JFK Debates
David Von Pein
DEBATING THE JFK CASE...............
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT -- The JFK Assassination: The Ongoing "Lone Assassin vs.
Conspiracy" Debate.
FEATURED TEXT -- Archived JFK Forum Messages From November 2005,
January 2006, February 2006, April 2006, October 2006, and March 2007.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CTer (A CONSPIRACY THEORIST) -- We don't wanna hear that {Lone Nut}
garbage anymore.
DVP (DAVID VON PEIN) -- Who cares what you want to hear? The evidence
favoring Lee Harvey Oswald's sole guilt isn't going to suddenly
change. And anyone with a single working brain cell knows this to be
true.
I recently re-watched the WFAA-TV (ABC) as-it-happened coverage of
11/22/63, and took note of how ZERO of the witnesses interviewed
(including WFAA newsmen Jay Watson and Jerry Haynes) heard more than
three shots that day.
Elm Street witness Bill Newman heard just two shots. Abraham Zapruder,
also interviewed on WFAA-TV on November 22, heard either 2 or 3 shots,
but no more than three. And yet people like Robert Groden have the
guts to purport up to a 10-shot shooting event.
And yet, somehow, virtually all witnesses failed to hear more than
half of those Groden-proposed shots....with a huge percentage of the
witnesses hearing an exact number of shots that equates to the number
of bullet shells found in the Book Depository's sniper's perch.
Convenient for those plotters, huh?
How do CTers explain this basic "Three Shots" statistic among most
witnesses? It can't be explained away with "silenced"
weapons...otherwise most CTers would have to totally abandon the
notion that ANY witnesses accurately heard any "Knoll" shots at all.
Conspiracy theories run the gamut from silly, to crazy, to ludicrous,
to outright impossible. Take your pick.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/5ac4a7c8a086bb36
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/d24cfcf0d0f8894b
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- How do you explain the fact that the plurality of witnesses
said that the shots came from the grassy knoll?
DVP -- You surely aren't purporting that "plurality" equates to
"majority"...are you? If you are suggesting that, you're mixed up big-
time. Because far more witnesses heard shots ONLY from the general
direction of the TSBD than they did from the Grassy Knoll area.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/shots4.jpg
And how do the conspiracy theorists conveniently explain away the
amazingly-low percentage of less than 5% of witnesses who heard shots
from more than just a single distinct direction (front or rear)?
Out of hundreds of witnesses, to have just 4 or 5 say they heard shots
from BOTH front and rear is extremely telling data -- which is data
that (via common sense) indicates the likelhood that shots came from
almost certainly only a SINGLE location (which has to be the Texas
School Book Depository, which is the only VERIFIED location of any of
the Dealey Plaza gunfire).
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- It's bizarre to me that so many here are anxious to viciously
attack Jim Garrison and Oliver Stone, with no proof that either of
them is a liar.
DVP -- Oh my heavens (and My Goodness)!! You've got to be joking with
this statement! No proof that Garrison lied??
Have you ever read Garrison's pack of lies within his October 1967
Playboy Magazine interview? That article/interview is so full of
obvious Garrison-spewed distortions and outright falsehoods, it's
staggering.
Have a good look. Here it is:
http://www.jfklancer.com/Garrison2.html
Anyone who has looked into the Kennedy assassination case (even in
just a cursory fashion) can easily debunk many of Garrison's obvious
lies that he spouted in that lengthy Playboy piece. Not to mention the
additional surplus of distortions that Garrison presented to the
American public in January 1968 during his interview with Johnny
Carson on "The Tonight Show".
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Here are some excerpts from Garrison's '68 "Tonight Show" appearance:
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Listen to the complete Garrison/Carson interview here:
http://www.jfk-online.com/jgcarson1.mp3
http://www.jfk-online.com/jgcarson2.mp3
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- What proof can you offer that Paul O'Connor was "wrong"? Paul
was there {at JFK's autopsy}, you were not.
DVP -- And guess who else was also there? -- Drs. Humes, Finck, and
Boswell. And they signed the autopsy report. Paul did not. The same
report you claim is full of feces.
You evidently don't have a single problem when it comes to believing
the ridiculous notion that all three autopsy doctors would
deliberately falsify the most important document they'd ever sign-off
on in their lives...right?
Is everything that is written within the "Supplementary Autopsy
Report" regarding JFK's brain all one big lie too?
And who was it, by the way, who wrote all of the "fiction" that's
described in that Supplementary Report re. the details of the brain
that Paul O'Connor said never existed at the autopsy?
Did Dr. James Humes do that all by himself? Or did he call in Stephen
King to help him pen a few choice bits of fiction to place in the
final draft of the report?
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- The gun that {Oswald} had in the Texas Theater was a "special"
that would have caused all the cartridges to bulge. None found at the
{Tippit murder} scene had that effect.
DVP -- And yet (some how, some miraculous way) ALL of those cartridges
were proven to have been fired from Oswald's .38 revolver (bulges or
no bulges). All the cops are liars, right?
Or: Did the "plotters/planters" slip up (yet again)? They planted used
cartridges that really DIDN'T come from Oswald's .38....but the cops
just went along with the plot anyway and said the shells WERE from
Oswald's gun. Is that about the size of it?
Make any sense...either way you slice it? (Maybe to a conspiracy kook
it does; but not to me.)
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- Oswald was identified as being in the theater prior to the
scheduled 1:20 showing of the movie by people who sat next to him and
who served him popcorn.
DVP -- So, let's re-create the scene (Via your "Conspiracy
Version")......
1.) Lee Harvey Oswald was inside the theater prior to 1:20 PM on
11/22/63.
2.) He then has a compulsive desire (after apparently paying for his
theater ticket) to get up and leave the theater prior to 1:50 PM.
3.) He then decides to act kinda "funny" in Johnny Brewer's shoe-store
entrance. (LHO's young daughter, Junie, needed shoes remember...maybe
he was browsing for shoes for Junie.)
4.) Then Oswald, after obviously not wanting to watch the police cars
roar by on Jefferson Boulevard, decides to go BACK into the theater he
was already in "prior to 1:20". (He just wanted to stretch his legs I
guess, and act kinda "funny" while he's stretching them. I hope he got
a "pass" to exit the theater and re-enter...did he show this "pass" to
cashier Julia Postal, or to anybody else? No, he didn't. Oh well.)
Any other stupid "Texas Theater" theories you'd like to get off your
chest?
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- Oswald didn't kill Tippit. Think for yourself just for once.
DVP -- Now you're just being flat-out stupid. Because nothing will
EVER turn Lee H. Oswald into an innocent man when it comes to the J.D.
Tippit murder. And anyone who has merely a hazy knowledge of the vast
evidence against LHO in the Tippit killing would conclude that Oswald
was guilty.
Only a person who WANTS (desperately!) a "conspiracy" to exist in
connection with the JFK assassination could think that Oswald was not
guilty of murdering Officer J.D. Tippit. And to WANT a conspiracy to
exist at ANY cost is also just flat-out stupid.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/4d1790303e6fcc19
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- There have been numerous cases where the bullet just STOPS
inside soft flesh. But almost every one of those cases involves a low-
caliber bullet or lower-velocity bullet.
DVP -- Precisely. And just WHY would these so-called "professional hit
men" who were shooting at the President (as many CTers believe)
utilize TWO such low-powered weapons on 11/22/63? It's goofy as all
get out. But, it looks like you're stuck with such nonsense via any
type of pro-conspiracy, anti-SBT theory. Good luck in getting that
craziness off the ground.
Let's listen in as the "Assassination Conspiracy Team" discusses their
multi-shooter plan as of November 21st, 1963:*
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/0b9d88a1b8c19183
* = The exact "Patsy Plot" scenario may vary from the scenario
purported within the above weblink, depending upon your degree of
"Conspiracy Disease".
For example, "Charlie The Umbrella Dude" can be replaced by "Maurice,
A Knoll Sniper" if you wish. But in such a version, Maurice must be
utilizing either a low-powered rifle or he must have fired a bad round
or a misfired round into JFK's neck from the front.
Please also remember to garner the proper patent numbers from the U.S.
Patent Office for any and all individual "Assassination Shooting
Scenarios Heavy On Lunacy, Etc." (aka "ASSHOLE", for short).
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- If the Badge Man is real, he still won't implicate the whole
operation, since very few, if any, actually saw him in real life.
DVP -- Please take a breath....pause for a second....and re-read the
above remark again. ..... Now, can you see how utterly silly that
comment is? If not, you're in trouble.
Because if Badge Man is "real", and is a real gunman firing real
bullets at JFK's head, and if he hits JFK with any of his shots, then
just HOW is he not going to somehow "implicate the whole
operation" (i.e., blow the whole "Patsy Plot" to bits by just BEING A
FRONTAL GUNMAN, period)?
Or are you purporting that Badge Man missed with his shot(s)? Or is he
just merely 'window dressing' of some ilk? If so, why is he there at
all? Makes no sense.
So, if Badge Man is "real", his presence is certainly going to be made
known if he HITS THE PRESIDENT, which many CTers believe did happen
(with those same CTers believing that the wound was magically
eradicated by cover-up operatives at a Conspiracy BatCave in the
Dallas sewer system somewhere, or elsewhere).
That theory resides in the "Nutty" file, along with all of the other
pro-conspiracy nonsense.
So, regardless of whether many witnesses (or any) physically saw Mr.
"Badge Man" or not....his "presence" is certainly going to throw a big
monkey-wrench in that "Oswald Lone Patsy Plot" if his bullets hit
anyone in Dealey Plaza.
http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/badgeman.htm
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/59e025a70efa9ef5
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- Is it coincidental that LHO worked right on the parade route?
DVP -- Yes. Absolutely. Positively. To believe otherwise, you're going
to have to explain HOW Mr. Oswald (or the "plotters" who were pulling
his weak-minded strings) were able to FORESEE THE FUTURE.
Oswald started working at the Book Depository on October 16, 1963. Not
a person alive knew for certain that a motorcade was going to take
place in Dallas until WEEKS after that October date (let alone that
such a parade would take JFK directly past the building Oswald worked
in).
To believe Oswald's being where he was on November 22 was NOT a
complete coincidence and happenstance and luck of the draw -- you have
no choice but to implicate SEVERAL different people in a conspiracy to
set Oswald up and "put" him in the TSBD for the sole purpose of taking
the fall for JFK's murder.
These people include individuals such as Ruth Paine, Linnie Randle,
and 19-year-old kid Wesley Frazier -- all of whom would have had ZERO
reasons whatsoever to want to get involved in such a heinous plot in
the first place.
For instance, no CTer has yet to provide one good, solid, believable
reason for WHY Ruth Paine or Wes Frazier would want to set Lee Oswald
up for killing their own President.
And even if somebody DOES come up with even a half-baked CT-slanted
reason for why those people would want to do this -- there's still
that OTHER large calendar-related obstacle to overcome (which can
never be overcome, no matter WHAT motives Paine, et al, may have
possessed) -- and that's the fact that nobody could have known of the
motorcade route until (at the earliest) the morning of Tuesday,
November 19th, 1963...just a mere three days prior to Kennedy's
arrival in Dallas.
Did the "plotters" just get extremely LUCKY when they "placed" LHO in
the TSBD? And did that dirty, rotten, evil, conspiratorial henchwoman
named Ruth Paine say this to her co-plotters in mid-October '63?.....
[RUTH PAINE IMITATION ON....]
Hey, Wesley and Linnie -- You know I think that the husband of that
woman I have staying with me just might be an ideal patsy to take the
lone fall in the killing of President Kennedy.
I really like JFK and don't have any real reason to want to conspire
with others to bump the guy off, but hey, when a perfect patsy just
falls into your lap like this Lee Oswald guy has done...you gotta go
with the flow, right?
Okay, so I'll call up the Depository manager and see if Lee can get
hired there. I'm just taking a guess that JFK will drive right past
the building MORE THAN A MONTH FROM NOW, and ON A WORK DAY when
Oswald's inside the building -- but that's a chance we'll just have to
take.
I don't have any knowledge at all of President Kennedy's visit to
Dallas, and even less information about any possible motorcade (let
alone the exact routing)...but we've gotta start somewhere, right?
So, what do you guys say? You with me, Linnie? Wesley? You two don't
mind putting your lives on the chopping block to frame this guy, do
you? Come on! Let's do this! It'll be great!
Just think of the rewards in the end! Cars! Furs! Houses! Cash!
Prison! And looking over our shoulders thinking the cops are gonna nab
us every time we step outside! What a fabulous plan!!
[/RUTH PAINE OFF]
Anybody care to buy a share of the above nonsense? I'd love it if some
defense lawyer were to present such a cockeyed theory to a jury. The
laughter would be so loud from the courtroom, you'd probably never get
the jury up off the floor.
But the conspiracy buffs who believe that Oswald was "planted" in the
Depository in mid-October of '63 are going to HAVE to "buy" something
similar to the above "Mock Ruth Paine Plot" in order to believe Lee
Harvey Oswald's presence in the Texas School Book Depository on
11/22/63 was NOT the result of pure ordinary coincidence and
happenstance.
David Von Pein
MORE DEBATES...........
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT -- The JFK Assassination: The Ongoing "Lone Assassin vs.
Conspiracy" Debate.
FEATURED TEXT -- Archived JFK Forum Messages From December 2005, May
2006, June 2006, October 2006, and November 2006.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CTer (A CONSPIRACY THEORIST) -- You mean the paper bag which was not
photographed? You mean the paper bag which did not come from TSBD
paper? You mean the paper bag which was too short to hold a MC rifle?
You mean the paper bag which had no rifle indentations? You mean the
paper bag which had no oil residue?
DVP (DAVID VON PEIN) -- Pretty doggone sloppy of the "Let's Frame Lee
Harvey Oswald" crew, wasn't it? To be THAT careless with an important
piece of LHO-incriminating evidence like the brown paper bag.
"They" (i.e., the proverbial forever-unseen and always-unidentified
"plotters"/"henchmen"/"silly bumbling boobs") need to have that paper
bag linked to Oswald and his rifle, so they do all they can to make
sure it can NEVER be linked to LHO??? Is that what you're saying here?
Kinda sounds like it. A smart plan indeed, wasn't it?
But back here in the world of reality --- The prints on the bag (in
EXACTLY the places that perfectly corroborate Buell Wesley Frazier's
testimony of how Oswald carried a very similar-looking package into
the Book Depository on 11/22/63) provide ample proof that the bag was
Oswald's and that Oswald handled it that very same day.
Only a rabid CTer would add up the paper-bag evidence and come to the
conclusion that Oswald did NOT take a bag up to that sixth floor on
November 22nd.
But then, per the CTers, everything that could have POSSIBLY been
"faked" by the cops WAS positively faked (naturally). I'm still
wondering, though, if the bag was supposedly "planted", how the DPD
managed to get Oswald's prints on that bag? And in the PERFECT places
on the bag to match Wes Frazier's "it was cupped in his right hand"
testimony to boot.
Those plotters were amazing. They could fake anything it seems. But it
should make a CTer wonder why "they" failed to make the bag the right
size though....per CT beliefs, that is....not by the REAL
measurements, which reveal that the rifle (34.8 inches at its
lengthiest when broken down) could easily fit inside the bag (38
inches).
Conspiracy math must somehow have 38 being a SMALLER number than 34.8
I guess. Go figure. .....
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0255b.htm
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/bag.jpg
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/rifle.jpg
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/f5b95bb50b412e61
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- Multiple shooters from multiple positions, firing in-synch,
would cause confusion as to where shots were coming from, and
ultimately make it seem plausible they came from wherever would be
convenient.
DVP -- And just exactly WHY would the assassins want to "confuse"
everybody about the shot direction? Especially when they COULD fire
shots from ONLY the place where their patsy is supposed to be located
(the TSBD), thereby creating sounds from the only place they WANT or
NEED to have shots heard by witnesses?
Why needlessly complicate and "confuse"....when they could just DO IT
RIGHT to start with?
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- The limo was washed right after it arrived at Parkland. You
don't assume the bullets plus fragments could have been made to
"disappear" right there?
DVP -- Another level of CTer ignorance has been reached with the post
above. For, in order to believe in what this CTer is saying here
(i.e., all of the bullets that "replace" the SBT got swept up by the
"limo clean-up/cover-up" crew), we'd necessarily have to believe that
BOTH of the bullets that struck JFK in the neck and back (per the "2
bullets hit him but never went through him" scenario) just happened to
fall out of Kennedy while he was still in the limousine during the 5-
minute ride to the hospital...and then were conveniently picked up by
some conspirator. (Did Jackie dig two bullets out of her husband's
body during the ride to Parkland? Is she "in" on the cover-up too?)
Plus, of course, we'd also have to believe that the separate (CT)
bullet that struck Governor Connally (or maybe even two bullets, per
some theorists who think JBC was struck twice instead of just once)
also just happened to fall out of him too and into the limo to be
snatched up by a plotter.
Mighty, mighty convenient, wasn't it, to have EVERY bullet magically
fall out of the bodies, right there in the limo, in order to be easily
seen and recovered by only evil henchmen just after the shooting?
These conspirators who pulled off this plot/cover-up/Patsy scheme
should definitely have won the 1963 Academy Award for "Best Special
Effects In A Fictional Drama" -- because they certainly earned that
distinction.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/dd7ec49b344e2c13
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- Nobody saw LHO bring the rifle to work, appear on the sixth
floor, and shoot JFK.
DVP -- Would you really expect a person (who wants to kill a President
from his workplace) to waltz right on in to the building, fully-
assembled rifle in hand, and shout from the lunchroom -- "Hey guys,
lookie here, see this rifle? I'm gonna use it at noontime to shoot
JFK. Just wanted you to know. See ya."?
~LOL!~
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- The shell casings from the Tippit killing got changed. An
officer wrote his initials on them. Where did they go?
DVP -- That CTer KNOWS the shells "got changed" somehow. Amazing. And
just HOW did this "change" take place, I ponder? It was the DPD right?
They substituted the "real shells" with ones from Oswald's
revolver...right?
Did the DPD, prior to the Tippit murder, just happen to have a few
spent shells to use as the phony evidence here? Or did they fire four
shots from Oswald's gun after LHO was apprehended? Which way was it?
A definitive answer would be nice, since you're accusing the Dallas
Police Department of a rather heinous criminal act here of framing an
innocent man for first-degree murder. So something other than just
"They Got Changed" would be useful, don't you agree?
The truth of the matter is that the DPD policeman in question (J.M.
Poe) probably never did mark the Tippit bullet shells. He told
Detective James Leavelle he didn't recall marking them.
On pages 263 and 265 of Dale Myers' superb book on the J.D. Tippit
murder ("With Malice"), we find this information:
"Poe did not mark them {the two spent bullet shells}", Detective James
Leavelle said. "There was no reason to mark them. There is an evidence
bag that is marked with the offense number along with your initials.
The evidence goes to the crime lab where it is checked and returned to
the bag and kept there until trial. I have run hundreds through that
way with no trouble and have never been contested on it", says
Leavelle.
Leavelle continues: "I talked to Poe. He said he didn't remember
marking them. But, that is something we didn't do back then."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/4d1790303e6fcc19
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- CE399 could have indeed come from near the top of the Dal-Tex
building.
DVP -- Sure, it could have (but only in a conspiracy-oriented world
that ignores these little facts):
1.) Bullet CE399 was traced to Oswald's rifle, which is a rifle that
was found in the TSBD very shortly after the assassination, not the
Dal-Tex.
2.) Three spent shells from Oswald's rifle were found in the TSBD, not
the Dal-Tex.
3.) Oswald was physically seen firing a rifle from the TSBD, not from
the Dal-Tex.
4.) Most of the witnesses heard shots from the TSBD, not the Dal-Tex.
5.) Police Officer Marrion Baker immediately ran into the TSBD, not
the Dal-Tex. (As far as I'm aware, not a single policeman or witness
or anyone ran into the Dal-Tex Building, expecting to find a shooter
there.)
6.) Jarman, Norman, and Williams heard the shooting taking place
directly above their fifth-floor window in the TSBD, not the Dal-Tex.
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- John Connally saw the President "slump" out of the corner of
his eye before he felt any impact.
DVP -- And then John Connally evidently lied about this ultra-
important fact for the rest of his life. Right?
Or: He simply FORGOT that he saw the President "slump" when he gave
his official testimony later to the WC and the HSCA? Is that correct?
And he also forgot about the "slump" remark whenever he talked about
his vivid recollections of the event on various JFK documentaries and
in TV interviews over the years. Right?
How on Earth could he NOT include this very critical "I Saw JFK
Slumping" remark in EVERY ONE of the many interviews he gave if it
were, in fact, true? Including in his under-oath statements to the WC,
where he is as clear as a bell regarding this point of seeing JFK vs.
not seeing him.....
"This almost sounds incredible, I am sure, since we were in the car
with them. But again I will repeat very briefly when what I believe to
be the shot first occurred. I turned to my right, which was away from
both of them, of course, and looked out and could see neither {JFK &
Jackie}, and then as I was turning to look into the back seat where I
would have seen both of them, I was hit, so I never completed the turn
at all, and I never saw either one of them after the firing started."
-- John B. Connally; 1964
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/conn_j.htm
So....Governor Connally is either a liar, or he simply misspoke during
the bedside interview in late 1963 when he said "the President had
slumped". That latter option is much more likely to be true.
The "slump" remark was probably a combination of his own version of
what he saw mixed in with a little of his wife Nellie's version of
events. Because there's no way (no how) that he's going to forget
something as important as that....especially when you factor in his
detailed, NEVER-CHANGING testimony with respect to OTHER portions of
his account of the shooting. Such as:
"I was not hit by shot #1; then I was hit; I heard but was not hit by
the third shot; it felt like a balled-up fist hit me in the back; I
looked down and could immediately see that I was covered with blood; I
did not hear the shot that hit me; They're going to kill us all; Blood
and brain tissue from the head shot fell on us; I didn't notice
anything unusual in the crowd, just the general activity of people
waving". (Paraphrasing.)
All of the above comments were repeated (nearly verbatim) every time I
ever heard Governor Connally talk about the assassination. But the "he
slumped" remark was never repeated. Ever wonder why?
Was JBC a liar? Or was he merely ASSUMING (perhaps) the President had
"slumped", because he was of the OPINION that President Kennedy had
been struck by that first shot?
Food for thought.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/741a872f58796bfe
robc...@netscape.com
Dave, you are breath of fresh air. We don't agree on this stuff but
at least you discuss evidence (yours) and try to make this a dialogue
about the assassination (mixed in with your disdain and nasty comments
for us "kooks"). I appreciate that. I look at your post more fully
later as I have to leave now.
Robert
mnhay27
To an extent I agree with you, Robert, Mr. Von Pein has clearly
studied the evidence and his opinions are usually thought provoking. I
have great repect for anyone who reaches their conclusions based upon
the evidence. However, I just don't understand the need for name-
calling. Labeling folks on the other side of the debate with charming
phrases like "kooks" and "buffs" doesn't make a person's theories any
stronger. It's just...well...childish.
tomnln
(sorry 'bout the typo)
What gives me satisfaction is that they RUN from their own
evidence/testimony>>>
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm
"mnhay27" <mnh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1193078500....@q3g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Ben Holmes
says...
It's unfortunate that DVP is so willing to lie about the evidence, then duck and
run away from defending his words.
Examples are too numerous to mention... he finally made it on to my killfilter
because he would almost *NEVER* admit or retract incorrect information.
To DVP... "discussion" involves him telling the world what Bugliosi believes...
and never defending his own words.
aeffects
wrote:
> In article <1193078500.500720.10...@q3g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, mnhay27
not that it makes any difference.... David Von Pein and Dave Reitzes =
same'o same'o
bigdog
> But, it Sure does allow for RETALIATION with KOOK-SUCKERS.
>
> (sorry 'bout the typo)
>
> What gives me satisfaction is that they RUN from their own
> evidence/testimony>>>
>
> http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htmhttp://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htmhttp://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm
>
>
> news:1193078500....@q3g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
At your age, Rossley, I'm glad to see you can still get satisfaction
from anything. Unfortunately, you've never figured out that your
worthless website is not evidence. It is just a collection tired,
stale, long debunked arguments that you have plagiarized from other
equally unreliable sources. You keep throwing this garbage out hoping
someone will actually pay attention to it. You confuse ignoring your
website with running from it. Here's a clue for you since you don't
seem to have one. There are over a billion people living in China. Not
one of them cares less about what you have on your website than I do.
Ben Holmes
says...
Oh, I really don't pay much attention to what they want to call themselves...
the trolls change names, and it really doesn't take much time to recognize 'em,
and killfile 'em.
LNT'ers who change names, still spout the same material, and still duck & run at
every opportunity.
I don't waste the time trying to figure out the scorecard - just as long as I
present the evidence and facts for lurkers to read.
tomnln
"bigdog" <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1193082721....@q3g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Glad to see you think the evidence/testimony in the WC's 26 volumes is Un
reliable.
You have to be the Queen od Assholes.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
robc...@netscape.com
> To an extent I agree with you, Robert, Mr. Von Pein has clearly
> studied the evidence and his opinions are usually thought provoking. I
> have great repect for anyone who reaches their conclusions based upon
> the evidence. However, I just don't understand the need for name-
> calling. Labeling folks on the other side of the debate with charming
> phrases like "kooks" and "buffs" doesn't make a person's theories any
> stronger. It's just...well...childish.
I agree with you, but with Dave at least we talk about the
assassination in addition to the comments. I would love no comments
too, but let's face it, it won't happen. Most of the LNers just use
insults with no evidence/disscussion.
robc...@netscape.com
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> SUBJECT -- The JFK Assassination: The Ongoing "Lone Assassin vs.
> Conspiracy" Debate.
> CTer (A CONSPIRACY THEORIST) -- We don't wanna hear that {Lone Nut}
> garbage anymore.
>
> DVP (DAVID VON PEIN) -- Who cares what you want to hear? The evidence
> favoring Lee Harvey Oswald's sole guilt isn't going to suddenly
> change. And anyone with a single working brain cell knows this to be
> true.
It's not going to change. It was non-existent in 1963 and it is still
non-existent today. I guess that why talking with LNers is so
frustrating as they only have "a single working brain cell" left.
>
> I recently re-watched the WFAA-TV (ABC) as-it-happened coverage of
> 11/22/63, and took note of how ZERO of the witnesses interviewed
> (including WFAA newsmen Jay Watson and Jerry Haynes) heard more than
> three shots that day.
Yeah like cameramen know about the sounds of gunshots? Please.
That's like saying lawyers know how a bullet will react when it hits
two people - oh wait, that is the SBT.
>
> Elm Street witness Bill Newman heard just two shots. Abraham Zapruder,
> also interviewed on WFAA-TV on November 22, heard either 2 or 3 shots,
> but no more than three. And yet people like Robert Groden have the
> guts to purport up to a 10-shot shooting event.
They were counting shots as they were ducking for their lives. Let's
see that one that went right by my right ear was shot #2 or was it
#3? Hmm. Interviews right after the shooting show people who were
still in shock and weren't thinking straight.
>
> And yet, somehow, virtually all witnesses failed to hear more than
> half of those Groden-proposed shots....with a huge percentage of the
> witnesses hearing an exact number of shots that equates to the number
> of bullet shells found in the Book Depository's sniper's perch.
> Convenient for those plotters, huh?
I guess when lawyers are bullying you and changing or omitting you
testimony any thing is possible, right?
>
> How do CTers explain this basic "Three Shots" statistic among most
> witnesses? It can't be explained away with "silenced"
> weapons...otherwise most CTers would have to totally abandon the
> notion that ANY witnesses accurately heard any "Knoll" shots at all.
I think I just did. The people that matter are the ones that are
trained in gunshot sounds and most of the police never said they only
heard 3 reports and most of them ran to the grassy knoll right away.
Those in the motorcade also said they thought they heard more than 3
reports, but again untrained people can't be relied on. That is where
the dictabelt comes in.
-------------------------------------------
>
> CTer -- How do you explain the fact that the plurality of witnesses
> said that the shots came from the grassy knoll?
>
> DVP -- You surely aren't purporting that "plurality" equates to
> "majority"...are you? If you are suggesting that, you're mixed up big-
> time. Because far more witnesses heard shots ONLY from the general
> direction of the TSBD than they did from the Grassy Knoll area.
I guess you have seen the photos of all the people running up the hill
to the knoll? I have never seen a photo of that many people
(including most of the police) running to the TBSD immediately after
the shots stopped.
> And how do the conspiracy theorists conveniently explain away the
> amazingly-low percentage of less than 5% of witnesses who heard shots
> from more than just a single distinct direction (front or rear)?
I don't know, let me guess. Not interviewing anyone who wouldn't say
what you wanted to hear as a lawyer for the WC, changing/omitting
testimony & badgering witnesses with no lawyer of their own to object
would be a good start.
>
> Out of hundreds of witnesses, to have just 4 or 5 say they heard shots
> from BOTH front and rear is extremely telling data -- which is data
> that (via common sense) indicates the likelhood that shots came from
> almost certainly only a SINGLE location (which has to be the Texas
> School Book Depository, which is the only VERIFIED location of any of
> the Dealey Plaza gunfire).
Dave, this is what the WC says. Most independent researchers who have
talked with many of the people there that day have been told by many
more than 4-5 that shots came from the front. That is the core of
this whole discussion. LNers believe every word in the WCR and CTers
based on independent corraboration don't.
> CTer -- It's bizarre to me that so many here are anxious to viciously
> attack Jim Garrison and Oliver Stone, with no proof that either of
> them is a liar.
>
> DVP -- Oh my heavens (and My Goodness)!! You've got to be joking with
> this statement! No proof that Garrison lied??
>
> Have you ever read Garrison's pack of lies within his October 1967
> Playboy Magazine interview? That article/interview is so full of
> obvious Garrison-spewed distortions and outright falsehoods, it's
> staggering.
>
> Have a good look. Here it is:
>
> http://www.jfklancer.com/Garrison2.html
Let's give equal time to the intrusion into his investigation by the
FBI and CIA who tapped a D.A'.s phone and bugged his office. This was
an elected official and they were bugging and tapping (it was
certainly illegal for the FBI to bug/tap a U.S. citizen in 1967-68 and
would be today if not for Dubya) his office to hear what he was
finding out. Why? The case is a slam dunk according you LNers? Why
all the paranoia? Why corrupt many of the staff he had? Why
assassinate his character in the press? He was a veteran with medals
for bravery and they are attacking him and making him sound gay and
drug user? So much for serving your country. Let's talk about that
Dave. Why all the fear if the evidence is so soundproof against LHO?
>
> Anyone who has looked into the Kennedy assassination case (even in
> just a cursory fashion) can easily debunk many of Garrison's obvious
> lies that he spouted in that lengthy Playboy piece. Not to mention the
> additional surplus of distortions that Garrison presented to the
> American public in January 1968 during his interview with Johnny
> Carson on "The Tonight Show".
Johnny tried to railroad this appereance too. He made Garrison write
out every topic he wanted to discuss and then Johnny came up with
questions. When Garrison realized that Johnny was trying to make him
look bad he continued with his answers beyond what they had talked
about to get his points across. Johnny was a lap dog and a bastard.
He made every comedian grovel to get on his show and would not speak
to people for going onto other shows. Loser.
> -------------------------------------------
>
> CTer -- What proof can you offer that Paul O'Connor was "wrong"? Paul
> was there {at JFK's autopsy}, you were not.
>
> DVP -- And guess who else was also there? -- Drs. Humes, Finck, and
> Boswell. And they signed the autopsy report. Paul did not. The same
> report you claim is full of feces.
Doctors that had never performed an autopsy involving forensic/
ballistic gunshots and who were fully controlled by higher officers.
Their findings are crap. The doctors had Parkland had 100% the
experience with guhshot wounds and they disagreed with everything the
Bethesda doctors said.
>
> You evidently don't have a single problem when it comes to believing
> the ridiculous notion that all three autopsy doctors would
> deliberately falsify the most important document they'd ever sign-off
> on in their lives...right?
It is called following orders. There are many things officers do in
the military they don't agree with. It is not a democracy. Also, if
they wanted to keep their careers, retirement and lives, yes.
>
> Is everything that is written within the "Supplementary Autopsy
> Report" regarding JFK's brain all one big lie too?
Probably.
>
> And who was it, by the way, who wrote all of the "fiction" that's
> described in that Supplementary Report re. the details of the brain
> that Paul O'Connor said never existed at the autopsy?
>
> Did Dr. James Humes do that all by himself? Or did he call in Stephen
> King to help him pen a few choice bits of fiction to place in the
> final draft of the report?
He probably had help as he had no experience with gunshot wounds. One
would think this might be helpful when doing an autopsy where the
victim was shot!!!!!
>
> -------------------------------------------
>
> CTer -- The gun that {Oswald} had in the Texas Theater was a "special"
> that would have caused all the cartridges to bulge. None found at the
> {Tippit murder} scene had that effect.
>
> DVP -- And yet (some how, some miraculous way) ALL of those cartridges
> were proven to have been fired from Oswald's .38 revolver (bulges or
> no bulges). All the cops are liars, right?
No, the first cop on the scene marked the automatic shells (2) with
his initials, yet when the cases were exhibited to the WC the initials
were not there. Two other bullet cases were turned into two different
police (one each) and no one knows what happened to them. So it would
have to be someone that is responsible for evidence that is guilty
here, not the cops on the scene.
> Or: Did the "plotters/planters" slip up (yet again)? They planted used
> cartridges that really DIDN'T come from Oswald's .38....but the cops
> just went along with the plot anyway and said the shells WERE from
> Oswald's gun. Is that about the size of it?
I don't know what you are refering to as the cop that inspected the
cases NEVER said they were from a revolver - he said they were from an
automatic gun.
-------------------------------------------
>
> CTer -- Oswald was identified as being in the theater prior to the
> scheduled 1:20 showing of the movie by people who sat next to him and
> who served him popcorn.
>
> DVP -- So, let's re-create the scene (Via your "Conspiracy
> Version")......
>
> 1.) Lee Harvey Oswald was inside the theater prior to 1:20 PM on
> 11/22/63.
He entered the theater at 1:05 pm, purchased a ticket and then went to
the balcony.
>
> 2.) He then has a compulsive desire (after apparently paying for his
> theater ticket) to get up and leave the theater prior to 1:50 PM.
This is wrong. He went to get popcorn at 1:15 pm and sat next to
several people prior to the 1:20 pm start of the film. One of these
was a pregnant woman and she left and was never seen again. Why enter
to see a movie and then leave before it starts? She may have been
letting someone know the Harvey Oswald was there. My guess is HO was
looking for his handler by moving around as he sat next to multiple
people/or he was setting up an alibi by making people notice him.
> 3.) He then decides to act kinda "funny" in Johnny Brewer's shoe-store
> entrance. (LHO's young daughter, Junie, needed shoes remember...maybe
> he was browsing for shoes for Junie.)
Lee Oswald never acted funny as he was the second Oswald - the one in
a t-shirt. He entered the theater around 1:30/35 pm and was the one
that didn't pay. Johnny Brewer was outside his store and noticed him
enter and not pay (according to him). He questioned the girl at the
window and she didn't see anyone. She was interviewed weeks
afterwards and still did not say she saw LO enter the theater. Only
when she testified to the WC did she suddenly remembered he may have
entered and not paid. Brewer, the nosy bum he is leaves his store and
follows LO into the theater and goes to the balcony. Not finding him
he then questions the Concession vendor about it (why he is not
minding his own business and running his own store is a mystery).
Harvey Oswald did not leave until his arrest, so he could not have
left at 1:20 pm.
>
> 4.) Then Oswald, after obviously not wanting to watch the police cars
> roar by on Jefferson Boulevard, decides to go BACK into the theater he
> was already in "prior to 1:20". (He just wanted to stretch his legs I
> guess, and act kinda "funny" while he's stretching them. I hope he got
> a "pass" to exit the theater and re-enter...did he show this "pass" to
> cashier Julia Postal, or to anybody else? No, he didn't. Oh well.)
There was no re-entry, this was the second Oswald. Harvey wore a long
brown shirt and Lee wore a white t-shirt. The police went to the
balcony and were talking with a man while the famous (Harvey) was
being arrested below. The shop owner a few doors down noticed a man
being arrested and brought out back while the famous one was coming
out the front. There was no arrest record for this other man and he
was never heard from again (seen - see the article I posted
yesterday). The other weird thing is the police mention in their logs
they talked to the manager about this, but the owner left at 1:15 pm
and there was no manager on duty at this time. Who was posing as a
manager and passing on info?
>
> Any other stupid "Texas Theater" theories you'd like to get off your
> chest?
Just the one you think happened.
> -------------------------------------------
>
> CTer -- Oswald didn't kill Tippit. Think for yourself just for once.
>
> DVP -- Now you're just being flat-out stupid. Because nothing will
> EVER turn Lee H. Oswald into an innocent man when it comes to the J.D.
> Tippit murder. And anyone who has merely a hazy knowledge of the vast
> evidence against LHO in the Tippit killing would conclude that Oswald
> was guilty.
Hazy is more apt to describe the evidence against LHO. It is all
conjecture. LHO shot no one that day.
>
> Only a person who WANTS (desperately!) a "conspiracy" to exist in
> connection with the JFK assassination could think that Oswald was not
> guilty of murdering Officer J.D. Tippit. And to WANT a conspiracy to
> exist at ANY cost is also just flat-out stupid.
I love this logic. What do we get out of a conspiracy? I would love
to believe in a single assassin. I would love to believe my
government cares about me and wants to protect me. This is not the
case. Denying it won't change it. The same can be said of LNers -
to want LHO to have acted alone at ANY cost is just-flat out stupid.
CTer -- There have been numerous cases where the bullet just STOPS
> inside soft flesh. But almost every one of those cases involves a low-
> caliber bullet or lower-velocity bullet.
>
> DVP -- Precisely. And just WHY would these so-called "professional hit
> men" who were shooting at the President (as many CTers believe)
> utilize TWO such low-powered weapons on 11/22/63? It's goofy as all
> get out. But, it looks like you're stuck with such nonsense via any
> type of pro-conspiracy, anti-SBT theory. Good luck in getting that
> craziness off the ground.
Ever hear of a dud round? They probably did shoot the Carcano a
couple of times to frame Oswald. The first rounds was a misfire and
the one that did not fully penetrate the back may have been another.
The Carcano is a low velocity gun.
bigdog
> "bigdog" <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1193082721....@q3g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 22, 2:50 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> But, it Sure does allow for RETALIATION with KOOK-SUCKERS.
>
> >> (sorry 'bout the typo)
>
> >> What gives me satisfaction is that they RUN from their own
> >> evidence/testimony>>>
>
>
> >> "mnhay27" <mnha...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:1193078500....@q3g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > At your age, Rossley, I'm glad to see you can still get satisfaction
> > from anything. Unfortunately, you've never figured out that your
> > worthless website is not evidence. It is just a collection tired,
> > stale, long debunked arguments that you have plagiarized from other
> > equally unreliable sources. You keep throwing this garbage out hoping
> > someone will actually pay attention to it. You confuse ignoring your
> > website with running from it. Here's a clue for you since you don't
> > seem to have one. There are over a billion people living in China. Not
> > one of them cares less about what you have on your website than I do.
>
> Glad to see you think the evidence/testimony in the WC's 26 volumes is Un
> reliable.
>
> You have to be the Queen od Assholes.
>
> - Show quoted text -
Wrong again, ancient one. Your website does not contain WC evidence.
It contains your twisted misinterpretations and misrepresentations of
WC evidence which is why it has absolutely no relevance to the JFK
assassination and why no intelligent person would waste a minute of
their time looking at it once they come to realize what it consists
of.
bigdog
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Robocrap, I doubt you even know the difference between an automatic
and a revolver. In case you do, are you really going to tell us J.D.
Tippit was killed with an automatic.
tomnln
own report little puppy.
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm
"bigdog" <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1193162548.4...@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
Are you Denying that the First reports from the Tippit murder scene was that
the shells came from an AUTOMATIC?
"bigdog" <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1193162710.6...@y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
bigdog
> little puppy;
>
> Are you Denying that the First reports from the Tippit murder scene was that
> the shells came from an AUTOMATIC?
>
good reason for that. CTs have no answers.
David Von Pein
of North America, I proudly present.....
"DEBATING THE JFK CASE: THE COMPLETE SERIES"!!
All sixty common-sense-filled volumes have now been electronically
packaged in one space-saving Mega-Set (below).
This series touches on virtually all of the various assassination sub-
topics -- from the SBT...to the WC...to the HSCA...to the TSBD...to
the BOH...to "I'm just a patsy"...to Badge Man...to Umbrella Man...to
the Tippit murder...to Oswald's many lies...to Dr. Humes...to Wesley
Frazier...to the "Anybody But Oswald" conspiracy theorists...and, of
course, to Vincent "Reclaiming History" Bugliosi.....
All of that "LN vs. CT" wrangling and squabbling, and lots more, can
be found (somewhere) within this 60-volume Super-Set!
So sit back, select a volume of your choice, and watch with joy as you
observe one conspiracy theory after another crumble into dust via
"DEBATING THE JFK CASE: THE COMPLETE SERIES BOXED SET"! .....
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/d64779e514304326
David Von Pein
DVP SAID:
"The evidence favoring Lee Harvey Oswald's sole guilt isn't going to
suddenly change. And anyone with a single working brain cell knows
this to be true."
ROB SAID:
"It was non-existent in 1963 and it is still non-existent today."
DVP NOW SAYS:
It's great being a conspiracy-spouting kook, isn't it? You have such
FREEDOM! And, having such freedom and not having to rely on ANY of the
real assassination evidence (which ALL spells "Oswald Was A Guilty
Bastard"), you can actually NOT feel embarrassed when typing out
incredibly-stupid nonsense, such as this sentence when talking about
the evidence favoring Oswald's guilt:
"It was non-existent in 1963 and it is still non-existent today."
I envy such freedom.
Too bad I'm not a kook.
DVP SAID:
"I recently re-watched the WFAA-TV (ABC) as-it-happened coverage of
11/22/63, and took note of how ZERO of the witnesses interviewed
(including WFAA newsmen Jay Watson and Jerry Haynes) heard more than
three shots that day."
ROB SAID:
"Yeah, like cameramen know about the sounds of gunshots? Please."
DVP NOW SAYS:
Neither of the WFAA men I mentioned were "cameramen". But that's not
important anyway, because your comment is very stupid, even if Watson
and Haynes HAD been "cameramen".
Both men mentioned hearing three gunshots (the same number also heard
by several other TV reporters who immediately reported the shooting to
America within minutes of the assassination--an assassination that
most conspiracy theorists think was carried out by multiple guns and
featured anywhere from 4 to 10 gunshots).
But, I guess Rob thinks that ONLY POLICE OFFICERS CAN ACCURATELY COUNT
GUNSHOTS. Nobody else could have possibly been able to count the
number of loud sounds (i.e., gunshots) they heard accurately. Right,
Bobby?
(Geez.)
ROB SAID:
"The people that matter are the ones that are trained in gunshot
sounds, and most of the police never said they only heard 3 reports."
DVP NOW SAYS:
Oh, really? What about the following 24 officers who did not hear more
than three gunshots? Let's have a look. ....
MR. BELIN -- "How many shots did you hear?"
OFFICER MARRION BAKER -- "Three."
~~~~~
MR. STERN -- "You cannot now recall more than two shots?"
OFFICER BOBBY HARGIS -- "That is all that I can recall remembering."
~~~~~
MR. BELIN -- "How many shots did you hear?"
OFFICER D.V. HARKNESS -- "Three."
~~~~~
MR. BALL -- "Did you hear the shots?"
OFFICER EARLE BROWN -- "Yes, sir."
MR. BALL -- "How many?"
MR. BROWN -- "Three."
~~~~~
MR. RANKIN -- "Did you hear any more than three shots?"
POLICE CHIEF JESSE CURRY -- "No, sir; I did not."
MR. RANKIN -- "Are you sure of that?"
MR. CURRY -- "I am positive of that. I heard three shots. I will never
forget it."
~~~~~
MR. BELIN -- "How many shots did you hear?"
OFFICER CLYDE HAYGOOD -- "Three."
~~~~~
MR. BALL -- "Did you hear some more shots {after the first shot}?
OFFICER B.J. MARTIN -- "Yes, sir."
MR. BALL -- "How many?"
MR. MARTIN -- "Two more shots."
~~~~~
DEPUTY SHERIFF EUGENE BOONE -- "Well, it was approximately 1 o'clock
when we heard the shots. The motorcade had already passed by us and
turned back to the north on Houston Street. And we heard what we
thought to be a shot. And there seemed to be a pause between the first
shot and the second shot and third shots--a little longer pause. And
we raced across the street there."
~~~~~
DEPUTY SHERIFF JACK FAULKNER (via the Sheriff's Report filed by
Faulkner on 11/22/63) -- "I was standing on the corner of Main and
Houston, when the presendital motorcade came by. A few seconds later I
heard three shots and the crowd began to move enmasse toward Elm
Street."
~~~~~
DEPUTY SHERIFF C.M. JONES (via the Sheriff's Report filed by Jones on
11/22/63) -- "Friday Morning, November the 22nd, 1963, between the
hours of approximately 12 noon and 12:35pm, I was standing in front of
the Criminal Courts Building talking with Allan Sweatt and Robert
Benevides and awaiting the arrival of the motorcade bearing the
President's party. The motorcade passed in front of us and everything
appeared to be in order. A few short seconds later I heard an
explosion, followed in about 3 to 5 seconds later two more explosions.
I am certain that I recognized the second two as being that of
gunfire."
~~~~~
DEPUTY SHERIFF W.W. MABRA (via the Sheriff's Report filed by Mabra on
11/27/63) -- "I and officer Orville Smith were standing on the curb in
front of {the} Criminal Courts Building, approximately 40 feet east of
Houston St., when the car bearing President Kennedy passed.
Approximately 1 minute after the car turned right onto Houston St., we
heard 3 shots."
~~~~~
DEPUTY SHERIFF A.D. McCURLEY (via the Sheriff's Report filed by
McCurley on 11/22/63) -- "I was standing at the front entrance of the
Dallas Sheriff's Office at 505 Main Street, Dallas, as the President's
motorcade passed and was watching the remainder of the parade pass
when I heard a retort [sic; report] and I immediately recognized it as
the sound of a rifle. I started running around the corner where I knew
the President's car should be, and in a matter of a few seconds heard
a second shot and then a third shot."
~~~~~
DEPUTY SHERIFF LUKE MOONEY (via the Sheriff's Report filed by Mooney
on 11/23/63) -- "I was standing in front of the Sheriff's office at
505 Main Street, Dallas, when President Kennedy and the motorcade
passed by. Within a few seconds after he had passed me and the
motorcade had turned the corner, I heard a shot, and I immediately
started running towards the front of the motorcade, and within seconds
heard a second and a third shot."
~~~~~
DEPUTY SHERIFF CHARLES P. PLAYER (via the Sheriff's Report filed by
Player on 11/22/63) -- "Mr. Decker, I watched the motorcade pass on
Record St. from your office window. After the President's car passed I
started back to my desk. I heard three shots and went back to the
window. People were running in all directions. I left the office by
the back door and went across the street to where my squad car was
parked on the side street just back of the book depository."
~~~~~
SHERIFF'S OFFICER L.C. SMITH (via the Sheriff's Report filed by Smith
on 11/22/63) -- "Just shortly before 12:30pm, Friday, November 22,
1963, I was standing in front of the Sheriff's Office on Main Street
and watched the President and his party drive by. Just a few seconds
later, I heard the first shot, which I thought was a backfire, then
the second shot and third shot rang out. I knew then that this was gun
shots and everyone else did also."
~~~~~
DEPUTY SHERIFF ALLAN SWEATT (via the Sheriff's Report filed by Sweatt
on 11/23/63) -- "At approximately 12:30 PM, Friday, November 22, 1963,
I was standing with a group of Deputy Sheriffs about 30 feat [sic]
east of the corner of Houston and Main Street on Main Street. The
president's caravan had just passed and about a minute or 2 I heard a
shot, and about 7 seconds later another shot and approximately 2 or 3
seconds later a third shot, which sounded to me like a rifle and
coming from the vicinity of Elm and Houston Street."
~~~~~
DEPUTY SHERIFF L.C. TODD (via the Sheriff's Report filed by Todd on
11/27/63) -- "On November the 22nd, 1963, I had come on duty at 9am
working the information window at the Dallas County Jail. About
12:15pm, the window was closed where I worked and I walked outside and
onto Houston Street to view the President's motorcade as it passed. A
few seconds after the President's car passed me and had turned the
corner of Houston onto Elm Street, I heard what I first thought was a
backfire. I heard a total of 3 and after the last two (2), I
immediately recognized them as being gun fire."
~~~~~
DEPUTY SHERIFF RALPH WALTERS (via the Sheriff's Report filed by
Walters on 11/23/63) -- "I was standing on Main Street in front of the
Criminal Courts Building the morning of November 22, 1963, and
observed the Presidential procession pass by. Just after it had turned
the corner and a very short time later, I heard what was [sic] shots,
3 in number."
~~~~~
DEPUTY SHERIFF EDDY "BUDDY" WALTHERS (via the Sheriff's Report filed
by Walthers on 11/22/63) -- "I was standing at the front entrance of
the Dallas Sheriff's Office when the motorcade with President Kennedy
passed. I was watching the remainder of the President's party when
within a few seconds I heard a retort [sic; report], and I immediately
recognized it to be a rifle shot. I immediately started running west
across Houston Street and ran across Elm Street and up into the
railroad yards. At this time it was not determined if, in fact, this
first retort [sic] and 2 succeeding retorts [sic] were of a rifle.
However, in my own mind, I knew."
~~~~~
SHERIFF'S OFFICER "RADIO" WATSON (via the Sheriff's Report filed by
Watson on 11/22/63) -- "I had just looked out the window of the radio
room facing Main Street and watched the Presidential parade pass and
as it turned the corner onto Record {Street}, I looked over in that
direction but was unable to see any of the vehicles from my location
and about that time I heard three loud reports, evenly spaced, which I
presumed to be rifle or shotgun blast. I looked at the time on the
radio panel and it was about 40 seconds after 12:30pm as I was calling
Dallas PD on the hot line, and I asked the operator that answered if
anything had been reported, and she said no. I told her that I heard
what I believed to be three shots, and she thought I was kidding."
~~~~~
DEPUTY SHERIFF HARRY WEATHERFORD (via the Sheriff's Report filed by
Weatherford on 11/23/63) -- "On Friday, November 22, 1963, at about
12:30 PM, I was standing in front of the Sheriff's Office watching the
Presidential Motorcade. The President's car had passed my location a
couple of minutes when I heard a loud report, which I thought was a
railroad torpedo, as it sounded as if it came from the railroad yard.
Thinking, this was a heck of a time for one to go off, then I heard a
2nd report which had more of an echo report and thought to myself that
this was a rifle, and I started toward the corner when I heard the 3rd
report."
~~~~~
DEPUTY SHERIFF JOHN WISEMAN (via the Sheriff's Report filed by Wiseman
on 11/23/63) -- "I was standing in front of the Sheriff's Office at
505 Main Street, Dallas, when the President passed and the car went
around the corner and a few more cars had passed when I heard a shot
and I knew something had happened. I ran at once to the corner of
Houston and Main Street and out into the street when the second and
third shots ran [sic; rang] out. I ran on across Houston Street, then
across the park to where a policeman was having trouble with his
motorcycle and I saw a man laying on the grass. This man laying on the
grass said the shots came from the building and he was pointing to the
old Sexton Building."
DVP Interjection --- That's kind of an interesting statement from
Wiseman there, IF the "man laying on the grass" was Bill Newman. Of
course, I suppose it could have been another man on the grass.
It's also interesting to note that Wiseman, in that same November 23rd
Sheriff's Report, says that he talked to Marilyn Sitzman just after
the shooting too....and (quoting Wiseman again): "She said the shots
came from that way and she pointed at the old Sexton Building {aka;
the TSBD}".
~~~~~
MR. FITHIAN -- "Officer, you said that as far as your memory is
concerned, you only heard one shot?"
OFFICER H.B. McLAIN {who certainly doesn't do the "More Than 3 Shots
Were Fired" CT crowd any favors} -- "Yes, sir, that is all that I can
recall. It was a loud one, but that was the only one."
~~~~~
MR. BALL -- "Did you hear any shots?"
OFFICER J.C. WHITE -- "No, sir."
DVP Interjection --- If up to SIX gunshots (or maybe up to TEN, per
Robert Groden's beliefs) were fired in Dealey Plaza that day, I wonder
how Officer White missed hearing every last one of them from his
position on top of the Triple Overpass on Elm Street?
However, a huge grain of salt must be placed beside anything this guy
White had to say, I will readily admit; because Mr. White claims that
a huge freight train was on the Overpass bridge at the exact time of
JFK's murder.
That train observation, of course, we know is false, based on the
photos and films that show no such train on the tracks above Elm
Street at that time. Such as this picture snapped by James Altgens:
www.assassinationscience.com/johncostella/jfk/intro/altgens7.jpg
ROB SAID:
"Those in the motorcade also said they thought they heard more than 3
reports."
DVP NOW SAYS:
~sigh~
Dead wrong (of course).
I know you were probably referring to JUST the policemen who were
riding in the motorcade in your above comment....but even there, you
are incorrect on several counts, because many officers in the
motorcade said they heard two or three shots (and not more than
three), including several of the officers I've listed above (such as
Baker, Hargis, Harkness, Haygood, Martin, and Police Chief Curry).
Plus -- In addition to the police officers who were riding in the
motorcade, many other people who were in the motorcade said they heard
three (or fewer) shots.
Here are just a few examples (and there are many more), with these
five examples representing the five people who were riding with JFK in
the Presidential limousine on 11/22/63.....
MR. SPECTER -- "How many {shots} did you hear in all?"
NELLIE CONNALLY -- "I heard three."
~~~~~
MR. RANKIN -- "Do you have any recollection of whether there were one
or more shots?"
JACQUELINE KENNEDY -- "Well, there must have been two. .... And those
are the only two I remember."
~~~~~
MR. SPECTER -- "Now, how many shots, or how many noises have you just
described that you heard?"
LIMO DRIVER WILLIAM GREER -- "I know there was three that I heard--
three. But I cannot remember any more than probably three. I know
there was three anyway that I heard."
~~~~~
MR. SPECTER -- "Now, in your prior testimony you described a flurry of
shells into the car. How many shots did you hear after the first noise
which you described as sounding like a firecracker?"
ROY KELLERMAN -- "Mr. Specter, these shells came in all together."
MR. SPECTER -- "Are you able to say how many you heard?"
MR. KELLERMAN -- "I am going to say two, and it was like a double
bang--bang, bang."
MR. SPECTER -- "You mean now two shots in addition to the first
noise?"
MR. KELLERMAN -- "Yes, sir; at least."
~~~~~
And Governor John Connally was a "Three Shot" witness. He heard two
shots and he felt the other one that hit him.
~~~~~
So, among the five people riding with President Kennedy in the limo,
the only person who can possibly be propped up as a "CT" type of
earwitness with respect to the number of gunshots is Secret Service
Agent Kellerman. And even HIS testimony seems to generally favor only
a "3-Shot" scenario.
ROB SAID:
"That is where the dictabelt comes in."
DVP NOW SAYS:
<large laugh goes here>
The Dictabelt evidence has been discredited entirely. For some reason,
many CTers continue to keep relying on it. Go figure that
(il)logic. .....
DEBUNKING THE ACOUSTICS/DICTABELT NONSENSE:
http://jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/acoustics.htm
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/64248615cd37c311
ROB SAID:
"Johnny {Carson} was a lap dog and a bastard."
DVP NOW SAYS:
~sigh~
Oh dear! Johnny was yet another shill working for the evil U.S.
Government, no doubt. Right?
Sounds like it's time for Rob to moved to Russia. He'd probably be
much happier there, away from the foul stench of the forever-evil
machinations of Washington's and Hollywood's "bastards".
BTW, Johnny Carson's treatment of Jim "Mega-Kook" Garrison on January
31st, 1968, on "The Tonight Show" was nothing short of brilliant.
Johnny was tough, but fair. He gave Garrison a chance to talk (at some
length) and to provide SOME proof of his wild "Oswald Didn't Shoot
Anybody" claims.
But, naturally, all we got was Garrison's screwy multi-shooter
speculation, including his theory of an assassin firing from the sewer
(one of up to FIVE gunmen that Garrison speaks of!).
Anyone who listens to that 1968 Carson/Garrison interview and comes
away with an opinion that Carson was unfair to poor Jimbo during the
lengthy interview is probably in the kooky "Anybody But Oswald" club
themselves.
Carson asked hard questions of Garrison and didn't simply let Garrison
run off at the mouth unchallenged about his silly "Oswald Never Shot A
Soul" bullshit. For that, I admire the late Mr. Carson immensely. And
so does Vince Bugliosi (which I am glad to see).....
"Johnny may have been a comedian, but he had a good, solid head
on his shoulders, and he could spot a phony, or at least an empty
vessel {meaning: Jim Garrison}, when he saw one." -- Vincent Bugliosi;
Page 1370 of "Reclaiming History" (c.2007)
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/7e730615fc2a0a14
ROB BELLOWED:
"No, the first cop on the scene marked the automatic shells (2) with
his initials..."
DVP NOW SAYS:
Would you care to prove your assertion that these were "automatic"
shells?
Of course you can't prove any such thing, because there is absolutely
no indication in the record that any "automatic" bullet shells were
ever recovered on Tenth Street in Oak Cliff after J.D. Tippit's
murder. You're dreaming that "CTer Wishful Thinking" dream once again.
And would you also please provide the absolute proof that Officer J.M.
Poe marked any shells at all on November 22, 1963?
In light of this Warren Commission testimony given by Officer Poe, I
wish you luck in proving that latter claim:
OFFICER J.M. POE -- "He {Tippit murder witness Domingo Benavides} told
me, give [sic] me the same, or similar description of the man, and
told me he was running out across this lawn. He was unloading his
pistol as he ran, and he {Benavides} picked the shells up."
MR. BALL -- "Domingo told you who was running across the lawn?"
MR. POE -- "A man; white man."
MR. BALL -- "What was he doing?"
MR. POE -- "He was unloading his pistol as he run [sic]."
MR. BALL -- "And what did he {Benavides} say?"
MR. POE -- "He said he picked the two hulls up."
MR. BALL -- "Did he hand you the hulls?"
MR. POE -- "Yes, sir."
MR. BALL -- "Did you put any markings on the hulls?"
MR. POE -- "I couldn't swear to it; no, sir."
MR. BALL -- "What did you do with the hulls?"
MR. POE -- "I turned the hulls into the crime lab, which was at the
scene."
ROB SPEWED:
"Two other bullet cases were turned into two different police
{officers} (one each), and no one knows what happened to them."
DVP NOW SAYS:
~sigh time (yet again)~
You must be cuckoo to utter such insane drivel. We know EXACTLY what
happened to the "two other bullet cases" that were turned over to the
police on 11/22/63.
One of those bullet shells was found by Virginia Davis in the side
yard of her apartment. And the other empty cartridge case was found by
Virginia's sister-in-law, Barbara Davis, also in the yard of the
Davis' apartment at the corner of 10th Street and Patton Avenue (the
exact same location where BOTH of the Davis girls saw Lee Harvey
Oswald physically emptying his revolver of bullet shells immediately
after J.D. Tippit was shot).
And both of these shells found by the Davises were positively
determined to be shells that were ejected from Lee Oswald's Smith &
Wesson .38 Special revolver (Serial Number V510210). .....
JOSEPH D. NICOL -- "It is my opinion, based upon the similarity of
class and individual characteristics, that the four cartridge cases in
{Commission Exhibit} 594 were fired in the same weapon as produced the
cartridge cases in {CE} 595."
Here are the four Oswald bullet shells:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0147a.htm
ROB GUSHED:
"He {Sweet Saint Oz, or "The Second Oswald"...it's impossible to keep
track of all these imposters running around} entered the theater at
1:05 pm, purchased a ticket and then went to the balcony."
DVP NOW SAYS:
Oh, goodie, we're going to get to hear "Made-Up Conspiracy Theory
#587"! (Complete with exact times and everything...like "1:05 pm".)
Continue with your myth, I'm fascinated.....
ROB DOES CONTINUE WITH HIS MYTH (JUST AS DVP WANTED):
"He {the proverbial "Patsy For All 11/22/63 Dallas Murders", Lee H.
Oswald; or, maybe it was the LHO "imposter"....who knows?} went to get
popcorn at 1:15 pm and sat next to several people prior to the 1:20 pm
start of the film. One of these was a pregnant woman, and she left and
was never seen again. Why enter to see a movie and then leave before
it starts? She may have been letting someone know that Harvey Oswald
was there. My guess is HO was looking for his handler by moving around
as he sat next to multiple people, or he was setting up an alibi by
making people notice him."
DVP NOW SAYS:
Well, at least Rob put in the words "my guess is" near the end of the
above batch of wholly-unsupportable kookshit. I suppose we can be
thankful for that anyway.
Let's hear Chapter 3 of the fable.....
ROB WRITES "CHAPTER 3":
"Lee Oswald never acted funny {when seen by Johnny Brewer at the shoe
store}, as he was the second Oswald -- the one in a t-shirt. He
entered the theater around 1:30/35 pm and was the one that didn't
pay.
"Brewer, the nosy bum he is {in reality, Mr. Brewer was a very
underrated player in the events leading to LHO's arrest in the
theater; but, naturally, Rob The Kook must try to discredit everything
and everybody that leads to the "Oswald's Guilty" conclusion,
including Johnny Calvin Brewer}, leaves his store and follows LO into
the theater and goes to the balcony. Not finding him, he then
questions the concession vendor about it (why he is not minding his
own business and running his own store is a mystery). Harvey Oswald
did not leave until his arrest, so he could not have left at 1:20 pm."
DVP NOW SAYS:
Rob's treatment of Johnny Brewer is sickening and reprehensible. But,
as mentioned within the text of Rob's fable above, all CT-Kooks MUST
try to paint EVERY "LN" type of witness in a bad light.
But, of course, if a particular witness favors a "conspiracy" of some
kind, then that witness is treated like royalty by the CT Brigade,
with those "CT" witnesses possessing razor-sharp and ultra-keen senses
and able to recall every little "conspiratorial" detail that will
later be highlighted by kooks like Rob.
Of course, to a non-kook who examines Johnny Brewer's actions after
1:30 PM on November 22nd, Brewer's activities were perfectly
reasonable and understandable (and even heroic to a degree).
Brewer heard on the radio that a policeman had just been shot just
blocks from his shoe store. Johnny also knew, of course, that the
President had been killed a short time before the officer was shot.
Brewer suddenly hears sirens out on the street and sees a man who
looks "scared" turning his back to the street as the police cars race
by behind him. (This, probably more than any other single thing,
aroused Brewer's suspicions about the man lurking in the store's
entryway.)
So, Brewer follows the man (who was Lee Harvey Oswald without a speck
of a doubt) to the theater and watches Oswald enter the theater lobby
without paying.
But, to a CT-Kook, apparently Brewer's alert reactions are to be
snubbed and frowned upon. He should have been "minding his own
business", per a certain conspiracy-loving idiot.
OK, let's have Chapter 4 of the fictional story.....
ROB DELIVERS CHAPTER FOUR'S LUNACY:
"....This was the second Oswald. Harvey wore a long brown shirt and
Lee wore a white t-shirt. The police went to the balcony and were
talking with a man while the famous (Harvey) was being arrested below.
The shop owner a few doors down noticed a man being arrested and
brought out back while the famous one was coming out the front. There
was no arrest record for this other man and he was never heard from
again."
DVP NOW SAYS:
~LOL time once more~
I can see that Rob's favorite book is, undoubtedly, Mr. Armstrong's
tripe-filled "Harvey And Lee", wherein Armstrong has BOTH "Harvey
Oswald" and "Lee Harvey Oswald" (two different people who are dead-
ringers for one another) inside the Texas School Book Depository
Building at the time of JFK's assassination.
The architects of this nutty "Double Oswald" plot (a plot that was, of
course, invented from whole cloth by Armstrong) were evidently just
hoping against hope that NOBODY SPIES *BOTH* OF THESE "OSWALDS" IN THE
BUILDING AT THE SAME TIME.
Yeah, come to think of it, it's always a really good idea to have your
resident "patsy" and your "imposter patsy" being present AT THE SAME
PLACE AT THE VERY SAME TIME, isn't it?
Lovely plan there indeed.
Addendum -- I wonder why CTers like Rob can't just believe in a
smaller, more-reasonable-sounding conspiracy theory (like, say, Oswald
being involved with just one or maybe two other losers like himself)?
I could even buy into that type of smaller "plot" myself if somebody
could supply a granule of hard evidence to support such a notion
(which I doubt can happen after 44 years; plus there's Oswald's "solo-
like" actions after he left the Book Depository Building on November
22nd, which are actions that scream out "I'm All Alone!" to anyone who
will listen).
But, instead of believing in a manageable type of smaller "plot" (with
Oswald as the lone shooter of both Kennedy and Tippit, which the
evidence shows he unquestionably was), we are treated to the
outlandish and completely-unsupportable "Harvey And Lee" double-Oswald
type of scenarios like the one belched forth by Robert above (which he
no doubt got from Mr. Armstrong's 2003 book).
Maybe somebody should tell Rob that many times "less" makes more
sense.
Speaking of John Armstrong and his book, let's take a break now and
watch Vince Bugliosi rip into Mr. Armstrong's silliness with both
barrels blazing from VB's "Common Sense" gun. (And these are just a
few select excerpts of Vincent's demolition of Armstrong's crazy
theory; there are a full 14 magnificent pages in the endnotes section
of VB's book devoted solely to the destruction of Mr. Armstrong's
nonsense.).....
"John Armstrong actually went on to publish a 983-page book in
2003 called 'Harvey and Lee: How the CIA Framed Oswald', in which he
carries his fantasy about a double Oswald to such absurd lengths that
not only doesn't it deserve to be dignified in the main text of my
book, but I resent even having to waste a word on it in this
endnote. ....
"Obviously, if Armstrong had a source for any of the things he
charges, he would be only too eager to give it. Instead, his only
source is his exceptionally fertile imagination. ....
"On the day of the assassination, Armstrong has both Lee Harvey
Oswald and Harvey Oswald, two people {per looney author Armstrong} who
are spitting images of each other, in the Depository. .... At the
moment of the assassination, HARVEY Oswald was in the second-floor
lunchroom having lunch and LEE Harvey Oswald was on the sixth floor
firing at Kennedy. ....
"Lee Harvey Oswald escaped arrest, but Armstrong doesn't tell
his readers what happened to him thereafter, though...he tells them
near the beginning of the book that he may be "very much alive"." --
Vincent T. Bugliosi; Pages 565-567 of "Reclaiming History's" CD's
Endnotes (c.2007)
ROB'S INSANITY BLOSSOMS:
"Hazy is more apt to describe the evidence against LHO. It is all
conjecture. LHO shot no one that day."
DVP NOW SAYS:
Rob can now look forward to Nurse Ratched and three men clad in white
coats knocking on his door any minute. For, only an insane person who
is ready for a well-padded room could possibly have uttered the above
paragraph.
~Knock, knock...~
ROB'S EPILOG:
"I would love to believe in a single assassin. I would love to believe
my government cares about me and wants to protect me. This is not the
case. Denying it won't change it. The same can be said of LNers -- to
want LHO to have acted alone at ANY cost is just-flat out stupid."
DVP NOW SAYS:
I'd like to say something here, but I'm too choked up with emotion
after Rob's soliloquy to say anything. (I will, however, succumb to
the normal dose of laughter that is immediately induced after reading
anything written by this "ABO" kook named Robert.)
ROB, ON AN ORGASMIC "ANYBODY BUT OSWALD" ROLL, EJACULATES:
"They probably did shoot the Carcano a couple of times to frame
Oswald. The first round was a misfire and the one that did not fully
penetrate the back may have been another."
DVP NOW SAYS:
Gee, how nice of Rob to say that the Carcano was "probably" fired "a
couple of times" on 11/22/63. That's quite a concession for a rabid
CTer. If Rob's not careful, he'll get himself thrown out of the "ABO
{Anybody But Oswald} Kook Club" if he keeps telling tall tales like
that "probably did shoot the Carcano" business.
Wait...no...come to think of it, there's no chance of Rob getting
booted out of the ABO door. And that's because he made the following
ultra-stupid declaration (without a hint of being embarrassed while
uttering it).....
"LHO shot no one that day."
That statement, all by itself, guarantees Rob a lifetime membership to
the precious "ABO" Club. Which is a membership he no doubt treasures
as much as an Academy Award-winning actor treasures his Oscar statue.
Thanks for the "ABO" chapters, Rob. Best laugh I've had since reading
Walt's last post.
tomnln
"bigdog" <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1193176813.6...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
robc...@netscape.com
> DVP SAID:
>
> "The evidence favoring Lee Harvey Oswald's sole guilt isn't going to
> suddenly change. And anyone with a single working brain cell knows
> this to be true."
>
> ROB SAID:
>
> "It was non-existent in 1963 and it is still non-existent today."
>
> DVP NOW SAYS:
>
> It's great being a conspiracy-spouting kook, isn't it? You have such
> FREEDOM! And, having such freedom and not having to rely on ANY of the
> real assassination evidence (which ALL spells "Oswald Was A Guilty
> Bastard"), you can actually NOT feel embarrassed when typing out
> incredibly-stupid nonsense, such as this sentence when talking about
> the evidence favoring Oswald's guilt:
>
> "It was non-existent in 1963 and it is still non-existent today."
>
> I envy such freedom.
>
F.Y.I. Dave, most kooks don't think they are crazy.
>
> DVP SAID:
>
> "I recently re-watched the WFAA-TV (ABC) as-it-happened coverage of
> 11/22/63, and took note of how ZERO of the witnesses interviewed
> (including WFAA newsmen Jay Watson and Jerry Haynes) heard more than
> three shots that day."
>
> ROB SAID:
>
> "Yeah, like cameramen know about the sounds of gunshots? Please."
>
> DVP NOW SAYS:
>
> Neither of the WFAA men I mentioned were "cameramen". But that's not
> important anyway, because your comment is very stupid, even if Watson
> and Haynes HAD been "cameramen".
If there not trained it is superficial. We'll use the dictabelt that
showed 5-6 shots.
>
> Both men mentioned hearing three gunshots (the same number also heard
> by several other TV reporters who immediately reported the shooting to
> America within minutes of the assassination--an assassination that
> most conspiracy theorists think was carried out by multiple guns and
> featured anywhere from 4 to 10 gunshots).
>
> But, I guess Rob thinks that ONLY POLICE OFFICERS CAN ACCURATELY COUNT
> GUNSHOTS. Nobody else could have possibly been able to count the
> number of loud sounds (i.e., gunshots) they heard accurately. Right,
> Bobby?
Right Davey, as there are things called echos and those not trained
can be confused. Especially when volleys are in play. See Davey,
there was multiple gunmen shooting at the same time. Kellerman, SS,
who was in the president's car said he heard a burst of shots.
> ROB SAID:
>
> "The people that matter are the ones that are trained in gunshot
> sounds, and most of the police never said they only heard 3 reports."
>
> DVP NOW SAYS:
>
> Oh, really? What about the following 24 officers who did not hear more
> than three gunshots? Let's have a look. ....
Let's not as this is WC testimony and not worth the space it takes.
It is not a legal document as the witnesses had no representation and
the lawyers did not have to follow legal proceedures when
questioning.
See the thing I have never gotten Davey is why did two bullets from
supposedly the same gun act so differently. One causes 7 wounds and
comes intact and another one just hits skull bone, brain matter and
tissue but totally disengrates on contact? Why? How can the same
ammo act so differently? Good luck with that one because there is no
explanation. There were different gunmen with different types of guns
and ammo that's why.
David Von Pein
You'd better read some of my 24 examples more carefully then, because
15 of the 24 examples are not WC testimony at all....they are mostly
from Sheriff's reports filed by the individual witnesses.
Were all of those Sheriff's deputies lying in their reports to Bill
Decker?
>>> "Why did two bullets from supposedly the same gun act so differently? One causes 7 wounds and comes intact and another one just hits skull bone, brain matter and tissue but totally disengrates [sic] on contact? Why? How can the same ammo act so differently? Good luck with that one, because there is no explanation. There were different gunmen with different types of guns and ammo, that's why." <<<
<heaving large sigh>
Why in heaven's name haven't you LEARNED THE PARTICULARS regarding
these issues? Particulars that (without question) favor the likelihood
of Oswald's WCC/MC bullets acting just EXACTLY as they did on
11/22....i.e.,
CE399 reacting just like it did on 11/22 after being slowed
sufficiently by JFK's body before entering Connally....and then slowed
a whole lot more when it did what it did inside JBC's thorax/chest.
The bullet pictured below is EXACTLY like CE399 (it's a WCC/MC/6.5mm/
FMJ missile from one of the exact same four lots of bullets that
Oswald's CE399 came from)....and this bullet has just gone through
many layers of simulated human flesh and body tissue, and has just
broken two ribs in a (mock) Connally torso, and has just fractured a
simulated wrist bone too.
And Voila! It emerges completely intact! (Doesn't this impress ANY
anti-SBT conspiracy lovers? If not...why the hell not?).....
http://216.122.129.112/dc/user_files/6735.jpg
As for the head-shot bullet from Oswald's gun, that too is a bullet
which reacted just exactly like several test bullets reacted after
hitting human skulls at full speed (about 2,100fps).
Dr. Alfred Olivier did tests to confirm this fact for the WC in 1964;
and then Dr. John Lattimer did the same type of tests in the 1970s.
And just take a look at the results (the top photos in this chart
pictured below are the two front-seat bullet fragments from Oswald's
gun, which are fragments that almost certainly are from the bullet
that struck JFK in the head; and those limo fragments look very, very
similar to the fragments from the two test bullets that were fired
through human skulls).....
http://i1.tinypic.com/44t3b0n.jpg
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0056a.htm
Dr. Lattimer offered up these observations following his skull
tests.....
"This bullet {a 6.5mm Mannlicher-Carcano missile like CE399} can
penetrate four feet of solid wood or three pine telephone poles side
by side and come out looking completely undeformed.
"On the other hand, if it is fired into the thick bone of the
back of a human skull, the jacket and core of the bullet will separate
{see the link provided above for verifiable proof of this}, releasing
a myriad of additional fragments of many different sizes." -- Dr. John
K. Lattimer; Page 277 of "Kennedy And Lincoln: Medical And Ballistic
Comparisons Of Their Assassinations" (c.1980)
=====================
Therefore, as can be seen, the very same type of WCC/MC bullet CAN,
and does, accommodate BOTH the SBT/CE399 and the fragmented bullet
that hit JFK in the head at full velocity.
David Von Pein
August 2004, July 2006, and March 2007.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CTer -- What in the world would anybody, especially him {Jack Ruby},
be doing going into the {Dallas Police} garage with a loaded gun at
exactly that time.
DVP -- It's just exactly the kind of thing Jack Ruby would do. He
loved to be "where the action is". He knew many DPD officers, and, in
fact, if you'll recall, he was present in the Dallas Police Station on
several OTHER occasions on November 22 and 23.
And Ruby's gaining access to the DPD basement via the Main St. ramp
seems to me to be no surprise either. He was a common sight around the
Department. He simply walked down the ramp.
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- How in God's name could Lee Harvey Oswald have the power to
get the Secret Service, protecting Kennedy's limousine, to stand down?
DVP -- The "limo stand-down" junk is pure myth. Never happened. You're
referring, of course, to Henry Rybka being left at Love Field when the
motorcade commenced. But where's the EMPTY running board on the Secret
Service follow-up vehicle in Dealey Plaza if Rybka was supposedly NOT
REPLACED in the SS car?
Answer: There's no empty slot on the Secret Service car. That car was
jam-packed with agents throughout JFK's motorcade in Dallas, including
the proper number of agents (4) riding on the four running
boards. .....
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/altgens.jpg
http://www3.baylor.edu/Library/BCPM/JFK/Photos/JFK%20Motorcade%202%20Large.jpg
Surely you don't think that Rybka and Clint Hill were assigned to RUN
alongside the limo ALL THE WAY TO THE TRADE MART, do you? (At 50 MPH
on Stemmons Freeway too? That's loony. They didn't assign "constantly
running agents" to JFK's motorcades. Just watch ANY previous Kennedy
parade.)
Pretty much all conspiracy theories are pure myths, which have
blossomed nicely since Oliver Stone's fantasy film first surfaced in
late 1991...which is a movie that Vincent Bugliosi will be thoroughly
trashing in "RECLAIMING HISTORY" (thank the Maker).
Moreover, a crazy conspiracy plot, like the multi-shooter type that is
believed by a large number of Americans, was utterly impossible...and,
just as importantly, such a plot would have been totally ridiculous
from a PRE-planned level prior to 11/22/63.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/3374883466e6f1e9
-------------------------------------------
DVP -- While looking at some online documents connected with the JFK
assassination, I noticed this interesting item -- Lee Harvey Oswald's
application for employment at the Texas School Book Depository (filled
out 38 days before he killed the President from that very workplace):
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0118b.htm
Note the several lies that Oswald tells on the application.....
1.) He lists his address incorrectly. He was really living at 1026
Beckley in Oak Cliff at the time. But, instead, lists his address as
Ruth Paine's home in Irving (where Marina was residing, but not Lee
himself). Oswald had been living at the Beckley roominghouse for just
one day prior to filling out that TSBD application (he rented the
Beckley Avenue room under the alias O.H. Lee on October 14, 1963).
2.) Re. the question "Where did you last work?", Oswald lists the
Marine Corps ("U.S.M.C."), which is a lie. Oswald had several jobs (in
Dallas and New Orleans) after leaving the Marines in 1959.
3.) Under "Do you room and board?", Oswald answered "No" .... which is
also a lie. He was "boarding" at the Beckley Avenue roominghouse, but
he evidently didn't want his Depository boss, Roy Truly, to know he
was living at a roominghouse.
4.) He also falsely claims that he's lived in Dallas "continuously".
This is inaccurate. Within just the previous year or two, he had also
lived in Fort Worth and New Orleans.
A fifth falsehood could be added here as well, when we look at
Oswald's answer of "No" to the question on the application about
"defects". However, it does only ask about the applicant's "physical"
defects, which wouldn't, of course, take into account Oswald's warped
mental state as of October 1963.
But if the word "physical" were to be removed from that question, Mr.
Oswald would have been forced to say this in response to such an
inquiry.....
"Yes -- I'm a fruitcake, a wife-beater, a defector to Russia, and an
assassin, having attempted to end the life of a human being (Retired
General Edwin Walker), in April of this year (1963). I sincerely hope
that my tendencies toward political assassinations do not dissuade you
from considering employing me with your company. Everybody, after all,
has SOME little black marks about their persona. Mine, unfortunately,
is that I'm prone to killing top political figures. But I can push a
mean two-wheeled cart filled with books! Yours truly, Lee H.
Oswald". :)
Oswald was hired at the Book Depository that very day he filled out
that application (October 15, 1963). He started to work, as an "order
filler" [for the then-minimum wage of $1.25 per hour], the next
morning, Wednesday, October 16, 1963, which was the beginning of a new
pay period at the Depository.
Hindsight is 20/20 (obviously) -- But I look at that application form
and think: If only Mr. Truly had passed on hiring Lee Oswald. Just
think of how history would have been altered by just that one fairly-
minor (at the time) decision made by Roy S. Truly of the Texas School
Book Depository Company.
Oswald, of course (who knows), might still have found some way to kill
President Kennedy on 11/22/63 as the motorcade made its way through
the Dallas, Texas, streets. But that is doubtful, since he probably
would not have had the golden opportunity that he was presented with
by being employed in a tall building right along the parade route.
I often wonder, though, if Oswald just might have tried to find a way
to use his Carcano rifle that November day, even if he hadn't been
employed at the Depository. That "What If?" is not of any significance
now, of course, but is something to ponder upon occasion.
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- It would worry me if you DID believe it was one superhuman
shooter from a window.
DVP -- Start worrying then. I'm in the "One Shooter Named Oswald"
camp. Nothing "superhuman", though, about Oswald's having done it
alone. Lee had ample training in the Marines and had very likely
practiced with his Carcano rifle for months before November 22nd
rolled around.
Plus -- Oswald more-than-likely had a little more than eight seconds
to accomplish the shooting, rather than the 5.6-second shooting window
that many people want to believe. .....
1st shot = At Zapruder Film frame 160 (approximately).
2nd shot = Z224 (3.50 seconds after the first shot).
3rd shot = Z313 (4.86 seconds after the second shot).
Total Time = 8.36 seconds (approximately).
Minimum mechanical firing time required to recycle the bolt of
Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle = 2.295 seconds (per the Warren
Commission/FBI tests).
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0061a.htm
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0071a.htm
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- Davey-boy is forced to the silly theory that up to 90% of
America are "kooks".
DVP -- As per the norm, the CTer who uttered the above sentence has
overstated the percentage of Americans who believe in a "JFK
conspiracy".
Not nearly ALL of the 70%-75% of the American people who currently
believe in conspiracy in the JFK case are to be considered outright
"kooks". And that "70%-75%" figure I mentioned is much closer to
reality than that CTer's "90%" data, as this relatively-recent 2003
poll verifies:
http://www.pollingreport.com/news2.htm#Kennedy
The "kooks" out of that 70%-75% are the percentile (whatever it may
be; I have no idea) who have actually studied the evidence in the case
and have read a goodly portion of the Warren Report and yet still
think that everything in the whole case stinks with "conspiracy" no
matter what (and they also think that Oswald didn't have a thing to do
with J.D. Tippit's demise either).
That's the type of CTer who ranks as a "kook" in my book, for certain.
Also -- The above-referenced poll (from November 2003) includes the
amazingly-low figure of SEVEN PERCENT in the "Oswald Not Involved"
category.
That's "amazingly low", that is, if Lee Harvey Oswald had really been
what a whole lot of conspiracy theorists seem to believe Oswald was on
11/22/63 -- i.e., an innocent patsy.
It would mean, if those "patsy"-believing CTers are correct, that 83%
of those people polled in 2003 (not counting the 10% with "no
opinion") are dead wrong when it comes to the question of Saint
Oswald's "involvement" in the JFK murder.
Are those 83% to be considered crazy or kooky? Or could it actually be
that that 83% of the people from that particular poll actually have
the common sense to realize that Lee Harvey Oswald's November 22nd
involvement is all too obvious (as spelled out by the entire batch of
physical and circumstantial evidence in the JFK case)?
I'll choose the latter option.
Here's what that portion of the above poll revealed:
"Do you think Lee Harvey Oswald was the only gunman in the Kennedy
assassination, do you think there was another gunman in addition to
Oswald there that day, or do you think Oswald was not involved in the
assassination at all?" .....
Only Oswald -- 32%
Another Gunman -- 51%
Oswald Not Involved -- 7%
No Opinion -- 10%
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- LHO was one of the lousiest shots the Marines ever had on the
shooting line!
DVP -- Where did you get that information? Do you have any detailed
statistics that can help prove your bold claim? .... (Didn't think
so.)
And there's also this with respect to Lee Harvey Oswald's shooting
abilities (from the 1986 LHO TV Docu-Trial)......
VINCENT BUGLIOSI -- "Mr. Delgado, I believe you testified before the
Warren Commission, that on the rifle range Oswald was kind of a joke,
a pretty big joke."
NELSON DELGADO (who served with Oswald in the Marines) -- "Yes, he
was."
BUGLIOSI -- "You're aware that at the time Oswald was doing poorly on
the range, he was about to be released from the Marines, is that
correct?"
DELGADO -- "Yes, he was."
BUGLIOSI -- "Are you aware that in 1956, when Oswald first joined the
Marines, and was going through Basic Training, he fired a 212 on the
rifle range with an M-1 rifle, which made him a 'sharpshooter' at that
time -- are you aware of that?"
DELGADO -- "Yes."
BUGLIOSI -- "Given the fact that Oswald was about to get out of the
Marines when he was in your unit, and the fact that he showed no
interest in firing on the range -- you don't attribute his poor
showing on the range to his being a poor shot?"
DELGADO -- "No."
BUGLIOSI -- "He could have done better, you felt, if he tried?"
DELGADO -- "Certainly."
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- This only goes to show LHO was a "plant" (i.e., patsy).
DVP -- No...it only goes to show that you (a kook) will believe
ANYTHING except the official evidence that's still on the table today,
which all points to only shots from the rear and only shots from LHO's
gun.
That's what it shows, Mr. Kook.
~~~~~
"Several factors make it clear that Kennedy and Connally WERE struck
by the same bullet. There's absolutely no evidence of the existence of
any separate bullet hitting Connally." -- Vince Bugliosi
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Egvc3TYQ9po
~~~~~
"If Lee Harvey Oswald had nothing to do with President Kennedy's
assassination and was framed....this otherwise independent and defiant
would-be revolutionary, who disliked taking orders from anyone, turned
out to be the most willing and cooperative frame-ee in the history of
mankind!! Because the evidence of his guilt is so monumental, that he
could have just as well gone around with a large sign on his back
declaring in bold letters 'I Just Murdered President John F.
Kennedy'!!!" -- Vince Bugliosi
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.video/msg/5093634b419405d5
bigdog
>
> news:1193176813.6...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Oct 23, 4:09 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> little puppy;
>
> >> Are you Denying that the First reports from the Tippit murder scene was
> >> that
> >> the shells came from an AUTOMATIC?
>
> > Once again, a CT responds to a question with a question. There is a
>
> - Show quoted text -
Christ, I think Rossley finally flat lined. He asked for a "good
reason" that reason was given in the next sentence.
robc...@netscape.com
> Archived JFK Forum Messages From May 2003, November 2003, June 2004,
> August 2004, July 2006, and March 2007.
>
>
> CTer -- What in the world would anybody, especially him {Jack Ruby},
> be doing going into the {Dallas Police} garage with a loaded gun at
> exactly that time.
>
> DVP -- It's just exactly the kind of thing Jack Ruby would do. He
> loved to be "where the action is". He knew many DPD officers, and, in
> fact, if you'll recall, he was present in the Dallas Police Station on
> several OTHER occasions on November 22 and 23.
And how do you know this? Based on official documents you have read.
You obviously believe everything you read. This is the argument made
by LNers to CTers before you go on to discredit our sources. Jack
Ruby was allowed in because he was given the job of killing LHO to
avoid a trial. The fact he open access to the police department all
weekend is not a great one (true however it may be) as a private
citizen should not have been allowed into restricted areas. What of
the car horn as LHO was brought out? Why so much advanced warning of
the move? Shouldn't this have been kept quiet?
>
> And Ruby's gaining access to the DPD basement via the Main St. ramp
> seems to me to be no surprise either. He was a common sight around the
> Department. He simply walked down the ramp.
Of course he was as he setup cops with strippers and god knows what
else. Still no excuse for why he was there and that is why it has
been denied for years by the DPD that he was let in by a cop.
> -------------------------------------------
>
> CTer -- How in God's name could Lee Harvey Oswald have the power to
> get the Secret Service, protecting Kennedy's limousine, to stand down?
>
> DVP -- The "limo stand-down" junk is pure myth. Never happened. You're
> referring, of course, to Henry Rybka being left at Love Field when the
> motorcade commenced. But where's the EMPTY running board on the Secret
> Service follow-up vehicle in Dealey Plaza if Rybka was supposedly NOT
> REPLACED in the SS car?
Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. The two agents on the back of the car
aside, how do you explain 9 agents drinking the night before when this
wasn't allowed when on a protection detail? Why were none of them
reprimanded or let go? Why did no one but Clint Hill (and initially
he was told not to move) react in the least bit to the shots? This was
the worst performance in the history of the SS.
>
> Answer: There's no empty slot on the Secret Service car. That car was
> jam-packed with agents throughout JFK's motorcade in Dallas, including
> the proper number of agents (4) riding on the four running
> boards. .....
Yeah on the follow-up car! None where to be found in JFK's car. Why
was Kellerman seperated from the president by JBC? The shotgun
rider's main responsibility is to throw themselves on the president at
the first sign of trouble. How could he when he was so far away? Why
was the driver not reacting? Why no car of homicide detectives that
was normal proceedure (Curry was mad about this when told they would
be in the motorcade)? Why so few motorcyle cops?
> Surely you don't think that Rybka and Clint Hill were assigned to RUN
> alongside the limo ALL THE WAY TO THE TRADE MART, do you? (At 50 MPH
> on Stemmons Freeway too? That's loony. They didn't assign "constantly
> running agents" to JFK's motorcades. Just watch ANY previous Kennedy
> parade.)
It was not uncommon to have agents riding on the back of the limo to
protect the president from behind. That is why the car had
"handrails" on the back so they could hold on.
>
> Pretty much all conspiracy theories are pure myths, which have
> blossomed nicely since Oliver Stone's fantasy film first surfaced in
> late 1991...which is a movie that Vincent Bugliosi will be thoroughly
> trashing in "RECLAIMING HISTORY" (thank the Maker).
Sure, give all the credit to Oliver Stone. Weisburg, Summers, Lane,
Russell, Lifton, Garrison, Marrs and quite a few others were writing
about this long before "JFK" come out. Also, it is easier on LNers to
blame it on Stone as if we can't think for ourselves. This is the
ailment of LNers not CTers.
> Moreover, a crazy conspiracy plot, like the multi-shooter type that is
> believed by a large number of Americans, was utterly impossible...and,
> just as importantly, such a plot would have been totally ridiculous
> from a PRE-planned level prior to 11/22/63.
Sure it would have. Read about covert operations some more. Start
with the overthrow of the duly elected president of Iran in 1953 to
see how this is done but intelligence groups.
> -------------------------------------------
>
> DVP -- While looking at some online documents connected with the JFK
> assassination, I noticed this interesting item -- Lee Harvey Oswald's
> application for employment at the Texas School Book Depository (filled
> out 38 days before he killed the President from that very workplace):
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0...
>
> Note the several lies that Oswald tells on the application.....
>
> 1.) He lists his address incorrectly. He was really living at 1026
> Beckley in Oak Cliff at the time. But, instead, lists his address as
> Ruth Paine's home in Irving (where Marina was residing, but not Lee
> himself). Oswald had been living at the Beckley roominghouse for just
> one day prior to filling out that TSBD application (he rented the
> Beckley Avenue room under the alias O.H. Lee on October 14, 1963).
Probably because Michael Paine had a security clearance in his job and
housing a
"defector" to the Soviet Union would look to good.
>
> 2.) Re. the question "Where did you last work?", Oswald lists the
> Marine Corps ("U.S.M.C."), which is a lie. Oswald had several jobs (in
> Dallas and New Orleans) after leaving the Marines in 1959.
All jobs that would not be appropriate to list. They were all had
intelligence links. Remember how Guy Banister got mad because LHO
used 544 Camp St. on his flyers?
>
> 3.) Under "Do you room and board?", Oswald answered "No" .... which is
> also a lie. He was "boarding" at the Beckley Avenue roominghouse, but
> he evidently didn't want his Depository boss, Roy Truly, to know he
> was living at a roominghouse.
Why? Is there wide spread discrimination against people who live in
boarding houses? He may have been embarrased to say he was seperated
from his wife.
>
> 4.) He also falsely claims that he's lived in Dallas "continuously".
> This is inaccurate. Within just the previous year or two, he had also
> lived in Fort Worth and New Orleans.
One can reside somewhere but have a permanent address somewhere else.
In the military I was overseas but my permanent address (Phila.) was
listed as my address.
>
> A fifth falsehood could be added here as well, when we look at
> Oswald's answer of "No" to the question on the application about
> "defects". However, it does only ask about the applicant's "physical"
> defects, which wouldn't, of course, take into account Oswald's warped
> mental state as of October 1963.
And you know this because you did a full pysch eval on him, right?
>
> "Yes -- I'm a fruitcake, a wife-beater, a defector to Russia, and an
> assassin, having attempted to end the life of a human being (Retired
> General Edwin Walker), in April of this year (1963). I sincerely hope
> that my tendencies toward political assassinations do not dissuade you
> from considering employing me with your company. Everybody, after all,
> has SOME little black marks about their persona. Mine, unfortunately,
> is that I'm prone to killing top political figures. But I can push a
> mean two-wheeled cart filled with books! Yours truly, Lee H.
He could have said all that, but LHO was more prone to tell the truth
("I'm a Patsy").
> Oswald was hired at the Book Depository that very day he filled out
> that application (October 15, 1963). He started to work, as an "order
> filler" [for the then-minimum wage of $1.25 per hour], the next
> morning, Wednesday, October 16, 1963, which was the beginning of a new
> pay period at the Depository.
Of course he was as he was refered by the Paines' with their United
Fruit Co. and CIA connections.
>
> Hindsight is 20/20 (obviously) Not for LNers as they see all this very poorly.
-- But I look at that application form
> and think: If only Mr. Truly had passed on hiring Lee Oswald. Just
> think of how history would have been altered by just that one fairly-
> minor (at the time) decision made by Roy S. Truly of the Texas School
> Book Depository Company.
Not a possibility as very important people told him to hire LHO.
>
> Oswald, of course (who knows), might still have found some way to kill
> President Kennedy on 11/22/63 as the motorcade made its way through
> the Dallas, Texas, streets. But that is doubtful, since he probably
> would not have had the golden opportunity that he was presented with
> by being employed in a tall building right along the parade route.
Thanks for making our point for us. Geez, isn't it lucky he got hired
the day he filled out the application? Like that happens all the
time.
>
> I often wonder, though, if Oswald just might have tried to find a way
> to use his Carcano rifle that November day, even if he hadn't been
> employed at the Depository. That "What If?" is not of any significance
> now, of course, but is something to ponder upon occasion.
It isn't a "What if" as he didn't own a Carcano rifle.
> -------------------------------------------
>
> CTer -- It would worry me if you DID believe it was one superhuman
> shooter from a window.
>
> DVP -- Start worrying then. I'm in the "One Shooter Named Oswald"
> camp. Nothing "superhuman", though, about Oswald's having done it
> alone. Lee had ample training in the Marines and had very likely
> practiced with his Carcano rifle for months before November 22nd
> rolled around.
Nothing superhuman about it. That's why the best shooters in the
world need 4 attempts on average to come close with a stationary
target. It is beyond superhuman. It is super galactical.
>
> Plus -- Oswald more-than-likely had a little more than eight seconds
> to accomplish the shooting, rather than the 5.6-second shooting window
> that many people want to believe
By people you mean the WC, right? Because they said it was 5.6
seconds that is why they dreamed up the SBT. Why we argue this point
is beyond me. A lawyer comes up with a theory and LNers want to
believe it. I thought most people say lawyers are liars.
>
> 1st shot = At Zapruder Film frame 160 (approximately).
> 2nd shot = Z224 (3.50 seconds after the first shot).
> 3rd shot = Z313 (4.86 seconds after the second shot).
>
> Total Time = 8.36 seconds (approximately).
The film has been altered when they realized it could not be 5.6
seconds because the bolt action would take longer than that. And just
to make sure it was LHO they never looked at anyone else. Some
investigation. They should give lessons to every police force in the
world - "How to solve a case in 2 hours".
>-------------------------------------------
>
> CTer -- Davey-boy is forced to the silly theory that up to 90% of
> America are "kooks".
>
> DVP -- As per the norm, the CTer who uttered the above sentence has
> overstated the percentage of Americans who believe in a "JFK
> conspiracy".
>
> Not nearly ALL of the 70%-75% of the American people who currently
> believe in conspiracy in the JFK case are to be considered outright
> "kooks". And that "70%-75%" figure I mentioned is much closer to
> reality than that CTer's "90%" data, as this relatively-recent 2003
> poll verifies:
>
> http://www.pollingreport.com/news2.htm#Kennedy
Polls can be skewed by the questions asked and we know which way they
will be skewed. After the blatant lies given for the current war I'm
confident close to 90% of people today believe a conspiracy was the
actual scenario. This doesn't mean LHO couldn't have been involved
for some of them, but he had help. See, we don't have to totally
disprove the LHO theory, just show it could not have been done by
himself. This has been done many times. Look at all the people who
claimed to have "known" he would do it but did not report. Look at
the media who insults our intelligence by never discussing the fact
that the official theory is bogus.
>
> The "kooks" out of that 70%-75% are the percentile (whatever it may
> be; I have no idea) who have actually studied the evidence in the case
> and have read a goodly portion of the Warren Report and yet still
> think that everything in the whole case stinks with "conspiracy" no
> matter what (and they also think that Oswald didn't have a thing to do
> with J.D. Tippit's demise either).
>
> That's the type of CTer who ranks as a "kook" in my book, for certain.
Sure, because our government is so honest. Ever hear of the "Gulf of
Tonkin"? Watergate? Iran Contra? Noriega/Panama? Shah of Iran?
Patriot Act? NAFTA? Gulf Storm I? (US ambassador told Hussein this was
an Arab issue - invasion of Kuwait) Gulf Storm II? WMD? Remember the
Maine? Most people are dubious about what the government says due to
these and many other events. The WC makes no sense. HSCA said there
was a second shooter.
>
> Also -- The above-referenced poll (from November 2003) includes the
> amazingly-low figure of SEVEN PERCENT in the "Oswald Not Involved"
> category.
>
> That's "amazingly low", that is, if Lee Harvey Oswald had really been
> what a whole lot of conspiracy theorists seem to believe Oswald was on
> 11/22/63 -- i.e., an innocent patsy.
You taking "involved" to mean part of the killing. Of course he was
involved as he was trying to infiltrate the group(s) planning the
killing.
> Are those 83% to be considered crazy or kooky? Or could it actually be
> that that 83% of the people from that particular poll actually have
> the common sense to realize that Lee Harvey Oswald's November 22nd
> involvement is all too obvious (as spelled out by the entire batch of
> physical and circumstantial ...
No, because they know the truth.
David Von Pein
Yeah, no kidding. They had a President killed on their watch.
Duh!
I'm excising the remainder of Rob's mega-kook-like BS. I started to
get physically ill while wading through Robby's morass of speculation
and misrepresentation of the evidence re. every single solid LN point
I made.
But, then again, what should I expect from a Mega-Kook who has the
Titanic-sized balls to say this:
"LHO shot no one that day." -- Rob-Kook; 10/22/2007
robc...@netscape.com
> >>> "This was the worst performance in the history of the SS." <<<
>
> Yeah, no kidding. They had a President killed on their watch.
>
> Duh!
>
> I'm excising the remainder of Rob's mega-kook-like BS. I started to
> get physically ill while wading through Robby's morass of speculation
> and misrepresentation of the evidence re. every single solid LN point
> I made.
Can't handle the truth Davey? Realizing your tenuous situation is
getting worse?
>
> But, then again, what should I expect from a Mega-Kook who has the
> Titanic-sized balls to say this:
>
> "LHO shot no one that day." -- Rob-Kook; 10/22/2007
He didn't shoot anyone and the WC knew it so they concocted lame proof
that most people determine to be untrue immediately. And then we have
the LNers.
David Von Pein
Talking evidence with a kook like Rob is like talking to a dripping-
wet sponge.....he (it) can't absorb any more.
BTW, Rob-Sponge.....any luck refuting those 24 "police" witnesses I
previously pointed out to you? (You know, the cops who heard three
shots or fewer, even though you insisted that the majority of the
police who gave an opinion as to the number of gunshots said they
heard more than three.)