|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
12th June 2018, 04:02 PM | #281 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,071
|
|
12th June 2018, 04:04 PM | #282 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,071
|
|
12th June 2018, 04:05 PM | #283 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,863
|
No government puts assassination plans in writing.
Just as the coup against Diem ended with his assassination, a coup against Castro would also end in the dictator's death.
Quote:
You make a claim based on your evaluation of what you have read, and you expect us to accept it as the word of god. But when I make a claim, based on all of the government documents I have read you mock it simply because it runs counter to your fantasy world view of the Kennedys. Killing Castro, or any other government leader, would not be part of a recorded conversation, and anyone who has studied the CIA - the real CIA - and the White House NSC would know this to be true. If I'm wrong someone on this board will correct me. Not you, someone who knows more about this kind of thing. |
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha |
|
12th June 2018, 04:11 PM | #284 |
Hostile Nanobacon
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rachel, KS
Posts: 33,127
|
How so? Be specific. Then you can explain why Oswald murdered Officer Tippit before going on to attempt murdering more officers in the theater when they cornered him. He didn't even have enough sense to get rid of the revolver which was the revolver used to murder Officer Tippit to the exclusion of all other firearms in the world.
Consilience Null hypothesis Burden of proof Words that make CTs run away screaming. |
12th June 2018, 04:20 PM | #285 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 25,301
|
|
__________________
If you're not a scientist but you think you've destroyed the foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that you're wrong. Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!! |
|
12th June 2018, 04:21 PM | #286 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
|
|
12th June 2018, 04:31 PM | #287 |
Hostile Nanobacon
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rachel, KS
Posts: 33,127
|
|
12th June 2018, 04:33 PM | #288 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 25,301
|
|
__________________
If you're not a scientist but you think you've destroyed the foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that you're wrong. Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!! |
|
12th June 2018, 04:37 PM | #289 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,071
|
So why do you pretend to know what the evil conspiracy did in detail?
How did you obtain this information without having a secret source who told you everything? Did they sneak into your house and leave messages in your sock drawer or arrange vegetables in your soup to give you hints? |
12th June 2018, 04:41 PM | #290 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,733
|
manifesto, posting links to your previous comments is not evidence, although you may think it is. Conjure up some real evidence to support your fantasies.
|
12th June 2018, 05:12 PM | #291 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
|
But you know that RFK was sanctioning plans/attempts on Castro?
How do you know this? You have to have something more than fantasies, right?
Quote:
The only thing you can find is contingency plans in case an internal coup on Castro would develop and gain sufficient momentum to legitimatly ask for American military assistance in a civil war situation. Until that happened, Mongoose was there to do two things: 1. Overtly making life difficult for the Castro regime and hope for a counter revolution in protest of the harsh living conditions created by the US sanctions and US-supported Cuban exile sabotage expeditions to Cuba. 2. Covertly show ’busy-ness’ containing a very real explosive situation among hundreds of thousands of Cuban exiles in the south of US and their allies in the CIA/Mafia/Pentagon/Right Wing/US National Security State. Meantime, JFK was conducting secret negotiations via proxy to reach some kind of reproachment with Castro and a solution to the conflict before the elections 1964. To use the carrot, not the stick. Aid and lifted sanctions against elections and democracy. A very real possibilty.
Quote:
Somehow that doesn’t count, does it.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
”Lots of government documents” ≠ supporting evidence. It’s what’s written IN the documents that matters.
Quote:
- We know that JFK was distraught when learning of the (CIA) assassination of Patrice Lumumba: - We know that both JFK and RFK became furious when informed of the CIA/Mob joint venture to assassinate Castro and ordered it to emediatly be terminated. - We know that CIA lied to JFK/RFK when saying it had already been terminated, when it had not. It continued in secret against the explicit orders from their Commander in Chief. - We know that French president De Gaulle asked JFK if the US assisted the OAS in their assassinations attempts and coup attempts against him and that JFK answered: ”No, of course not ... but I can’t answer for the CIA”. And yes, CIA backed OAS in all this efforts, knowing that their Commander in chief was against it. - We know that JFK explicitly stated that Diem had to be protected and brought to safety in US in case of a coup, and that he left the room ash grey when learning of Diems assassination. - We know that CIA’s E. Howard Hunt allegedly on the orders from president Nixon, fabricated cables that contained orders from JFK to assassinate Diem. - We know that the CIA lied to it’s Cuban asset Cubela (i.e. AM/LASH), when telling him that his planned assassination attempt on Castro was directly and explicitly sanctioned by RFK. - We know from the Church hearings that CIA had NO orders, sanctions, ’silent nods’ from neither JFK or RFK to assassinate anyone, including Fidel Castro. And that this conclusion was reached by CIA itself in an internal investigation. So, Axxman, I’m a bit puzzled of from where you are drawing your conclusions. Is it from your a... ? |
12th June 2018, 05:45 PM | #292 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
|
|
12th June 2018, 05:52 PM | #293 |
Hostile Nanobacon
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rachel, KS
Posts: 33,127
|
|
12th June 2018, 07:05 PM | #294 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,071
|
|
12th June 2018, 07:22 PM | #295 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,733
|
|
12th June 2018, 07:28 PM | #296 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Never Mind
Posts: 5,074
|
Asked and answered here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...postcount=3155 Other people Manifesto doesn't count (Lee Harvey Oswald and Arnold Rowland) said they saw or spoke with Secret Service agents. They didn't. They assumed it. See the above link for further details. Many of the statements Manifesto cites appear to be assumptions as well. If they are assumptions, there is nothing suspicious here. But they don't need to be assumptions to not be suspicious. There is a loophole large enough to drive a tractor-trailer through. The way this is usually expressed in conspiracy books is that none of the President's Secret Service detail remained in Dealey Plaza, all went with the motorcade to Parkland Hospital, and that Sorrels was the first Secret Service agent to return to Dealey Plaza, and he didn't arrive until 12:50-12:55. The problem with all that is that there were local agents from field offices in Dallas, and in Forth Worth, and other locales in Texas. Eliminating the President's Secret Service detail from Dealey Plaza doesn't eliminate the Secret Service from Dealey Plaza. This is what the conspiracy authors withhold from their readers in their attempt to build a conspiracy argument. Moreover, as pointed out by other posters above, there are other known law enforcement agents from other agencies that were in Dealey Plaza during the shooting could have been mistaken for Secret Service agents. The HSCA did their best to narrow down who it was. At the end of the day, they identified two different law enforcement officers as being in Dealey Plaza during the assassination, although both denied identifying themselves as from the Secret Service. One was Frank Ellsworth of the ATF. The other was James Powell of Army Intelligence. No, it's not. It's based upon assumptions and claims out of context. And refusal to face the facts that eliminating the President's detail from Dealey Plaza means squat in the search for the identity of the supposed Secret Service agent behind the knoll. After all, if his job was to keep people away from behind the fence, it didn't work. Hank |
__________________
I have never ”refused” to provide evidence. I provide evidence if requested to do so in a specific and relevant manner. Hanks ”method” [of requesting evidence] is not going to [get me to] provide any evidence since it has a completely different purpose. To create the the illusion of me not providing evidence when requested to do so. - Manifesto |
|
12th June 2018, 07:29 PM | #297 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
|
I’m starting to get really fed up by your bare assertions of my alleged ”bare assertions”.
If I provide a link or several links to posts where I have already provided evidence in form of citations, sources, links to sources, and argued for its veracity, it’s up to you to explain what’s missing. And, to do so with specific reference to the posts I have provided links to. |
12th June 2018, 07:36 PM | #298 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
|
Lets for the sake of argument assume this is true, why have no one stepped forward in all these years?
They where reported identified by Dallas police officers behind the world famous picket fence on the world famous grassy knoll, and behind the world famous Texas School Books Depository. And this, seconds/minutes after the shooting of president Kennedy? Were they living in an isolated cave or just, modest? Why not make themselves available to the investigation? |
12th June 2018, 07:37 PM | #299 |
Hostile Nanobacon
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rachel, KS
Posts: 33,127
|
|
12th June 2018, 07:40 PM | #300 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Never Mind
Posts: 5,074
|
|
__________________
I have never ”refused” to provide evidence. I provide evidence if requested to do so in a specific and relevant manner. Hanks ”method” [of requesting evidence] is not going to [get me to] provide any evidence since it has a completely different purpose. To create the the illusion of me not providing evidence when requested to do so. - Manifesto |
|
12th June 2018, 07:51 PM | #301 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,071
|
|
12th June 2018, 09:12 PM | #302 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Never Mind
Posts: 5,074
|
You tell me. The point is you have to assume there's something suspicious here for there to be anything suspicious here. If the guy was working for the Secret Service in the Fort Worth office, and showed his Secret Service badge, why would he even be aware there's a problem here? Or if he was aware, why wouldn't he simply take it as an example of the idiocy of the conspiracy theorists in general? He would know he's the Secret Service agent in question, and he would write it off as just people being ignorant of the fact that the Secret Service had more agents than those who travelled in the Presiden't detail that were stationed in Washington. Maybe he doesn't know this is an issue for a tiny percentage of the populace (less than one one-thousandth of one percent, at best). Not everyone reads everything having to do with the JFK assassination. Maybe he is dead. Maybe he doesn't want the publicity. Who knows?
His reasons for not coming forward are his own. The problems with your arguments are all your own. You own the arguments you advance here. You own the problems that go along with them. Show us how you eliminated all possible Secret Service agents. Show us how you determined it couldn't be a misunderstanding or an assumption by those men who reported seeing an agent (like Oswald and Rowland reported). And again, while it may be a big deal to you, it may not be a big deal to him. He may not even know it's an issue for you. Look at Stephen Witt. Witt was in Dealey Plaza holding an open umbrella.Over the years critics have speculated he was either a gunman (with a special CIA invented dart gun hidden inside the umbrella) or a signal man for the shooters (although why they needed to have a guy stand next to a sign if all he was to do was mark the spot the shooting would happen is beyond me, wouldn't the sign work just as well?) Witt didn't know there was any question about his actions between 1963 and 1978 until the HSCA tried to identify him. Conspiracy Theorist Josiah Thompson explains it all right here: https://youtu.be/iuoZWb9gqv0 That's two more possibilities. When did the supposed 'Secret Service' man on the knoll first get raised as an issue? Only after the publication of the 26 Warren Commission volumes of testimony and evidence. Which would have only been after the Commission's investigation was concluded. Kaput. Ended. Finished. Over and Done with. So why would he come forward years later and to whom? Not everyone reads JFK conspiracy literature. Hank |
__________________
I have never ”refused” to provide evidence. I provide evidence if requested to do so in a specific and relevant manner. Hanks ”method” [of requesting evidence] is not going to [get me to] provide any evidence since it has a completely different purpose. To create the the illusion of me not providing evidence when requested to do so. - Manifesto |
|
12th June 2018, 09:13 PM | #303 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 3,027
|
If anybody wants to see my ultimate masterpost of EOP wound evidence on reddit, see this post on /r/conspiracy (too spicy for the mods of /r/ChangeMyView!) https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/...rs_in_the_jfk/
|
12th June 2018, 09:39 PM | #304 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Never Mind
Posts: 5,074
|
|
__________________
I have never ”refused” to provide evidence. I provide evidence if requested to do so in a specific and relevant manner. Hanks ”method” [of requesting evidence] is not going to [get me to] provide any evidence since it has a completely different purpose. To create the the illusion of me not providing evidence when requested to do so. - Manifesto |
|
12th June 2018, 09:40 PM | #305 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,863
|
I read the documents posted, I've read other documents I have yet to post, and I grew up in a time when all of the Kennedy/Castro history was revealed.
There is an 10, August, 1962 there is a meeting in Rusk's office attended by McNamara, and other members of the Special Group. According to a 14. August memo from William Harvey assassination was discussed and:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
On 7, May, 1962, the CIA General Council met with RFK at his office to discuss payment to Rosseli and Giancana $150,000 for a successful hit on Castro. All things Assassination can be found here: https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/...iles/94465.pdf I know, you hate reading. |
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha |
|
12th June 2018, 09:44 PM | #306 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 25,301
|
|
__________________
If you're not a scientist but you think you've destroyed the foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that you're wrong. Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!! |
|
12th June 2018, 10:03 PM | #307 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
|
Still not a word on RFK’s by you alleged involvement in attempts/plans of assassinating Castro.
Why do you continue posting documents that not in any way supports your claims?
Quote:
Well, that’s just silly. Especially considering your well documented habit of posting links to documents not at all containing information supporting your claims. No. Cite the relevant parts and present them here. |
12th June 2018, 10:10 PM | #308 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
|
Both the DPD and the deputy sheriffs were ordered on radio by Curry and Decker to the area behind the picket fence on the knoll seconds after the shooting.
IF a federal agent was stationed behind said fence, why not stay put and explain to all the officers that there was nothing to see? Why just disapperar? He had to know that cops came running to the area. Why not inform them of his absolutely critical observations? It was the assassination of the president of the USA, but he just shows his credentials and walks away? Really? |
12th June 2018, 10:18 PM | #309 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 25,301
|
|
__________________
If you're not a scientist but you think you've destroyed the foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that you're wrong. Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!! |
|
12th June 2018, 10:43 PM | #310 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,863
|
In the real world, minutes of meetings where the Attorney General of the United States is either copied or is an active participant in meetings where aggressive covert action against Cuba coupled with historical testimonies of those surviving participants constitutes grounds for evidence that it is true.
Just as in the case of Diem, where JFK seemed not to grasp the end result of the CIA-backed coup HE APPORVED would end in the murder of Diem and his brother, it is clear that the Kennedy brothers were either working toward Castro's death one way or the other. They were smart guys, and knew how the sausage was made. That this is somehow contrary to your fantasy view of JFK is your problem
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha |
|
12th June 2018, 10:48 PM | #311 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,863
|
Nobody said the agents were stationed behind the fence, they said they encountered them near the fence. In the photographs and films of the assassination there is NOBODY (including a shooter) behind the fence. This means that the agents ran up there with everyone else.
The crime scene was narrowed to the TSBD, and that's where the primary focus shifted within a half hour of the assassination, so names were lost, or never taken because that is where all of the evidence was discovered. |
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha |
|
12th June 2018, 11:23 PM | #312 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 6,863
|
Nobody liked Castro, everyone wanted him dead.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/...iles/94465.pdf And guess what? It seems as if the CIA was not completely truthful when it spoke to the Church hearings. Shocking And it details JFK's and RFK's involvement in plans to kill Castro.
Quote:
I have read around 3,500 documents from the recent National Archives JFK record's release. Most of them are boring. Many of them have nothing to do directly with the assassination nor the investigation of the assassination, but when viewed by subject and scope one gets a clear understanding of what the FBI, CIA, Warren Commission, and the HSCA were looking at as far as avenues that could prove a conspiracy to kill JFK. There are over 52,000 documents left to read through. I doubt I will find anything profound. Have you read any of the documents from the recent National Archives releases? If not, why?
Quote:
https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/release I use the Excel file to search before I go online. What are your research techniques? |
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha |
|
12th June 2018, 11:54 PM | #313 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 25,301
|
If you really want to learn about a subject, and to rightfully claim to be "well read" in that subject, THEN YOU HAVE TO READ THE MATERIAL, and that means reading stuff that you may not necessarily agree with.
If you want to to remain an ignorant, one-dimensional CT, then continue to do what you have been doing; reading only the things you think you agree with, from the echo chambers of CT loony websites and the pages of CT nutter's books. You would be surprised if you saw how many JFK conspiracy websites I lurk at, looking for something new. Unfortunately, I am always disappointed; its always tired old stuff that has been thoroughly and repeatedly debunked. |
__________________
If you're not a scientist but you think you've destroyed the foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that you're wrong. Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!! |
|
13th June 2018, 01:51 AM | #314 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 7,171
|
Manifesto's barrage of unsupported assertions about how the Evil Them faked all the evidence implicating Oswald got me thinking, though possibly not in the direction Manifesto intended.
I have two questions: Firstly, creating this extensive and elaborate trail of false clues to frame LHO would only have been worthwhile if the plotters knew in advance of all of this that JFK would be travelling in front of the Book Depsitory on the fateful day. How far in advance was his itinerary fixed, and who would have known about it? ETA: Sorry, this was asked a page or so ago, but I still think a little more clarity and detail on this would be useful. The whole plot hangs on it, after all. Secondly, the Warren Commission was set up one week after the assassination. That doesn't leave very much time to fake all the x-rays, intimidate the doctors and other relevant staff and witnesses to support the plot's narrative, and tidy up any other loose ends. Is there a chain of custody for the medical evidence and the forensic evidence for the time between JFK's autopsy and the start of the Warren Commission? Do we know where the witnesses were during this week? The devil is in the details, as they say. |
__________________
'Of course it can be OK to mistreat people.'- shuttlt Bring Back the Yak! P.J. Denyer |
|
13th June 2018, 05:15 AM | #315 |
Hostile Nanobacon
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rachel, KS
Posts: 33,127
|
|
13th June 2018, 05:16 AM | #316 |
Hostile Nanobacon
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rachel, KS
Posts: 33,127
|
|
13th June 2018, 05:22 AM | #317 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,733
|
Here is one of your posts that list links to your previous statements, none contain any evidence.
Cite. Explain and do be specific. Now I don't much care that you are fed up with my pointing out that you have not provided any evidence for your bare assertions, as you haven't. You continue to attempt to use the dicta-belt acoustic "evidence". That has been refuted although you don't understand the data for this refutation. You continue to se eye, ear, nose statements concerning the grassy knoll. The may be interesting but as evidence they are sorely lacking. If you want me to stop posting bare assertions to your comments, then post evidence. It is really very simple. |
13th June 2018, 05:31 AM | #318 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,906
|
Here is the evidence, the report from the HSCA acoustical investigation: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=961
The other links contains my explanations of said evidence and arguments for its veracity. If you have any complaints on the evidence, explanations or arguments, let me know, but remember, be specific with reference to relevant material. Wholesale whining are not going to get you anywhere outside your Mighty Church. Go ahead. |
13th June 2018, 05:36 AM | #319 |
Hostile Nanobacon
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rachel, KS
Posts: 33,127
|
|
13th June 2018, 05:48 AM | #320 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Never Mind
Posts: 5,074
|
We discussed here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...7#post12305687 From their position in the lead car, Curry and Decker would have been very near the overpass as the shots were fired (the lead car was ahead of the Presidential limo). At that point, the knoll would be between those men and the Depository. Shots from the Depository would sound like they were coming from the knoll. Besides, this is a change of subject (a LOGICAL FALLACY called a red herring). Now you're trying to argue for shots from the knoll, not a man with fake Secret Service credentials. No, not really. Make up your mind. You're contradicting yourself again, trying to have it both ways. The man above is argued by you to be a man with fake credentials who told the police there was no problem back there. Now you ask why a real officer would not stay and sound the 'all clear'. Maybe he did. Maybe you're just wrongly assuming what you need to prove. As an addendum to this, we all recall your twisting in the wind over the overpass / railroad yards distinction, and how you first tried to say those who said the railroad yards didn't mean the overpass, but the knoll. Then you tried to spin it the other way, saying those who said the overpass couldn't be hearing echoes from the Depository shooter, but meant the knoll. Two city DPD officers (Foster and White) were stationed on the overpass during the shooting. http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/foster.htm http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/white_jc.htm The overpass constitutes part of the railroad yards. Again, we see you asserting things that are false or misleading ("No DPD officer was stationed in the yards"). Why do you do this? I know, because I used to do this. You get your information from CT web sources, which get their information from CT authors who write books to sell books. And if people want books on conspiracy, by golly those authors will give it to them, even if they have to make up stuff or take it out of context. And people believe it, when there's clearly a profit motive that calls into question how honest these guys are. And you fall for it, because you don't research it independently. Hank |
__________________
I have never ”refused” to provide evidence. I provide evidence if requested to do so in a specific and relevant manner. Hanks ”method” [of requesting evidence] is not going to [get me to] provide any evidence since it has a completely different purpose. To create the the illusion of me not providing evidence when requested to do so. - Manifesto |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|