Explain These LNers

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 17, 2007, 6:17:28 PM10/17/07

to

If LHO was the sole assassin as you think then aswer the following
questions.

1) Why did he do it? - motive
2) How was he lucky enough to get a job at a site that just happen to
be along the route the president would be going? - opportunity
3) Why would anyone pick one of the most horrific guns in modern
military history to pull off such a big hit?
4) Why did LHO leave his pistol at the boarding house? Don't you
think that he would possibly need it with him after he shot the
president?
5) Why did he fail a nitrate test if he had fired a rifle at the
president and shot a cop?
6) Why did his rifle have no hair or fibers matching the blanket Ruth
Paine said LHO wrapped it in while it was supposedly stored in her
garage?
7) Why not practice the kill beforehand? No one can say they saw LHO
ever out shooting a gun before the assassination.
8) Why did he supposedly use a 30.6 for the General Walker attempt (a
much better rifle when he would have been much closer) and a piece of
junk Mannlicher Carcano (low velocity) for the president when he would
have been much further away?
9) Why did he go to the Texas Theater? What was the purpose of going
to watch a movie instead of trying to get out of town?
10) Why was only a smudged palm print on the rifle when LHO wore no
gloves and should have left a million prints all over it? You can't
say because he didn't want to get caught because he did a lot of other
stupid things if this was his goal (i.e. backyard photos, dropped
casings, A. Hiddell card in his wallet, etc...)

Gil Jesus

unread,

Oct 17, 2007, 6:53:33 PM10/17/07

to

Rob you may ask why it was that Oswald was careless enough to leave an
identifiable fingerprint on a box in the sniper's nest and yet smart
enough not to leave any IDENTIFIABLE prints on the weapon.

And why Oswald slipped into the theater without paying and drawing
attention to himself when he had money in his pocket?

lazu...@webtv.net

unread,

Oct 17, 2007, 7:00:21 PM10/17/07

to

Right, Rob! And if LHO were planning to leave town, why did he leave
practically all his money with his wife, departing for his date with
destiny with only $14.00 or so in his pockets? Hmm, I wonder if he
thought he could escape by jet effect? ----Old Laz

Sam Brown

unread,

Oct 17, 2007, 8:30:29 PM10/17/07

to

<lazu...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:13283-471...@storefull-3238.bay.webtv.net...

Who says he was planning to leave town Laz? What if he had absolutely NO
plans beyond his initial act of violence and that everything that occurred
from that moment on, well, could he have been winging it?
Now you are going to accuse me of speculating here and you'd be right, but
the thing is, can you admit that you too are speculating?

>

justm...@gmail.com

unread,

Oct 17, 2007, 8:44:01 PM10/17/07

to

He didn't think he was going to escape at all which would be even more
reason to leave money for his wife if he was killed. Once again...you
use NO common sense. If you were going to commit a crime and you
suspected you would never see the light of day again after doing so,
are you going to keep all your money with you so the law can take it
as evidence and leave your wife with nothing? What's the point of
asking someone who makes a stupid comment like the one above a
question that has to do with common sense? The CT's on this newsgroup
have none, which they prove daily.

lazu...@webtv.net

unread,

Oct 17, 2007, 9:46:21 PM10/17/07

to

Justme pulls out the old "common sense" card. Well I can play that game
too. Common sense tells me that LHO had no motive to kill JFK. He
vehemently denied shooting anyone that day, when common sense tells me
that if he were really a Lone Deranger seeking glory, he would have
proclaimed it at some point in his captivity. No, common sense tells me
that he was a patsy, just a he claimed.

Common sense tells me that he couldn't have done the terrible deed all
by himself, therefore there had to be a conspiracy.

Common sense tells me, as I watch the Z film, that JFK is shot from the
front. Common sense tells me that the SBT is a load of horse patootie. I
could go on, but you get the idea.----Old Laz

Sam Brown

unread,

Oct 17, 2007, 11:48:44 PM10/17/07

to

<lazu...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:17684-47...@storefull-3235.bay.webtv.net...

> Justme pulls out the old "common sense" card. Well I can play that game
> too. Common sense tells me that LHO had no motive to kill JFK.

People kill other people with no discernable motive everyday. What was Mark
Chapmans motive for murdering John Lennon?

He
> vehemently denied shooting anyone that day,

And lovely Lee was a pillar in the community wasn't he? Never told a lie in
his life. Fuckwit.

when common sense tells me
> that if he were really a Lone Deranger seeking glory, he would have
> proclaimed it at some point in his captivity.

Once he admitted it, his day in the sun, being paraded in front of the media
at every turn, would be effectively over. He enjoyed the limelight that
being "mysterious" gave him.

No, common sense tells me
> that he was a patsy, just a he claimed.

Common sense tells me that you are nuttier than squirrel shit.

>
> Common sense tells me that he couldn't have done the terrible deed all
> by himself, therefore there had to be a conspiracy.

Kook.

>
> Common sense tells me, as I watch the Z film, that JFK is shot from the
> front. Common sense tells me that the SBT is a load of horse patootie. I
> could go on, but you get the idea.----Old Laz

We certainly do. You are a hypocrite who wouldn't know common sense if it
walked up and kicked you in your lazy arse.
>

tomnln

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 12:01:58 AM10/18/07

to

If ANYBODY can give us insight to the thinking of a Criminal, it's
justme1952.

'cause she sure don't understand shit about evidence/testimony.

<justm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1192663597.9...@k35g2000prh.googlegroups.com...

YoHarvey

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 2:41:56 AM10/18/07

to

On Oct 17, 7:00 pm, lazuli...@webtv.net wrote:

Apparently Jesus, aka Robcap is so embarrassed at this point by his
Jesus nic that he once again resorts to a pseudonym. These questions
has been answered sooooo many times but to those lacking any semblence
of education, they ask again. How sad indeed. Shows one more time,
none of these misfits has EVER spent anytime attempting to get to know
Oswald or what his life was all about. Surprised? Nope.

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 2:46:12 AM10/18/07

to

> attention to himself when he had money in his pocket?- Hide quoted text -

Very good point Gil. Also, bye the bye, the Texas Theater was owned
by Howard Hughes who had a long history of work for the CIA (not an
agent, but a cover man). Many theorize it was Oswald's meeting place
setup by his handlers.

Gil Jesus

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 2:51:13 AM10/18/07

to

On Oct 17, 6:17?pm, robcap...@netscape.com wrote:

Rob you may ask why it was that Oswald was careless enough to leave an

cdddraftsman

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 3:43:00 AM10/18/07

to

On Oct 17, 9:01 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> " If ANYBODY can give me a pair of balls I'd like to use them
> to try and answer these questions " :

tl

(*) Verified accurate enough to be admissible
in a court of law !

muc...@gmail.com

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 8:05:43 AM10/18/07

to

1) Limited time to build nest
2) No gloves
3) Lack of realization that cardboard has ablity to retain
(identifiable) hand/fingerprints
4) Handling boxes was part of his job

> And why Oswald slipped into the theater without paying and drawing
> attention to himself when he had money in his pocket?

Your logic is difficult to follow. What are you suggesting? That
sneaky/stupid behaviour makes Oswald appear less guilty? Or that his
drawing attention to himself was deliberate? Or that the money was
planted on him?

muc...@gmail.com

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 9:11:13 AM10/18/07

to

You have a degree in history?! Doesn't sound like that to me.

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 11:36:39 AM10/18/07

to

> > Common sense tells me, as I watch the Z film, that JFK is shot from the
> > front. Common sense tells me that the SBT is a load of horse patootie. I
> > could go on, but you get the idea.----Old Laz
>
> We certainly do. You are a hypocrite who wouldn't know common sense if it
> walked up and kicked you in your lazy arse.

Meanwhile, I still don't hear an answer to any of the ten questions
listed above. Let's argue about things that don't matter as much, the
same old LNer line. Answer the ten questions.

Robert

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 11:38:20 AM10/18/07

to

I haven't seen your answers. I'm new here so go ahead. If you have
answered them soooo many times before you should be able to just cut
and paste them here. Nice try. You can't answer them logically is
probably more like it.

Robert

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 11:40:45 AM10/18/07

to

> Rob you may ask why it was that Oswald was careless enough to leave an
> identifiable fingerprint on a box in the sniper's nest and yet smart
> enough not to leave any IDENTIFIABLE prints on the weapon.
>
> And why Oswald slipped into the theater without paying and drawing

> attention to himself when he had money in his pocket?- Hide quoted text -

Exactly. Also, what is so strange about finding LHO's finger prints on
boxes when he worked there? Come on, that's like saying they found my
finger prints in my house. So what? I live here.

And why was the shoe guy so busy watching the theater anyway?
Shouldn't he have been doing his job inside the store?

Robert

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 11:43:11 AM10/18/07

to

> You have a degree in history?! Doesn't sound like that to me/

What does someone not paying for a 75 cent theater ticket and 20 cop
cars showing up have to do with history? You make no sense. You must
be a LNer.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 11:47:40 AM10/18/07

to

In article <1192721799.5...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
robc...@netscape.com says...

Are you trying to infringe on my trademark? :)

After all, I started the "35 Questions" (Eddie copied me with his "35 Reasons)

Then expanded them to the "45 Questions"

And will soon (with Laz's recent help) expand again to 50 or more...

But, of course, LNT'ers can't answer 'em. Drives 'em batty, in fact. You'll
soon be known as "retarded", "kook", and many other delightful names... You're
not really a fully authorized and accepted CT'er until you have the trolls in a
frenzy over you.

justm...@gmail.com

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 11:56:28 AM10/18/07

to

On Oct 18, 11:47 am, Ben Holmes <ad...@websitewealthcollege.com>
wrote:
> In article <1192721799.522910.254...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
> robcap...@netscape.com says...

Holmes, your as delusional as the rest of them...frenzy??? More like
hysterical laughter that Gil would once again stoop to his stupidity
of talking to himself under 2 names...btw, it's just more idiotic
questions we can ignore and insult you over...it keeps us busy and
entertained.

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 11:56:35 AM10/18/07

to

> Are you trying to infringe on my trademark? :)

RDC: Absolutely not. I'm just trying get someone to answer basic
questions without 45 links. :-)

>
> After all, I started the "35 Questions" (Eddie copied me with his "35 Reasons)
>
> Then expanded them to the "45 Questions"
>
> And will soon (with Laz's recent help) expand again to 50 or more...
>
> But, of course, LNT'ers can't answer 'em. Drives 'em batty, in fact. You'll
> soon be known as "retarded", "kook", and many other delightful names... You're
> not really a fully authorized and accepted CT'er until you have the trolls in a
> frenzy over you.

I can't wait. The more name calling they do the more obvious it
becomes they don't have a let to stand on. In fact, some of them
probably really don't believe the LNer stuff themselves they just like
to give us CTers a hard time. I have known several people like that
before.

justm...@gmail.com

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 12:01:36 PM10/18/07

to

I'm sure you have Gil, and they all think your a BIGOT too!

tomnln

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 12:58:54 PM10/18/07

to

This Scuzzbucket has No Shame at all.

His wife's Promiscuity leads him to becoming a Lying Criminal.

Here are some of his Aliases;
Yo(Momma)Harvey
baileynme
spiffy

AND Others.

Here he is, Exposed in his own words>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/baileynme.htm

His wife is just as bad.
She made multiple copies of the sex video me & her made.
She is gonna sell those copies.

It's NOT all her fault though. It's my fault.

I was the one who answered her add in the N Y Times.

"YoHarvey" <bail...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1192665738.9...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

tomnln

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 1:07:27 PM10/18/07

to

<muc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1192713073....@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> You have a degree in history?! Doesn't sound like that to me.

You're familiar with the evidence/testimony in the 26 volumes?

Doesn't look that way to me.

You've Never addresses these>>>
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

tomnln

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 1:11:44 PM10/18/07

to

<justm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1192722988....@v23g2000prn.googlegroups.com...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Holmes, your as delusional as the rest of them...frenzy??? More like
> hysterical laughter that Gil would once again stoop to his stupidity
> of talking to himself under 2 names...btw, it's just more idiotic
> questions we can ignore and insult you over...it keeps us busy and
> entertained.

Keep thjose insults coming justme.

I LOVE the Retaliations.

They send you into SHIT-FITS.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

YoHarvey

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 1:24:17 PM10/18/07

to

On Oct 18, 12:01 pm, "justme1...@gmail.com" <justme1...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I'm sure you have Gil, and they all think your a BIGOT too!- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Ok, last time just for Jesus, aka Robcap, aka Justin, aka Moore or
whichever name Jesus is now using:

1. Motive. It's obvious that Jesus by ANY name knows nothing about
LHO or his history. No surprise there.
Oswald was intelligent but suffered from delusions of grandeur. He
considered himself brighter than the average person yet emotionally,
could not connect with anybody, including his wife. He failed at
virtually everything he considered important, nothing more important
to Lee that the Cuban Revolution. How could he commit the chaos he so
wanted badly wanted to be involved with? Murder the most powerful man
on earth, that's how.

2. Lucky enough to get a job at the TSBD? Luck had nothing to do
with it. Oswald had registered with the Texas State Employment
Department and had inverviewed for other positions that very week he
got his temporary job at the TSBD. Had Roy Truly hired him for the
other TSBD opening in Dallas, Oswald would never have had the
opportunity he had on 11/22.

3. The choice of weapons is interesting but not surprising. Oswald
was notorioulsy cheap. While in the military in Japan, he rarely
joined co-marines of their liberties. On the few occassions he did go
out, he usually took up time with a higher class of Prostitute. IMHO,
price had everything to do with his choice of weapons.

4. I don't believe Oswald ever considered he would not be captured or
killed. I believe his state of mind had changed considerably over the
previous 24 hours as evidenced by his actions. Throughout his
marriage to Marina, he rarely if ever gave her any money. They lived
the life of poverty. Once Oswald made the decision to carry out the
events of 11/22, I don't believe he was any longer being rational.
Hency, he did what he never had done before. He left Marina with $170
cash and carried only $13 on 11/22. Pocket change. He didn't need
his pistol because IMHO, he never considered the possiblity of
survival. I truly believe he was shocked when he realized he had
gotten out of the TSBD alive. For his remaining time before capture,
everything he did demonstrated panic, not thought.

5. One doesn't pass or fail a nitrate test.

6. This is a blantent lie by the questioner. WC Article IV, page 56,
76-80 proves the bag carrying the MC into the TSBD on 11/22 contained
fibers from the blanket in the Paine garage to a 95-99% match. This
alone would be enough to convict the owner of said weapon.

7. Unanswerable. One cannot get into the mind of LHO.

8. After Oswalds arrest, the bullet fragments were matched to the
bullets obtained from the attempt on General Walker. The match, while
NOT conclusive were close. Considering Oswald left a note for Marina
on instructions on what to do if caught for the Walker murder, this is
pretty much overstated.

9. Unanswerable, BUT not surprising. Oswald was in an obvious state
of panic now after the Tippit shooting. IMHO, he'd have crawled down
a hole had one been available.

10. Absolutely and totally a false comment. Oswald fingerprints were
found on the trigger housing.
http://www.jfk-online.com/prints.html

Questions answered. I suggest you CT's spend some of your valuable
time studying Lee Harvey Oswald. After 44 years, your ignorance of
who he was and what he represented is astounding.

On a side note, IMHO, Oswald did NOT make the decision to assassinate
JFK until the evening of 11/21. Understanding the mindset of Oswald
at this point is critical. After Marina rejected his sexual advances
several times on 11/21, I believe this was the final step in the
desolution of a human being. Oswald decided that evening to leave the
world in chaos. He succeeded.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 1:29:39 PM10/18/07

to

In article <1192722995....@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
robc...@netscape.com says...

>
>> Are you trying to infringe on my trademark? :)
>
>RDC: Absolutely not. I'm just trying get someone to answer basic
>questions without 45 links. :-)

LOL! Just jerking your leg... Seems that I latched on to a good idea of merely
defining the evidence in terms that they can't answer.

>>After all, I started the "35 Questions" (Eddie copied me with his "35 Reasons)
>>
>> Then expanded them to the "45 Questions"
>>
>> And will soon (with Laz's recent help) expand again to 50 or more...
>>
>> But, of course, LNT'ers can't answer 'em. Drives 'em batty, in fact.
>> You'll soon be known as "retarded", "kook", and many other delightful
>> names... You're not really a fully authorized and accepted CT'er until
>> you have the trolls in a frenzy over you.
>
>I can't wait. The more name calling they do the more obvious it
>becomes they don't have a let to stand on.

Yet they don't seem to realize this...

cdddraftsman

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 2:13:23 PM10/18/07

to

On Oct 17, 8:48 pm, "Sam Brown" <samjbrow...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> <lazuli...@webtv.net> wrote in message

Correction Justme : " kicked you in your Old Laz(y)
arse." .....:-) ...tl

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 2:35:02 PM10/18/07

to

This is not a motive. It could describe thousands of people and they
don't shoot the president. In fact, our point in time is probably the
most stressful in all of history and yet I don't see a single lone nut
shooting a president. You have not listed a motive. That babble
wouldn't hold up in a court of law.

>
> 2. Lucky enough to get a job at the TSBD? Luck had nothing to do
> with it. Oswald had registered with the Texas State Employment
> Department and had inverviewed for other positions that very week he
> got his temporary job at the TSBD. Had Roy Truly hired him for the
> other TSBD opening in Dallas, Oswald would never have had the
> opportunity he had on 11/22.

You're leaving out the most important part - Ruth Paine pulled strings
for him. Her father was CIA and her husband worked at Bell
Helicopter. Ever hear of them? They only made a fortune in Vietnam
when in 1963 they were boardering on bankruptcy. Michael Paine also
reported to a William Gehlen. Look him up and you'll see even more
worms pop out.

>
> 3. The choice of weapons is interesting but not surprising. Oswald
> was notorioulsy cheap. While in the military in Japan, he rarely
> joined co-marines of their liberties. On the few occassions he did go
> out, he usually took up time with a higher class of Prostitute. IMHO,
> price had everything to do with his choice of weapons.

Sure, so what happened to the 30.6 he used on Walker? He was so cheap
he bought a gun with a bent scope to kill the president.

>
> 4. I don't believe Oswald ever considered he would not be captured or
> killed. I believe his state of mind had changed considerably over the
> previous 24 hours as evidenced by his actions. Throughout his
> marriage to Marina, he rarely if ever gave her any money. They lived
> the life of poverty. Once Oswald made the decision to carry out the
> events of 11/22, I don't believe he was any longer being rational.
> Hency, he did what he never had done before. He left Marina with $170
> cash and carried only $13 on 11/22. Pocket change. He didn't need
> his pistol because IMHO, he never considered the possiblity of
> survival. I truly believe he was shocked when he realized he had
> gotten out of the TSBD alive. For his remaining time before capture,
> everything he did demonstrated panic, not thought.

Is there an answer in there. Did you ever meet Oswald? How can all
you LNers know what he was thinking so thoroughly? You can't is the
answer. His actions were not that of someone who just shot the
president. That whole weekend he was very calm and cool.

>
> 5. One doesn't pass or fail a nitrate test.

Yes one does, it called positive and negative. He was negative on the
parafin test.

>
> 6. This is a blantent lie by the questioner. WC Article IV, page 56,
> 76-80 proves the bag carrying the MC into the TSBD on 11/22 contained
> fibers from the blanket in the Paine garage to a 95-99% match. This
> alone would be enough to convict the owner of said weapon.

I have never read this. It would not be enough as the weapon was
never linked to LHO in the first place.

>
> 7. Unanswerable. One cannot get into the mind of LHO.

Since when? You LNers are always in the mind of LHO. He was this, he
was that. How do you know? Because the government says so?

>
> 8. After Oswalds arrest, the bullet fragments were matched to the
> bullets obtained from the attempt on General Walker. The match, while
> NOT conclusive were close. Considering Oswald left a note for Marina
> on instructions on what to do if caught for the Walker murder, this is
> pretty much overstated.

How could they match? It is common knowledge a 30.6 rifle was used
for the attempt on Walker and the government claims LHO used a 6.5mm.
The interesting thing here is that a 30.6 was used in the killing of
MLK and it was the weapon "Frenchy" liked to use.

>
> 9. Unanswerable, BUT not surprising. Oswald was in an obvious state
> of panic now after the Tippit shooting. IMHO, he'd have crawled down
> a hole had one been available.

Really, so much in a panic he rides a bus and takes a cab only to end
up in a movie house? Please. That's right LHO couldn't drive an
automobile. Doesn't this seem like a major handicap for someone who
is going to shoot the president and have no help? I don't think he
could fly a plane either. Why not head for the nearest train
station? How far away is the Mexican border from Dallas anyway?

>
> 10. Absolutely and totally a false comment. Oswald fingerprints were
> found on the trigger housing.http://www.jfk-online.com/prints.html

You have found something the rest of the world missed. I have never
heard this one before. The Dallas police sure couldn't find any
prints and neither could the FBI initially and then magically the palm
print showed up.

>
> Questions answered. I suggest you CT's spend some of your valuable
> time studying Lee Harvey Oswald. After 44 years, your ignorance of
> who he was and what he represented is astounding.

Yeah, you're such an expert on the topic.

>
> On a side note, IMHO, Oswald did NOT make the decision to assassinate
> JFK until the evening of 11/21. Understanding the mindset of Oswald
> at this point is critical. After Marina rejected his sexual advances
> several times on 11/21, I believe this was the final step in the
> desolution of a human being. Oswald decided that evening to leave the
> world in chaos. He succeeded.

There you go again, acting like you know exactly what LHO was
thinking. Yeah sure, all people decide the night before to commit a
major crime like shooting the president. Who needs to plan? Just
wing it.

muc...@gmail.com

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 3:08:37 PM10/18/07

to

On 18 Okt., 17:43, robcap...@netscape.com wrote:

> > You have a degree in history?! Doesn't sound like that to me/

I'm taking the liberty to re-insert the snipped parts above.

Did you graduate from G.J. Academy?

Message has been deleted

Bud

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 5:20:30 PM10/18/07

to

robcap...@netscape.com wrote:
> If LHO was the sole assassin as you think then aswer the following
> questions.
>
> 1) Why did he do it? - motive

Saw Kennedy as an opponent of his hero, Castro.

> 2) How was he lucky enough to get a job at a site that just happen to
> be along the route the president would be going? - opportunity

There was no plan of a motorcade going past the TSBD when Oz got
his job there.

> 3) Why would anyone pick one of the most horrific guns in modern
> military history to pull off such a big hit?

Affordability.

> 4) Why did LHO leave his pistol at the boarding house?

Knew it was useless to his assassination plans.

> Don't you
> think that he would possibly need it with him after he shot the
> president?

Wasn`t looking to shoot his way out of the TSBD.

> 5) Why did he fail a nitrate test if he had fired a rifle at the
> president and shot a cop?

He tested positive for nitrates on his hands.

> 6) Why did his rifle have no hair or fibers matching the blanket Ruth
> Paine said LHO wrapped it in while it was supposedly stored in her
> garage?

The FBI found fibers, but couldn`t get a conclusive match, I
believe.

> 7) Why not practice the kill beforehand? No one can say they saw LHO
> ever out shooting a gun before the assassination.

Why are you suggesting improvements to an already sucessful
venture?

> 8) Why did he supposedly use a 30.6 for the General Walker attempt (a
> much better rifle when he would have been much closer) and a piece of
> junk Mannlicher Carcano (low velocity) for the president when he would
> have been much further away?

He used the same rifle for both.

> 9) Why did he go to the Texas Theater? What was the purpose of going
> to watch a movie instead of trying to get out of town?

You`re an idiot.

> 10) Why was only a smudged palm print on the rifle when LHO wore no
> gloves and should have left a million prints all over it?

Quote the fingerprint expert who says the rifle should have had a
million prints.

> You can't
> say because he didn't want to get caught because he did a lot of other
> stupid things if this was his goal (i.e. backyard photos, dropped
> casings, A. Hiddell card in his wallet, etc...)

Another clueless CT looking at this case who shouldn`t be. Get a
hobby that doesn`t require thinking.

muc...@gmail.com

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 5:53:57 PM10/18/07

to

On 18 Okt., 23:20, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> robcap...@netscape.com wrote:
> > If LHO was the sole assassin as you think then aswer the following
> > questions.
>
> > 1) Why did he do it? - motive
>
> Saw Kennedy as an opponent of his hero, Castro.
>
> > 2) How was he lucky enough to get a job at a site that just happen to
> > be along the route the president would be going? - opportunity
>
> There was no plan of a motorcade going past the TSBD when Oz got
> his job there.

Gil claims that Connally nailed it on 10/4/63 by getting JFK to accept
the Trade Mart as *the* luncheon site!

> > 3) Why would anyone pick one of the most horrific guns in modern
> > military history to pull off such a big hit?
>
> Affordability.

And lack of time.

> > 4) Why did LHO leave his pistol at the boarding house?
>
> Knew it was useless to his assassination plans.
>
> > Don't you
> > think that he would possibly need it with him after he shot the
> > president?
>
> Wasn`t looking to shoot his way out of the TSBD.
>
> > 5) Why did he fail a nitrate test if he had fired a rifle at the
> > president and shot a cop?
>
> He tested positive for nitrates on his hands.
>
> > 6) Why did his rifle have no hair or fibers matching the blanket Ruth
> > Paine said LHO wrapped it in while it was supposedly stored in her
> > garage?
>
> The FBI found fibers, but couldn`t get a conclusive match, I
> believe.
>
> > 7) Why not practice the kill beforehand? No one can say they saw LHO
> > ever out shooting a gun before the assassination.
>
> Why are you suggesting improvements to an already sucessful
> venture?
>
> > 8) Why did he supposedly use a 30.6 for the General Walker attempt (a
> > much better rifle when he would have been much closer) and a piece of
> > junk Mannlicher Carcano (low velocity) for the president when he would
> > have been much further away?
>
> He used the same rifle for both.

Btw, a .30-06 (Springfield) is a cartridge, not a rifle.

> > 9) Why did he go to the Texas Theater? What was the purpose of going
> > to watch a movie instead of trying to get out of town?
>
> You`re an idiot.

Who claims to hold a degree in history.

> > 10) Why was only a smudged palm print on the rifle when LHO wore no
> > gloves and should have left a million prints all over it?
>
> Quote the fingerprint expert who says the rifle should have had a
> million prints.
>
> > You can't
> > say because he didn't want to get caught because he did a lot of other
> > stupid things if this was his goal (i.e. backyard photos, dropped
> > casings, A. Hiddell card in his wallet, etc...)
>
> Another clueless CT looking at this case who shouldn`t be. Get a
> hobby that doesn`t require thinking.

Some historian...

muc...@gmail.com

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 6:02:36 PM10/18/07

to

On 18 Okt., 23:53, much...@gmail.com wrote:
> On 18 Okt., 23:20, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> > robcap...@netscape.com wrote:
> > > If LHO was the sole assassin as you think then aswer the following
> > > questions.
>
> > > 1) Why did he do it? - motive
>
> > Saw Kennedy as an opponent of his hero, Castro.
>
> > > 2) How was he lucky enough to get a job at a site that just happen to
> > > be along the route the president would be going? - opportunity
>
> > There was no plan of a motorcade going past the TSBD when Oz got
> > his job there.
>
> Gil claims that Connally nailed it on 10/4/63 by getting JFK to accept
> the Trade Mart as *the* luncheon site!
>
> > > 3) Why would anyone pick one of the most horrific guns in modern
> > > military history to pull off such a big hit?
>
> > Affordability.
>
> And lack of time.

...to upgrade, of course.

Bud

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 6:03:57 PM10/18/07

to

Stupid thinking. Are you going to make the case that Hinckley
didn`t shoot Reagan because other obsessed kooks didn`t shoot anyone?

> In fact, our point in time is probably the
> most stressful in all of history and yet I don't see a single lone nut
> shooting a president.

You don`t see a President.

> You have not listed a motive. That babble
> wouldn't hold up in a court of law.

Only need to show that Oz shot JFK. That has been shown for decades
now.

> > 2. Lucky enough to get a job at the TSBD? Luck had nothing to do
> > with it. Oswald had registered with the Texas State Employment
> > Department and had inverviewed for other positions that very week he
> > got his temporary job at the TSBD. Had Roy Truly hired him for the
> > other TSBD opening in Dallas, Oswald would never have had the
> > opportunity he had on 11/22.

Establish that a motoracde route existed when Oz applied for the job
at the TSBD.

> You're leaving out the most important part - Ruth Paine pulled strings
> for him.

She told him there might be an openning. Randle told her about it.
Is she CIA also, kook?

> Her father was CIA and her husband worked at Bell
> Helicopter. Ever hear of them? They only made a fortune in Vietnam
> when in 1963 they were boardering on bankruptcy. Michael Paine also
> reported to a William Gehlen. Look him up and you'll see even more
> worms pop out.

In other words, you have nothing .

> > 3. The choice of weapons is interesting but not surprising. Oswald
> > was notorioulsy cheap. While in the military in Japan, he rarely
> > joined co-marines of their liberties. On the few occassions he did go
> > out, he usually took up time with a higher class of Prostitute. IMHO,
> > price had everything to do with his choice of weapons.
>
> Sure, so what happened to the 30.6 he used on Walker? He was so cheap
> he bought a gun with a bent scope to kill the president.

Who knows when the scope was bent? Might hav been bent post-
assassination, there was a long fresh scrape on it when found.

> > 4. I don't believe Oswald ever considered he would not be captured or
> > killed. I believe his state of mind had changed considerably over the
> > previous 24 hours as evidenced by his actions. Throughout his
> > marriage to Marina, he rarely if ever gave her any money. They lived
> > the life of poverty. Once Oswald made the decision to carry out the
> > events of 11/22, I don't believe he was any longer being rational.
> > Hency, he did what he never had done before. He left Marina with $170
> > cash and carried only $13 on 11/22. Pocket change. He didn't need
> > his pistol because IMHO, he never considered the possiblity of
> > survival. I truly believe he was shocked when he realized he had
> > gotten out of the TSBD alive. For his remaining time before capture,
> > everything he did demonstrated panic, not thought.
>
> Is there an answer in there. Did you ever meet Oswald? How can all
> you LNers know what he was thinking so thoroughly?

Mostly we read and understand what we read.

> You can't is the
> answer. His actions were not that of someone who just shot the
> president.

Tell that to Tippit.

>That whole weekend he was very calm and cool.
> >
> > 5. One doesn't pass or fail a nitrate test.
>
> Yes one does, it called positive and negative. He was negative on the
> parafin test.

He was positive on his hands.

> > 6. This is a blantent lie by the questioner. WC Article IV, page 56,
> > 76-80 proves the bag carrying the MC into the TSBD on 11/22 contained
> > fibers from the blanket in the Paine garage to a 95-99% match. This
> > alone would be enough to convict the owner of said weapon.
>
> I have never read this. It would not be enough as the weapon was
> never linked to LHO in the first place.

Interesting. This evidence is only meaningful if it is absent. Once
presented, it become insignificant.

> > 7. Unanswerable. One cannot get into the mind of LHO.
>
> Since when? You LNers are always in the mind of LHO. He was this, he
> was that. How do you know? Because the government says so?

You can get a basic understanding of a person if you study what
they said and what they did in various situations.

> > 8. After Oswalds arrest, the bullet fragments were matched to the
> > bullets obtained from the attempt on General Walker. The match, while
> > NOT conclusive were close. Considering Oswald left a note for Marina
> > on instructions on what to do if caught for the Walker murder, this is
> > pretty much overstated.
>
> How could they match? It is common knowledge a 30.6 rifle was used
> for the attempt on Walker and the government claims LHO used a 6.5mm.
> The interesting thing here is that a 30.6 was used in the killing of
> MLK and it was the weapon "Frenchy" liked to use.

Someone has been reading too many crackpot conspiracy books.

> > 9. Unanswerable, BUT not surprising. Oswald was in an obvious state
> > of panic now after the Tippit shooting. IMHO, he'd have crawled down
> > a hole had one been available.
>
> Really, so much in a panic he rides a bus and takes a cab only to end
> up in a movie house? Please.

This is before he shot Tippit. Oak Cliff had cops running around
looking for Oz after he killer Tippit. They has a general description,
and they were all over the vicintity Oz was in.

> That's right LHO couldn't drive an
> automobile. Doesn't this seem like a major handicap for someone who
> is going to shoot the president and have no help? I don't think he
> could fly a plane either. Why not head for the nearest train
> station? How far away is the Mexican border from Dallas anyway?

Why not get a ride from one of those conspirators?

> > 10. Absolutely and totally a false comment. Oswald fingerprints were
> > found on the trigger housing.http://www.jfk-online.com/prints.html
>
> You have found something the rest of the world missed. I have never
> heard this one before. The Dallas police sure couldn't find any
> prints and neither could the FBI initially and then magically the palm
> print showed up.

Both the Dallas police and the FBI found prints.

> > Questions answered. I suggest you CT's spend some of your valuable
> > time studying Lee Harvey Oswald. After 44 years, your ignorance of
> > who he was and what he represented is astounding.
>
> Yeah, you're such an expert on the topic.

This guys sounds like Ricland. Spouting off when he doesn`t even
know the basics.

> > On a side note, IMHO, Oswald did NOT make the decision to assassinate
> > JFK until the evening of 11/21. Understanding the mindset of Oswald
> > at this point is critical. After Marina rejected his sexual advances
> > several times on 11/21, I believe this was the final step in the
> > desolution of a human being. Oswald decided that evening to leave the
> > world in chaos. He succeeded.
>
> There you go again, acting like you know exactly what LHO was
> thinking. Yeah sure, all people decide the night before to commit a
> major crime like shooting the president. Who needs to plan? Just
> wing it.

Worked. Not a very complex plan, though, take his concealed rifle
to work and shoot the President from there. Pretty bland, which is why
kooks try to spice up the plot with ninjas and poison dart umbrellas
and such.

David Von Pein

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 6:28:43 PM10/18/07

to

Jean Davison summed up the assassination very nicely in just 30 words,
on page #297 of her very-underrated 1983 LHO book......

"The assassination of John Kennedy was neither an act of random
violence nor a conspiracy. It was carried out as a result of Oswald's
character and background interacting with circumstance." -- Jean
Davison; Page 297 of "Oswald's Game"

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 7:59:17 PM10/18/07

to

On Oct 18, 5:20 pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> robcap...@netscape.com wrote:
> > If LHO was the sole assassin as you think then aswer the following
> > questions.
>
> > 1) Why did he do it? - motive
>
> Saw Kennedy as an opponent of his hero, Castro.

Opponent? He was the only one who didn't want to invade the island.
If the CIA/military had their way they would have invaded in a
heartbeat. Why? Not to depose a ruthless leader but to get those
casinos back up and running.

>
> > 2) How was he lucky enough to get a job at a site that just happen to
> > be along the route the president would be going? - opportunity
>
> There was no plan of a motorcade going past the TSBD when Oz got
> his job there.

Wrong. The final plan was in place by September 13 and LHO didn't
start working at the TSBD until mid-October.

>
> > 3) Why would anyone pick one of the most horrific guns in modern
> > military history to pull off such a big hit?
>
> Affordability.

Since one could expect to be in jail or dead after shooting the
president I would think he could have splurged on a good weapon.

>
> > 4) Why did LHO leave his pistol at the boarding house?
>
> Knew it was useless to his assassination plans.

How about for self-defense?

>
> > Don't you
> > think that he would possibly need it with him after he shot the
> > president?
>
> Wasn`t looking to shoot his way out of the TSBD.

But a professional killer is ready for anything. Just proves he was
an amatuer and incapable of doing the deed.

>
> > 5) Why did he fail a nitrate test if he had fired a rifle at the
> > president and shot a cop?
>
> He tested positive for nitrates on his hands.

Which came from the boxes he was handling all morning. His cheek was
a negative and since he supposedly used a rifle this would be
impossible.

>
> > 6) Why did his rifle have no hair or fibers matching the blanket Ruth
> > Paine said LHO wrapped it in while it was supposedly stored in her
> > garage?
>
> The FBI found fibers, but couldn`t get a conclusive match, I
> believe.

I don't think they found squat.

>
> > 7) Why not practice the kill beforehand? No one can say they saw LHO
> > ever out shooting a gun before the assassination.
>
> Why are you suggesting improvements to an already sucessful
> venture?

Professionals constantly practice and they are the best, why would an
average at best shooter not practice and hope to be successful?

>
> > 8) Why did he supposedly use a 30.6 for the General Walker attempt (a
> > much better rifle when he would have been much closer) and a piece of
> > junk Mannlicher Carcano (low velocity) for the president when he would
> > have been much further away?
>
> He used the same rifle for both.

Not what the police said. They listed the ballistics for the Walker
attempt as a 30.6 bullet.

>
> > 9) Why did he go to the Texas Theater? What was the purpose of going
> > to watch a movie instead of trying to get out of town?
>
> You`re an idiot.

Sure, insult when you have no remote reason for this. How far away was
Mexico again? Why not head there?

>
> > 10) Why was only a smudged palm print on the rifle when LHO wore no
> > gloves and should have left a million prints all over it?
>
> Quote the fingerprint expert who says the rifle should have had a
> million prints.

Boy and I'm the idiot. If one handles a gun with no gloves don't you
think their prints will be all over it. Metal and wood are two of the
best conducters for prints. Thanks, you make me feel like a genius.

>
> > You can't
> > say because he didn't want to get caught because he did a lot of other
> > stupid things if this was his goal (i.e. backyard photos, dropped
> > casings, A. Hiddell card in his wallet, etc...)
>
> Another clueless CT looking at this case who shouldn`t be. Get a
> hobby that doesn`t require thinking.

Yeah, because you just gave me so much overwhelming evidence I should
just convert to a LNer!! Not!! You are the one who doesn't have a
clue so go sniff some more glue.

justm...@gmail.com

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 8:05:13 PM10/18/07

to

Rob? You and Gil Jesus fell from the same tree, you're as ignorant as
he is (although we know you're the same person, changing your way of
posting alittle to sound like an idiot) Your true colors are coming
out Chico....BIGOT!

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 8:19:31 PM10/18/07

to

> > This is not a motive. It could describe thousands of people and they
> > don't shoot the president.
>
> Stupid thinking. Are you going to make the case that Hinckley
> didn`t shoot Reagan because other obsessed kooks didn`t shoot anyone?

I said our point in time - just f.y.i. it is 2007. Reagan's attempt
was 1981. Get up-to-date. Reagan was shot because he was going to
take on the Federal Reserve and everyone ends up dead that does that
(Lincoln, JFK and Garfield).

>
> > In fact, our point in time is probably the
> > most stressful in all of history and yet I don't see a single lone nut
> > shooting a president.
>
> You don`t see a President.

What are you talking about? Can't complete a thought?

>
> > You have not listed a motive. That babble
> > wouldn't hold up in a court of law.
>
> Only need to show that Oz shot JFK. That has been shown for decades
> now.

Do it - show it. What country do you live in? I haven't been shown
LHO did it, just told he did it.

>
> > > 2. Lucky enough to get a job at the TSBD? Luck had nothing to do
> > > with it. Oswald had registered with the Texas State Employment
> > > Department and had inverviewed for other positions that very week he
> > > got his temporary job at the TSBD. Had Roy Truly hired him for the
> > > other TSBD opening in Dallas, Oswald would never have had the
> > > opportunity he had on 11/22.
>
> Establish that a motoracde route existed when Oz applied for the job
> at the TSBD.

Same old LNer tactic. Look it up. The motorcade route (minus turns
on Houston and Elm) and the luncheon were set as of September 13, 1963
before LHO started work at the TSBD.

>
> > You're leaving out the most important part - Ruth Paine pulled strings
> > for him.
>
> She told him there might be an openning. Randle told her about it.
> Is she CIA also, kook?
>
> > Her father was CIA and her husband worked at Bell
> > Helicopter. Ever hear of them? They only made a fortune in Vietnam
> > when in 1963 they were boardering on bankruptcy. Michael Paine also
> > reported to a William Gehlen. Look him up and you'll see even more
> > worms pop out.
>
> In other words, you have nothing .

Okay, if you say so. I guess you need a rock to fall on your head.

>
> > > 3. The choice of weapons is interesting but not surprising. Oswald
> > > was notorioulsy cheap. While in the military in Japan, he rarely
> > > joined co-marines of their liberties. On the few occassions he did go
> > > out, he usually took up time with a higher class of Prostitute. IMHO,
> > > price had everything to do with his choice of weapons.
>
> > Sure, so what happened to the 30.6 he used on Walker? He was so cheap
> > he bought a gun with a bent scope to kill the president.
>
> Who knows when the scope was bent? Might hav been bent post-
> assassination, there was a long fresh scrape on it when found.

The bent scope was the least of the problems. It was a low-velocity
gun. It jams alot. It is inaccurate. Not good things for an
assassin to have against him.

>
> > > 4. I don't believe Oswald ever considered he would not be captured or
> > > killed. I believe his state of mind had changed considerably over the
> > > previous 24 hours as evidenced by his actions. Throughout his
> > > marriage to Marina, he rarely if ever gave her any money. They lived
> > > the life of poverty. Once Oswald made the decision to carry out the
> > > events of 11/22, I don't believe he was any longer being rational.
> > > Hency, he did what he never had done before. He left Marina with $170
> > > cash and carried only $13 on 11/22. Pocket change. He didn't need
> > > his pistol because IMHO, he never considered the possiblity of
> > > survival. I truly believe he was shocked when he realized he had
> > > gotten out of the TSBD alive. For his remaining time before capture,
> > > everything he did demonstrated panic, not thought.
>
> > Is there an answer in there. Did you ever meet Oswald? How can all
> > you LNers know what he was thinking so thoroughly?
>
> Mostly we read and understand what we read.

No, you're brainwashed.

>
> > You can't is the
> > answer. His actions were not that of someone who just shot the
> > president.
>
> Tell that to Tippit.

Sorry, Tippit is dead. Shot by two men with automatic weapons.

>
> >That whole weekend he was very calm and cool.
>
> > > 5. One doesn't pass or fail a nitrate test.
>
> > Yes one does, it called positive and negative. He was negative on the
> > parafin test.
>
> He was positive on his hands.

Negative on the cheek, impossible if you use a rifle.

>
> > > 6. This is a blantent lie by the questioner. WC Article IV, page 56,
> > > 76-80 proves the bag carrying the MC into the TSBD on 11/22 contained
> > > fibers from the blanket in the Paine garage to a 95-99% match. This
> > > alone would be enough to convict the owner of said weapon.
>
> > I have never read this. It would not be enough as the weapon was
> > never linked to LHO in the first place.
>
> Interesting. This evidence is only meaningful if it is absent. Once
> presented, it become insignificant.

Presented by who? Prove it. Where's the link? That's what you guys
always say. I'm not taking his word for it.

>
> > > 7. Unanswerable. One cannot get into the mind of LHO.
>
> > Since when? You LNers are always in the mind of LHO. He was this, he
> > was that. How do you know? Because the government says so?
>
> You can get a basic understanding of a person if you study what
> they said and what they did in various situations.

Maybe, if you have formal training in this area and even then it is an
educated guess. Do you have formal training?

>
> > > 8. After Oswalds arrest, the bullet fragments were matched to the
> > > bullets obtained from the attempt on General Walker. The match, while
> > > NOT conclusive were close. Considering Oswald left a note for Marina
> > > on instructions on what to do if caught for the Walker murder, this is
> > > pretty much overstated.
>
> > How could they match? It is common knowledge a 30.6 rifle was used
> > for the attempt on Walker and the government claims LHO used a 6.5mm.
> > The interesting thing here is that a 30.6 was used in the killing of
> > MLK and it was the weapon "Frenchy" liked to use.
>
> Someone has been reading too many crackpot conspiracy books.

Sure, avoid the topic. Can't explain it so make nasty comments.
Pathetic.

>
> > > 9. Unanswerable, BUT not surprising. Oswald was in an obvious state
> > > of panic now after the Tippit shooting. IMHO, he'd have crawled down
> > > a hole had one been available.
>
> > Really, so much in a panic he rides a bus and takes a cab only to end
> > up in a movie house? Please.
>
> This is before he shot Tippit. Oak Cliff had cops running around
> looking for Oz after he killer Tippit. They has a general description,
> and they were all over the vicintity Oz was in.

He wouldn't have time to shoot Tippit and more witnesses said it
wasn't LHO than did. What was JDT doing in the north area anyway when
all other cops were downtown?

>
> > That's right LHO couldn't drive an
> > automobile. Doesn't this seem like a major handicap for someone who
> > is going to shoot the president and have no help? I don't think he
> > could fly a plane either. Why not head for the nearest train
> > station? How far away is the Mexican border from Dallas anyway?
>
> Why not get a ride from one of those conspirators?

Finally, you are seeing the light. He must have expected to meet
someone to give his report to.

> > > 10. Absolutely and totally a false comment. Oswald fingerprints were
> > > found on the trigger housing.http://www.jfk-online.com/prints.html
>
> > You have found something the rest of the world missed. I have never
> > heard this one before. The Dallas police sure couldn't find any
> > prints and neither could the FBI initially and then magically the palm
> > print showed up.
>
> Both the Dallas police and the FBI found prints.

Prove it. Where's the link?

>
> > > Questions answered. I suggest you CT's spend some of your valuable
> > > time studying Lee Harvey Oswald. After 44 years, your ignorance of
> > > who he was and what he represented is astounding.
>
> > Yeah, you're such an expert on the topic.
>
> This guys sounds like Ricland. Spouting off when he doesn`t even
> know the basics.

I forgot more than you will ever know. You probably don't know who's
buried in Grant's tomb.

>
> > > On a side note, IMHO, Oswald did NOT make the decision to assassinate
> > > JFK until the evening of 11/21. Understanding the mindset of Oswald
> > > at this point is critical. After Marina rejected his sexual advances
> > > several times on 11/21, I believe this was the final step in the
> > > desolution of a human being. Oswald decided that evening to leave the
> > > world in chaos. He succeeded.
>
> > There you go again, acting like you know exactly what LHO was
> > thinking. Yeah sure, all people decide the night before to commit a
> > major crime like shooting the president. Who needs to plan? Just
> > wing it.
>
> Worked. Not a very complex plan, though, take his concealed rifle
> to work and shoot the President from there. Pretty bland, which is why
> kooks try to spice up the plot with ninjas and poison dart umbrellas
> and such.

You sound like Limbaugh. Is that right wing wacko your hero. The
same guy who got a deferment because he has an anal ailment? Stop
taking it up the rear and he'd be okay.

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 8:26:09 PM10/18/07

to

> Rob? You and Gil Jesus fell from the same tree, you're as ignorant as
> he is (although we know you're the same person, changing your way of
> posting alittle to sound like an idiot) Your true colors are coming
> out Chico....BIGOT!

Based on the amount of crack you must consume I'll take that as a
compliment. Why is so important to have one lonely man do this? Does
it make you feel better? Think maybe you could pull it off? Dream
on.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 8:33:24 PM10/18/07

to

In article <1192744437....@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
muc...@gmail.com says...

>
>On 18 Okt., 23:20, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>> robcap...@netscape.com wrote:
>> > If LHO was the sole assassin as you think then aswer the following
>> > questions.
>>
>> > 1) Why did he do it? - motive
>>
>> Saw Kennedy as an opponent of his hero, Castro.
>>
>> > 2) How was he lucky enough to get a job at a site that just happen to
>> > be along the route the president would be going? - opportunity
>>
>> There was no plan of a motorcade going past the TSBD when Oz got
>> his job there.
>
>Gil claims that Connally nailed it on 10/4/63 by getting JFK to accept
>the Trade Mart as *the* luncheon site!
>
>> > 3) Why would anyone pick one of the most horrific guns in modern
>> > military history to pull off such a big hit?
>>
>> Affordability.
>
>And lack of time.

How strange? We know he had plenty of money... how much did he leave his wife?
We know he could have walked into any store that carried rifles, and walked out
again with a better rifle than the MC... and without leaving any traceable
records either.

>> > 4) Why did LHO leave his pistol at the boarding house?
>>
>> Knew it was useless to his assassination plans.
>>
>> > Don't you
>> > think that he would possibly need it with him after he shot the
>> > president?
>>
>> Wasn`t looking to shoot his way out of the TSBD.
>>
>> > 5) Why did he fail a nitrate test if he had fired a rifle at the
>> > president and shot a cop?
>>
>> He tested positive for nitrates on his hands.

Of course, we *know* due to tests conducted by Guinn that it was nitrates on the
CHEEK that would have proven beyond all doubt that LHO fired an MC that day.
Lack of such was certainly exculpatory. This explains why the WC buried the
data, and even most LNT'ers deny it to this day.

But unless he was kissing books and boxes, there would have been no reason for a
positive NAA test on the cheek caste - as there *was* a perfectly legitimate
reason for a positive paraffin test on his hands.

>> > 6) Why did his rifle have no hair or fibers matching the blanket Ruth
>> > Paine said LHO wrapped it in while it was supposedly stored in her
>> > garage?
>>
>> The FBI found fibers, but couldn`t get a conclusive match, I
>> believe.

Little more of a problem than that... by all means, take a look at the testimony
to learn more.

>> > 7) Why not practice the kill beforehand? No one can say they saw LHO
>> > ever out shooting a gun before the assassination.
>>
>> Why are you suggesting improvements to an already sucessful
>> venture?
>>
>> > 8) Why did he supposedly use a 30.6 for the General Walker attempt (a
>> > much better rifle when he would have been much closer) and a piece of
>> > junk Mannlicher Carcano (low velocity) for the president when he would
>> > have been much further away?
>>
>> He used the same rifle for both.
>
>Btw, a .30-06 (Springfield) is a cartridge, not a rifle.

Tis true... all you need to do now is demonstrate that the MC "owned" by Oswald
could fire such cartridges...

Interesting to note, Frazier's .30-06 was confiscated FROM HIS HOME by the DPD.
Any explanation?

>> > 9) Why did he go to the Texas Theater? What was the purpose of going
>> > to watch a movie instead of trying to get out of town?
>>
>> You`re an idiot.
>
>Who claims to hold a degree in history.

Anyone who asks questions that embarrass the LNT'er camp will be labeled
"idiot"... it's one of the best determinations of good questions that can be
made in this forum.

>> > 10) Why was only a smudged palm print on the rifle when LHO wore no
>> > gloves and should have left a million prints all over it?
>>
>> Quote the fingerprint expert who says the rifle should have had a
>> million prints.
>>
>> > You can't
>> > say because he didn't want to get caught because he did a lot of other
>> > stupid things if this was his goal (i.e. backyard photos, dropped
>> > casings, A. Hiddell card in his wallet, etc...)
>>
>> Another clueless CT looking at this case who shouldn`t be. Get a
>> hobby that doesn`t require thinking.
>
>Some historian...

Some answers...

Sam Brown

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 8:52:20 PM10/18/07

to

"YoHarvey" <bail...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:1192728257....@k35g2000prh.googlegroups.com...

Fantastic post Yo. Now watch these stumps puff out their chests and resort
to name-calling instead of a sensible rebuttal.

>

David Von Pein

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 8:53:41 PM10/18/07

to

>>> "Interesting to note, Frazier's .30-06 was confiscated FROM HIS HOME by the DPD. Any explanation? " <<<

Sure. A very easy-to-explain explanation, in fact. ......

Frazier drove the assassin to the place from where the assassination
took place on the very morning the assassination took place, you
idiot.

I would have expected Wesley Frazier to be an initial "suspect".

Why WOULDN'T he be so considered in the very early stages of the
investigation? He drove the killer to the killing. Initially, people
could think there could be some connection there.

Hence, Frazier's RIFLE might be of some interest as well (seeing as
how Frazier drove Oswald and the murder weapon--a rifle--to the TSBD
on 11/22).

Ben's a moron.

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 9:07:13 PM10/18/07

to

How's it going Dave? You make a very good point here. I'm serious.
Let's break this down to the very basic. You and I see this from
different points of view, which is what makes this fun, but how about
this? A conspiracy in the eyes of the law is when one or more people
had foreknowledge of a crime and did not report it and when a group
(i.e. just two people) aided and abeted in relation to a crime. Why
was Ruth Paine, Marina Oswald, Guy Banister, David Ferrie, George H.W.
Bush and Wesley Frazier (just to name a few) not arrested as all of
them claimed to have knowledge he was going to do something like
this. How come not one of them (save Bush who waited until after the
assassination to call the FBI and give a false name - Parrot - the
same guy who would head his re-election campaign against Clinton)
called and reported this to the police or FBI? Are they not complicit
by doing nothing? Is Baker not complicit by not holding LHO at the
TBSD like the rest of the employees? He couldn't have supposedly shot
Tippit if he was held. Why did it take 10 minutes to seal the
building off if most people said the shots came from there per WC?
Why was LBJ not complicit for allowing evidence to be damaged? Hoover
for failing to act on warnings and not investigating any one besides
LHO? Let's assume none of them planned it, but their actions right
before and after should have made them all suspects and they should
have been arrested in some cases.

Conspiracy can be more than just the planning and execution stages.
Coverup can also include conspiracy.

YoHarvey

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 9:34:29 PM10/18/07

to

On Oct 18, 1:11 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> <justme1...@gmail.com> wrote in message

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>
> > Holmes, your as delusional as the rest of them...frenzy??? More like
> > hysterical laughter that Gil would once again stoop to his stupidity
> > of talking to himself under 2 names...btw, it's just more idiotic
> > questions we can ignore and insult you over...it keeps us busy and
> > entertained.
>
> Keep thjose insults coming justme.
>
> I LOVE the Retaliations.
>
> They send you into SHIT-FITS.

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

You call a lack of creativity "retaliations"?? What an asshole
roflmao.

Bud

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 11:24:25 PM10/18/07

to

robcap...@netscape.com wrote:
> On Oct 18, 5:20 pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > robcap...@netscape.com wrote:
> > > If LHO was the sole assassin as you think then aswer the following
> > > questions.
> >
> > > 1) Why did he do it? - motive
> >
> > Saw Kennedy as an opponent of his hero, Castro.
>
> Opponent? He was the only one who didn't want to invade the island.
> If the CIA/military had their way they would have invaded in a
> heartbeat. Why? Not to depose a ruthless leader but to get those
> casinos back up and running.

What does any of this have to do with my answer to your question.
Can you dispute that Oswald saw Kennedy as an opponent of Castro?

> > > 2) How was he lucky enough to get a job at a site that just happen to
> > > be along the route the president would be going? - opportunity
> >
> > There was no plan of a motorcade going past the TSBD when Oz got
> > his job there.
>
> Wrong. The final plan was in place by September 13

Show this "plan".

> and LHO didn't
> start working at the TSBD until mid-October.
> >
> > > 3) Why would anyone pick one of the most horrific guns in modern
> > > military history to pull off such a big hit?
> >
> > Affordability.
>
> Since one could expect to be in jail or dead after shooting the
> president I would think he could have splurged on a good weapon.

Who cares what you think? Do you think he could have shot Kennedy
deader with a better rifle?

He didn`t buy the rifle to kill Kennedy, probaly Walker, or Nixon.
Some facist. It was plenty good enough to kill Walker, who he could
have used a brick on, possibly with better reults.

> > > 4) Why did LHO leave his pistol at the boarding house?
> >
> > Knew it was useless to his assassination plans.
>
> How about for self-defense?

The main goal was assassination. A pistol complicates this. It
doesn`t help him kill Kennedy, but increases his chance of being
uncovered beforehand. If you keep in mind that rifles were seen in the
TSBD a few days prior to the assassination, you see that Oz carrying a
rifle could be explainable. If he hides the bullet clip, he is only
carrying a non-lethal object.

> > > Don't you
> > > think that he would possibly need it with him after he shot the
> > > president?
> >
> > Wasn`t looking to shoot his way out of the TSBD.
>
> But a professional killer is ready for anything.

Exactly, Oz was no pro. Pros have better rifles.

> Just proves he was
> an amatuer and incapable of doing the deed.

Then Hinkley couldn`t shoot Reagan. Booth couldn`t shoot Lincoln.
Tom couldn`t do Ellen.

> > > 5) Why did he fail a nitrate test if he had fired a rifle at the
> > > president and shot a cop?
> >
> > He tested positive for nitrates on his hands.
>
> Which came from the boxes he was handling all morning.

How did you determine where the nitrate came from? And why did you
suddenly back off your claim of no nitrates?

> His cheek was
> a negative and since he supposedly used a rifle this would be
> impossible.

Quote an expert saying this.

> > > 6) Why did his rifle have no hair or fibers matching the blanket Ruth
> > > Paine said LHO wrapped it in while it was supposedly stored in her
> > > garage?
> >
> > The FBI found fibers, but couldn`t get a conclusive match, I
> > believe.
>
> I don't think they found squat.

Because that would indicate Oz`s guilt, and you could never face
that.

> > > 7) Why not practice the kill beforehand? No one can say they saw LHO
> > > ever out shooting a gun before the assassination.
> >
> > Why are you suggesting improvements to an already sucessful
> > venture?
>
> Professionals constantly practice and they are the best, why would an
> average at best shooter not practice and hope to be successful?

Your asking me how Oz could hope to be sucessful after he has been
shown to have been sucessful?

> > > 8) Why did he supposedly use a 30.6 for the General Walker attempt (a
> > > much better rifle when he would have been much closer) and a piece of
> > > junk Mannlicher Carcano (low velocity) for the president when he would
> > > have been much further away?
> >
> > He used the same rifle for both.
>
> Not what the police said. They listed the ballistics for the Walker
> attempt as a 30.6 bullet.

Show a Dallas ballistic test that concluded the bullet was 30-06.

> > > 9) Why did he go to the Texas Theater? What was the purpose of going
> > > to watch a movie instead of trying to get out of town?
> >
> > You`re an idiot.
>
> Sure, insult when you have no remote reason for this. How far away was
> Mexico again? Why not head there?

Try stamp collecting, idiot.

> > > 10) Why was only a smudged palm print on the rifle when LHO wore no
> > > gloves and should have left a million prints all over it?
> >
> > Quote the fingerprint expert who says the rifle should have had a
> > million prints.
>
> Boy and I'm the idiot. If one handles a gun with no gloves don't you
> think their prints will be all over it. Metal and wood are two of the
> best conducters for prints. Thanks, you make me feel like a genius.

No, I asked you to quote an expert, and you quoted an idiot.

> > > You can't
> > > say because he didn't want to get caught because he did a lot of other
> > > stupid things if this was his goal (i.e. backyard photos, dropped
> > > casings, A. Hiddell card in his wallet, etc...)
> >
> > Another clueless CT looking at this case who shouldn`t be. Get a
> > hobby that doesn`t require thinking.
>
> Yeah, because you just gave me so much overwhelming evidence I should
> just convert to a LNer!!

We don`t want you. Idiots need not apply.

> Not!! You are the one who doesn't have a
> clue so go sniff some more glue.

Ouch. You can`t be Gil, he isn`t clever enough to be responsible
for that zinger.

tomnln

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 11:28:19 PM10/18/07

to

You LOSE at evidence/testimony.
Because we're Better at it.
So, you revert to name-calling.

You LOSE at name-calling.
Because we're Better at THAT TOO.

You're ONLY option left is to OVERDOSE.

LAST CHANCE;

http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm

"Sam Brown" <samjb...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:4717ffda$0$6925$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...

tomnln

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 11:31:01 PM10/18/07

to

Hahahahahahahaha LOSER.

Wanna buy a video???

"YoHarvey" <bail...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:1192757669.7...@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

Ben Holmes

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 11:47:12 PM10/18/07

to

In article <1192756033.7...@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
robc...@netscape.com says...

>
>On Oct 18, 8:53 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>> "Interesting to note, Frazier's .30-06 was confiscated FROM HIS HOME by the
>>DPD. Any explanation? " <<<
>>
>> Sure. A very easy-to-explain explanation, in fact. ......
>>
>> Frazier drove the assassin to the place from where the assassination
>> took place on the very morning the assassination took place, you
>> idiot.
>>
>> I would have expected Wesley Frazier to be an initial "suspect".
>>
>> Why WOULDN'T he be so considered in the very early stages of the
>> investigation? He drove the killer to the killing. Initially, people
>> could think there could be some connection there.
>>
>> Hence, Frazier's RIFLE might be of some interest as well

Therefore, the rifles that were KNOWN to have been in the TSBD just days before
would have been of even *MORE* interest than a rifle at a guy's home.

Tell us about the DPD response to those rifles, Troll...

David Von Pein

unread,

Oct 18, 2007, 11:56:40 PM10/18/07

to

>>> "The motorcade route (minus turns on Houston and Elm) and the luncheon were set as of September 13, 1963, before LHO started work at the TSBD." <<<

Total bullshit. Learn the case. And the proper chronology.

It was announced in mid-September that JFK would be going to Dallas,
yes. But the site for the November 22 luncheon (and, hence, the exact
motorcade route through the city) wasn't determined and finalized
until much later (November 13 or 14 to be more precise).

Ken O'Donnell is the one who approved the Trade Mart for the
luncheon....and he didn't put the stamp of finality on that decision
until November 13th or 14th.

Look it up on Page 31 of the Warren Report, right here:

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0028a.htm

Plus -- The specific motorcade route through Dealey Plaza wasn't made
known to the public (including Mr. Oswald) until the morning of
Tuesday, November 19th.

The whole notion of some kind of "plot" with respect to "placing" LHO
in the Depository Building is one of the most insane theories ever
postulated by CTers over the years.

It's insane because of how we KNOW Lee Oswald got his job....which was
a job that was obtained through garden-variety happenstance and
ordinary word-of-mouth -- from Wes Frazier, to Linnie Randle, to Ruth
Paine/Marina Oswald, to Lee Oswald, to Roy Truly (with the latter
hiring Oswald on October 15th).

Were Frazier, Randle, Paine, Marina, and Truly ALL part of the evil
assassination "plot"?

Anyone thinking that ANY of those individuals was part of some scheme
or pre-assassination "plot" to put LHO in the Depository should be
locked up with Charlie Manson. Because such a CTer is certainly off
his or her rocker.

www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/64195df0086af9b4

>>> "Since one could expect to be in jail or dead after shooting the president, I would think he could have splurged on a good weapon." <<<

Oswald didn't buy the Carcano specifically to shoot the President
with. He bought it in March '63 to use on General Walker. Oz's one-man
plot to kill JFK wasn't even on the horizon as of late March 1963 when
LHO first laid his hands on Rifle #C2766.

>>> "A professional killer is ready for anything. {Oswald not taking his revolver to work with him on Nov. 22} Just proves he was an amateur and incapable of doing the deed." <<<

Oswald knew he wouldn't need his pistol WHILE HE WAS STILL IN THE
DEPOSITORY BUILDING.

He knew this because of exactly what DID occur when he bumped into
Officer Baker in the lunchroom -- i.e., Oswald knew that his status as
an employee in the building would get him off the hook (temporarily at
least) just after the shooting. And, of course, it did just that, when
Roy Truly verified to Baker Oswald's status as a TSBD employee.

Why would Oswald want to start shooting away at cops (and others) when
it wasn't the slightest bit necessary to do so in order to flee the
building without being stopped as a suspect?

Oswald might have also thought it was wiser to NOT bring his revolver
with him to work on Friday. Because if (for some reason) he was caught
with the gun on him inside the building just after he shot the
President, it just might not look too good for ol' Lee at that time.*

* = Although, granted, many Texans did carry guns with them, circa
1963. But, then too, how many TSBD warehouse workers do you suppose
were packing rods on 11/22/63? (I don't know the answer to that
question with 100% certainty; but I'd wager the correct answer would
be: Zero.)

>>> "{The nitrates on LHO's hands} came from the boxes he was handling all morning." <<<

Huh? Nitrates from handling cardboard boxes?? First time I've heard
that one.

You could be correct I suppose (since I know that many ordinary things
can, indeed, result in a positive nitrate result), but I don't think
I've ever heard the "Boxes Caused The Positive Paraffin Result"
argument heretofore.

Of course, Rob doesn't think it's possible that Oswald could have
gotten any nitrates on his hands while he FIRED THOSE FOUR BULLETS
INTO J.D. TIPPIT'S BODY on Tenth Street....right Rob?

Because, per kooks like Robert, Oswald never shot a police officer on
November 22nd. Right, Bobby?

(Sickening.)

>>> "His cheek was a negative and since he supposedly used a rifle this would be impossible." <<<

Bullshit. Learn the case, Rob. An FBI agent fired Oswald's rifle after
the assassination and tested "negative" on BOTH his hands and his
cheek.

>>> "Professionals constantly practice and they are the best. Why would an average at best shooter not practice and hope to be successful?" <<<

You can't prove Oswald never practiced with his Mannlicher-Carcano.
You THINK he never practiced. But you know you can never prove that
speculation.

And even if LHO never did "practice" with his weapon leading up to the
assassination, CTers still have noplace to go with this argument. It's
a sidebar issue...at best. It's a meaningless argument based on the
sum total of "OSWALD SHOT KENNEDY" evidence.

Naturally, a CTer prefers their chaff to the abundance of wheat that
LNers are always munching on. Well, so be it. ~sigh~

>>> "Not what the police said. They listed the ballistics for the Walker attempt as a 30.6 bullet." <<<

More bullshit.

The Dallas "police" notwithstanding, both Robert Frazier of the FBI
and Joseph Nicol of Illinois (the independent firearms identification
expert who examined much of the assassination-related evidence)
testified about the Walker bullet (CE573) in front of the Warren
Commission. Let's listen:

Mr. EISENBERG - Mr. Frazier, did you examine this bullet to determine
whether it was or might have been fired in Exhibit 139?

ROBERT A. FRAZIER - Yes, I did.

Mr. EISENBERG - And what was your conclusion?

Mr. FRAZIER - We determined that the general rifling characteristics
of the rifle 139 are of the same type as those found on the bullet,
Exhibit 573, and, further, on this basis, that the bullet could have
been fired from the rifle on the basis of its land and groove
impressions. .... All of the remaining physical characteristics of
this bullet, 573, are the same as Western 6.5 mm. Mannlicher-Carcano
bullets of the type normally loaded in ammunition made for this rifle,
139. However, the mutilation of the nose of the bullet has eliminated
the length characteristics, and it cannot be definitely stated that
Exhibit 573 is in fact a Western Cartridge Co. product, but all of the
remaining characteristics of base shape, distance from the base to the
cannelure, the width of the cannelure, and the overall appearance,
coloration, and so forth, are similar to Western ammunition.

Mr. EISENBERG - But you do conclude that this was fired from a
Mannlicher-Carcano 91/38, or a rifle with similar barrel
characteristics?

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.

Mr. McCLOY - When you say you were able to determine it was fired from
this type of rifle or one similar to it, that would include a number
of different kinds of rifles besides the Mannlicher-Carcano?

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; it could include a variety of weapons with
which I am not familiar in the foreign field.

Mr. McCLOY - But it is definitely, according to your best judgment, a
6.5 mm. bullet?

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

JOSEPH D. NICOL. I found that within the limits that Commission
Exhibit 573 is badly mutilated as a result of having struck some hard
object on the side that the class characteristics generally
correspond, that is to say it would be fired from a weapon of
comparable rifling to Commission Exhibit 572 {test bullets fired from
Oswald's Carcano rifle for comparison purposes}.

Mr. EISENBERG. As I understand your testimony, therefore, you feel
that there are sufficient identical microscopic characteristics on 572
and 573 to say that they were probably fired from the same weapon, but
not enough to say that they were definitely fired from the same
weapon.

Mr. NICOL. Yes. My opinion would be based upon the finding of families
of lines that would be of the order of two to four fine striations on
the burr that I referred to. For a stronger identification, I would
want a larger group, I would want perhaps five or six in a given area,
all matching in terms of contour as well as position. But this I did
not find. And so for that reason, I would not want to express this as
a positive finding. However, I would not want to be misunderstood or
suggest that this could not have come from that particular gun.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/frazr1.htm

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/nicol.htm

I'm certainly no ballistics expert like Bob Frazier or Joe Nicol, but
I can see the definite "MC/6.5mm" similarities with just one look at
CE573. The similarities are obvious, as can be easily seen in the side-
by-side pictures here:

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0142b.htm

>>> "If one handles a gun with no gloves, don't you think their prints will be all over it?" <<<

It's my opinion that Oswald used his brown shirt (which he was
probably not wearing during the assassination) to wipe off as many
prints as he could from the rifle while transporting it to the
northwest corner of the sixth floor before dumping the gun behind his
(IMO) pre-arranged box-hiding location near the stairs.

This could account for the fresh brownish fibers being found under the
butt plate of the rifle. (I ask: How would shirt fibers manage to
WEDGE themselves onto the rifle in any OTHER fashion?) ~shrug~

>>> "It {Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle} was a low-velocity gun." <<<

Technically, yes, it's considered "low velocity". But it still
produced an average muzzle velocity of 2,165 feet-per-second (per
Robert Frazier's 1964 WC testimony), which of course is more than
powerful enough to kill a human being who is less than 100 yards from
the shooter.

Let's listen to Bob Frazier again:

Mr. FRAZIER - The higher velocity bullets of approximately the same
weight would have more killing power. This has a low velocity, but has
very adequate killing power with reference to humans, because it is an
established military weapon.

>>> "It jams a lot." <<<

AFAIK, the Carcano never once "jammed" during the many tests that the
rifle was subjected to by the Army at Edgewood Arsenal. I could be
wrong about that, however. I will admit, on this point, I don't have
the exact stats at my fingertips. But it seems to me that I heard, via
some of the MC tests that were done after 11/22/63, that the MC rifle
was not prone to jamming up as much as CTers claim.

I might be thinking about Dr. John Lattimer's experiments in the
mid-1970s, in which he tested various MC rifles (although not CE139
itself), with Lattimer finding that the Carcano rifle and its WCC
ammunition were very reliable and accurate.

Lattimer suffered no misfires at all while firing approx. 700 test
rounds from the exact same lots of bullets (4 lots total) that were
used by Oswald himself in CE139.

Upon perusing Lattimer's 1980 book ("Kennedy And Lincoln"), I couldn't
find a specific reference that addressed the "jamming" subject with
respect to the MC rifles he used in his tests, but Lattimer's
extensive experiments definitely showed that the conspiracy theorists
are dead-wrong when they insist that Lee Harvey Oswald's feat in
Dallas was "impossible" due to his Mannlicher-Carcano rifle being a
"piece of junk". Take a look:

http://i18.tinypic.com/2s82w78.jpg

http://i4.tinypic.com/346m1zl.jpg

>>> "Tippit is dead. Shot by two men with automatic weapons." <<<

Mega-Bullshit this time!

Lee Harvey Oswald killed J.D. Tippit beyond all doubt.

And: I wonder why "two men" were needed to murder Officer Tippit? And
I wonder (even more so) why it was, per Rob's scenario, that EVERY
SINGLE WITNESS (including Acquilla Clemons!) at the Tippit murder
scene failed to notice TWO GUNMEN?

Nobody saw TWO men with guns on 10th Street. The witnesses (save
Clemons) only saw one killer--Oswald. And only ONE man (Oswald) was
seen fleeing the scene by virtually all witnesses (with, again,
Clemons seeming to be the only dissenting witness in this "one man"
regard).

Also: How did the unknown "plotters" think they'd be able to frame
ONLY OSWALD for Tippit's murder when "they" went ahead and killed the
policeman with TWO automatic weapons, instead of just using one non-
automatic gun (which is all the proverbial "patsy" had with him on
November 22nd)?

Those plotters must have just gotten lucky when the cops AND the WC
apparently wanted to frame the SAME patsy named Oswald after the
murder.

(Geez.)

>>> "He {Saint Oswald} wouldn't have time to shoot Tippit..." <<<

You're referring to CT Myth #34B -- "OSWALD DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO
GET FROM HIS ROOMINGHOUSE TO TENTH STREET IN TIME TO ENCOUNTER TIPPIT"
-- right?

Of course, this is more CT-slanted BS. Re-enactments were done, and it
was proven that a person could easily traverse the 0.85 of a mile in
question in the approx. time Oswald had on 11/22/63. It took about 11
or 12 minutes, per the re-creations.

And that was only at a "fast-walking" pace; Oswald might have been
moving faster. Plus, Oz was almost certainly not in that roominghouse
for more than a minute or two, tops....not the "3 to 4 minutes" that
Earlene Roberts estimated.

>>> "...and more witnesses said it wasn't LHO {who killed Tippit} than did." <<<

~sigh~

BULLSHIT ALERT #66!

Gee whiz, you seem to be trying for "Kook Of The Month" or something.
You've misrepresented just about every single thing you've posted
today....including the above hunk of total balderdash about the Tippit
witnesses.

Virtually every witness identified Lee Oswald as Tippit's murderer or
as the ONE MAN they saw fleeing the murder site with a gun in his
hands.

Mrs. Clemons, again, is the exception here. But Clemons only saw the
aftermath of the shooting; and, given the totality of the evidence
that needs to be weighed and assessed in this matter, Clemons almost
certainly HAD to have seen Ted Callaway with Tippit's gun, not some
non-Oswald "killer".

To believe that Clemons trumps people like the Davis girls (who saw
Oswald UP CLOSE and both saw him emptying shells from his REVOLVER on
their lawn) is just plain crazy.

In short, if Lee Harvey Oswald didn't kill J.D. Tippit, then nobody
killed him.

www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com

muc...@gmail.com

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 4:29:01 AM10/19/07

to

On 19 Okt., 02:33, Ben Holmes <ad...@websitewealthcollege.com> wrote:
> In article <1192744437.904174.78...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> much...@gmail.com says...

>
> >On 18 Okt., 23:20, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> >> robcap...@netscape.com wrote:
> >> > If LHO was the sole assassin as you think then aswer the following
> >> > questions.
>
> >> > 1) Why did he do it? - motive
>
> >> Saw Kennedy as an opponent of his hero, Castro.
>
> >> > 2) How was he lucky enough to get a job at a site that just happen to
> >> > be along the route the president would be going? - opportunity
>
> >> There was no plan of a motorcade going past the TSBD when Oz got
> >> his job there.
>
> >Gil claims that Connally nailed it on 10/4/63 by getting JFK to accept
> >the Trade Mart as *the* luncheon site!

You seem reluctant to comment on Gil's theory, Ben. Trouble in
Paradise?

> >> > 3) Why would anyone pick one of the most horrific guns in modern
> >> > military history to pull off such a big hit?
>
> >> Affordability.
>
> >And lack of time.
>
> How strange? We know he had plenty of money... how much did he leave his wife?
> We know he could have walked into any store that carried rifles, and walked out
> again with a better rifle than the MC... and without leaving any traceable
> records either.

Does this question lead to anything other than speculation?

> >> > 4) Why did LHO leave his pistol at the boarding house?
>
> >> Knew it was useless to his assassination plans.
>
> >> > Don't you
> >> > think that he would possibly need it with him after he shot the
> >> > president?
>
> >> Wasn`t looking to shoot his way out of the TSBD.
>
> >> > 5) Why did he fail a nitrate test if he had fired a rifle at the
> >> > president and shot a cop?
>
> >> He tested positive for nitrates on his hands.
>
> Of course, we *know* due to tests conducted by Guinn that it was nitrates on the
> CHEEK that would have proven beyond all doubt that LHO fired an MC that day.
> Lack of such was certainly exculpatory. This explains why the WC buried the
> data, and even most LNT'ers deny it to this day.
>
> But unless he was kissing books and boxes, there would have been no reason for a
> positive NAA test on the cheek caste - as there *was* a perfectly legitimate
> reason for a positive paraffin test on his hands.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/factoid2.htm

> >> > 6) Why did his rifle have no hair or fibers matching the blanket Ruth
> >> > Paine said LHO wrapped it in while it was supposedly stored in her
> >> > garage?
>
> >> The FBI found fibers, but couldn`t get a conclusive match, I
> >> believe.
>
> Little more of a problem than that... by all means, take a look at the testimony
> to learn more.

Why not start here: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/bag.htm ?

> >> > 7) Why not practice the kill beforehand? No one can say they saw LHO
> >> > ever out shooting a gun before the assassination.
>
> >> Why are you suggesting improvements to an already sucessful
> >> venture?
>
> >> > 8) Why did he supposedly use a 30.6 for the General Walker attempt (a
> >> > much better rifle when he would have been much closer) and a piece of
> >> > junk Mannlicher Carcano (low velocity) for the president when he would
> >> > have been much further away?
>
> >> He used the same rifle for both.
>
> >Btw, a .30-06 (Springfield) is a cartridge, not a rifle.
>
> Tis true... all you need to do now is demonstrate that the MC "owned" by Oswald
> could fire such cartridges...

Why?

> Interesting to note, Frazier's .30-06 was confiscated FROM HIS HOME by the DPD.
> Any explanation?

DVP has explained this to you.

> >> > 9) Why did he go to the Texas Theater? What was the purpose of going
> >> > to watch a movie instead of trying to get out of town?
>
> >> You`re an idiot.
>
> >Who claims to hold a degree in history.
>
> Anyone who asks questions that embarrass the LNT'er camp will be labeled
> "idiot"... it's one of the best determinations of good questions that can be
> made in this forum.

Emrarrass the LN camp?! It is both *idiotic* and *dishonest* of you
and Rob to pretend that LN'ers believe that Oswald snuck into the TT
simply to watch a movie.

Bud

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 5:53:37 AM10/19/07

to

robcap...@netscape.com wrote:
> > > This is not a motive. It could describe thousands of people and they
> > > don't shoot the president.
> >
> > Stupid thinking. Are you going to make the case that Hinckley
> > didn`t shoot Reagan because other obsessed kooks didn`t shoot anyone?
>
> I said our point in time -

No, you used the fact that a lot of people like Oz don`t shoot
Presidents as evidence that Oz didn`t shoot JFK. I showed the fallacy
of that concept.

> just f.y.i. it is 2007. Reagan's attempt
> was 1981. Get up-to-date. Reagan was shot because he was going to
> take on the Federal Reserve and everyone ends up dead that does that
> (Lincoln, JFK and Garfield).

I wasn`t questioning you kook bona fides.

> > > In fact, our point in time is probably the
> > > most stressful in all of history and yet I don't see a single lone nut
> > > shooting a president.
> >
> > You don`t see a President.
>
> What are you talking about? Can't complete a thought?

I completed it. If you could think, you could take it from there.

> > > You have not listed a motive. That babble
> > > wouldn't hold up in a court of law.
> >
> > Only need to show that Oz shot JFK. That has been shown for decades
> > now.
>
> Do it - show it. What country do you live in? I haven't been shown
> LHO did it, just told he did it.

You`ve been shown. That doesn`t gaurantee you will see.

> > > > 2. Lucky enough to get a job at the TSBD? Luck had nothing to do
> > > > with it. Oswald had registered with the Texas State Employment
> > > > Department and had inverviewed for other positions that very week he
> > > > got his temporary job at the TSBD. Had Roy Truly hired him for the
> > > > other TSBD opening in Dallas, Oswald would never have had the
> > > > opportunity he had on 11/22.
> >
> > Establish that a motoracde route existed when Oz applied for the job
> > at the TSBD.
>
> Same old LNer tactic.

Yah, asking kooks to back up their kook claims.

> Look it up. The motorcade route (minus turns
> on Houston and Elm) and the luncheon were set as of September 13, 1963
> before LHO started work at the TSBD.
> >
> > > You're leaving out the most important part - Ruth Paine pulled strings
> > > for him.
> >
> > She told him there might be an openning. Randle told her about it.
> > Is she CIA also, kook?
> >
> > > Her father was CIA and her husband worked at Bell
> > > Helicopter. Ever hear of them? They only made a fortune in Vietnam
> > > when in 1963 they were boardering on bankruptcy. Michael Paine also
> > > reported to a William Gehlen. Look him up and you'll see even more
> > > worms pop out.
> >
> > In other words, you have nothing .
>
> Okay, if you say so.

No, you did. Producing nothing, I assumed you had nothing.

> I guess you need a rock to fall on your head.
> >
> > > > 3. The choice of weapons is interesting but not surprising. Oswald
> > > > was notorioulsy cheap. While in the military in Japan, he rarely
> > > > joined co-marines of their liberties. On the few occassions he did go
> > > > out, he usually took up time with a higher class of Prostitute. IMHO,
> > > > price had everything to do with his choice of weapons.
> >
> > > Sure, so what happened to the 30.6 he used on Walker? He was so cheap
> > > he bought a gun with a bent scope to kill the president.
> >
> > Who knows when the scope was bent? Might hav been bent post-
> > assassination, there was a long fresh scrape on it when found.
>
> The bent scope was the least of the problems. It was a low-velocity
> gun.

You`re an idiot.

> It jams alot.

True.

> It is inaccurate.

False.

> Not good things for an
> assassin to have against him.

How can you critique sucess?

For an alleged historian, you have a poor approach to historical
events. Next you`ll be arguing that Hitler didn`t start WWII, based on
the fact that he didn`t have the armies or material to hope to win it.

> > > > 4. I don't believe Oswald ever considered he would not be captured or
> > > > killed. I believe his state of mind had changed considerably over the
> > > > previous 24 hours as evidenced by his actions. Throughout his
> > > > marriage to Marina, he rarely if ever gave her any money. They lived
> > > > the life of poverty. Once Oswald made the decision to carry out the
> > > > events of 11/22, I don't believe he was any longer being rational.
> > > > Hency, he did what he never had done before. He left Marina with $170
> > > > cash and carried only $13 on 11/22. Pocket change. He didn't need
> > > > his pistol because IMHO, he never considered the possiblity of
> > > > survival. I truly believe he was shocked when he realized he had
> > > > gotten out of the TSBD alive. For his remaining time before capture,
> > > > everything he did demonstrated panic, not thought.
> >
> > > Is there an answer in there. Did you ever meet Oswald? How can all
> > > you LNers know what he was thinking so thoroughly?
> >
> > Mostly we read and understand what we read.
>
> No, you're brainwashed.

I think your brain could be washed with a moist towelette.

> > > You can't is the
> > > answer. His actions were not that of someone who just shot the
> > > president.
> >
> > Tell that to Tippit.
>
> Sorry, Tippit is dead. Shot by two men with automatic weapons.

You do know people saw him shot, right?

> > >That whole weekend he was very calm and cool.
> >
> > > > 5. One doesn't pass or fail a nitrate test.
> >
> > > Yes one does, it called positive and negative. He was negative on the
> > > parafin test.
> >
> > He was positive on his hands.
>
> Negative on the cheek, impossible if you use a rifle.

Thats what kooks say. What do experts have to say about this?

> > > > 6. This is a blantent lie by the questioner. WC Article IV, page 56,
> > > > 76-80 proves the bag carrying the MC into the TSBD on 11/22 contained
> > > > fibers from the blanket in the Paine garage to a 95-99% match. This
> > > > alone would be enough to convict the owner of said weapon.
> >
> > > I have never read this. It would not be enough as the weapon was
> > > never linked to LHO in the first place.
> >
> > Interesting. This evidence is only meaningful if it is absent. Once
> > presented, it become insignificant.
>
> Presented by who? Prove it. Where's the link? That's what you guys
> always say. I'm not taking his word for it.

My comment had nothing to do with the information, I spoke to ur
quick change of position after the information was mentioned.

> > > > 7. Unanswerable. One cannot get into the mind of LHO.
> >
> > > Since when? You LNers are always in the mind of LHO. He was this, he
> > > was that. How do you know? Because the government says so?
> >
> > You can get a basic understanding of a person if you study what
> > they said and what they did in various situations.
>
> Maybe, if you have formal training in this area and even then it is an
> educated guess. Do you have formal training?

That Oz is willing to do put his money where is mouth is is
established by his giving phamplets out in a neighborhood he knew to
be hostile to his message, defecting to Russia, ect. Once you
understand that Oz is the type who will do more than talk, a person
who will act on his convictions, then the assassination becomes easier
to understand. But like most kooks, understanding this event isn`t
your goal, making it conform to your preconceived notions is.

> > > > 8. After Oswalds arrest, the bullet fragments were matched to the
> > > > bullets obtained from the attempt on General Walker. The match, while
> > > > NOT conclusive were close. Considering Oswald left a note for Marina
> > > > on instructions on what to do if caught for the Walker murder, this is
> > > > pretty much overstated.
> >
> > > How could they match? It is common knowledge a 30.6 rifle was used
> > > for the attempt on Walker and the government claims LHO used a 6.5mm.
> > > The interesting thing here is that a 30.6 was used in the killing of
> > > MLK and it was the weapon "Frenchy" liked to use.
> >
> > Someone has been reading too many crackpot conspiracy books.
>
> Sure, avoid the topic.

I spoke directly to what you brought up. The "connections" you
mentioned are like those employed in crackpot conspiracy books.

> Can't explain it so make nasty comments.

I can do both.

> Pathetic.
> >
> > > > 9. Unanswerable, BUT not surprising. Oswald was in an obvious state
> > > > of panic now after the Tippit shooting. IMHO, he'd have crawled down
> > > > a hole had one been available.
> >
> > > Really, so much in a panic he rides a bus and takes a cab only to end
> > > up in a movie house? Please.
> >
> > This is before he shot Tippit. Oak Cliff had cops running around
> > looking for Oz after he killer Tippit. They has a general description,
> > and they were all over the vicintity Oz was in.
>
> He wouldn't have time to shoot Tippit

It didn`t take Oz that long to do it.

>nd more witnesses said it
> wasn't LHO than did.

All the witnesses in the vicitity who made an ID said it was Oz
running around Oak Cliff with a gun.

> What was JDT doing in the north area anyway when
> all other cops were downtown?

Learn the case, idjit. He was assigned there.

> > > That's right LHO couldn't drive an
> > > automobile. Doesn't this seem like a major handicap for someone who
> > > is going to shoot the president and have no help? I don't think he
> > > could fly a plane either. Why not head for the nearest train
> > > station? How far away is the Mexican border from Dallas anyway?
> >
> > Why not get a ride from one of those conspirators?
>
> Finally, you are seeing the light. He must have expected to meet
> someone to give his report to.

Why would he expect to get out of the TSBD? Why would he need to
report that he shot JFK, when it was probably in the newspapers?

> > > > 10. Absolutely and totally a false comment. Oswald fingerprints were
> > > > found on the trigger housing.http://www.jfk-online.com/prints.html
> >
> > > You have found something the rest of the world missed. I have never
> > > heard this one before. The Dallas police sure couldn't find any
> > > prints and neither could the FBI initially and then magically the palm
> > > print showed up.
> >
> > Both the Dallas police and the FBI found prints.
>
> Prove it. Where's the link?

Learn the case, idjit.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 10:11:54 AM10/19/07

to

In article <1192782541.5...@e34g2000pro.googlegroups.com>,
muc...@gmail.com says...

>
>On 19 Okt., 02:33, Ben Holmes <ad...@websitewealthcollege.com> wrote:
>> In article <1192744437.904174.78...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
>> much...@gmail.com says...
>>
>> >On 18 Okt., 23:20, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>> >> robcap...@netscape.com wrote:
>> >> > If LHO was the sole assassin as you think then aswer the following
>> >> > questions.
>>
>> >> > 1) Why did he do it? - motive
>>
>> >> Saw Kennedy as an opponent of his hero, Castro.
>>
>> >> > 2) How was he lucky enough to get a job at a site that just happen to
>> >> > be along the route the president would be going? - opportunity
>>
>> >> There was no plan of a motorcade going past the TSBD when Oz got
>> >> his job there.
>>
>> >Gil claims that Connally nailed it on 10/4/63 by getting JFK to accept
>> >the Trade Mart as *the* luncheon site!
>
>You seem reluctant to comment on Gil's theory, Ben. Trouble in
>Paradise?

Coming from someone too cowardly to answer a simple question, and take dozens of
posts to fail to do so - this seems quite amusing!

The selection of the Trademart *WAS* the key to the motorcade going through
Dealey Plaza. Feel free to argue otherwise...

I also fail to comment on the color of the sky...

>> >> > 3) Why would anyone pick one of the most horrific guns in modern
>> >> > military history to pull off such a big hit?
>>
>> >> Affordability.
>>
>> >And lack of time.
>>
>> How strange? We know he had plenty of money... how much did he leave
>> his wife? We know he could have walked into any store that carried rifles,
>> and walked out again with a better rifle than the MC... and without leaving
>> any traceable records either.
>
>Does this question lead to anything other than speculation?

Speculation is always best answered with facts. *YOU* speculated that there was
a "lack of time" - yet the FACTS demonstrate otherwise.

Weapons WERE openly sold all through the town - it would have been quite easy to
purchase *anonymously* a far better weapon with the money WE KNOW OSWALD HAD.

So where's YOUR speculation now? (I'd say... in the dirt.)

>> >> > 4) Why did LHO leave his pistol at the boarding house?
>>
>> >> Knew it was useless to his assassination plans.
>>
>> >> > Don't you
>> >> > think that he would possibly need it with him after he shot the
>> >> > president?
>>
>> >> Wasn`t looking to shoot his way out of the TSBD.
>>
>> >> > 5) Why did he fail a nitrate test if he had fired a rifle at the
>> >> > president and shot a cop?
>>
>> >> He tested positive for nitrates on his hands.
>>
>>Of course, we *know* due to tests conducted by Guinn that it was nitrates on the
>> CHEEK that would have proven beyond all doubt that LHO fired an MC that day.
>> Lack of such was certainly exculpatory. This explains why the WC buried the
>> data, and even most LNT'ers deny it to this day.
>>
>>But unless he was kissing books and boxes, there would have been no reason for a
>> positive NAA test on the cheek caste - as there *was* a perfectly legitimate
>> reason for a positive paraffin test on his hands.
>
>http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/factoid2.htm

Quote the relevant part if you have the courage to defend it.

>> >> > 6) Why did his rifle have no hair or fibers matching the blanket Ruth
>> >> > Paine said LHO wrapped it in while it was supposedly stored in her
>> >> > garage?
>>
>> >> The FBI found fibers, but couldn`t get a conclusive match, I
>> >> believe.
>>
>> Little more of a problem than that... by all means, take a look at the
>> testimony to learn more.
>
>Why not start here: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/bag.htm ?

Why not quote the relevant part, and be prepared to defend it?

Can YOU tell us why the fibers found was more of a problem than first appears?

I suspect not. LNT'ers rarely read the actual testimony.

>> >> > 7) Why not practice the kill beforehand? No one can say they saw LHO
>> >> > ever out shooting a gun before the assassination.
>>
>> >> Why are you suggesting improvements to an already sucessful
>> >> venture?
>>
>> >> > 8) Why did he supposedly use a 30.6 for the General Walker attempt (a
>> >> > much better rifle when he would have been much closer) and a piece of
>> >> > junk Mannlicher Carcano (low velocity) for the president when he would
>> >> > have been much further away?
>>
>> >> He used the same rifle for both.
>>
>> >Btw, a .30-06 (Springfield) is a cartridge, not a rifle.
>>
>>Tis true... all you need to do now is demonstrate that the MC "owned" by Oswald
>> could fire such cartridges...
>
>Why?

Or, alternatively, you could find another rifle to put in his hands at the
Walker attempt. Take your pick.

>> Interesting to note, Frazier's .30-06 was confiscated FROM HIS HOME by
>> the DPD. Any explanation?
>
>DVP has explained this to you.

No, he hasn't. He's avoided the evidence that his explanation is nonsense.

That's true of most LNT'ers, of course...

>> >> > 9) Why did he go to the Texas Theater? What was the purpose of going
>> >> > to watch a movie instead of trying to get out of town?
>>
>> >> You`re an idiot.
>>
>> >Who claims to hold a degree in history.
>>
>> Anyone who asks questions that embarrass the LNT'er camp will be labeled
>> "idiot"... it's one of the best determinations of good questions that can be
>> made in this forum.
>
>Emrarrass the LN camp?! It is both *idiotic* and *dishonest* of you
>and Rob to pretend that LN'ers believe that Oswald snuck into the TT
>simply to watch a movie.

The alternative, of course, is that he was there to meet his intelligence
handler... I suspect that you won't be endorsing that.

Notice Rob - how quickly you *were* labeled an idiot and dishonest from someone
who doesn't know the evidence, and refuses to answer simple questions.

YoHarvey

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 12:03:42 PM10/19/07

to

> Coverup can also include conspiracy.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

How strange? We know he had plenty of money... how much did he leave

his wife?
We know he could have walked into any store that carried rifles, and
walked out
again with a better rifle than the MC... and without leaving any
traceable
records either.

One more ighorant comment from a typical CT. The WC investigated
Oswalds financial records for several years. He has NO assets and
lived a life of virtual poverty. You know this Holmes so why does a
supposed honest man like you make such a blantant attempt at lying to
this newsgroup? Is it contagious amongst you CT's?

bigdog

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 12:31:44 PM10/19/07

to

On Oct 17, 6:17 pm, robcap...@netscape.com wrote:
> If LHO was the sole assassin as you think then aswer the following
> questions.
>

robocrap, these questions have been answered thousands of time before
but we'll keep humoring you.

> 1) Why did he do it? - motive

Only Oswald knew. He ain't talking.

> 2) How was he lucky enough to get a job at a site that just happen to
> be along the route the president would be going? - opportunity

Chance circumstance. It happens all the time.

> 3) Why would anyone pick one of the most horrific guns in modern
> military history to pull off such a big hit?

He bought that rifle because he could afford it. He had no idea when
he bought it that he would be using it to kill JFK.

> 4) Why did LHO leave his pistol at the boarding house? Don't you

> think that he would possibly need it with him after he shot the
> president?

Oswald had returned to Irving the previous night and went directly to
the TSBD on Friday from there. In order to have his pistol with him,
he would have to have brought it to the TSBD with him on Thursday
morning and either concealed it there or taken it back to Irving on
Thursday night and back to the TSBD on Friday morning. If he was
discovered at any time with a pistol in his possession, he might have
some explaining to do.

> 5) Why did he fail a nitrate test if he had fired a rifle at the
> president and shot a cop?

An FBI agent fired the same rifle three times and also tested negative
for nitrates.

> 6) Why did his rifle have no hair or fibers matching the blanket Ruth
> Paine said LHO wrapped it in while it was supposedly stored in her
> garage?

The fibers did not cling to the rifle. There were only a few in the
bag.

> 7) Why not practice the kill beforehand? No one can say they saw LHO
> ever out shooting a gun before the assassination.

He didn't know until Monday or Tuesday he would even have a chance to
shoot JFK and he didn't have access to his rifle until Thursday
night.

> 8) Why did he supposedly use a 30.6 for the General Walker attempt (a
> much better rifle when he would have been much closer) and a piece of
> junk Mannlicher Carcano (low velocity) for the president when he would
> have been much further away?

He didn't. He used the MC in both attacks.

> 9) Why did he go to the Texas Theater? What was the purpose of going
> to watch a movie instead of trying to get out of town?

He didn't. He was fleeing. He thought he might escape detection by
ducking into the TT when police cars were racing to the neighborhood
where Oswald had just shot a cop

> 10) Why was only a smudged palm print on the rifle when LHO wore no

> gloves and should have left a million prints all over it? You can't

> say because he didn't want to get caught because he did a lot of other
> stupid things if this was his goal (i.e. backyard photos, dropped
> casings, A. Hiddell card in his wallet, etc...)

The metal and the wood of the rifle were in such condition that prints
did not readily adhere to them. Yes Oswald did a lot of incriminating
things because he wasn't a mastermind. Just a petty little jerk who
took advantage of a golden opportunity to make his place in history.
He suceeded.

muc...@gmail.com

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 4:10:05 PM10/19/07

to

Since the reply I posted several hours ago didn't appear, this is a
new try.

On 19 Okt., 16:11, Ben Holmes <ad...@websitewealthcollege.com> wrote:
> In article <1192782541.595083.205...@e34g2000pro.googlegroups.com>,
> much...@gmail.com says...

>
> >On 19 Okt., 02:33, Ben Holmes <ad...@websitewealthcollege.com> wrote:
> >> In article <1192744437.904174.78...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> >> much...@gmail.com says...
>
> >> >On 18 Okt., 23:20, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> >> >> robcap...@netscape.com wrote:
> >> >> > If LHO was the sole assassin as you think then aswer the following
> >> >> > questions.
>
> >> >> > 1) Why did he do it? - motive
>
> >> >> Saw Kennedy as an opponent of his hero, Castro.
>
> >> >> > 2) How was he lucky enough to get a job at a site that just happen to
> >> >> > be along the route the president would be going? - opportunity
>
> >> >> There was no plan of a motorcade going past the TSBD when Oz got
> >> >> his job there.
>
> >> >Gil claims that Connally nailed it on 10/4/63 by getting JFK to accept
> >> >the Trade Mart as *the* luncheon site!
>
> >You seem reluctant to comment on Gil's theory, Ben. Trouble in
> >Paradise?
>
> Coming from someone too cowardly to answer a simple question, and take dozens of
> posts to fail to do so - this seems quite amusing!
>
> The selection of the Trademart *WAS* the key to the motorcade going through
> Dealey Plaza. Feel free to argue otherwise...

Refreshingly candid of you to admit that you agree with Gil's claim
that Connally, at a 10/4/63 meeting, persuaded JFK to accept the Trade
Mart as *the* luncheon site. Now, kindly post the evidence that
supports the claim.

> I also fail to comment on the color of the sky...
>
> >> >> > 3) Why would anyone pick one of the most horrific guns in modern
> >> >> > military history to pull off such a big hit?
>
> >> >> Affordability.
>
> >> >And lack of time.
>
> >> How strange? We know he had plenty of money... how much did he leave
> >> his wife? We know he could have walked into any store that carried rifles,
> >> and walked out again with a better rifle than the MC... and without leaving
> >> any traceable records either.
>
> >Does this question lead to anything other than speculation?
>
> Speculation is always best answered with facts. *YOU* speculated that there was
> a "lack of time" - yet the FACTS demonstrate otherwise.

What facts? You don't know when Oswald reached the point of no return
and decided that he was actually going to commit the deed. In any
case, he only had a couple of days to find a gun shop, purchase rifle
and ammo, and become somewhat acquainted with the new weapon. The
possibility of the Feds keeping an eye on the local gun shops could
also have been a concern. Too speculative for you?

> Weapons WERE openly sold all through the town - it would have been quite easy to
> purchase *anonymously* a far better weapon with the money WE KNOW OSWALD HAD.
>
> So where's YOUR speculation now? (I'd say... in the dirt.)

My speculation beats yours any day.

> >> >> > 4) Why did LHO leave his pistol at the boarding house?
>
> >> >> Knew it was useless to his assassination plans.
>
> >> >> > Don't you
> >> >> > think that he would possibly need it with him after he shot the
> >> >> > president?
>
> >> >> Wasn`t looking to shoot his way out of the TSBD.
>
> >> >> > 5) Why did he fail a nitrate test if he had fired a rifle at the
> >> >> > president and shot a cop?
>
> >> >> He tested positive for nitrates on his hands.
>
> >>Of course, we *know* due to tests conducted by Guinn that it was nitrates on the
> >> CHEEK that would have proven beyond all doubt that LHO fired an MC that day.
> >> Lack of such was certainly exculpatory. This explains why the WC buried the
> >> data, and even most LNT'ers deny it to this day.
>
> >>But unless he was kissing books and boxes, there would have been no reason for a
> >> positive NAA test on the cheek caste - as there *was* a perfectly legitimate
> >> reason for a positive paraffin test on his hands.
>
> >http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/factoid2.htm
>
> Quote the relevant part if you have the courage to defend it.

Find someone else's leg to hump. I was trying to help Rob.

> >> >> > 6) Why did his rifle have no hair or fibers matching the blanket Ruth
> >> >> > Paine said LHO wrapped it in while it was supposedly stored in her
> >> >> > garage?
>
> >> >> The FBI found fibers, but couldn`t get a conclusive match, I
> >> >> believe.
>
> >> Little more of a problem than that... by all means, take a look at the
> >> testimony to learn more.
>
> >Why not start here:http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/bag.htm?
>
> Why not quote the relevant part, and be prepared to defend it?

Why not find someone else's leg to hump?

> Can YOU tell us why the fibers found was more of a problem than first appears?
>
> I suspect not. LNT'ers rarely read the actual testimony.

You suspect too much.

> >> >> > 7) Why not practice the kill beforehand? No one can say they saw LHO
> >> >> > ever out shooting a gun before the assassination.
>
> >> >> Why are you suggesting improvements to an already sucessful
> >> >> venture?
>
> >> >> > 8) Why did he supposedly use a 30.6 for the General Walker attempt (a
> >> >> > much better rifle when he would have been much closer) and a piece of
> >> >> > junk Mannlicher Carcano (low velocity) for the president when he would
> >> >> > have been much further away?
>
> >> >> He used the same rifle for both.
>
> >> >Btw, a .30-06 (Springfield) is a cartridge, not a rifle.
>
> >>Tis true... all you need to do now is demonstrate that the MC "owned" by Oswald
> >> could fire such cartridges...
>
> >Why?
>
> Or, alternatively, you could find another rifle to put in his hands at the
> Walker attempt. Take your pick.

Have you listed all conceivable alternatives? Think hard.

> >> Interesting to note, Frazier's .30-06 was confiscated FROM HIS HOME by
> >> the DPD. Any explanation?
>
> >DVP has explained this to you.
>
> No, he hasn't. He's avoided the evidence that his explanation is nonsense.
>
> That's true of most LNT'ers, of course...

...and some CT'ers...

> >> >> > 9) Why did he go to the Texas Theater? What was the purpose of going
> >> >> > to watch a movie instead of trying to get out of town?
>
> >> >> You`re an idiot.
>
> >> >Who claims to hold a degree in history.
>
> >> Anyone who asks questions that embarrass the LNT'er camp will be labeled
> >> "idiot"... it's one of the best determinations of good questions that can be
> >> made in this forum.
>
> >Emrarrass the LN camp?! It is both *idiotic* and *dishonest* of you
> >and Rob to pretend that LN'ers believe that Oswald snuck into the TT
> >simply to watch a movie.
>
> The alternative, of course, is that he was there to meet his intelligence
> handler... I suspect that you won't be endorsing that.
>
> Notice Rob - how quickly you *were* labeled an idiot and dishonest from someone
> who doesn't know the evidence, and refuses to answer simple questions.

You are the very definition of dishonesty, Ben. There may still be
hope for Rob.

Message has been deleted

Walt

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 4:32:56 PM10/19/07

to

Translation...... The murder of president Kennedy is unexplainable
using logic and commonsense. Therfore the only way to hoodwink people
into believing that Oswald was the "lone nut killer" is: .... Claim
that he was a nut who acted on impulse.

The major problem with Davison's crap is:.... There is not a shred of
evidence that Lee Oswald was a nut, nor was he impulsive. All
availble evidence indicates that he was just the opposite of
impulsive. He assimilated information and calculated the meaning of
the information. ( Listen to the debate he had with Carlos Bringuer )

DVP is merely attempting to peddle a moldy old lie.......

Walt

David Von Pein

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 4:46:50 PM10/19/07

to

>>> "The selection of the Trademart *WAS* the key to the motorcade going through Dealey Plaza." <<<

Indeed it was. And the final decision to have the luncheon at the
Trade Mart wasn't made until November 13 or 14, almost a month after
LHO got his TSBD job. And Kenny O'Donnell made that decision. And who
here thinks Kenny was a plotter?

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 4:58:28 PM10/19/07

to

On Oct 18, 11:56 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>> "The motorcade route (minus turns on Houston and Elm) and the luncheon were set as of September 13, 1963, before LHO started work at the TSBD." <<<
>
> Total bullshit. Learn the case. And the proper chronology.
>
> It was announced in mid-September that JFK would be going to Dallas,
> yes. But the site for the November 22 luncheon (and, hence, the exact
> motorcade route through the city) wasn't determined and finalized
> until much later (November 13 or 14 to be more precise).

Sure and those like LBJ and JBC weren't confident that it would wind
up there? Most people in JFK's camp didn't want it there, but he was
adamant about leaving up to the Texas Dems. This theory that because
O'Donnell didn't stamp it until mid-November that is was up in the air
is bullshit. You don't know how politics work if you believe that.

>
> Ken O'Donnell is the one who approved the Trade Mart for the
> luncheon....and he didn't put the stamp of finality on that decision
> until November 13th or 14th.
>
> Look it up on Page 31 of the Warren Report, right here:
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0028a.htm

Right, because this is so truthful.

>
> Plus -- The specific motorcade route through Dealey Plaza wasn't made
> known to the public (including Mr. Oswald) until the morning of
> Tuesday, November 19th.
>
> The whole notion of some kind of "plot" with respect to "placing" LHO
> in the Depository Building is one of the most insane theories ever
> postulated by CTers over the years.

Why was LHO so casual about getting into place? The motorcade was
late, but how would LHO know that? It was supposed to be there at
12:25 PM and LHO wasn't even in place by 12:20 PM. Why the delay?
This makes no sense like the rest of the fairy tale.

>
> It's insane because of how we KNOW Lee Oswald got his job....which was
> a job that was obtained through garden-variety happenstance and
> ordinary word-of-mouth -- from Wes Frazier, to Linnie Randle, to Ruth
> Paine/Marina Oswald, to Lee Oswald, to Roy Truly (with the latter
> hiring Oswald on October 15th).
>
> Were Frazier, Randle, Paine, Marina, and Truly ALL part of the evil
> assassination "plot"?

Here's some background on the Paines:

Who were the Paines? To believe the Warren Commission and the CIA
staff of lawyers, they were Mr. and Mrs. Good Neighbor, all heart,
altruistic. Ruth simply wanted to learn more Russian from a native.
For that price, she housed Marina, a two-year-old daughter, a new
infant, with all the fuss and mess of three extras in a tiny house.

Michael Paine was a descendant of the Cabots on both sides. His cousin
Thomas Dudley Cabot, former president of United Fruit, had offered
their Gibraltar Steamship as a cover for the CIA during the Bay of
Pigs. Another cousin was Alexander Cochrane Forbes, a director of
United Fruit and trustee of Cabot, Cabot, and Forbes.

Both Allen Dulles and John J. McCloy were part of the United Fruit
team. The Paine family had links with circles of the OSS and the CIA.

Ruth Hyde Paine maintained close ties with the Forbes families. Peter
Dale Scott investigated the Paines, "the patrician Paine and Forbes
families." A far cry from anybody's neighbor.
Excerpt From "The Nazi Connection to the John F. Kennedy
Assassination"
(c) 1983 LFP, Inc.
(from The Rebel, Nov. 22, 1983)

Michael Paine worked for Nazi General Walter Dornberger and required a
security clearance:

Michael Paine's occupation at Bell Aircraft is the Defense Department.
This job requires security clearances, so what would the unlikely
Oswalds be doing in his home? Oswald, the "defector?" Paine's boss at
Bell Aircraft as Director of Research and Development, was none other
than the notorious war criminal General Walter Dornberger. Dornberger
was supposed to be hanged at Nuremburg for his war crimes, slave labor
and mass murders. The British warned the U.S. not to let him live
because even after the war he was conniving for another one. As
stated, "Dornberger is a menace of the first order who is
untrustworthy. His attitude will turn ally against ally and he would
become a source of irritation and future unrest." (Project Paperclip,
Clarence Lansey.)

Sound so innocent now? Yes they should have been arrested.

> Anyone thinking that ANY of those individuals was part of some scheme
> or pre-assassination "plot" to put LHO in the Depository should be
> locked up with Charlie Manson. Because such a CTer is certainly off
> his or her rocker.

Davey boy is a judge of who is sane or not? Please.

> >>> "Since one could expect to be in jail or dead after shooting the president, I would think he could have splurged on a good weapon." <<<
>
> Oswald didn't buy the Carcano specifically to shoot the President
> with. He bought it in March '63 to use on General Walker. Oz's one-man
> plot to kill JFK wasn't even on the horizon as of late March 1963 when
> LHO first laid his hands on Rifle #C2766.

Oswald didn't buy the gun at all remember - it was Alek Hidell.

>
> >>> "A professional killer is ready for anything. {Oswald not taking his revolver to work with him on Nov. 22} Just proves he was an amateur and incapable of doing the deed." <<<
>
> Oswald knew he wouldn't need his pistol WHILE HE WAS STILL IN THE
> DEPOSITORY BUILDING.

And why would he think that? Did someone tell him there would be no
one stopping his escape? You walked into it diamond Dave. That would
mean a conspiracy.

>
> He knew this because of exactly what DID occur when he bumped into
> Officer Baker in the lunchroom -- i.e., Oswald knew that his status as
> an employee in the building would get him off the hook (temporarily at
> least) just after the shooting. And, of course, it did just that, when
> Roy Truly verified to Baker Oswald's status as a TSBD employee.

I love how all you LNers seem to know everything LHO thought. This is
assinine thinking. The boy scout motto applies when you are shooting
anyone, especially the president, be prepared.

>
> Why would Oswald want to start shooting away at cops (and others) when
> it wasn't the slightest bit necessary to do so in order to flee the
> building without being stopped as a suspect?

Nobody said he would imitate Jesse James, but if they fired at him it
would be handy to have a gun Einstein.

>
> Oswald might have also thought it was wiser to NOT bring his revolver
> with him to work on Friday. Because if (for some reason) he was caught
> with the gun on him inside the building just after he shot the
> President, it just might not look too good for ol' Lee at that time.*

See, you don't know. How many variations are you going to come up
with for this one Davey boy?

>
> * = Although, granted, many Texans did carry guns with them, circa
> 1963. But, then too, how many TSBD warehouse workers do you suppose
> were packing rods on 11/22/63? (I don't know the answer to that
> question with 100% certainty; but I'd wager the correct answer would
> be: Zero.)
>
> >>> "{The nitrates on LHO's hands} came from the boxes he was handling all morning." <<<
>
> Huh? Nitrates from handling cardboard boxes?? First time I've heard
> that one.

It is possible. Many of the boxes had ink on them and this can give a
false positive.

>
> You could be correct I suppose (since I know that many ordinary things
> can, indeed, result in a positive nitrate result), but I don't think
> I've ever heard the "Boxes Caused The Positive Paraffin Result"
> argument heretofore.
>
> Of course, Rob doesn't think it's possible that Oswald could have
> gotten any nitrates on his hands while he FIRED THOSE FOUR BULLETS
> INTO J.D. TIPPIT'S BODY on Tenth Street....right Rob?

Of course it is possible. I mean a LNer may make sense once in awhile
too, possible, but not likely. All but one witness claimed two men
shot JDT with automatic weapons.

>
> Because, per kooks like Robert, Oswald never shot a police officer on
> November 22nd. Right, Bobby?

This kook agrees with your statement. He didn't shoot JDT.
>
> (Sickening.) Take some Tums.

>
> >>> "His cheek was a negative and since he supposedly used a rifle this would be impossible." <<<
>
> Bullshit. Learn the case, Rob. An FBI agent fired Oswald's rifle after
> the assassination and tested "negative" on BOTH his hands and his
> cheek.

By learn the case Dave you mean I should believe some stupid statement
like above and that one bullet can cause 7 wounds and come out
pristine, right? You should sell swamplane in FL.

>
> >>> "Professionals constantly practice and they are the best. Why would an average at best shooter not practice and hope to be successful?" <<<
>
> You can't prove Oswald never practiced with his Mannlicher-Carcano.
> You THINK he never practiced. But you know you can never prove that
> speculation.

I don't have to prove anything, remember? LHO would have been a
"defendant". It is the prosecution's responsibility to prove this. No
one saw the real LHO shooting any guns prior to the assassination.

>
> And even if LHO never did "practice" with his weapon leading up to the
> assassination, CTers still have noplace to go with this argument. It's
> a sidebar issue...at best. It's a meaningless argument based on the
> sum total of "OSWALD SHOT KENNEDY" evidence.

Sure, it is sidebar. Let's see. I want to kill the president and I
am a lousy shot per my marine testing. I'm also going to put a large
tree in my way and pass up an easier shot on Houston by letting them
turn onto Elm....wait....wait...wait...don't shoot right away...let
them get closer to the underpass.....now pull out my 3 bullets and let
them rip. Oh wait, my scope is bent. Geez, if I had practiced I
could have figured that out sooner. Based on the above you are right,
who needs to practice?

>
> Naturally, a CTer prefers their chaff to the abundance of wheat that
> LNers are always munching on. Well, so be it. ~sigh~
>
> >>> "Not what the police said. They listed the ballistics for the Walker attempt as a 30.6 bullet." <<<
>
> More bullshit.

Bullshit makes the world go around. Pros don't use Carcanos and we
know LHO was no pro.

Believe me they are no experts either if the WC used them.

> >>> "If one handles a gun with no gloves, don't you think their prints will be all over it?" <<<
>
> It's my opinion that Oswald used his brown shirt (which he was
> probably not wearing during the assassination) to wipe off as many
> prints as he could from the rifle while transporting it to the
> northwest corner of the sixth floor before dumping the gun behind his
> (IMO) pre-arranged box-hiding location near the stairs.

Opinions are like assholes Davey, you know the rest. Sure make an
impossible shooting episode even harder by using a shirt to hold the
gun. Geez, it gets better and better.

>
> This could account for the fresh brownish fibers being found under the
> butt plate of the rifle. (I ask: How would shirt fibers manage to
> WEDGE themselves onto the rifle in any OTHER fashion?) ~shrug~
>
> >>> "It {Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle} was a low-velocity gun." <<<
>
> Technically, yes, it's considered "low velocity". But it still
> produced an average muzzle velocity of 2,165 feet-per-second (per
> Robert Frazier's 1964 WC testimony), which of course is more than
> powerful enough to kill a human being who is less than 100 yards from
> the shooter.

Blah, blah, blah.

>
> Let's listen to Bob Frazier again:

Let's not.

Message has been deleted

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 5:21:47 PM10/19/07

to

On Oct 19, 5:53 am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:

Reagan wan't meant to be killed. JH had a .45 and .22 with him. My
use the .22 if you want to kill? He was brainwashed anyway. His
brother was a good friend of the brother of Dubya. They had dinner
planned the night after the shooting. Not a random act.

> No, you used the fact that a lot of people like Oz don`t shoot
> Presidents as evidence that Oz didn`t shoot JFK. I showed the fallacy
> of that concept.

Even accepting your argument, one in tens of thousands of unhappy
people does not set a trend.

> > Do it - show it. What country do you live in? I haven't been shown
> > LHO did it, just told he did it.
>
> You`ve been shown. That doesn`t gaurantee you will see.

More tap dancing. Get those dancing shoes on.

> > Same old LNer tactic.
>
> Yah, asking kooks to back up their kook claims.

Most of them have way more education than you. See, that happens when
you have education, you learn to think for yourself.

> > > She told him there might be an openning. Randle told her about it.
> > > Is she CIA also, kook?

Sure is:

Michael Paine's occupation at Bell Aircraft is the Defense Department.
This job requires security clearances, so what would the unlikely
Oswalds be doing in his home? Oswald, the "defector?" Paine's boss at
Bell Aircraft as Director of Research and Development, was none other
than the notorious war criminal General Walter Dornberger. Dornberger
was supposed to be hanged at Nuremburg for his war crimes, slave labor
and mass murders. The British warned the U.S. not to let him live
because even after the war he was conniving for another one. As
stated, "Dornberger is a menace of the first order who is
untrustworthy. His attitude will turn ally against ally and he would
become a source of irritation and future unrest." (Project Paperclip,
Clarence Lansey.)

The very first call to authorities after the gun went off on November
22, 1963, was from an employee at Bell Helicopter who suggested
"Oswald did it." Police never located the source of both Oswald
addresses that day.

Michael Paine took Lee to a meeting with General Edwin Walker shortly
before the assassination. Soon Oswald would be charged with having
shot Walker in April, and Walker would be calling his nazi cronies in
Germany 24 hours after JFK was killed telling them he finally solved
"who shot through his window" seven months earlier: the same Oswald.

Who were the Paines? To believe the Warren Commission and the CIA
staff of lawyers, they were Mr. and Mrs. Good Neighbor, all heart,
altruistic. Ruth simply wanted to learn more Russian from a native.
For that price, she housed Marina, a two-year-old daughter, a new
infant, with all the fuss and mess of three extras in a tiny house.

Michael Paine was a descendant of the Cabots on both sides. His cousin
Thomas Dudley Cabot, former president of United Fruit, had offered
their Gibraltar Steamship as a cover for the CIA during the Bay of
Pigs. Another cousin was Alexander Cochrane Forbes, a director of
United Fruit and trustee of Cabot, Cabot, and Forbes.

Both Allen Dulles and John J. McCloy were part of the United Fruit
team. The Paine family had links with circles of the OSS and the CIA.

Ruth Hyde Paine maintained close ties with the Forbes families. Peter
Dale Scott investigated the Paines, "the patrician Paine and Forbes
families." A far cry from anybody's neighbor.

Michael's education came as a tradition, third generation physicist at
Harvard before working for Bell Helicopter.

Excerpt From "The Nazi Connection to the John F. Kennedy
Assassination"
(c) 1983 LFP, Inc.
(from The Rebel, Nov. 22, 1983)

> > > In other words, you have nothing .
>
I have plenty, see above.

> > The bent scope was the least of the problems. It was a low-velocity
> > gun.
>
> You`re an idiot.

An idiot would be a compliment to you.

>
> > It jams alot.
>
> True.
>
> > It is inaccurate.
>
> False.

Read some reports on them. Why do you think the Italians lost every
major battle they were in during WWII? Even the Albanians kicked
their asses.

> For an alleged historian, you have a poor approach to historical
> events. Next you`ll be arguing that Hitler didn`t start WWII, based on
> the fact that he didn`t have the armies or material to hope to win it.

He started it, but with a lot of help from the west. Where did a
country that needed a million marks to buy a loaf of bread suddenly
have enough money for roads, arms, tanks, planes, ships and modern
industry growth? From western banks. So they are as guilty. Why
didn't France attack Germany when they entered the Rhineland in 1936?
They would have destroyed the tiny German force. Why did France not
invade western Germany in 1939 when the 90% of Germany's forces
(including all of the panzers) were in the East (they did advance for
10 miles but then ran right back out)? Why did the Soviets sign a non-
agression pact that guaranteed the end of Poland and brought German
troops closer to their border? THERE are many things that contributed
to Hitler's early successes that were not totally due to his troops.

> > > Mostly we read and understand what we read.

Obviously not, as most things say LHO was innocent. You have Warren
Commission, Posner and Bugman.

> I think your brain could be washed with a moist towelette.

Even your insults are pathetic.

>
> > > > You can't is the
> > > > answer. His actions were not that of someone who just shot the
> > > > president.

> > Sorry, Tippit is dead. Shot by two men with automatic weapons.

> You do know people saw him shot, right?

If you read anything other than propaganda you would know the
witnesses names that testified they saw two men and neither was LHO.

>
> > > He was positive on his hands.
>
> > Negative on the cheek, impossible if you use a rifle.
>
> Thats what kooks say. What do experts have to say about this?

Most real experts say this is not possible (having no nitrates on your
cheeks if you have discharged a rifle), but I'm sure the lamebrains
from WC will find some who agree with them, even if they have to force
them.

>
> > > > > 6. This is a blantent lie by the questioner. WC Article IV, page 56,
> > > > > 76-80 proves the bag carrying the MC into the TSBD on 11/22 contained
> > > > > fibers from the blanket in the Paine garage to a 95-99% match. This
> > > > > alone would be enough to convict the owner of said weapon.

> > Maybe, if you have formal training in this area and even then it is an

> > educated guess. Do you have formal training?
>
> That Oz is willing to do put his money where is mouth is is
> established by his giving phamplets out in a neighborhood he knew to
> be hostile to his message, defecting to Russia, ect. Once you
> understand that Oz is the type who will do more than talk, a person
> who will act on his convictions, then the assassination becomes easier
> to understand. But like most kooks, understanding this event isn`t
> your goal, making it conform to your preconceived notions is.

And if one is totally clueless to the fact that there are sound
reasons for all of these actions which do not equal = assassin.

> > > > How could they match? It is common knowledge a 30.6 rifle was used
> > > > for the attempt on Walker and the government claims LHO used a 6.5mm.
> > > > The interesting thing here is that a 30.6 was used in the killing of
> > > > MLK and it was the weapon "Frenchy" liked to use.
>
> > > Someone has been reading too many crackpot conspiracy books.

No, I read the non-crackpot ones.

> I spoke directly to what you brought up. The "connections" you
> mentioned are like those employed in crackpot conspiracy books.

I wouldn't know as I don't read those ones, but you obviously do!!!

> > Can't explain it so make nasty comments.
>
> I can do both.

No, you maybe, maybe can chew gum and make nasty comments, but you
definitely can't explain anything reasonably.

David Von Pein

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 5:22:19 PM10/19/07

to

>>> "And why would he think that? Did someone tell him {Oswald} there would be no one stopping his escape {thusly, LHO would need no revolver in the TSBD}?" <<<

Oswald had a brain too. And he used it occasionally too. Why would
somebody ELSE have to tell him that he'd need no gun in the TSBD just
after the shooting of JFK? Why couldn't Oz figure that out all by
himself? (Which he did.)

>>> "Pros don't use Carcanos and we know LHO was no pro." <<<

Right. So...your CT point here is??

>>> "Believe me they are no experts either if..." <<<

I'll stop you there. You lost me entirely after the words "believe
me".

>>> "Sure, make an impossible shooting episode even harder by using a shirt to hold the gun." <<<

You're an idiot.

When did I ever say Oz used the SHIRT to "hold the gun"? In fact, I
believe I specifically said it was my opinion that the brown shirt was
at Oswald's FEET in the SN during the shooting itself. He only picked
up the shirt AFTER the assassination, possibly using that garment to
wipe down the gun of prints.

>>> "All but one witness claimed two men shot JDT with automatic weapons." <<<

Now you're just being stupid (or being an outright liar; not sure
which it is, but one certainly applies). Because the exact opposite
from what you just said is true, of course.

Only one person claimed to have seen TWO men involved in the Tippit
murder...and even she (Clemons) didn't see TWO GUNS (much less seeing
TWO "automatic" guns).

You should really learn the case, Rob, instead of following the little
CT voices in your head. It would cut down on the immense amount of
pure bullshit you spew.

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 5:24:29 PM10/19/07

to

On Oct 19, 10:11 am, Ben Holmes <ad...@websitewealthcollege.com>
wrote:

> The alternative, of course, is that he was there to meet his intelligence

> handler... I suspect that you won't be endorsing that.
>
> Notice Rob - how quickly you *were* labeled an idiot and dishonest from someone
> who doesn't know the evidence, and refuses to answer simple questions.

Ben, I've noticed and it is funny coming from people who would be
complimented to be called idiots.

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 5:27:07 PM10/19/07

to

On Oct 19, 12:03 pm, YoHarvey <bailey...@gmail.com> wrote:

> One more ighorant comment from a typical CT. The WC investigated
> Oswalds financial records for several years. He has NO assets and
> lived a life of virtual poverty. You know this Holmes so why does a
> supposed honest man like you make such a blantant attempt at lying to

> this newsgroup? Is it contagious amongst you CT's?- Hide quoted text -

Some life of poverty. Trips on luxary liners to Russia. Flying first
class back to the U.S. after you defected for Russia. Travelling back
and forth between New Orleans and Dallas. Maybe even visiting Mexico
City if you believe the WC. Sounds like a real poor man.

Bud

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 5:28:38 PM10/19/07

to

Ben Holmes wrote:
> In article <1192782541.5...@e34g2000pro.googlegroups.com>,
> muc...@gmail.com says...
> >
> >On 19 Okt., 02:33, Ben Holmes <ad...@websitewealthcollege.com> wrote:
> >> In article <1192744437.904174.78...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> >> much...@gmail.com says...
> >>
> >> >On 18 Okt., 23:20, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> >> >> robcap...@netscape.com wrote:
> >> >> > If LHO was the sole assassin as you think then aswer the following
> >> >> > questions.
> >>
> >> >> > 1) Why did he do it? - motive
> >>
> >> >> Saw Kennedy as an opponent of his hero, Castro.
> >>
> >> >> > 2) How was he lucky enough to get a job at a site that just happen to
> >> >> > be along the route the president would be going? - opportunity
> >>
> >> >> There was no plan of a motorcade going past the TSBD when Oz got
> >> >> his job there.
> >>
> >> >Gil claims that Connally nailed it on 10/4/63 by getting JFK to accept
> >> >the Trade Mart as *the* luncheon site!
> >
> >You seem reluctant to comment on Gil's theory, Ben. Trouble in
> >Paradise?
>
>
> Coming from someone too cowardly to answer a simple question, and take dozens of
> posts to fail to do so - this seems quite amusing!
>
> The selection of the Trademart *WAS* the key to the motorcade going through
> Dealey Plaza. Feel free to argue otherwise...

Ok. No it wasn`t. Your turn.

> I also fail to comment on the color of the sky...

Or the stripe on your back (its yellow, BTW).

> >> >> > 3) Why would anyone pick one of the most horrific guns in modern
> >> >> > military history to pull off such a big hit?
> >>
> >> >> Affordability.
> >>
> >> >And lack of time.
> >>
> >> How strange? We know he had plenty of money... how much did he leave
> >> his wife? We know he could have walked into any store that carried rifles,
> >> and walked out again with a better rifle than the MC... and without leaving
> >> any traceable records either.
> >
> >Does this question lead to anything other than speculation?
>
>
> Speculation is always best answered with facts. *YOU* speculated that there was
> a "lack of time" - yet the FACTS demonstrate otherwise.

<snicker> What do those "facts demonstrate" (another word-game
answer)? When Oz decided to kill JFK? When Oz knew the motorcade was
going to go past his workplace?

Also, Oz, as a non-driving, non-car owning person living in a
boardinghouse with other people tend to limit some of Oz`s options. In
any case, he got good results using what he had on hand.

> Weapons WERE openly sold all through the town - it would have been quite easy to
> purchase *anonymously* a far better weapon with the money WE KNOW OSWALD HAD.

Of course this conjecture assumes that Oz was unhappy with the
weapon he had. It assumes when he knew Kennedy was coming, and when he
decided to shoot him. If Oz made the decission to shoot JFK fairly
close to his actually accomplishing this task, there would be little
time to improve his weapon. Kooks hate this kind of speculation, they
think supportable conjecture by LN is intolerable, while they advance
all kinds of kooky ideas.

> So where's YOUR speculation now? (I'd say... in the dirt.)

I`d say you are retarded.

> >> >> > 4) Why did LHO leave his pistol at the boarding house?
> >>
> >> >> Knew it was useless to his assassination plans.
> >>
> >> >> > Don't you
> >> >> > think that he would possibly need it with him after he shot the
> >> >> > president?
> >>
> >> >> Wasn`t looking to shoot his way out of the TSBD.
> >>
> >> >> > 5) Why did he fail a nitrate test if he had fired a rifle at the
> >> >> > president and shot a cop?
> >>
> >> >> He tested positive for nitrates on his hands.
> >>
> >>Of course, we *know* due to tests conducted by Guinn that it was nitrates on the
> >> CHEEK that would have proven beyond all doubt that LHO fired an MC that day.
> >> Lack of such was certainly exculpatory. This explains why the WC buried the
> >> data, and even most LNT'ers deny it to this day.
> >>
> >>But unless he was kissing books and boxes, there would have been no reason for a
> >> positive NAA test on the cheek caste - as there *was* a perfectly legitimate
> >> reason for a positive paraffin test on his hands.
> >
> >http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/factoid2.htm
>
>
> Quote the relevant part if you have the courage to defend it.

Why don`t you voice your objection to the relevant part, idjit? How
is Mark supposed to know what part your consider "relevant"?

> >> >> > 6) Why did his rifle have no hair or fibers matching the blanket Ruth
> >> >> > Paine said LHO wrapped it in while it was supposedly stored in her
> >> >> > garage?
> >>
> >> >> The FBI found fibers, but couldn`t get a conclusive match, I
> >> >> believe.
> >>
> >> Little more of a problem than that... by all means, take a look at the
> >> testimony to learn more.
> >
> >Why not start here: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/bag.htm ?
>
>
> Why not quote the relevant part, and be prepared to defend it?

Voice your objections to the produced information, kook.

> Can YOU tell us why the fibers found was more of a problem than first appears?

Why don`y you. Why is you such a pussy that you are afraid to
present your position? Is it because you might have to defend it?

> I suspect not. LNT'ers rarely read the actual testimony.

You`re free to present information that supports your claims. Why
are you loathe to do so?

> >> >> > 7) Why not practice the kill beforehand? No one can say they saw LHO
> >> >> > ever out shooting a gun before the assassination.
> >>
> >> >> Why are you suggesting improvements to an already sucessful
> >> >> venture?
> >>
> >> >> > 8) Why did he supposedly use a 30.6 for the General Walker attempt (a
> >> >> > much better rifle when he would have been much closer) and a piece of
> >> >> > junk Mannlicher Carcano (low velocity) for the president when he would
> >> >> > have been much further away?
> >>
> >> >> He used the same rifle for both.
> >>
> >> >Btw, a .30-06 (Springfield) is a cartridge, not a rifle.
> >>
> >>Tis true... all you need to do now is demonstrate that the MC "owned" by Oswald
> >> could fire such cartridges...
> >
> >Why?
>
>
> Or, alternatively, you could find another rifle to put in his hands at the
> Walker attempt. Take your pick.

Why didn`t you answer Mark`s question? I thought you claimed you
always do, yet the reality is that you rarely do.

> >> Interesting to note, Frazier's .30-06 was confiscated FROM HIS HOME by
> >> the DPD. Any explanation?
> >
> >DVP has explained this to you.
>
>
> No, he hasn't.

Because Ben didn`t like his explaination, he says DVP didn`t give
one. Typical of Ben to deny what he doesn`t like.

> He's avoided the evidence that his explanation is nonsense.

You make this claim, but don`t support it. Why didn`t you rebutt
David`s assertions? To just label them "nonsense" without addressing
them is just a coward`s tact.

> That's true of most LNT'ers, of course...

You are true to form for CTers here. Make claims, fail to support
them. Believe it or not, your just *saying* things doesn`t carry a
whole lot of weight.

> >> >> > 9) Why did he go to the Texas Theater? What was the purpose of going
> >> >> > to watch a movie instead of trying to get out of town?
> >>
> >> >> You`re an idiot.
> >>
> >> >Who claims to hold a degree in history.
> >>
> >> Anyone who asks questions that embarrass the LNT'er camp will be labeled
> >> "idiot"... it's one of the best determinations of good questions that can be
> >> made in this forum.
> >
> >Emrarrass the LN camp?! It is both *idiotic* and *dishonest* of you
> >and Rob to pretend that LN'ers believe that Oswald snuck into the TT
> >simply to watch a movie.
>
>
> The alternative, of course, is that he was there to meet his intelligence
> handler... I suspect that you won't be endorsing that.

<snicker> These are the only alternatives the kooks can come up
with, "see a movie", or "meet an intellegence officer". Why was
Postal out of the ticket booth, kook? To see the commotion of the cops
flying hither and yon in search of Tippit`s killer (later identified
as Oz). That you folks still have your heads up your asses after all
these decades on these issues shows why what you kooks say can`t be
taken seriously, and clearly shows that you have no interest in
honestly trying to determine what occurred.

.
> Notice Rob - how quickly you *were* labeled an idiot

Right after he showed himself to be one. And you were labeled a
pussy for proving yourself to be one of those (and a retard).

> and dishonest from someone
> who doesn't know the evidence, and refuses to answer simple questions.

Posed by a dishonest simpleton who won`t support his own words.

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 5:29:22 PM10/19/07

to

On Oct 19, 12:31 pm, bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> robocrap, these questions have been answered thousands of time before
> but we'll keep humoring you.

You must be fat and ugly - bigdog. That's hilarious!!!

>
> > 1) Why did he do it? - motive
>
> Only Oswald knew. He ain't talking.

Case over then!!!!!!!! CTers win dumbass. He was never convicted and
there is no lawyer in the country (including bugman) who can get a
conviction without a motive. No need to even look at the rest of the
questions.

muc...@gmail.com

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 5:41:24 PM10/19/07

to

What kind of a historian are you? You're obviously not interested in
learning the truth; you just want to acquit Oswald.

David Von Pein

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 5:43:35 PM10/19/07

to

>>> "There is no lawyer in the country (including bugman) who can get a conviction without a motive." <<<

Rob displays his total ignorance once again. Vince B. has secured
convictions in a courtroom without determining a definitive
motive. .....

"I've put murderers on Death Row without knowing for sure why
they did it. All I knew was that they killed the victim and they had
no legal justification for doing so." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi, Esq.;
2007

Vince is just a rotten liar, right Rob-Kook?

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 5:49:43 PM10/19/07

to

On Oct 19, 5:21 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> Oswald had a brain too. And he used it occasionally too. Why would
> somebody ELSE have to tell him that he'd need no gun in the TSBD just
> after the shooting of JFK? Why couldn't Oz figure that out all by
> himself? (Which he did.)

Now all of a sudden he has a brain! I thought he was a mindless drone
based on how LNers talk about him. Big bad JFK wouldn't invade little
ol' Cuba so I'm gonna gun him down!! Too bad my little daughters will
have no father the rest of their lives and be ridiculed because I shot
the beloved 35th president. Oh well. They'll have to live with it.

>
> >>> "Pros don't use Carcanos and we know LHO was no pro." <<<
>

> Right. So...your CT point here is??

That someone else shot at, wait, let me spell it out. S-O-M-E-O-N-E
E-L-S-E
S-H-O-T A-T W-A-L-K-E-R!!!!!1

>
> >>> "Believe me they are no experts either if..." <<<
>
> I'll stop you there. You lost me entirely after the words "believe
> me".

And I'm the idiot? I didn't say the above.
>
> >>> "Sure, make an impossible shooting episode even harder by using a shirt to hold the gun." <<<
>
> You're an idiot.

Yeah, like I'm the one saying someone is wrapping a shirt around a
gun? You're the idiot Davey boy.

>
> When did I ever say Oz used the SHIRT to "hold the gun"? In fact, I
> believe I specifically said it was my opinion that the brown shirt was
> at Oswald's FEET in the SN during the shooting itself. He only picked
> up the shirt AFTER the assassination, possibly using that garment to
> wipe down the gun of prints.

You can't hope to wipe away every print in the limited time he had,
espicially using a shirt.

>
> >>> "All but one witness claimed two men shot JDT with automatic weapons." <<<
>

> Now you're just being stupid (or being an outright liar; not sure
> which it is, but one certainly applies). Because the exact opposite
> from what you just said is true, of course.

I'm no liar and I don't feel like digging out "Rush To Judgement",
"High Treason", "Whitewashed", "Crossfire: The Plot to Kill Kennedy",
etc... and cite all the pages this topic covers. It is quicker to
say: Read something beyond the 43 year old WCR.

>
> Only one person claimed to have seen TWO men involved in the Tippit
> murder...and even she (Clemons) didn't see TWO GUNS (much less seeing
> TWO "automatic" guns).

It had to be automatic, as the shells that were recovered by the
police first on the scene were from an automatic gun.

>
> You should really learn the case, Rob, instead of following the little
> CT voices in your head. It would cut down on the immense amount of
> pure bullshit you spew.

I know the case better than you ever will Davey. You rely on a 43
year document that was fraudulent then (See quotes by LBJ and Nixon
about what a joke it was), fraudelent Posner junk and Bugman junk.
Both of these use the WCR too so you really have only read one
source. Pathetic.

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 5:55:42 PM10/19/07

to

On Oct 19, 5:41 pm, much...@gmail.com wrote:

> What kind of a historian are you? You're obviously not interested in
> learning the truth; you just want to acquit Oswald.

I hope you are not a stalker. I shouldn't have said where I live. I
mentioned once I had a degree in history and you mention every post.
Geez. I already know history. Acquitting LHO is the only way we can
go with you lamers. All LNers are so set that it was him and him
alone it doesn't leave us much wiggle room when we bring up other
options. Why do you think he did it so bad?

Answer these:

When did the U.S. become a country?
Name the four presidents assassinated?
Name all the other ones who had attempts on their lives?
What is the official start of the Civil War?
What other major thing happened on this day?

I could go on, but it will take you awhile to answer the first one.

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 6:01:18 PM10/19/07

to

On Oct 19, 5:43 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> Rob displays his total ignorance once again. Vince B. has secured
> convictions in a courtroom without determining a definitive
> motive. .....
>
> "I've put murderers on Death Row without knowing for sure why
> they did it. All I knew was that they killed the victim and they had
> no legal justification for doing so." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi, Esq.;
> 2007
>
> Vince is just a rotten liar, right Rob-Kook?

He is a liar. And the worst kind. What he is saying is that he sent
people to prison that may have been innocent. There is always a
motive. It maybe as simple as the person is bonafide nutcase serial
killer. He is saying the police never came up with a motive. See,
Davey, it is the police that uncover the motive not the DA. There is
no way he tried people without a motive. Also, he had to have had
sound evidence showing that person did it (I hope - it was L.A.). LHO
was never proven to have committed the act.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 6:07:04 PM10/19/07

to

In article <1192824605.8...@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
muc...@gmail.com says...

Refreshingly candid of you to admit to molesting children.

>that Connally, at a 10/4/63 meeting, persuaded JFK to accept the Trade
>Mart as *the* luncheon site. Now, kindly post the evidence that
>supports the claim.

Your statement concerning your child molestation, and my statement
detailing my agreement with "Gil's claim that Connnally, at a 10/4/63 meeting,
persuaded JFK to accept the Trade Mart as *the* luncheon site." have much in
common.

They both don't exist.

>> I also fail to comment on the color of the sky...
>>
>> >> >> > 3) Why would anyone pick one of the most horrific guns in modern
>> >> >> > military history to pull off such a big hit?
>>
>> >> >> Affordability.
>>
>> >> >And lack of time.
>>
>> >> How strange? We know he had plenty of money... how much did he leave
>> >> his wife? We know he could have walked into any store that carried rifles,
>>>> and walked out again with a better rifle than the MC... and without leaving
>> >> any traceable records either.
>>
>> >Does this question lead to anything other than speculation?
>>
>> Speculation is always best answered with facts. *YOU* speculated that
>> there was a "lack of time" - yet the FACTS demonstrate otherwise.
>
>What facts? You don't know when Oswald reached the point of no return
>and decided that he was actually going to commit the deed.

You presume what you cannot prove.

On the other hand, we *KNOW* that rifles were easily purchased in Dallas -
merely walk into a shop and purchase one. We *KNOW* that Oswald had sufficient
money to do so. How much time did Oswald have? How long would it have taken to
walk into a place that sold weapons? We even have sightings of him going INTO
such a place.

>In any
>case, he only had a couple of days to find a gun shop, purchase rifle
>and ammo, and become somewhat acquainted with the new weapon.

You argue lack of time, then undercut your own argument. Thank you.

>The possibility of the Feds keeping an eye on the local gun shops could
>also have been a concern. Too speculative for you?

Completely speculative, with *ZERO* basis in fact, history, or possible
citation.

>> Weapons WERE openly sold all through the town - it would have been quite
>> easy to purchase *anonymously* a far better weapon with the money WE KNOW
>> OSWALD HAD.
>>
>> So where's YOUR speculation now? (I'd say... in the dirt.)
>
>My speculation beats yours any day.

You even undercut your own argument of lack of time...

>> >> >> > 4) Why did LHO leave his pistol at the boarding house?
>>
>> >> >> Knew it was useless to his assassination plans.
>>
>> >> >> > Don't you
>> >> >> > think that he would possibly need it with him after he shot the
>> >> >> > president?
>>
>> >> >> Wasn`t looking to shoot his way out of the TSBD.
>>
>> >> >> > 5) Why did he fail a nitrate test if he had fired a rifle at the
>> >> >> > president and shot a cop?
>>
>> >> >> He tested positive for nitrates on his hands.
>>
>>>>Of course, we *know* due to tests conducted by Guinn that it was nitrates on
>>the
>>>> CHEEK that would have proven beyond all doubt that LHO fired an MC that day.
>>>> Lack of such was certainly exculpatory. This explains why the WC buried the
>> >> data, and even most LNT'ers deny it to this day.
>>
>>>>But unless he was kissing books and boxes, there would have been no reason for
>>a
>>>> positive NAA test on the cheek caste - as there *was* a perfectly legitimate
>> >> reason for a positive paraffin test on his hands.
>>
>> >http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/factoid2.htm
>>
>> Quote the relevant part if you have the courage to defend it.
>
>Find someone else's leg to hump. I was trying to help Rob.

Didn't really think you would or could. LNT'ers shy away from supporting their
words - they generally *can't*.

>> >> >> > 6) Why did his rifle have no hair or fibers matching the blanket Ruth
>> >> >> > Paine said LHO wrapped it in while it was supposedly stored in her
>> >> >> > garage?
>>
>> >> >> The FBI found fibers, but couldn`t get a conclusive match, I
>> >> >> believe.
>>
>> >> Little more of a problem than that... by all means, take a look at the
>> >> testimony to learn more.
>>
>> >Why not start here:http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/bag.htm?
>>
>> Why not quote the relevant part, and be prepared to defend it?
>
>Why not find someone else's leg to hump?

How's that yellow stripe down your back doing?

>>Can YOU tell us why the fibers found was more of a problem than first appears?
>>
>> I suspect not. LNT'ers rarely read the actual testimony.
>
>You suspect too much.

Sadly, all too often based on evidence that would persuade most lurkers...

>> >> >> > 7) Why not practice the kill beforehand? No one can say they saw LHO
>> >> >> > ever out shooting a gun before the assassination.
>>
>> >> >> Why are you suggesting improvements to an already sucessful
>> >> >> venture?
>>
>> >> >> > 8) Why did he supposedly use a 30.6 for the General Walker attempt (a
>> >> >> > much better rifle when he would have been much closer) and a piece of
>>>> >> > junk Mannlicher Carcano (low velocity) for the president when he would
>> >> >> > have been much further away?
>>
>> >> >> He used the same rifle for both.
>>
>> >> >Btw, a .30-06 (Springfield) is a cartridge, not a rifle.
>>
>>>>Tis true... all you need to do now is demonstrate that the MC "owned" by
>>Oswald
>> >> could fire such cartridges...
>>
>> >Why?
>>
>> Or, alternatively, you could find another rifle to put in his hands at the
>> Walker attempt. Take your pick.
>
>Have you listed all conceivable alternatives? Think hard.

The problem, of course, is that *YOU* don't know the facts - and are therefore
handicapped - not knowing the actual evidence.

>> >> Interesting to note, Frazier's .30-06 was confiscated FROM HIS HOME by
>> >> the DPD. Any explanation?
>>
>> >DVP has explained this to you.
>>
>> No, he hasn't. He's avoided the evidence that his explanation is nonsense.
>>
>> That's true of most LNT'ers, of course...
>
>...and some CT'ers...
>
>> >> >> > 9) Why did he go to the Texas Theater? What was the purpose of going
>> >> >> > to watch a movie instead of trying to get out of town?
>>
>> >> >> You`re an idiot.
>>
>> >> >Who claims to hold a degree in history.
>>
>> >> Anyone who asks questions that embarrass the LNT'er camp will be labeled
>>>> "idiot"... it's one of the best determinations of good questions that can be
>> >> made in this forum.
>>
>> >Emrarrass the LN camp?! It is both *idiotic* and *dishonest* of you
>> >and Rob to pretend that LN'ers believe that Oswald snuck into the TT
>> >simply to watch a movie.
>>
>> The alternative, of course, is that he was there to meet his intelligence
>> handler... I suspect that you won't be endorsing that.
>>
>> Notice Rob - how quickly you *were* labeled an idiot and dishonest from
>> someone who doesn't know the evidence, and refuses to answer simple
>> questions.
>
>You are the very definition of dishonesty, Ben. There may still be
>hope for Rob.

No, there's no hope whatsoever... you've clearly not been paying attention when
he asserted that he's been taking a look at this case for, what was it? Over 20
years?

And whenever you'd like to back up your assertion that I'm dishonest... you
know, quoting something I've said, then providing the citation that makes it
dishonest... by all means, go ahead...

Ben Holmes

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 6:15:30 PM10/19/07

to

In article <1192829069.3...@t8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
robc...@netscape.com says...

It *is* easy, however, to have pity on them... not because they are
unintelligent (well, most of them aren't - I reserve comment on a few of them)
but because they are truly between a rock and a hard place.

They have their faith, yet the evidence doesn't support them... so they can't
argue or debate the evidence. This surely places them squarely as cowards, even
if they may not be... but what can they do?

I really *do* feel sorry for many of them...

muc...@gmail.com

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 6:19:27 PM10/19/07

to

Do you think this is Trivial Pursuit? Quit bluffing. Show us your
academic credentials or tone down the rhetoric.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 6:27:09 PM10/19/07

to

In article <1192829227.8...@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
robc...@netscape.com says...

>
>On Oct 19, 12:03 pm, YoHarvey <bailey...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> One more ighorant comment from a typical CT.

Sadly snipped... so I can't defend whatever was said.

However, what I *DO* notice is that whatever it was, you haven't been able to
cite the evidence that disproves it.

>> The WC investigated
>> Oswalds financial records for several years.

Actually, no. The Warren Commission was not even in existence for one *full*
year, let alone "several years"... so this troll doesn't even know the facts.

But what facts the WC did discover - they then strangely buried them. In fact,
I think those tax records are *still* classified. At least, I don't recall
seeing any information about Oswald's finances that have been released.

>> He has NO assets and
>> lived a life of virtual poverty.

And yet visited and lived in more countries than the average American ever has.
Even owned a rather expensive Minox camera. And according to testimony, was
clearly looking to purchase a car. Doesn't sound very poor to me...

>> You know this Holmes

I do indeed know the facts of this case...

>> so why does a supposed honest man like you make such a blantant
>> attempt at lying to this newsgroup?

Unfortunately, snipping and such have prevented me from knowing just what it was
that I said that got you upset.

What I note, as usual, that no-one seems able to quote anything I say, and CITE
THE EVIDENCE THAT MAKES IT A LIE.

Indeed, most LNT'ers and trolls avoid any responses to the evidence in this
case.

>> Is it contagious amongst you CT's?
>

>Some life of poverty. Trips on luxary liners to Russia. Flying first
>class back to the U.S. after you defected for Russia. Travelling back
>and forth between New Orleans and Dallas. Maybe even visiting Mexico
>City if you believe the WC. Sounds like a real poor man.

Yep... he certainly led a typical life for a "poor" man. I wonder if this troll
can explain why Oswald's tax records were sealed.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 6:41:23 PM10/19/07

to

In article <1192831278.8...@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
robc...@netscape.com says...

>
>On Oct 19, 5:43 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>> Rob displays his total ignorance once again. Vince B. has secured
>> convictions in a courtroom without determining a definitive
>> motive. .....
>>
>> "I've put murderers on Death Row without knowing for sure why
>> they did it. All I knew was that they killed the victim and they had
>> no legal justification for doing so." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi, Esq.;
>> 2007
>>
>> Vince is just a rotten liar, right Rob-Kook?

Was he a liar when he stood in court and argued that a conspiracy was involved
in the RFK and JFK case?

Or is he a liar now when he claims that there was no conspiracy in the JFK case?

>He is a liar.

All lawyers are... that's an occupational hazard. They often *know* that they
aren't on the side of truth... what's important to a lawyer is to provide the
same protection to *ALL* people, regardless of guilt or innocence.

muc...@gmail.com

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 6:52:56 PM10/19/07

to

On 20 Okt., 00:07, Ben Holmes <ad...@websitewealthcollege.com> wrote:
> In article <1192824605.812800.138...@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> much...@gmail.com says...

Don't you have any shame? This discussion is over. You lost.

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 6:53:34 PM10/19/07

to

On Oct 19, 6:19 pm, much...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Do you think this is Trivial Pursuit? Quit bluffing. Show us your

> academic credentials or tone down the rhetoric.- Hide quoted text -

What are yours? Why are you so obsessed with me? Move on.

justm...@gmail.com

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 7:05:18 PM10/19/07

to

Robcap is losing his cool, the Gil Jesus in him is coming out. You
blew it moron when you stated where you live, because you and Jesus
wouldn't be in the same ISP pool, you live too far apart. So, stop
trying to pretend your not Jesus and move on yourself. You've lost
every argument you've started, made yourself look like a total ass
(which you are) and a liar and bigot. You have the other lying
bastard backing you up none other then *Benji the Dwarf*. Ask Mr.
Kung Fu whos been kicked in the head one too many times by 5 yr old
kids about his friend the author John Welsh Hodges and his upcoming
book that was going to bury VB. Holmes will agree with anyone that
kisses his ass no matter how stupid and idiotic their comments are.
Confront him on something or challange him to a debate and hes a lying
coward, just like he calls everyone else. His bait and switch game
doesn't work around here but he keeps trying, thinking he's winning in
his own little world of make believe.
Jesus? You are a class A Idiot if I've ever seen one. You even give
white trash a bad name.
Go spend your time scarfing more videos that no one cares about, it
keeps you busy and away from here.
And have your alter identity grow up....he's a dumber version of you
if thats possible.

David Von Pein

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 7:07:03 PM10/19/07

to

>>> "Was he {Bugliosi} a liar when he stood in court and argued that a conspiracy was involved in the RFK and JFK case?" <<<

VB never argued in favor of a "conspiracy" in the JFK case. Even the
VB quote Ben likes to tout as PROOF that Vince did do just that
actually proves no such thing.

VB argued a possible conspiracy in the RFK case, yes. But not the JFK
case.

But that won't stop Ben The Super-Kook from continuing to bring up
this lie of his every few months. That's what kooks do....pretend
something is fresh and undebunked, when in fact it's been debunked
long ago.

Without such an M.O., kooks like Ben would have pooped out long ago.

David Von Pein

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 7:07:43 PM10/19/07

to

>>> "I thought he {Oswald} was a mindless drone, based on how LNers talk about him." <<<

When did I ever say that? That "drone" description sounds more like
something you conspiracy kooks would say about "Patsy" Oswald....i.e.,
he was so stupid and brain-free, he just went right ahead and toted
his own rifle into work for some OTHER killer(s) to frame him with.

But from my own POV -- Oswald's escape plan was pure crap, yes. But
LHO was smart in many ways, and the proof of that is the way he has
duped millions of people into believing every lie that came out of his
murdering mouth, including his famous "I'm just a patsy" declaration
(which was actually aimed at the DPD and not at any outside entity who
"framed" him for JFK's murder).

>>> "Big bad JFK wouldn't invade little ol' Cuba, so I'm gonna gun him down!!" <<<

Why on Earth would Oswald be upset by Kennedy NOT invading LHO's
beloved Cuba? As per the kook norm, you've got things backwards.

>>> "You can't hope to wipe away every print in the limited time he had, especially using a shirt." <<<

So? Why can't you read? I never said he wiped off EVERY last print via
my proposed "He Used The Shirt To Wipe Off Prints" scenario.

Obviously, he didn't get all the prints. He didn't even get the
trigger-guard prints. (He was probably too busy wiping down the stock
and barrel only; hence, no prints found there at all.)

Of course, he also didn't wipe off (nor could he have) the palmprint
on the underside of the barrel. He would have needed to dismantle the
gun to get to that print.

Next hunk of CT kookshit please.....

>>> "I'm no liar and I don't feel like digging out "Rush To Judgement" [sic], "High Treason", "Whitewashed" [sic], "Crossfire: The Plot to Kill Kennedy", etc." <<<

Wonderful. A nice assortment of kookbooks there, for you (another
kook) to try to use as definitive PROOF that "all but one witness

claimed two men shot JDT with automatic weapons".

Ya gotta love it! Kooks following more kooks.

Fact is: Not a single one of the four witnesses who actually saw
Tippit being shot (Markham, Benavides, Scoggins, and Tatum) saw more
than ONE killer. And they ALL identified Oswald as that ONE man.*

* = With a grain of salt beside Benavides' name. But Domingo did seem
pretty sure of the killer's identity when he appeared in front of the
CBS-TV cameras in June of 1967. Let's listen.....

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

And every witness (save Clemons) who saw the aftermath of the Tippit
shooting saw only ONE man running from the scene of the crime, with
the large majority of those witnesses going on record and saying that
that one man was Lee Harvey Oswald.

>>> "It had to be automatic, as the shells that were recovered by the police first on the scene were from an automatic gun." <<<

More bullshit from a mega-kook.

No "automatic" shells were recovered. Not a one. And no kook can
produce any proof that ANY automatic bullet shells were found.

Benavides picked up two shells from Oswald's non-automatic revolver;
Barbara Davis later found one shell from Oswald's gun; and Virginia
Davis also found one spent shell (also determined to have been ejected
from Oswald's S&W revolver to the exclusion of every weapon in the
world).

The initial thoughts about an "automatic" being involved in the
shooting stemmed from two sources -- Ted Callaway's telling a
policeman that he thought the killer had an automatic, just by the way
Oswald was handling the gun. And Gerald Hill's initial erroneous
thoughts (which he fully explained and corrected later on) about it
being an "automatic", because of the small general area where the
shells were found (or at least where he THOUGHT at the time all the
shells were found).

Naturally, the "No Takebacks" rule is always in effect if you're a
conspiracy-loving kook. I.E.: Whatever a person says initially (which
may or may not be based on incorrect or misinterpreted information)
MUST be correct and is, therefore, written in stone FOREVER (if you're
in the Kook Club).

Such as Gerry Hill's "automatic" statement. And there's Weitzman's and
Boone's "It Looked Like A Mauser" statements too. Those have been
fully explained by each man, with each man admitting it WASN'T really
a Mauser, but a Carcano....but, per the kooks, since the word "Mauser"
was uttered initially by the police, then a Mauser WAS positively the
gun found on the sixth floor, and NOTHING anyone does later can change
a kook's mind in this regard.

Another perfect example of the "No Takebacks" rule that many CTers
swear by is Malcolm Perry and his initial comments regarding JFK's
throat wound being a wound of "entry". But Perry said to the WC that
the wound could have been "either" an entry or an exit wound.

Vince Bugliosi, in his book, logically explains Perry's mistake:

"Common sense tells us that seeing only the wound to the front
of the president's neck {and not seeing the corresponding entry wound
in Kennedy's back at any time}, the Parkland doctors would
instinctively have been more inclined to think of it as an entrance
wound. Almost anyone would be so predisposed." -- VB; Page 414 of
"Reclaiming History" (c.2007)

>>> "I know the case better than you ever will Davey." <<<

You know the "kook" version of the case better than me, sure. But, who
cares about that make-believe version of events?

Are you a proud member of the "9/11 Conspiracy" Kook Club too? Sounds
right up your alley.

>>> "Pathetic." <<<

Yeah, you are.

www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com

www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A1FDW1SPYKB354/ref=cm_pdp_about_see_review/002-2065385-6525668?ie=UTF8&sort%5Fby=MostRecentReview

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 7:23:51 PM10/19/07

to

On Oct 19, 7:05 pm, "justme1...@gmail.com" <justme1...@gmail.com>

So pathetic. Why don't you get off this board as you have nothing to
add to the discussion. This isn't about your problems, it's about
JFK. I'm not Gil, but if your little mind can't grasp that tough.
Move on Sister. Go nag someother group of people.

justm...@gmail.com

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 7:28:35 PM10/19/07

to

> Move on Sister. Go nag someother group of people.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Liar and a bigot LOL

Ben Holmes

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 7:31:09 PM10/19/07

to

In article <1192834376.9...@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
muc...@gmail.com says...

Of *course* the discussion is over... when it gets pointed out that you're
willing to simply lie to make a "point", you haven't anyplace else to go.

You can either produce the non-existent quote from me, or you can run away...
there isn't anything else you can do...

But of course, my point - that the selection of the Trademart *WAS* the key to
the motorcade going through Dealey Plaza... has strangely been unanswered by
you... there *is* no answer of course - because it's the simple truth. None of
the other possibilities would have led the motorcade through the kill zone.

justm...@gmail.com

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 7:39:26 PM10/19/07

to

On Oct 19, 7:31 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@websitewealthcollege.com> wrote:
> In article <1192834376.913377.222...@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> much...@gmail.com says...

> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Where's your proof that Dealy Plaza was designated as the "kill
zone"?? Because you say so? Dealy Plaza BECAME the kill zone after
LHO shot JFK. You have no proof that it was planned in advance just as
you have nothing to support all the other speculations you make. Tell
me something Holmes, do you get off changing the title of every thread
accusing people of running or lying??? It's getting old and boring.
Actually you look like more of an ass everytime you do it, because all
the LN's on this newsgroup know your one of the biggest liars and
cowards here...next to Gil Jesus that is. Try a new tatic, you're
failing at this one.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 7:46:17 PM10/19/07

to

In article <1192836231.5...@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
robc...@netscape.com says...

>
>On Oct 19, 7:05 pm, "justme1...@gmail.com" <justme1...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>> On Oct 19, 6:53 pm, robcap...@netscape.com wrote:
>>
>> > On Oct 19, 6:19 pm, much...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> > > Do you think this is Trivial Pursuit? Quit bluffing. Show us your
>> > > academic credentials or tone down the rhetoric.
>>

>> > What are yours? Why are you so obsessed with me? Move on.
>>
>> Robcap is losing his cool, the Gil Jesus in him is coming out. You
>> blew it moron when you stated where you live, because you and Jesus
>> wouldn't be in the same ISP pool, you live too far apart. So, stop
>> trying to pretend your not Jesus and move on yourself. You've lost
>> every argument you've started, made yourself look like a total ass
>> (which you are) and a liar and bigot. You have the other lying
>> bastard backing you up none other then *Benji the Dwarf*.

Never been considered a tall man... 5'9"... but few people would try to assert
such as a "dwarf".

Facts, of course, never stop trolls or LNT'ers.

>> Ask Mr. Kung Fu

"Kung Fu" is a generic term which encompasses a wide variety of Chinese arts,
from wrestling like arts to the more familiar "P&K" (Punching & Kicking) arts.

Judo, on the other hand, is a specific art developed by Jigoro Kano in Japan.
It has very little in common with Kung Fu.

I've never done any formal study of Kung Fu - but I can dance circles around
your knowledge of Judo. (or probably any other martial art for that matter)

>> whos been kicked in the head one too many times by 5 yr old
>> kids

Kicks are limited to kata, and then only by black belts. 5 year olds would
never learn kicks in a Judo class. Black belts are, with very rare exceptions,
limited to the age of 16 or older.

But don't let the facts get in your way...

>> about his friend the author John Welsh Hodges and his upcoming
>> book that was going to bury VB. Holmes will agree with anyone that
>> kisses his ass no matter how stupid and idiotic their comments are.

Rob may find that hard to believe when he asserted a political affiliation for
LNT'ers and CT'ers that doesn't exist.

>> Confront him on something or challange him to a debate and hes a lying
>> coward,

Sadly, this is provably false. I've never killfiled *ANYONE* who hasn't already
proven their willingness to run from questions based on the evidence.

>> just like he calls everyone else. His bait and switch game
>> doesn't work around here but he keeps trying, thinking he's winning in
>> his own little world of make believe.

Bait and switch *WHAT*? I still ask the same questions, over and over... and
still can't get an answer...

>> Jesus? You are a class A Idiot if I've ever seen one. You even give
>> white trash a bad name.
>> Go spend your time scarfing more videos that no one cares about, it
>> keeps you busy and away from here.

You see, Rob - I recommend that you put them into a feeding frenzy by posting a
link to any YouTube video... Gil is famous for this, you could be the talk of
the Troll Community if you'd do so as well... since it would validate their
theory.

>> And have your alter identity grow up....he's a dumber version of you
>> if thats possible.
>
>So pathetic. Why don't you get off this board as you have nothing to
>add to the discussion. This isn't about your problems, it's about
>JFK. I'm not Gil, but if your little mind can't grasp that tough.
>Move on Sister. Go nag someother group of people.

Killfiles are a wonderful thing, Rob. I can't speak highly enough for them!

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 8:05:44 PM10/19/07

to

On Oct 19, 7:07 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>> "I thought he {Oswald} was a mindless drone, based on how LNers talk about him." <<<
>
> When did I ever say that? That "drone" description sounds more like
> something you conspiracy kooks would say about "Patsy" Oswald....i.e.,
> he was so stupid and brain-free, he just went right ahead and toted
> his own rifle into work for some OTHER killer(s) to frame him with.
>
> But from my own POV -- Oswald's escape plan was pure crap, yes. But
> LHO was smart in many ways, and the proof of that is the way he has
> duped millions of people into believing every lie that came out of his
> murdering mouth, including his famous "I'm just a patsy" declaration
> (which was actually aimed at the DPD and not at any outside entity who
> "framed" him for JFK's murder).

Some comparison Davey, he had about 48 hours to make his case (and of
course most of what he said has never been told to us) while the other
side has had nearly 44 years to say whatever they want with no proof.
The guy they are smashing is dead.

>
> >>> "Big bad JFK wouldn't invade little ol' Cuba, so I'm gonna gun him down!!" <<<
>
> Why on Earth would Oswald be upset by Kennedy NOT invading LHO's
> beloved Cuba? As per the kook norm, you've got things backwards.

Exactly my point. Why kill the man who was negotiating with Cuba?
The guy that came next did more to fight militarily against communism
that JFK would have done. That was an earlier post question. Why
would LHO shoot a man who was not hell bent on wiping communism out
when there were others more dangerous in the wings? (i.e. LBJ, RMN)

>
> >>> "You can't hope to wipe away every print in the limited time he had, especially using a shirt." <<<
>
> So? Why can't you read? I never said he wiped off EVERY last print via
> my proposed "He Used The Shirt To Wipe Off Prints" scenario.

I can read. The only print on the gun was a smudged palm print.
Therefore, if you are saying all the prints couldn't be wiped off,
where are they? There should be some left if LHO used it. There
aren't any because he never laid his hands on the gun!! Case closed.

>
> Obviously, he didn't get all the prints. He didn't even get the
> trigger-guard prints. (He was probably too busy wiping down the stock
> and barrel only; hence, no prints found there at all.)
>
> Of course, he also didn't wipe off (nor could he have) the palmprint
> on the underside of the barrel. He would have needed to dismantle the
> gun to get to that print.
>
> Next hunk of CT kookshit please.....
>
> >>> "I'm no liar and I don't feel like digging out "Rush To Judgement" [sic], "High Treason", "Whitewashed" [sic], "Crossfire: The Plot to Kill Kennedy", etc." <<<
>
> Wonderful. A nice assortment of kookbooks there, for you (another
> kook) to try to use as definitive PROOF that "all but one witness
> claimed two men shot JDT with automatic weapons".

Say what you will, at least I'm reading many books by different
people, all you read is the WCR and books that only use the WCR and
HSCA. Your getting one point of view. I guess when you can't handle
too much information this is the best approach.

>
> Ya gotta love it! Kooks following more kooks.
>
> Fact is: Not a single one of the four witnesses who actually saw
> Tippit being shot (Markham, Benavides, Scoggins, and Tatum) saw more
> than ONE killer. And they ALL identified Oswald as that ONE man.*

They only presented Markham and Benavides (WCR pp. 166-167). This was
after they claimed they had "12 people" who saw LHO shoot Tippit.
Even their own witness gave them trouble as Benavides said he "didn't
want to get out and rush right up. He might start shooting again". (VI
448) This messed up the timeline for the commission though as they
had to have him call it in by 1:16 pm so they concocted the statement
that he "rushed up to Tippit", but has we have seen Benavides said he
didn't. Benavides was nearest to Tippit yet he still wouldn't
identify LHO as the gunman. (VI 452) So this left Markham. She went
on to say she didn't recognize anyone in the hastily put together
lineup. After some proding and leading questions she said she got
"chills" when she looked at LHO. (III 311) Some ID.

A few weeks after the assassination Mrs. Markham told Mark Lane in an
interview that the "...Tippit's killer was a short man, somewhat on
the heavy side, with slightly bushy hair". (Rush to Judgement, p.
180)

Mrs. Acquilla Clemons said she saw two men standing near the police
car moments before one of them shot Tippit. (II 32,51) The killer
waved to the other one and then they ran away in different directions.
(I 330; XXI 139; XXIV 7) During a taped conversation she described the
gunman as "kind of a short guy" and "kind of heavy" (sound familar?)
and said the other man was tall and slim and wore khaki pants and a
white shirt. (XX 594-595)

>
> * = With a grain of salt beside Benavides' name. But Domingo did seem
> pretty sure of the killer's identity when he appeared in front of the
> CBS-TV cameras in June of 1967. Let's listen.....
>
> 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."

This was changed, because as I just said Benavides would not ID LHO as
the man he saw shooting Tippit.

>
> No "automatic" shells were recovered. Not a one. And no kook can
> produce any proof that ANY automatic bullet shells were found.
>

The officer put his initials on them and then they dissappeared. Very
convenient.

> "Common sense tells us that seeing only the wound to the front
> of the president's neck {and not seeing the corresponding entry wound
> in Kennedy's back at any time}, the Parkland doctors would
> instinctively have been more inclined to think of it as an entrance
> wound. Almost anyone would be so predisposed." -- VB; Page 414 of
> "Reclaiming History" (c.2007)

It is funny that you keep mentioning common sense since I don't see
how anyone with any could possibly believe the lies the WC put forth.
I guess 1+1 doesn't equal 2 for everyone.

>
> >>> "I know the case better than you ever will Davey." <<<
>
> You know the "kook" version of the case better than me, sure. But, who
> cares about that make-believe version of events?

It is funny you call it kook work since most of them start at the same
place you did - with the WC. They then show how what the WC said is
not factual in more cases than not. If you got your nose out of those
26 volumes you may know this.

>
> Are you a proud member of the "9/11 Conspiracy" Kook Club too? Sounds
> right up your alley.

I have not even looked at that, but if I was so what? It is suppose
to be a free country. I wish I could believe everything I'm told and
not think for myself but I can't. I envy you for that. I could tell
you today is Sunday and you'd believe me. Some citizen of a free
country.
>
> >>> "Pathetic." <<<
>
> Yeah, you are.

You really think anyone cares about your blog? Please. Most people
have an ability to think for themselves. Sad.

tomnln

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 11:34:45 PM10/19/07

to

<muc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1192824605.8...@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

> Since the reply I posted several hours ago didn't appear, this is a
> new try.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>> >> >Gil claims that Connally nailed it on 10/4/63 by getting JFK to
>> >> >accept
>> >> >the Trade Mart as *the* luncheon site!
>>
>> >You seem reluctant to comment on Gil's theory, Ben. Trouble in
>> >Paradise?
>>
>> Coming from someone too cowardly to answer a simple question, and take
>> dozens of
>> posts to fail to do so - this seems quite amusing!
>>
>> The selection of the Trademart *WAS* the key to the motorcade going
>> through
>> Dealey Plaza. Feel free to argue otherwise...
>
> Refreshingly candid of you to admit that you agree with Gil's claim

> that Connally, at a 10/4/63 meeting, persuaded JFK to accept the Trade
> Mart as *the* luncheon site. Now, kindly post the evidence that
> supports the claim.

HERE it is>>> From HSCA Volume I.

tomnln

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 11:36:52 PM10/19/07

to

That's Backwards David.

See JBC's testimony in HSCA Volume I.

"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1192826810.5...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

>>>> "The selection of the Trademart *WAS* the key to the motorcade going
>>>> through Dealey Plaza." <<<
>

> Indeed it was. And the final decision to have the luncheon at the
> Trade Mart wasn't made until November 13 or 14, almost a month after
> LHO got his TSBD job. And Kenny O'Donnell made that decision. And who
> here thinks Kenny was a plotter?
>

tomnln

unread,

Oct 19, 2007, 11:47:18 PM10/19/07

to

This Bimbo has you talking about everything EXCEPT the evidence/testimony.

"Ben Holmes" <ad...@websitewealthcollege.com> wrote in message
news:ffbfk...@drn.newsguy.com...

David Von Pein

unread,

Oct 20, 2007, 12:12:00 AM10/20/07

to

>>> "That's Backwards David. See JBC's testimony in HSCA Volume I." <<<

Okay......

Mr. DEVINE. But if you had had your way there would have been no
motorcade through the downtown area, you would have gone directly to
the---

Mr. CONNALLY. Trade Mart.

Mr. DEVINE. Trade Mart, right.

Mr. CONNALLY. Yes. As a matter of fact, it was quite a point of
dispute, as I say, and we never did agree to it, and finally they not
only said we are going to have a motorcade but we are going to publish
the route of it, and I said, well, that is crazy, I said, because here
again I was thinking only in terms of pickets or embarrassing signs or
things of that sort, but indeed they did, they ran a map of the parade
route 3 or 4 days, I think it was Tuesday before the Friday, in the
Dallas papers. Full route of the motorcade. ....

Mr. MCKINNEY. When was the final decision made or when did you finally
get your way that the speech would be made at the Trade Mart instead
of the Women's Building?

Mr. CONNALLY. I don't remember, Congressman, the precise date, but I
would guess it was a couple of weeks before the visit.

Mr. MCKINNEY. Basically, that was a decision on your part so that the
President could appeal to the conservative faction of the party in
Texas?

Mr. CONNALLY. Yes, well basically, the Women's Building is in the
fairground part of the city. The Trade Mart at that time was a new,
exciting building, out on the Stemmons Freeway, it is a magnificent
facility, it is a beautiful facility. I thought it was the type of
thing that particularly reflected the flare and the style of both
President and Mrs. Kennedy. It was a new building, it is a tremendous
thing with an enormous vaulted ceiling.
The Secret Service had some doubts about it because it had balconies
around, but we filled all those balconies with tables. And it was just
a better facility, better parking, easier to get to for everyone,
because you get to it off the Stemmons Freeway, and I thought it just
frankly was a much better facility in order to accommodate the crowd
that we wanted to have, 1,800, 2,000 people there, to hear the
President.
I didn't know at the time there was a big argument about whether we go
to the Women's Building or the Trade Mart. I didn't go to either of
them at the time. Most of these arguments arose at the staff level and
those that they couldn't settle I would finally hear about and get a
hold of and sometimes I would just make a decision we are going to do
thus and so and sometimes I would call somebody at the White House and
get it worked out, but this went on constantly.

Mr. McKINNEY. In any event, at either building, the motorcade would
have had to go through some part of Dealey Plaza?

Mr. CONNALLY. Well, in any event the motorcade certainly would have
gone through downtown. It would not necessarily have had to go through
Dealey Plaza, no, sir. If the Women's Building had been chosen, it
could have gone another route, and probably would have gone another
route.

tomnln

unread,

Oct 20, 2007, 12:16:04 AM10/20/07

to

JBC "Insisted" on the trade mart.

"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message

news:1192853520.2...@q3g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

>>>> "That's Backwards David. See JBC's testimony in HSCA Volume I." <<<
>
> Okay......
>
>
>
> Mr. DEVINE. But if you had had your way there would have been no
> motorcade through the downtown area, you would have gone directly to
> the---
>
> Mr. CONNALLY. Trade Mart.
>
> Mr. DEVINE. Trade Mart, right.
>
> Mr. CONNALLY. Yes. As a matter of fact, it was quite a point of
> dispute, as I say, and we never did agree to it, and finally they not
> only said we are going to have a motorcade but we are going to publish
> the route of it, and I said, well, that is crazy, I said, because here
> again I was thinking only in terms of pickets or embarrassing signs or
> things of that sort, but indeed they did, they ran a map of the parade
> route 3 or 4 days, I think it was Tuesday before the Friday, in the
> Dallas papers. Full route of the motorcade. ....

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Mr. MCKINNEY. When was the final decision made or when did you finally
> get your way that the speech would be made at the Trade Mart instead
> of the Women's Building?

>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gil Jesus

unread,

Oct 20, 2007, 7:13:36 AM10/20/07

to

Wrong again Von Pinhead.

Don't you ever get sick of being wrong ?

There was a major battle for the site of the luncheon and Connally was
the main antagonist.

Kennedy decided to give in and let him have his way on October 4th,
after a meeting for which Connally flew all the way to Washington for.

That same evening, Connally had dinner with Johnson to let him know
that things were progressing.

The site wasn't decided a week before the assassination you dumb shit.
Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that preparations have to
be made for a Presidential appearance, preparations that take more
than a week to finalize.

Menus have to be decided, food ordered, etc.

Kennedy approved the luncheon site on October 4th.

Frank Bruno was advised by Kenny O'Donnell that they were "going to
let Connally have the site". O'Donnell didn't make the final decision,
idiot. He just notified Bruno of it.

O'Donnell, as Kennedy's appointments secretary, didn't have the power
to decide where Kennedy went. That was the Secret Service's job.

Bruno was a SS advance agent who was loyal to Kennedy. Bruno didn't
like what he saw at the Trade mart and protested. Connally fought hard
for the site and the battle was so fierce that Kennedy stepped in to
make the final decision.

justm...@gmail.com

unread,

Oct 20, 2007, 7:52:19 AM10/20/07

to

Holmes, glad to see you commented on everything but what I said about
Dealy Plaza. Why is that???

Dealy Plaza did not become a KILL ZONE until after JFK was shot. The
CT"s have given Dealy Plaza this name after the fact, but try to pawn
it off as being prepared as a kill zone before the motorcade route was
made public. You have/had no proof that JFK was going to be
assassinated in Dealy Plaza or anywhere else for that matter. Stop
trying to mislead people by saying the entire trip to Dallas was so
JFK would be murdered. JFK knew it would be dangerous, so did his
staff...but any motorcade or public appearance a president makes is
dangerous. It's amazing how you people will take someones testimony
and twist it around into something sinister. Right away you are
speculating that Connally pulled strings to have JFK in the "Kill
Zone". What a crock. Maybe Jesus can scarf up a few more videos of
people stating their opinions without proof on this one too.

Oh, and Holmes? You lied again...YoHarvy challanced you to a debate on
the Medical evidence and you ran for the hills claiming he was
killfiled. Another technique you have to avoid confrontation you know
you'll lose at. His debate was about the assassination which you claim
you will discuss with even "trolls" if their serious about it. Thank
you for proving my point that you're a lying coward like you accuse
everyone else of being. Gil Jesus ran too...the 2 big mouths who think
they know everything there is to know and have the case solved. Damn
amazing.

Sam Brown

unread,

Oct 20, 2007, 10:03:45 AM10/20/07

to

Did you just bitch-slap the Dwarf Gums?

"tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:vTeSi.21987$UN....@newsfe24.lga...

David Von Pein

unread,

Oct 20, 2007, 5:20:22 PM10/20/07

to

>>> "O'Donnell didn't make the final decision, idiot." <<<

Yes, he did. And O'Donnell could have nixed the Trade Mart decision
had he wanted to do so, you brain cramp. .....

"KENNETH O'DONNELL MADE THE FINAL DECISION TO HOLD THE LUNCHEON
AT THE TRADE MART; BEHN SO NOTIFIED LAWSON ON NOVEMBER 14." -- WCR;
Page 31

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0028a.htm

Naturally, all CT-Kooks in the "Patsy" Club have to believe that Page
#31 of the Warren Report (linked above for all to read themselves) is
a blatant and outright lie. Right?

So it is with the kooks. Kooky and irrational to the end.

Bud

unread,

Oct 20, 2007, 5:52:17 PM10/20/07

to

Yah, there is a certain amount of "checks and balances" involved
with publishing imformation when the people are still alive. They can
scream "No, I never did" to everyone and anyone who will listen.
O`Donnel was Kennedy`s friend, it`s unlikely he was setting up JFK to
be killed by selecting this site. And, of course, Connally insisting
on the Trade Mart so he could get in a car with his wife with the
dozens of assassins the kooks imagine firing at it doesn`t make much
sense either. But, after all these years, this is the foolishness they
entertain.

Tom Di Eva

unread,

Oct 25, 2007, 11:43:20 PM10/25/07

to

I am not a LNer but here are my unbelievable answers! Really, it wasn't a
conspiracy. There was a second shooter, maybe a third is possible. He made
the mistake of telling someone his intentions. He didn't know they were
there.

<robc...@netscape.com> wrote in message
news:1192659448.9...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

> If LHO was the sole assassin as you think then aswer the following
> questions.
>
> 1) Why did he do it? - motive

He was a freakin communist, c'mon now, he renounced his US citizenship.

> 2) How was he lucky enough to get a job at a site that just happen to
> be along the route the president would be going? - opportunity

Totally coincidence.

> 3) Why would anyone pick one of the most horrific guns in modern
> military history to pull off such a big hit?

He was poor and didn't have much money. Wasn't he working at the Texas
School Book Depository? What kind of a job is that, c'mon.

> 4) Why did LHO leave his pistol at the boarding house? Don't you

> think that he would possibly need it with him after he shot the
> president?

If he was caught, having a gun would detract from an innocent plea.

> 5) Why did he fail a nitrate test if he had fired a rifle at the
> president and shot a cop?

An unreliable test.

> 6) Why did his rifle have no hair or fibers matching the blanket Ruth
> Paine said LHO wrapped it in while it was supposedly stored in her
> garage?

The rifle was handled by so many people after they found it.

> 7) Why not practice the kill beforehand? No one can say they saw LHO
> ever out shooting a gun before the assassination.

He made a last minute decision to do what he did.

> 8) Why did he supposedly use a 30.6 for the General Walker attempt (a
> much better rifle when he would have been much closer) and a piece of
> junk Mannlicher Carcano (low velocity) for the president when he would
> have been much further away?

Again, he was poor. How much money can you make working in a school book
depository? (translation: warehouse for storing books)

> 9) Why did he go to the Texas Theater? What was the purpose of going
> to watch a movie instead of trying to get out of town?

He was freakin out. He was acting like a scared animal looking for some
place to hide and a dark movie theatre seemed like a good place.

> 10) Why was only a smudged palm print on the rifle when LHO wore no

> gloves and should have left a million prints all over it? You can't

> say because he didn't want to get caught because he did a lot of other
> stupid things if this was his goal (i.e. backyard photos, dropped
> casings, A. Hiddell card in his wallet, etc...)

The rifle was handled by so many people after they found it.

robc...@netscape.com

unread,

Oct 26, 2007, 5:15:51 PM10/26/07

to

On Oct 25, 11:43 pm, "Tom Di Eva" <tomd...@verizon.net> wrote:
> I am not a LNer but here are my unbelievable answers! Really, it wasn't a
> conspiracy. There was a second shooter, maybe a third is possible. He made
> the mistake of telling someone his intentions. He didn't know they were
> there.

If you believe multiple people shot at JFK then you do believe in a
conspiracy.

> > If LHO was the sole assassin as you think then aswer the following
> > questions.
>
> > 1) Why did he do it? - motive
>
> He was a freakin communist, c'mon now, he renounced his US citizenship.

This is not true, he never lost his U.S. citizenship and never became
a Russian citizen.

>
> > 2) How was he lucky enough to get a job at a site that just happen to
> > be along the route the president would be going? - opportunity
>
> Totally coincidence.

Sure and all those CIA contacts the Paines had didn't help. Oh, and
the fact that LBJ was good friends with D.H. Byrd (owner of TBSD)
might have nothing to do with it either. Yeah, I guess it was all
just goofy luck.

>
> > 3) Why would anyone pick one of the most horrific guns in modern
> > military history to pull off such a big hit?
>
> He was poor and didn't have much money. Wasn't he working at the Texas
> School Book Depository? What kind of a job is that, c'mon.

How does a poor man afford to travel to Russia? Dallas - multiple
times? New Orleans - multiple times? Clinton, MS? Mexico City? How
come he didn't live with Marina at the Paine's if he was broke? Why
spend extra money on a boarding house?

>
> > 4) Why did LHO leave his pistol at the boarding house? Don't you
> > think that he would possibly need it with him after he shot the
> > president?
>
> If he was caught, having a gun would detract from an innocent plea.

Okay, so you are saying he was thought to be guilty because he had a
gun on him?

>
> > 5) Why did he fail a nitrate test if he had fired a rifle at the
> > president and shot a cop?
>
> An unreliable test.

Really? Why did all the police departments and FBI rely on it in
1963?

>
> > 6) Why did his rifle have no hair or fibers matching the blanket Ruth
> > Paine said LHO wrapped it in while it was supposedly stored in her
> > garage?
>
> The rifle was handled by so many people after they found it.

This is at least original anyway, but handling it would not remove all
the traces. IF LHO handled it so much that all the fibers were gone,
why were there no fingerprints on the gun matching LHO?

>
> > 7) Why not practice the kill beforehand? No one can say they saw LHO
> > ever out shooting a gun before the assassination.
>
> He made a last minute decision to do what he did.

Really? Then why frame him with the General Walker shooting? What
drove him over the edge to make a snap decision to shoot the
president?

>
> > 8) Why did he supposedly use a 30.6 for the General Walker attempt (a
> > much better rifle when he would have been much closer) and a piece of
> > junk Mannlicher Carcano (low velocity) for the president when he would
> > have been much further away?
>
> Again, he was poor. How much money can you make working in a school book
> depository? (translation: warehouse for storing books)

He worked there for a month before the assassination. He had money to
have two kids. If you are going to shoot a president you buy a good
gun. The point being made here is, why not use this gun on 11/22/63?
What happened to it? Why did he supposedly buy another one?

>
> > 9) Why did he go to the Texas Theater? What was the purpose of going
> > to watch a movie instead of trying to get out of town?
>
> He was freakin out. He was acting like a scared animal looking for some
> place to hide and a dark movie theatre seemed like a good place.

If he was freaking out, why was he so calm on the 2nd floor of the
TBSD shortly after the shooting? Why not freak out and flee to
Mexico? A bus doesn't cost that much.

>
> > 10) Why was only a smudged palm print on the rifle when LHO wore no
> > gloves and should have left a million prints all over it? You can't
> > say because he didn't want to get caught because he did a lot of other
> > stupid things if this was his goal (i.e. backyard photos, dropped
> > casings, A. Hiddell card in his wallet, etc...)
>
> The rifle was handled by so many people after they found it.

That does't remove the prints he would have left. They can eliminate
the police because they have them on file. The issue is that no
prints of LHO were ever found on the gun.