Extreme conspiracy theories

Patrick C · 07-30-2016, 11:03 AM

Today I found probably one of the most ridiculous posts I have ever read on the JFK case and once again it makes me ask the question...if you do believe there was a conspiracy, why does it so often have to be extreme......

This guy thinks there were 11 shots........and the rest........

It is a You Tube post and he can't spell too well either......

Mists & Shadows 5 hours ago

So, if that is the ONLY BULLET that came forwards, through the car, and it is DOWN in Connally's thigh, in near perfect condition, why is there at least three holes FORWARD AND UP into the windshield?
Why do both Kellerman and Greer talk about a 'storm' of bullets coming into the car in their Warren Testimony? Why did the Secret Service find multiple bullet fragments all over the floorboards?
Why did ANOTHER bullet fall out of Connally's thigh, on the floor of Trauma-2, at Parkland?
Why did ANOTHER bullet, fall out of Kennedy's body, into the wrappings around his head, as they lifted the corpse from the casket for X-Rays? And what about the shot that nicked James Tague with spall or shrapnel, another 50 yards down the street?
We're talking a MINIMUM of six or seven shots into the car itself. Not counting the added shots into the Stemmons sign, the scrapes on the concrete manhole surround in the green belt and several more into street signs and lamps up and down Elm (Leroy Blevins: 11 shots).
No. The presumption that Oswald was the lone shooter and whether there were 2-3-4 shots is a standard misdirection/distraction effort that focusses on arguing over details to cover up the reality of THE LIE ITSELF. Which is that there were in fact far more and the witnesses only heard the shots whose direct report was closest to them.
There were half a dozen or more shots as two each from three teams. MINIMUM.
And the proof of this is twofold:
1. The HSCA was never allowed to further analyze reechoant patterns from positions /other than/ The Grassy Knoll. As in the Records Building, DalTex or Sherriff's Office. Could not continue to sort the wheat from the chaff to get the perfect acoustic overlay. This has not happened event yet, to this day. Even when shell casings were found atop the Records building.
2. The lead fragments in Connally's body which could not have come from CE-399, the 'single bullet' which not only went right-left-right to strike two people. But up-down-up to hit the windshield at three different points, almost three feet apart, before returning to Connally's leg as a whole and undamaged projectile.

CONCLUSION:
You get a good copy of Altgens 6. You look at Emory Roberts, sitting in the QM, as Dallas Detail chief. A man who was known throughout the Presidential Protection unit as 'serious to the point of taciturn' and you tell me why he's smiling that Mona Lisa grin after having pulled two agents off the car at Love Field and ordered another not to run forwards to the X-100 at the very last moment when it might have saved Kennedy's life.

***Ben Holmes*** · 07-30-2016, 02:37 PM

Patrick C Wrote:Today I found probably one of the most ridiculous posts I have ever read on the JFK case and once again it makes me ask the question...if you do believe there was a conspiracy, why does it so often have to be extreme......

This guy thinks there were 11 shots........and the rest........

It is a You Tube post and he can't spell too well either......

Mists & Shadows 5 hours ago

Quote:So, if that is the ONLY BULLET that came forwards, through the car, and it is DOWN in Connally's thigh, in near perfect condition, why is there at least three holes FORWARD AND UP into the windshield?
Why do both Kellerman and Greer talk about a 'storm' of bullets coming into the car in their Warren Testimony? Why did the Secret Service find multiple bullet fragments all over the floorboards?
Why did ANOTHER bullet fall out of Connally's thigh, on the floor of Trauma-2, at Parkland?
Why did ANOTHER bullet, fall out of Kennedy's body, into the wrappings around his head, as they lifted the corpse from the casket for X-Rays? And what about the shot that nicked James Tague with spall or shrapnel, another 50 yards down the street?
We're talking a MINIMUM of six or seven shots into the car itself. Not counting the added shots into the Stemmons sign, the scrapes on the concrete manhole surround in the green belt and several more into street signs and lamps up and down Elm (Leroy Blevins: 11 shots).
No. The presumption that Oswald was the lone shooter and whether there were 2-3-4 shots is a standard misdirection/distraction effort that focusses on arguing over details to cover up the reality of THE LIE ITSELF. Which is that there were in fact far more and the witnesses only heard the shots whose direct report was closest to them.
There were half a dozen or more shots as two each from three teams. MINIMUM.
And the proof of this is twofold:
1. The HSCA was never allowed to further analyze reechoant patterns from positions /other than/ The Grassy Knoll. As in the Records Building, DalTex or Sherriff's Office. Could not continue to sort the wheat from the chaff to get the perfect acoustic overlay. This has not happened event yet, to this day. Even when shell casings were found atop the Records building.
2. The lead fragments in Connally's body which could not have come from CE-399, the 'single bullet' which not only went right-left-right to strike two people. But up-down-up to hit the windshield at three different points, almost three feet apart, before returning to Connally's leg as a whole and undamaged projectile.

CONCLUSION:
You get a good copy of Altgens 6. You look at Emory Roberts, sitting in the QM, as Dallas Detail chief. A man who was known throughout the Presidential Protection unit as 'serious to the point of taciturn' and you tell me why he's smiling that Mona Lisa grin after having pulled two agents off the car at Love Field and ordered another not to run forwards to the X-100 at the very last moment when it might have saved Kennedy's life.

You ask why critics so often have to be extreme - even as you've just been slapped silly for your insane claim that Oswald washed up... well enough to have a negative result on his cheeks, yet still quite positive on his hands...

So extreme in your faith that you ABSOLUTELY REFUSE to answer a question that would force YOU to admit that the McAdams earwitness tabulation you rely on is absolute nonsense. You'd rather have your cowardice pointed out time and time again than to find yourself stating a truth that undermines that tabulation.

Yet you try to point out an "extreme" viewpoint??? While not recognizing your own?

Patrick C · 07-31-2016, 11:49 AM

(07-30-2016, 02:37 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote:
Patrick C Wrote:Today I found probably one of the most ridiculous posts I have ever read on the JFK case and once again it makes me ask the question...if you do believe there was a conspiracy, why does it so often have to be extreme......

This guy thinks there were 11 shots........and the rest........

It is a You Tube post and he can't spell too well either......

Mists & Shadows 5 hours ago

Quote:So, if that is the ONLY BULLET that came forwards, through the car, and it is DOWN in Connally's thigh, in near perfect condition, why is there at least three holes FORWARD AND UP into the windshield?
Why do both Kellerman and Greer talk about a 'storm' of bullets coming into the car in their Warren Testimony? Why did the Secret Service find multiple bullet fragments all over the floorboards?
Why did ANOTHER bullet fall out of Connally's thigh, on the floor of Trauma-2, at Parkland?
Why did ANOTHER bullet, fall out of Kennedy's body, into the wrappings around his head, as they lifted the corpse from the casket for X-Rays? And what about the shot that nicked James Tague with spall or shrapnel, another 50 yards down the street?
We're talking a MINIMUM of six or seven shots into the car itself. Not counting the added shots into the Stemmons sign, the scrapes on the concrete manhole surround in the green belt and several more into street signs and lamps up and down Elm (Leroy Blevins: 11 shots).
No. The presumption that Oswald was the lone shooter and whether there were 2-3-4 shots is a standard misdirection/distraction effort that focusses on arguing over details to cover up the reality of THE LIE ITSELF. Which is that there were in fact far more and the witnesses only heard the shots whose direct report was closest to them.
There were half a dozen or more shots as two each from three teams. MINIMUM.
And the proof of this is twofold:
1. The HSCA was never allowed to further analyze reechoant patterns from positions /other than/ The Grassy Knoll. As in the Records Building, DalTex or Sherriff's Office. Could not continue to sort the wheat from the chaff to get the perfect acoustic overlay. This has not happened event yet, to this day. Even when shell casings were found atop the Records building.
2. The lead fragments in Connally's body which could not have come from CE-399, the 'single bullet' which not only went right-left-right to strike two people. But up-down-up to hit the windshield at three different points, almost three feet apart, before returning to Connally's leg as a whole and undamaged projectile.

CONCLUSION:
You get a good copy of Altgens 6. You look at Emory Roberts, sitting in the QM, as Dallas Detail chief. A man who was known throughout the Presidential Protection unit as 'serious to the point of taciturn' and you tell me why he's smiling that Mona Lisa grin after having pulled two agents off the car at Love Field and ordered another not to run forwards to the X-100 at the very last moment when it might have saved Kennedy's life.
You ask why critics so often have to be extreme - even as you've just been slapped silly for your insane claim that Oswald washed up... well enough to have a negative result on his cheeks, yet still quite positive on his hands...

So extreme in your faith that you ABSOLUTELY REFUSE to answer a question that would force YOU to admit that the McAdams earwitness tabulation you rely on is absolute nonsense. You'd rather have your cowardice pointed out time and time again than to find yourself stating a truth that undermines that tabulation.

Yet you try to point out an "extreme" viewpoint??? While not recognizing your own?

Oh I think the McAdams Post direction assimilation is unassailable in terms of accuracy of interpretation of witness statements.

There is no question.

And as for my "extreme" view....I think NOT. My view is that Oswald shot JFK acting alone. There is nothing extreme about that.

Modern history is littered with sad examples of young men with guns killing innocent people....Dunblane, Sandy Hook, Oslo......Tucson.....etc.

However a THREE team, 11 shot assassination scenario IS extreme by any sane person's reckoning.

No wonder you have no critique of it Ben.......please tell me you reject it and confirm you do have an an ounce of sanity in respect of this open and shut case.

***Ben Holmes*** · 07-31-2016, 05:53 PM

(07-31-2016, 11:49 AM)Patrick C Wrote: Oh I think the McAdams Post direction assimilation is unassailable in terms of accuracy of interpretation of witness statements.

You're a liar, Patrick.

You claim it's 'unassailable' - then you RUN AS FAST AS YOU CAN from any defense of it.

Until you can gather up enough courage to answer the question of how to differentiate shots heard from the Railroad yard from shots that came from that Grassy Knoll - YOU STAND INDICTED AS A YELLOW COWARD!

I find it amusing that you keep arguing that the McAdams' tabulation is accurate - even as you quite desperately refuse to defend it. Your mere assertion is not enough. Until you answer the question, you're demonstrating hypocrisy, wouldn't you say?

Why do you keep asserting that you don't like being labeled a liar, then continue to lie? If you cannot recognize that your statement above is incompatible with what an honest answer to the question (you keep running from) would be - then your education has been wasted, right?

Patrick C · 08-01-2016, 12:10 PM

Ben Holmes Wrote:Until you can gather up enough courage to answer the question of how to differentiate shots heard from the Railroad yard from shots that came from that Grassy Knoll...

Courage !!!

Are you kidding me.......?

I have no idea if I could tell the difference between a shot from the Knoll (picket fence) and the Railroad yard - maybe, maybe not. Probably more likely if the railroad shot was over the the south and probably not if the shooter was in the yard behind the Knoll fence.

Not only is it a silly question, it has no relevance - it does not matter what I think.

What is significant (though proves nothing) is that the VAST majority of witnesses stated that ALL the shots they heard sounded like they came from the SAME location.

There are no lies, just your ridiculous and frankly off the wall interpretation of plain English and your frankly juvenile cryptic comments. Now I am a smart guy Holmes and extremely well educated, but some of the stuff you write just mystifies me - it really does.

And all this no doubt is about your silly theory that some one fired from the Southern "knoll" area - and that he was one of about 5 or 6 shooters who got off maybe 7 shots......yeah right.

My education has been wasted.....? You have no basis to make that judgement and what a illogical and juvenile statement it is.

I would not call working as a young graduate research assistant in cancer research a waste, neither would I call teaching 16 o 18 years olds biological sciences a waste and neither would I call being a successful business consultant a waste of an education having worked in over 30 countries and lived in 5......and that is not the half of it! ....You have some nerve Holmes! Anyway, as usual this goes nowhere. Keep living in fantasy land......I do have one question though.....how many people knew about this conspiracy you believe in.....100, 200, 300...? more......?

Mark Ulrik · 08-01-2016, 01:25 PM

Can someone give me the lowdown on what it is, specifically, that Ben doesn't like (or understand) about McAdams' tabulation?

***Ben Holmes*** · 08-01-2016, 02:38 PM

(08-01-2016, 12:10 PM)Patrick C Wrote:
Ben Holmes Wrote:Until you can gather up enough courage to answer the question of how to differentiate shots heard from the Railroad yard from shots that came from that Grassy Knoll...

Courage !!!

Are you kidding me.......?

I have no idea if I could tell the difference between a shot from the Knoll (picket fence) and the Railroad yard - maybe, maybe not. Probably more likely if the railroad shot was over the the south and probably not if the shooter was in the yard behind the Knoll fence.

Not only is it a silly question, it has no relevance - it does not matter what I think.

Au contraire!!! The fact that you've been running from this question shows that you know you're fighting a losing battle. Because in order to defend McAdams' tabulation - YOU ABSOLUTELY MUST BE ABLE TO DIFFERENTIATE between the Railroad yards and the Grassy Knoll.

And you've just admitted that you cannot.

Such amazing cowardice!

Now, since you've admitted that you cannot tell the difference... unless you can produce a statement from McAdams that details how HE
was able to do what you cannot, then YOU MUST ADMIT THAT THE TABULATION IS PROVABLY WRONG.

My best guess is that you won't... you'll simply turn silent again.

But if you EVER try to defend the McAdams tabulation as accurate again, I'll simply label you a liar.

(08-01-2016, 12:10 PM)Patrick C Wrote: What is significant (though proves nothing) is that the VAST majority of witnesses stated that ALL the shots they heard sounded like they came from the SAME location.

This is quite typical... try to change the topic.

You cannot differentiate between the Railroad yard and Grassy Knoll from the TSBD entrance... therefore, BY YOUR OWN WORDS - you have no way of placing such a witness in the "Railroad" list, instead of the "Grassy Knoll" list.

And more important, you realize this - which is why you've been running like a coward for days on this issue.

(08-01-2016, 12:10 PM)Patrick C Wrote: There are no lies, just your ridiculous and frankly off the wall interpretation of plain English and your frankly juvenile cryptic comments. Now I am a smart guy Holmes and extremely well educated, but some of the stuff you write just mystifies me - it really does.

Yes Patrick, it's ABSOLUTELY a lie to put a witness into a category that you cannot show they belong in.

Until YOU can differentiate between a Railroad yard location, and a Grassy Knoll location - then YOU are dishonest in placing such a witness outside of the Grassy Knoll list.

YOU ARE PERSONALLY DISHONEST - because you're defending the dishonest tabulation of McAdams...

So yes, Patrick... there are lies being told.

(08-01-2016, 12:10 PM)Patrick C Wrote: And all this no doubt is about your silly theory that some one fired from the Southern "knoll" area - and that he was one of about 5 or 6 shooters who got off maybe 7 shots......yeah right.

Change of topic again...

Got caught lying, and it hurts...

(08-01-2016, 12:10 PM)Patrick C Wrote: My education has been wasted.....? You have no basis to make that judgement and what a illogical and juvenile statement it is.

Indeed, it most certainly HAS been wasted ... you can't see the simple point I'm making.

***Ben Holmes*** · 08-01-2016, 02:42 PM

(08-01-2016, 01:25 PM)Mark Ulrik Wrote: Can someone give me the lowdown on what it is, specifically, that Ben doesn't like (or understand) about McAdams' tabulation?

Why not help Patrick out, and show everyone how you can differentiate a shot coming from the same direction?

Patrick has admitted that the Grassy Knoll and the Railroad yards can be found on the same vector from the entrance to the TSBD... so how can you make the determination between the two locations from an earwitness?

Or, were you honest, you'd simply admit that McAdams' tabulation is provably wrong.

Because unless you can do what Patrick has failed to do - show a way to differentiate between the two locations - then YOU'VE PROVEN THAT MCADAMS' TABULATION IS FALSE.

My prediction is that you'll refuse to answer as well...

Patrick C · 08-01-2016, 03:46 PM

(08-01-2016, 01:25 PM)Mark Ulrik Wrote: Can someone give me the lowdown on what it is, specifically, that Ben doesn't like (or understand) about McAdams' tabulation?

I can only think Holmes is of the view that the witnesses stated a different opinion at another time, because there is no doubt he has the interpretation as correct in his tabulation.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/shots.htm

McAdam's makes sensible deductions in an entirely reliable manner-

Quote:

So even if the majority of witnesses did hear shots from the Depository, that's not particularly strong proof of anything.
But:

Conspiracists should not produce bogus numbers claiming that a clear majority of witnesses thought shots came from the Knoll.
Conspiracists should not pretend that (even if their numbers were correct) it is strong proof of anything.

End of Quote

If Holmes disagrees with McAdams, his numbers are bogus just like Josiah Thompson and Stuart Galanor who pull the wool over their own eyes as well as others.

(08-01-2016, 02:42 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote:
(08-01-2016, 01:25 PM)Mark Ulrik Wrote: Can someone give me the lowdown on what it is, specifically, that Ben doesn't like (or understand) about McAdams' tabulation?

Why not help Patrick out, and show everyone how you can differentiate a shot coming from the same direction?

Patrick has admitted that the Grassy Knoll and the Railroad yards can be found on the same vector from the entrance to the TSBD... so how can you make the determination between the two locations from an earwitness?

Or, were you honest, you'd simply admit that McAdams' tabulation is provably wrong.

Because unless you can do what Patrick has failed to do - show a way to differentiate between the two locations - then YOU'VE PROVEN THAT MCADAMS' TABULATION IS FALSE.

My prediction is that you'll refuse to answer as well...

(08-01-2016, 03:46 PM)Patrick C Wrote:
(08-01-2016, 01:25 PM)Mark Ulrik Wrote: Can someone give me the lowdown on what it is, specifically, that Ben doesn't like (or understand) about McAdams' tabulation?

I can only think Holmes is of the view that the witnesses stated a different opinion at another time, because there is no doubt he has the interpretation as correct in his tabulation.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/shots.htm

McAdam's makes sensible deductions in an entirely reliable manner-

Quote:

So even if the majority of witnesses did hear shots from the Depository, that's not particularly strong proof of anything.
But:

Conspiracists should not produce bogus numbers claiming that a clear majority of witnesses thought shots came from the Knoll.

Conspiracists should not pretend that (even if their numbers were correct) it is strong proof of anything.

End of Quote

If Holmes disagrees with McAdams, his numbers are bogus just like Josiah Thompson and Stuart Galanor who pull the wool over their own eyes as well as others.

(08-01-2016, 02:42 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote:
(08-01-2016, 01:25 PM)Mark Ulrik Wrote: Can someone give me the lowdown on what it is, specifically, that Ben doesn't like (or understand) about McAdams' tabulation?

Why not help Patrick out, and show everyone how you can differentiate a shot coming from the same direction?

Patrick has admitted that the Grassy Knoll and the Railroad yards can be found on the same vector from the entrance to the TSBD... so how can you make the determination between the two locations from an earwitness?

Or, were you honest, you'd simply admit that McAdams' tabulation is provably wrong.

Because unless you can do what Patrick has failed to do - show a way to differentiate between the two locations - then YOU'VE PROVEN THAT MCADAMS' TABULATION IS FALSE.

My prediction is that you'll refuse to answer as well...

McAdams categorises the rail road tracks as "Knoll" - well based on for example - see statement from Danny Arce. Link below.

If you thought the shots came from the front right of JFK, you might describe that as being by the fence, the trees, or toward the rail tracks and because one would reasonably expect most people not to be able to differentiate between such precise locations, McAdams sensibly sorts the comments as "Knoll". He could perhaps have used the term "right front" or "front near overpass" etc.

Holmes is simply being pedantic and misses the point. The fact is that the majority thought TSBD and a significant number thought Knoll - but of those they thought all the shots came from the front which they clearly did not - a point which Holmes seems to conveniently ignore.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/earwitnesses.htm

***Ben Holmes*** · 08-01-2016, 05:32 PM

(08-01-2016, 03:46 PM)Patrick C Wrote: McAdams categorises the rail road tracks as "Knoll" - well based on for example - see statement from Danny Arce.

No Patrick, you are provably wrong.

McAdams DOES NOT categorize the Railroad yard as the Grassy Knoll.

For example, Peggy Hawkins CD897 - yet McAdams places her as a "RR Yard" witness - removing her from her logical place as a Knoll witness.

That ONE PROVABLE EXAMPLE shows that the McAdams tabulation is not accurate, as you keep implying.

Now, would you like to retract your false claim that "Oh I think the McAdams Post direction assimilation is unassailable in terms of accuracy of interpretation of witness statements.?"

Since it's now been proven wrong...

Notice how long it's taken for you to get to the point where you cannot but accept that you're wrong. It's taken DAYS of posts just to get you to admit the basic facts... facts that prove that your "opinion" is wrong.