There Was No Shooter on the 6th Floor
dcwi...@netscape.net
The Warren Report authors wanted to have their 6th-floor shooter *and*
their 5th-floor witnesses, too. In order to have both, though, they
first had to explain--or felt that they had to explain--why there
wasn’t a general collision in the vicinity of the 5th-floor stairwell,
as the various exiting parties converged. Hence, this passage (p153):
Oswald’s use of the stairway is consistent with the testimony of other
employees in the building. Three employees--James Jarman Jr., Harold
Norman, and Bonnie Ray Williams--were watching the parade from the 5th
floor, directly below the window from which the shots were fired.
They rushed to the west windows after the shots were fired. While
they were at the west windows, their view of the stairwell was
completely blocked by shelves & boxes. This is the period during
which Oswald would have descended the stairs.
True, a shooter could have run down before or after the west-end rush
(depending on whether the shooter hurried or lingered, respectively),
but the rush was fairly well synched with the most likely time that a
shooter would be clambering down the stairwell. As Williams answered
Joseph Ball’s “Are you able to see the opening of the downstairs from
this view, 492 [the west windows]?”: “No, sir.” (p181)
The west-end charge was perhaps the most consistent element in the
joint testimonies of the three witnesses:
We ran to the west side of the building. (Williams affidavit 11/22/63)
[Williams] & the other 2 then ran to the west end of the building….
(Williams FBI int. 11/23/63)
Jarman said that he & Norman & Williams went to the west side of the
building…. (Jarman FBI int. 11/24/63)
[Norman], Jarman & Williams ran to the other end of the room…. (Norman
FBI int. 11/26/63)
I went to the west side with Williams & Jarman…. (Norman, SS int.
12/4/63)
I ran to the west end of the building…. Hank & Junior also ran to the
west end…. (Williams, FBI int. 3/19/64)
We all decided we would run down to the west side of the building.
(Williams, WC testimony)
We ran to the farthest window facing the expressway. (Norman, WC
testimony)
And so we ran to the west side of the building. (Jarman, WC testimony)
At the hearings, a few retrospective details were added to the basic
west-side run. Williams testified that he led the run: “I left here
& I came like this. The other fellows followed like this.” (v3p177)
And Jarman added that he opened that “farthest window”:
Ball: When you ran down there was the window open or closed?
Jarman: It was closed.
Ball: And who opened it?
Jarman: I did. (v3p205)
Williams concurs. “I believe James Jarman opened the
window.” (v3p177) CE 488 shows the three leaning out said window,
marked “Y“. (Ball: “Now, the other day, when you were up here, you 3
men went to that window & stood there & had your picture taken, did
you not?” Williams: “Yes, sir.” v3p177)
Window “Y” then proved to be objective evidence that the west-side
rush really happened--photos abounded showing “Y” wide open in the
hour after the shooting (e.g., “Pictures of the Pain”, pp460, 471,
499).
Photo & witness evidence, then, seems to be in perfect synch. Ah!
Harmony. But in his 11/23 FBI interview, Williams made an odd gaffe:
Williams stated he & Hank & Junior were standing [at the west windows]
where they would have seen anyone coming down from the 6th floor via
the stairs & that they did not see anyone coming down.
In his Commission testimony, he had to deny that he even said this:
I could not possibly have told him that, because you cannot see
anything coming down [the stairs] from that position (p180).
Certainly, Williams was capable of telling the FBI that, &, if he did,
that would suggest that he was rather hazy, on 11/23/63, re what,
exactly, the view was from the SW corner of the 5th floor. Perhaps,
until the unspecified day of CE 488, he did not realize that the view
of the NW stairs from the SW corner was “completely blocked”. At the
very least, he was forced to retract a part of the original story of
the 5th-floor charge. And it was that retraction, in part, which made
it possible for the WR to conclude that “their view of the stairwell
was completely blocked” during the period that “Oswald would have
descended the stairs”.
But there are a few more parts of the tale of the charge still--in
2008--awaiting retraction. CE 488 is very persuasive: There they
are, the three of them, yes, once again, leaning out that same window
which Jarman opened back in November. Unforcedly, easily, CE 488
makes you think that, yes, it must have happened just like that.
It didn’t.
There are two photos to which the Commission did not have access. In
fact, no one had access to them for decades. It took author Richard
Trask yeoman use of the FOIA, in fact, to finally make them available,
intact, to us, in 1994 (“Pictures of the Pain“ pp259 & 469). But
Trask was apparently unfamiliar with the history of Jarman & Window Y,
& did not realize what he had unearthed.
First: Williams did not lead any *charge*. There he is, still--about
a minute after the shooting--in the second window from the *east*
end. And Window Y, at the west end, is already open! (Powell slide,
p449) Norman & Jarman are not visible at all.
Second: Jarman did not open the westernmost window facing Elm, after
the shooting. Moorman Polaroid #3, taken about 12:26, shows Window Y
already open (p233), well *before* any shot was fired. CE 488 was not
a reconstruction. It was a fabrication. No wonder that there are no
photographs of the trio leaning out the window, on November 22nd, or
of Jarman opening the window! No pictures of them on the west side at
all…. All we have here is their word, & their word is not looking
good.
So, Williams--the day after the assassination--apparently, incorrectly
*guessed* that you could see the stairs from the southwest windows.
And he did not lead the supposed charge to the west end. And he and
Jarman wrongly testified that Jarman opened Window Y after the
shooting. The objective evidence which should have supported the many
witness statements concerning the charge instead succeeds only in
undermining them.
There it is: The photographic *proof* of the charge was in place by
12:26, before it happened, or was supposed to have happened. The
*charge*, then, turns out to be, simply, a vignette developed for the
day of the assassination, a vignette intended to help foster the
illusion that somebody was *up there*, above Williams & co…. somebody
who must have slipped down while they were at the west windows. But
Jarman was not there to open the window, & Williams was not there to
see that you could not see the stairs from the west windows.
Two conclusions:
1) Williams, Norman, & Jarman did not just happen to go to the 5th
floor. An open window was waiting for Jarman & co. for who knows how
long.
2) There was no 6th-floor shooter. If there was no west-end charge,
there was no 6th-floor shooter. The former was supposed to have
precluded a run-in with the latter. Which means that there was no
latter, no chance of a run-in. Anyone from the 5th floor could have
run downstairs--or upstairs--unimpeded, hence the necessity for lying
Window Y….
copr 2008 dcw
David Von Pein
>>> "There Was No Shooter on the 6th Floor." <<<
And "There Are No Brains In Don Willis' Head" either.
[copr 2008 dvp]
dcwi...@netscape.net
Ol' Dave is projecting....
David Von Pein
>>> "Ol' Dave is projecting...." <<<
Ol' Donald is stupid.
Gil Jesus
> >>> "There Was No Shooter on the 6th Floor." <<<
>
> And "There Are No Brains In Don Willis' Head" either.
Typical comeback by a troll who has nothing substantial to post.
David Von Pein
>>> "Typical comeback by a troll who has nothing substantial to post." <<<
Yeah, but Donald's "There Was No Shooter On The 6th Floor" tripe is,
of course, "substantial". Right, Gilbert?
Gil doesn't even believe Donald's "No shooter on the 6th floor"
silliness. Who COULD possibly believe it (even amongst CTers)?
But that disbelief won't stop Gil from slapping Don on the back with
an "attaboy" (just for the heck of it).
Right, Gil-Kook?
(What a tribe, this crop of kooks.)
Gil Jesus
Personally I can't see how an open window on the west side of the
building would prove that there was no shooter on the 6th floor.
Unless, of course, your making a point about the lack of credibility
of the witnesses.
The photographic proof, however, is interesting and seems to indicate
that the witnesses were either less than truthful about what they did,
their accounts were altered, or that their accounts were given under
duress.
Let's face it:
The cops have Amos Euins saying he saw a black man with a rifle in the
window before the shooting and here we have three black men in the
building and the cops subsequently finding a rifle in the
building......
Well, you can see how they might agree to anything they were told to
say by the KKK/bircher cops.
curtjester1
I always wonder what went on before witnesses testified, and how it
might have affected their outcomes....like Marina Oswald and Brennan
who spent a lots and lots of time with the Feds. Of course one can
tell by how their stories changed or were sidetracked like a Karen
Carlin and Julia Postal, a Johnny Brewer. The FBI of Dallas staked
out Jean Hill's residence for over a year, for didn't-like-the-
testimony reasons....so we should wonder what, how, and why
testimonies might have been 'conveniently' streamlined by the time
they took the grand stage. Didn't one TSBD employee get let go for
potential 'bad witnessing'? Maybe a fifth floor one, got a perk?
CJ
Bud
> On Sep 6, 3:32 am, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Don:
>
> > Personally I can't see how an open window on the west side of the
> > building would prove that there was no shooter on the 6th floor.
>
> > Unless, of course, your making a point about the lack of credibility
> > of the witnesses.
>
> > The photographic proof, however, is interesting and seems to indicate
> > that the witnesses were either less than truthful about what they did,
> > their accounts were altered, or that their accounts were given under
> > duress.
>
> > Let's face it:
>
> > The cops have Amos Euins saying he saw a black man with a rifle in the
> > window before the shooting and here we have three black men in the
> > building and the cops subsequently finding a rifle in the
> > building......
>
> > Well, you can see how they might agree to anything they were told to
> > say by the KKK/bircher cops.
>
> I always wonder what went on before witnesses testified, and how it
> might have affected their outcomes....like Marina Oswald and Brennan
> who spent a lots and lots of time with the Feds. Of course one can
> tell by how their stories changed or were sidetracked like a Karen
> Carlin and Julia Postal, a Johnny Brewer.
Kooks seem to believe that since they would change what they had to
say to whatever the authorities wanted to hear, that everyone would.
> The FBI of Dallas staked
> out Jean Hill's residence for over a year, for didn't-like-the-
> testimony reasons....
What a silly thing to believe.
Bud
> Don:
>
> Personally I can't see how an open window on the west side of the
> building would prove that there was no shooter on the 6th floor.
>
> Unless, of course, your making a point about the lack of credibility
> of the witnesses.
>
> The photographic proof, however, is interesting and seems to indicate
> that the witnesses were either less than truthful about what they did,
> their accounts were altered, or that their accounts were given under
> duress.
These are the only possibilities that Gil`s tiny mind can come up
with. This is why kooks end up in the places they do.
> Let's face it:
>
> The cops have Amos Euins saying he saw a black man with a rifle in the
> window before the shooting and here we have three black men in the
> building and the cops subsequently finding a rifle in the
> building......
> Well, you can see how they might agree to anything they were told to
> say by the KKK/bircher cops.
I was just watching a show on the Atlanta murders in the 80`s. A
serial killer was killing children, twenty-something in all before he
was done. The FBI released a profile of the murderer, saying it was
likely a young black man was responsible. The black community in
Atlanta largely had themselves convinced that the Klan was behind the
murders, and it seems they rejected the FBI`s profile. This allowed
the real murderer, Wayne Williams to continue to kill children (and a
few adults) up until his arrest,. Because so many blacks refused to
believe that a black man was responsible, they probably were too busy
protecting the children from a threat that didn`t exist, which left
them vulnerable to the real threat. This is what happens when people
are so desperate to cling to their mistaken beliefs that they reject
reason. Even with Williams behind bars and the murders stopped, many
black in Atlanta still feel he is a patsy, a fall guy to cover for the
real murderers they prefer to believe responsible.
Gil Jesus
> � �I was just watching a show on the Atlanta murders in the 80`s. A
> serial killer was killing children, twenty-something in all before he
> was done. The FBI released a profile of the murderer, saying it was
> likely a young black man was responsible. The black community in
> Atlanta largely had themselves convinced that the Klan was behind the
> murders, and it seems they rejected the FBI`s profile. This allowed
> the real murderer, Wayne Williams to continue to kill children (and a
> few adults) up until his arrest,. Because so many blacks refused to
> believe that a black man was responsible, they probably were too busy
> protecting the children from a threat that didn`t exist, which left
> them vulnerable to the real threat. This is what happens when people
> are so desperate to cling to their mistaken beliefs that they reject
> reason. Even with Williams behind bars and the murders stopped, many
> black in Atlanta still feel he is a patsy, a fall guy to cover for the
> real murderers they prefer to believe responsible.
What the heck has black people " so desperate to cling to their
mistaken beliefs that they reject
reason " got to do with what we're talking about ?
We're talking about black WITNESSES being intimidated by police.
Boy are you stupid.
Gil Jesus
> Gil doesn't even believe Donald's "No shooter on the 6th floor"
> silliness. Who COULD possibly believe it (even amongst CTers)?
I didn't say that, LIAR. I said that "I can't see how an open window
on the west side of the
building would prove that there was no shooter on the 6th floor.
Unless, of course, your making a point about the lack of credibility
of the witnesses. "
YOU LIKE TO TWIST THINGS AROUND, DON'T YOU ?
> But that disbelief won't stop Gil from slapping Don on the back with
> an "attaboy" (just for the heck of it).
>
> Right, Gil-Kook?
>
> (What a tribe, this crop of kooks.)
That's all you have to respond with ? LIES & INSULTS ?
YOU'RE PATHETIC.
aeffects
gotta love your naivete .... keep coming back, it does get better
aeffects
I take that back... DON'T keep coming back --- think JFK assassination
son, c'mon you mental midget!
Bud
I`ve been coming back, and if anything, you folks keep getting
stupider and stupider.
Chuck Schuyler
Gil, how do you answer someone who is as dumb as Donald Willis? Willis
deserves ridicule for such childish insanity.
Surely someone was up there firing something, right?
Right?
Mauser?
Dud round?
Warning shot?
Cap gun????
Please tell me you at least agree with the fact that SOMEONE fired
SOMETHING at the motorcade from the 6th floor. You don't even need to
say who you think it was or whether the shots were aimed at the POTUS
or whether the bullets found their mark. Just tell me you recognize
the fact that someone was firing something from the 6th floor of the
TSBD at approximately 1230pm on 11/22/63.
Tell Don Willis he's wrong. Until you kooks thin out the herd you'll
always be Clueless in Conspiracyville.
curtjester1
explained 2 days after the assassassination about the Conspiracy with
Ruby and all, and begging for immunity. Julia saying in testimony
that they had to change Burrough's original story. Brewer being
silent on clothing until WC time. There is so much on Brennan and M.
Oswald that it would take pages to unravel the Ooops's.
> > The FBI of Dallas staked
> > out Jean Hill's residence for over a year, for didn't-like-the-
> > testimony reasons....
>
> What a silly thing to believe.
>
Oh? You might want to read a book someday. Her very intimate long-
time boyfriend was J.B. Marshall. He was flanked next to JFK on his
left side by the curb next to the limo. He had a lot to say about
the Feds in front of her house and at DPD.
CJ
>
>
> >so we should wonder what, how, and why
> > testimonies might have been 'conveniently' streamlined by the time
> > they took the grand stage. Didn't one TSBD employee get let go for
> > potential 'bad witnessing'? Maybe a fifth floor one, got a perk?
>
> > CJ- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Bud
Like I said, since you folks believe that you would say anything the
authorities told you to say, you think all the witnesses in this case
would do like you would do in their situation. But what if these
people had more moral fiber than you conspiracy kooks have?
> > > The FBI of Dallas staked
> > > out Jean Hill's residence for over a year, for didn't-like-the-
> > > testimony reasons....
>
> > What a silly thing to believe.
>
> Oh? You might want to read a book someday. Her very intimate long-
> time boyfriend was J.B. Marshall. He was flanked next to JFK on his
> left side by the curb next to the limo. He had a lot to say about
> the Feds in front of her house and at DPD.
<snicker> And the reason these "Feds" gave for being out front was
because they didn`t like her testimony? I suspect these people out
front were actually conspiracy writers, who intimidated her into
making fantastic claims not included in her initial statements.
tomnln
You KOOK-SUCKERS DID.
(sorry 'bout the typo)
http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
news:70e8619c-a1c4-499d...@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
dcwi...@netscape.net
> >>> "Ol' Dave is projecting...." <<<
>
> Ol' Donald is stupid.
Gawd! Oscar Wilde is not dead!
David Von Pein
>>> "Gawd! Oscar Wilde is not dead!" <<<
But Donald is still really, really stupid for starting up a thread
entitled "There Was No Shooter on the 6th Floor".
curtjester1
home and phoned constantly and she 'grew' to know him on a highly
personal level. Oh his reason for the surveillance? 'Protection'.
He might as well have put a little '<snicker>' sign on the corner of
his mouth. And you can bet it was not his idea, nor the "conspiracy
writers." Actually the intimidation picked up after that, but you'll
hav to pick up a book for that..<snicker>.
CJ
dcwi...@netscape.net
David Von Pein, or 100 Ways To End Debate
dcwi...@netscape.net
> >>> "Typical comeback by a troll who has nothing substantial to post." <<<
>
> Yeah, but Donald's "There Was No Shooter On The 6th Floor" tripe is,
> of course, "substantial". Right, Gilbert?
>
> Gil doesn't even believe Donald's "No shooter on the 6th floor"
> silliness. Who COULD possibly believe it (even amongst CTers)?
>
> But that disbelief won't stop Gil from slapping Don on the back with
> an "attaboy" (just for the heck of it).
>
again....
dcwi...@netscape.net
> On Sep 6, 3:36 am, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 6, 2:06 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > >>> "There Was No Shooter on the 6th Floor." <<<
>
> > > And "There Are No Brains In Don Willis' Head" either.
>
> > Typical comeback by a troll who has nothing substantial to post.
>
> Gil, how do you answer someone who is as dumb as Donald Willis? Willis
> deserves ridicule for such childish insanity.
>
> Surely someone was up there firing something, right?
>
> Right?
>
> Mauser?
>
> Dud round?
>
> Warning shot?
>
> Cap gun????
>
> Please tell me you at least agree with the fact that SOMEONE fired
> SOMETHING at the motorcade from the 6th floor. You don't even need to
> say who you think it was or whether the shots were aimed at the POTUS
> or whether the bullets found their mark. Just tell me you recognize
> the fact that someone was firing something from the 6th floor of the
> TSBD at approximately 1230pm on 11/22/63.
Curious, tho--several witnesses described the TSBD suspect as lying
down in a funny way, hanging out the window, & even (Go Brennan!)
sitting on the window sill--apparently trying to draw attention to
himself. Yet, not one photo of this wild & crazy guy! Explain why he
went from grandstander to shrinking violet....
dw
Chuck Schuyler
> Curious, tho--several witnesses described the TSBD suspect as lying
> down in a funny way, hanging out the window, & even (Go Brennan!)
> sitting on the window sill--apparently trying to draw attention to
> himself. Yet, not one photo of this wild & crazy guy! Explain why he
> went from grandstander to shrinking violet....
> dw
How 'bout admitting that there was someone in the TSBD 6th floor
firing a weapon at the POTUS, and then I'll comment on what the
witnesses reported seeing.
Don, you are probably a normal guy when you're not shivering with JFK
Conspiracy Fever, but until you can come to grips with basic
Assassination 101 stuff, you're always going to stuck in reverse gear.
dcwi...@netscape.net
> Don:
>
> Personally I can't see how an open window on the west side of the
> building would prove that there was no shooter on the 6th floor.
>
> Unless, of course, your making a point about the lack of credibility
> of the witnesses.
Okay, I'll say that it's something more than less-than-credible
witnesses, but perhaps something less than No 6th-floor shooter. That
is, it was not just the incorrect testimony of Williams & Jarman. It
was also the two photos which proved the incorrectness & which were
withheld from both the Commission & the public for some 30 years.
Why? Or, why Window Y? Open to question. I've provided one possible
answer.
> The photographic proof, however, is interesting and seems to indicate
> that the witnesses were either less than truthful about what they did,
> their accounts were altered, or that their accounts were given under
> duress.
>
> Let's face it:
>
> The cops have Amos Euins saying he saw a black man with a rifle in the
> window before the shooting and here we have three black men in the
> building and the cops subsequently finding a rifle in the
> building....
Or, rather, we have two reporters saying Euins told Harkness the
sniper was black. Then, circa 10 minutes later, a police-radio
broadcast from the same site saying the shooter was white. At the
least, Insp Sawyer should not have said anything about the color of
the supposed sniper.... Unless, of course, they had someone lined up
as the latter.
>
> Well, you can see how they might agree to anything they were told to
> say by the KKK/bircher cops.
Or by SS Agent in Charge of Dallas Sorrels, who apparently met with
Brennan & Euins at the Sheriff's
dcwi...@netscape.net
> On Sep 6, 3:32 am, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Don:
>
> > Personally I can't see how an open window on the west side of the
> > building would prove that there was no shooter on the 6th floor.
>
> > Unless, of course, your making a point about the lack of credibility
> > of the witnesses.
>
> > The photographic proof, however, is interesting and seems to indicate
> > that the witnesses were either less than truthful about what they did,
> > their accounts were altered, or that their accounts were given under
> > duress.
>
> > Let's face it:
>
> > The cops have Amos Euins saying he saw a black man with a rifle in the
> > window before the shooting and here we have three black men in the
> > building and the cops subsequently finding a rifle in the
> > building......
>
> > Well, you can see how they might agree to anything they were told to
> > say by the KKK/bircher cops.
>
> I always wonder what went on before witnesses testified, and how it
> might have affected their outcomes....like Marina Oswald and Brennan
Wasn't it his foreman who said Brennan's hair turned white while he
was with the feds....
> who spent a lots and lots of time with the Feds. Of course one can
> tell by how their stories changed or were sidetracked like a Karen
> Carlin and Julia Postal, a Johnny Brewer. The FBI of Dallas staked
> out Jean Hill's residence for over a year, for didn't-like-the-
> testimony reasons....so we should wonder what, how, and why
> testimonies might have been 'conveniently' streamlined by the time
> they took the grand stage. Didn't one TSBD employee get let go for
> potential 'bad witnessing'? Maybe a fifth floor one, got a perk?
>
dcwi...@netscape.net
>
> > > >so we should wonder what, how, and why
> > > > testimonies might have been 'conveniently' streamlined by the time
> > > > they took the grand stage. Didn't one TSBD employee get let go for
> > > > potential 'bad witnessing'? Maybe a fifth floor one, got a perk?
>
>
dcwi...@netscape.net
Hey! That word is (c) by DVP & Bud
David Von Pein
>>> "David Von Pein, or 100 Ways To End Debate." <<<
Reprise:
Don Willis is an idiot. (This thread is a testimony to that undeniable
fact.)
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/254681ba5f0054c8
>>> "The acoustical evidence proves that three shots were fired from the sniper's nest." <<<
~~LOL Break~~
The above response by Mr. Anthony Marsh is rich with irony (and
unintentional hilarity).
Of all the wide assortment of different things that prove beyond all
doubt that three shots were, indeed, fired from Oswald's Sniper's Nest
on the 6th Floor of the TSBD Building, Tony decides to choose evidence
that has been totally DISCREDITED in virtually every way (the
"acoustical"/Dictabelt crap) as the best evidence for declaring that
"three shots were fired from the sniper's nest".
And I can only assume via his post above that Tony feels that the
"acoustical evidence" (i.e., the hopelessly-flawed and proven-pretty-
much-worthless "DPD Dictabelt" audio recording) is, in fact, the "best
evidence" for proving that three shots came from Oswald's Sniper's
Nest.
Because if there was BETTER evidence (in Tony's opinion) in existence
to prove that three shots came from the SN, then Tony surely would
have utilized that other evidence in his post above, instead of
relying on only the "acoustical evidence". Right, Tony?
So, Tony's right about the 3 shots from the Nest. But for anyone to
think that the acoustics nonsense is the thing that "proves" that fact
more than all of the other much-better stuff on the table that proves
it....is just laughable.
Bud
Hell, dw, I`m just waiting for your next series, where you use the
witness testimony to show there was no 6th floor in the TSBD.
curtjester1
> On Sep 6, 4:02 am, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 6, 3:32 am, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > Don:
>
> > > Personally I can't see how an open window on the west side of the
> > > building would prove that there was no shooter on the 6th floor.
>
> > > Unless, of course, your making a point about the lack of credibility
> > > of the witnesses.
>
> > > The photographic proof, however, is interesting and seems to indicate
> > > that the witnesses were either less than truthful about what they did,
> > > their accounts were altered, or that their accounts were given under
> > > duress.
>
> > > Let's face it:
>
> > > The cops have Amos Euins saying he saw a black man with a rifle in the
> > > window before the shooting and here we have three black men in the
> > > building and the cops subsequently finding a rifle in the
> > > building......
>
> > > Well, you can see how they might agree to anything they were told to
> > > say by the KKK/bircher cops.
>
> > I always wonder what went on before witnesses testified, and how it
> > might have affected their outcomes....like Marina Oswald and Brennan
>
> Wasn't it his foreman who said Brennan's hair turned white while he
> was with the feds....
>
>
wabbit and duck.
CJ
>
> > who spent a lots and lots of time with the Feds. Of course one can
> > tell by how their stories changed or were sidetracked like a Karen
> > Carlin and Julia Postal, a Johnny Brewer. The FBI of Dallas staked
> > out Jean Hill's residence for over a year, for didn't-like-the-
> > testimony reasons....so we should wonder what, how, and why
> > testimonies might have been 'conveniently' streamlined by the time
> > they took the grand stage. Didn't one TSBD employee get let go for
> > potential 'bad witnessing'? Maybe a fifth floor one, got a perk?
>
> > CJ- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/254681ba5f0054c8
>>> "There is no PROOF that any shots were fired from the sixth floor. The best we can say is that there is SOME evidence pro and con. " <<<
The first sentence above is certainly a 100% incorrect statement if
there ever was one.
The 6th-Floor Laundry List:
Howard Brennan.
Bob Jackson.
Mal Couch.
Amos Euins.
Arnold Rowland.
Harold Norman.
James Jarman.
Bonnie Ray Williams.
Many other "Shots Came From The TSBD" witnesses.
Rifle #C2766 found on 6th Floor.
Shells from C2766 found in SN.
CE399 (fired from C2766) found in Parkland.
CE567/569 (fired from C2766) found in limo.
If the above list, in its totality, doesn't add up to "SHOTS WERE
FIRED FROM THE SNIPER'S NEST ON THE SIXTH FLOOR ON NOVEMBER 22", then
it never gets hot in Phoenix.
dcwi...@netscape.net
> www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/25468...
>
> >>> "There is no PROOF that any shots were fired from the sixth floor. The best we can say is that there is SOME evidence pro and con. " <<<
>
> The first sentence above is certainly a 100% incorrect statement if
> there ever was one.
>
> The 6th-Floor Laundry List:
>
> Bob Jackson. WHO never could quite explain why he didn't use his *loaded* camera to get a photo of the suspect
> Mal Couch. WHO also said the shooter was at a wide-open window
> Amos Euins. WHO reporters overheard saying that the shooter was a "colored man"
> Arnold Rowland.
> Harold Norman. WHO waited 10 days before mentioning the cascading hulls & clickclickclickclick action
> James Jarman. WHO as I've shown testified wrongly that he opened Window Y (see above)
> Bonnie Ray Williams. WHO ditto re Jarman
> Many other "Shots Came From The TSBD" witnesses.
> Rifle #C2766 found on 6th Floor.
Bud
dw, if Norman, Jarman, and Williams are deemed unreliable because of
the window thing, why does your construct rely almost entirely on
information they supplied?
And if you have caught them lying, isn`t it possible that they did
see Oswald come down the steps, and decided amongst themselves to say
they didn`t?
Baldoni
Regarding laundry Welles and Buster Crabbe were diguised as laundry
workers and left Dallas in a laundry truck.
--
Count Baldoni
aeffects
"construct"? Must we remind you 5 pathetic Lone Nut posters to this
USENET board alt.conspiracy.jfk (this particular 5 responsible for
well over 50,000 posts over the years) that you need to cover your
tracks a bit better than this. Creativity boy's!
Keep it up and its back to A-ball (JFKLancer) forget about Triple-A
(alt.assassination.jfk more commonly called .johnnies) with your
pathetic amateur asses....
Walt
> www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/25468...
>
>
> The first sentence above is certainly a 100% incorrect statement if
> there ever was one.
>
> The 6th-Floor Laundry List:
>
> Howard Brennan.
Brennan said he saw a 30 to 35 year old, a175 pond man, who was
desssed in WHITE shirt and trousers, who was STANDING and bracing a
HIGH POWERED (hunting) rifle against the side of a WIDE OPEN winow as
he aimed it from that window.
> Bob Jackson.
Jackson, a news photographer claimed that he saw a rifle barrel
sticking out of an upper story window of the TSBD.... Why didn't he
take the pultzer prize winning photo?
> Mal Couch.
Couch caught a glancing glimpse of a rifle barrel being pulled back
into a window.
Couch could not have been looking at the SE corner window becauuse it
would have been impossible for any gunman to have a rifle barrel
outside of the plane of the window while sitting on a box over two
feet back from the window. The rifle would have have to have been
about FIVE feet long!
> Amos Euins.
Amos Euins saw a "pipe like thing"....Which describes an exposed
hunting rifle barrel
> Arnold Rowland.
Rowland saw a man clad in WHITE clothing STANDING behind the WIDE OPEN
window at the WEST end of the sixth floor. The man was holding a
HUNTING rifle with a telescoptic sight.
> Harold Norman.
Saw activity behind the fence on the grassy knoll and ran to the west
end of the fifth floor to get a better view of that activity.
> James Jarman.
Jarman was with Norman and also saw the activity behind the fence and
ran to the west end window.
> Bonnie Ray Williams.
Bonnie Ray williams had his upper body outside of the window and got
cement and debris in his hair whe a bullet struck the window ledge
above his head. The sound of the impact was mistaken as a muzzle
blast of a rifle on the floor above.
> Many other "Shots Came From The TSBD" witnesses.
Stupid statement without accreditation.
> Rifle #C2766 found on 6th Floor.
Big deal!!! Please present proof of ownership.....
> Shells from C2766 found in SN.
Big deal... When were those shells fired??.... Please present proof
that the were fired at the time of the murder.
> CE399 (fired from C2766) found in Parkland.
Big deal!! .... Please present proof that it was fired on the day of
the murder.
> CE567/569 (fired from C2766) found in limo.
>
> If the above list, in its totality, doesn't add up to "SHOTS WERE
> FIRED FROM THE SNIPER'S NEST ON THE SIXTH FLOOR ON NOVEMBER 22", then
> it never gets hot in Phoenix.
It might add up for a obtuse idiot that can't add........
Bud
Yah, look the word up if it is giving you trouble. A typical dw
construction, "this means this, which means this means this, which
means this means this". Followed by "the witness said this, which
doesn`t make sense to me, so I`ll change it to this". Followed by "I
don`t like what the witness said here, so I`ll just disregard it".
> Must we remind you 5 pathetic Lone Nut posters to this
> USENET board alt.conspiracy.jfk (this particular 5 responsible for
> well over 50,000 posts over the years) that you need to cover your
> tracks a bit better than this. Creativity boy's!
You kooks need to employ less creativity, and apply a little more
reality.
> Keep it up and its back to A-ball (JFKLancer) forget about Triple-A
> (alt.assassination.jfk more commonly called .johnnies) with your
> pathetic amateur asses....
What are Walt and dw but self-appointed amateur sleuths? They`ve
shown no aptitude for the task, it`s more like watching chimps work on
a 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle... sometimes the pieces go up their noses,
sometimes they chew on them, but never do they properly connect two
together.
Bud
> On 7 Sep, 21:25, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/25468...
>
> > >>> "There is no PROOF that any shots were fired from the sixth floor. The best we can say is that there is SOME evidence pro and con. " <<<
>
> > The first sentence above is certainly a 100% incorrect statement if
> > there ever was one.
>
> > The 6th-Floor Laundry List:
>
> > Howard Brennan.
>
> Brennan said he saw a 30 to 35 year old, a175 pond man, who was
> desssed in WHITE shirt and trousers, who was STANDING and bracing a
> HIGH POWERED (hunting) rifle against the side of a WIDE OPEN winow as
> he aimed it from that window.
Walt is improving, he only told three lies about what Brennan said
this time. He didn`t give a set weight, he gave a range, he didn`t say
the pants the man was wearing were white, and he didn`t say the rifle
was on the side of the window, he said the "sill".
> > Bob Jackson.
>
> Jackson, a news photographer claimed that he saw a rifle barrel
> sticking out of an upper story window of the TSBD.... Why didn't he
> take the pultzer prize winning photo?
>
> > Mal Couch.
>
> Couch caught a glancing glimpse of a rifle barrel being pulled back
> into a window.
> Couch could not have been looking at the SE corner window becauuse it
> would have been impossible for any gunman to have a rifle barrel
> outside of the plane of the window while sitting on a box over two
> feet back from the window. The rifle would have have to have been
> about FIVE feet long!
Unless the gunman had arms.
> > Amos Euins.
>
> Amos Euins saw a "pipe like thing"....Which describes an exposed
> hunting rifle barrel
Which describes a rifle barrel. What window did Euins indicate he
saw that "pipe-like thing in", Walt?
> > Arnold Rowland.
>
> Rowland saw a man clad in WHITE clothing
Not true, of course. Rowland said the shirt was "white or light blue
or a color such as that". He said the pants were "dark slacks or blue
jeans".
> STANDING behind the WIDE OPEN
> window at the WEST end of the sixth floor. The man was holding a
> HUNTING rifle with a telescoptic sight.
He called in a "hi-powered rifle" in his affidavit.
> > Harold Norman.
>
> Saw activity behind the fence on the grassy knoll and ran to the west
> end of the fifth floor to get a better view of that activity.
Did he say he saw activity BEHIND the fence, Walt?
> > James Jarman.
>
> Jarman was with Norman and also saw the activity behind the fence and
> ran to the west end window.
There was activity on the knoll. Walt wants to pretend their
attention was caught by a shooter, something none of these three
witnesses indicated.
> > Bonnie Ray Williams.
>
> Bonnie Ray williams had his upper body outside of the window and got
> cement and debris in his hair whe a bullet struck the window ledge
> above his head. The sound of the impact was mistaken as a muzzle
> blast of a rifle on the floor above.
<snicker> Walt knows better than the people there. Did three bullets
hit above their heads, thats how many Norman placed above his head.
> > Many other "Shots Came From The TSBD" witnesses.
>
> Stupid statement without accreditation.
You are unaware of any witnesses who said they thought the shots
they heard came from the TSBD? Some reasearcher you are.
> > Rifle #C2766 found on 6th Floor.
>
> Big deal!!! Please present proof of ownership.....
Would you like fries with your photos, prints, testimony and
handwriting on the order form?
> > Shells from C2766 found in SN.
>
> Big deal... When were those shells fired??.... Please present proof
> that the were fired at the time of the murder.
Were they there when the flooring crew was working in that area?
> > CE399 (fired from C2766) found in Parkland.
>
> Big deal!! .... Please present proof that it was fired on the day of
> the murder.
Proof, as in absolute proof? Has is such a thing attained? Perhaps
you should lower the bar to "what is reasonable to believe", you might
actually make some progress figuring out this case.
> > CE567/569 (fired from C2766) found in limo.
>
> > If the above list, in its totality, doesn't add up to "SHOTS WERE
> > FIRED FROM THE SNIPER'S NEST ON THE SIXTH FLOOR ON NOVEMBER 22", then
> > it never gets hot in Phoenix.
>
> It might add up for a obtuse idiot that can't add........
I`m afraid you need to be removed from this case, after so many years
you still can`t get easy to look up basics correct. We`re trying to
get to the truth here, and you are just too sloppy and loose with the
facts.
Walt
> On Sep 8, 11:51 am, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 7 Sep, 21:25, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > >www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/25468...
>
> > > >>> "There is no PROOF that any shots were fired from the sixth floor. The best we can say is that there is SOME evidence pro and con. " <<<
>
> > > The first sentence above is certainly a 100% incorrect statement if
> > > there ever was one.
>
> > > The 6th-Floor Laundry List:
>
> > > Howard Brennan.
>
> > Brennan said he saw a 30 to 35 year old, a175 pond man, who was
> > desssed in WHITE shirt and trousers, who was STANDING and bracing a
> > HIGH POWERED (hunting) rifle against the side of a WIDE OPEN winow as
> > he aimed it from that window.
>
> Walt is improving, he only told three lies about what Brennan said
> this time. He didn`t give a set weight, he gave a range, he didn`t say
> the pants the man was wearing were white, and he didn`t say the rifle
> was on the side of the window, he said the "sill".
Hey moron..... Is a person in their "early thirties" between 30 and
35? Brennan said the gunman he saw could have been as heavy as 175
pounds...or as light as 165 pounds. Oswald weighed 140 pounds.
Brennan said the man that he saw with a HIGH POWERED (hunting) rifle,
which was possibly a Winchester 30-30, was wearing a dingy white shirt
and his trousers were a SHADE LIGHTER than his dingy WHITE shirt.
Brennan said the man was STANDING and he could see all of the man from
his hips to the top of his head...... So he couldn't have been
steadying the rifle on the window SILL. Brennan had to have been
referring to the SIDE of the window as part of the window sill.
>
> > > Bob Jackson.
>
> > Jackson, a news photographer claimed that he saw a rifle barrel
> > sticking out of an upper story window of the TSBD.... Why didn't he
> > take the pultzer prize winning photo?
>
> > > Mal Couch.
>
> > Couch caught a glancing glimpse of a rifle barrel being pulled back
> > into a window.
> > Couch could not have been looking at the SE corner window becauuse it
> > would have been impossible for any gunman to have a rifle barrel
> > outside of the plane of the window while sitting on a box over two
> > feet back from the window. The rifle would have have to have been
> > about FIVE feet long!
>
> Unless the gunman had arms.
Good retort Dud....If you intended to display your stupidity.
>
> > > Amos Euins.
>
> > Amos Euins saw a "pipe like thing"....Which describes an exposed
> > hunting rifle barrel
>
> Which describes a rifle barrel. What window did Euins indicate he
> saw that "pipe-like thing in", Walt?
If Euins had been describing a Mannlicher Carcano barrel it's doubtful
he'd have described a couple of inches of exposed barrel as a "pipe
like thing"
>
> > > Arnold Rowland.
>
> > Rowland saw a man clad in WHITE clothing
>
> Not true, of course. Rowland said the shirt was "white or light blue
> or a color such as that".
Thank you..... you've just admitted that the man was NOT Lee Oswald.
The investigators said that Oswald was wearing a REDDISH BROWN shirt
at the time of the shooting.
He said the pants were "dark slacks or blue
> jeans".
>
> > STANDING behind the WIDE OPEN
> > window at the WEST end of the sixth floor. The man was holding a
> > HUNTING rifle with a telescoptic sight.
>
> He called in a "hi-powered rifle" in his affidavit.
Rowland went on to make it clear that the rifle he saw in the gunmans
hands was a HUNTING RIFLE.
>
> > > Harold Norman.
>
> > Saw activity behind the fence on the grassy knoll and ran to the west
> > end of the fifth floor to get a better view of that activity.
>
> Did he say he saw activity BEHIND the fence, Walt?
>
> > > James Jarman.
>
> > Jarman was with Norman and also saw the activity behind the fence and
> > ran to the west end window.
>
> There was activity on the knoll. Walt wants to pretend their
> attention was caught by a shooter, something none of these three
> witnesses indicated.
>
> > > Bonnie Ray Williams.
>
> > Bonnie Ray williams had his upper body outside of the window and got
> > cement and debris in his hair whe a bullet struck the window ledge
> > above his head. The sound of the impact was mistaken as a muzzle
> > blast of a rifle on the floor above.
>
> <snicker> Walt knows better than the people there. Did three bullets
> hit above their heads, thats how many Norman placed above his head.
I have a photo that shows the pockmark left by that bullet.....and a
photo that shows the debris falling toward Bonnie Ray Williams head.
>
> > > Many other "Shots Came From The TSBD" witnesses.
>
> > Stupid statement without accreditation.
>
> You are unaware of any witnesses who said they thought the shots
> they heard came from the TSBD? Some reasearcher you are.
>
> > > Rifle #C2766 found on 6th Floor.
>
> > Big deal!!! Please present proof of ownership.....
>
> Would you like fries with your photos, prints, testimony and
> handwriting on the order form?
The ORDER FORM!!??.... Can you prove that Oswald didn't order that
rifle at the behest of another man?? Perhaps the man wasn't a
citizen and wanted Oswald to order the rifle for him, or simply didn't
want any paper trail leading to him. The Order form is NOT proof of
ownership!.
>
> > > Shells from C2766 found in SN.
>
> > Big deal... When were those shells fired??.... Please present proof
> > that the were fired at the time of the murder.
>
> Were they there when the flooring crew was working in that area?
Don't know.......... and neither do you.
>
> > > CE399 (fired from C2766) found in Parkland.
>
> > Big deal!! .... Please present proof that it was fired on the day of
> > the murder.
>
> Proof, as in absolute proof? Has is such a thing attained? Perhaps
> you should lower the bar to "what is reasonable to believe", you might
> actually make some progress figuring out this case.
The pristine condition of CE 399 fairly SCREAMS of being fired into a
bullet trap. Never in all of history has so much damage been
attributed to an undamaged bullet..... Only a unthinking sucker would
believe that CE 399 was fired on the day of the assassination.
>
> > > CE567/569 (fired from C2766) found in limo.
>
> > > If the above list, in its totality, doesn't add up to "SHOTS WERE
> > > FIRED FROM THE SNIPER'S NEST ON THE SIXTH FLOOR ON NOVEMBER 22", then
> > > it never gets hot in Phoenix.
>
> > It might add up for a obtuse idiot that can't add........
>
> I`m afraid you need to be removed from this case,
Yer a liar.... You'd love it if I'd go away.
after so many years
> you still can`t get easy to look up basics correct. We`re trying to
> get to the truth here, and you are just too sloppy and loose with the
> facts.- Hide quoted text -
dcwi...@netscape.net
No, I'm never a normal guy. Strange how sacrosanct that 6th floor is,
even to CTers...!
dw
dcwi...@netscape.net
Oh! the immensity of that "almost"! But, yes, without Window Y & the
photos which show the shelves between the SW corner & NW corner of the
5th floor, I'd be focussing on them less. Even then, tho, there are
provocative changes in their ongoing testimony/statements....
dw
>
> And if you have caught them lying, isn`t it possible that they did
> see Oswald come down the steps, and decided amongst themselves to say
> they didn`t?
If so, you've caught them carrying as big a cover-up as I have!
dcwi...@netscape.net
Bud, I'm glad to hear *you* weren't self-appointed!
dw
They`ve
> shown no aptitude for the task, it`s more like watching chimps work on
> a 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle... sometimes the pieces go up their noses,
> sometimes they chew on them, but never do they properly connect two
> together.
>
>
>
> > > And if you have caught them lying, isn`t it possible that they did
> > > see Oswald come down the steps, and decided amongst themselves to say
> > > they didn`t?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
dcwi...@netscape.net
Well, he said he saw it in the hands of a "colored man". You tell me
what window that was!
dw
> facts.- Hide quoted text -
Walt
Hey Don..... I think we've just received a high compliment.