The Assassination of JFK

[kylebisme]

Obviously you can't, since the point went over your head. The bigger question is -- was I the only one who made a point go over your head, or did I have conspirators helping me in the shadows?

Rather, people conspire to mislead you into believing there is some point in conflating the evidence which disproves the belief that JFK was murdered by a lone gunman with crackpot arguments from Moon landing deniers. They aren't helping you do anything, and have no interest in anything of the sort. In fact, you are unwittingly helping those people who have no consern for you, while lashing out at me for trying to help you come to terms with that.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Rather, people conspire to mislead you into believing there is some point in conflating the evidence which disproves the belief that JFK was murdered by a lone gunman with crackpot arguments from Moon landing deniers. They aren't helping you do anything, and have no interest in anything of the sort. Rather, you are unwittingly helping them, while lashing out at me for trying you come to terms with that.

No, I was just giving you a hard time. You seem to have a knack for conspiracy threads.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

--snip--

Links not found. No discussion needed.

 

[al981]

Links not found. No discussion needed.

keep dodging, pussy. like i said, you are not interested in doing any research.

no sense spoon feeding a proven loser.

 

[kylebisme]

You seem to have a knack for conspiracy threads.

You obviously have a "knack" for failing to distinguish between proposing conspiracy theories and debunking cover-ups, as I've no interest in the former.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

keep dodging, pussy. like i said, you are not interested in doing any research.

no sense spoon feeding a proven loser.

Translation: al981 can't provide links from any peer-reviewed sources to corroborate his viewpoint. Thanks for playing.

 

[al981]

You obviously have a "knack" for failing to distinguish between proposing conspiracy theories and debunking cover-ups, as I've no interest in the former.

blanghorst is a proven pussy and won't ever admit a cover-up / conspiracy ever existed.

here's another cover-up, watch him dodge like the pussy he is!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/27/oklahoma-city-bombing-tap_n_301293.html

almost time for the mods to lock this thread...too many facts in here

 

[kylebisme]

Links not found. No discussion needed.

The NOVA interviews with the doctors and nurses who handed JFK's body in Dallas is in the documentary that I linked in the OP, as is the photograph of the bullet damage above the mirror, the witnesses of the bullet hole though the front of the windshield, and much more.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

You obviously have a "knack" for failing to distinguish between proposing conspiracy theories and debunking cover-ups, as I've no interest in the former.

Many think they are debunking cover-ups with that as well.

Let me ask a question to you, seriously. It has been nearly 50 years since JFK was shot. The circumstances were definitely mysterious, but don't you think that by now, something more concrete would have been found and made public? Or do you think that since it has been so long, people just don't care and dropped it?

 

[IndyColtsFan]

blanghorst is a proven pussy and won't ever admit a cover-up / conspiracy ever existed.

here's another cover-up, watch him dodge like the pussy he is!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/27/oklahoma-city-bombing-tap_n_301293.html

almost time for the mods to lock this thread...too many facts in here

Do you understand what burden of proof is? Do you understand forensics? I read the article, but I won't take the word of a lawyer until the tape has been vetted through recognized forensics experts and peer reviewed and they agree with his conclusion. If articles like this is what you consider "proof," you are way off base.

I am always willing to listen, but I take any and all conspiracy claims with a boulder of salt until recognized experts publish their findings and they hold up under the scrutiny of their peers.

 

[al981]

The NOVA interviews with the doctors and nurses who handed JFK's body in Dallas is in the documentary that I linked in the OP, as is the photograph of the bullet damage above the mirror, the witnesses of the bullet hole though the front of the windshield, and much more.

you're wasting your time with blanghorst. he's a gutless, proven pussy, and will never admit there's anything wrong with the government's obvious bullshit.

see, he didn't even take a few minutes to look through your links and he starts mouthing off like an idiot in this thread. how does that crow taste blanghorst? crispy?

 

[al981]

Do you understand what burden of proof is? Do you understand forensics? I read the article, but I won't take the word of a lawyer until the tape has been vetted through recognized forensics experts and peer reviewed and they agree with his conclusion. If articles like this is what you consider "proof," you are way off base.

I am always willing to listen, but I take any and all conspiracy claims with a boulder of salt until recognized experts publish their findings and they hold up under the scrutiny of their peers.

what the fuck? the tapes ARE edited. portions before and after the blast are missing. what is so hard to understand about that? you should be asking why ALL the tapes were edited, you gutless pussy.

the us governent's answer to the jfk question was a "magic bullet". what is it for oklahoma city? a "magical emp bomb" which magically stopped , er, edited, all surveillance footage before the blast?

you gutless pussy. hahahaha. point proven ++

edit: this is fun, dodge more blanghorst!

 

[kylebisme]

Many think they are debunking cover-ups with that as well.

And when they are discussing the evidence which contradicts official stories as I do, debunking cover-ups is what they are doing.

Let me ask a question to you, seriously. It has been nearly 50 years since JFK was shot. The circumstances were definitely mysterious, but don't you think that by now, something more concrete would have been found and made public? Or do you think that since it has been so long, people just don't care and dropped it?

I know for a fact that that some people don't care enough to acknowledge piles of evidence which thoroughly debunk the JFK cover-up, and rather ramble on obliviously as if it isn't there. Granted, national polling consistently shows a strong majority of the population isn't that naive, though those of you who are seem to have a majority here.

Do you understand what burden of proof is?

I figure he does, and I'd wager he also comprehends the fact that the officials story for the OKC bombing can never even come close to meeting the burden of proof, while there is plenty of evidence and even experimental confirmation to debunk it.

 

[al981]

Many think they are debunking cover-ups with that as well.

Let me ask a question to you, seriously. It has been nearly 50 years since JFK was shot. The circumstances were definitely mysterious, but don't you think that by now, something more concrete would have been found and made public? Or do you think that since it has been so long, people just don't care and dropped it?

many witnesses and public figures have spoken up about it, including forensics experts.

unfortunately for the human race, morons like you exist which continue to believe government and media lies

 

[al981]

.


I figure he does, and I'd wager he also comprehends the fact that the officials story for the OKC bombing can never close to meeting the burden of proof, while there is plenty of evidence and even experimental confirmation to debunk it.

no no no...

like blanghorst, i'm just waiting for a government "forensic expert" to confirm the oklahoma city tapes have not been edited... even though it was the government who released the edited tapes... then i can go back to my fantasy world

wat?

 

[kylebisme]

Are you also pissed about Pope John Paul II having admited Galileo was right?

 

[IndyColtsFan]

I figure he does, and I'd wager he also comprehends the fact that the officials story for the OKC bombing can never even come close to meeting the burden of proof, while there is plenty of evidence and even experimental confirmation to debunk it.

And that's fine -- where is the credible evidence supported by experts and supported by peer review?

 

[Craig234]

Many think they are debunking cover-ups with that as well.

Let me ask a question to you, seriously. It has been nearly 50 years since JFK was shot. The circumstances were definitely mysterious, but don't you think that by now, something more concrete would have been found and made public? Or do you think that since it has been so long, people just don't care and dropped it?

There's a lot more to the JFK assassination than a person realizes unless they get informed.

Let's say Oswald acted completely alone. The statement above is still true.

There was massive 'intrigue' involving the CIA, the mafia, and more that's very important to understand to understand the nation, even if Oswald did act completely alone.

It's not at all the case that something more concrete would necessarily have been found. Murders happen all the time that are never discovered, and assassinations can too.

As I said before, IMO people should not 'drop it' - as any important part of history, it's worthwile to keep the public educated on, and in this case to continue to research.

For example, just the fact that there was a major 'rogue' culture at the CIA at the time is an important part of history to understand.

For just one example of that, a Cuban leader in the Bay of Pigs said that had Kennedy cancelled the invasion, the Cubans and CIA had made a plot to fake the Cubans overcoming and tying up the CIA handlers and launching the invasion anyway. Today, we reorganized the intelligence organizations not long ago, and may again, and knowing the history can help inform people how to do it right.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

what the fuck? the tapes ARE edited. portions before and after the blast are missing. what is so hard to understand about that? you should be asking why ALL the tapes were edited, you gutless pussy.

the us governent's answer to the jfk question was a "magic bullet". what is it for oklahoma city? a "magical emp bomb" which magically stopped , er, edited, all surveillance footage before the blast?

you gutless pussy. hahahaha. point proven ++

edit: this is fun, dodge more blanghorst!

Do you know what the word "dodge" means? Evidently not, because I haven't dodged anything. On the contrary, I said that this looks interesting but warrants further investigation before you take it at face value. I would, however, like to thank you for proving my point. In other words, you'll take ANYONE'S word for it. You say it was edited. Did the article say the government said it was edited? Uh, no:

He said government officials claim the security cameras did not record the minutes before the bombing because "they had run out of tape" or "the tape was being replaced."

So we have a lawyer's word against the government's word. This isn't hard to test, is it? A forensics lab could easily provide a quick answer, right? He now has the tapes and can easily have this done. Let me know when that has been done.

And by the way, there are independent forensics labs, so you don't have to use a "government lab" as you claimed in another post.

And lastly, what is on the edited out portions of the tape? I'm sure you have that answer too, right?

 

[IndyColtsFan]

no no no...

like blanghorst, i'm just waiting for a government "forensic expert" to confirm the oklahoma city tapes have not been edited... even though it was the government who released the edited tapes... then i can go back to my fantasy world

wat?

No, you're not waiting for a forensic expert (I made no mention of a "government" forensic expert -- you are now lying for all to see) because if you were, that would mean you're showing a logical thought process and that can't happen with you.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Are you also pissed about Pope John Paul II having admited Galileo was right?

Peer-reviewed journals, articles, etc. proved Galileo right. Again, you guys miss my point but I am not terribly surprised. You have al981 running around citing the word of a lawyer published in Huffington Post as "proof." You know what? The lawyer may very well be right and if you notice, I have never said he wasn't. What I HAVE said, though, is that the government disputes his version of the story and it would be extremely easy to confirm either story. What is the harm in that? There is no harm, you guys know it, and all you can say is "But...but...dodge!"

Seriously kyle, I might disagree with your theories but I will say you seem intelligent and should be able to see that logic. I have not said a single conspiracy (the OK City bombing, 9/11, or TWA 800) is completely bunk -- what I HAVE said is that if you have good, legitimate proof, please show me so I can read it. al981 has so far refused to do it and his usual dodge (and yes, it IS a dodge) is "do your own research." He has no good sources, he knows it, and he knows if he posts what links he does have that he'll get laughed off the forum.

He loves going around throwing the word "dodge" out, but the only person dodging here is al981. Let me be clear:

1. I am asking him to post his information. I'd love to read it.
2. I have never said that any of the conspiracies he discussed are lies, like he likes to claim. What I HAVE said is that I need more information and I'd like to see his sources. He won't give them to me. When someone makes strong claims and then won't reveal their sources, anyone with intelligence sees red flags.

I mentioned the moon landing hoax conspiracy earlier, and the reason I brought that out was because that is the conspiracy I've done the most research on personally. Around 2000, there was a big special on network TV and predictably presented a very one-sided argument depicting the landings as a hoax. I went to work the next day and was mortified that a friend believed it. The sources the show used were not credible sources and their arguments were obviously flawed, but to a person with limited scientific understanding, their explanations might have made sense. So, I researched it thoroughly and proved to my friend that the special was dead wrong. Credible, renowned astronomers who were not affiliated with NASA ripped their arguments to shreds.

That is why I want to see sources. I could Google any of the conspiracies that al981 mentions but guess what? Most of the hits are from wingnut sites. I want something better and al hints he has that, but he won't share. There is a reason he won't share it, and I bet you know as well as I do what that reason is.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

There's a lot more to the JFK assassination than a person realizes unless they get informed.

Let's say Oswald acted completely alone. The statement above is still true.

There was massive 'intrigue' involving the CIA, the mafia, and more that's very important to understand to understand the nation, even if Oswald did act completely alone.

It's not at all the case that something more concrete would necessarily have been found. Murders happen all the time that are never discovered, and assassinations can too.

As I said before, IMO people should not 'drop it' - as any important part of history, it's worthwile to keep the public educated on, and in this case to continue to research.

For example, just the fact that there was a major 'rogue' culture at the CIA at the time is an important part of history to understand.

For just one example of that, a Cuban leader in the Bay of Pigs said that had Kennedy cancelled the invasion, the Cubans and CIA had made a plot to fake the Cubans overcoming and tying up the CIA handlers and launching the invasion anyway. Today, we reorganized the intelligence organizations not long ago, and may again, and knowing the history can help inform people how to do it right.

I'm honestly intrigued by the whole JFK assassination. And on a second note, thanks for the intelligent discourse even though I know we disagree on many things political.

 

[al981]

Do you know what the word "dodge" means? Evidently not, because I haven't dodged anything. On the contrary, I said that this looks interesting but warrants further investigation before you take it at face value. I would, however, like to thank you for proving my point. In other words, you'll take ANYONE'S word for it. You say it was edited. Did the article say the government said it was edited? Uh, no:



So we have a lawyer's word against the government's word. This isn't hard to test, is it? A forensics lab could easily provide a quick answer, right? He now has the tapes and can easily have this done. Let me know when that has been done.

And by the way, there are independent forensics labs, so you don't have to use a "government lab" as you claimed in another post.

The tapes turned over by the FBI came from security cameras various companies had mounted outside office buildings near the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building. They are blank at points before 9:02 a.m., when a truck bomb carrying a 4,000 pound fertilizer-and-fuel-oil bomb detonated in front of the building, Trentadue said.

"Four cameras in four different locations going blank at basically the same time on the morning of April 19, 1995. There ain't no such thing as a coincidence," Trentadue said.



Four. separate. tapes. all. blank. I guess your last remaining unfathomable excuse is all 4 tapes were being replaced at the exact same time. That's ok, you can still use my "magic emp bomb" excuse. That holds more than whatever bullshit you or the government can come up with hahahaha.




"The interesting thing is they spring back on after 9:02," he said. "The absence of footage from these crucial time intervals is evidence that there is something there that the FBI doesn't want anybody to see."

No kidding!

"A spokesman for the FBI in Oklahoma City, Gary Johnson, declined to comment and referred inquiries about the tapes to FBI officials in Washington, who were not immediately available for comment Sunday"

LuLz. Sounds like Blangdodge alright! dodge dodge dodge dodge dodge.

 

[al981]

No, you're not waiting for a forensic expert (I made no mention of a "government" forensic expert -- you are now lying for all to see) because if you were, that would mean you're showing a logical thought process and that can't happen with you.

Forensic experts for at least 4 tapes that are confirmed to have missing footage? That makes zero sense whatsoever. The only remaining question is what should've been shown during the time periods that the government edited out, er, that is what should've been shown while the (at least) 4 tapes were being "replaced" . Also, I never quoted "government", only "forensic expert", so you can stop lying, loser

Why is it you are deadly silent on the OP's links regarding "experts" contracting the government's lies? Deadly. Silent. Tell me blangDodge, how does that crow taste?

 

[al981]

I'm honestly intrigued by the whole JFK assassination. And on a second note, thanks for the intelligent discourse even though I know we disagree on many things political.

No you're not intrigued. you'll dodge, make up an excuse, or completely ignore evidence that doesn't support the government bullshit version, as already seen by your dodging in this thread.