Post by GKnollPost by Steve M. GalbraithPost by g***@gmail.comPost by Steve M. GalbraithOn Wednesday, May 15, 2019 at 8:21:03 PM UTC-4, Steve M.
Post by Steve M. GalbraithOn Monday, May 13, 2019 at 11:11:02 PM UTC-4, Steve M.
Post by Steve M. GalbraithPost by 19efpppPost by Steve M. GalbraithPost by Deth2Uall AsoulsPost by BOZProfessor McAdams said something like this in the first
debate against
Rossley.
Oswald could have been outside or on the 5th floor or in a
place where a
witness could vouch for him during the assassination.
Oswald was on the 6th floor shooting (Historical fact).
They told him to remain out of sight. He was working for
the conspiracy.
He was taking orders. They told him to remain out of sight. Simple.
And your evidence for this order is? Who gave it? When did
they give it to
him? Did he object? How did they know he carried out the
order? That a
co-worker wasn't with him?
When we ask such questions we're not asking for conspiracy
believers to
just make things up. We're asking for evidence of your claims.
But I have another question: who wasn't involved in the conspiracy?
"Exactly 12:43." What do you care about evidence?
Burkley wrote "12:43" - not "exactly 12:43" - as the time JFK arrived at
https://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/pdf/WH21_Price_Ex_2-35.pdf
You're using that 12:43 as evidence for you claim that Greer - who you
think shot JFK - delayed/slowed their arrival to Parkland. That's wrong.
Again: what is the evidence that Oswald was ordered to stay out of sight?
Give us something, a claim about a meeting, a phone call, something.
This is how this works: a person makes a claim and others ask
for evidence
for it. You've cited no evidence that Oswald was ordered to hide during
the shooting.
Burkley did not give any time. You need to work on your reading
comprehension skills.
I am not using the 12:43 time as evidence of anything other than that the
ride took longer than it should have. Again, your reading comprehension
skills need some honing.
I have already provided the evidence regarding Oswald's call, and you
chose to ignore it. Now the baby is crying. Maybe Mommy will feed him, but
I have no obligation to do so. He's not my baby.
Again: what is the evidence that Oswald received a call to hide during the
shooting? You've presented none. Who gave his this order? Saying "the
conspirators" is not a person or persons.
No, you've given no evidence of such a call. You've given no evidence of
such an order. You've given no evidence that there was a "Truly office" -
whatever that is - where he hid out.
This is how this works: a person makes a claim and then others ask for
evidence for it. If you do not like that method then you can go back to
youtube and post your goofy videos and disable comments.
As to Burkley/Clark: Yes, as I said elsewhere, it was Clark not Burkley. I
acknowledged the mistake; I attributed that time to Burkley when it was
Clark who gave it.
However, Clark testified that he arrived at the ER at 12:30 and that JFK
was being attended to at that time of his arrival. So which time should we
use?
Dr. CLARK - I would estimate it took a minute and a half to two minutes,
so I would guess that I arrived [at the ER] at approximately 12:30.
Mr. SPECTER - And who was present, if anyone, upon your arrival, attending
to the President?
Dr. CLARK - Dr. Jenkins, that is M. T. Jenkins, I suppose I ought to say,
Dr. Ronald Jones, Dr. Malcolm Perry, Dr. James Carrico; arriving either
with me or immediately thereafter were Dr. Robert McClelland, Dr. Paul
Peters, and Dr. Charles Baxter.
Mr. SPECTER - What did you observe the President's condition to be on your
arrival there?
Dr. CLARK - The President was lying on his back on the emergency cart.
Finally, the motorcycle officers - four - who accompanied the limo stated
that they raced to Parkland. Two of them who were leading the limo stated
that the limo was on their bumper during the entire journey. One said he
was worried about being run over. None of the officers said anything about
the limo slowing down. They all said they raced to Parkland.
Relying on Clark's recollections and ignoring the totality of the evidence
is not the way to put a full picture together. You're welcome to play with
your babies and do so. Others will take a different approach. Be sure to
tell the babies your bedtime stories about how Greer shot JFK and Norman
was pretending to. That should put them to sleep.
Yes, Clark apparently was not there at the time of JFK's arrival, but he
nonetheless said that JFK arrived at 12:43. And on the next page, somebody
else, apparently, said "exactly 12:43." I think we should know who said
that and why. Apparently Clark got his time from that person, or from the
same source as that person. Maybe it's wrong, but it is the most
definitively-stated time. Somebody thought that JFK arrived at EXACTLY
12:43. And Arlen Specter didn't care enough to ask when he talked to Price
and when he talked to Clark. Pretty shoddy work for your Official
Storytellers.
So you admit that Clark wasn't there but still use his 12:43 time to
support your view? Because "somebody else" said it? And this "somebody
else" is for you "the most definitely stated time"? Even though you don't
know who it was?
That's certainly not how I consider accounts; but you're welcome to your
own approach. Now I understand why you say Greer shot JFK. Your thinking
is illogical.
The most definitely stated time is the ER Registration form. That was
done, by all accounts, contemporaneously. It was not the
recollection of
someone days later.
And again, the accounts, e.g., Nurse Bowron who accompanied a stretcher
from the ER to the limo, say that a boy was admitted at the same time as
JFK. They recall the boy because he was bleeding profusely and his mother
was quite upset. That time for the boy on the ER form is: 12:38.
You guys are so ridiculous.
You want all this evidence to prove that Oswald was not part of a
conspiracy. Yet you completely ignore the fact that Jack Ruby killed
Oswald two days later and accept without any reservation at all that the
reason he did it was because he wanted to spare Jackie a trial.
You guys have very little credibility.
What the heck does that have to do with JFK's arrival time at Parkland?
Nobody accepts Ruby's claims as to why he shot Oswald. Who here accepts
that by itself?
We look at his claims, his actions, accounts by colleagues and others, and
other corroborating evidence to conclude he acted alone. Nobody accepts
his claim uncritically.
You apparently think that because he was Jewish - and only based on that -
that he worked with the Israeli government to kill JFK because Kennedy was
against Tel Aviv's nuclear program.
You have no evidence whatsoever that he was working for the Mossad. You've
presented none at all.
I think I have struck a nerve.
I have presented my evidence for why I think that Ruby was part of the
conspiracy, but you just ignore it because it does not fit the narrative
that you want to project.
The evidence is circumstantial and for something like this the evidence
can always only be circumstantial because people who work for state
intelligence agencies do so in secret, something that I am sure you know.
The Mossad was modeled after our CIA. In our CIA when citizens are asked
to perform services for the CIA and when they are asked to do that they
are required to keep it secret. It is reasonable to assume that the
Mossad works the same way.
But the Mossad has one problem that the CIA did not have and I have
already mentioned it several times...while not all Jewish people are
Mossad agents, it is reasonable to assume that all Mossad agents would
be Jewish.
You only mention Ruby, but it is not just Ruby. As I have also stated many
times, when we look at the most significant assassination events we find
that they are all performed by people who are Jewish. Considering the
Jewish population of Dallas at the time, that should not have happened by
chance.
With respect to Ruby, we know that he lied when he said that he did not
know Oswald or help Oswald with the assassination. The HSCA polygraph
panel was pretty clear about that. So why did Ruby lie? If Ruby did know
Oswald and did help him with the assassination in some way, why would Ruby
then kill Oswald?
And we have Ruby's words in this video clip where he actually tells us
there was a conspiracy.
http://youtu.be/5dLupbqmtUU
Here is what Ruby tells us in that video
Ruby: Everything pertaining to whats happening has never come to the
surface. The world will never know the true facts of what occurred, my
motive. In other words, I am the only person in the background that knows
the truth of everything relating to my circumstances.
Reporter: Do you think it[the truth] will ever come out?
Ruby: No, because, unfortunately, the people had so much to gain and had
such a material motive to put me in the position I'm in will never let the
true facts come above board to the world.
Reporter: Are these people in very high positions Jack?
Ruby: Yes.
And then we find out that JFK was trying to prevent Israel from possessing
nuclear weapons. JFK sent a letter to the Prime Minister of Israel, in
which JFK demanded that Israel submit their nuclear plant at Dimona to US
inspections. JFK said that US support for Israel could be in jeopardy if
they did not comply with his(JFK's) request.
It is hard to imagine any motive for regime change that would be greater
than Israels motive.
Today Israel is suspected of having over 200 nuclear weapons. This would
likely not have occurred if JFK was not assassinated. JFK was adamant,
particularly after the peaceful solution of the Cuban Missile Crisis, that
Israel (or any other Middle East Country) would be allowed to possess
nuclear weapons.
We also know that Yitzak Rabin was in Dallas the night before the
assassination. We know that because his widow told us that in the
autobiography of her husband. Yitzak Rabin was the head of the Israeli
Defense Force (IDF) at the time.
So, there is a lot more to this Ruby thing than you let on.
You bring up the fact that Ruby was Jewish more than I do.
Israeli intelligence.