Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: On The Trail Of Delusion  (Read 78914 times)

Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7444
Re: JFK Revisited: Were the Oswald Backyard Photographs Faked?
« Reply #736 on: December 08, 2021, 11:48:03 PM »
Advertisement
It isn't about defending Richard who is someone I have come to blows with elsewhere on this forum and whose LN stance I do not share.
It's about calling Rick out on his underhand bullsh%t tactics.
In his last post Martin wrote:

"When Richard said "Oswald had no apparent sense of humor" it was of course an opinion,"

It's Martin's opinion that this was presented as a fact and that's just an opinion.
But Rick was calling it out as an "absolute statement", which it is not. So he did something which I find unacceptable - he actually changed what Richard had posted in order to make it an absolute statement and then kept derailing the discussion by constantly challenging Richard to answer for an absolute statement he had never made and it got on my tits because I thought it was quite an interesting thread and debate was being quashed by Rick's  BS:

So I called him out on it.
Provided the quotes to back up what I was saying.
And that should have been the end of that.

And that should have been the end of that.

On this forum? Really?

"When Richard said "Oswald had no apparent sense of humor" it was of course an opinion,"
It's Martin's opinion that this was presented as a fact and that's just an opinion.


No. It was a fact - or absolute statement - presented as an opinion.

And yes, it is my opinion, just like what you are saying is your opinion.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: JFK Revisited: Were the Oswald Backyard Photographs Faked?
« Reply #736 on: December 08, 2021, 11:48:03 PM »


Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: JFK Revisited: Were the Oswald Backyard Photographs Faked?
« Reply #737 on: December 08, 2021, 11:55:50 PM »
You are the one who is out of line.
Richard said "Oswald had no apparent sense of humor".
This is not an absolute statement, it is an opinion.
In a move that was really out of line you started claiming he had said "He (Oswald) never had a sense of humor".
This is a falsehood and one that, instead of acknowledging and correcting it, you continue to perpetuate it.

Pointing out your falsehoods is not an "attack".

"I've made nothing up"

Really? Your falsehoods are documented here:
Nice try at playing word games.

Yes you have "made things up". You called me an "old man" when you have no clue how old I am.   

Oswald had no apparent sense of humor and was certainly too insecure to be self deprecating.
   
Richard Smith made a false statement claiming Oswald had "no sense of humor" and then goes on to claim Oswald was "too insecure to be self deprecating". This indeed is an absolute statement. Richard Smith never knew Oswald personally so he has no clue that he had no "sense of humor" or that "he was too insecure".

Richard Smith makes absolute statements all the time. He stated that "Kennedy never had anything to do civil rights", there were "zero Omicron Variant cases in Southern African countries", and that "President Biden has done nothing for the pandemic". All these absolute statements are false and he did use "never" in past posts.       

This is none of your concern since the question was not directed at you.

If you had a problem with my question, you could have acted like a civil adult and raised your objection. Instead, you personally attacked, slandered me, and made false accusations against me in order to defame my character. Your posts were out of line and you clearly have broken forum rules with your personal insults. You called me an "old man" when you have no clue how old I even am. You accused me of being "deceitful" and made up some conspiracy about me for simply asking a question about how Richard would know anything about Oswald not having a "sense of humor' when he never knew the man.

You couldn't care less about my question. It's obvious to me and to others that your whole goal was to attack me as you feign your "outrage".

This is my last comment to you regarding this and it's obvious Richard isn't going to answer my question.         

If you attack or slander me again,  I'm going to report you for harassment.               

Offline Steve M. Galbraith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1500
Re: JFK Revisited: Were the Oswald Backyard Photographs Faked?
« Reply #738 on: December 09, 2021, 01:38:19 AM »
If they faked the photos to implicate Oswald then why say he claimed they were faked? He's dead, they can say he admitted that they were real, that Marina took them. Don't open up the question to their authenticity: close the door don't open them.

It's seems completely illogical to fake the photos and say Oswald said they were faked.

But I'm difficult like this when it comes to JFK conspiracy claims. As a former conspiracy believer I guess I'm like the ex-smoker and get upset at smokers/conspiracists. In any case, I blame the internet.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: JFK Revisited: Were the Oswald Backyard Photographs Faked?
« Reply #738 on: December 09, 2021, 01:38:19 AM »


Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: JFK Revisited: Were the Oswald Backyard Photographs Faked?
« Reply #739 on: December 09, 2021, 03:45:11 AM »
I thought this Oswald photos article was interesting from over 40 years ago.

More Oswald Photo Evidence Said to Be Found

September 15, 1978

Dallas police officers evidently seized more incriminating photographic evidence against Lee Harvey Oswald than they ever supplied to the Warren Commission, the House Assassinations Committee was told yesterday.

The missing evidence, particularly two negatives showing Oswald holding a rifle in one hand and copies of the Militant and the Worker publications in the other, has for years shored up the contentions of critics that the photos the commission did get were fakes.

A panel of photographic experts assembled by the House committee reported yesterday, however, they had now collected enough original prints, showing Oswald in three different poses to establish their authenticity.

One of the experts, Sgt. Cecil W. Kirk of the metropolitan police department here, said the finding that the pictures all came from Oswald's Imperial reflex camera was shored up by a chance discovery he made at the National Archives only last Sunday.

It was an 8-inch by 10-inch Dallas enlargement of one of the original police shots. According to Kirk, tests have established that the blow-up was made directly from one of the negatives that Dallas police found among Oswald's possessions on Nov. 23, 1963, the day after President Kennedy's assassination.

The negative is missing. But the enlargement, with the official rubber stamp of the Dallas Police Department imprinted on the back, shows that the Warren Commission erred in reporting that the negative was "never recovered."

Kirk, who supervises the D.C. police department's mobile crime laboratory and photographic services unit, also gave low marks to the police procedure involved. He said Oswald was shown the blow-up, rather than the smaller original, which he had seen before.

This, Kirk suggested, gave Oswald an opportunity to denounce it as a fake, which he did under interrogation at Dallas Police Headquarters on the nith of Nov. 23.

"Why give a suspect an enlargement if you've got the original?" Kirk added during testimony. "It seemed to me to be kind of strange." To reporters, during a break, he added, more succinctly, "I thought it was kind of dumb."

The testimony came near the end of a busy hearing that started with a final round of questioning for Oswald's widow, Marina, and paused in mid afternoon for a House floor vote on a $790,000 request to keep the inquiry going until the end of the year.

The House handed the committee the money on a voice vote after a series of speechs praising Chariman Louis Stokes (D-Ohio) for putting the investigation in order after a shaky beginning. Rep. Robert E. Bauman (R-Md.) protested that the committee has already spect $4.5 million in the past two years, making it "the most expensive investigation in the House's history, including the impeachment investigation." But other former critics of the insuiry said they could not justify closing it down in the midst of the public hearing.

Concluding her testimony, the formers Mrs. Oswald, now Marina Porter, finally conceded to the committee that she thought Oswald had killed the president. She had refused to answer that question Wednesday, but she relented after Rep. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) reminded her that she had said as much to the Warren commission 14 years ago.

Porter said she thought Oswald acted alone and not, in her judgement, for any coherent political reason. "I don't think anybody in his right mind could commit a crime like that," she told the committee. Oswald, she agreed under questioning by Rep. Richardson Preyer (D-N.C.), probably wanted to make himself "important by killing someone important."

Porter told the committee that she snapped the photos of Oswald with his rifle, and a holstered pistol, at his insistence in the spring of 1963 in the back yard of their Neely street home in Dallas. She said she couldn't remember how many pictures she took, whether two or three, and only vaguely recalled his saying something about sending a copy to the Militant.

After the assassination, she burned two prints she found in her daughter June's baby book. She told the committee it never occured to her to look around for the negatives.

Dallas police evidently found three negatives and at least two prints. The Warren Commission got only two prints and only one negative. Besides the traces of the one Sgt. Kirk uncovered, the evidence of another negative having been seized by police was obtained by the committee from two other sources.

Original copies of this pose, never seen by the Warren Commission, were given to the committee by the widow of Dallas police officer Roscoe White and by former Dallas police detective Richard S. Stovall, one of those who conducted the search. The negative is missing, but Kirk said the prints, like all the others, show the unique "signature" of scratch marks and indentations made by Oswald's camera.

Another large print of one of the photos, obtained last year from the widow of Oswald's one time benefactor, George de Mohrenschildt, was subjected to handwriting analysis. Inscriptions on the back included in one corner a notation saying, "For my friend George from Lee Oswald," with an obscure date "5/IV/63." At the top, in printed Russian letters, were the words "Hunter of fascists - ha, ha, ha." Finally, at the bottom right corner, in printed letters, was the note: "Copyright G de M."

De Mohrenschildt, who was in Haiti at the time of the JFK assassination, committed suicide in March 1977. He had left Dallas for Haiti in May 1963, shortly after Oswald's attempted assassination of Gen. Edwin Walker (U.S. Army, Ret.)

There has been speculation that Oswald's wife jotted down the mocking note above Oswald's purpoted inscription, perhaps to chide her husband for the Walker incident. She told the committee that the sarcastic "hunter of fascists" line sounded like something she would have written, but the handwriting was not hers.

Handwriting expert Joseph P. McNally agreed that it was not her writing. But he told the committee that the Russian words had apparently been traced over an original, perhaps similar inscription after it had faded or been erased.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1978/09/15/more-oswald-photo-evidence-said-to-be-found/39265ee1-14b7-498a-921f-fb3416d07f46/

Offline Fred Litwin

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 338
"JFK Revisited" Misleads on the Supposed Chicago Plot
« Reply #740 on: December 09, 2021, 02:15:35 PM »
"JFK Revisited" Misleads on the Supposed Chicago Plot
Oliver Stone's so-called documentary discusses a plot to kill JFK in Chicago in early November 1963. The only problem is that there is no evidence that there was actually a plot.

https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/jfk-revisited-misleads-on-the-supposed-chicago-plot

JFK Assassination Forum

"JFK Revisited" Misleads on the Supposed Chicago Plot
« Reply #740 on: December 09, 2021, 02:15:35 PM »


Offline Steve M. Galbraith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1500
Re: JFK Revisited: Were the Oswald Backyard Photographs Faked?
« Reply #741 on: December 09, 2021, 03:48:46 PM »
Don"t get involved with logic, Steve.

No, you're not difficult to figure out at all.

Thumb1:
Thanks. Merry Christmas to you too.

But my difficult observation is still there. Instead of cash, why not gift me an answer?

Again, I'll go slow (my fingers are typing real slow; so it left here that way):
If Oswald is dead then the conspirators can say he admitted that the BYP were authentic. Why say he denied their authenticity? Telling the public he denied their authenticity opens the door to them being challenged. If they say - again he is dead; they can say anything (remember they're pure evil) - he admitted to taking them then we lone nutter morons can say, "But he said they were authentic."

If you prefer to send cash that'll be fine anyway.

Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7444
Re: JFK Revisited: Were the Oswald Backyard Photographs Faked?
« Reply #742 on: December 09, 2021, 04:07:24 PM »
Thanks. Merry Christmas to you too.

But my difficult observation is still there. Instead of cash, why not gift me an answer?

Again, I'll go slow (my fingers are typing real slow; so it left here that way):
If Oswald is dead then the conspirators can say he admitted that the BYP were authentic. Why say he denied their authenticity? Telling the public he denied their authenticity opens the door to them being challenged. If they say - again he is dead; they can say anything (remember they're pure evil) - he admitted to taking them then we lone nutter morons can say, "But he said they were authentic."

If you prefer to send cash that'll be fine anyway.

This is the other side of the same coin; If they said that Oswald had admitted that the BYP were authentic, people would ask why he would do that when he claimed to be innocent?

Offline Jon Banks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1219
Re: "JFK Revisited" Misleads on the Supposed Chicago Plot
« Reply #743 on: December 09, 2021, 04:48:30 PM »
"JFK Revisited" Misleads on the Supposed Chicago Plot
Oliver Stone's so-called documentary discusses a plot to kill JFK in Chicago in early November 1963. The only problem is that there is no evidence that there was actually a plot.

https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/jfk-revisited-misleads-on-the-supposed-chicago-plot

Fmr. Secret Service agent Abraham Bolden in his own words

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: "JFK Revisited" Misleads on the Supposed Chicago Plot
« Reply #743 on: December 09, 2021, 04:48:30 PM »