Sometimes Things Really Are As They Appear To Be

[Robert Prudhomme]

No David, not LHO's identification of a Secret Service agent.

A policeman's.

Bumping this because DVP never addressed my question.

Add it to the list. DVP never answers questions he has no answer to.

[David Von Pein]

My crystal ball is broken. Sorry. I don't know for sure who Joe Smith encountered. I think it was probably James Powell, but maybe it was somebody else.

I was thinking just yesterday of the remote possibility that it could have been SS Agent Lem Johns (who we know was stranded in Dealey Plaza for a brief period immediately after the assassination). Yes, I know Lem Johns said he was sure he never got out of the street, and therefore he was never in the Knoll area to encounter anyone, but Johns WAS a "Secret Service agent" and he definitely WAS on the ground in Dealey Plaza at just about the time Officer Smith encountered the alleged "Secret Service agent" on the Grassy Knoll.

So...just maybe...

Flame away if you wish.

Edited May 3, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Guest Mark Valenti]

My crystal ball is broken. Sorry. I don't know for sure who Joe Smith encountered. I think it was probably James Powell, but maybe it was somebody else.

I was thinking just yesterday of the remote possibility that it could have been SS Agent Lem Johns (who we know was stranded in Dealey Plaza for a brief period immediately after the assassination). Yes, I know Lem Johns said he was sure he never got out of the street, and therefore he was never in the Knoll area to encounter anyone, but Johns WAS a "Secret Service agent" and he definitely WAS on the ground in Dealey Plaza at just about the time Officer Smith encountered the alleged "Secret Service agent" on the Grassy Knoll.

So...just maybe...

Flame away if you wish.

No flames, just a key, unanswered question that LNs are prone to gloss over. Yes, most of the time these anomalies can be answered with common sense and logic. But sometimes a question arises that begs a deeper, fuller answer. And for this question, there has been *nothing* in all these years that explains what Smith saw.

[Paul Trejo]

No flames, just a key, unanswered question that LNs are prone to gloss over. Yes, most of the time these anomalies can be answered with common sense and logic. But sometimes a question arises that begs a deeper, fuller answer. And for this question, there has been *nothing* in all these years that explains what Smith saw.

Even former CIA veterans have considered that the alleged Secret Service agent seen by Smith was probably acting as a decoy to let other conspirators escape. A "nice touch," as Gary Shaw remarked.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

[Greg Parker]

no CTer on the Internet is ever going to be swayed by one single thing ANY LNer says, or will ever say.

I wouldn't have believed that before, but i think you've convinced me.

[Larry Hancock]

Well played Greg....grin

[Paul Trejo]

no CTer on the Internet is ever going to be swayed by one single thing ANY LNer says, or will ever say.

I wouldn't have believed that before, but i think you've convinced me.

The motive of the LNer has been from the very start -- patriotic loyalty. It makes sense that it starts with the FBI.

Hoover told his guys to stomp on all JFK evidence that contradicted the Lone Nut theory of OSWALD, and that's exactly what they did -- out of patriotic loyalty.

When Posner and Bugliosi wrote their defenses of the WC Report -- years after the HSCA update -- they were mainly parading down Main Street wearing their Uncle Sam costumes. It was a display of patriotic loyalty.

Even to this very day, LNers don't dig deeply into the evidence -- because that could be disloyal.

Yet the HSCA has contradicted the WC Report, and openly declares a "Conspiracy" in the JFK murder. It criticizes the WC Report -- not out of disloyalty -- on the contrary -- it was our own US Congress that published the HSCA findings.

Since 1979, the official position of the US Government on the JFK murder is actually the HSCA, and not the WC Report.

Therefore, Posner and Bugliosi were parading for nothing -- their loyalty was already out-of-date and out-of-touch, even back in the 1990's when they made headlines.

Anybody who is still fighting the Lone Nut theory of Lee Harvey Oswald is 35 years behind the times. The Lone Nut theory isn't our real problem here.

Isn't it obvious? Our real problem on this Forum is the massive disagreement that we CTers have just among ourselves.

The main reward of being a LNer today, in 2015, is the comedy of watching CTers fall all over each other like Keystone Kops.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited May 5, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Glenn Nall]

"Sometimes things really are as they appear to be"

I agree, and I'm amazed that this thing appears to anyone to be anything other than a chaotic conspiracy. There is NOTHING about this murder that leads anyone to believe that it was the work of one person except for the immediate propaganda machine.

[Greg Parker]

Sometimes Things Really Are As They Appear To Be

And you, david, are living proof.

[Glenn Nall]

no CTer on the Internet is ever going to be swayed by one single thing ANY LNer says, or will ever say.

I wouldn't have believed that before, but i think you've convinced me.

The motive of the LNer has been from the very start -- patriotic loyalty. It makes sense that it starts with the FBI.

Hoover told his guys to stomp on all JFK evidence that contradicted the Lone Nut theory of OSWALD, and that's exactly what they did -- out of patriotic loyalty.

When Posner and Bugliosi wrote their defenses of the WC Report -- years after the HSCA update -- they were mainly parading down Main Street wearing their Uncle Sam costumes. It was a display of patriotic loyalty.

Even to this very day, LNers don't dig deeply into the evidence -- because that could be disloyal.

Yet the HSCA has contradicted the WC Report, and openly declares a "Conspiracy" in the JFK murder. It criticizes the WC Report -- not out of disloyalty -- on the contrary -- it was our own US Congress that published the HSCA findings.

Since 1979, the official position of the US Government on the JFK murder is actually the HSCA, and not the WC Report.

Therefore, Posner and Bugliosi were parading for nothing -- their loyalty was already out-of-date and out-of-touch, even back in the 1990's when they made headlines.

Anybody who is still fighting the Lone Nut theory of Lee Harvey Oswald is 35 years behind the times. The Lone Nut theory isn't our real problem here.

Isn't it obvious? Our real problem on this Forum is the massive disagreement that we CTers have just among ourselves.

The main reward of being a LNer today, in 2015, is the comedy of watching CTers fall all over each other like Keystone Kops.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

I have to wholeheartedly agree with you, Paul. At this point there's just no real sense in debating a Lone Nut Theory person, just as there's no real sense in the theory itself. The people who still hold to it, for whatever reasons they do, are as easily dismissable as, as,... any moron or sellout.

The gallant and most constructive battle waged today is, unfortunately, separating the Conspiracy Nuts from the Conspiracy Legitimates. Just as the Populist Christians (please forgive my analogy, some of you who might bristle at it) make the Legitimate ones a laughing-stock, it is in the legitimate CTers best interests to first remove the inane before the sane can be taken seriously. It's probably not too easy to convince a Congressman to take a look at something if he thinks we think a Limo driver, or a clumsy Secret Service agent, or a UFO shot John Kennedy.

How crazy is that when any sensible person knows that Ruth Paine shot JFK because JFK spurned her advances. Well, that's my theory this week, anyway. I got the idea from DVP.

Edited May 30, 2015 by Glenn Nall

[Paul Trejo]

I have to wholeheartedly agree with you, Paul. At this point there's just no real sense in debating a Lone Nut Theory person, just as there's no real sense in the theory itself. The people who still hold to it, for whatever reasons they do, are as easily dismissable as, as,... any moron or sellout.

The gallant and most constructive battle waged today is, unfortunately, separating the Conspiracy Nuts from the Conspiracy Legitimates. Just as the Populist Christians (please forgive my analogy, some of you who might bristle at it) make the Legitimate ones a laughing-stock, it is in the legitimate CTers best interests to first remove the inane before the sane can be taken seriously. It's probably not too easy to convince a Congressman to take a look at something if he thinks we think a Limo driver, or a clumsy Secret Service agent, or a UFO shot John Kennedy.

How crazy is that when any sensible person knows that Ruth Paine shot JFK because JFK spurned her advances. Well, that's my theory this week, anyway. I got the idea from DVP.

Yes, Glenn, as soon as I read the official HSCA conclusion, that JFK was 'probably assassinated as the result of a conspiracy," I realized that even the US Government isn't willing to back the Hoover fiction anymore.

The real question for JFK research isn't debating the Warren Report anymore -- but in identifying the conspirators.

Jim Garrison went part way, but was stopped at his own pond of New Orleans. The real answer must come from a thorough investigation of Dallas -- especially Dallas officials. That has never been done in the past 50 years -- and really almost all of the "legitimate" literature on JFK research merely blames the CIA -- without proof.

But if not the CIA, then who?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo