Power cut important clarification required

[Richard Smith]

Hine never indicated the power was cut-off.  That is a myth that CTers contrived from misconstruing her testimony in which she explained why she was able to go to window and look at the motorcade.  Her job was to answer the phone.   There were no incoming calls at that moment (i.e. the "lights" on the phone).  So she could walk away from her desk and look out the window.

Mr. BALL. Did you stay at your desk?
Miss HINE. Yes, sir: I was alone until the lights all went out and the phones became dead because the motorcade was coming near us and no one was calling so I got up and thought I could see it from the east window in our office.

It's apparent what Hine meant.  First, look at the question she is being asked. "Did you stay at your desk?"  Her job was to answer the phone at her desk.  She had volunteered to stay behind and answer the telephone so some others could go out to see the motorcade.  Her response explains why she didn't stay at her desk to answer the phone (i.e. there were no calls to be answered).  The lights going out in the building would have nothing to do with her ability to leave her desk.  LOL.  If there were any doubt about this, she confirms the "lights all went out and phones became dead because"  "no one was calling."  No one was calling!  Not that the power was out but that "no one was calling."  She attributes this - rightly or wrongly - to the fact that "the motorcade was coming near us."  Why would she have any cause to believe a motorcade nearing them would cause a power outage?   What she is conveying is that because most everyone was outside watching the motorcade that there were no calls at that moment (i.e. there were no lights on the phone because "no one was calling") which allowed her to leave her desk because she had no calls to answer.  Good grief. 

BUT AGAIN what point would there be in a conspiracy scenario to turn the power and phones off for a brief instant while the motorcade passed the building?  I've never seen anyone articulate a reasonable basis for the conspirators to do this.  And if these CTers are to be believed the power came back on, but then a few minutes later was turned off again to explain why a couple of elevators didn't work!  Again why would the conspirators bother with this risky and seemingly pointless undertaking of turning the power on and off more than once for brief instant?  If the point, however, is simply that the power may have gone off for some reason unrelated to a conspiracy or the assassination, it seemingly makes little difference whether it went off or not.  It would be like arguing about the temperature that day.  The implication being made by some CTers is that a power outage suggests something more sinister but they can't or won't articulate what.  It's a where there is smoke, there is fire argument that is based on a false premise and then makes no narrative sense if given more than a seconds thought.

[John Iacoletti]

The lights going out in the building would have nothing to do with her ability to leave her desk.  LOL. 

I suppose she could have stumbled around in the dark. LOL.

If there were any doubt about this, she confirms the "lights all went out and phones became dead because"  "no one was calling."

The only thing that confirms is your bias. That could just as easily be read as (the lights all went out) AND (the phones became dead because no one was calling).

And your argument might carry more weight if other people hadn’t also reported power outages. Which you also brush off as mistakes. Why are you so attached to the idea that the power didn’t go out?

What she is conveying is that because most everyone was outside watching the motorcade that there were no calls at that moment

Why would people all over Texas needing textbooks stop calling just because a motorcade was coming down the street at the Book Depository building? Good grief indeed.

BUT AGAIN what point would there be in a conspiracy scenario to turn the power and phones off for a brief instant while the motorcade passed the building? 

Who said it had to be a conspiracy scenario? But if you’re calling for speculation, it could be in order to aid the shooters in getting away. Which was articulated the last time you asked the question.

[Richard Smith]

Turning the lights out on a sunny day in a building with numerous windows and cutting the phones in the TSBD would not assist the killer.  Hine's testimony relates to the moment of the assassination.  Baker and Truly take the elevator with no problem just a few minutes later.  Why would the power be cut again later when Mooney takes his elevator ride?   The power is obviously back on when he rides from the first to second floor but then gets cut again at that point?  How are conspirators coordinating these multiple power cuts with real time events in the days before cell phones?  Why would Hine attribute the approach of the motorcade with causing a power outage?   

So no one here is alleging the power outage was part of a conspiracy scenario?  Great! That's the standard response when attempting to prove a conspiracy by implication.  It allows for a suggestion of conspiracy without any actual proof or explanation as to the objective of the conspirators because there is none.  Then why are we discussing it?  Let's assume the power went out for a few seconds around the time of the assassination but that it had nothing whatsoever to do with the assassination or a conspiracy.  Why would it matter?   If someone wants to believe that the power/phones went out but that this was not part of a conspiracy, then knock yourself out.  That's incorrect but fine with me.  I only take issue with those that attempt to use the alleged power outage as a way to imply there was a conspiracy.  And that is clearly the intent for most CTers who raise the issue.

[John Iacoletti]

Turning the lights out on a sunny day in a building with numerous windows and cutting the phones in the TSBD would not assist the killer.

There aren’t many windows on the north side of the building, particularly in the area of the freight elevators and staircase on the first floor. And Hine’s office area had no windows. She would have been acutely aware of lights going out.

Hine's testimony relates to the moment of the assassination.  Baker and Truly take the elevator with no problem just a few minutes later.  Why would the power be cut again later when Mooney takes his elevator ride?   The power is obviously back on when he rides from the first to second floor but then gets cut again at that point?  How are conspirators coordinating these multiple power cuts with real time events in the days before cell phones?  Why would Hine attribute the approach of the motorcade with causing a power outage?

This is a classic argument from ignorance. You can’t imagine how such a thing could be done, therefore it couldn’t have been done. And it’s another example of your usual strawman “vast conspiracy that would have to have been perfectly executed” argument.

If someone wants to believe that the power/phones went out but that this was not part of a conspiracy, then knock yourself out.  That's incorrect but fine with me. 

How arrogant.

I only take issue with those that attempt to use the alleged power outage as a way to imply there was a conspiracy.  And that is clearly the intent for most CTers who raise the issue.

There are two ways to approach something unusual like reports of power going out near the time of the assassination. One is to say “hmm...that’s odd and merits additional investigation or examination”. Another is to say “we already know Oswald did this by himself, so it must be a coincidence, unimportant, or they are mistaken”.

Guess which one reflects a genuine search for the truth and which one reflects a biased, predetermined outcome?

[Richard Smith]

So many words.  Again, if the point of this discussion has nothing to do with a conspiracy and that issue is just a "strawman" here because no one here is implying the alleged power/phone outage had anything to do with a conspiracy, then the discussion is pointless.  If you want to believe the power went off briefly and the phones didn't work for a moment that is fine.  That is wrong but makes no difference to this case if deemed a coincidence having nothing to do with the assassination.  Does anyone think that is what Dishonest John is really contending?  Hard to say since he never takes any position because that would require him to do something other than be a contrarian.  But he has indicated that a conspiracy is a "strawman" here.  So how about John just confirm that he doesn't believe the power outage has anything to do with a conspiracy and clear that strawman up so that we can move on?

If, however, the implication is that the power and phones not working is evidence of a conspiracy, then someone needs to explain how that advanced the cause of the conspirators.  If the power was off at 12:30 as CTers alleged via Hine, then it was turned back on because we know Baker and Truly took the elevator a few minutes later.  Also Hine confirms that when she walked to another office on her floor right after the assassination that she could not get the attention of the person because they were on the phone.   Thus, the phones were working again within moments.  Was the outage limited just to Hine's office?  If so, that raises even more questions as to how that advances the conspirator's cause.  There was no killer in her office or apparent reason to briefly turn the power and phone off in just her office where nothing was happening.  There are other examples of the elevators working in the minutes after the assassination and Mooney himself takes the elevator from the first to second floor (thus power).  So if there are power outages, then they are multiple and over time with the power being turned off and on again.  The one at 12:30 when CTers allege Hine confirms the power and phones are out and then another after Mooney rides the elevator to the second floor (power on to get him to the second floor, then power turned off and then back on).  That occurs many minutes after 12:30.  Who and how are these outages being coordinated?  It is risky and seemingly without purpose.  How was the person charged with cutting the power in the building informed where and when to do so? Someone would have relay in real time information to him as events were playing out in other parts of the building that he couldn't monitor.   How did these people avoid being seen when the DPD were in the building looking for an assassin etc.?  Most importantly why are they even doing this as it served no apparent purpose?  It is ridiculous.

[John Iacoletti]

So many words.  Again, if the point of this discussion has nothing to do with a conspiracy and that issue is just a "strawman" here because no one here is implying the alleged power/phone outage had anything to do with a conspiracy, then the discussion is pointless.

Don’t let the door hit your ass on the way out.

If you want to believe the power went off briefly and the phones didn't work for a moment that is fine.  That is wrong but makes no difference to this case if deemed a coincidence having nothing to do with the assassination.

And you know this is wrong . . . how, exactly?

  Does anyone think that is what Dishonest John is really contending?  Hard to say since he never takes any position because that would require him to do something other than be a contrarian.  But he has indicated that a conspiracy is a "strawman" here.  So how about John just confirm that he doesn't believe the power outage has anything to do with a conspiracy and clear that strawman up so that we can move on?

How would I know if the reported power outage had anything to do with a conspiracy? I don’t have the patented “Richard” crystal ball that would enable me to just decree what is “wrong” without any basis.

[John Iacoletti]

If the power was off at 12:30 as CTers alleged via Hine, then it was turned back on because we know Baker and Truly took the elevator a few minutes later.

So?

  Also Hine confirms that when she walked to another office on her floor right after the assassination that she could not get the attention of the person because they were on the phone.   Thus, the phones were working again within moments.  Was the outage limited just to Hine's office?

Are you suggesting that electricity was required to use the telephone?

Who and how are these outages being coordinated?  It is risky and seemingly without purpose.  How was the person charged with cutting the power in the building informed where and when to do so? Someone would have relay in real time information to him as events were playing out in other parts of the building that he couldn't monitor.   How did these people avoid being seen when the DPD were in the building looking for an assassin etc.?  Most importantly why are they even doing this as it served no apparent purpose? 

“Richard” can’t figure out a “purpose” for cutting the power, therefore nobody cut the power.