Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Are JFK Conspiracy Theories Slowly Dying?

177 views
Skip to first unread message

chucksch...@gmail.com

unread,
Nov 27, 2017, 8:09:44 PM11/27/17
to

John McAdams gets a shout-out in the article, too.




http://quillette.com/2017/11/25/jfk-conspiracies-slowly-dying/

Anthony Marsh

unread,
Nov 28, 2017, 5:26:19 PM11/28/17
to
On 11/27/2017 8:09 PM, chucksch...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> John McAdams gets a shout-out in the article, too.
>
>
>
>
> http://quillette.com/2017/11/25/jfk-conspiracies-slowly-dying/
>


Is that directly from the CIA or is it another one of Ned Dolan's
aliases? If so, glad to see he's still alive.

bigdog

unread,
Nov 28, 2017, 10:52:36 PM11/28/17
to
On Monday, November 27, 2017 at 8:09:44 PM UTC-5, chucksch...@gmail.com wrote:
> John McAdams gets a shout-out in the article, too.
>
>
>
>
> http://quillette.com/2017/11/25/jfk-conspiracies-slowly-dying/

A little fact checking. The author makes the same mistake so many LNs and
CTs make when they attributed an estimate of the time frame of the shots
to the WC when he wrote:

[quote one]

Oswald may have had more time to accomplish the shooting than previously
thought – as much as 11 seconds for three shots, rather than just
under eight seconds, as estimated by the Warren Commission. In 2013, the
science series Nova produced another useful contribution to the debate for
PBS entitled Cold Case JFK.

[quote off]

One more time. THE WARREN COMMISSION MADE NO ESTIMATE AS TO THE TOTAL TIME
OSWALD TOOK TO FIRE THE THREE SHOTS. Instead they examined a number of
possible scenarios while committing to none of them because they didn't
think they had sufficient evidence to make a positive determination.
Gerald Posner made this same gaffe back when he was promoting his book. I
find this erroneous claim especially galling when I read it coming from
those defending the lone assassin point of view. Have any of these people
read what the WC actually wrote regarding this. Apparently not. Here is
their summary conclusion on the subject at the end of chapter 3 of the
report

[quote on]

TIME SPAN OF SHOTS

Witnesses at the assassination scene said that the shots were fired within
a few seconds, with the general estimate being 5 to 6 seconds.365 That
approximation was most probably based on the earlier publicized reports
that the first shot struck the President in the neck, the second wounded
the Governor and the third shattered the President's head, with the time
span from the neck to the head shots on the President being approximately
5 seconds. As previously indicated, the time span between the shot
entering the back of the President's neck and the bullet which shattered
his skull was 4.8 to 5.6 seconds. If the second shot missed, then 4.8 to
5.6 seconds was the total time span of the shots. If either the first or
third shots missed, then a minimum of 2.3 seconds (necessary to operate
the rifle) must be added to the time span of the shots which hit, giving a
minimum time of 7.1 to 7.9 seconds for the three shots. If more than 2.3
seconds elapsed between a shot that missed and one that hit, then the time
span would be correspondingly increased.

CONCLUSION

Based on the evidence analyzed in this chapter, the Commission has
concluded that the shots which killed President Kennedy and wounded
Governor Connally were fired from the sixth-floor window at the southeast
corner of the Texas School Book Depository Building. Two bullets probably
caused all the wounds suffered by President Kennedy and Governor Connally.
Since the preponderance of the evidence indicated that three shots were
fired, the Commission concluded that one shot probably missed the
Presidential limousine and its occupants, and that the three shots were
fired in a time period ranging from approximately 4.8 to in excess of 7
seconds.

[quote off]

The Warren Commission did not give an estimate. They gave a possible range
with an indefinite upper limit for the range. "in excess of 7 seconds"
could be 10, 15, or even more seconds. If the first shot missed, and they
never concluded that it did, there was no definitive proof as to when it
was fired. Without a definite beginning it is impossible to place a limit
on the total firing time.

Sorry for the rant but this is one of my pet peeves regarding the
assassination. The myth that the WC actually stated how long the time span
was for the shots has become accepted as fact and not just by the
conspiracy hobbyists. This factoid survives because apparently so few
people have bothered to read the damn report.

Ace Kefford

unread,
Nov 28, 2017, 11:09:21 PM11/28/17
to
On Monday, November 27, 2017 at 8:09:44 PM UTC-5, chucksch...@gmail.com wrote:
> John McAdams gets a shout-out in the article, too.
>
>
>
>
> http://quillette.com/2017/11/25/jfk-conspiracies-slowly-dying/

Are you kidding?! Even the ones that have been thoroughly refuted won't
go away. And the buffs and nuts are always adding more.

David Von Pein

unread,
Nov 29, 2017, 10:42:07 AM11/29/17
to
I feel so sorry for JFK assassination researcher and "LN" author Charles
I. Adams (if such a person should exist). His initials will forever brand
him as "CIA" in so many conspiracy theorists' eyes. Same for Colleen Ida
Atkins. She, too, will never be able to shed the rumors that she's a
disinfo agent for the CIA.

chucksch...@gmail.com

unread,
Nov 29, 2017, 2:08:28 PM11/29/17
to
Tough for you to contemplate adulthood without The Hobby, eh?


bigdog

unread,
Nov 29, 2017, 5:56:02 PM11/29/17
to
Conspiracy theories will die when the conspiracy hobbyists die. Future
generations whose opinions won't have been corrupted by decades of
conspiracy mongering will accept that Oswald was the assassin just as
Booth is universally accepted as Lincoln's assassin. They will be aware
that many believed he did not act alone but they will have little doubt
that he acted. Those that believe Oswald was nothing more than a patsy
will be about as common as flat earth believers.

David Von Pein

unread,
Nov 29, 2017, 6:04:49 PM11/29/17
to
I hear ya, BigDog. The "5.6 seconds" myth has been one of my pet peeves
for years too....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/five-point-six-seconds-myth.html

chucksch...@gmail.com

unread,
Nov 29, 2017, 6:07:18 PM11/29/17
to
I think this is fading a bit, which is only natural. The event is 54 years
old now.

Conspiracy theories will never totally go away because conspiracism is a
natural part of the human condition. The author makes some good points,
and for someone curious about the events surrounding JFK's murder, the
field of study isn't as one-sided any longer. It used to be tough to find
anything touting the Oswald Alone explanation.

I've often said that JFK conspiracy belief is a mile wide and an inch
deep. Expose the average person to both sides of the story and you'll be
able to convince them that Oswald acted alone.

Yes, there will always be people like Anthony Marsh and Ralph Cinque, but
they're the hardcore "unreachables" and not the "average" person looking
for some answers.

Ace Kefford

unread,
Nov 29, 2017, 6:08:25 PM11/29/17
to
Well, that the CIA would create a disinfo agent and then stupidly have the
person use a name with the initials "C.I.A." would fit into the usual
bungling of that agency, so maybe there is something to it!

John McAdams

unread,
Nov 29, 2017, 6:09:41 PM11/29/17
to
On 29 Nov 2017 18:08:24 -0500, Ace Kefford <bglo...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Remember, the Russians shot down flight KAL 007.

With that name, it had to be a spy plane!

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

Anthony Marsh

unread,
Nov 29, 2017, 6:26:14 PM11/29/17
to
Wow, you're ragging on people's names and complaining about Trolls using
aliases? Say it ain't so. Your puppet master insists that his minions
use aliases. But at least they're cute aliases. Remember Joe Diamond and
Amethyst and Zircon? All take-offs on The Family Jewels.
Do you remember who Paul Nolan was? You're such a pein in the ass.
But at least you're polite enough to capitalize the Von. Do you know
that it means if you don't capitalize it? I am not allowed to say that word.


Anthony Marsh

unread,
Nov 30, 2017, 11:04:08 AM11/30/17
to
That was only one possibility based on watching the Zapruder film. I
don't think anyone is clever enough to SEE the missed shot on the
Zapruder film.
Maybe if you believe in the jiggle analysis.

David Von Pein

unread,
Nov 30, 2017, 2:46:10 PM11/30/17
to
W. ANTHONY MARSH SAID:

You're such a pein in the ass.


DAVID R. VON PEIN SAID:

That tired old insult would only pay off if my name was actually
pronounced Von PAIN. But it's not. So the people who think they're being
cute by telling me that I'm a "Pein in the ass" only look foolish when
they find out the true pronunciation. It somehow doesn't have the same
bite when somebody says, "You're such a PINE in the ass". Although, with
Christmas approaching, perhaps you could still use that insult, because a
pine needle shoved up the ol' anal crack probably wouldn't be a pleasant
experience. :-)

David Von Pein

unread,
Nov 30, 2017, 2:48:16 PM11/30/17
to
On Wednesday, November 29, 2017 at 6:26:14 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> On 11/29/2017 10:42 AM, David Von Pein wrote:
> > On Tuesday, November 28, 2017 at 5:26:19 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> >> On 11/27/2017 8:09 PM, chucksch...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>
> >>> John McAdams gets a shout-out in the article, too.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> http://quillette.com/2017/11/25/jfk-conspiracies-slowly-dying/
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Is that directly from the CIA or is it another one of Ned Dolan's
> >> aliases? If so, glad to see he's still alive.
> >
> > I feel so sorry for JFK assassination researcher and "LN" author Charles
> > I. Adams (if such a person should exist). His initials will forever brand
> > him as "CIA" in so many conspiracy theorists' eyes. Same for Colleen Ida
> > Atkins. She, too, will never be able to shed the rumors that she's a
> > disinfo agent for the CIA.
> >
>
> Wow, you're ragging on people's names and complaining about Trolls using
> aliases? Say it ain't so.

I *knew* I should have included the proverbial "smiley face" in that "CIA"
post, since Tony can't seem to identify obvious humor when he reads it.
-----> :-)

bigdog

unread,
Nov 30, 2017, 9:02:54 PM11/30/17
to
Bugliosi said that people who think Oswald was innocent fall into two
camps. Either they are unaware of the evidence or they are just silly. I
believe most conspiracy believers accept Oswald's role as a shooter. They
either believe there were other shooters or that he was acting on the
behalf of others. If you ask those people why they believe that, few of
them will be able to actually cite evidence. It's just their hunch. Some
of them fell for the Kevin Costner/Jim Garrison reenactment from the movie
JFK. They aren't well informed enough to know how bogus that was.

Anthony Marsh

unread,
Dec 1, 2017, 11:21:07 AM12/1/17
to
On 11/29/2017 5:56 PM, bigdog wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 28, 2017 at 11:09:21 PM UTC-5, Ace Kefford wrote:
>> On Monday, November 27, 2017 at 8:09:44 PM UTC-5, chucksch...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> John McAdams gets a shout-out in the article, too.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://quillette.com/2017/11/25/jfk-conspiracies-slowly-dying/
>>
>> Are you kidding?! Even the ones that have been thoroughly refuted won't
>> go away. And the buffs and nuts are always adding more.
>
> Conspiracy theories will die when the conspiracy hobbyists die. Future
> generations whose opinions won't have been corrupted by decades of
> conspiracy mongering will accept that Oswald was the assassin just as
> Booth is universally accepted as Lincoln's assassin. They will be aware

Yes, exactly. And some people are smart enough to go to High School
where they learn that it was also a conspiracy and some of the
conspiractors were hanged.

> that many believed he did not act alone but they will have little doubt
> that he acted. Those that believe Oswald was nothing more than a patsy
> will be about as common as flat earth believers.
>


Ok, so you are on record as saying that Oswald was part of a conspiracy.
Is that what the WC told you?


Jason Burke

unread,
Dec 1, 2017, 3:58:01 PM12/1/17
to
On 11/30/2017 11:48 AM, David Von Pein wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 29, 2017 at 6:26:14 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>> On 11/29/2017 10:42 AM, David Von Pein wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, November 28, 2017 at 5:26:19 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>>>> On 11/27/2017 8:09 PM, chucksch...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> John McAdams gets a shout-out in the article, too.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://quillette.com/2017/11/25/jfk-conspiracies-slowly-dying/
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Is that directly from the CIA or is it another one of Ned Dolan's
>>>> aliases? If so, glad to see he's still alive.
>>>
>>> I feel so sorry for JFK assassination researcher and "LN" author Charles
>>> I. Adams (if such a person should exist). His initials will forever brand
>>> him as "CIA" in so many conspiracy theorists' eyes. Same for Colleen Ida
>>> Atkins. She, too, will never be able to shed the rumors that she's a
>>> disinfo agent for the CIA.
>>>
>>
>> Wow, you're ragging on people's names and complaining about Trolls using
>> aliases? Say it ain't so.
>
> I *knew* I should have included the proverbial "smiley face" in that "CIA"
> post, since Tony can't seem to identify obvious humor when he reads it.
> -----> :-)

He still wouldn't get it...

Anthony Marsh

unread,
Dec 1, 2017, 9:54:48 PM12/1/17
to
It's called Poisoning the Well, because he wasn't qualified to debate
the issues.


Mark OBLAZNEY

unread,
Dec 2, 2017, 8:32:11 PM12/2/17
to
I wonder if that umbrella really had a camera in it? or was it his bow
tie? still looking for america, anthony?

Anthony Marsh

unread,
Dec 4, 2017, 12:07:33 AM12/4/17
to
Typical kookbaiting. Nonsense. Making up silly things and claiming that
I said them.


OHLeeRedux

unread,
Dec 5, 2017, 2:07:53 PM12/5/17
to
Nobody has to make up anything, Anthony. Your foot is in your mouth so
often you have athlete's tongue.


0 new messages