Contradictions prove conspiracy

charles wallace

unread,

Apr 28, 2007, 5:10:15 PM4/28/07

to

All of the witnesses to JFK's assassination in Dealey Plaza have an
error of some sort in their accounts but when scrutinized and all is
taken into account the truth emerges. Accounts related below show there
were at a minimum four shots fired during the shooting sequence in
Dealey Plaza. This means therefore a conspiracy in JFK's murder since
the three ear witnesses on the fifth floor of the TSBD did not hear more
than three shots fired above them.

JBC said the first shot did not hit him then he was hit. Mrs. Kennedy
and Mrs. Connally turning to look at JFK before JBC is hit proves they
also heard the first shot that JBC claimed to hear.

You can watch the Zapruder film and see that these two shots have
occurred before JFK slumps to his left towards his wife.

In the Secret Service Agent car directly behind JFK's limo SSA Emory
Roberts says he heard a shot then JFK leans towards his wife. Two more
shots follow and Roberts says he cannot tell which of those two caused
JFK's head wound. SSA Samuel Kinney and SSA George Hickey also in this
car give basically the same account of a shot, a JFK slump, then the
final two shots.

Robert Edwards who was at the intersection of Elm and Houston says in
his WC testimony in response to the question of how many shots did he
hear, "Well, I heard one more shot than was fired".

If you advocate just three shots were fired then are you advocating
that we believe a lie? If you truly believe there were just three shots
fired then please explain why JBC was wrong or why three Secret Service
Agents were wrong.

Case Wide Open: A JFK Murder Investigation
http://community.webtv.net/ccwallace/CaseWideOpenAJFK

David Von Pein

unread,

Apr 28, 2007, 6:20:42 PM4/28/07

to

As usual, a CTer has everything backwards.

It's much more likely that a LACK of contradictions would equate more
to a "Pre-arranged Plot".

Contradictions in a case with HUNDREDS of witnesses (such as this
case) should be EXPECTED. If they weren't there, I'd probably be more
suspicious of a perfectly-carried-out "plot" of some kind.

But even WITH "contradictions" by the earwitnesses, the overwhelming
majority of witnesses favor 3 shots and ONLY A SINGLE DIRECTION FOR
THOSE SHOTS (whether it be front or rear).

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/shots3.jpg

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/shots4.jpg

charles wallace

unread,

Apr 28, 2007, 8:39:03 PM4/28/07

to

David,
All the witnesses in my post have not challenged the three shot scenario
and even claim that three is the correct number. The only exception
possibly is the person that claimed to hear one more shot than was
fired. But we know that for all to be correct at least four shots were
fired.

I'm sorry that you cannot determine which of the witnesses are wrong and
why they are so. Your lack of knowledge in this area means that the
truth of four shots minimum was fired still stands.

David Von Pein

unread,

Apr 28, 2007, 8:52:04 PM4/28/07

to

I suggest you check out the two pie charts I linked above.

The preponderance of evidence (via earwitnesses) does NOT favor
conspiracy. It favors a THREE-SHOT shooting scenario (quite
obviously)....and also favors ONE SINGLE SHOOTING LOCATION (per 95% of
the witnesses).

And that location HAS to be the TSBD (from where even CTers do not
dispute gunfire).

Mark VII.

cdddraftsman

unread,

Apr 28, 2007, 9:41:37 PM4/28/07

to

Mr. Wallace what you seek in your question is unattainable
by going about it the way your doing :

Everyone in Dealey Plaza could be wrong and everyone could
be wrong and still there could be no conspiracy for the simple
fact is the truth has no requirement that anyone has to believe in
it .

Like Belief v. Reality , Myth v. Historic Accuracy , Conspiracy v.
Happenstance , Hollywood v. History, these are all inseperable ,
( In our minds ) yet distinctly unique aspects that are linked by
physicality , but yet sometimes can't be joined by reality in happy
harmony . These are the hard facts of life , incidents that don't
jive 100% of the time and there for get classified as a counter-
intuative
events , are supposed to be solved by advanced mathmatics and
mult-various analytical techniques that your shallow skimming
technique is woefully inadequate to handle .

For example :

(1) Your use of eye and ear witnesses and memory to solve any
thing to do with this case is so obsolete that you could be charged
with murdering JFK with this weak evidence and if enough people
saw fit to believe this hogwash , Texas would be glad to get rid of
the JFK Assassination aura that lingers and you too as a toot to
boot !

(2) Your analysis of the Zapfilm is ten years dated . Shots are
clearly and abundantly reacted to at Z-160 , Z-224 and Z-313 .
All well with in the capability and range of LHO and his rifle .

(3) Your post just earned you a 1 on the Favorites Rating
Big Board of boring theorys that are going no were . Ricland
is trying to get someone , anyone to post at his mammoth
ark of research , that will eventually contain two of everything
in the JFK Assassination ! I suggest posting there , he'll
literally love you to death for doing so ! ...................tl

aeffects

unread,

Apr 28, 2007, 10:19:09 PM4/28/07

to

sitdown, you dumb fuck..... let the elder's deal with the serious
material...

charles wallace

unread,

Apr 28, 2007, 10:36:35 PM4/28/07

to

Cdddraftsman,
Your point two says the shots were Z160, Z224, and Z313. Translation:
The three Secret Service Agents were wrong because only one shot was
fired after JFK slumped to his left.

Could you tell me how these three professionals who were just feet from
JFK mistook one LOUD shot to be TWO LOUD shots?

RICLAND

unread,

Apr 29, 2007, 8:08:49 AM4/29/07

to

David Von Pein wrote:
> As usual, a CTer has everything backwards.

You mean everything "backward."

No "s" required when "backward" is used as an adjective.

>
> It's much more likely that a LACK of contradictions would equate more
> to a "Pre-arranged Plot".

Then you admit there are contradictions? This is good. Your gobbleygook
about "pre-arranged Plot (is there any other kind?) is worthless, though.

>
> Contradictions in a case with HUNDREDS of witnesses (such as this
> case) should be EXPECTED. If they weren't there, I'd probably be more
> suspicious of a perfectly-carried-out "plot" of some kind.

First, the contradictions include the hundreds of pieces of evidence.
Second, there is no contractions among the witnesses, just
contradictions between what they say and what the Warren Commission says.

In every instance the witnesses say one thing, while the Warren
Commission says something completely different or simply ignores what
they say.

For example, more than 40 witnesses say the shots came from the grassy
knoll, while the Warren Commission says they did not. Gov. Connally says
he wasn't hit with the same bullet JFK was, the Warren commission says
he was. Ms. Clemons says there were two shooters at the Tippit murder,
the Warren Commission says there was only one. Respected news reporter
Seth Kantor says Ruby was at Parkland Hospital, the Warren Commission
says he was not.

The list goes on and on.

ricland
--
Ricland:

"In other words, David, you disprove the timeline evidence by simply
tossing it out."

David Van Pein:

In favor of better, firmer evidence. Yes.

Reclaiming History ...???
The Rebuttal to Bugliosi's JFK Assassination Book
http://jfkhit.com

cdddraftsman

unread,

Apr 29, 2007, 9:09:12 AM4/29/07

to

ricland

The list goes on and on.

TL :
Yes and it sounds the the ching ! ching ! ching ! of the cash
register
everytime a lie was told ! Get the picture , you naive boob tube
watcher ? ................Heheheheh ! .............tl

Walt

unread,

Apr 29, 2007, 9:23:17 AM4/29/07

to

On 29 Apr, 07:08, RICLAND <blackwr...@lycos.com> wrote:
> David Von Pein wrote:
> > As usual, a CTer has everything backwards.
>
> You mean everything "backward."
>
> No "s" required when "backward" is used as an adjective.
>
>
>
> > It's much more likely that a LACK of contradictions would equate more
> > to a "Pre-arranged Plot".
>
Then you admit there are contradictions? This is good. Your
gobbleygook
about "pre-arranged Plot (is there any other kind?) is worthless,
though.

Your gobbleygook about "pre-arranged Plot (is there any other kind?)
is worthless, though.

I'm glad to see you take DVP to task for his mish-mash and
gobbleygook. It gets tedious showing him to be a liar time after
time. I can't count the number of times that I pointed out the the
gunman on the sixth floor was 35 pounds heavier than Oswald, was about
7 years older than Oswald, and was dressed in light colored clothes,
while Oswald was wearing dark colored clothes. The Idiot just keeps
right on lying and saying the gunman that Brennan saw was Oswald.
Von Pea Brain is using the same methods the Warren Commission taught
him over 40 years ago.
He has nothing original or new...( he lacks the ability ) ... He just
keeps presenting the same old lies that we've heard for four
decades.

Walt

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

Apr 29, 2007, 5:08:28 PM4/29/07

to

>>> "There is [sic] no contractions [sic; sigh; were they all pregnant?] among the witnesses, just contradictions between what they say and what the Warren Commission says." <<<

Total bullshit. Of course there were contradictions among many of the
witnesses....and the WC fully acknowledged the fact that some
witnesses did not support the "3-shot/LHO" scenario. I suggest you
read WR Page 110 for proof of this WC acknowledgment. Here is that
page:

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0067b.htm

But, as mentioned in prior posts, discrepancies within witness
testimony are to be expected. Especially when we take into account
that there were HUNDREDS of people in Dealey Plaza watching the
motorcade pass by.

As VB said (and rightly so, as per his norm)......

"With respect to whether or not any shots were fired from the Grassy
Knoll, I want to make the following observations -- firstly, it is
perfectly understandable that the witnesses were confused as to the
origin of fire. Not only does Dealey Plaza resound with echoes, but
here you have a situation of completely-unexpected shots over just a
matter of a few moments.

"When you compound all of that with the fact that the witnesses were
focusing their attention on the President of the United States driving
by, a mesmerizing event for many of them....and the chaos, the
hysteria, the bedlam that engulfed the assassination scene....it's
remarkable that there was any coherence at all to what they thought
they saw and heard.

"Human observation, notoriously unreliable under even the most optimum
situation, HAS to give way to hard, scientific evidence. And we do
have indisputable, scientific evidence in this case that the bullets
which struck President Kennedy came from his rear, not his front.

"The surgeons who conducted the autopsy on President Kennedy's
body....plus ALL NINE --- even Wecht, even Wecht --- all nine forensic
pathologists who reviewed the photographic evidence and the X-rays of
the President's wounds for the House Select Committee on
Assassinations agreed that the two bullets that struck President
Kennedy were fired from behind....the upper-back wound and the wound
to the rear of the President's head being ENTRANCE wounds." -- VINCE
B.

>>> "In every instance the witnesses say one thing, while the Warren Commission says something completely different or simply ignores what they say." <<<

In EVERY instance, huh?

You truly think there are ZERO witnesses who said "3 shots and all
from the TSBD"?

And you truly think there are ZERO witnesses who think Lee Harvey
Oswald acted alone?

You really ARE clueless, aren't you?

Start with Harold Norman and go from there. Norman's a good witness to
prove that you're dead-wrong with respect to your last inane statement
above. ....

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/fa26e26f62263eeb

David Von Pein

unread,

Apr 29, 2007, 5:47:59 PM4/29/07

to

>>> "I'm glad to see you take DVP to task for his mish-mash and gobbleygook. It gets tedious showing him to be a liar time after time....{further bullshit excised}..." <<<

Somebody take a picture of the above text....it's needed for the next
edition of "Pot & Kettle" magazine.

>>> "Von Pea Brain is using the same methods the Warren Commission taught him over 40 years ago." <<<

Yeah, the WC taught me their methods in the early '60s....when I was 3
years old. (I learned pretty well for such a young-un, huh?)

>>> "He {Von Pea Brain} has nothing original or new." <<<

And why in this world would I need something "original or new"? The
case was solved by the DPD (for all intents and purposes) the very
weekend the assassination occurred in November 1963.

Lee Harvey Oswald, by himself, shot and killed 2 men in Dallas, using
his own guns to do so. Mark VII.

Why do I need to add something "new" here? Or is it your opinion that
I should somehow be able to come up with the missing (Tague) bullet?
Or maybe I'm supposed to come up with a new tape recording taken in
DP, wherein we can hear Oswald's distinct voice yelling out, "Take
THAT, John Kennedy! This one's for Fidel!"?

What type of "new" LHO-did-it stuff should I be unearthing, circa
2007, do you think?

It's the CTers who feel the need for a "new" batch of guesswork every
so often. Take Don Willis as a good example, and Don's wild fairy tale
about how 18-year-old kid Danny Arce killed JFK from the FIFTH floor
of the TSBD, while other Depository employees ran around waving
useless rifles out of the WRONG windows as they complicated their
crazy plot to absurd heights of complexity.

For the full "ARCE DID IT" laughfest, click the link below (and ya
GOTTA love this...if for only the SHEER BALLS it took to write this
fantasy!):

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/28516c307a2d8e88/2e4bbc26d963007e?#2e4bbc26d963007e

That's just one example, among many, of CTers stepping up to the plate
and striking out on three straight pitches (every time).

Although I must give Donald at least a teeny bit of credit, in that at
least he had the gonads to actually place that crackpot theory on the
Internet CT table for all to read (and laugh at).

A good many (most, in fact) CTers fail to EVER state their precise
scenarios of how JFK met his death at the hands of these sinister
forces that supposedly surrounded him that November day.

Ben "Mega Kook" Holmes being a prime example of an "isolationist" type
of CTer who lives in a piecemeal world of shadowy conspiracy 24/7. But
he's smart enough to never, EVER put on the table a shot-by-shot,
detailed CT scenario re. the way things really went down on 11/22/63.

Because if Holmes ever DID do that, he'd be laughed at even harder
than we laugh at Mr. Willis' "Arce" theory.

In summary...nothing "new" is required to solve the JFK and Tippit
murder cases. The Dallas Police solved both of those cases back in
'63. All the Warren Commission did was to verify the guilt of one Lee
Harvey Oswald (beyond all reasonable doubt).

Todd W. Vaughan

unread,

Apr 30, 2007, 3:04:43 PM4/30/07

to

On Apr 29, 8:08 am, RICLAND <blackwr...@lycos.com> wrote:
> David Von Pein wrote:
> > As usual, a CTer has everything backwards.
>
> You mean everything "backward."
>
> No "s" required when "backward" is used as an adjective.
>
>

Just below you mean "gobbledygook" or "gobbledegook".

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/gobbledygook

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gobbledygook

Two can play your game.

>
> > It's much more likely that a LACK of contradictions would equate more
> > to a "Pre-arranged Plot".
>
> Then you admit there are contradictions? This is good. Your gobbleygook
> about "pre-arranged Plot (is there any other kind?) is worthless, though.
>
>
>
> > Contradictions in a case with HUNDREDS of witnesses (such as this
> > case) should be EXPECTED. If they weren't there, I'd probably be more
> > suspicious of a perfectly-carried-out "plot" of some kind.
>
> First, the contradictions include the hundreds of pieces of evidence.
> Second, there is no contractions

You mean "contradictions".

Two can play your game.

>among the witnesses, just
> contradictions between what they say and what the Warren Commission says.
>
> In every instance the witnesses say one thing, while the Warren
> Commission says something completely different or simply ignores what
> they say.
>
> For example, more than 40 witnesses say the shots came from the grassy
> knoll, while the Warren Commission says they did not. Gov. Connally says
> he wasn't hit with the same bullet JFK was,

That's not what Governor Connally told the Warren Commission.

tomnln

unread,

Apr 30, 2007, 5:39:59 PM4/30/07

to

JBC said after the first shot he saw JFK "Slumped".

http://whokilledjfk.net/catch_of_the_day.htm

THAT nullifies the SBT.

"Todd W. Vaughan" <twvaug...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1177959883.8...@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...

cdddraftsman

unread,

Apr 30, 2007, 8:48:45 PM4/30/07

to

He said it figuratively ASSHIOLE ! YOU ARE SO FUCKING STUPID ,
EVEN WITH THE EVENT FILMED YOU STILL CAN'T FIGURE IT OUT !
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ! R O S S L E Y ' S A D U M B F U C K !
HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHA ! B O Z O ! ..............................tl

AND NOW YOU CAN ADDRESS YOUR CRIMES
HERE ROSSLENUTS :

The World and
We are sick and tired of your Lie's Rossley ! :

ANSWER FOR YOUR CRIMES ! :

On Apr 30, 2:39 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> JBC said after the first shot he saw JFK "Slumped".
>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/catch_of_the_day.htm
>
> THAT nullifies the SBT.
>

> "Todd W. Vaughan" <twvaughan2...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:1177959883.8...@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...

> >> The Rebuttal to Bugliosi's JFK Assassination Bookhttp://jfkhit.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

cdddraftsman

unread,

Apr 30, 2007, 8:55:06 PM4/30/07

to

No need to remove your testicles from your mouth to be
able to yell at me bozo , I just disposed of any further
need to discuss this issue ! The matter is closed !
.............tl

> > > Case Wide Open: A JFK Murder Investigationhttp://community.webtv.net/ccwallace/CaseWideOpenAJFK- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

tomnln

unread,

Apr 30, 2007, 11:37:01 PM4/30/07

to

http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm

RUN LOUSY RUN

"cdddraftsman" <cdddra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1177980525....@c35g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

tomnln

unread,

Apr 30, 2007, 11:37:42 PM4/30/07

to

http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm

"cdddraftsman" <cdddra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:1177980906.6...@u30g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...