Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?  (Read 24966 times)

Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7444
Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #56 on: March 17, 2018, 12:08:43 AM »
Advertisement




Huh? You're attempting to make a comparison where none exists, the evidence is solid and tangible and my influence of being reasonable has absolutely no impact on this Mountain of Evidence but on the other hand people like you and Iacoletti continually attempt to dispute virtually every piece of evidence and this blatant illogical paranoia can only be seen as "unreasonable" which makes my original point even more valid.



JohnM

The mere fact that you keep calling it a "mountain of evidence" proves that you are not a reasonable person.


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #56 on: March 17, 2018, 12:08:43 AM »


Offline Joe Elliott

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1727
Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #57 on: March 17, 2018, 02:24:00 AM »


Because the paper trail is faked? Who faked it? How many people would it take to fake this? Who was in a position to assign the people to produce and insert the fake paper work in the appropriate location, to make it appear that this rifle was ordered by the same ?person? whose fake ID Oswald was found carrying?

Why would the entire paper trail be faked and why would there be a need to insert fake documents in some location? In case of the rifle all it took to create the entire papertrail was a small order form (with only a few words written on it) and a money order, right?

For the revolver there was even less paperwork.



But only the CIA, the FBI or the police would not know what form to recreate. They don?t know how Klein's Sporting Goods stores its records. They don?t know where in the Klein?s Sporting Goods records to insert such paperwork.

Even if the CIA did insert this paperwork, they wouldn?t know if that company keeps an index list of purchases. It would look bad if there was paperwork for other rifle orders, which also appeared on the index list. But not Oswald?s order.

No, to pull this off, to have the Klein?s Sporting Goods Company to go through it?s records and find this paperwork, you would need the Klein?s Sporting Goods Company involved with the conspiracy. If not the entire company, the CIA would somehow have to make inquires to identify the key people who know what paperwork is kept and then recruit them.

Since Oswald had a rifle and seemed to be obeying the orders of this alleged conspiracy (be sure to bring a long object wrapped in a paper bag on the morning the President drive by) it would seem simpler to just instruct Oswald to order himself a rifle, rather than recruit the Klein?s Sporting Goods company into the conspiracy and have them create a fake paper trail.





Or do you believe that Oswald was not really carrying a fake ID? Even if this is so, officers would be needed to plant the fake ID on him and go along with the story, and other people would be needed to produce the fake paper trail that seems to lead to a P. O. Box associated with this alias.

To answer your question first; I don't know if Oswald was carrying a fake ID or not. All I know is that there is no day 1 report from any of the arresting officers, including Paul Bentley who took a wallet from Oswald in the car, that mentions something as significant as a fake ID. Can you give a reasonable explanation for why that is?



Can you provide me with link to the paperwork Paul Bentley filed that day? I would be curious to know what else was missing from that paperwork.

I don?t know how through the Dallas Police department was with immediate paperwork. And what need is there since the fake ID is being stored? I don?t know of any need, unless Bentley was afraid that people were suspecting that they were creating a false case against Oswald and so he needs to carefully itemize everything to help deflect this. But I don?t know if that had ever occurred to him on that day.

And all this seems to be nothing more than needlessly postulating a conspiracy that does everything at the last second. Planning this assassination for weeks and it isn?t until immediately after the assassination that it occurs to them that they need to make a fake ID and get some fake paperwork from Klein?s Sporting Goods before the weekend is over.





But so far, Martin, you are dodging my main question. Why can?t a CTer provide a list of the evidence that was probably fake and a rough count of who was involved?

Had you attempted such a list, would you have remembered to include the Klein?s Sporting Goods Company?

I can only think that CTers don?t provide such a list because it would be like providing a list of all the grains of sand to be found on a certain beach.


Offline Colin Crow

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1860
Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #58 on: March 17, 2018, 10:32:37 AM »

So, are you a CTer or not?

Questions:

If you are a CTer, can you provide a list of the evidence that was faked?

Can you provide a rough list of all those involved in this alledged conspiracy?




And by doing so argument that you are not a believer in Large Secret Conspiracies.

Please define a CTer as requested. Why is this task impossible for your group?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #58 on: March 17, 2018, 10:32:37 AM »


Offline Steve Thomas

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 64
Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #59 on: March 17, 2018, 11:38:26 AM »
Lee Harvey Oswald did not kill John F. Kennedy.

Lee Henry Oswald did.

Or Harvey Lee Oswald did.

I can never keep them straight.

Steve Thomas

Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7444
Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #60 on: March 17, 2018, 12:40:39 PM »

But only the CIA, the FBI or the police would not know what form to recreate. They don?t know how Klein's Sporting Goods stores its records. They don?t know where in the Klein?s Sporting Goods records to insert such paperwork.

Even if the CIA did insert this paperwork, they wouldn?t know if that company keeps an index list of purchases. It would look bad if there was paperwork for other rifle orders, which also appeared on the index list. But not Oswald?s order.

No, to pull this off, to have the Klein?s Sporting Goods Company to go through it?s records and find this paperwork, you would need the Klein?s Sporting Goods Company involved with the conspiracy. If not the entire company, the CIA would somehow have to make inquires to identify the key people who know what paperwork is kept and then recruit them.

Since Oswald had a rifle and seemed to be obeying the orders of this alleged conspiracy (be sure to bring a long object wrapped in a paper bag on the morning the President drive by) it would seem simpler to just instruct Oswald to order himself a rifle, rather than recruit the Klein?s Sporting Goods company into the conspiracy and have them create a fake paper trail.


Can you provide me with link to the paperwork Paul Bentley filed that day? I would be curious to know what else was missing from that paperwork.

I don?t know how through the Dallas Police department was with immediate paperwork. And what need is there since the fake ID is being stored? I don?t know of any need, unless Bentley was afraid that people were suspecting that they were creating a false case against Oswald and so he needs to carefully itemize everything to help deflect this. But I don?t know if that had ever occurred to him on that day.

And all this seems to be nothing more than needlessly postulating a conspiracy that does everything at the last second. Planning this assassination for weeks and it isn?t until immediately after the assassination that it occurs to them that they need to make a fake ID and get some fake paperwork from Klein?s Sporting Goods before the weekend is over.

But so far, Martin, you are dodging my main question. Why can?t a CTer provide a list of the evidence that was probably fake and a rough count of who was involved?

Had you attempted such a list, would you have remembered to include the Klein?s Sporting Goods Company?

I can only think that CTers don?t provide such a list because it would be like providing a list of all the grains of sand to be found on a certain beach.


But only the CIA, the FBI or the police would not know what form to recreate. They don?t know how Klein's Sporting Goods stores its records. They don?t know where in the Klein?s Sporting Goods records to insert such paperwork.

Even if the CIA did insert this paperwork, they wouldn?t know if that company keeps an index list of purchases. It would look bad if there was paperwork for other rifle orders, which also appeared on the index list. But not Oswald?s order.


You don't get it. There wouldn't be a need to recreate and/or insert paperwork anywhere. Anybody can fill out a faked order form and send it by mail. The normal business procedure by Klein's would do the rest.

No, to pull this off, to have the Klein?s Sporting Goods Company to go through it?s records and find this paperwork, you would need the Klein?s Sporting Goods Company involved with the conspiracy. If not the entire company, the CIA would somehow have to make inquires to identify the key people who know what paperwork is kept and then recruit them.

That's only what you want to believe so you can hang on to your strawmen argument. Fact of the matter is that the rifle purchase basically only required a faked order form. The order would be processed by Klein's in the normal manner, producing the remainder of the paperwork, which would lay dormant in their files for whenever it would be needed. If there was a conspiracy at the highest level they could have done the same thing for several people all over the country and we would only ever find out about the one concerning the individual ultimately selected as the patsy.

Since Oswald had a rifle and seemed to be obeying the orders of this alleged conspiracy (be sure to bring a long object wrapped in a paper bag on the morning the President drive by) it would seem simpler to just instruct Oswald to order himself a rifle, rather than recruit the Klein?s Sporting Goods company into the conspiracy and have them create a fake paper trail.

True, that's more or less the same as what I am saying, but if Oswald was manipulated in doing it himself even the order form wouldn't be fake. It would just be the story behind it that would need to change to morph into the official narrative.


Can you provide me with link to the paperwork Paul Bentley filed that day? I would be curious to know what else was missing from that paperwork.

I don't think he filed any paperwork that day at all. After arresting Oswald he went to the hospital for his injury. The first time he re-appears in public is the next day when he gives a television interview. My take on this is that had Bentley filed a report that mentioned finding the Hidell alias, we would have known about it by now. As it stands he wasn't even called to testify for the WC.

I don?t know how through the Dallas Police department was with immediate paperwork. And what need is there since the fake ID is being stored? I don?t know of any need, unless Bentley was afraid that people were suspecting that they were creating a false case against Oswald and so he needs to carefully itemize everything to help deflect this. But I don?t know if that had ever occurred to him on that day.

So, by your reasoning, there was no need to file a report about finding a fake ID in Oswald's wallet, yet other officers filed extensive reports about all sorts of everything. Remarkable.

And all this seems to be nothing more than needlessly postulating a conspiracy that does everything at the last second. Planning this assassination for weeks and it isn?t until immediately after the assassination that it occurs to them that they need to make a fake ID and get some fake paperwork from Klein?s Sporting Goods before the weekend is over.

Where did you get the idea that a conspiracy did everything at the last second. They could have been planning for months, having all sorts of scenarios in place and selecting at short notice which scenario to impliment.

But so far, Martin, you are dodging my main question. Why can?t a CTer provide a list of the evidence that was probably fake and a rough count of who was involved?

Had you attempted such a list, would you have remembered to include the Klein?s Sporting Goods Company?


Why should a CT provide such a list? When you, as LN, present a piece of evidence it's on you to show it is authentic. But if I had made such a list (which I haven't and won't) I most certainly would have no reason at all to include Klein's in it.

I can only think that CTers don?t provide such a list because it would be like providing a list of all the grains of sand to be found on a certain beach.

Of course you would think that. That's why you asked to question to begin with. Another strawmen argument to be shot down!

« Last Edit: March 17, 2018, 01:43:07 PM by Martin Weidmann »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #60 on: March 17, 2018, 12:40:39 PM »


Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6513
Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #61 on: March 17, 2018, 03:44:39 PM »
Lee Harvey Oswald did not kill John F. Kennedy.

Lee Henry Oswald did.

Or Harvey Lee Oswald did.

I can never keep them straight.

Steve Thomas

A bitter, mentally-deranged pipsqueak wanted to make a name for himself
Smith, Wesson, and Lee: Dirty Harvey.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2018, 03:49:33 PM by Bill Chapman »

Offline Steve M. Galbraith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1500
Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #62 on: March 17, 2018, 09:04:51 PM »
Colin, I'm have no idea curious as to why this is being asked? What's the purpose here?

CT is simply short hand - an acronym - used for those who believe/theorize/know that JFK was killed in a conspiracy. CT = conspiracy theorist.

It's clearly inaccurate in that it includes people who both theorize or believe there was a conspiracy as well as people - like the late Gaeton Fonzi - who say they "know" there was one.

But LN is inaccurate too since there are people who think Oswald acted without help but he that wasn't "nuts."

CT and LN are just figures of speech, shorthand that we use.

At least that's what my paymasters at Langley tell me to say.





« Last Edit: March 18, 2018, 02:46:59 PM by Steve M. Galbraith »

Offline Jack Trojan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 833
Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #63 on: March 18, 2018, 02:06:40 AM »
To me a CTer is a person who insists, beyond a reasonable standard of proof, that Oswald needed help

That's your problem. A CTer is a person who looks at all the circumstantial evidence re the JFK assassination and leans toward Oswald likely not acting alone. CTers represent the majority of the world who give a damn. And for that the fringe LNers label CTers as tin foil hat wearing kooks. Go figure.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2018, 02:41:48 AM by Jack Trojan »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?
« Reply #63 on: March 18, 2018, 02:06:40 AM »