On The Trail Of Delusion

[Martin Weidmann]

Instead of playing the endless contrarian how about you provide us with some explanation of how a note written in Russian is on this BY photo?  How many people, for example, who had access to this picture in Dallas could write in Russian?  That can't be a long list.  If it wasn't Marina, then who do you believe are the suspects and why did they write it?  It's not clear what you are even suggesting.  You appear to accept the photo is genuine.  Oswald himself signed and inscribed it to DeM.  So tell us what point you are trying to make here.

how about you provide us with some explanation of how a note written in Russian is on this BY photo?

No, let's not play that game. There is Russian handwriting on the back of the DeMohrenschildt BY photo and it was not ever linked to anybody we know. As you are the one who is ruling out the involvement of anybody else in the assassination of Kennedy, it's up to you to tell us how that handwriting got there and who wrote it.

How many people, for example, who had access to this picture in Dallas could write in Russian?  That can't be a long list.

You tell me. You are the one who constantly claims to know details about Oswald that none of us know. I most certainly do not know how many people, that could write in Russian, Oswald was in contact with in late March 1963.

If it wasn't Marina, then who do you believe are the suspects and why did they write it?  It's not clear what you are even suggesting.

We know it wasn't Marina. There is no "if" about it. Who did write the text is unknown and that's exactly the point. And you understand this, but you can't explain it, which is why you now suddenly play ignorant and try to shift the burden of proof.

You appear to accept the photo is genuine. 

Yes, I don't think it's faked, if that's what you mean. What I have serious doubts about is the backdrop story.

Oswald himself signed and inscribed it to DeM.  So tell us what point you are trying to make here.

Well, let's see;

The official narrative tells us Marina took the pictures and the Oswald developed them at his place of work, which implies that they were the only to people involved in the making of these photos.

However, over the years that pass, Marina frequently tells a different story about the number of photos that she took and when asked for a demonstration, it turns out she doesn't even know how the work the camera. Then we learn that a copy of one of the photos is found, in 1967, in a storage room of the DeMohrenschildt's which allegedly has Oswald's handwriting on the back as well as a text in Russian written by an unknown individual. Now, the story becomes that Oswald gave that picture to George DeMohrenschildt as a present, before he left the country.

Strangely enough neither George or Jeanne DeMohrenschildt mention that picture in their testimony to the WC,  in April 1964, some two months after Life Magazine caused a publicity storm by publishing one of the pictures on it's front cover.

So, now we have already four known persons involved with the BY pictures and one unknown person who wrote the Russian text on the back.

Today, we also know that Michael Paine confirmed in a television interview (iirc with CBS) that Oswald had shown him the BY photo shortly after it had been taken. However, Paine also not only did not tell the WC and/or investigators this. He went even so far as to claim that he did not know Oswald had a rifle.

So, at least five personswe know were somehow involved with the pictures. Massive media attention because of the Life Magazine publication and nobody is talking, except Marina, who can't get her facts right. And then there is the unknown writer of the Russian text.

Now you do the math....

[Jerry Freeman]

Having to cast doubt on the evidence as the product of lies or fakery is an implicit acknowledgement on Stone's part that the evidence links Oswald to the crime. The same could be said for the naysayers who frequent this forum. Yet they would never admit that the Warren Commission got anything right.

Why don't you stick with your endless political rants and leave the discussion of the JFK case to others?

So any skeptics should just leave the forum and let the nutters all sit around and agree with each other?
The are no discussions just attaboy pat pat ...conspiracy kooks --"indeed"  ...Oswald did it -never mind the particulars.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

If Stone just believed in one specific JFK conspiracy theory, that would be bad enough but he apparently accepts them all.  Hundreds or thousands of people would have to be involved in the conspiracy under Stone's interpretation of events.

I have no idea, none, why reasonable conspiracy believers - and there are some - are not furious with this nonsense by Stone and DiEugenio. Nothing discredits their theories, their concerns, their legitimate questions (there are still a few at this late date) than this series of slanders and outrages and fantasies promoted by them.

I mentioned before that response by Stone when asked about the smearing of Shaw: he said, "Sometimes in a war you have to sacrifice people." My guess is that this is what he and DiEugenio are doing. They think they're fighting a war against the secret "they" that really runs America, to wit, this mix of "deep state" actors and military industrialists and quasi-fascists in Wall Street and elsewhere. And so in such a battle if innocents get hurt that's just the price that will be paid. It's a nasty business; collateral damage will happen.

If I wanted to discredit the conspiracy movement or cause I would hire someone like Stone and DiEugenio to do so. And this is how I'd do it.

I guess if you believe the Cold War was caused by the US, by Truman's policies, by the "national security state" and "military industrial complex" and you think that JFK was going to end all of that - Stone, DiEugenio and the absurd Jim Garrison did - then it makes sense on some level that the assassination was engineered by them. That's providing a twisted sort of motive but never explains how.  In any case, it is sheer nonsense and completely false that the East-West conflict was caused solely or even predominantly by the West. I mean good lord, Josef Stalin a victim?

[Richard Smith]

how about you provide us with some explanation of how a note written in Russian is on this BY photo?

No, let's not play that game. There is Russian handwriting on the back of the DeMohrenschildt BY photo and it was not ever linked to anybody we know. As you are the one who is ruling out the involvement of anybody else in the assassination of Kennedy, it's up to you to tell us how that handwriting got there and who wrote it.

How many people, for example, who had access to this picture in Dallas could write in Russian?  That can't be a long list.

You tell me. You are the one who constantly claims to know details about Oswald that none of us know. I most certainly do not know how many people, that could write in Russian, Oswald was in contact with in late March 1963.

If it wasn't Marina, then who do you believe are the suspects and why did they write it?  It's not clear what you are even suggesting.

We know it wasn't Marina. There is no "if" about it. Who did write the text is unknown and that's exactly the point. And you understand this, but you can't explain it, which is why you now suddenly play ignorant and try to shift the burden of proof.

You appear to accept the photo is genuine. 

Yes, I don't think it's faked, if that's what you mean. What I have serious doubts about is the backdrop story.

Oswald himself signed and inscribed it to DeM.  So tell us what point you are trying to make here.

Well, let's see;

The official narrative tells us Marina took the pictures and the Oswald developed them at his place of work, which implies that they were the only to people involved in the making of these photos.

However, over the years that pass, Marina frequently tells a different story about the number of photos that she took and when asked for a demonstration, it turns out she doesn't even know how the work the camera. Then we learn that a copy of one of the photos is found, in 1967, in a storage room of the DeMohrenschildt's which allegedly has Oswald's handwriting on the back as well as a text in Russian written by an unknown individual. Now, the story becomes that Oswald gave that picture to George DeMohrenschildt as a present, before he left the country.

Strangely enough neither George or Jeanne DeMohrenschildt mention that picture in their testimony to the WC,  in April 1964, some two months after Life Magazine caused a publicity storm by publishing one of the pictures on it's front cover.

So, now we have already four known persons involved with the BY pictures and one unknown person who wrote the Russian text on the back.

Today, we also know that Michael Paine confirmed in a television interview (iirc with CBS) that Oswald had shown him the BY photo shortly after it had been taken. However, Paine also not only did not tell the WC and/or investigators this. He went even so far as to claim that he did not know Oswald had a rifle.

So, at least five personswe know were somehow involved with the pictures. Massive media attention because of the Life Magazine publication and nobody is talking, except Marina, who can't get her facts right. And then there is the unknown writer of the Russian text.

Now you do the math....

Bottom line - the photos are genuine.  They depict Oswald holding the murder weapon and Commie literature (the relevant point).  There may be some debate about who wrote the "Hunter of Fascists" note on the back but it likely wasn't Oswald.  Most believe it was Marina and contrary to your claim she has not been ruled out.  If she didn't do it, that only leaves a couple of folks who had access to this photo and could write in Russian.  Big deal.  What difference does it make unless you think some fantasy conspirator wrote it for some inexplicable reason?  How is that relevant to what the picture depicts?  This is just more rabbit hole nonsense to deflect from the important point.  The photo is genuine and Oswald is holding the murder weapon.   There was understandable reluctance by George DeM and Marina to be associated with these photos.  Awareness of Oswald's bizarre behavior could lend itself to criticism that they should have known he was a potentially violent kook and reported him.  George DeM wanted nothing to do with that.  So maybe he socks his picture away and plays dumb.

[Richard Smith]

I have no idea, none, why reasonable conspiracy believers - and there are some - are not furious with this nonsense by Stone and DiEugenio. Nothing discredits their theories, their concerns, their legitimate questions (there are still a few at this late date) than this series of slanders and outrages and fantasies promoted by them.

If I wanted to discredit the conspiracy movement or cause I would hire someone like Stone and DiEugenio to do so. And this is how I'd do it.

Careful or I'm sure some CTer will latch onto this and suggest the CIA is behind Stone's documentary.  I find it astounding as well.  But there are a lot of intelligent people who still believe in Bigfoot and the Loch Ness monster.  There is no dissuading such people with facts, evidence, or logic because if those concepts had any impact they would not have come to these conclusions in the first place.  It is a faith-based belief system impossible to dissuade with reason.

[Martin Weidmann]

Bottom line - the photos are genuine.  They depict Oswald holding the murder weapon and Commie literature (the relevant point).  There may be some debate about who wrote the "Hunter of Fascists" note on the back but it likely wasn't Oswald.  Most believe it was Marina and contrary to your claim she has not been ruled out.  If she didn't do it, that only leaves a couple of folks who had access to this photo and could write in Russian.  Big deal.  What difference does it make unless you think some fantasy conspirator wrote it for some inexplicable reason?  How is that relevant to what the picture depicts?  This is just more rabbit hole nonsense to deflect from the important point.  The photo is genuine and Oswald is holding the murder weapon.   There was understandable reluctance by George DeM and Marina to be associated with these photos.  Awareness of Oswald's bizarre behavior could lend itself to criticism that they should have known he was a potentially violent kook and reported him.  George DeM wanted nothing to do with that.  So maybe he socks his picture away and plays dumb.

Bottom line - the photos are genuine.

No, the bottom line is that there is sufficient reason to consider the story of their making in the official narrative is highly suspect. I had my picture taken once holding a rifle, which belonged to a friend. That photo was not only genuine but also benign. It's all about context and that's where the official narrative is lacking substance.

They depict Oswald holding the murder weapon and Commie literature (the relevant point).

There is no conclusive evidence that the rifle Oswald is holding in the BY photos is in fact "the murder weapon". Even if the HSCA photographic experts concluded that the rifle in the photo and the one found on the 6th floor are similar that does not mean they actually are the same one.

There may be some debate about who wrote the "Hunter of Fascists" note on the back but it likely wasn't Oswald.  Most believe it was Marina and contrary to your claim she has not been ruled out.

By repeating this same old BS are you somehow hoping it becomes true? Once again, if Marina had written that text, a simple comparison of her handwriting would be sufficient to make that determination and we would have known about it by now. I'm not sure who these "most" are that you claim believe it was Marina. They are likely a figment of your imagination.

If she didn't do it, that only leaves a couple of folks who had access to this photo and could write in Russian.  Big deal.  What difference does it make unless you think some fantasy conspirator wrote it for some inexplicable reason?

Big deal? Yes, it's a big deal when there is an unknown person involved as it clearly points to the involvement of more persons in a case you claim is a lone nut affair. You understand this, because otherwise you would not keep pushing the BS that Marina wrote the text.

How is that relevant to what the picture depicts?

Pray tell... what does the picture depict that is so important to you? It's just a guy holding a rifle and some magazines, months before the President was assassinated. So, what makes the picture so relevant?

There was understandable reluctance by George DeM and Marina to be associated with these photos.  Awareness of Oswald's bizarre behavior could lend itself to criticism that they should have known he was a potentially violent kook and reported him.  George DeM wanted nothing to do with that.  So maybe he socks his picture away and plays dumb.

I agree that George DeMohrenschildt (and Michael Paine) had good reason not to mention the pictures to the WC or the investigators, but I seriously doubt you and I are thinking about the same reason.

Oh well, at least you have now accepted that George DeMohrenschildt had at least some sort of involvement in matter of the BY photos. 

[Martin Weidmann]

Careful or I'm sure some CTer will latch onto this and suggest the CIA is behind Stone's documentary.  I find it astounding as well.  But there are a lot of intelligent people who still believe in Bigfoot and the Loch Ness monster.  There is no dissuading such people with facts, evidence, or logic because if those concepts had any impact they would not have come to these conclusions in the first place.  It is a faith-based belief system impossible to dissuade with reason.

The pot just called the kettle black!

There is no dissuading such people with facts, evidence, or logic because if those concepts had any impact they would not have come to these conclusions in the first place.  It is a faith-based belief system impossible to dissuade with reason.

The is one of the best definitions of an LN I have read in a long time.

[Fred Litwin]

Bad faith? Where am I wrong in this blog post?

fred