Re: "PAM", "DVP", "THE BUG", DiEUGENIO, AND "ITTC"
David Von Pein
www.JFKAssassinationForum.com/index.php/topic,912.msg12824.html#msg12824
www.JFKAssassinationForum.com/index.php/topic,912.msg13318.html#msg13318
>>> "Although "DVP" loves to take any opportunity to ramble on about his theories about the assassination and pay homage to his heroes such as the Bug [Vincent T. Bugliosi] and Gary Mack either directly or indirectly through imitation, it is usually quickly apparent that he also prefers to allow others such as Mack and the Bug to do his thinking for him, and seems to have little interest in working through issues objectively. Such is also the dilemna [sic] of ITTC ["JFK: Inside The Target Car"], in that it conveniently tells everyone what to think, no matter what their footage actually shows. It also encourages everyone to allow Gary Mack and the DC [Discovery Channel] to do their thinking for them, and not to question what might have been purposefully left out, and cheerily follow all the rabbit trails it sets up." <<<
IMO, the simulated Texas School Book Depository gunshot that was shown
in the "Inside The Target Car" program wasn't nearly as important as
the two "from the Knoll" simulated shots, which were two gunshots
(from two different types of rifles) that prove beyond all possible
doubt that no shot could have struck JFK in the head from the Grassy
Knoll, which is the favorite location, of course, for the CTers of the
world to place their make-believe "frontal" gunman in Dealey Plaza.
"Pam" apparently thinks the 2 "from the Knoll" simulated shots that
Yardley fired in ITTC were rigged in some way. That's a typical CTer
mindset, of course, and it's a mindset that will never ever change
when it comes to the hardline conspiracy theorists.
IOW -- Even when faced with rock-solid PROOF that they are dead wrong
when it comes to their long-held beliefs of a Grassy Knoll gunshot
killing President Kennedy, conspiracists will merely shake off the
proof and begin their pro-conspiracy raving anew the next day, as if
the proof they just witnessed the previous day never even existed.
Hardline JFK conspiracy theorists are, indeed, pathetic (as usual).
"BLACK OP RADIO" FOOTNOTE:
On a related "conspiratorial" note, I was treated to my weekly
Thursday-night chuckle on August 13, 2009, when conspiracy guru James
DiEugenio made his first appearance this month on Len Osanic's weekly
"Black Op Radio" program (linked below).
www.BlackOpRadio.com/black436e.ram
The biggest laugh from the August 13th show was when Mr. DiEugenio
decided to add three additional suspects to the forever-growing list
of potential conspirators in the JFK case. The three being: Buell
Wesley Frazier, Marrion Baker, and Roy Truly.
DiEugenio thinks that the "curtain rod"/"paper bag" story told by
Frazier is "questionable", and Jim also has now decided to believe
that the whole Baker/Truly/Oswald/Lunchroom encounter is
"questionable" as well.
In other words, DiEugenio apparently smells a rat when it comes to the
things that were said (under oath) to the Warren Commission by Wesley
Frazier, Marrion Baker, Roy Truly, and Linnie Mae Randle.
DiEugenio didn't mention Randle among his latest batch of plotters/
liars, but he really has no choice but to put Linnie Mae under that
same "questionable" umbrella too, since she is also on record as one
of only two people who observed Lee Harvey Oswald carrying a long
paper bag on the day of JFK's murder (with 19-year-old Depository
employee Frazier, of course, being the other).
It must be great to be a conspiracy theorist, huh? You can just go on
Internet radio (or wherever) and spout any stupid, unprovable nonsense
you want to....and you'll get some people to believe you. And you
never have to be worried about the actual evidence in the case either.
Just say the evidence (and the testimony of MULTIPLE innocent
witnesses) is "in question" or "questionable", as DiEugenio did on
8/13/09, and evidently that's good enough.
As I said -- pathetic.
ANOTHER RELATED DiEUGENIO FOOTNOTE:
Below is an example (among several that I have documented at my JFK
Blog and elsewhere on the Internet since September 2008) of how
miserable James DiEugenio can be when attempting to evaluate certain
things written by Vincent Bugliosi in VB's 2007 book "Reclaiming
History". And yet we're supposed to take DiEugenio seriously when he
tries to bash and undermine Bugliosi's book incessantly, week after
week? Yeah, right:
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/625da252cb9b3ae9
www.google.com/group/Reclaiming-History/browse_thread/thread/4de239e56e02f210
Gil Jesus
postings.
lazu...@webtv.net
garbge, but apparently the bullet did not fragment in the reenactment
correct, nor was there any blatant back and to the left movement from
the dummy and Gary Mack who has become beneath contempt, deliberately
put Jackie in the way of JFK to try and nullify a GK headshot.
ShutterBun
There was no "back and to the left" because the heads were mounted on
rigid necks. Also, the two grassy knoll shots (from both a soft point
round and a FMJ round) produced wounds that were totally inconsistent
with JFK's anyway. (though I think DVP is mistaken about using two
different rifles for the GK shots; it was the same rifle, but
different ammo)
And no, Jackie's position had NOTHING to do with the experiment.
Sam Brown
"Gil Jesus" <gjj...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:de36e03e-b98b-440b...@k6g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> Try citing the evidence and testimony instead of citing your own
> postings.
ROTFLMAO!!!!!!! This from the fucktard that uses the bible as a refernce for
his sas little life. His pilfered videos are from shows like TMWKK, some of
the most ridiculed and dismissed sources available. Grow a brain. Theres
plenty of room for one behind that freakishly massive forehead of yours.
You're not supposed to hear the ocean all day long, did you know that Chico?
David Von Pein
>>> "I think DVP is mistaken about using two different rifles for the GK shots..." <<<
I'm not mistaken. There were two different guns used in the "Knoll"
experiments -- a Winchester rifle and a Carcano.
ShutterBun
That's what I initially thought, too. But man, the video editing and
the narration are no help. First of all, he holds up an "Oswald"
style bullet, saying he will use the same kind. Then the next scene
shows him loading in "pointy bullets." What's more, he manually
pushes them down into the magazine, which is not at all like Oswald's
rifle. (lord knows I've had enough trouble about the issues of
loading Carcanos without clips on this board) The shot of his finger
on the trigger reveals no housing for the clip. There aren't many
good shots of him with the second rifle, but I'll agree, it's clearly
not the same as the first one. It would have been helpful if the
narrator just flat out said "Using the same type of ammunition AND
rifle as Oswald, he takes his second shot..." Might he have used the
"long rifle" version of the Carcano? Obviously, editing can make it
look like just about anything (substituting previous footage of his
finger on the trigger of a different rifle, for dramatic effect, etc.)
I just wish the narration had been more clear.
But at a minimum, it's clear to me now that there were indeed two
different rifles used on the Knoll shots.