JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots

[Grashtel]

I do have a specific narrative.

Then either stop dancing around and actually present it or go bother some other forum.  If you are so convinced that people here are too brainwashed or paid off to accept your stuff why are you bothering to dance around the actual point rather than just posting the actual meat of what you have so you have a chance of convincing the lurking masses  or just going somewhere more receptive to your ideas rather than just dancing around and changing your story for 600 posts.

[Echnaton]

So tell us, what is your training and expertise in judging how the SS should have acted?  Actually I'll help you with that answer, you have demonstrated no abilities in this matter so your posts simply have no meaning.  Do you care to dispute my assessment by providing some credentials?

Clip
laundry list
/clip

My Expertise and Training IS Irrelevant!

Thank you for finally admitting that you have no expertise or ability to make good judgements or interpretations of evidence on the JFK issue.  My question is why do you continue to make judgements and interpretations when you know you have no ability to do so?

[gillianren]

I never wade in on JFK stuff too much, except to bore people with my usual comment that Oswald assassinating JFK by himself by shooting him from the 6th floor of the Texas State Book Depository does in no way preclude the possibility of a conspiracy ... and in fact, were such a conspiracy intended to finger Oswald as the shooter, this is actually the best way to ensure that the desired result is achieved.

I don't find that boring; I find it reasonable.  Why aren't any of the conspiracy theories so easy and obvious? 

[LunarOrbit]

I look for corroborating testimony that will contribute towards a cohesive and logical narrative.

Translation: you cherry-pick pieces of testimony that you can use to support your predetermined conclusion that there was a conspiracy... and then discard the rest.

[profmunkin]

FACT: Roberts called off 2 SS agents that should have ridden on the back of the limo.

Because JFK had made it known, repeatedly, that he did not want the agents obstructing the public's view of him. Nevertheless, there are photographs and films of several agents, including Clint Hill, riding the back of the limousine at certain points in the Dallas motorcade. When they reached Dealy Plaza, they expected to speed up soon as they got on a high speed freeway, and it would have been unsafe to ride on the back of the limo. The crowd was also thinning out, and their primary concern was always the crowd.

This is nothing more than propagation of a filthy stinking lie.
Vince Palamara has done extensive interviews and correspondence with SS agents that worked with JFK and to a man they have stated that JFK NEVER interfered with their jobs in any way.
JFK NEVER told anyone not to ride on the rear of the limo.
Don't you ever even think about repeating this outrageous lie again.

The stinking ss agents stood down and watched him get assassinated and the bastards blame JFK for not allowing them to protect him, damn them to hell!

Vince Palamara

about 3 minutes into this video as 2 agents are about to mount the limo, Roberts calls them off and they are left behind at the airport, one of the agent shrugging his shoulders 3 times in astonishment.

[profmunkin]

So what? Where is the rest of the evidence for anything being seen or recovered at the knoll?

Witnesses report hearing sounds from a variety of locations, a variety of numbers of shots, and a variety of patterns of shots. They cannot all be correct, since only one chain of events actually occurred.

Where is the corroborating evidence other than what people heard?

What is this non-sense that some evidence had to be recovered from the knoll.
The sniper had to leave the rifle or spent shells to have existed?
At least 5 witnesses saw the sniper and the spotter, 4 witnesses saw a puff of smoke and dozens heard the sound of the report.

There is probably more witnesses, we will never know because the WC never allowed people around the knoll to testify.

[profmunkin]

FACT: Miami motorcade had recently been cancelled because of known threats.

Wrong. Miami motorcade went ahead as scheduled.

November 18th 1963
http://www.jfkflorida.blogspot.com/
"There would be no motorcade in Miami, however, a decision based on several death threats intercepted by the FBI. Instead, JFK helicoptered to the Americana Hotel in Bal Harbour, a guest of the Inter American Press Association. In the hotel ballroom JFK dined on roast beef in periguex sauce and sipped burgundy before addressing the group.

It was to be JFK's last major speech"

You have different information post it.

[profmunkin]

Because Oswald never had a defense attorney! He was dead, remember? The United States has an adversarial legal system. Because a dead defendant can hardly act as an adversary in his own defense, that means there's no way to try a dead defendant in our system. But because of the importance of the case, we adopted, ad-hoc, a form of inquiry widely used in countries that don't have an adversarial legal system like ours: a neutral investigative body: the Warren Commission. Their work was not perfect, but I think they did a pretty good job under the circumstances. All of their main conclusions have stood for nearly half a century, notwithstanding a noisy bunch of conspiracy kooks.

Not true, again.

Mark Lane approached the WC on behalf of Oswald's mother and asked to be appointed the defence for Oswald, the commission consented.
Shortly thereafter they recended the offer to allow Lane to participate.
There was a small uproar over this move by the commission so they requested Walter E. Craig, president of the American Bar Association, to participate. Mr. Craig and his associates were given the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses.

According to Lane they never cross-examined one witness.
Lane said Craig made a statement saying even though he was appointed council, he would not participate.

All the illusion of a real trial, but not more then a fraud.

[Echnaton]

All the illusion of a real trial, but not more then a fraud.

It could not be an illusion of a trial simply because it was not a trial.  There was no defendant and could be no sentence.

[profmunkin]

But if they don't know either of our qualifications or experience, how do they decide which of us to take seriously on which subject?

I would not want you to believe anything that I am posting here, I want you to question what I am posting, then go find out for yourself, this is the only way you will know.

The FACTS
for instance
FACT: Some agents witnessed JFK in distress, then turned away, is in agent reports.
FACT: Roberts called off 2 agents, can be seen in video

If someone wants to argue that it is unfair to criticize an agent for not reacting to the threat in under 6 seconds, I will listen to the argument (assuming he is an expert in human reactions under stress), but it will never change the
FACT: that no agent did move to protect JFK in that 4-6 seconds. Hill's assignment was Jackie, and even then, Hill only moved when Jackie started to climb out of the back seat.

so on

[ka9q]

This is nothing more than propagation of a filthy stinking lie.
Vince Palamara has done extensive interviews and correspondence with SS agents that worked with JFK and to a man they have stated that JFK NEVER interfered with their jobs in any way.
JFK NEVER told anyone not to ride on the rear of the limo.
Don't you ever even think about repeating this outrageous lie again.

Excuse me, sir, but you were not a Secret Service agent on the White House detail. Vince Palamara was not a Secret Service agent on the White House detail.

But Gerald Blaine and Clint Hill were both Secret Service agents on the White House detail, and they wrote the book The Kennedy Detail. They describe the events of the Tampa motorcade on November 18, 1963, including how two agents had ridden the back steps of the limousine and how JFK had objected, humorously calling them "Ivy League charlatans".

about 3 minutes into this video as 2 agents are about to mount the limo, Roberts calls them off and they are left behind at the airport, one of the agent shrugging his shoulders 3 times in astonishment.

Count the agents in the followup car. Note particularly that the right-hand running board, behind Rybka, already has two agents. In fact, when we see the followup car later in the motorcade, we can see that it is completely full: four agents on the running boards, the driver and Roberts in the front seats, two JFK aides in the jump seats, and two agents in the back seat. Where, exactly, would agent Rybka have stood when the motorcade was going too fast for him to safely cling to the limo's rear step?

The fact of the matter was explained by Blaine and Hill: Rybka was never even assigned to ride in the motorcade; he was supposed to stay at the airport and wait for its return. He was joking with his co-workers. And since Blaine and Hill know far more about this than you do, I'll go with their report, thank you very much.
 

[ka9q]

FACT: Miami motorcade had recently been cancelled because of known threats.

Wrong. Miami motorcade went ahead as scheduled.

November 18th 1963
http://www.jfkflorida.blogspot.com/
"There would be no motorcade in Miami, however, a decision based on several death threats intercepted by the FBI. Instead, JFK helicoptered to the Americana Hotel in Bal Harbour, a guest of the Inter American Press Association. In the hotel ballroom JFK dined on roast beef in periguex sauce and sipped burgundy before addressing the group.

My mistake; I was thinking of the Tampa motorcade, which did happen. I mixed up Tampa and Miami.

See, when I make a mistake I concede it as soon as I'm aware of it. Can you?

[twik]

Yes, parts of the Z film were altered.

Evidence?

It shows something different than what he believes must have happened. Thaat is his evidence.

[profmunkin]

Then either stop dancing around and actually present it or go bother some other forum.  If you are so convinced that people here are too brainwashed or paid off to accept your stuff why are you bothering to dance around the actual point rather than just posting the actual meat of what you have so you have a chance of convincing the lurking masses  or just going somewhere more receptive to your ideas rather than just dancing around and changing your story for 600 posts.

Posting, not dancing around anything.
Posts have been presenting data mined from the Warren Commission testimonies. 

Honestly shocked because the belief was that the testimonies would sustain the Warren Commission Report, believed the whole thing was a fraud. Not true, the WC did take actual testimonies but framed the issues as best they could, people being unpredictable, still got the truth in.
Not trying to convince you of anything, since I truly believe that the purpose of this board is to maintain the official narrative, unblemished. I am really using you as a sounding board and amusement.
As a matter of fact if your waiting for my narrative, I apologize, but I don't envision posting it on this forum.

[profmunkin]

I look for corroborating testimony that will contribute towards a cohesive and logical narrative.

Translation: you cherry-pick pieces of testimony that you can use to support your predetermined conclusion that there was a conspiracy... and then discard the rest.

Actually only discarded the pigeon watchers Romack and Rackley, it was just to absurd to think that anyone could attribute their testimonies to support TSBD for a source of the reports.
All the testimonies and reports I have reviewed are entered into the data base, to be fair I have reexamined many testimonies many times and before I am finished I will probably read them all one more time, then compare my findings with McAdams and a few others and see where the conclusions differ and why.
"Cherry-pick" conspiricied cry baby words.