A Fun CT Bashfest (Revisited)
David Von Pein
THAT THEY REALLY ARE KOOKS, AND ALSO BEAT THEM OVER THE HEAD WITH THE
ACTUAL EVIDENCE IN THE KENNEDY CASE AS OFTEN AS POSSIBLE...EVIDENCE
THAT THE KOOKS THINK WAS (SOMEHOW) ALL "FAKED".
THE FOLLOWING IS A RE-POST FROM A SESSION I HAD WITH A CONSPIRACY KOOK
NAMED "ROB" IN LATE 2007. A QUINTESSENTIAL "NOTHING IS WHAT IT SEEMS
TO BE" KOOK, ROB KEPT COMING BACK FOR MORE, AND WAS BEATEN BACK INTO
THE WOODS EACH TIME (WITH THE EVIDENCE).
ROB, THOUGH, THINKS HE WON EVERY DEBATE WE HAD. AMAZING, HUH? ......
===================================================
Let's begin with this lovely gem from the e-lips of Rob The Mega-Kook
(it's worth highlighting every so often...just for the laughs this
quote invariably elicits):
"LHO shot no one that day." -- Robcap; October 22, 2007
===================================================
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/a4c6818d6cdc7c89
>>> "Don't get me wrong..." <<<
You're always wrong.
>>> "...there are some crazy theories out for conspiracy..." <<<
Like the "LHO shot no one" theory. Yeah, that's one for the KookBooks,
to be sure.
>>> "...but the craziest one of all is the official theory." <<<
To a kook like you, sure it's "crazy". That's because it actually
relies on something called THE ACTUAL EVIDENCE in the case (as opposed
to made-up claptrap gushed forth by CT-Kooks).
After all, why would anyone even BEGIN to suspect dear sweet Lee
Oswald of any wrong-doing on 11/22/63? It was only HIS gun on the 6th
Floor, shells from HIS gun in the SN, HIS prints all over the exact
same teeny-tiny area where JFK's assassin was located during the
assassination itself, HIS gun that killed Tippit, HIS bullets in the
limousine where the President was shot, HIS bullet in the hospital
where the victims were taken, HIS face identified as the one and only
killer of Tippit, and HIS face identified by Howard Brennan as JFK's
murderer too.
Yeah....Rob's right. I've got "nothing".
It's a wonder the silly ol' Warren Commission got ANYBODY to believe
such flimsy, threadbare evidence...huh Mr. Rob-Mega-Kook?
>>> "Maybe the cop that found {the Tippit shells} and initialed them only to have other bullets entered as evidence..." <<<
More extraordinary conclusions arrived at by a mega-kook (when
ordinary scenarios can work just as easily...even better). Go figure.
And there's no proof that Officer Poe marked ANY shells on Tenth
Street on November 22. Maybe he did mark them; but maybe he didn't.
Poe just flat-out wasn't sure. I showed you his WC testimony
previously...which you totally ignored, no doubt. Here it is again
anyway.....
JOE BALL -- "Did you put any markings on the hulls?"
J.M. POE -- "I couldn't swear to it; no, sir."
[Later...]
MR. BALL -- "Did you make a mark?"
MR. POE -- "I can't swear to it; no, sir."
MR. BALL -- "But there is a mark on two of these?"
MR. POE -- "There is a mark. I believe I put on them, but I couldn't
swear to it. I couldn't make them out any more."
MR. BALL -- "Now, the ones you said you made a mark on are you think
it is these two? Q-77 and Q-75?"
MR. POE -- "Yes, sir; those two there."
MR. BALL -- "Both marked Western Special? They both are marked Western
Special."
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/poe.htm
(No mention of any "automatic" shells at all. It's all in a kook's
mind.)
>>> "LHO's handgun had a bent firing pin anyway." <<<
Not when he plugged Tippit four times with it.
Kook.
>>> "Which witness said they saw the killer shaking out bullets? It could appear to be that way from a distance to a terrified witness as the bullets automatically eject, thus the term automatic." <<<
Good God...you really ARE clueless re. the evidence, aren't you? (And
yet you're so POSITIVE that "LHO shot no one" on November 22nd. You're
Super-Pathetic!)
Virginia Davis AND Barbara Davis saw Lee Oswald (UP CLOSE, within just
a few feet of their own bodies), and both Davis girls saw Oswald
dumping shells out of his gun as LHO cut across their yard.
In both of the Davises' 11/22 affidavits, they mention the fact that
they saw a man crossing their yard "unloading his gun":
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/bdavis.htm
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/vdavis.htm
~~~~~
BARBARA DAVIS -- "I heard a shot and jumped up and heard another shot.
I put on my shoes and went to the door and I saw this man walking
across my front yard unloading a gun. .... When the police arrived, I
showed one of them where I saw this man emptying his gun and we found
a shell."
VIRGINIA DAVIS -- "We heard a shot and then another shot and ran to
the side door at Patton Street. I saw the boy cutting across our yard
and he was unloading his gun. .... Jeanette {Barbara Davis} found a
[sic] empty shell that the man had unloaded and gave it to the police.
After the police had left, I found a [sic] empty shell in our yard."
~~~~~
BTW, Domingo Benavides saw the killer (whom he later stated on CBS-TV
was positively LHO) dumping shells from his gun too. .....
BENAVIDES (Via his WC session) -- "Then I seen the man turn and walk
back to the sidewalk and go on the sidewalk and he walked maybe five
foot and then kind of stalled. He didn't exactly stop. And he threw
one shell and must have took five or six more steps and threw the
other shell up, and then he kind of stepped up to a pretty good trot
going around the corner."
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/benavide.htm
>>> "12 {Tippit witnesses} initially became two, and then one, as Benevides [sic] was very hesitant and never gave a firm, definitive ID." <<<
Yes he did. Very definitively too (in front of an audience of millions
in June 1967):
EDDIE BARKER -- "Is there any doubt in your mind that Oswald was the
man you had seen shoot Tippit?"
DOMINGO BENAVIDES -- "No, sir; there was no doubt at all. Period. I
could even tell you how he combed his hair and the clothes he wore and
what-have-you and the details....and if he'd had a scar on his face, I
could have probably told you about it. You don't forget things like
that."
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/6b2a00b13bdc81ae
>>> "You got nothing {as far as "Tippit witnesses" go}." <<<
Yeah, I've only got:
1.) Helen Markham
2.) Domingo Benavides
3.) Jack Tatum
4.) William Scoggins
5.) Ted Callaway
6.) Barbara J. Davis
7.) Virginia Davis
8.) Warren Reynolds
9.) B.M. "Pat" Patterson
10.) L.J. Lewis
11.) Harold Russell
12.) B.D. Searcy
13.) Sam Guinyard
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/1bdb7e56f0427853
A couple of the above Tippit-murder witnesses don't fall into the
"Positive I.D. Of Oswald" category....but every one of them saw an
"Oswald-like" person with a gun either on 10th Street or on Patton
Avenue (approaching Jefferson Blvd.) on 11/22/63.
And the above-mentioned "baker's dozen" doesn't even count the Brocks
(Mary and Robert), who saw an Oz-like man passing through the Texaco
Station just after Tippit was shot, with Mary Brock positively
identifying the man she saw as Lee Harvey Oswald (via a January 1964
FBI Report re. Mary Brock's Nov. 22 observations, linked below):
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/brock_m.htm
So, as you can see, I've practically got "nothing"....right Mr. Kook?
>>> "I haven't heard this." <<<
You haven't heard much of anything, it would seem (except junk spewed
forth by conspiracy authors).
>>> "Let's see some links on the verification of the gun being the {Tippit} murder weapon." <<<
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/nicol.htm
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/cunningham2.htm
MR. EISENBERG -- "Now, for the record, these cartridge cases were
earlier identified as having been fired by the FBI in Commission
Exhibit No. 143, the revolver believed to have been used to kill
Officer Tippit. Also for the record, I obtained these cartridge cases,
both Exhibit 595, which are test cases, and Exhibit 594, which are
cases from the murder scene, from the FBI, and transmitted them
directly to Mr. Nicol for his examination. Mr. Nicol, did you examine
the cartridge cases in Exhibit 594 to determine whether they bad been
fired from the weapon in which the cartridge cases in Exhibit 595 had
been fired?"
JOSEPH D. NICOL (Independent Firearms Expert from Illinois) -- "Yes,
sir; I did."
MR. EISENBERG -- "And can you give us your conclusions?"
MR. NICOL -- "It is my opinion, based upon the similarity of class and
individual characteristics, that the four cartridge cases in 594 were
fired in the same weapon as produced the cartridge cases in 595."
[Re. the bullets recovered from Tippit's body...]
MR. NICOL -- "On specimen 602--I'm sorry--603, which I have designated
as Q-502, I found sufficient individual characteristics to lead me to
the conclusion that that projectile was fired in the same weapon
{CE143, Oswald's revolver} that fired the projectiles in 606."
MR. EISENBERG -- "That is to the exclusion of all other weapons?"
MR. NICOL -- "Yes, sir."
MR. EISENBERG -- "By the way, on the cartridge cases, that was also to
the exclusion of all other weapons?"
MR. NICOL -- "Correct."
~~~~~~~~~~
CORTLANDT CUNNINGHAM (FBI) -- "As a result of my examination, it is my
opinion that those four cartridge eases, Commission Exhibit 594, were
fired in the revolver, Commission Exhibit 143, to the exclusion of all
other weapons."
>>> "We know they substitued the casings, since they lacked the officer's initials he put there at the crime scene." <<<
Prove that the officer (Poe) put his initials on them at the crime
scene. You can't. Even Officer Poe HIMSELF said he couldn't be sure he
marked them. Why isn't HIS OWN WORD good enough for you kooks?
>>> "I want those reports by those cops." <<<
You're the one who wants to believe that Poe initialed some
"automatic" shells....YOU find the "reports" saying so. It's not up to
me to prove your make-believe case.
I've provided Poe's WC testimony above. And there's no mention of
"automatic" shells within that testimony. Obviously, you don't want to
believe anything put forth by the evil "Government", though, right?
Anyway, the facts are still the facts...and those FACTS do not include
ANY "automatic" bullet shells. None.
Sergeant Gerald Hill, who initially (incorrectly) thought the Tippit
shells were from an automatic weapon, tried to clear up the confusion
when he said this in 1986:
"I assumed that it was an automatic simply because we had found
all the hulls in one little general area. .... If you find a cluster
of shells, you have to assume that they were fired from an automatic."
-- Quote by Gerald Hill (Taken from Dale Myers' book, "With Malice";
Pages 260-261)
>>> "I'll keep trying to enlighten you..." <<<
Oh, you mean with wondrous "enlightening" kook statements like these
gems authored by Robert C.?:
"LHO shot no one."
"Which witness said they saw the killer shaking out bullets."
"It wasn't LHO that shot JDT."
"You are trying to distort evidence to make it be LHO just like the WC
did."
"I haven't heard this."
"It was impossible since the gun had a bent firing pin."
"Let's see some links on the verification of the gun being the murder
weapon."
"We know they substitued the casings."
"That is not what I have read."
"LBJ thought he could control him {Senator Richard Russell}."
"You are clueless."
"LHO shot no one." (This one here is worthy of a repeat performance,
due to its extreme idiocy.)
[END KOOK QUOTES.]
When gazing upon the assortment of oddball quotes I've offered above,
it looks like it's Robby who could use a tad bit of "enlightenment"
re. the JFK and Tippit murder cases.
But, per Rob-Kook, DVP is the one who is "clueless". Go figure.
~shrug~
>>> "...but I'm sure the money you make to push the official theory will make it a tough assignment." <<<
Yeah, the evil Government hasn't got anything better to spend their
money on, so they hired a few of us "clueless" LNers to type
meaningless messages into a Google Groups JFK Assassination database,
to be seen by a whopping dozen or so people per day (at best).
For this I make $49,000 a year (dental insurance included too).
All-in-all, not a bad deal. And just for taking candy from a baby too.
[CIA'S "DISINFO CENTRAL" LINKED BELOW:]
David Von Pein
CTer BASHFEST REPLAY (PART 2):
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/99f2d68524323bbd
>>> "He {Roy Kellerman} said JFK had 4 wounds, you guys say 2." <<<
You're an idiot.
LNers know that President Kennedy had FOUR separate "wounds" on his
body -- 2 inshoots (entries) and 2 outshoots (exits).
Kellerman didn't say he thought JFK had "four ENTRY holes" in his
body.
Worth repeating....
You're an idiot.
>>> "Like faking evidence is so far fetched....isn't that what got O.J. off?" <<<
No. It certainly didn't. Because not a single piece of evidence was
"faked" in the O.J. case at all. And furthermore, Simpson's Scheme
Team of defense lawyers failed miserably to prove that any evidence
was faked (or even significantly "mishandled" in any fashion).
O.J. "got off" due to the slimy, underhanded tactics of Johnnie
Cochran and Company....plus the fact that the prosecution team was
pretty much totally inept and failed to present some of the BEST
evidence favoring Simpson's obvious guilt (e.g., the police interview,
where O.J. admitted to dripping blood on the very night of the
murders; and the Bronco chase, which reeks of Simpson's guilt).
Plus, the jury was awful and filled with halfwits as well, which
certainly didn't make things any better for the prosecution either.
>>> "You're calling a heck of a lot more people liars, like the emergency room team at Parkland, Jackie, Hill, Kellerman, all the people who prepped JFK for Bethesda, and the embalmer. You're calling way more people liars than I am." <<<
I never once called any of those people "liars". Never.
And that's because none of them were "liars". They were merely WRONG
about certain things. Simple as that.
>>> "So Jackie got it wrong, all the doctors and nurses at Parkland got it wrong, the staff that prepared the body for its flight to Bethesda got it wrong, the non-doctors at Bethesda who have said they saw a major wound in the back of the head got it wrong and the embalmer got it wrong. Who's the kook now?" <<<
Oh, you still are. Without question. (I'm surprised you had to ask.)
You're still the kook mainly due to the following two things:
1.) Because you fail to accept the BEST evidence in the case (e.g.,
the AUTHENTICATED photos of the dead President, the autopsy report,
the never-wavering "LN-favoring" comments from the autopsy doctors
themselves over the years, the huge amount of "IT WAS ONLY OSWALD"
evidence that's piled up against the door, plus Oswald's own guilty
actions and provable lies that show him to be guilty beyond all
reasonable doubt).
--And:--
2.) Because you actually believe that a vast number of people (from
various organizations and law-enforcement departments and other
entities) wanted to frame some innocent "patsy" named Oswald for John
F. Kennedy's murder.
The belief in that kind of an all-encompassing "LET'S GET OSWALD" plot
will make you a "kook" for all time. Bank on it.
www.booktv.org/program.aspx?ProgramId=8792&SectionName=In%20Depth&PlayMedia=Yes
curtjester1
Is this how they got the name L NUTS??!!
CJ
aeffects
> IT'S ALWAYS A GOOD IDEA TO REMIND THE C.T.-KOOKS ON A REGULAR BASIS
> THAT THEY REALLY ARE KOOKS, AND ALSO BEAT THEM OVER THE HEAD WITH THE
> ACTUAL EVIDENCE IN THE KENNEDY CASE AS OFTEN AS POSSIBLE...EVIDENCE
> THAT THE KOOKS THINK WAS (SOMEHOW) ALL "FAKED".
>
oh really?
you're so tedious.....
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also
known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods
qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with
unpopular titles such as "kooks", "right-wing", "liberal", "left-
wing", "terrorists", "conspiracy buffs", "radicals", "militia",
"racists", "religious fanatics", "sexual deviates", and so forth. This
makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same
label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
if you can't sell books, specifically, Reclaiming History by that old
washed up LA DA, Dave -- what can you sell? Certainly not the Warren
Commission Report....
Carry on, Studley.....
aeffects
LMAO he (ole Davey boy) is the present day epitomy.... great retort,
CJ
> CJ
muc...@gmail.com
> On Jan 30, 12:44 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > IT'S ALWAYS A GOOD IDEA TO REMIND THE C.T.-KOOKS ON A REGULAR BASIS
> > THAT THEY REALLY ARE KOOKS, AND ALSO BEAT THEM OVER THE HEAD WITH THE
> > ACTUAL EVIDENCE IN THE KENNEDY CASE AS OFTEN AS POSSIBLE...EVIDENCE
> > THAT THE KOOKS THINK WAS (SOMEHOW) ALL "FAKED".
>
> oh really?
>
> you're so tedious.....
>
> 5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also
> known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods
> qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with
> unpopular titles such as "kooks", "right-wing", "liberal", "left-
> wing", "terrorists", "conspiracy buffs", "radicals", "militia",
> "racists", "religious fanatics", "sexual deviates", and so forth.
Exactly what the majority of lurkers think you dolts are...
robcap...@netscape.com
> IT'S ALWAYS A GOOD IDEA TO REMIND THE C.T.-KOOKS ON A REGULAR BASIS
> THAT THEY REALLY ARE KOOKS, AND ALSO BEAT THEM OVER THE HEAD WITH THE
> ACTUAL EVIDENCE IN THE KENNEDY CASE AS OFTEN AS POSSIBLE...EVIDENCE
> THAT THE KOOKS THINK WAS (SOMEHOW) ALL "FAKED".
>
> THE FOLLOWING IS A RE-POST FROM A SESSION I HAD WITH A CONSPIRACY KOOK
> NAMED "ROB" IN LATE 2007. A QUINTESSENTIAL "NOTHING IS WHAT IT SEEMS
> TO BE" KOOK, ROB KEPT COMING BACK FOR MORE, AND WAS BEATEN BACK INTO
> THE WOODS EACH TIME (WITH THE EVIDENCE).
>
"ROB, THOUGH, THINKS HE WON EVERY DEBATE WE HAD. AMAZING, HUH? ......
Nothing amazing about it as you have NO evidence or proof. My little
daughter could beat you.
===================================================
"Let's begin with this lovely gem from the e-lips of Rob The Mega-Kook
(it's worth highlighting every so often...just for the laughs this
quote invariably elicits):
"LHO shot no one that day." -- Robcap; October 22, 2007"
First off, flattery will get you NOWHERE with me!
===================================================
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/a4c6818d6cdc7c89
>>>"Don't get me wrong..."
"You're always wrong."
Prove it, it is a simple request yet you are unable to do so, why?
Oh, that is right, you have NO proof or evidence. I have to keep
reminding all the readers out there of this simple fact.
>>> "...there are some crazy theories out for conspiracy..." <<<
"Like the "LHO shot no one" theory. Yeah, that's one for the
KookBooks, to be sure."
I like how DVP took this out of context. Yes, there are some theories
NOT all CTers agree on, but he left the most important part out, that
NONE are as crazy as the official theory!
>>> "...but the craziest one of all is the official theory." <<<
"To a kook like you, sure it's "crazy". That's because it actually
relies on something called THE ACTUAL EVIDENCE in the case (as opposed
to made-up claptrap gushed forth by CT-Kooks)."
Sure it does, that is why your long-winded posts, like this one, NEVER
have ANY real evidence in them!
"After all, why would anyone even BEGIN to suspect dear sweet Lee
Oswald of any wrong-doing on 11/22/63? It was only HIS gun on the 6th
Floor, shells from HIS gun in the SN, HIS prints all over the exact
same teeny-tiny area where JFK's assassin was located during the
assassination itself, HIS gun that killed Tippit, HIS bullets in the
limousine where the President was shot, HIS bullet in the hospital
where the victims were taken, HIS face identified as the one and only
killer of Tippit, and HIS face identified by Howard Brennan as JFK's
murderer too."
Prove it was his gun! I have seen NO proof from you or the WC. IF he
ordered a rifle at all, and this is highly suspect, it was a 36 inch
rifle, yet they found a 40.2 inch rifle!! Rifles are NOT prone to
grow, even with watering and direct sunlight! Again, the shells were
shown to be from the 40.2 inch rifle, and even this is questionable to
due poor chain of custody handling, and NOT the alleged 36 inch rifle
he would have ordered in 2/63. Prints found where someone works!!!
Wow, that cinches the case. Why NO prints of his on the rifle, the
clip, the shells, the live bullet in the chamber or on the top of the
alleged bag he used to carry the alleged rifle into the building with?
Fragments in the limo were claimed to match the 40.2 inch rifle, and
this is questionable, yet there is NO proof LHO ever owned it.
Secondly, and most importantly, the fragments lacked any blood, tissue
or fabric from either victim so the linkage to the victims is not
there. Ipso facto, you have no murder weapon. The chain of custody for
CE399 (magic bullet) could take a post as long as windbag DVP's, so
let's just say everyone who saw it or touched it said the one later
presented was NOT the one found that day. The ID of LHO for the JDT
murder was a joke, as she was prompted by the police to pick LHO after
multiple attempts to get her to do it on her own. She testified they
stared at each other after the shooting, yet she could NOT ID him by
the face, rather by his clothes! Read more on this shaky (and this is
too kind) ID.
"Yeah....Rob's right. I've got "nothing"."
For once I agree with you, You've got nothing. This isn't a to do
list, you don't just list items with NOT being able to show how they
pertain to the case.
"It's a wonder the silly ol' Warren Commission got ANYBODY to believe
such flimsy, threadbare evidence...huh Mr. Rob-Mega-Kook?"
It is, and you LNers amaze me each day with your naiveness, but as
P.T. Barnum said, "There's a sucker born every minute."
> >>> "Maybe the cop that found {the Tippit shells} and initialed them only to have other bullets entered as evidence..." <<<
"More extraordinary conclusions arrived at by a mega-kook (when
ordinary scenarios can work just as easily...even better). Go figure."
Nothing to figure out, Poe AND Barnes initialed them, yet later on
both set of initials were gone! Explain this for us.
"And there's no proof that Officer Poe marked ANY shells on Tenth
Street on November 22. Maybe he did mark them; but maybe he didn't.
Poe just flat-out wasn't sure. I showed you his WC testimony
previously...which you totally ignored, no doubt. Here it is again
anyway....."
How dumb do you think we are? It is standard procedure in crime scene
custodianship to do this. Great, he is going to show us a document
that has more fiction than a Stephen King book to make his point.
> JOE BALL -- "Did you put any markings on the hulls?"
>
> J.M. POE -- "I couldn't swear to it; no, sir."
What is this? How can you NOT remeber doing this? It is standard
procedure. He didn't want to lie and perjure himself so he just
played dumb, in court this type of answer would NOT have been
accepted. He would have been grilled by the defense team.
> [Later...]
>
> MR. BALL -- "Did you make a mark?"
>
> MR. POE -- "I can't swear to it; no, sir."
>
> MR. BALL -- "But there is a mark on two of these?"
>
> MR. POE -- "There is a mark. I believe I put on them, but I couldn't
> swear to it. I couldn't make them out any more."
I thought he couldn't swear to it? Now all of a sudden he remembers?
Now we are back to not being able to swear to it. If you can't make
them out does this mean they were not there? IF so, is it because
they are NOT the same shells found? This is all vague and the WC had
a right and a duty to clarify this stuff, but when they leave it vague
it is for a reason, it makes their case look bad.
> MR. BALL -- "Now, the ones you said you made a mark on are you think
> it is these two? Q-77 and Q-75?"
>
> MR. POE -- "Yes, sir; those two there."
>
> MR. BALL -- "Both marked Western Special? They both are marked Western
> Special."
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/poe.htm
>
"(No mention of any "automatic" shells at all. It's all in a kook's
mind.)"
I never said the WC contained a reference to automatic shells, I said
two officers, one of them Sgt. Barnes transmitted from the scene a .32
and a .38 automatic was used in the shooting. It is in the DPD
transcripts.
> >>> "LHO's handgun had a bent firing pin anyway." <<<
"Not when he plugged Tippit four times with it."
Yeah, except the slugs pulled from JDT did NOT match LHO's revolver,
so you and all LNers have a BIG problem.
"Kook."
He believes in sending people to the gas chamber with NO proof and I'm
the kook, go figure.
> >>> "Which witness said they saw the killer shaking out bullets? It could appear to be that way from a distance to a terrified witness as the bullets automatically eject, thus the term automatic." <<<
"Good God...you really ARE clueless re. the evidence, aren't you? (And
yet you're so POSITIVE that "LHO shot no one" on November 22nd. You're
Super-Pathetic!)"
I'm well aware of the evidence, the killer used an automatic pistol.
He then pulled out a standard revolver and made a show of throwing
shell casings out into the air to be seen. The problem for the WC,
and clueless people like you, is the shells were from a standard .38
pistol, yet LHO's was refitted and was .38 special. IOW, the shells
found by the people you are listing below COULD NOT have been fired
from the special pistol LHO had on him.
"Virginia Davis AND Barbara Davis saw Lee Oswald (UP CLOSE, within
just a few feet of their own bodies), and both Davis girls saw Oswald
dumping shells out of his gun as LHO cut across their yard."
This isn't true as neither ID'd LHO, in fact, they said he had a black
jacket on and LHO NEVER owned a black jacket in his life. They found
the standard .38 shells the real killer left.
"In both of the Davises' 11/22 affidavits, they mention the fact that
they saw a man crossing their yard "unloading his gun":"
The key here is they saw a "man", they never said LHO, and the
clothing they described did NOT match what LHO was wearing.
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/bdavis.htm
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/vdavis.htm
>
> ~~~~~
>
> BARBARA DAVIS -- "I heard a shot and jumped up and heard another shot.
> I put on my shoes and went to the door and I saw this man walking
> across my front yard unloading a gun. .... When the police arrived, I
> showed one of them where I saw this man emptying his gun and we found
> a shell."
>
> VIRGINIA DAVIS -- "We heard a shot and then another shot and ran to
> the side door at Patton Street. I saw the boy cutting across our yard
> and he was unloading his gun. .... Jeanette {Barbara Davis} found a
> [sic] empty shell that the man had unloaded and gave it to the police.
> After the police had left, I found a [sic] empty shell in our yard."
~Yawn~
Oops, another ~Yawn~
Where do they say LHO was the "man" they saw? I must have missed it.
~~~~~
BTW, Domingo Benavides saw the killer (whom he later stated on CBS-TV
was positively LHO) dumping shells from his gun too. ....."
He never positively ID'd LHO, and only after his brother was shot (and
he thought they meant to shoot him) did he say "it may have been" LHO,
but he never said it was beyond any doubt. This hurt the WC real bad
as he was the closest at the time of the shooting, and if he couldn't
ID LHO that was a problem.
> BENAVIDES (Via his WC session) -- "Then I seen the man turn and walk
> back to the sidewalk and go on the sidewalk and he walked maybe five
> foot and then kind of stalled. He didn't exactly stop. And he threw
> one shell and must have took five or six more steps and threw the
> other shell up, and then he kind of stepped up to a pretty good trot
> going around the corner."
Oops, I did it again. I read so fast I missed the part where he says
the "man" he saw was LHO.
~Yawn~
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/benavide.htm
> >>> "12 {Tippit witnesses} initially became two, and then one, as Benevides [sic] was very hesitant and never gave a firm, definitive ID." <<<
"Yes he did. Very definitively too (in front of an audience of
millions in June 1967):"
So he finally ID'd him in 1967!!! I guess I'm wrong, but I was
refering to right after the shooting and during the life of the WC,
not in the years to come. Boy you are clueless.
Wait,
~Yawn~ I'm getting real sleepy.
> EDDIE BARKER -- "Is there any doubt in your mind that Oswald was the
> man you had seen shoot Tippit?"
>
> DOMINGO BENAVIDES -- "No, sir; there was no doubt at all. Period. I
> could even tell you how he combed his hair and the clothes he wore and
> what-have-you and the details....and if he'd had a scar on his face, I
> could have probably told you about it. You don't forget things like
> that."
>
> www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/6b2a00b13bdc81ae
>
> >>> "You got nothing {as far as "Tippit witnesses" go}." <<<
>
"Yeah, I've only got:
>
> 1.) Helen Markham
> 2.) Domingo Benavides
> 3.) Jack Tatum
> 4.) William Scoggins
> 5.) Ted Callaway
> 6.) Barbara J. Davis
> 7.) Virginia Davis
> 8.) Warren Reynolds
> 9.) B.M. "Pat" Patterson
> 10.) L.J. Lewis
> 11.) Harold Russell
> 12.) B.D. Searcy
> 13.) Sam Guinyard"
This is how clueless he is, only one person would testify she ID'd
LHO, and this was after 5 attempts by the WC lawyer (they all failed
by the way) so he just finally said, "You ID'd number two didn't
you?" This would NOT have allowed in a court of law as it breaks all
the cannons of justice. All these names look impressive, a to do list
if you will, but read their testimony, none beyond Markham ever say
under oath it was LHO they saw. In fact, several say they don't
remember Markham being there at the time of the shooting!!
>
> www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/1bdb7e56f0427853
"A couple of the above Tippit-murder witnesses don't fall into the
"Positive I.D. Of Oswald" category....but every one of them saw an
"Oswald-like" person with a gun either on 10th Street or on Patton
Avenue (approaching Jefferson Blvd.) on 11/22/63."
A couple? This is like saying your wife/girlfriend is only a little
pregnant! Try none! This is the CIA method, they admit up front to
the falsehoods (in this case, he acts like some of them didn't ID LHO)
so you will believe the rest without checking it out. I urge you all
to check it out. NOT one witness positively ID'd LHO as the shooter
of JDT, period.
"And the above-mentioned "baker's dozen" doesn't even count the Brocks
(Mary and Robert), who saw an Oz-like man passing through the Texaco
Station just after Tippit was shot, with Mary Brock positively
identifying the man she saw as Lee Harvey Oswald (via a January 1964
FBI Report re. Mary Brock's Nov. 22 observations, linked below):"
The "baker's dozen"? This is an insult to donuts everywhere. At
least a donut has a purpose, to be eaten. I'm half kidding as these
witnesses have a purpose too, they show us the falsehood of the WCR
and shed light onto what really transpired that day long ago. Thanks
for the link as this is the real killer she saw and the twom men
chased. Note the clothing does NOT match what LHO would be wearing
when he was arrested. They would have caught him too, but a phony call
went out over the police radio calling everyone to the Marsalis
library for a possible suspect. They then said it was the wrong man,
how did they know this so early? Also, the library is exactly where
the bus passed that LHO was allegedly on, so the capture would have
occured there. Is this what they meant the wrong man was there as it
was NOT LHO?
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/brock_m.htm
"So, as you can see, I've practically got "nothing"....right Mr.
Kook?"
Once again we are in full agreement, you've got nothing.
> >>> "I haven't heard this." <<<
"You haven't heard much of anything, it would seem (except junk spewed
forth by conspiracy authors)."
Boy this is a repectful move, take something like this way out of
context and leave it hang there. It shows what level the LNers will
stoop too, but in all fairness, they have NO evidence or proof so they
have to do something.
This is all bullcrap, they could NOT match them. In fact, they
couldn't even match shots they themselves fired as the alterations to
the barrel made it impossible to match ballistically. This is all a
bunch of tap dancing to make it seem they have something solid.
> ~~~~~~~~~~
>
> CORTLANDT CUNNINGHAM (FBI) -- "As a result of my examination, it is my
> opinion that those four cartridge eases, Commission Exhibit 594, were
> fired in the revolver, Commission Exhibit 143, to the exclusion of all
> other weapons."
>
> >>> "We know they substitued the casings, since they lacked the officer's initials he put there at the crime scene." <<<
"Prove that the officer (Poe) put his initials on them at the crime
scene. You can't. Even Officer Poe HIMSELF said he couldn't be sure he
marked them. Why isn't HIS OWN WORD good enough for you kooks?"
Unfortunately I have the same proof you have, his word. He said he
marked them at the crime scene as this is standard procedure, so I
took his word for it. Only when he got in front of the WC did this
become "I can't swear to it", so the burden is on you my nutty LNer NG
keyboard pal as he did NOT deny it, just said he couldn't swear to it.
I have to do the rest in another posts as DVP is rather long-winded.
robcap...@netscape.com
> >>> "We know they substitued the casings, since they lacked the officer's initials he put there at the crime scene." <<<
"Prove that the officer (Poe) put his initials on them at the crime
scene. You can't. Even Officer Poe HIMSELF said he couldn't be sure he
marked them. Why isn't HIS OWN WORD good enough for you kooks?"
This is what I can add to your post. Two months after the hearing he
told FBI agent Bardwell Odum that "he recalled marking cases before
giving them to (DPD Sgt. W.E.) Barnes, but he stated after a thorough
examination of the four cartridges shown to him on June 12, 1964, he
cannot locate his marks; therefore, he **cannot positively identify
any of these cartridges as being the same ones he received from
Benavides.**" He later told Odum he had marked two shells with
"JMP". When shown the same shells, Benavides could NOT identify them
as the ones he found. (XXIV, 415) Sgt. Barnes testified to receiving
two shells from Poe and putting his "B" on them. (VII, 275-276)
>
> >>> "I want those reports by those cops." <<<
"You're the one who wants to believe that Poe initialed some
"automatic" shells....YOU find the "reports" saying so. It's not up to
me to prove your make-believe case."
I'm not saying any such thing, Poe said it, read above. I figured you
wouldn't find anything as it ruins your pathetic "theory." IT is up to
you as you are supposed to prove guilt and all leads have to be
followed.
"I've provided Poe's WC testimony above. And there's no mention of
"automatic" shells within that testimony. Obviously, you don't want to
believe anything put forth by the evil "Government", though, right?"
So of course your search ends there, right? Well for all the readers
who really care find the DPD transcripts and you'll see where two
transmissions said the killre used an automatic pistol.
"Anyway, the facts are still the facts...and those FACTS do not
include ANY "automatic" bullet shells. None."
Of course, anything can be a FACT if you bury your head and refuse to
be exposed to anything new. Good luck with that approach.
Sergeant Gerald Hill, who initially (incorrectly) thought the Tippit
shells were from an automatic weapon, tried to clear up the confusion
when he said this in 1986:"
This man had over 25 years of military and police experience, yet he
can't tell the difference between an automatic and a revolver shell?
They are very different by the way. This is all crap.
"I assumed that it was an automatic simply because we had found all
the hulls in one little general area. .... If you find a cluster of
shells, you have to assume that they were fired from an automatic." --
Quote by Gerald Hill (Taken from Dale Myers' book, "With Malice";
Pages 260-261)"
I love this quote!!!! Instead of picking up shells at a crime scene
he goes by how they lay. What an insult to his intelligence. This
shows the pressure he must have been under to agree to say this as it
makes him sound like an incompetent.
> >>> "I'll keep trying to enlighten you..." <<<
"Oh, you mean with wondrous "enlightening" kook statements like these
gems authored by Robert C.?:"
NO, with the proof and evidence you lack in your theory.
"LHO shot no one."
He didn't, and you have NO proof that he did.
"Which witness said they saw the killer shaking out bullets."
I like this mind game DVP plays, I say "killer" and he provides me
with quotes, but he problem is he says it was LHO that was the killer,
yet none of the quotes say it was LHO. He has failed the burden of
proof test yet again.
"It wasn't LHO that shot JDT."
It wasn't, and you have NO real proof it was.
"You are trying to distort evidence to make it be LHO just like the WC
did."
I think this long-winded post shows this to be true all by itself.
> "I haven't heard this."
>
> "It was impossible since the gun had a bent firing pin."
>
> "Let's see some links on the verification of the gun being the murder
> weapon."
>
> "We know they substitued the casings."
>
> "That is not what I have read."
>
> "LBJ thought he could control him {Senator Richard Russell}."
>
> "You are clueless."
>
> "LHO shot no one." (This one here is worthy of a repeat performance,
> due to its extreme idiocy.)
>
> [END KOOK QUOTES.]
>
"When gazing upon the assortment of oddball quotes I've offered above,
it looks like it's Robby who could use a tad bit of "enlightenment"
re. the JFK and Tippit murder cases."
I don't think so, and even if I did, you are NOT the person to do it
as you have NO proof.
"But, per Rob-Kook, DVP is the one who is "clueless". Go figure.
~shrug~"
What's to figure? You have NO proor and NO evidence.
robcap...@netscape.com
> CTer BASHFEST REPLAY (PART 2):
>
> www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/99f2d68524323bbd
>
> >>> "He {Roy Kellerman} said JFK had 4 wounds, you guys say 2." <<<
"You're an idiot."
You can say this all you want, it makes you fell better I guess, but
Kellerman said this and it is in the WC volumes. He testified to
seeing four wounds, of course this sent the WC lawyers into a tizzy
and they quickly got him to admit there were only three shots and two
wounds, but he said 4 to start with.
"LNers know that President Kennedy had FOUR separate "wounds" on his
body -- 2 inshoots (entries) and 2 outshoots (exits)."
Nice try but it doesn't work that way. NO ONE in law enforcement
counts an entrance and an exit wound seperately!! He meant four
seperate wounds Einstein.
"Kellerman didn't say he thought JFK had "four ENTRY holes" in his
body."
Of course he did as NO ONE counts entrance and exit wounds as seperate
wounds Einstein. They were caused by the same shot.
"Worth repeating....
You're an idiot."
He counts entrance and exit wounds as seperate wounds and I am the
idiot? Go figure.
> >>> "Like faking evidence is so far fetched....isn't that what got O.J. off?" <<<
"No. It certainly didn't. Because not a single piece of evidence was
"faked" in the O.J. case at all. And furthermore, Simpson's Scheme
Team of defense lawyers failed miserably to prove that any evidence
was faked (or even magnificantly "mishandled" in any fashion)."
You are clueless in all trials I guess. BY poor chain of
custodianship (or implied)they left the impression much was planted or
faked. What trial were you watching?
"O.J. "got off" due to the slimy, underhanded tactics of Johnnie
Cochran and Company....plus the fact that the prosecution team was
pretty much totally inept and failed to present some of the BEST
evidence favoring Simpson's obvious guilt (e.g., the police interview,
where O.J. admitted to dripping blood on the very night of the
murders; and the Bronco chase, which reeks of Simpson's guilt)."
I'm no fan of Cochran (he is dead now) but that is his job, to get the
defendent off. It is the job of the prosecutor to have a solid case
which they did not, but it was still 10 times better than the JFK
investigation. Guess how that trial would have turned out.
"Plus, the jury was awful and filled with halfwits as well, which
certainly didn't make things any better for the prosecution either."
It is called a "jury of your peers" and the screening could have been
better.
> >>> "You're calling a heck of a lot more people liars, like the emergency room team at Parkland, Jackie, Hill, Kellerman, all the people who prepped JFK for Bethesda, and the embalmer. You're calling way more people liars than I am." <<<
"I never once called any of those people "liars". Never."
Nah, you just say everything they saw was totally inaccurate with NO
proof. They had way more experience than the Bethesda doctors to
boot.
"And that's because none of them were "liars". They were merely WRONG
about certain things. Simple as that."
Sure, be so matter of fact. Like they got the lunch special wrong or
something. They said he had the right side of his head in the back
blown out and he had frontal wounds, small things like that. What a
spin doctor!
> >>> "So Jackie got it wrong, all the doctors and nurses at Parkland got it wrong, the staff that prepared the body for its flight to Bethesda got it wrong, the non-doctors at Bethesda who have said they saw a major wound in the back of the head got it wrong and the embalmer got it wrong. Who's the kook now?" <<<
"Oh, you still are. Without question. (I'm surprised you had to ask.)
You're still the kook mainly due to the following two things:
1.) Because you fail to accept the BEST evidence in the case (e.g.,
the AUTHENTICATED photos of the dead President, the autopsy report,
the never-wavering "LN-favoring" comments from the autopsy doctors
themselves over the years, the huge amount of "IT WAS ONLY OSWALD"
evidence that's piled up against the door, plus Oswald's own guilty
actions and provable lies that show him to be guilty beyond all
reasonable doubt)."
Why no mention of all the problems with these "IT WAS ONLY LHO"
evidence? You don't have one piece of "evidence" that can't be shown
to be totally inaccurate or inconclusive. You have no proof LHO did
the crimes, you should be focusing on who did.
"--And:--
2.) Because you actually believe that a vast number of people (from
various organizations and law-enforcement departments and other
entities) wanted to frame some innocent "patsy" named Oswald for John
F. Kennedy's murder."
Hey, somebody had to take the fall. The American people could NOT be
appeased with NO ONE found to be guilty so they picked a patsy ahead
of time.
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/d59adb8ececbf653
I love getting Rob-Kook all wound up. It's fun seeing the kookshit
streaming from his keyboard like water over Niagara.
Let me just highlight the choice tidbits of utter insanity written by
Rob "Double-Mega-Kook" Caprio, culled from his newsgroup message dated
January 30th, 2008 AD.
These tidbits should be sent to Ripley's Museum, to be placed in the
display case marked "DID THAT KOOK ACTUALLY HAVE THE GONADS TO UTTER
SUCH SHIT?!":
>>> "You have NO evidence or proof." <<<
LOL right off the bat. I'm sure Rob will only get funnier. Let's see.
>>> "Prove it. .... You have NO proof or evidence. I have to keep reminding all the readers out there of this simple fact." <<<
Yep. Even funnier indeed.
>>> "Your long-winded posts NEVER have ANY real evidence in them!" <<<
And as we all know by now, only people who believe in a JFK
"conspiracy" have any "real evidence". Right, Robert C.?
>>> "Prove it was his {Saint Oswald's} gun! I have seen NO proof from you or the WC." <<<
That's probably because you're an "Anybody But Oswald" idiot. (Ya
think?)
>>> "IF he {St. Oz} ordered a rifle at all, and this is highly suspect, it was a 36-inch rifle, yet they found a 40.2-inch rifle!!" <<<
I think it's quite possible that Klein's Sporting Goods of Chicago
didn't always mail the EXACT rifle that was ordered via their various
magazine ads to the customer. It's quite possible that on occasion
they had to substitute slightly-different models for the ones pictured
in the advertisements.
I believe this might have been the case with Lee Harvey Oswald's order
for his "Italian Carbine". The ad said one dimension for the rifle,
but Klein's sent a slightly-different version of the gun.
If I recall correctly, I also think that other researchers looking
into this matter have said that Klein's was, indeed, running low on
their stock of 36-inch Carcanos at about the time of Oswald's order in
March.
So it seems reasonable to think that it's quite possible that Klein's
just simply ran out of the 36-inch version of the weapon and sent LHO
a 40-inch model instead. Klein's definitely did carry and sell BOTH a
36-inch Carcano rifle and a 40-inch MC variant during the calendar
year of 1963.
In any case, it's quite obvious that Lee Oswald (using his alias "A.
Hidell") WAS indeed shipped a Model 91/38 Mannlicher-Carcano Italian
carbine (i.e., rifle) in March of '63 by Klein's Sporting Goods of
Chicago, Illinois.
But, evidently, to a suspicious "ABO" kook like Robby, this slight 4-
inch discrepancy in the rifle length MUST mean that Oswald received NO
RIFLE AT ALL from Klein's in March 1963.
Go figure kooks.
>>> "Why NO prints of his {Oswaldovich The Great} on the rifle?" <<<
There were prints of Ozzie's on the rifle. But you just want to
dismiss this evidence. Like always.
But the fact that you dismiss the LHO palmprint doesn't mean it wasn't
found by J.C. Day and appropriately preserved...because it was. Your
denials regarding this evidence couldn't possibly matter less.
>>> "There is NO proof LHO ever owned it {Rifle #C2766}." <<<
There's tons of proof that LHO owned Mannlicher-Carcano Rifle #C2766.
Your denials regarding this evidence couldn't possibly matter less.
>>> "The ID of LHO for the J.D. Tippit murder was a joke." <<<
Yeah, we LNers could only prove LHO guilty of that murder if there had
been 16 different witnesses in the area. Instead, we LNers have only
got 15 (or pert-near that number, counting the Patton Ave. people).
Damn! One shy of the kook requirement!
And Oswald's guilt could only be proven (ballistically) if we had FIVE
bullet shells linked conclusively to LHO's revolver. Instead, we've
only got four (sad to say).
Again, one item short of the Promised "LHO DID IT" Land!
>>> "You've got nothing." <<<
Don't you ever get tired of revealing your ignorance in public? You'd
think you would, especially after three-plus months of your kind of
tripe. But, I guess not. Continue, kook....
>>> "You LNers amaze me each day with your naiveness." <<<
CTers are amazed by the strangest things, aren't they?
>>> "He {DVP} believes in sending people to the gas chamber with NO proof; and {per DVP's spot-on accurate appraisal} I'm the kook. Go figure." <<<
I would have preferred the hangman's noose or the firing squad for
Oswald. Gas would have been too dignified for his double-murdering
ass.
>>> "I'm well aware of the evidence, the killer used an automatic pistol {to plug J.D. Tippit}. He then pulled out a standard revolver and made a show of throwing shell casings out into the air to be seen." <<<
Another LOL moment here I see. Don't ya just love it when a kook
decides ON HIS OWN what the real evidence in a murder case is going to
be? Pa-thet-ic.
>>> "The problem for the WC, and clueless people like you, is the {Tippit} shells were from a standard .38 pistol, yet LHO's was refitted and was .38 special." <<<
More ignorance (or lies) from Robby-boy here. None of the four shells
found at 10th and Patton on 11/22/63 were "Standard" shells. They were
all clearly marked "38 Special".
Why you think otherwise is a mystery. But, then too, most CTers like
you have a unique way of mangling the verified evidence so that it
appears to be exactly the opposite from the truth.
Your "pathetic" stature grows with each passing lie/misrepresentation
that comes out of your e-mouth.
And your next lie/misrepresentation is?.....
>>> "This isn't true, as neither {Barbara Davis nor Virginia Davis} ID'd LHO." <<<
Right on cue. Another outright falsity. In fact, this might be your
most blatant "lie/misrepresentation" to date.
Back to the actual facts now:
BOTH Davis girls (Barbara and Virginia) positively identified the man
they saw dumping bullet shells in their yard as Lee Harvey
Oswald....and any halfwit knows this.
But somehow Rob doesn't seem to be aware of this most basic of facts.
~shrug~
>>> "The key here is they {Barb & Virginia Davis} saw a "man", they never said LHO." <<<
More lies--or ignorance--from our resident nuthatch. I wonder why
Robert just doesn't read the WC witness transcripts of Barbara and
Virginia Davis to see what they each said?
Even though he'll toss every last sentence within those transcripts
out the window (because a kook can never take the WC and its witnesses
at face value), Rob can prove to himself that his last idiotic
declaration ("THEY NEVER SAID LHO") is a bald-face lie.
Even the 11/22/63 affidavits filled out and signed under oath by
Barbara Davis and Virginia Davis indicate it was Oswald, for Pete
sake. (Both affidavits say "the #2 man" in the police line-up, that
is. And who was that "#2 man" in the line-up? Lee Harvey Oswald.
That's who.)
And then there's this from Virginia Davis' 1964 WC session:
VIRGINIA DAVIS -- "The boy that was known as Lee Harvey Oswald shot
J.D. Tippit."
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/davis_vc.htm
And this via Barbara Davis' WC testimony:
JOE BALL -- "Did you recognize anyone in that room?"
BARBARA DAVIS -- "Yes, sir. I recognized number 2. .... I thought
number 2 was the man that I saw." ....
BALL -- "By number 2, was the man you saw the man you saw doing what?"
DAVIS -- "Unloading the gun."
BALL -- "And going across your yard?"
DAVIS -- "Yes, sir."
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/davis_b.htm
>>> "Where do they say LHO was the "man" they saw? I must have missed it." <<<
You miss a lot of things. (I think your brain is in Tulsa someplace.
Better check the lost-and-found there.)
>>> "Only one person {Helen Markham} would testify she ID'd LHO {as Tippit's killer}." <<<
Only if you want to toss out (because you're a kook) the positive
"Oswald IDs" made by Scoggins, Davis, Davis, Callaway, Tatum,
Patterson, and Brock.
Any particular reason why those seven positive IDs of LHO need to be
trashed (other than the fact you're a freakin' moron and an "Anybody
But Oswald" conspiracy clown)?
>>> "None beyond Markham ever say under oath it was LHO they saw." <<<
Bull-shit. I'll again remind the kook of these words spoken by
Virginia Davis (via her under-oath WC testimony): "The boy that was
known as Lee Harvey Oswald shot J.D. Tippit".
Let me guess -- Virginia doesn't count. Right, kook?
>>> "In fact, several say they don't remember Markham being there at the time of the {Tippit} shooting!!" <<<
Great. Now the kook is going to try to argue that Helen wasn't even AT
the Tippit murder scene.
Lovely. But typical Kook Think.
>>> "NOT one witness positively ID'd LHO as the shooter of JDT, period." <<<
I love it when a kook gives me several openings within the very same
forum post with which to expose his astounding idiocy concerning the
basic facts of the case:
"The boy that was known as Lee Harvey Oswald shot J.D. Tippit".
-- Virginia Davis; Via Warren Commission Testimony; April 2, 1964;
Available to view in WC Vol. #6, Page 456 (linked below). ....
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh6/html/WC_Vol6_0233b.htm
Let me guess -- Virginia's testimony doesn't count. Right, Robby? She
didn't actually SEE Oswald pulling the trigger and killing Officer
Tippit; therefore, I suppose (per your basic rules of insanity/
conspiracy), we're forced to think that Oswald really DIDN'T shoot
Tippit; he was merely in the area with a gun and was unloading that
gun immediately after somebody ELSE murdered the policeman. Right,
Mister K-Word?
>>> "NO ONE counts entrance and exit wounds as separate wounds, Einstein." <<<
Roy Kellerman did, Einstein. That's obvious.
Why is it obvious?
Because John F. Kennedy DID, indeed, have just "four wounds" (i.e.,
bullet holes) in his body. And two of those holes were determined at
autopsy to positively be EXIT holes for the bullets that entered on
the other side of those exits.
REPLAY (JUST FOR THE LAUGHS):
>>> "NO ONE counts entrance and exit wounds as separate wounds." <<<
So, do you now want to purport that Kennedy was hit by FOUR bullets?
Is that it, Einstein? And zero of these four missiles exited his body
at all? No "exit" holes were present on JFK's body whatsoever? Is that
correct?
Or do you want to believe that JFK had many additional holes in his
body from these four bullets that hit him? But, somehow, these extra
holes just didn't show up in the photographs and were never reported
(or were just missed) by the three autopsists at Bethesda?
Maybe the X-rays of JFK somehow managed to completely miss the FOUR
bullets that went into President Kennedy and failed to exit, huh?
Or...maybe the X-rays were all fakes? And maybe Humes, et al, were all
liars?
Go with those latter two choices, Rob. Being a kook, you no doubt
shall.
>>> "A phony call went out over the police radio calling everyone to the Marsalis library for a possible suspect." <<<
Oh goodie! Something else that's considered "phony" by a conspiracy
nut.
As my very able and astute LN cohort Bud likes to say on occasion
(paraphrasing here) --- What could possibly matter less than the
unsupportable opinions of a conspiracy-loving kook?
David Von Pein
Subj: My Regards To A Mega-Kook
Date: 1/31/2008
From: DVP
To: carter_ian @ hotmail.com
In a message dated 1/31/2008 2:37:52 AM Eastern Standard Time, some
kook name "Ian Carter" wrote:
>>> "You are fucking scumbag." <<<
And how are you, Mr. Kook?
>>> "Why do you perpetuate bullshit about JFK?" <<<
I'm paid to be CIA Disinfo Agent. Isn't that obvious, Mr. Kook?
>>> "Do you enjoy telling lies?" <<<
Of course...don't all Paid CIA Disinfo Agents? Geesh. Get with it.
>>> "You fucking Americans are so full of bullshit you can't even see or accept your cuntry is rotten to the core." <<<
And a potential woman President too. Can it GET any worse, Mr. Kook?
>>> "Oswald was an innocent patsy." <<<
Naturally. All mega-kooks think that way. Good to see you're just as
idiotic, Mr. K-Word.
>>> "That makes you an accessory to murder after the fact." <<<
Naturally. Next?....
>>> "So you should be in prison with Johnson, Lansdale, Nixon, Bush and the rest of you corrupt Yankee scum." <<<
You just lost any chance of getting that birthday card from me.
Have a nice (kooky) day, Mr. Moron.
(Gee, what a pleasant person Ian Carter must be to be around at
Christmas time, huh?)
David Von Pein
>>> "To claim a total of three shots is to ignore tons of eyewitness testimony." <<<
I guess, then, that the many different shooters who fired 4 to 8 shots
(or 128 shots) at JFK on November 22nd just got extremely lucky when
every one of the following newsmen reported "THREE SHOTS WERE FIRED"
to the world via radio, TV, and newswire IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE
SHOOTING, huh?.....
Merriman Smith
Jack Bell
Jay Watson
Jerry Haynes
Pierce Allman
Bob Clark
Robert MacNeil
And probably several more I'm not aware of.
To believe in ANY number of shots other than "three", given these
witnesses above (plus the ones that comprise the chart below), is just
silly.
(McAdams' chart MUST be ignored by CT-Kooks, of course. But I'll post
it anyway, because it's as accurate as can reasonably be expected when
factoring in all of the Dealey Plaza witnesses.).....