14-02-2019, 04:56 PM
Ray,
This thread is about Marvin Johnson's report- one of the basic pieces of Baker evidence, which proponents of the lunchroom hoax have never addressed. I covered Officer E in Death of the Lunchroom Hoax, which apparently you did not bother to read, or forgot about.
p. 34: "The hoaxers want to infer from Officer E that Baker met Oswald somewhere near the front lobby, but to do so they need to ignore Baker's obvious haphazard recounting of his itinerary inside. It was a story he'd told numerous times and he knew that Bowles was familiar with it anyways. And he interjected the statement about the freight elevator as an afterthought, realizing he'd forgotten to include it when he began this condensed retelling of his pursuit inside the Depository. This Bowles interview, upon analysis, turns into a nothing-burger."
Ray, when Baker confronted Oswald he pulled a gun on him. It doesn't make sense that that would happen in the crowded lobby, and none of the witnesses ever came forward. When you cherry-pick an item of evidence like Officer E's account, out of context, you imbue it with a meaning it doesn't normally have. This account is just another example which has led hoaxers to a massive case of cognitive dissonance.
I invite you, or any of the proponents of the lunchroom hoax, to put together a few paragraphs that show how Marvin Johnson's report correlates with the hoax. If you lived in the truth, it would formulate bit by bit off your tongue.
But you don't live in the truth. You live in the deception of Sean Murphy's fantasies.
This thread is about Marvin Johnson's report- one of the basic pieces of Baker evidence, which proponents of the lunchroom hoax have never addressed. I covered Officer E in Death of the Lunchroom Hoax, which apparently you did not bother to read, or forgot about.
p. 34: "The hoaxers want to infer from Officer E that Baker met Oswald somewhere near the front lobby, but to do so they need to ignore Baker's obvious haphazard recounting of his itinerary inside. It was a story he'd told numerous times and he knew that Bowles was familiar with it anyways. And he interjected the statement about the freight elevator as an afterthought, realizing he'd forgotten to include it when he began this condensed retelling of his pursuit inside the Depository. This Bowles interview, upon analysis, turns into a nothing-burger."
Ray, when Baker confronted Oswald he pulled a gun on him. It doesn't make sense that that would happen in the crowded lobby, and none of the witnesses ever came forward. When you cherry-pick an item of evidence like Officer E's account, out of context, you imbue it with a meaning it doesn't normally have. This account is just another example which has led hoaxers to a massive case of cognitive dissonance.
I invite you, or any of the proponents of the lunchroom hoax, to put together a few paragraphs that show how Marvin Johnson's report correlates with the hoax. If you lived in the truth, it would formulate bit by bit off your tongue.
But you don't live in the truth. You live in the deception of Sean Murphy's fantasies.