Oswald couldn't have
had accomplices because the limo passed in front of the depository.
See my reply to Von Pein.
Robert Harris
Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:
> On Thursday, September 4, 2014 4:34:15 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
> > One of the most outrageously illogical nutter arguments goes something
> >
> > like this:
> >
> >
> >
> > Oswald couldn't have had accomplices because the motorcade passed in front
> >
> > of his workplace.
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm not distorting or exaggerating their position. That is precisely it.
>
> No, it isn`t. If it was you would address the arguments where they were
> in context.
I already did. I replied to BT's silly arguments in the thread in which
> On Thursday, September 4, 2014 4:34:15 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
> > One of the most outrageously illogical nutter arguments goes something
> >
> > like this:
> >
> >
> >
> > Oswald couldn't have had accomplices because the motorcade passed in front
> >
> > of his workplace.
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm not distorting or exaggerating their position. That is precisely it.
>
> No, it isn`t. If it was you would address the arguments where they were
> in context.
they appeared.
And you are also wrong in denying that they claimed Oswald couldn't have
had accomplices because the limo passed in front of the depository.
See my reply to Von Pein.
Robert Harris
Robert Harris
Sep 7, 2014, 9:54:42 PM9/7/14
to
In article <203c133b-dc55-43d6...@googlegroups.com>,
Of course it was. See my reply to Von Pein.
But since you are now denying it, may I assume that you agree that the
fact that the limo passed in front of the depository, has nothing to do
with the question of conspiracy?
I mean, that's not what you said before. Did you change your mind:-)
> The argument is that
> it would have been silly for Marcello or any other Mafia figure to recruit
> Oswald while he was living in New Orleans to do a hit in Dallas during a
> presidential trip that hadn't even been planned.
Bullshit!
I cited you verbatim in the reply to DVP.
And that argument is equally silly. The trip to Dallas appeared in the
newspapers, in an AP release on Sept. 7th. Less than a month later,
Oswald was on his way there.
Robert Harris
bigdog <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, September 4, 2014 4:34:15 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
> > One of the most outrageously illogical nutter arguments goes something
> >
> > like this:
> >
> > Oswald couldn't have had accomplices because the motorcade passed in front
> >
> > of his workplace.
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm not distorting or exaggerating their position. That is precisely it.
> >
> > It is usually prefaced by the equally ridiculous claim that it was
> >
> > incredibly unlikely that the motorcade would do that.
> >
> >
> >
> > The motorcade was deliberately routed through the most densely populated,
> >
> > commercial part of Dallas. It probably passed more tall building than it
> >
> > didn't. It was certainly no million-to-one shot that it passed by the
> >
> > depository. It probably wasn't even a 2 to 1 shot:-)
> >
> >
> >
> > This argument is contingent on the belief that if the President had not
> >
> > passed through Dealey plaza, the assassination would never have taken
> >
> > place. Of course, that is also preposterous.
> >
> >
> >
> > Even if Oswald had been working alone, he would simply have positioned
> >
> > himself elsewhere to shoot at the President - just as he did when he
> >
> > apparently, shot at General Walker.
> >
> >
> >
> > Obviously, it *was* a coincidence that the motorcade passed by the
> >
> > depository, but not a very big one. In fact, the Daltex building which
> >
> > housed Dallas Uranium & Oil, (apparently, a Braden-style scam operation)
> >
> > was probably a bigger attraction to the killers than the depository was.
> >
>
> That isn't the argument at all, Bob, and you know it.
ROFLMAO!!
> On Thursday, September 4, 2014 4:34:15 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
> > One of the most outrageously illogical nutter arguments goes something
> >
> > like this:
> >
> > Oswald couldn't have had accomplices because the motorcade passed in front
> >
> > of his workplace.
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm not distorting or exaggerating their position. That is precisely it.
> >
> > It is usually prefaced by the equally ridiculous claim that it was
> >
> > incredibly unlikely that the motorcade would do that.
> >
> >
> >
> > The motorcade was deliberately routed through the most densely populated,
> >
> > commercial part of Dallas. It probably passed more tall building than it
> >
> > didn't. It was certainly no million-to-one shot that it passed by the
> >
> > depository. It probably wasn't even a 2 to 1 shot:-)
> >
> >
> >
> > This argument is contingent on the belief that if the President had not
> >
> > passed through Dealey plaza, the assassination would never have taken
> >
> > place. Of course, that is also preposterous.
> >
> >
> >
> > Even if Oswald had been working alone, he would simply have positioned
> >
> > himself elsewhere to shoot at the President - just as he did when he
> >
> > apparently, shot at General Walker.
> >
> >
> >
> > Obviously, it *was* a coincidence that the motorcade passed by the
> >
> > depository, but not a very big one. In fact, the Daltex building which
> >
> > housed Dallas Uranium & Oil, (apparently, a Braden-style scam operation)
> >
> > was probably a bigger attraction to the killers than the depository was.
> >
>
> That isn't the argument at all, Bob, and you know it.
Of course it was. See my reply to Von Pein.
But since you are now denying it, may I assume that you agree that the
fact that the limo passed in front of the depository, has nothing to do
with the question of conspiracy?
I mean, that's not what you said before. Did you change your mind:-)
> The argument is that
> it would have been silly for Marcello or any other Mafia figure to recruit
> Oswald while he was living in New Orleans to do a hit in Dallas during a
> presidential trip that hadn't even been planned.
I cited you verbatim in the reply to DVP.
And that argument is equally silly. The trip to Dallas appeared in the
newspapers, in an AP release on Sept. 7th. Less than a month later,
Oswald was on his way there.
Robert Harris
bigdog
Sep 7, 2014, 11:00:36 PM9/7/14
to
On Sunday, September 7, 2014 9:54:42 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
>
> And that argument is equally silly. The trip to Dallas appeared in the
> newspapers, in an AP release on Sept. 7th. Less than a month later,
> Oswald was on his way there.
And by an amazing coincidence, he took a job at a building overlooking the
>
> And that argument is equally silly. The trip to Dallas appeared in the
> newspapers, in an AP release on Sept. 7th. Less than a month later,
> Oswald was on his way there.
motorcade route that hadn't even been settled on. Then you go on to
pontificate how Oswald could have easily been moved to another location
had it not been for this extraordinary piece of luck, completely ignoring
the logistical problems this would entail. As if Oswald could just pop
into any old building along whatever other motorcade route had been
selected with his Carcano in the paper bag, lay in wait for JFK to arrive
and not drawn any suspiscion to himself. This of course after he found a
suitable location for the ambush, which itself would be logistical
problem. Maybe he could have gone to the building's receptionist and said,
"Excuse me. I'm planning to assassinate President Kennedy later this week.
Would you mind if I look around your building and see if there is a
suitable location I could use. I don't need a lot of space and won't be
much of a bother. I'll just need a few square feet by a window for a few
minutes to get set up".
Anthony Marsh
Sep 8, 2014, 10:37:03 AM9/8/14
to
On 9/7/2014 11:00 PM, bigdog wrote:
> On Sunday, September 7, 2014 9:54:42 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
>>
>> And that argument is equally silly. The trip to Dallas appeared in the
>> newspapers, in an AP release on Sept. 7th. Less than a month later,
>> Oswald was on his way there.
>
> And by an amazing coincidence, he took a job at a building overlooking the
By an amazing coincidence Oswald got a job in Dealey Plaza, where every
> On Sunday, September 7, 2014 9:54:42 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
>>
>> And that argument is equally silly. The trip to Dallas appeared in the
>> newspapers, in an AP release on Sept. 7th. Less than a month later,
>> Oswald was on his way there.
>
> And by an amazing coincidence, he took a job at a building overlooking the
motorcade route goes past several tall buildings.
> motorcade route that hadn't even been settled on. Then you go on to
> pontificate how Oswald could have easily been moved to another location
> had it not been for this extraordinary piece of luck, completely ignoring
> the logistical problems this would entail. As if Oswald could just pop
when people point out your silliness.
> into any old building along whatever other motorcade route had been
> selected with his Carcano in the paper bag, lay in wait for JFK to arrive
the grassy knoll and the police investigated, but did not catch him.
> and not drawn any suspiscion to himself. This of course after he found a
> suitable location for the ambush, which itself would be logistical
> problem. Maybe he could have gone to the building's receptionist and said,
> "Excuse me. I'm planning to assassinate President Kennedy later this week.
> Would you mind if I look around your building and see if there is a
> suitable location I could use. I don't need a lot of space and won't be
> much of a bother. I'll just need a few square feet by a window for a few
> minutes to get set up".
>
man arguments you are constructing. Why can't you learn to debate
honestly?
Robert Harris
Sep 8, 2014, 4:27:44 PM9/8/14
to
bigdog wrote:
> On Sunday, September 7, 2014 9:54:42 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
>>
>> And that argument is equally silly. The trip to Dallas appeared in the
>> newspapers, in an AP release on Sept. 7th. Less than a month later,
>> Oswald was on his way there.
>
> And by an amazing coincidence, he took a job at a building overlooking the
> motorcade route that hadn't even been settled on.
That may have been a coincidence but it wasn't very amazing. The
> On Sunday, September 7, 2014 9:54:42 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
>>
>> And that argument is equally silly. The trip to Dallas appeared in the
>> newspapers, in an AP release on Sept. 7th. Less than a month later,
>> Oswald was on his way there.
>
> And by an amazing coincidence, he took a job at a building overlooking the
> motorcade route that hadn't even been settled on.
motorcade passed by a zillion tall buildings that day, and many
thousands of people's workplaces.
> Then you go on to
> pontificate how Oswald could have easily been moved to another location
> had it not been for this extraordinary piece of luck, completely ignoring
> the logistical problems this would entail.
What "logistical problem"? Rent him a room in one of the many hotels
along the route and tell him to shoot Kennedy when he goes by.
Or if you don't want to pay for his accomodations, put him on the roof
of a building somewhere.
> As if Oswald could just pop
> into any old building along whatever other motorcade route had been
> selected with his Carcano in the paper bag, lay in wait for JFK to arrive
> and not drawn any suspiscion to himself.
Bigdog, you're getting desperate. There were a thousand places along
that route where a sniper could position himself and get the job done.
Robert Harris
bigdog
Sep 8, 2014, 4:30:49 PM9/8/14
to
On Monday, September 8, 2014 10:37:03 AM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> On 9/7/2014 11:00 PM, bigdog wrote:
>
> > On Sunday, September 7, 2014 9:54:42 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> And that argument is equally silly. The trip to Dallas appeared in the
> >> newspapers, in an AP release on Sept. 7th. Less than a month later,
> >> Oswald was on his way there.
>
> > And by an amazing coincidence, he took a job at a building overlooking the
>
> By an amazing coincidence Oswald got a job in Dealey Plaza, where every
> motorcade route goes past several tall buildings.
>
Not every motorcade would go down Elm St. The only reason for the
> On 9/7/2014 11:00 PM, bigdog wrote:
>
> > On Sunday, September 7, 2014 9:54:42 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> And that argument is equally silly. The trip to Dallas appeared in the
> >> newspapers, in an AP release on Sept. 7th. Less than a month later,
> >> Oswald was on his way there.
>
> > And by an amazing coincidence, he took a job at a building overlooking the
>
> By an amazing coincidence Oswald got a job in Dealey Plaza, where every
> motorcade route goes past several tall buildings.
>
motorcade to make the jog from Main to Elm would to get on I-35
(Stemmons). That would be the quickest way from the edge west edge of
downtown to the Trade Mart.
>
> > motorcade route that hadn't even been settled on. Then you go on to
> > pontificate how Oswald could have easily been moved to another location
> > had it not been for this extraordinary piece of luck, completely ignoring
> > the logistical problems this would entail. As if Oswald could just pop
>
> I enjoyed the pontificating. It is so rarely done any more. I enjoy it
> when people point out your silliness.
>
sense sound silly to you.
>
> > into any old building along whatever other motorcade route had been
>> > selected with his Carcano in the paper bag, lay in wait for JFK to arrive
>
> Who said he had to carry it in a paper bag. Some guy carried a gun up to
> the grassy knoll and the police investigated, but did not catch him.
>
was no gunman up there when JFK arrived.
>
> > and not drawn any suspiscion to himself. This of course after he found a
> > suitable location for the ambush, which itself would be logistical
> > problem. Maybe he could have gone to the building's receptionist and said,
> > "Excuse me. I'm planning to assassinate President Kennedy later this week.
> > Would you mind if I look around your building and see if there is a
> > suitable location I could use. I don't need a lot of space and won't be
> > much of a bother. I'll just need a few square feet by a window for a few
> > minutes to get set up".
>
> We have a serious shortage of straw in our country due to all the straw
> man arguments you are constructing. Why can't you learn to debate
> honestly?
decision making processes independent of the other, that brought JFK into
rifle range of Oswald's place of employment. It was nothing that anybody
could have planned, not even Oswald. He simply discovered the golden
opportunity those random circumstances had dealt him and took full
advantage to become somebody infamous. Ironically, he didn't get to live
long enough to enjoy his infamy.
BT George
Sep 8, 2014, 4:33:25 PM9/8/14
to
On Sunday, September 7, 2014 8:54:15 PM UTC-5, Robert Harris wrote:
> In article <e01af5bb-b3eb-405b...@googlegroups.com>,
>
> Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Thursday, September 4, 2014 4:34:15 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
>
> > > One of the most outrageously illogical nutter arguments goes something
>
> > >
>
> > > like this:
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > Oswald couldn't have had accomplices because the motorcade passed in front
>
> > >
>
> > > of his workplace.
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > I'm not distorting or exaggerating their position. That is precisely it.
>
> >
>
> > No, it isn`t. If it was you would address the arguments where they were
>
> > in context.
>
>
>
> I already did. I replied to BT's silly arguments in the thread in which
>
> they appeared.
>
>
1) You replied to my arguments partially *ignoring* the CENTRAL point of
> In article <e01af5bb-b3eb-405b...@googlegroups.com>,
>
> Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Thursday, September 4, 2014 4:34:15 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
>
> > > One of the most outrageously illogical nutter arguments goes something
>
> > >
>
> > > like this:
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > Oswald couldn't have had accomplices because the motorcade passed in front
>
> > >
>
> > > of his workplace.
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > I'm not distorting or exaggerating their position. That is precisely it.
>
> >
>
> > No, it isn`t. If it was you would address the arguments where they were
>
> > in context.
>
>
>
> I already did. I replied to BT's silly arguments in the thread in which
>
> they appeared.
>
>
the argument. :-)
2) Furthermore, you replied to the portion of my arguments directed at my
(apparently mistaken) belief that you had Oswald being "set-up" by the Mob
as a "Patsy-shooter" to take the fall as a "lone-nut" shooting from the
TSBD.
As I said before, *AFTER* you address the *CENTRAL* point of my argument,
we can re-address some of the issues brought on by you apparent belief
that the Mob's "brilliant" idea was to have Oswald set up as follows:
"The hope was that Oswald would be thought to have been part of
acommunist conspiracy, and it almost worked."
LOL! ...How clever!
ANYONE knows the Mob---ever concerned about perpetuating itself---was too
stupid/reckless to be concerned about thermo-nuclear war! :-) So now NOT
content to merely depart from long-standing precedent against killing
high-level US officials (for fear of it putting an effective end to their
criminal enterprises) you have them not only upping the stakes BIG time to
take out the POTUS, you have them upping the stakes REALLY BIG, BIG time
to risking *ALL* life on planet Earth...including *theirs*!!!
Brilliant! Stunning! How "utterly" and "completely" compelling! :-)
3) So now before we proceed with all THAT, you still owe me some (serious)
answers right back at this post over here:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.assassination.jfk/zAdDGqRdETE/cI1_nzOGwpwJ
BT George
bigdog
Sep 8, 2014, 9:37:13 PM9/8/14
to
On Monday, September 8, 2014 4:27:44 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
> bigdog wrote:
>
> > On Sunday, September 7, 2014 9:54:42 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
>
> >> And that argument is equally silly. The trip to Dallas appeared in the
> >> newspapers, in an AP release on Sept. 7th. Less than a month later,
> >> Oswald was on his way there.
>
> > And by an amazing coincidence, he took a job at a building overlooking the
> > motorcade route that hadn't even been settled on.
>
> That may have been a coincidence but it wasn't very amazing. The
> motorcade passed by a zillion tall buildings that day, and many
> thousands of people's workplaces.
>
The point is that it was happenstance that Oswald was working at a place
> bigdog wrote:
>
> > On Sunday, September 7, 2014 9:54:42 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
>
> >> And that argument is equally silly. The trip to Dallas appeared in the
> >> newspapers, in an AP release on Sept. 7th. Less than a month later,
> >> Oswald was on his way there.
>
> > And by an amazing coincidence, he took a job at a building overlooking the
> > motorcade route that hadn't even been settled on.
>
> That may have been a coincidence but it wasn't very amazing. The
> motorcade passed by a zillion tall buildings that day, and many
> thousands of people's workplaces.
>
that overlooked the motorcade. It wasn't anything that anyone, including
Oswald, could have planned. That is what indicates this was nothing more
than a crime of opportunity and not a crime that had been planned well in
advance.
>
> > Then you go on to
> > pontificate how Oswald could have easily been moved to another location
>
> Yes, he indeed, movable:-)
>
just 3 days advance notice, how do you find a building where you will have
a clear shot at the motorcade and not be exposed to the people who
actually work in that building. Then you have to figure out how to get a
perfect stranger in that building with a rifle and not be noticed by the
people that work there.
>
> > had it not been for this extraordinary piece of luck, completely ignoring
> > the logistical problems this would entail.
>
> LOL!
>
> What "logistical problem"? Rent him a room in one of the many hotels
> along the route and tell him to shoot Kennedy when he goes by.
>
> Or if you don't want to pay for his accomodations, put him on the roof
> of a building somewhere.
>
on the GK.
>
> > As if Oswald could just pop
> > into any old building along whatever other motorcade route had been
> > selected with his Carcano in the paper bag, lay in wait for JFK to arrive
> > and not drawn any suspiscion to himself.
>
Sigh..
>
> Bigdog, you're getting desperate. There were a thousand places along
> that route where a sniper could position himself and get the job done.
>
spot where you could COUNT on not being spotted.
Anthony Marsh
Sep 9, 2014, 9:25:15 AM9/9/14
to
Anthony Marsh
Sep 9, 2014, 12:34:34 PM9/9/14
to
On 9/8/2014 4:30 PM, bigdog wrote:
> On Monday, September 8, 2014 10:37:03 AM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>> On 9/7/2014 11:00 PM, bigdog wrote:
>>
>>> On Sunday, September 7, 2014 9:54:42 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> And that argument is equally silly. The trip to Dallas appeared in the
>>>> newspapers, in an AP release on Sept. 7th. Less than a month later,
>>>> Oswald was on his way there.
>>
>>> And by an amazing coincidence, he took a job at a building overlooking the
>>
>> By an amazing coincidence Oswald got a job in Dealey Plaza, where every
>> motorcade route goes past several tall buildings.
>>
>
> Not every motorcade would go down Elm St. The only reason for the
> motorcade to make the jog from Main to Elm would to get on I-35
> (Stemmons). That would be the quickest way from the edge west edge of
> downtown to the Trade Mart.
>
All the parades and motorcades went through Dealey Plaza. They weren't
> On Monday, September 8, 2014 10:37:03 AM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>> On 9/7/2014 11:00 PM, bigdog wrote:
>>
>>> On Sunday, September 7, 2014 9:54:42 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> And that argument is equally silly. The trip to Dallas appeared in the
>>>> newspapers, in an AP release on Sept. 7th. Less than a month later,
>>>> Oswald was on his way there.
>>
>>> And by an amazing coincidence, he took a job at a building overlooking the
>>
>> By an amazing coincidence Oswald got a job in Dealey Plaza, where every
>> motorcade route goes past several tall buildings.
>>
>
> Not every motorcade would go down Elm St. The only reason for the
> motorcade to make the jog from Main to Elm would to get on I-35
> (Stemmons). That would be the quickest way from the edge west edge of
> downtown to the Trade Mart.
>
looking for the quickest way. They were looking for the largest crowds.
>>
>>> motorcade route that hadn't even been settled on. Then you go on to
>>> pontificate how Oswald could have easily been moved to another location
>>> had it not been for this extraordinary piece of luck, completely ignoring
>>> the logistical problems this would entail. As if Oswald could just pop
>>
>> I enjoyed the pontificating. It is so rarely done any more. I enjoy it
>> when people point out your silliness.
>>
>
> Of course you do. You believe silly things make sense and things that make
> sense sound silly to you.
>
>>
>>> into any old building along whatever other motorcade route had been
>>>> selected with his Carcano in the paper bag, lay in wait for JFK to arrive
>>
>> Who said he had to carry it in a paper bag. Some guy carried a gun up to
>> the grassy knoll and the police investigated, but did not catch him.
>>
>
> He must have carried it away too before the motorcade arrived since there
> was no gunman up there when JFK arrived.
Sandy McCroskey
Sep 9, 2014, 3:55:47 PM9/9/14
to
Ha ha
bigdog
Sep 9, 2014, 4:12:07 PM9/9/14
to
parking lot, plus anyone else who might have happened to show up there.
The area in front of the fence would have been exposed to the spectators
in Dealey Plaza. Ya, there's a place where a shooter could count on not
being seen. <snicker>
bigdog
Sep 9, 2014, 8:15:35 PM9/9/14
to
On Tuesday, September 9, 2014 12:34:34 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> On 9/8/2014 4:30 PM, bigdog wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Not every motorcade would go down Elm St. The only reason for the
> > motorcade to make the jog from Main to Elm would to get on I-35
> > (Stemmons). That would be the quickest way from the edge west edge of
> > downtown to the Trade Mart.
>
> All the parades and motorcades went through Dealey Plaza. They weren't
> looking for the quickest way. They were looking for the largest crowds.
>
Not all of them would go down Elm St. You can go through Dealey Plaza on
> On 9/8/2014 4:30 PM, bigdog wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Not every motorcade would go down Elm St. The only reason for the
> > motorcade to make the jog from Main to Elm would to get on I-35
> > (Stemmons). That would be the quickest way from the edge west edge of
> > downtown to the Trade Mart.
>
> All the parades and motorcades went through Dealey Plaza. They weren't
> looking for the quickest way. They were looking for the largest crowds.
>
Main or Commerce too. Depending on where you came from and where you were
going, both of those would have been an option and neither would have
given Oswald the easy shot at JFK he had from the TSBD firing down Elm St.
with JFK and his protection detail all having their backs to him.
>
> >>> motorcade route that hadn't even been settled on. Then you go on to
> >>> pontificate how Oswald could have easily been moved to another location
> >>> had it not been for this extraordinary piece of luck, completely ignoring
> >>> the logistical problems this would entail. As if Oswald could just pop
>
> >> I enjoyed the pontificating. It is so rarely done any more. I enjoy it
> >> when people point out your silliness.
>
> > Of course you do. You believe silly things make sense and things that make
> > sense sound silly to you.
>
> >>> into any old building along whatever other motorcade route had been
> >>>> selected with his Carcano in the paper bag, lay in wait for JFK to arrive
>
> >> Who said he had to carry it in a paper bag. Some guy carried a gun up to
> >> the grassy knoll and the police investigated, but did not catch him.
>
> > He must have carried it away too before the motorcade arrived since there
> > was no gunman up there when JFK arrived.
>
> As usual you miss the point.
>
Anthony Marsh
Sep 9, 2014, 8:37:18 PM9/9/14
to
seen by one little girl. What's she gonna do, go tackle him?
You are being silly on purpose.
Anthony Marsh
Sep 9, 2014, 8:41:00 PM9/9/14
to
Robert Harris
Sep 9, 2014, 9:32:43 PM9/9/14
to
In article <706cbf4e-6af7-4049...@googlegroups.com>,
along the route, which travelled from one end of the Dallas to the
other, passing through the most heavily populated, commercial areas.
> That is what indicates this was nothing more
> than a crime of opportunity and not a crime that had been planned well in
> advance.
Utter nonsense.
Bigdog, *THINK*.
I don't know about you, but if I was going to shoot someone like that,
the very *LAST* place I would do it, was from my workplace.
In fact, how did it happen that Oswald was identified so quickly? That's
right - he wasn't present when Truly did a head count.
But what if he had the day off, and took a shot a couple miles from
there, and then got away in a cab, like he did, from the depository?
His chances of escaping unidentified, would have been *MUCH* better -
just like the other snipers in DP.
But Oswald didn't get to make that decision. The people who put him on
the sixth floor with a very noisy rifle, expected and wanted him to be
killed.
>
> >
> > > Then you go on to
> > > pontificate how Oswald could have easily been moved to another location
> >
> > Yes, he indeed, movable:-)
> >
>
> And you continue to ignore the logistical problems that would entail.
Yes, I tend to ignore things that do not exist. That's why I'm an
atheist:-)
> With
> just 3 days advance notice, how do you find a building where you will have
> a clear shot at the motorcade and not be exposed to the people who
> actually work in that building.
Any rooftop would be fine. The crowd would be focused on Kennedy, not
the sky.
Or any hotel room, especially, using a suppressed rifle. Of course, for
Oswald, the perps would have wanted him to use an unsuppressed weapon.
You're fabricating complications which just didn't exist. That's what
happens when you are trying to "win" debates, rather than address
reality.
> Then you have to figure out how to get a
> perfect stranger in that building with a rifle and not be noticed by the
> people that work there.
People come into hotels carrying baggage amigo.
Sigh.. this is all too easy.
Robert Harris
bigdog <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Monday, September 8, 2014 4:27:44 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
> > bigdog wrote:
> >
> > > On Sunday, September 7, 2014 9:54:42 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
> >
> > >> And that argument is equally silly. The trip to Dallas appeared in the
> > >> newspapers, in an AP release on Sept. 7th. Less than a month later,
> > >> Oswald was on his way there.
> >
> > > And by an amazing coincidence, he took a job at a building overlooking the
> > > motorcade route that hadn't even been settled on.
> >
> > That may have been a coincidence but it wasn't very amazing. The
> > motorcade passed by a zillion tall buildings that day, and many
> > thousands of people's workplaces.
> >
>
> The point is that it was happenstance that Oswald was working at a place
> that overlooked the motorcade. It wasn't anything that anyone, including
> Oswald, could have planned.
Yep, just like ten thousand or more other folks who worked in buildings
> On Monday, September 8, 2014 4:27:44 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
> > bigdog wrote:
> >
> > > On Sunday, September 7, 2014 9:54:42 PM UTC-4, Robert Harris wrote:
> >
> > >> And that argument is equally silly. The trip to Dallas appeared in the
> > >> newspapers, in an AP release on Sept. 7th. Less than a month later,
> > >> Oswald was on his way there.
> >
> > > And by an amazing coincidence, he took a job at a building overlooking the
> > > motorcade route that hadn't even been settled on.
> >
> > That may have been a coincidence but it wasn't very amazing. The
> > motorcade passed by a zillion tall buildings that day, and many
> > thousands of people's workplaces.
> >
>
> The point is that it was happenstance that Oswald was working at a place
> that overlooked the motorcade. It wasn't anything that anyone, including
> Oswald, could have planned.
along the route, which travelled from one end of the Dallas to the
other, passing through the most heavily populated, commercial areas.
> That is what indicates this was nothing more
> than a crime of opportunity and not a crime that had been planned well in
> advance.
Bigdog, *THINK*.
I don't know about you, but if I was going to shoot someone like that,
the very *LAST* place I would do it, was from my workplace.
In fact, how did it happen that Oswald was identified so quickly? That's
right - he wasn't present when Truly did a head count.
But what if he had the day off, and took a shot a couple miles from
there, and then got away in a cab, like he did, from the depository?
His chances of escaping unidentified, would have been *MUCH* better -
just like the other snipers in DP.
But Oswald didn't get to make that decision. The people who put him on
the sixth floor with a very noisy rifle, expected and wanted him to be
killed.
>
> >
> > > Then you go on to
> > > pontificate how Oswald could have easily been moved to another location
> >
> > Yes, he indeed, movable:-)
> >
>
> And you continue to ignore the logistical problems that would entail.
atheist:-)
> With
> just 3 days advance notice, how do you find a building where you will have
> a clear shot at the motorcade and not be exposed to the people who
> actually work in that building.
the sky.
Or any hotel room, especially, using a suppressed rifle. Of course, for
Oswald, the perps would have wanted him to use an unsuppressed weapon.
You're fabricating complications which just didn't exist. That's what
happens when you are trying to "win" debates, rather than address
reality.
> Then you have to figure out how to get a
> perfect stranger in that building with a rifle and not be noticed by the
> people that work there.
Sigh.. this is all too easy.
Robert Harris
Anthony Marsh
Sep 9, 2014, 9:41:01 PM9/9/14
to
On 9/9/2014 8:15 PM, bigdog wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 9, 2014 12:34:34 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>> On 9/8/2014 4:30 PM, bigdog wrote:
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Not every motorcade would go down Elm St. The only reason for the
>>> motorcade to make the jog from Main to Elm would to get on I-35
>>> (Stemmons). That would be the quickest way from the edge west edge of
>>> downtown to the Trade Mart.
>>
>> All the parades and motorcades went through Dealey Plaza. They weren't
>> looking for the quickest way. They were looking for the largest crowds.
>>
>
> Not all of them would go down Elm St. You can go through Dealey Plaza on
I didn't say Elm Street. Stop putting words in my mouth. Are you saying
> On Tuesday, September 9, 2014 12:34:34 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>> On 9/8/2014 4:30 PM, bigdog wrote:
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Not every motorcade would go down Elm St. The only reason for the
>>> motorcade to make the jog from Main to Elm would to get on I-35
>>> (Stemmons). That would be the quickest way from the edge west edge of
>>> downtown to the Trade Mart.
>>
>> All the parades and motorcades went through Dealey Plaza. They weren't
>> looking for the quickest way. They were looking for the largest crowds.
>>
>
> Not all of them would go down Elm St. You can go through Dealey Plaza on
you couldn't hit the limo on Main Street?
> Main or Commerce too. Depending on where you came from and where you were
> going, both of those would have been an option and neither would have
> given Oswald the easy shot at JFK he had from the TSBD firing down Elm St.
> with JFK and his protection detail all having their backs to him.
>
If you think Oswald could hit JFK in the head on Elm it's not much
farther to Main.
bigdog
Sep 10, 2014, 1:18:55 PM9/10/14
to
bigdog
Sep 10, 2014, 1:19:36 PM9/10/14
to
after the shooting. The reason nobody could see a shooter behind the fence
was because there was no shooter behind the fence.
Anthony Marsh
Sep 10, 2014, 10:47:34 PM9/10/14
to
bigdog
Sep 11, 2014, 1:06:38 PM9/11/14
to
who worked in the TSBD to take the fall, would put a gunman one the GK to
take an "insurance shot" and wouldn't care if he was seen or not?
Brilliant plan.
PS. You really are slipping. You didn't ever notice I mistakenly wrote
Brewer was in the railroad tower rather than Bowers. It's not like you to
allow errors such as this to go by without some snide comment.
Anthony Marsh
Sep 11, 2014, 9:46:10 PM9/11/14
to
On 9/11/2014 1:06 PM, bigdog wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 10:47:34 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>> On 9/10/2014 1:18 PM, bigdog wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, September 9, 2014 8:37:18 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>>
>>>> On 9/9/2014 4:12 PM, bigdog wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, September 9, 2014 9:25:15 AM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>>
>>>>>> On 9/8/2014 9:37 PM, bigdog wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> There are a lot of places he could shoot from. The problem is finding a
>>>>>>> spot where you could COUNT on not being spotted.
>>
>>>>>> How about the Grassy Knoll?
>>
>>>>> Ya, how about the GK. Brewer in the railroad yard with a full view of the
>>>>> parking lot, plus anyone else who might have happened to show up there.
>>
>>>>> The area in front of the fence would have been exposed to the spectators
>>>>> in Dealey Plaza. Ya, there's a place where a shooter could count on not
>>>>> being seen. <snicker>
>>
>>>> So what if he was seen? Whatya gonna do about it? Black Dog Man was only
>>>> seen by one little girl. What's she gonna do, go tackle him?
>>>> You are being silly on purpose.
>>
>>> One question. Are you serious?
>>
>> No, I am making fun of your logic, or lack thereof.
>
> So you think it's logical that your conspirators, planning to have a guy
> who worked in the TSBD to take the fall, would put a gunman one the GK to
> take an "insurance shot" and wouldn't care if he was seen or not?
> Brilliant plan.
>
Like their Castro plots.
> On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 10:47:34 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>> On 9/10/2014 1:18 PM, bigdog wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, September 9, 2014 8:37:18 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>>
>>>> On 9/9/2014 4:12 PM, bigdog wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, September 9, 2014 9:25:15 AM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>>
>>>>>> On 9/8/2014 9:37 PM, bigdog wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> There are a lot of places he could shoot from. The problem is finding a
>>>>>>> spot where you could COUNT on not being spotted.
>>
>>>>>> How about the Grassy Knoll?
>>
>>>>> Ya, how about the GK. Brewer in the railroad yard with a full view of the
>>>>> parking lot, plus anyone else who might have happened to show up there.
>>
>>>>> The area in front of the fence would have been exposed to the spectators
>>>>> in Dealey Plaza. Ya, there's a place where a shooter could count on not
>>>>> being seen. <snicker>
>>
>>>> So what if he was seen? Whatya gonna do about it? Black Dog Man was only
>>>> seen by one little girl. What's she gonna do, go tackle him?
>>>> You are being silly on purpose.
>>
>>> One question. Are you serious?
>>
>> No, I am making fun of your logic, or lack thereof.
>
> So you think it's logical that your conspirators, planning to have a guy
> who worked in the TSBD to take the fall, would put a gunman one the GK to
> take an "insurance shot" and wouldn't care if he was seen or not?
> Brilliant plan.
>
> PS. You really are slipping. You didn't ever notice I mistakenly wrote
> Brewer was in the railroad tower rather than Bowers. It's not like you to
> allow errors such as this to go by without some snide comment.
>
bigdog
Sep 13, 2014, 3:30:56 PM9/13/14
to
On Thursday, September 11, 2014 9:46:10 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>
> > PS. You really are slipping. You didn't ever notice I mistakenly wrote
> > Brewer was in the railroad tower rather than Bowers. It's not like you to
> > allow errors such as this to go by without some snide comment.
>
> There is not enough time in the day to correct ALL your errors.
Of course. You are far too busy making yours.
>
> > PS. You really are slipping. You didn't ever notice I mistakenly wrote
> > Brewer was in the railroad tower rather than Bowers. It's not like you to
> > allow errors such as this to go by without some snide comment.
>
> There is not enough time in the day to correct ALL your errors.
0 new messages