Jump to content
The Education Forum

Cognitive Bias in the Formulation of Theories


W. Niederhut
 Share

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Benjamin,

That surely wasn't LHO's wallet. I mean, how many wallets does a man carry? And besides, even if that were LHO shooting Tippit, what are the odds  he would accidentally drop his wallet at that particular unfortunate moment?

 

 

Is there any compelling reason to believe that LHO had anything whatsoever to do with the Walker shooting? (Exclusive of anything Marina said about it, considering how unreliable her testimony was.)

 

 

If the JFKA were a CIA operation, which I believe it was, then it is highly unlikely that LHO knew anything about the assassination plot beforehand. For the simple reason that he didn't have the "need to know." But given the police car giving a honk at his apartment and his activities at the  theater, it does appear that he was tricked by the CIA into playing a part.

 

 

Sure there were beans to spill. Oswald was knocked off so he wouldn't reveal that his employer, the CIA, had set him up as patsy for their heinous crime.

 

Sandy L-

 

Thanks for your comments.

1. The wallet. Oh, I agree, that wallet was planted at the Tippit murder scene. There is the video, and the FBI agent commentary. The evidence inside the wallet is too pat for a comic book, let alone a pulp detective novel. And then to be left at the scene?  So who planted the wallet? If a small CIA-assassin-squad came from Miami to Dallas and LHO was not in the loop...the assassination squad came to Dallas prepared with a fake wallet? Maybe so....seems like a stretch. 

2.  https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/27058-general-edwin-walker-lee-harvey-oswald-the-bad-shot-and-the-dog-that-didn’t-bark /

 

The above is my take on the Walker shooting. I contend the Walker shot was obviously an intentional miss, and a biography builder. Most likely LHO had a ride. I have no proof, but hear me out. 

3. OK, if LHO knew nothing at all about the JFKA on Nov. 22, totally clueless and just working his day job packing boxes (although LHO was likely a military-COA intel aset in Russia, New Orleans and elsewhere)...why did he leave the TBSD and take a taxi, go home and get his gun? Why did LHO not assume some punks or right-wing kooks, mobsters, etc., had taken a potshot at JFK, and it did not concern him? Sheesh, he could have walked home from the TBSD if he just wanted to leave work (less than two miles, and LHO was 24, and the day was not hot).  

4.  If LHO knew nothing at all about the JFKA, what beans could he spill? LHO might be able to convince someone somewhere he had in the past been a military-intel asset, or informant, although no records of that. Then what?  LHO, with able counsel, might have been able to avoid a guilty verdict. But so what? He had no beans to spill (if totally uninvolved), except that he had been a government informant, but can't prove it?  

No, the reason LHO had to be killed and quickly...logically...was that he knew a lot about what happened on Nov. 22. That implies participation. I posit unwitting participation, but enough participation he had to be eliminated. 

Larry Hancock may soon flesh out this troubling question, of LHO's role in the JFKA. 

This is my take:

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/27073-towards-a-simple-plausible-yet-explanatory-conspiracy-theory/

That's my story and I am sticking with it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 103
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

7 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Sandy L-

 

Thanks for your comments.

1. The wallet. Oh, I agree, that wallet was planted at the Tippit murder scene. There is the video, and the FBI agent commentary. The evidence inside the wallet is too pat for a comic book, let alone a pulp detective novel. And then to be left at the scene?  So who planted the wallet? If a small CIA-assassin-squad came from Miami to Dallas and LHO was not in the loop...the assassination squad came to Dallas prepared with a fake wallet? Maybe so....seems like a stretch. 

2.  https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/27058-general-edwin-walker-lee-harvey-oswald-the-bad-shot-and-the-dog-that-didn’t-bark /

 

The above is my take on the Walker shooting. I contend the Walker shot was obviously an intentional miss, and a biography builder. Most likely LHO had a ride. I have no proof, but hear me out. 

3. OK, if LHO knew nothing at all about the JFKA on Nov. 22, totally clueless and just working his day job packing boxes (although LHO was likely a military-COA intel aset in Russia, New Orleans and elsewhere)...why did he leave the TBSD and take a taxi, go home and get his gun? Why did LHO not assume some punks or right-wing kooks, mobsters, etc., had taken a potshot at JFK, and it did not concern him? Sheesh, he could have walked home from the TBSD if he just wanted to leave work (less than two miles, and LHO was 24, and the day was not hot).  

4.  If LHO knew nothing at all about the JFKA, what beans could he spill? LHO might be able to convince someone somewhere he had in the past been a military-intel asset, or informant, although no records of that. Then what?  LHO, with able counsel, might have been able to avoid a guilty verdict. But so what? He had no beans to spill (if totally uninvolved), except that he had been a government informant, but can't prove it?  

No, the reason LHO had to be killed and quickly...logically...was that he knew a lot about what happened on Nov. 22. That implies participation. I posit unwitting participation, but enough participation he had to be eliminated. 

Larry Hancock may soon flesh out this troubling question, of LHO's role in the JFKA. 

This is my take:

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/27073-towards-a-simple-plausible-yet-explanatory-conspiracy-theory/

That's my story and I am sticking with it. 

Ben, no cognitive bias with me BUT I did like Greg's piece on that wallet at the Tippit scene.

The wallet at the Tippit scene: a simpler solution? - JFK Assassination Debate - The Education Forum (ipbhost.com)

I also consider the amount of setting up/sheep dipping of LHO in NOLA & Dallas as a patsy, with rifle & sniper's nest accoutrements etc necessitated preventing his day in court, hence Ruby.  If Ossie knew or suspected anything prior to 22nd Nov is anyone's guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In line with the topic of this thread and to encourage stepping outside of boxes, consider the following for a moment.  I'll be blogging about this in a bit more detail so those who follow that will see it again.

One of the world views we often use is that virtually nothing collected by the WC is trustworthy, not just the evidence but virtually everything.  We also point out the fact that they took a virtual pass on motive or proving that he was violent enough to jump from radio interviews to murder in one fell swoop.  That's especially interesting considering you can use what they collected to paint a picture of an increasingly radicalized Oswald - radicalization occurring over a fairly short period.  Of course one problem in doing that might have exposed the possibility that Oswald was not himself becoming radicalized, but that someone or something was behind the creation of that image and that it might have been cultivated for purposes that neither the FBI nor the CIA would want explored (and no, not presidential assassination).

So step outside the box and think a bit of what it implies if the following were true,  beginning with the manuscript Oswald himself produced shortly after his return from Russia - in which he blasts the Soviet Union, and calls out its manipulation of communist parties including the Communist Party USA as being foreign tools of Russia and worthy only of disgust. And note that this occurs in the same general time frame he has assured the FBI that he is loyal and will certainly report anyone contacting him who appears to be suspicious or intending to use him in any way.

So what follows - he approaches and begins protesting for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee before leaving Dallas,  he orders a rifle and pistol (or somebody orders it for him),  he poses with said rifle and piston and with newspapers which could only be construed as subversive or radical - especially when displayed with weapons. 

Then comes the Walker shooting, a note to provide for Marina if he is killed or captured in the act - pretty radical.   Enough so that even if he doesn't do it his friend George gets the message - "Hunter of Fascists". 

That all feels pretty radical and then what comes next - on to New Orleans and a false flag approach to the DRE - which they are too skeptical to fall for but which certainly paints him as an activist.  Media coverage, interviews, and a large scale propaganda push follows (we have documents showing the CIA was routinely trying to control and direct DRE propaganda and complaining they were out of control in propaganda work - but strangely no complaints about the Oswald propaganda in the summer of 1963.....then again we can't see the files that might contain that, them still being withheld and all).

And next letters to the SWP and CPUSA including asking CPUSA (who he detested only months before) if he should go "underground".  

Then someone shows up in Mexico City and reportedly even carries CPUSA membership credentials - Oswald seems to have gotten seriously subversive and seriously  radical. 

So...what if all those elements were true and not fictional, made up after the fact.  Step into that box and revisit the Walker shooting, the photos, the letter and ask yourself,  is this Oswald really becoming a radical,  or is it all a process for building his value for intelligence purposes, either collections or propaganda?  And if you pick one, think about what was supposed to happen next if it wasn't just Oswald becoming a radical - and why the WC didn't go full bore with painting the above picture for the public?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Larry Hancock said:

In line with the topic of this thread and to encourage stepping outside of boxes, consider the following for a moment.  I'll be blogging about this in a bit more detail so those who follow that will see it again.

One of the world views we often use is that virtually nothing collected by the WC is trustworthy, not just the evidence but virtually everything.  We also point out the fact that they took a virtual pass on motive or proving that he was violent enough to jump from radio interviews to murder in one fell swoop.  That's especially interesting considering you can use what they collected to paint a picture of an increasingly radicalized Oswald - radicalization occurring over a fairly short period.  Of course one problem in doing that might have exposed the possibility that Oswald was not himself becoming radicalized, but that someone or something was behind the creation of that image and that it might have been cultivated for purposes that neither the FBI nor the CIA would want explored (and no, not presidential assassination).

So step outside the box and think a bit of what it implies if the following were true,  beginning with the manuscript Oswald himself produced shortly after his return from Russia - in which he blasts the Soviet Union, and calls out its manipulation of communist parties including the Communist Party USA as being foreign tools of Russia and worthy only of disgust. And note that this occurs in the same general time frame he has assured the FBI that he is loyal and will certainly report anyone contacting him who appears to be suspicious or intending to use him in any way.

So what follows - he approaches and begins protesting for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee before leaving Dallas,  he orders a rifle and pistol (or somebody orders it for him),  he poses with said rifle and piston and with newspapers which could only be construed as subversive or radical - especially when displayed with weapons. 

Then comes the Walker shooting, a note to provide for Marina if he is killed or captured in the act - pretty radical.   Enough so that even if he doesn't do it his friend George gets the message - "Hunter of Fascists". 

That all feels pretty radical and then what comes next - on to New Orleans and a false flag approach to the DRE - which they are too skeptical to fall for but which certainly paints him as an activist.  Media coverage, interviews, and a large scale propaganda push follows (we have documents showing the CIA was routinely trying to control and direct DRE propaganda and complaining they were out of control in propaganda work - but strangely no complaints about the Oswald propaganda in the summer of 1963.....then again we can't see the files that might contain that, them still being withheld and all).

And next letters to the SWP and CPUSA including asking CPUSA (who he detested only months before) if he should go "underground".  

Then someone shows up in Mexico City and reportedly even carries CPUSA membership credentials - Oswald seems to have gotten seriously subversive and seriously  radical. 

So...what if all those elements were true and not fictional, made up after the fact.  Step into that box and revisit the Walker shooting, the photos, the letter and ask yourself,  is this Oswald really becoming a radical,  or is it all a process for building his value for intelligence purposes, either collections or propaganda?  And if you pick one, think about what was supposed to happen next if it wasn't just Oswald becoming a radical - and why the WC didn't go full bore with painting the above picture for the public?

"So...what if all those elements were true and not fictional, made up after the fact.  Step into that box and revisit the Walker shooting, the photos, the letter and ask yourself,  is this Oswald really becoming a radical,  or is it all a process for building his value for intelligence purposes, either collections or propaganda?  And if you pick one, think about what was supposed to happen next if it wasn't just Oswald becoming a radical - and why the WC didn't go full bore with painting the above picture for the public?"--LH

Can you re-phrase the question?  My take is there was a biography build on LHO.  He himself was conflicted or just cynical, or even just youthful and academically uneducated (though certainly smart enough). Maybe willing to change views for a new paymaster. In a troubled marriage. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Matt Allison said:

The fact that Oswald had to make a brief stop at his home to pick up a pistol is strong evidence that things were happening contrary to what he expected; it would have been trivially simple for him to have arranged in advance to have a handgun ready that day, yet he didn't.

I think I agree. 

So...if LHO was just doing his job and was totally uninvolved with the JFKA...then why go home and get his pistol? 

And if LHO knew nothing about the JFKA...why did Ruby gun him down? 

It sure looks like LHO was involved...probably as a patsy, but perhaps as part of multiple shooters at JFK. Somebody was shooting at JFK from the TSBD. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a handful of questions involved -  if you accept the body of information (regardless if its true or false) the WC collected you could paint Oswald as a communist influenced radical,  assign a clear motive and have a serious piece of anti-communist propaganda showing the dangerous of communist influence at the height of the Cold War.   Surely both Hoover and that old time rabid anti-Communist LBJ could hardly object to that.   So why wasn't the story presented to the public in that form?

Another question, was Oswald truly becoming radicalized to the extent of the WC information (some of which has to come from Oswald, for example his manuscript and his later letter to CPUSA) or was that picture being built around him without his full knowledge - and of course to what purpose. 

Suggestion - look at that picture of Oswald as of October,  as he arrived in Dallas.  Even with what was in various FBI and CIA files he looked pretty radical; this is at a time when teachers were routinely required to take loyalty oaths in some States. When FBI agents were dispatched to Mexico to monitor expats from Hollywood (see Heitman's autobiography).  When any American visiting the Cuban embassy was put under surveillance.  Then ask yourself, is this Russian defector, commie radical being cultivated for an assassination that is going to make everybody in the security community look like idiots?   Or are they ignoring him because somebody has him "in play". 

What I'm calling for, in line with the thread title, is for some new and out of the box scenarios, not just the old ones we have tossed around forever....they might not be right but the question is how tightly are we tied to the way we have looked at this for so long (and to our preferred villains)?

 

Edited by Larry Hancock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

I think I agree. 

So...if LHO was just doing his job and was totally uninvolved with the JFKA...then why go home and get his pistol? 

And if LHO knew nothing about the JFKA...why did Ruby gun him down? 

It sure looks like LHO was involved...probably as a patsy, but perhaps as part of multiple shooters at JFK. Somebody was shooting at JFK from the TSBD. 

 

 

Yes, let's think about that for moment; would Oswald's adventures in New Orleans and the alleged Walker incident been enough to place the entire blame for the assassination on him? Not likely. For him to be completely believable as the assassin you've got to tie him to the event better than that. That means getting his rifle into the building, that means not allowing him to wander outside onto the street to watch the motorcade, which would give him an alibi. He had to have some specific role. So that means he had to have at least some cognizance that something was going to happen. Yet not something that he anticipated needing his pistol for. Somewhere between those two situations lies the truth of what happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Matt Allison said:

Yes, let's think about that for moment; would Oswald's adventures in New Orleans and the alleged Walker incident been enough to place the entire blame for the assassination on him? Not likely. For him to be completely believable as the assassin you've got to tie him to the event better than that. That means getting his rifle into the building, that means not allowing him to wander outside onto the street to watch the motorcade, which would give him an alibi. He had to have some specific role. So that means he had to have at least some cognizance that something was going to happen. Yet not something that he anticipated needing his pistol for. Somewhere between those two situations lies the truth of what happened.

I largely concur with you. You cannot make LHO the patsy (at least immediately) if he is on the sidewalk waving at the President.

True, the rifle alone might lead to him being considered a suspect and a co-conspirator.  But then the government is left with finding the other conspirators.  LHO's mysterious wallets and mail order guns add to the clues.

Larry Hancock, based upon real and circumspect research,  posits the real shooters did not care if it became known there were multiple shooters or not. They just wanted to kill JFK and escape. Which they did.  Which leaves LHO as something of a fifth wheel. 

Unfortunately, the CIA guy in charge of assassinations, Bill Harvey, conducted paperless meetings with oblique language, and even created fake paper trails.  So reading through documents is likely a dead end. 

At his late date, we end up in a cul-de-sac , with only speculation as to the actual perps....

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m always amazed that DPD brought LHO out to talk to media, and the DA allowed it.

The DPD claimed they wanted to show their prisoner was not being mistreated. It was also a sure way to endanger his life.

But what a powder keg situation that was. What if LHO, either deranged or telling the truth, yelled that he was a paid Russian assassin - that could’ve immediately led to WWIII. Who in America could’ve stopped it?

He also could’ve said he was the proverbial spy left out in the cold by his own govt. Or that others were involved still at large. Or he could’ve yelled Viva Castro!

But he didn’t say any of these things. He stayed with his innocence. Despite a tremendously dangerous idea to bring him out for a frickin’ press conference, he doesn’t say anything but restate his innocence and ask for legal representation. And he looks pissed when a reporter tells him he HAS been charged for the assassination.

As always with this case, the closer you look, the weirder it gets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michaleen Kilroy said:

I’m always amazed that DPD brought LHO out to talk to media, and the DA allowed it.

The DPD claimed they wanted to show their prisoner was not being mistreated. It was also a sure way to endanger his life.

But what a powder keg situation that was. What if LHO, either deranged or telling the truth, yelled that he was a paid Russian assassin - that could’ve immediately led to WWIII. Who in America could’ve stopped it?

He also could’ve said he was the proverbial spy left out in the cold by his own govt. Or that others were involved still at large. Or he could’ve yelled Viva Castro!

But he didn’t say any of these things. He stayed with his innocence. Despite a tremendously dangerous idea to bring him out for a frickin’ press conference, he doesn’t say anything but restate his innocence and ask for legal representation. And he looks pissed when a reporter tells him he HAS been charged for the assassination.

As always with this case, the closer you look, the weirder it gets.

Kilroy (was here):

I like to say there isn't single straight line in the entire JFKA.  I am working on a story regarding Connally's clothing from that day. A pulp fiction novel is more believable. By far. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Kilroy (was here):

I like to say there isn't single straight line in the entire JFKA.  I am working on a story regarding Connally's clothing from that day. A pulp fiction novel is more believable. By far. 

You know, Nov. 22, 1963 was strange altogether. 

The day writer Aldous Huxley died (Brave New World).

The day Dr. Who was set to premiere on BBC (it was postponed for a week).

The day I believe Carlos Marcello won his day in court in NO and could remain in the US.

Strangeness all around. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On that day,  they also were making the case for indictment against LBJ.

Michaleen:

But what a powder keg situation that was. What if LHO, either deranged or telling the truth, yelled that he was a paid Russian assassin - that could’ve immediately led to WWIII. Who in America could’ve stopped it?

He also could’ve said he was the proverbial spy left out in the cold by his own govt. Or that others were involved still at large. Or he could’ve yelled Viva Castro!

But he didn’t say any of these things.

Except that he was a patsy, which really isn't saying anything. But that's right, in his short press  conference LHO could have spilled a lot more beans if he had them, and actually serve to protect himself, as any group he would expose may now be more hesitant to draw attention to themselves by murdering him.

According to Lovell, Oswald was very confident  he was in no danger by going out to the public. Which could indicate he thought he was being protected by somebody.

Edited by Kirk Gallaway
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Michaleen Kilroy said:

I’m always amazed that DPD brought LHO out to talk to media, and the DA allowed it.

I know, right? Thank god we at least got that. So many telling things from that short appearance.

Listen to his voice crack when he says "the newspaper reporters in the hall asked me that question" He is shook. Seems genuinely upset about the death of the President. Outside of that he did a very thorough job of playing his cards close and not giving away anything.

Edited by Matt Allison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...