Huckster's Scenario VS. A Critics Scenario.

[Ben Holmes]

> The evidence against Oswald is voluminous, and comes from many
> different scientific disciplines. In brief:
>
> We can establish the rifle that was found on the sixth floor was the
> C2766 rifle from the films and photographs of the weapon in the
> Depository as well as photographs of the weapon taken by news men as
> it was taken from the building. In addition, J.C.Day took possession
> of the rifle, carried it personally to the Dallas Police Crime Lab,
> and executed a statement identifying the weapon as bearing the serial
> number C2766.
>
> We can establish the rifle found on the sixth floor was used in the
> assassination from the three shells found at the sniper's nest window,
> the two large fragments recovered from the target car, and the nearly
> whole bullet found at Parkland. Those six items were determined to
> have been fired from the C2766 rifle to the exclusion of all other
> weapons in the world.
>
> We can establish Oswald owned the C2766 rifle via the paperwork at
> Klein's Sporting Goods, which received his order (using the alias of
> Hidell) and shipped the CE2766 rifle to Oswald's PO box. We can
> establish Oswald ordered the rifle through the handwriting on the
> order form and the envelope mailed to Kleins', and his prior use of
> the Hidell alias. We can establish Oswald purchased the weapon through
> the money order in his original handwriting. We can establish Oswald
> took possession of the weapon through the photographs showing him with
> the rifle, and his fingerprints on the weapon's trigger guard. We can
> establish the weapon was missing from its normal hiding place on the
> afternoon of the assassination from police accounts of their search of
> the Paine residence and attached garage. Those accounts are confirmed
> by Ruth Paine and Marina Oswald.
>
> We can establish the evidence indicates Oswald brought the C2766
> weapon to the Depository by the eye witness accounts of Wes Frazier
> and his sister, Linnie Mae Randle, as well as the print of Oswald's
> found on the bag in the sniper's nest corner.
>
>I can cite the testimony for all of that evidence. You will note the
> evidence against Oswald takes the multivariate forms of business
> records, handwriting analysis, ballistic evidence, photographic
>evidence, and eyewitness testimony. You won't be able to cite anything
>comparable for your three-gunman scenario. You won't even be able to
> name three real people as the shooters and cite the evidence linking
> them to the shooting.

I've stated that I can match, in length and detail, and number of
citations, anything a believer can post. I've previously shown how
the above scenario by Huckster is filled with lies... so let's now
show how to correctly post a scenario.

I've left his scenario in (above) so that people can compare his
assertions with a real scenario.

And although Huckster gave not a single citation, I'm more than happy
to sprinkle a few cites in my post... just for people to get more
detailed information... but as Huckster didn't feel the need for any
cites at all - I felt no need for more detailed cites.

We begin by pointing out the indisputable fact that there were several
assassination attempts that year, one in Chicago, and one in Tampa,
Florida. While it's conceivable that these were all independent
attempts to assassinate JFK - most ordinary intelligent people will
take a dim view of those who dogmatically assert this as fact.

Or those who quite desperately deny these facts...

The earliest actions of the conspirators that can be seen on the day
of the assassination is the removal of the Secret Service agents who
routinely walked behind the limo. The limo was designed with steps
and handholds for times when the limo would speed up - and yet, on the
very *DAY* of the assassination - these agents were removed.

https://www.fugly.com/videos/5835/jfk-secret-service.html

I know I shouldn't provide citations, as Huckster provided none at
all, but it's interesting that this particular video disappeared from
Youtube.

And amusingly, the first reports from the Secret Service *CONTINUED*
to detail these removed agents as present in Dealey Plaza.

The motorcade was also reshuffled so that the cameras were well away
from the Presidential limo.

Motorcycle escorts were told they couldn't travel in their normally
appropriate spots for Presidential protection.

When shots rang out - the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of eyewitnesses,
*including those on the TSBD steps* - pointed to the GK as the source
of shots.

The windshield was struck from the front, as a number of eyewitnesses
verified.

https://jamesfetzer.org/2015/09/jfk-conspiracy-the-bullet-hole-in-the-windshield/

This was almost certainly the shot that struck JFK in the throat...
and the trajectory lines back to a grassy knoll on the other side of
the more famous Grassy Knoll.

The chances of this trajectory just happening to line up to a perfect
location if it were *NOT* a frontal shot are quite slim indeed. I
wouldn't want to be the one to try to calculate the odds against this
happening.

Both Drs. Clark and Carrico thought that the large back wound was
tangential... if so, this could have come from the GK. This also
explains why Bobby Hargis was struck by so much bloody material from
JFK.
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/jfkinfo/hscaharg.htm

This brings to mind the frequent lie told by believers, that the
motorcycle officers were **NOT** splattered directly, but *drove
through* the airborne bloody material. They have ZERO evidence for
this assertion.

But when you have to lie, it tells the intelligent man where the truth
actually lies.

Connally was struck at least twice, once from behind, and once in the
wrist from the right side of the limo - this shot almost certainly
came from the GK.

According to Dr. Shaw, he could have been struck as many as three
times:
Mr. DULLES - Or two bullets?
Dr. SHAW - Yes; or three.
Mr. DULLES - Why do you say three?
Dr. SHAW - He has three separate wounds. He has a wound in the chest,
a wound of the wrist, a wound of the thigh.
Mr. DULLES - Oh, yes; we haven't. come to the wound of the thigh yet,
have we?
Mr. McCLOY - You have no firm opinion that all these three wounds were
caused by one bullet?
Dr. SHAW - I have no firm opinion.
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/shaw1.htm

But, as there is no trajectory from the chest to the outside of his
wrist (note: no believer has **EVER** dealt with this issue), his
wrist was quite certainly struck by a separate bullet than the one
that went through his chest.

And, despite me pointing out the issue AGAIN - no believer will
address it with anything other than lies or logical fallacies. WATCH,
I've predicted it.

The extant Z-film shows that Connally didn't show any signs of being
struck at the same time as JFK - indeed the Warren Commission was
asking questions about a "delayed reaction" to try to account for
this.

Mr. McCLOY - Let me ask you this, Doctor, in your experience with
gunshot wounds, is it possible for a man to be hit sometime before he
realizes it?
Dr. SHAW - Yes. There can be a delay in the sensory reaction.
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/shaw1.htm

The Warren Commission quite explicity refers to this "delayed
reaction" but doesn't tie it to the extant Z-film but to the
testimony:
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0068b.htm
(last paragraph)

Believers in recent years have tried to claim that both JFK and
Connally showed a reaction at the same time, but they implicitly label
the Warren Commission liars when they do so.

We also have a shot that hit the concrete curb - and the trajectory of
that bullet was quite high above the limo... certainly a shot from the
TSBD 6th floor.

The problem - of course, is that the WC had a very limited amount of
time, and "evidence" of only three bullets - so this forced the
creation of the SBT - without which it's INDISPUTABLE that a
conspiracy existed.

But the evidence doesn't support the SBT...
1. The extant film doesn't show them being hit at the same time. (So
the Warren Commission came up with the "delayed reaction."
2. The eyewitnesses don't support this... *NO-ONE* does...
3. Transit would be a necessity, and ther's zero medical evidence of
this.

Without transit, the SBT is an impossibility.
Without the SBT - conspiracy is a proven fact.

And although believers have had close to 60 years to explain this -
they never have. Transit is just as unproven today as it was in 1963.

James Chaney - the closest non-limo eyewitness would have testified to
SEPARATE shots striking JFK and Connally, and this would have *PROVEN*
a conspiracy - so the DPD, FBI, and WC simply refused to ask him so
much as a single question for the WCR.

This one fact - by itself - demonstrates a conspiracy. And amusingly,
*NOT ONE SINGLE BELIEVER* has ever publicly acknowledged this fact.

But the medical testimony ALSO failed to support the SBT... the Warren
Commission assigned the role of CE399 to be the bullet that struck
both men... and flat *LIED* about this by asserting:

"All the evidence indicated that the bullet found on the Governor’s
stretcher could have caused all his wounds."
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0060a.htm

But that is simply an outrageous lie... and one easy to prove...

Dr. Humes disagreed:

Mr. SPECTER - Dr. Humes, under your opinion which you have just given
us, what effect, if any, would that have on whether this bullet, 399,
could have been the one to lodge in Governor Connally's thigh?
Commander HUMES - I think that extremely unlikely. The reports, again
Exhibit 392 from Parkland, tell of an entrance wound on the lower
midthigh of the Governor, and X-rays taken there are described as
showing metallic fragments in the bone, which apparently by this
report were not removed and are still present in Governor Connally's
thigh. I can't conceive of where they came from this missile.
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/humes.htm

Dr. Finck disagreed:
Mr. SPECTER - Dr. Finck, have you had an opportunity to examine
Commission's Exhibit 399?
Colonel FINCK - For the first time this afternoon, sir.
Mr. SPECTER - And based upon your examination of that bullet, do you
have an opinion as to whether in its current condition it could have
passed through President Kennedy at point C-D in 385 and then
inflicted the wound in the back and chest of Governor Connally?
Colonel FINCK - Yes; I do. This is a bullet showing marks indicating
the bullet was fired. The second point is that there was practically
no loss of this bullet. It kept its original caliber and dimensions.
There was no evidence that any major portion of the jacket was lost,
and I consider this as one bullet which possibly could have gone
through the wounds you described.
...
Mr. SPECTER - And could it have been the bullet which inflicted the
wound on Governor Connally's right wrist?
Colonel FINCK - No; for the reason that there are too many fragments
described in that wrist.
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/finck.htm

Dr. Shaw disagreed:
Dr. SHAW - All right. As far as the wounds of the chest are concerned,
I feel that this bullet could have inflicted those wounds. But the
examination of the wrist both by X-ray and at the time of surgery
showed some fragments of metal that make it difficult to believe that
the same missile could have caused these two wounds. There seems to be
more than three grains of metal missing as far as the I mean in the
wrist.
...
Mr. SPECTER - What is your opinion as to whether bullet 399 could have
inflicted all of the wounds on the Governor, then, without respect at
this point to the wound of the President's neck?
Dr. SHAW - I feel that there would be some difficulty in explaining
all of the wounds as being inflicted by bullet Exhibit 399 without
causing more in the way of loss of substance to the bullet or
deformation of the bullet.
(Discussion off the record.)
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/shaw1.htm

(side note - it's fascinating to see the number of times the WC went
"off record" when facing difficulties to their theory)

So the WC falsely asserted that "All the evidence indicated that the
bullet found on the Governor’s stretcher could have caused all his
wounds." - we see here the PROOF that they lied.

All evidence does *NOT* indicate that... and if the SBT isn't true,
then conspiracy is proven.

And not a *SINGLE* believer has ever publicly acknowedged so much as a
single lie told by the WCR - despite the proof given for many of them.

The actual wounds JFK & Connally had also support the fact that this
was a conspiracy... This undoubtedly explains why believers flat LIE
repeatedly about these wounds. Often exchanging their personal views
of what they can see in the extant Z-film with actual eyewitnesses and
the Autopsy Report.

Believers ROUTINELY lie about the indisputable fact that JFK had a
LARGE wound in the back of his head... but this is the conclusion of
the Autopsy Report, and corroborated by dozens of medically trained
eyewitnesses.

http://www.assassinationweb.com/ag6.htm

The planning for the murder of the President can be seen in the
actions of the Secret Service, who - BEFORE THE PRESIDENT WAS EVEN IN
THE EMERGENCY ROOM - were asking for a bucket of water and sponge. The
speed with which this was done shows pre-planning... The bucket was
photographed next to the limo. As all Secret Service agents are
lawyers, they knew full well the legalities of a crime scene.

We know that the Warren Commission evaded all evidence that would
refute their theory - so they were unable to find the first news
reports given by the Parkland doctors describing the wounds.

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/md41/html/Image0.htm

This evidence for the throat wound being an entry demonstrates just
how early evidence for a conspiracy existed.

As there is **NO** evidence from the Autopsy about this wound - the
**ONLY** credible medical evidence shows that the throat wound was an
entry wound... and with a wound in JFK's back - we have indisputable
proof of at least *two* shooters.

The Warren Commission simply lied about this early evidence for a
frontal neck wound.

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0057b.htm
(Compare with the actual news conference)

The body was - at gunpoint - removed from Dallas, and taken to
Bethesda, where a completely flawed autopsy was performed. None of
the ordinary procedures were followed, and the photographic & X-ray
evidence was promptly taken away with no chain of custody. The
prosectors were not allowed to view this material before their
prepared testimony to the WC.

We know that there were multiple coffins involved, and *different*
people carried in the coffin at *different* times. The credible
evidence shows that JFK arrived at 1835, and for nearly the next hour
and a half, was examined and had surgery done prior to the actual
official autopsy beginning at 2000.

The fact that believers have quite desperately been evading this issue
for YEARS tells the intelligent lurker all he needs to know...

The DPD began investigating, and had virtually all of their collected
evidence yanked from them by the FBI... who "returned" more evidence
than they had collected.

We know that a commission was rather quickly formed to coverup the
evidence, and we know that this was the intent by merely reading what
Chief Warren himself said in a formerly classified executive session
from Dec 5th, 1963.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1323

The Warren Commission also quite intentionally refused to call
witnesses that would have testified against their theory - James
Chaney being a notable example, but many others were avoided as well.
Huckster can list these witnesses as easily as I can... this shows
their intent to cover up facts.

They also coved up facts from history - as they went "off the record"
hundreds of times while taking testimony, and there is no longer any
record of what was said during those times.

Why does a "lone nut" who alone killed the President require such
secrecy from those investigating it?

The answer is simple, the secrecy protected far more than simply a
lone rogue nut... the secrecy protected the fact that there was
official govenmental investment in this assassination.

The governmental secrecy also protected them from their blatant
lies... The HSCA flat lying about the Bethesda witnesses disagreeing
with the Parkland witnesses regarding the wounds - for example.

And not *ONE* believer has publicly acknowledged these proven lies,
this speaks volumes...

The FBI lied, manipulated, and buried evidence in this case... The
Warren Commission buried evidence in this case... The military
destroyed their intelligence files on Oswald... the Secret Service
destroyed many files related to this case... It's simply not known how
many files the CIA destroyed related to this case, but there shouldn't
be any doubt that they did.

The truth doesn't need this.

Now... who actually committed the murder? The evidence tends to lead
to a coalition of conspirators.

It wouldn't have been easy without assistance from the one or more
members of the Secret Service. The FBI was instrumental in the
frameup of a suspect, but may or may not have been involved in the
actual conspiracy to murder JFK. I tend to think (quite tentatively)
that the evidence shows them to be 'after the fact' conspirators...

The military was another absolute requirement, although needing only
one or two high ranking military to give orders that everyone else
followed. Admiral Burkley was certainly involved, at least after the
fact.

The evidence points to the actual planning of the murder being done by
those connected with the CIA and Cuban operations. The shooters were
most likely Cubans, or connected with the Anti-Cuban activities of the
CIA.

The evidence for this can be found in a number of books, (See Larry
Hancock for one.) and indeed, *takes* entire books to detail it...
but Huckster will whine if I don't mention who was involved, and will
whine that I've not cited for these assertions ... so who cares?
(Huckster cited for ZERO of his assertions!)

And today, we see how believers continue the lies to try to refute the
fact that JFK was killed by a conspiracy. For even when OUTRIGHT
PROVABLE FACTS are posted, believers simply run...

I've done (again) what I've stated, I've posted a scenario as
detailed, and as long, and with as many citations as Huckster posted.

Watch folks, as believers will whine about this fact, or that fact ...
that hasn't been mentioned here, then **REFUSE** to say the same about
Huckster's rather abortive attempt at a scenario.

Lurkers may note the rather complete absence of any mention of Oswald.
I feel no need to acknowledge a suspect whom Huckster has quite
clearly been unable to establish as the sole killer. Huckster knows
full well the excupatory evidence for Oswald's "guilt" - and runs from
it. No need to offer it again for Huckster to run again... it's *HIS*
burden to prove his claim, not mine to disprove it.

So Oswald is quite meaningless for this topic. He didn't have the
power to do the things we *KNOW* were done by the conspiracy in this
case. (This is the same reason I advance when I hear morons whining
that this was a "Mafia" hit. They had no power to do what was
provably done.)

A far more detailed scenario has been posted by me previously, and has
**NEVER** been responded to:

The Challenge - Part 1
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/x4n7Di-GBd8/_WbEfALeAAAJ
The Challenge - Part 2
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/WVBtmUQkx6c/9ZdyxAPeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 1
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/y0hdkKgWvtI/3uukYgXeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 2
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/jSfe1BrGfJc/SOXAOQbeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 2a
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/kGfZPR4C-Lw/AlnRq1HeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 3
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/IShoUFao5OU/VuYGWFTeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 3a
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/JFuasrnWRqA/l1vih03eAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 4
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/LRMeWBFE1ug/bfjGTAbeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 5
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/S1ddVKc3Jj4/IESJbFPeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 6
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/b5ODl3yA4uk/g77N-UreAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 7
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/rwmZjz92YC8/P-9Mn07eAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 8
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c6e29olW6XA/Os29-FveAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 9
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/ixNqGISHbrU/gd06wVHeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 10
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/3Di6kuseb2Q/aHbAQmLeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 11
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/sYEyPH0A_eI/IH-UZgbeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 11a
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/aGduj6uaGUk/3eDp513eAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 11b
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/8rAmKZBOCiY/yCELq27eAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 12
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/OnrH5R6ryHE/stjdfgbeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 12a
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/J0A8N12PPHU/CcxpiU7eAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 13
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/8hD-q0gTa_c/Co3ZJE7eAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 14
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/lsaXwhPRbEg/hZ7ZmEveAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 15
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/UA86YdJXEgY/JhG8o0reAAAJ
My Scenario - The Conclusion
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/UWfco_sGxYw/yApSPFXeAAAJ

Now... watch carefully folks - Huckster needs to publicly acknowledge
that I did indeed do what I've repeatedly stated I can do... post a
scenario as long, as detailed, and with as many citations as any
believer can do. But he won't. He'll dive right in and start posting
lies and logical fallacies. Watch for it... I've predicted it here in
advance!

[Ben Holmes]

Actually, I was wrong. Huckster simply ran away. He's TERRIFIED of
admitting that I'm right.

[Bud]

You are terrified to admit you are wrong.

[Ben Holmes]

On Fri, 13 May 2022 16:09:46 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:

"Critical thinking is the analysis of facts to form a judgment". I
present the facts, I present the analysis, and I present my
conclusion.

[Bud]

Non sequitur.

[Ben Holmes]

On Fri, 13 May 2022 16:42:52 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

Tell Huckster. Stop crying to me.