On Monday, November 15, 2021 at 5:43:22 PM UTC+11, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, November 14, 2021 at 9:32:28 PM UTC, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Sunday, November 14, 2021 at 1:32:22 PM UTC-5, Scrum Drum wrote:
On Sunday, November 14, 2021 at 12:40:53 PM UTC-5, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Friday, November 12, 2021 at 12:43:01 PM UTC-5, Scrum Drum wrote:
Like Parker Kamp just flat-out ignores that FBI told Yates they were committing him to a mental hospital because he had passed his lie detector test with flying colors...Kamp conveniently left that out of his post...FBI used the logic that
since Oswald was at work when Yates witnessed his Oswald hitch-hiking and asking if Kennedy could be shot from a high building, that therefore Yates was insane because the test showed he actually believed it...Yates had witnessed something dangerous so
the FBI needed to get him off the streets and away from any interviewers...That is the context of what is seen in the FBI report Kamp posts...Kamp of course is so stupid that he suggests it shows Yates was crazy and therefore his story wasn't credible...
The correct interpretation shows the opposite and backs Yates and his witnessing of an Oswald double trying to frame Harvey...
And you know your interpretation is the right one because?
Because it fits the evidence you are ignoring and trolling...It figures a Lone Nutter like yourself would defend Kamp and Parker...
You must have me confused with two other people. I defended neither. I merely asked you a question.
I guess you instinctively defend people who argue a Lone Nutter position like Kamp and Greg...You failed to answer the point that it is incredibly dumb for Kamp to miss the point that "No emotional response" is a euphemism for "No indication of
lying"
According to whom? You do understand that there’s a reason lie detector tests are not admissible in court, right?
and that FBI avoided using wording that would evidence the fact Yates passed his lie detector test and therefore proved he was telling the truth about seeing an Oswald look-alike...
If we credit the lie detector test - which its inadmissibility tells us not to - it only tells what Yates believed to be true, not what is true. Yates could have picked up someone else and after the assassination believed it to be Oswald. That doesnâ€
™t make it Oswald, anymore than the sighting of Brian Laundrie or of Elvis after their respective deaths makes those sightings true.
The bottom line is Kamp fails to answer for his deliberate misinterpretation of the evidence or quoting FBI's smearing of Yates that was used to deny his witnessing...In effect Kamp takes the side of, and uses the exact same dishonest methods as,
FBI in their criminal denial of Yates and his witnessing and therefore betrays good CT research in order to paint a wrong picture of Yates...Make no mistake - FBI used the wording "No emotional response" because they were trying to make it look like
Yates' craziness was responsible for his passing the test...Kamp dishonestly omits that FBI told Yates directly that he passed his lie detector test with flying colors and it therefore proved he was insane because Oswald was at work...
According to whom did this transpire this way?
Gordon then helps DiEugenio avoid honestly answering why he then gives approval to this bogus researcher Kamp...
Parker knew Yates had passed his lie detector test and witnessed something real so he went to his usual bag of tricks and claimed Larry Crafard was a one-size-fits-all stand-in that could be used as an excuse any time the evidence showed there was
a second Oswald...
Whatever happened to the simple possibility of mistaken identity?
How do you narrow it down to Crafard o4 Oswald as the only possibilities?
Parker claimed Yates passed his lie detector test because the person pretending to be Oswald was Crafard, but Scheim pointed-out that Crafard was missing his front teeth at the time and it would have been unlikely that Yates would have missed that..
.It is obvious to any intelligent person with common sense that Parker was only claiming Yates saw Crafard because he knew Yates' witnessing was real and he needed an excuse fast...And the Education Forum is OK with that even though it is obviously just
crazy Greg pulling that out of his ass...I'm sure if research was done back then you would find that Crafard was provably somewhere else when Greg has him doing all this stand-in work for Lee impersonating Harvey...
The only possibilities are not Crafard or Oswald.
By the time all this trolling is finished Kamp, Parker, and the trolls all fail to answer how Larry Crafard got away with walking a rifle wrapped in brown paper up to the Depository, where Yates last saw him headed, with his missing teeth and
explaining why a person with no relation to the Depository was bringing a rifle there?...
Is all this confirmed, and if so, how? What other people confirm anyone was seen with a long package that morning?
Again, lying Greg knows he's in trouble with this so he turns up the lying and says Crafard went to the Carousel Club after Yates dropped him off...But Greg ignores that Yates passed a lie detector test where he described Oswald walking towards the
front entrance of the Book Depository with that brown paper package after he dropped him off...
Sigh. Again, a lie detector result is not admissible and even if it was, it does not determine what happened. It can at best only determine what is believed to have happened.
And when you press Greg on that he refuses to answer because Greg thinks the whole world is ROKC and he can just ignore whomever he likes...Especially when he can't answer for his easily swiss-cheesed bullshit...
Jim DiEugenio gives credit and praise to ROKC, Kamp, and Parker...He comes in on the side dubious pro Lone Nut researchers like Kamp and Parker and their dubious work like what Kamp is offering here just like he did against Pitzer and Janney
etc...Jim and Kamp are protected from criticism of offerings like this by favoring moderators who label their critics as "attackers" offering intolerable input and using that false accusation to ignore their credible refutation of idiotic claims like
this one...
My irony meter just broke.
You're trolling Hank...You've publicly failed to answer all the main points I made - which is a sign of their veracity...
Sigh. That’s the logical fallacy of attempting to shift the burden of proof. I have no burden to disprove your contentions. I did question your assertions, you have provided no reasons to accept them - just more repetition of the claims.
FBI murdered a witness to the second Oswald
Not everyone saying they saw Elvis or Brian Laundrie actually saw either. Most in fact did not. The same with Oswald. You appear to believe these kinds of sightings are somehow sacrosanct and above reproach, and take it a step further and believe
these sightings are evidence of an Oswald double. That would imply an Elvis double and a Brian Laundrie double as well.
by means of Gestapo/KGB-like mental commitment because his witnessing was highly dangerous to their cover-up...
Begged.
This idiot Kamp then comes in on the side of the FBI against one of the most important witnesses for the conspiracy >
Begged.
and dummies like Jim D give approval and nutrition to some of the craziest, most damaging Fetzer-like trolls on the Kennedy internet...
I think you might be overlooking one crazy troll, but that’s just my opinion.
I am fully expecting you to call me a liar and an idiot and a troll. Don’t disappoint by actually addressing any of my points. That would too un-CT-like.
That's right, Scrum Drum. How do you narrow it down to Crafard and Oswald?
Crafard was often misremembered as being Oswald and he did hang around at Ruby's apartment and was a known hitch-hiker..
It could have been anybody picked up by Yates in Oak Cliff
Anybody that was routinely misremembered as Oswald and known to hang around Oak Cliff.
and dropped off at the TSBD
Nope. Carousel where business was consummated.
who was talking about shooting the president from a building
A conversation started not by Crafard but by Yates.
and the overpass
The overpass was never mentioned.
and who had a package of "curtain rods" big enough to be a rifle and a Backyard Photo to boot.
Before any of that was in the public domain, Yates had only mentioned a package, otherwise not described.
Anybody at all. It might have been Kate Smith or Sarah Stanton. What makes you think it had anything to do with Oswald?
A deep-seated desire to become one of the Conspiracracy Elites.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)