A straight line

[Andrew Mason]

Ray, I do agree with their conclusions.  Do you? Or do you just want to cherry pick what they said?

FTR, they never said that there was a conspiracy. They said there was probably a conspiracy.

What is wrong with agreeing with some of their conclusions and disagreeing with others?  I disagree with their conclusion that there was a second gunman because that conclusion is based on very unreliable acoustic analysis that has since been completely discredited, let alone that it fits with no other evidence.

[John Iacoletti]

Probably the same thing that is circular about the fact that Seaport Traders sent the revolver to Oswald's PO box under Hidell's name and the fact that the revolver was in Oswald's possession in the Texas Theatre.

"fact".  LOL.

[John Iacoletti]

You CTs are so predictable, in court I'd present the established predictable behaviour of Oswald's New Orleans Post Office application with AJ Hidell written in Oswald's handwriting and you'd present...... nothing.

"predictable behaviour".  LOL.  That's about as convincing as "prohibitive probability".  I'd present an FBI report saying that Oswald did not indicate that Hidell would receive mail through the box, and you'd present "predictable behaviour".

[John Iacoletti]

Life can turn on a dime...

Says the guy with zero evidence that said rifle was ever assembled with a dime.

[John Iacoletti]

Remember they say Oswald never owned that rifle. That's what he said too.

All planted.

So the same rifle they say Oswald never had is in the picture of him with that rifle. And oh yeah, he really truly did bring curtain rods to work that day. The ones never found? The ones he didn't bring with him when he left the building right after the shooting? The ones he absolutely needed to bring to his room. Yeah, those rods.

That's called conspiracy logic. It doesn't have to make sense; it just has to clear Oswald.

Yes, the top CIA agent Oswald who never had a car, never had a phone, never had a house, lived on unemployment checks and apparently went on his top secret missions using a bus.

In cloud cuckoo land that makes sense. Everywhere else it's absurd.

Can you prove that Oswald owned that rifle?  Or that that specific rifle is the one in the backyard photos?  That's LN logic.  Make up conclusions that you can't prove and state them as facts.  It doesn't have to make sense, it just has to convict Oswald.

[John Iacoletti]

The WC findings were the results of an investigation, not the results of a trial.

And by "investigation" you mean making a bunch of wild-ass guesses based on insufficient, contradictory, and tainted evidence.

[John Iacoletti]

There have been numerous investigations, of course, into the assassination. The conspiracy crowd fixates on the Warren Commission Report and ignores the other investigations that have been done (the HSCA, the Clark Panel, the Rockefeller Commission (granted, this was pretty slipshod), et cetera). This includes those done by news organizations - CBS, ABC, PBS - as well as investigations by private journalists like Tim Weiner on the CIA and other reporters. We can add the works of historians like those by Caro and Dallek to the mix.

They were all slipshod.  The problem with investigations like this is that they feel like they're required to come up with some answer and then rationalize it rather than just admitting that they don't know.

[John Iacoletti]

Ray, I do agree with their conclusions.  Do you?

Tim, you agree that "John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy"?