CTers do you have any evidence other than hearsay?

[Jack Trojan]

Ray the point of this post is do CTers have any evidence. The physical and ballistic evidence has been well established for decades now. And CTers are always saying that the burden of proof is on the people who believe Oswald acted alone. This is not a court of law and neither side is compelled to "prove" anything.  The best ploy the CTers have that I have seen on here is, that a CTer will wait until the LNers, as you guys call them, posts something and then try and dispute it without really ever saying or citing any real evidence at all. All the CTers have is stuff like "I had a friend, that knew a guy, that had a girlfriend, that had a friend, that said he overheard someone say, they knew a guy that saw something." It really is fascinating and hilarious. Can you cite any credible, physical, ballistic evidence that points away from Oswald or points to a second gunman?

CTs don't have to cite any physical evidence linking someone other than Oswald to the crime. The onus is on CTs to prove Oswald was not a LN, hence the JFK assassination was by definition a conspiracy. This lowers the bar considerably because all it takes is 1 contradiction to the LN narrative and BOOM, it's over for the LNers. I'm sure this fact is not lost on some of the LNers, which is why they debate the way they do, via obfuscation, dismissal/ridicule and outright ignoring any and all contradictions to their belief system. They have boxed themselves in so they have no choice but to defend Oswald's apparent LNer insanity because 1 strike and you're out.

The LNers have to explain why there isn't a single piece of physical evidence that can be directly linked to LHO's guilt. It's all weak circumstantial evidence that reeks of setup. Top notch conspirators would have surely come up with a well thought out coup that used a patsy to cover enough of their tracks to make it almost impossible to pin down any accomplices such as 2nd shooters, etc. The LNers need to apply logic to their critical thinking and realize that if evidence≠LNer then conspiracy=true. For example, if any of the following are true then conspiracy=true:

• There is not a straight line path thru JFK as per the autopsy photos for the magic bullet trajectory. If there is, then LNers need to show it (and with a re-enactment, not with graphics).
• The magic bullet must have hit JFK's spine, yet exited cleanly, then tumbled into Connally breaking his rib and wrist bones and experienced practically no deformation. LNers need to show this was possible.
• The magic bullet had no tissue, blood or bone on it. How is that possible?
• The magic bullet showed up "after the fact" on the wrong stretcher as tho it had been planted. LNers?
• The head-shot bullet clearly exploded in JFK's head. LNers need to show how a FMJ bullet, like the MB, can do that merely because it hit the skull instead of other bones.
• Why did the head-shot bullet blow out the right side of JFK's skull if it didn't explode?
• How did a FMJ bullet eject skull fragments almost tangential to the force of impact if it didn't explode?
• Why didn't the autopsy photos show a "fist-sized" hole in the back of JFK's head that was seen by many health professionals who could not possibly misinterpret such a thing, especially given the circumstances?
• Who gave JFK a haircut for the "back of the head" autopsy photos?
• How could an unpracticed marksman pull off 2 of 3 hits, including a bullseye, in under 10 secs (the FBI 1st claimed 2 shots were 3/4 of second apart) with a useless scope? What military marksman would not know that the scope would be useless and not remove it from the rifle before smuggling it disassembled into the TSBD? At the very least LNers need to cite a re-enactment study that accomplished a similar feat.
• Where were all the prints on the supposed disassembled/reassembled MC stock, barrel, scope, trigger, clip and ammo? IOW, where were LHO's gloves?

I could go on and on but if you determine that any 1 of the above is impossible then you can no longer be a LNer, unless you ignore or dismiss them all. But that wouldn't be critical thinking if you did that, would it? You need to address ALL of them and not just make lame excuses and obfuscate. LNers have put themselves in a box of all or nothing, which is untenable and illogical. But it seems that's what this forum is all about, LNers vs CTs. And the last of the conspirators thank you LNers for it. Because of you there is never a consensus re anything that points to a conspiracy. Like the NRA, your motto is to never give an inch. In for a penny.

As soon as GHWB meets his maker we might get a look into the bigger picture than a rogue lone nut who wanted to kill the POTUS because he was being unfair to Cuba. For some reason this resonates with you LNers and all contradictions to your belief system can go straight to hell in a hand-basket.

Good luck with that!

JTrojan

[Walt Cakebread]

Setting the assassination aside for the moment (if there had been no motorcade at all) if what Oswald was shooting at were just regular citizens in an open car and he scored a twofer and headshot, such a case would be old news by Monday. Oswald would be seen as mentally deranged and upset by his separation.

Then tried 'n fried.

The difference between CTers and LNers is that CTers can't quite fathom that spombleprofglidnoctobuns happens; that a David can bring down a Goliath.

The difference between CTers and LNers is that CTers can't quite fathom that spombleprofglidnoctobuns happens; that a David can bring down a Goliath.

The primary difference between a LNer and a CT is, like Night and Day ........    The LNer accepts the pinion of "experts" no matter how ridiculous that opinion is..... The CT challenges and questions the opinion of the "expert" even when that opinion seems rational before examination.

[Wesley Johnson]

CTs don't have to cite any physical evidence linking someone other than Oswald to the crime. The onus is on CTs to prove Oswald was not a LN, hence the JFK assassination was by definition a conspiracy. This lowers the bar considerably because all it takes is 1 contradiction to the LN narrative and BOOM, it's over for the LNers. I'm sure this fact is not lost on some of the LNers, which is why they debate the way they do, via obfuscation, dismissal/ridicule and outright ignoring any and all contradictions to their belief system. They have boxed themselves in so they have no choice but to defend Oswald's apparent LNer insanity because 1 strike and you're out.

The LNers have to explain why there isn't a single piece of physical evidence that can be directly linked to LHO's guilt. It's all weak circumstantial evidence that reeks of setup. Top notch conspirators would have surely come up with a well thought out coup that used a patsy to cover enough of their tracks to make it almost impossible to pin down any accomplices such as 2nd shooters, etc. The LNers need to apply logic to their critical thinking and realize that if evidence≠LNer then conspiracy=true. For example, if any of the following are true then conspiracy=true:

• There is not a straight line path thru JFK as per the autopsy photos for the magic bullet trajectory. If there is, then LNers need to show it (and with a re-enactment, not with graphics).
• The magic bullet must have hit JFK's spine, yet exited cleanly, then tumbled into Connally breaking his rib and wrist bones and experienced practically no deformation. LNers need to show this was possible.
• The magic bullet had no tissue, blood or bone on it. How is that possible?
• The magic bullet showed up "after the fact" on the wrong stretcher as tho it had been planted. LNers?
• The head-shot bullet clearly exploded in JFK's head. LNers need to show how a FMJ bullet, like the MB, can do that merely because it hit the skull instead of other bones.
• Why did the head-shot bullet blow out the right side of JFK's skull if it didn't explode?
• How did a FMJ bullet eject skull fragments almost tangential to the force of impact if it didn't explode?
• Why didn't the autopsy photos show a "fist-sized" hole in the back of JFK's head that was seen by many health professionals who could not possibly misinterpret such a thing, especially given the circumstances?
• Who gave JFK a haircut for the "back of the head" autopsy photos?
• How could an unpracticed marksman pull off 2 of 3 hits, including a bullseye, in under 10 secs (the FBI 1st claimed 2 shots were 3/4 of second apart) with a useless scope? What military marksman would not know that the scope would be useless and not remove it from the rifle before smuggling it disassembled into the TSBD? At the very least LNers need to cite a re-enactment study that accomplished a similar feat.
• Where were all the prints on the supposed disassembled/reassembled MC stock, barrel, scope, trigger, clip and ammo? IOW, where were LHO's gloves?

I could go on and on but if you determine that any 1 of the above is impossible then you can no longer be a LNer, unless you ignore or dismiss them all. But that wouldn't be critical thinking if you did that, would it? You need to address ALL of them and not just make lame excuses and obfuscate. LNers have put themselves in a box of all or nothing, which is untenable and illogical. But it seems that's what this forum is all about, LNers vs CTs. And the last of the conspirators thank you LNers for it. Because of you there is never a consensus re anything that points to a conspiracy. Like the NRA, your motto is to never give an inch. In for a penny.

As soon as GHWB meets his maker we might get a look into the bigger picture than a rogue lone nut who wanted to kill the POTUS because he was being unfair to Cuba. For some reason this resonates with you LNers and all contradictions to your belief system can go straight to hell in a hand-basket.

Good luck with that!

JTrojan

You are wrong Jack. All the CTers do is try and blow smoke. All of the ballistic evidence was linked to Oswald. So I ask again. Do you have any physical, or ballistic evidence to add to the debate. Anything at all will do. By the way, which conspiracy theory do you believe?

[Jack Trojan]

You are wrong Jack. All the CTers do is try and blow smoke. All of the ballistic evidence was linked to Oswald. So I ask again. Do you have any physical, or ballistic evidence to add to the debate. Anything at all will do. By the way, which conspiracy theory do you believe?

Wesley, you need to address the content of my post and not make make generalized comments about CTs. Which FACT did I get wrong? And give me 1 piece of ballistic evidence that links Oswald to the crime. Just 1 will do. BTW when you finally accept that a conspiracy was more probable than the LN hypothesis, sky is the limit.

[Wesley Johnson]

Wesley, you need to address the content of my post and not make make generalized comments about CTs. Which FACT did I get wrong? And give me 1 piece of ballistic evidence that links Oswald to the crime. Just 1 will do. BTW when you finally accept that a conspiracy was more probable than the LN hypothesis, sky is the limit.

"sky is the limit."

You mean like "Jackie did it", or "the driver did it", "it was a hoax", or "Kennedy was an alien", or "GHWBush did it" Hilarious Jack.

[Wesley Johnson]

Obviously you've not heard the Blood Cannons theory.

Enlighten me Steve. It can't be any stranger then the ones I've heard before.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

"sky is the limit."

You mean like "Jackie did it", or "the driver did it", "it was a hoax", or "Kennedy was an alien", or "GHWBush did it" Hilarious Jack.

Remember, "they" can do anything. And apparently, they did.

If we ask how did "they" do "A" or "B" or "C", we get the usual bogeyman of how awful Hoover and LBJ and Angleton were. How did "they" plant the rifle? "They just did". How did they know Oswald didn't have an alibi, that he wasn't with several people at the time of the shooting? "They just did."

"The sky's the limit" indeed.

This is conspiracy worldview first and then finding the evidence to support that view. When you have an event like the JFK assassination that has been studied to this degree - we literally have thousands of pieces of information on it - you can select a piece here and a piece there to support your conspiracy.

But it all has to start with a "the sky's the limit" view. That if it could be done then it simply was.

[John Iacoletti]

Still waiting for Wesley to show "ballistic evidence that was linked to Oswald".



Just what the forum needs -- another arrogant LNer making claims about the case that aren't true.