Cultural Learnings of David von Pein for Make Clear Conclusion of No Conspiracy
Baron Wrangle
live television and radio coverage of the assassination to debunk
"most of" the major conspiracy theories of the assassination:
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/becoming-lone-assassin-believer.html
I suppose you could, but why stop there? There's so much more to
learn! Here, you learn that the shots were fired at 12:45 PM CST:
http://www.youtube.com/user/DavidVonPein1#p/c/5A7AB25B97DEDAE9/0/lDCt7dRndDo
Here, you learn that the shots were fired after the presidential
limosine passed under the triple overpass:
http://www.youtube.com/user/DavidVonPein1#p/c/5A7AB25B97DEDAE9/5/LML4qZnlEIA
Here, you learn that Lieutenant J.C. Day walked out of the Texas
School Depository with a British 303 (.30-03?) rifle.
http://www.youtube.com/user/DavidVonPein1#p/c/5A7AB25B97DEDAE9/7/5UEPHeWdtJI
Here, you learn that a Mauser was found in the Depository:
http://www.youtube.com/user/DavidVonPein1#p/c/5A7AB25B97DEDAE9/8/bscLfaTm7Zk
Here, you learn that a rifle was found on the fifth floor of the
Depository and that Lee Harvey Oswald exchanged fire with J.D. Tippit
inside the Texas Theater, killing him:
http://www.youtube.com/user/DavidVonPein1#p/c/5A7AB25B97DEDAE9/13/Ae9Mle8JYBM
BW
The devil can cite scripture for his purpose.
Antonio in "The Merchant of Venice," Act I, Scene iii
Bud
> Here's one of DVP's web sites, in which he recommends watching the
> live television and radio coverage of the assassination to debunk
> "most of" the major conspiracy theories of the assassination:
>
>
> I suppose you could, but why stop there? There's so much more to
> learn! Here, you learn that the shots were fired at 12:45 PM CST:
>
>
> Here, you learn that the shots were fired after the presidential
> limosine passed under the triple overpass:
>
>
> Here, you learn that Lieutenant J.C. Day walked out of the Texas
> School Depository with a British 303 (.30-03?) rifle.
>
>
> Here, you learn that a Mauser was found in the Depository:
>
>
> Here, you learn that a rifle was found on the fifth floor of the
> Depository and that Lee Harvey Oswald exchanged fire with J.D. Tippit
> inside the Texas Theater, killing him:
>
>
> BW
>
> The devil can cite scripture for his purpose.
>
> Antonio in "The Merchant of Venice," Act I, Scene iii
Retards... focusing on all the wrong things since 1963.
aeffects
Budster the Dudster, admit it troll.... you've got plenty to do even
40 years AFTER the fact.... get busy nutless! Or, you can always run
back to .johnnies and sulk there :) LMFAO!
aeffects
Budster the Dudster, admit it troll.... you've got plenty to do even
Baron Wrangle
>
> - Show quoted text -
Yes, like the truth
BW
Bud
You think those things you mentioned are true?
> BW
Bud
No, nothing. Ruby wrapped things up nicely.
Baron Wrangle
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Since David von Pein relies on them, no.
BW
aeffects
evidently you have a tough time swallowing evwen the WCR, otherwise,
why are you still trying to convince yourself of its legit-ness, even
40+ years after the fact ..... ya some kind of moron or sumpin'?
Baron Wrangle
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Better make it moron, Bud. "Sumpin'" includes imbeciles and idiots.
BW
David Von Pein
Thanks for the plugs, Kook Baron.
That particular "Watch The 11/22 TV Coverage" article has been a
favorite of mine for years--mainly because I have never once heard
anyone else ever talk about the common-sense things I mention in that
article. (Maybe somebody has discussed it in the past, but I sure
haven't come across it.)
Here's the article in full (all common sense included free of charge):
-------------------------------------
To those JFK conspiracy theorists who seem to favor the Oliver
Stone-like or Robert Groden-promoted assassination scenarios (that
feature a minimum of three gunmen and anywhere from 6 to 10 gunshots
being fired at President Kennedy in Dallas' Dealey Plaza on November
22, 1963) -- I always suggest to them that they ought to dig up some
of
the originally-aired "As It Is Happening" live TV or radio broadcasts
from that dark Friday in American history.
After performing that exercise of watching a few hours of the November
22 television coverage of the assassination (in real time), or
listening to some of the radio broadcasts in real time (which works
just as well) -- I challenge anyone to then arrive at the same
conclusion that was slapped up on the big theater screen in 1991 via
Director Oliver Stone's blockbuster, conspiracy-laden motion picture
"JFK".
Watching the day's events unfold "live" in front of you (or listening
to them unfold on the radio as it was happening) should, in my
opinion,
provide everyone with a good general idea of how utterly impossible a
task it would have been to have "faked" so much stuff that was being
IMMEDIATELY reported to the world on live television and radio within
minutes and hours of the President's assassination (and within a very
short space of time following Police Officer J.D. Tippit's murder as
well).
Via those original live TV/Radio broadcasts, you're not going to hear
a
SINGLE report that resembles anything close to the Oliver Stone/Jim
Garrison-endorsed nonsense of:
"Three gunmen fired six shots at President Kennedy's motorcade today
here in Dallas!!"
What you will hear, instead, is live coverage, as it happened, of a
ONE-GUNMAN assassination taking place from where the majority of
witnesses said it took place (the Texas School Book Depository
Building), with no more than three shots having been fired by THE
SINGLE SHOOTER, which is a shot count that over 91% of the witnesses
concur with -- including the small percentage of witnesses who heard
only one or two shots, who are witnesses that certainly don't do Mr.
Stone's "6-shot ambush" theory any favors.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/shots.htm
Upon evaluating virtually ALL of the TV networks' live assassination
footage from November 22nd, 1963, there is no possible way that a
reasonable person could arrive at a conclusion that JFK was shot by
three assassins, firing from both front and rear. Let alone arriving
at
an even more-cockeyed conclusion, as purported by Mr. Groden and some
other CTers, which is an outlandish conspiracy-flavored scenario that
has John Kennedy and John Connally being shot by way more than just
the
two Warren Commission-backed Mannlicher-Carcano bullets from Lee
Harvey
Oswald's rifle.
Very nearly all of the information being reported on TV and radio that
November day favored a "Lone Assassin" shooting scenario (including
the
info concerning the Tippit murder in Oak Cliff), with very little
evidence and information to support any type of a "conspiracy"
whatsoever.
This is quite a telling "One Killer" fact. Because, in my view, if a
vast conspiracy and subsequent "cover-up" had been in place on
November
22nd (given the immense amount of TV and radio coverage, with
reporters
scrutinizing everything coming across their desks and digging hard for
any type of case-solving clues during those first hours and days after
JFK and J.D. Tippit were killed), I think that at least SOME pieces of
the conspiracy would have leaked through to the sweeping television
and
radio coverage surrounding the two Dallas murders.
And I'm guessing that every reporter and newsman in the country would
have loved to dig up some "conspiracy"-oriented angle during that
weekend in November of '63. Being the person who uncovered such a huge
story would certainly be a feather in that reporter's cap, to be sure.
But, as it turned out, nothing of that nature occurred....and has yet
to occur all these many years later.
To think (as many theorists do) that these conspirators were so smart
and so quick to have had the capabilities to immediately eliminate
virtually every last scrap of information leading to a conspiracy plot
of some kind, making sure that none of the "multi-gunmen shooting
event" details seeped through to the media (multiplied by TWO separate
murders as well, counting Tippit's!), is to think that any such
evil-doers had powers similar to "Superman".
For example -- Almost every one of the initial reports concerning the
number of gunshots heard by witnesses stated "3 shots". And while it's
true that the very first report of the shooting from UPI's Merriman
Smith (which was broadcast over all the television networks) stated
"Three shots were fired...", it's also worth noting that Smith's
initial bulletin was not the ONLY "three-shots" account that was
reported during those early hours just after the shooting.
For instance, Jay Watson of ABC affiliate WFAA-TV in Dallas (who
happened to be in Dealey Plaza during the shooting and nervously
reported the first bulletins to the unaware Dallas TV audience) is
heard multiple times on November 22 saying he heard "3 shots" fired.
Plus, several other members of the media are also on record stating
their own PERSONAL beliefs that exactly three shots were fired by the
assassin, including Robert MacNeil, Jack Bell, Bob Clark, Jerry
Haynes,
and Pierce Allman, among still others.
Could these ultra-clever conspirators have somehow managed to
"manipulate" several reporters who were relaying the news live to the
world immediately after the event, and have them ALL report on hearing
just "three shots" (or, in a few cases, hearing just TWO shots, which
is a number that certainly does not favor a "Multi-Shooter Conspiracy
Plot")?
Or did the plotters just happen to get really, really LUCKY when
virtually all of the news reports favored the "Three Shots Fired"
conclusion? With this 3-shot scenario matching the precise number of
bullet shells that were found on the 6th Floor of the Book Depository
after the shooting; and also perfectly matching the exact number of
shots heard by TSBD witness Harold Norman, and also perfectly matching
the precise number of bullet shells (3) that Norman heard hitting the
plywood floor directly above his 5th-Floor location within the
Depository.
Which, per Oliver Stone's movie, would mean that a full 50% of the
ACTUAL number of gunshots were somehow inaudible to the enormous
majority (91%+) of the earwitnesses! And, remember, Oliver has NONE of
the shots within his movie's six-shot assassination ambush being
"synchronized" in order to merge together with the sound of some of
the
other shots.
And yet, per Mr. Stone, we're supposed to actually believe that
approximately 9 out of every 10 witnesses somehow missed hearing HALF
of the gunshots fired that day! A reasonable thing to believe....or
not? I ask you.
Were these so-called conspiratorial shooters so good that they could
make 4 to 10 shots sound like only three to the vast majority of
witnesses scattered all throughout Dealey Plaza? Highly doubtful, to
say the least.
Again....watch the live TV footage....or listen to some of the
surviving 11/22/63 radio tapes....and then try to find a multi-gunmen
conspiracy lurking within any of those original broadcasts.
This link [below] offers up a great "Live" example of what I'm talking
about.
It contains over an hour's worth of footage from Dallas radio station
KLIF, beginning at 12:35 PM (Dallas time) on the afternoon of Friday,
November 22, 1963.
http://www.box.net/shared/hqqtfedzrh
I challenge anyone to try and locate even a hint of a multi-gun
conspiracy within that radio footage. Do conspiracy buffs think that
all of these
KLIF news reporters were "in" on some kind of massive conspiracy plot
and
an IMMEDIATELY-IN-PLACE "cover-up" operation too? That would be a good
question for conspiracists to ask themselves as they listen to that
live radio coverage.
David Von Pein
December 2006
June 2010
aeffects
troll... no one is going to run your foolish errands for you.... get
some nads, dipshit!
Gil Jesus
> troll... no one is going to run your foolish errands for you.... get
> some nads, dipshit!
Disinfo Dave hawking his 11 herbs and spices:
http://i44.tinypic.com/30c8w3l.jpg
I'm wondering if those chicken bones found on the sixth floor
came from original, extra crispy or grilled ?
Baron Wrangle
> Thanks for the plugs, Kook Baron.
>
> That particular "Watch The 11/22 TV Coverage" article has been a
> favorite of mine for years--mainly because I have never once heard
> anyone else ever talk about the common-sense things I mention in that
> article. (Maybe somebody has discussed it in the past, but I sure
> haven't come across it.)
>
Darn tootin' nobody's talked about those common sense things--because
they aren't there! I have just listed several examples of information
that's definitely or probably wrong in NBC's coverage on the day of
the assassination. I didn't mention the other networks, or go beyond
November 22. On November 24, 1963, WFAA-TV reported that a small
elderly man had just shot Lee Harvey Oswald. Here is a link to KDFW's
video archives, which includes KRLD-TV's coverage of the
assassination:
http://www.myfoxdfw.com/subindex/news/fox_4_projects/jfk_video
On its coverage of Oswald's shooting, you can hear Bob Huffaker
talking about "Lee Harold Oswald." Gil mentioned chicken bones. The
book "Four Days," published in 1964, described Kennedy's assassin
eating chicken and drinking Dr. Pepper as he waited for Kennedy to
arrive. No, it was Bonnie Ray Williams who had lunch on the sixth
floor. (When did he leave?) And you want us to base our conclusion
that there was no conspiracy on this information. The Warren
Commission had access to sworn testimony, some of which wasn't
perjured. They never stated that there wasn't any conspiracy. They
merely stated that they knew of no evidence that Oswald or Ruby had
been part of a conspiracy to kill Kennedy. The TV coverage is useful
if you want to recall past times or work on your Elie Abel
impersonation.
I'm no fan of Edward Jay Epstein--I call him the unscrupulous
investigator's best friend--but you should read his book "Between Fact
and Fiction: The Problem with Journalism." Journalism isn't flat-out
fiction, but it is rarely unchallengable fact. During my
undergraduate days (figure out when), one of my fellow students came
into probability class waving a copy of the New York Times and saying
that the Russians had solved the traveling salesman problem. They
hadn't. You can expect the National Enquirer to get some facts about
Lady Gaga wrong, but the New York Times? Last week, a Times column
described Ann Richards and Earl Weaver conversing in heaven. Weaver
was amused to hear about this.
So, if you won't listen to common sense, why should I present you with
the truth? As my uncle Jack said, "You can't handle the truth!" I
was tempted to inject the truth into Ben and Rob's vaudeville act, but
I restrained myself. Walt, I will answer any of your questions.
But enough serious talk--the holidays are approaching! Smoke some
eggnog! Drink a cigar!
> Here's the article in full (all common sense included free of charge):
As Allan Sherman said, "Good advice costs nothing, and it's worth the
price."
He don't know me very well, do he?
Freiherr von Küch
Keen, Objective, Observant Knower
P.S. I feel like Dick Gregory
Bud
You can show DVP relies on the information you highlighted?
> BW
Bud
I don`t concern myself with those non-issues at all. I concern
myself with your retard-ness.
Bud
So does "conspiracy theorist".
>
> BW
Baron Wrangle
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
OK, you're a moron, then.
FvK, KOOK
David Von Pein
Kook Baron thinks that an obvious ERROR is supposed to indicate
"conspiracy" (like the mix-up about WHO was eating a chicken-on-the-
bone sandwich on the sixth floor, or the obvious error about the ONE
AND ONLY rifle that was found in the TSBD).
I guess, per Kook Baron, we're supposed to believe that ALL of those
various types of rifles were, indeed, seen in the TSBD on 11/22 --
from a Mauser, to a .303, to a Carcano, to a Japanese weapon.
And I guess Kook Baron also must think that the obvious error about
Tippit being shot INSIDE the theater is somehow supposed to signal
"conspiracy" too. But--how?
My original article about the 11/22 TV/radio footage wasn't talking
about obvious (and expected) mistakes. I was talking about this:
If Oliver Stone is right (as many CTers believe), then why don't we
hear ANYBODY saying something like this on live TV/radio shortly after
the shots were fired in Dealey Plaza?:
"SIX SHOTS WERE FIRED FROM THREE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS TODAY AT
PRESIDENT KENNEDY."
Nothing even CLOSE to that type of bulletin was reported at any time
on 11/22/63.
Baron Wrangle
> Kook Baron thinks that an obvious ERROR is supposed to indicate
> "conspiracy" (like the mix-up about WHO was eating a chicken-on-the-
> bone sandwich on the sixth floor, or the obvious error about the ONE
> AND ONLY rifle that was found in the TSBD).
>
> I guess, per Kook Baron, we're supposed to believe that ALL of those
> various types of rifles were, indeed, seen in the TSBD on 11/22 --
> from a Mauser, to a .303, to a Carcano, to a Japanese weapon.
You didn't read what I wrote. I described the reports as definitely
wrong or probably wrong. I'm listing the report on the Mauser as
probably wrong. There are some who will argue until they're blue in
the face that a Mauser was found in the Depository. I'm not one of
them.
FvK, KOOK
Baron Wrangle
Yes, the news media is so good at ferreting out conspiracy. We
learned from them of the conspiracy going on inside Enron--after the
company filed for bankruptcy! Or, take Iran-contra. What periodical
reported the arms for hostages deal? The New York Times? The
Washington Post? No, it was Ash-Shiraa, a Lebanese magazine. Such a
stellar record!
FvK, KOOK
Ego Dominus Tuus
W.B. Yeats
David Von Pein
>>> "You didn't read what I wrote. I described the reports as definitely wrong or probably wrong. I'm listing the report on the Mauser as probably wrong. There are some who will argue until they're blue in the face that a Mauser was found in the Depository. I'm not one of them." <<<
So, Kook Baron, therefore, this whole thread you started is pretty
much totally pointless and meaningless, and fails to debunk the point
I made in my original 2006 article re the 11/22 coverage.
What was the point of this thread again, Mr. Kook? To illustrate that
the media got some things wrong on 11/22?
Big deal.
Baron Wrangle
No, my point was to demonstrate that you are a complete and utter
idiot for using reports of dubious accuracy to establish that John F.
Kennedy was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald acting alone, and for
thinking that anyone who wasn't already convinced of your version of
events would be convinced.
I didn't even check to see if your videos of CBS-TV's coverage
extended to November 25, 1963 and included Dan Rather's report from
Dallas on that day that he had just viewed the Zapruder film. Neither
the Zapruder film nor a copy of it were in Dallas on that day.
Walter Lippmann said it best: "The news and the truth are not the
same thing." Or, maybe Mad Magazine said it best. A 1959 issue
included a series of editions of a ficticious newspaper. In the
earliest edition, there was heavy traffic in Boston and an H-bomb had
been dropped on Cairo. In the latest edition, an explosives warehouse
had detonated in Cairo, Illinois, and aliens had landed in Boston.
FvK, KOOK
Always with the negative waves, Moriarty. Always with the negative
waves.
Donald Sutherland in "Kelly's Heroes"
> Big deal.
David Von Pein
Kook Baron probably thinks that virtually every witness missed hearing
half of the shots in Dealey Plaza. Almost every single witness heard
three shots or fewer. And yet the kooks think 4 to 10 shots were
fired. Don Adams thinks there were 11. Kooky as hell.
aeffects
Von Pein -- pssst, you just got your ass kicked, denial is your BEST
friend, eh hon?
You keep coming back here hon, you're thee prime example of: lone nut
lunacy!
lazu...@webtv.net
Sandy Speaker world war 2 vet who heard 5? And A.J. Millican who heard
8? And Jean Hill who heard 4-6? And James Worrell who heard 4? There's a
few others who more than 3 as well...Laz
Baron Wrangle
Whoah . . . must have had too much egg nog and nodded off. (BTW, will
the person who spiked DVP's nog with peyote please come forward? This
is serious business, people. Drinking egg nog shouldn't make you
think you're an egg.) DVP puts great stock in Harold Weisberg's
"voting witnesses." For the sake of argument, I will acknowledge that
the majority of Dealey Plaza witnesses recalled hearing three shots if
David acknowledges that the majority of doctors in the Parkland
emergency room described a large wound in the back of JFK's head. I
draw the line, however, at applying his sophistries with the shots to
the head wounds.
FvK, KOOK
P.S. Better look forward to a better 2011, David! Not that it'll
happen.
David Von Pein
Rob Caprio
> http://JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/boh.html
Dave, why all the lurking on the other board? Why don't you post
anything? Or do you, but under a different name?
tom...@cox.net
wHAT COULD HE POSSIBL POST/
tHIS ASSHOLE DOESN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE EVIDENCE/TESTIMONY IN THE 26
VOLUMES.
--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
Rob Caprio
DVP is different from most LNers (is he Dave Reitzes?) because he does
know the evidence and he does cite it from time to time, but he lies
about what it shows us. DVP has cited more evidence to me than any
other LNer, but he continually lies about it supporting the WC's
theory -- which it doesn't.
Therefore, he is the most dishonest of the group because he knows it
does not support the WC's claims but he keeps on lying and claiming it
does.
Baron Wrangle
I can just hear DVP sighing "Rob!", like Mary Tyler Moore on "The Dick
van Dyke Show."
If you accidentally swallow some of his tripe, watch this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0A3GUlmIFzE
It will come right up.
FvK, KOOK
Baron Wrangle
Thanks for mentioning Robert MacNeil:
"Defense of the Warren Report is characterized by ingnorance and
stupidity. The only other means of defending it is by lies.
Indiscriminately and lustily JAMA resorts to all these means under
[George] Lundberg's spirited and uninhibited leadership.
"In one of his little-noticed displays of both ignorance and
stupidity, after all that effort in JAMA and in his eminently
successful press conference, he actually admitted that the Report is
unacceptable and wrong beyond repair. And appeared entirely unaware
of it!
"But the devotion of the media to its own support of the Report as
well as media ignorance of the established facts of the assassination,
let him get away with it even as he was making his unintended
confession or error on 'The MacNeil/Lehrer Newshour' of May 20, 1992.
"The Warren Report concluded that Oswald alone fired three shots and
that no other shots were fired during the assassination. Admitting a
single additional shot at the very least was to admit that without
possibility of any question at all, there had been a conspiracy.
Without enough time for three shots, a fourth was impossible for
Oswald with that rifle.
"Thus, even without Specter's impossible concoction of that magic
bullet having inflicted all seven nonfatal wounds on the President and
Connally, on the basis of a fourth shot alone there was a conspiracy.
It seems both the FBI and the Secret Service independently determined
to deny there had been a conspiracy. Each decided to ignore the shot
that was fired during the assassination and missed the car and its
occupants widely, by a large margin, if fired from that 'Oswald'
window.
"Throughout all the articles, Lundberg's editorial, and the
selection of letters it published, JAMA acknowledged only two shots
having been fired.
"Typical is Lundberg at his press conference quoted in the Los
Angeles Times of May 20, 1992: 'I can state without concern or
question that President Kennedy was struck and killed by two, and only
two bullets, fired from one high-velocity rifle. No other bullets
struck the President. A single assassin fired both.'
"He amplified this with what is not tainted by a single accuracy:
'The main conspiracy theory rests on there being more than one gun and
the bullets hitting the President in more than one direction. We can
categorically state that to be untrue.' If, however, other shots that
struck nobody were fired, that means there was a conspiracy.
"When the FBI could no longer ignore other shots, it dismissed the
bullets forced upon it with the non sequitur that those bullets would
not have fit in Oswald's rifle! This, of course, is what an honest
investigation would have used as the basis for further investigation.
"Jim Lehrer of 'The MacNeil/Lehrer Newshour' knew that there had
been at least a third shot because he reported it when he worked for
the Dallas Times Herald. He had interviewed James Tague, who was
wounded by a spray of concrete from a curbstone that ahd been struck
by a bullet during the assassination. On the Lundberg broadcast
Lehrer made no mention of his personal knowledge of this 'missed'
shot, which could not have come from where Oswald was allegedly
shooting.
"MacNeil, saying he would 'play devil's advocate,' said that JAMA
was 'not capable of saying that those were the only bullets fired at
the President.'
"(On November 11 [sic] 1963, MacNeil, then an NBC reporter in the
motorcade, heard three shots and said that when he rushed in to the
TSBD looking for a phone, Oswald directed him to one on the first
floor when Oswald was allegedly on the sixth floor. So, naturally,
the Commission did not call him to testify. He did not recall this
when interviewing Lundberg [See Manchester's 'The Death of a
President,' page 229]).
"Lundberg's reply was: 'No, there may have been many other
gunshots . . . But none of them hit the President'"
Harold Weisberg, "Never Again! The Government Conspiracy in the JFK
Assassination" (New York: Carroll & Graf, 1995), pp. 323-24.
Many other gunshots? If MacNeil didn't doubt that there were only
three shots before inteviewing Lundberg, he must have afterwards.
BW
Baron Wrangle
Three employees of the TSBD were on the fifth floor, directly below
the "sniper's perch," at the time of the assassination. One of them,
James Jarman, thought that the first shot had come from below (3 WCH
209):
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0109a.htm
Another, Bonnie Ray Williams, thought that the first shot was a
backfire or gun salute (3 WCH 175):
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0092a.htm
So, almost all of the witnesses directly below the sniper's perch
thought that the first shot had come from below. What good is it if
you establish that there were exactly three shots, but that at least
one didn't come from the sniper's perch?
BW
Bud
> On Dec 22 2010, 9:33 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Kook Baron probably thinks that virtually every witness missed hearing
> > half of the shots in Dealey Plaza. Almost every single witness heard
> > three shots or fewer. And yet the kooks think 4 to 10 shots were
> > fired. Don Adams thinks there were 11. Kooky as hell.
>
> Three employees of the TSBD were on the fifth floor, directly below
> the "sniper's perch," at the time of the assassination. One of them,
> James Jarman, thought that the first shot had come from below (3 WCH
> 209):
>
>
> Another, Bonnie Ray Williams, thought that the first shot was a
> backfire or gun salute (3 WCH 175):
So his mind went to "what caused that noise?", and his mind went
through the loud sounds it had experienced in the past. This doesn`t
speak to the idea that he had in his mind a direction the sound had
come from.
> http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3...
>
> So, almost all of the witnesses directly below the sniper's perch
> thought that the first shot had come from below.
Showing that people don`t really place the direction of sound well,
which the directions people indicated outside confirm.
> What good is it if
> you establish that there were exactly three shots, but that at least
> one didn't come from the sniper's perch?
Did BRW or Jarman indicate they thought the sounds came from
multiple sources?
> BW
Baron Wrangle
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Jarman thought that the first shot came from below him and to his
left. There wasn't much of the Depository to his left, but the Dal-
Tex Building was to his left. He said that the subsequent shots he
heard sounded the same. Williams's testimony wasn't as detailed.
BW
Baron Wrangle
Post? OK, Boomer.