Remember old man Milteer
Neil Coburn
hours.
YoHarvey
> He said 'If Kennedy is shot they will arrest some body with in two
> hours.
Again, so what?????????????????????????????????????? Milteer has been
discredted more in 44 years than Jesus/Robcap. What's the point?
tomnln
"YoHarvey" <bail...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ffd732de-a255-4e60...@n58g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
REALLY??? Yo(Momma)Harvey???
That would mean the Miami detective (w/audio tape) would HAVE to have been
"discredited".
Please provide Citations to such! ! !
Yo(Momma)Harvey is the one who has been "DISCREDITED".
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/baileynme.htm
Ask yo(Momma)Harvey to address his own evidence/testimony>>>
Walt
Discredited ??.... Buy Whom, The LNer's who are committed down to
their souls ( if theu have one) to support LBJ's Warren Commission
decree.
Gil Jesus
>
> Again, so what?????????????????????????????????????? �Milteer has been
> discredted more in 44 years than Jesus/Robcap. �What's the point?
Tomnln wrote:
> REALLY??? Yo(Momma)Harvey???
>
> That would mean the Miami detective (w/audio tape) would HAVE to have been
> "discredited".
>
> Please provide Citations to such! ! !
------------------------------------------------------------
MILTEER ON TAPE "PREDICTING" THE ASSASSINATION OF JFK AND THE CAPTURE
OF SOMEONE "JUST TO THROW THE PUBLIC OFF".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cp3HJdhHNZI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJauvNr-ZT8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Yo(Momma)Harvey is the one who has been "DISCREDITED".
>
> SEE>>> �http://whokilledjfk.net/baileynme.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------
ALSO SEE:
THE PATHOLOGICAL LIAR KNOWN AS YOHARVEY/SPIFFY/SPIFFY_ONE/BAILEYNME
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
1.It was YoHarvey, under the screenname baileynme who claimed that the
Oswald rifle had no scope when found. Baileynme-spiffy-YoHarvey wrote:
"The scope was NOT on the MC when it was found. It was laying
alongside the weapon."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/e3aedb4b219289ad
But a photo of Lt. Day in the TSBD picking the rifle up by the strap
SHOWS a scope ATTACHED:
http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1Lw8sYt--F*VUv4xQp5Fd3Ig=/large/
YOHARVEY AS A SNEAK
2. he/she tried to infiltrate JFKconspiracy under a different
screenname
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
3. he/she claimed that Operation White Star began in Cambodia in 1962,
when in fact it began in Laos in 1958 and ended with the Declaration
of Neutrality in 1962
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/f1e7c24a013b01d0
at which time I corrected his/her lack of historical knowledge
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/fc6cacfb427769c5
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
4. he/she posted a false "letter" and attributed the author as my
third grade teacher, who claimed to have me in her class at a time
when I was in kindergarten, proving himself/herself once again as a
liar.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/4f6f846cc8f05f54
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
5. posted an article by Dave Reitzes
http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100custody.html
as his own without giving Reitzes any credit
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/293de06a42d2729e
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
6. Then he/she perpetrated a falsehood that:: " In the mid 1950's Lee
Oswald spoke about killing an American President. Palmer MacBride
testified to the WC, in 1956 he befriended Oswald and they often
discussed politics. MacBride said that one central theme discussed was
the "exploitation of the working class" and one one occassion after
they began discussing President Eisenhower, Oswald made a statement
that he would like to kill the President because he was exploiting the
working class.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/275a8c64ca997ce4
but in fact: McBride's affidavit given to the FBI alleged that Oswald
made the statement in "late 1957 or early 1958", not in 1956 as
YoHarvey claimed. The 1957-58 timeframe conflicted with Marine records
that clearly showed that Oswald was in Japan at that time.
http://www.jfkresearch.com/jfk_101.html
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
7. In one post YoHarvey calls the Education Forum the "research
community"
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/48acfed5de8ec2ac
then he refers to it as a "demented group of misfits"
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/f100f49279807b0e
in another post he refers to it as "major kook central"
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/605057d1f9873de2
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
8. YoHarvey lied when he/she said that I was arrested in March 1994
for not paying a cable TV bill. He/she would like the reader to
believe that the theft of cable TV would go on for 2 or 3 years
without their knowing. He/she provides no evidence to support this
charge except his say so. No links to any police records, court
records, newspaper accounts of the theft. No links. No info.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/515311a1bd65759b
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
9. YoHarvey lied when he said that I believed that Santos Trafficante
meant that JFK was going to be hit by Jackie because she found a bra
under JFK's pillow. I never said that. YOHARVEY DID THEN ATTRIBUTED IT
TO ME!! Here's the link to YoLarvae's ridiculous post:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/aeddd4f800150a44
and my response was:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/8140300091f92867
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
10. YoHarvey claimed that I said that Connally shot JFK. The post that
was cited is here.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/dd783b571f900c24
But as the post shows, I didn't actually say it. In fact, if you do a
search of this newsgroup of the phrase "Connally shot JFK", you'll
find that most, if not all of the posts were made by the trolls and
that I never actually said any such thing. I put to rest any notion
that I ever actually said any such thing here:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/25bc946d919d2937
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
11. YoHarvey produces a fake newspaper story that claims that I was
being questioned for killing JFK, even though I was only 9 when he was
murdered.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/d202c8da08ea114f
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
12. YoHarvey makes up a fake "interview" between me and MSNBC
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/0a7f3712cd2cb352
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
13. YoHarvey's sick mind accuses me of having sex with young boys.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/ec2d0a4a45a30211
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/0253a663f62ae2fc
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b7e9552bbd126cf9
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/fb1ae52e7cef1625
because I posted for a new youtube christian channel on newsgroup
alt.religion.christian-teen.
But as anyone can see, that posting was also posted to newsgroups
alt.religion.christian and
alt.fan.jesus, proving that the post was not geared to children at
all. It was geared to ANYONE
who enjoys Christian music, including, but not limited to, Christians.
ALT.RELIGION.CHRISTIAN
http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?hl=3Den&show=3Dmore&enc_user=3DTTTQ9=
w8AAACIRAuC87fBj5ZuSkBeRxuc&group=3Dalt.religion.christian
ALT.RELIGION.CHRISTIAN-TEEN
http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?hl=3Den&show=3Dmore&enc_user=3DTTTQ9=
w8AAACIRAuC87fBj5ZuSkBeRxuc&group=3Dalt.religion.christian-teen
ALT.FAN.JESUS:
http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?hl=3Den&show=3Dmore&enc_user=3DTTTQ9=
w8AAACIRAuC87fBj5ZuSkBeRxuc&group=3Dalt.fan.jesus
YoHarvey/justme1952 makes up LIES as he/she goes along...like these:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/bc526ae91bd97331
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/54b99cbd78e1b516
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/c31913883d98d97a
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/22423b43ea270314
YOHARVEY ADMITS HE/SHE'S LIVING A LIE
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/d8a4e3914459a3e9
ANTICHRIST YOHARVEY POKING FUN OF THE CRUCIFIXION
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/3e955da36f61d10f
Given his/her propensity for lying, can we believe ANYTHING YoHarvey/
baileynme/spiffy says ?
YoHarvey
> > "YoHarvey" <bailey...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > Again, so what?????????????????????????????????????? �Milteer has been
> > discredted more in 44 years than Jesus/Robcap. �What's the point?
>
>
> Tomnln wrote:
> > REALLY??? Yo(Momma)Harvey???
>
> > That would mean the Miami detective (w/audio tape) would HAVE to have been
> > "discredited".
>
> > Please provide Citations to such! ! !
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> MILTEER ON TAPE "PREDICTING" THE ASSASSINATION OF JFK AND THE CAPTURE
> OF SOMEONE "JUST TO THROW THE PUBLIC OFF".
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cp3HJdhHNZI
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJauvNr-ZT8
>
>
> > Yo(Momma)Harvey is the one who has been "DISCREDITED".
>
> > SEE>>> �http://whokilledjfk.net/baileynme.htm
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> ALSO SEE:
>
> THE PATHOLOGICAL LIAR KNOWN AS YOHARVEY/SPIFFY/SPIFFY_ONE/BAILEYNME
>
> YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
>
> 1.It was YoHarvey, under the screenname baileynme who claimed that the
> Oswald rifle had no scope when found. Baileynme-spiffy-YoHarvey wrote:
> "The scope was NOT on the MC when it was found. It was laying
> alongside the weapon."
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/e3aedb4b219289ad
>
> But a photo of Lt. Day in the TSBD picking the rifle up by the strap
> SHOWS a scope ATTACHED:
>
>
> because I posted for a new youtube christian channel on newsgroup
> alt.religion.christian-teen.
>
> But as anyone can see, that posting was also posted to newsgroups
> alt.religion.christian and
> alt.fan.jesus, proving that the post was not geared to children at
> all. It was geared to ANYONE
> who enjoys Christian music, including, but not limited to, Christians.
>
> ALT.RELIGION.CHRISTIAN
>
> w8AAACIRAuC87fBj5ZuSkBeRxuc&group=3Dalt.religion.christian
>
> ALT.RELIGION.CHRISTIAN-TEEN
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?hl=3Den&show=3Dmore&enc_user=...
> w8AAACIRAuC87fBj5ZuSkBeRxuc&group=3Dalt.religion.christian-teen
>
> ALT.FAN.JESUS:
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?hl=3Den&show=3Dmore&enc_user=...
> w8AAACIRAuC87fBj5ZuSkBeRxuc&group=3Dalt.fan.jesus
>
> YoHarvey/justme1952 makes up LIES as he/she goes along...like these:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/bc526ae91bd97331
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/54b99cbd78e1b516
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/c31913883d98d97a
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/22423b43ea270314
>
> YOHARVEY ADMITS HE/SHE'S LIVING A LIE
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/d8a4e3914459a3e9
>
> ANTICHRIST YOHARVEY POKING FUN OF THE CRUCIFIXION
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/3e955da36f61d10f
>
> Given his/her propensity for lying, can we believe ANYTHING YoHarvey/
> baileynme/spiffy says ?
YoHarvey
>
> - Show quoted text -
The real Milteer:
robcap...@netscape.com
How was he discredited? His voice was captured on tape perdicting the
assassination.
YoHarvey
wrote:
Jesus? Thought you were a JFK researcher for 30 years. Tell us the
truth, you this stupid in REAL life?
Gil Jesus
> The real Milteer:
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/milteer.htm-
The real McAdams
The real YoHarvey
THE PATHOLOGICAL LIAR KNOWN AS YOHARVEY/SPIFFY/SPIFFY_ONE/BAILEYNME
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
1.It was YoHarvey, under the screenname baileynme who claimed that the
Oswald rifle had no scope when found. Baileynme-spiffy-YoHarvey wrote:
"The scope was NOT on the MC when it was found. It was laying
alongside the weapon."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/e3aedb4b219289ad
But a photo of Lt. Day in the TSBD picking the rifle up by the strap
SHOWS a scope ATTACHED:
http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1Lw8sYt--F*VUv4xQp5Fd3Ig=/large/
YOHARVEY AS A SNEAK
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/f1e7c24a013b01d0
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/fc6cacfb427769c5
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/4f6f846cc8f05f54
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100custody.html
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/293de06a42d2729e
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/275a8c64ca997ce4
http://www.jfkresearch.com/jfk_101.html
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/48acfed5de8ec2ac
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/f100f49279807b0e
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/605057d1f9873de2
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/515311a1bd65759b
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/aeddd4f800150a44
and my response was:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/8140300091f92867
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/dd783b571f900c24
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/25bc946d919d2937
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/d202c8da08ea114f
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/0a7f3712cd2cb352
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/ec2d0a4a45a30211
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/0253a663f62ae2fc
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b7e9552bbd126cf9
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/fb1ae52e7cef1625
because I posted for a new youtube christian channel on newsgroup
alt.religion.christian-teen.
But as anyone can see, that posting was also posted to newsgroups
alt.religion.christian and
alt.fan.jesus, proving that the post was not geared to children at
all. It was geared to ANYONE
who enjoys Christian music, including, but not limited to, Christians.
ALT.RELIGION.CHRISTIAN
http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?hl=3Den&show=3Dmore&enc_user=3DTTTQ9=
w8AAACIRAuC87fBj5ZuSkBeRxuc&group=3Dalt.religion.christian
ALT.RELIGION.CHRISTIAN-TEEN
http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?hl=3Den&show=3Dmore&enc_user=3DTTTQ9=
w8AAACIRAuC87fBj5ZuSkBeRxuc&group=3Dalt.religion.christian-teen
ALT.FAN.JESUS:
http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?hl=3Den&show=3Dmore&enc_user=3DTTTQ9=
robcap...@netscape.com
Quit ducking the issue (I'm not Gil) and answer the question. Explain
why he was along the parade route as well.
YoHarvey
>
> - Show quoted text -
Firstly, Milteer was NOT in Dallas on 11/22. That was fully
investigated. Milteer also stated JFK would die in Miami during the
motorcade there. No motorcade was ever planned for Miami. In
addition, Milteer used a "generic" assassination formula: man on roof
shoots man in car!! Lastly, Milteer had a reputation, similar to you
Jesus of being a LUNATIC. I surely understand why you support this
loser. Was he daddy perhaps???
martyb...@gmail.com
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> The real Milteer:
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Jesus Gil, how many times are you and Walt and the other kooks going
to keep throwing out the same o same that's been discovered, covered
and discounted at least a thousand times in the last 45 years. "Yo"
you've done a credible job of bashing the kooks big play.
Unfortunately given a little time one of these super kooks will dust
off all of this info and repost it like it was todays news and the
smoking gun discovery they've all been panting over and you'll have to
once again introduce them to reality.
YoHarvey
wrote:
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > The real Milteer:
>
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Jesus Gil, how many times are you and Walt and the other kooks going
> to keep throwing out the same o same that's been discovered, covered
> and discounted at least a thousand times in the last 45 years. "Yo"
> you've done a credible job of bashing the kooks big play.
> Unfortunately given a little time one of these super kooks will dust
> off all of this info and repost it like it was todays news and the
> smoking gun discovery they've all been panting over and you'll have to
>
> - Show quoted text -
Marty? All they have is rehash. Same crap; different day.
robcap...@netscape.com
I believe he was and this picture is pretty convincing:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/milteer_dp.jpg
Who investigated it McAdams? You are so clueless. When Milteer
called Somerset (the FBI informant) in Miami he was in Dallas!!! The
call was traced. A motorcade would have been planned but threats
caused them to take JFK by helicopter. He described a man shooting
from a high-rise building using a high-powered rifle and this is
exactly what happened. You are delusional as well as clueless.
robcap...@netscape.com
wrote:
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > The real Milteer:
>
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
"Jesus Gil, how many times are you and Walt and the other kooks going
to keep throwing out the same o same that's been discovered, covered
and discounted at least a thousand times in the last 45 years. "Yo"
you've done a credible job of bashing the kooks big play.
Unfortunately given a little time one of these super kooks will dust
off all of this info and repost it like it was todays news and the
smoking gun discovery they've all been panting over and you'll have to
once again introduce them to reality."
Here is another delusional man as he thinks this stuff has been
discounted!! How hilarious is that? Why don't you post this
"discounting" proof again for us?
YoHarvey
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > The real Milteer:
>
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> "Jesus Gil, how many times are you and Walt and the other kooks going
> to keep throwing out the same o same that's been discovered, covered
> and discounted at least a thousand times in the last 45 years. "Yo"
> you've done a credible job of bashing the kooks big play.
> Unfortunately given a little time one of these super kooks will dust
> off all of this info and repost it like it was todays news and the
> smoking gun discovery they've all been panting over and you'll have to
> once again introduce them to reality."
>
> Here is another delusional man as he thinks this stuff has been
> discounted!! How hilarious is that? Why don't you post this
>
> - Show quoted text -
Jesus/Robcap? Ignornance is not a virtue. Don't embarrass mom and
dad even if you don't know them. Behave. It's good manners.
Bud
Half of what he said was wrong, the other half obvious.
If a chucklehead like Milteer could find out about this
assassination, the lid would have been blown off the conspiracy
decades ago.
Milteer was a blowhard, the guy he was talking to brought up the
threat of assassination in the conversation, and Milteer just happened
to know about one (one in which he got much of the facts wrong, people
named, place, ect)
tomnln
David Von Pein
{suspected assassination plotter Joseph} Milteer said, "They will pick
up somebody within hours afterwards," his very next words were "IF
anything like that would happen," words clearly showing that Milteer
was not saying Kennedy was about to be murdered, but rather, what
would happen IF he were. ....
"The argument that the right wing was behind Kennedy's
assassination suffers, like all other conspiracy theories, from the
inconvenient and stubborn reality that there is no evidence of its
involvement." -- Vince Bugliosi; Pages 1271 and 1272 of "RH" (c.2007)
Martin Shackelford
building.
It's unfortunate that David Kaiser didn't factor him in to his research in
The Road to Dallas, though it would have complicated his picture of
the event--he does mention Rose Cheramie, and unlike the Lone Nut
bozos, understands her significance.
Martin
"Neil Coburn" <dayto...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:9079-47F...@storefull-3335.bay.webtv.net...
Martin Shackelford
Martin
"tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:s_aJj.51724$097....@newsfe21.lga...
lazu...@webtv.net
John Martino, spent time around 544 Camp St.& NO, in the summer of
'63... which would explain alot...
Martin Shackelford
Kaiser's book The Road to Dallas.
Martin
<lazu...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:27975-47F...@storefull-3234.bay.webtv.net...
Bud
Martin Shackelford wrote:
> He also predicted that Kennedy would be shot with a rifle from an office
> building.
But not a hill.
So, Milteer guessed at a way to kill Kennedy, and the same notion
occurred to Oswald. It`s not a real poser, the President is pretty
well protected up close, but it`s well known that rifles are lethal
from a distance.
lazu...@webtv.net
what's comin' down- thanx Martin-I'll pick up Kaiser's book tomorrow..
robcap...@netscape.com
Yes Laz, and Martino had foreknowledge of the assasination as well.
robcap...@netscape.com
> Martin Shackelford wrote:
> > He also predicted that Kennedy would be shot with a rifle from an office
> > building.
>
> But not a hill.
>
"So, Milteer guessed at a way to kill Kennedy, and the same notion
occurred to Oswald. It`s not a real poser, the President is pretty
well protected up close, but it`s well known that rifles are lethal
from a distance."
Well protected? You obviously have not seen photos of JFK in the
midst of crowds on many, many occassions, the last being at Love
Field. He was a very easy target up close and JFK said this the night
before his murder that someone could have shot him easy that night as
he was surrounded by people.
>
>
>
> > It's unfortunate that David Kaiser didn't factor him in to his research in
> > The Road to Dallas, though it would have complicated his picture of
> > the event--he does mention Rose Cheramie, and unlike the Lone Nut
> > bozos, understands her significance.
>
> > Martin
>
> > "Neil Coburn" <daytonac...@webtv.net> wrote in message
> >news:9079-47F...@storefull-3335.bay.webtv.net...
> > > He said 'If Kennedy is shot they will arrest some body with in two
> > > hours.- Hide quoted text -
YoHarvey
wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
speculation, innuendo, conjecture.....the conspiracy way!!! And yet,
NOTHING has changed in 44 years!! Nor will it. Tell ya what CT's, I
heard it from a reliable source, aliens did JFK. They came from a
planet outside our solar system and left immediately. Gee, guess I'll
write a book about it and make millions. Just one more dumb "theory"
with NO evidence.
tomnln
speculation, innuendo, conjecture.....the conspiracy way!!! And yet,
NOTHING has changed in 44 years!! Nor will it. Tell ya what CT's, I
heard it from a reliable source, aliens did JFK. They came from a
planet outside our solar system and left immediately. Gee, guess I'll
write a book about it and make millions. Just one more dumb "theory"
with NO evidence.
Just like your "SBT".
http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
RUN SPIFFY RUN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bud
robcap...@netscape.com wrote:
> On Apr 4, 5:34�am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > Martin Shackelford wrote:
> > > He also predicted that Kennedy would be shot with a rifle from an office
> > > building.
> >
> > � �But not a hill.
> >
>
>
> "So, Milteer guessed at a way to kill Kennedy, and the same notion
> occurred to Oswald. It`s not a real poser, the President is pretty
> well protected up close, but it`s well known that rifles are lethal
> from a distance."
>
> Well protected?
More protected in close than from further away.
> You obviously have not seen photos of JFK in the
> midst of crowds on many, many occassions, the last being at Love
> Field.
Usually on a whim from Kennedy, not something an assassin could plan
on, or count on.
> He was a very easy target up close and JFK said this the night
> before his murder that someone could have shot him easy that night as
> he was surrounded by people.
Up close is problematic for a variety of reasons, many assassins
have been thwarted by spectators.
robcap...@netscape.com
> robcap...@netscape.com wrote:
> > On Apr 4, 5:34�am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > > Martin Shackelford wrote:
> > > > He also predicted that Kennedy would be shot with a rifle from an office
> > > > building.
>
> > > � �But not a hill.
>
> > "So, Milteer guessed at a way to kill Kennedy, and the same notion
> > occurred to Oswald. It`s not a real poser, the President is pretty
> > well protected up close, but it`s well known that rifles are lethal
> > from a distance."
>
> > Well protected?
>
"More protected in close than from further away."
??????? Then please explain why every assassination in the world up
to the JFK one had the assailant attack from close range. The JFK
assassination was the first one in history to utilize a rifle and be
successful (the attempts on DeGualle had failed).
> > You obviously have not seen photos of JFK in the
> > midst of crowds on many, many occassions, the last being at Love
> > Field.
>
> Usually on a whim from Kennedy, not something an assassin could plan
> on, or count on.
>
> > He was a very easy target up close and JFK said this the night
> > before his murder that someone could have shot him easy that night as
> > he was surrounded by people.
>
"Up close is problematic for a variety of reasons, many assassins have
been thwarted by spectators."
It is NOT problematic for a man acting on his own that is why every
assassination before this one had the person get up close to increase
the chances of success.
> > > > It's unfortunate that David Kaiser didn't factor him in to his research in
> > > > The Road to Dallas, though it would have complicated his picture of
> > > > the event--he does mention Rose Cheramie, and unlike the Lone Nut
> > > > bozos, understands her significance.
>
> > > > Martin
>
> > > > "Neil Coburn" <daytonac...@webtv.net> wrote in message
> > > >news:9079-47F...@storefull-3335.bay.webtv.net...
> > > > > He said 'If Kennedy is shot they will arrest some body with in two
> > > > > hours.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Bud
robcap...@netscape.com wrote:
> On Apr 4, 2:26 pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > robcap...@netscape.com wrote:
> > > On Apr 4, 5:34�am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > > > Martin Shackelford wrote:
> > > > > He also predicted that Kennedy would be shot with a rifle from an office
> > > > > building.
> >
> > > > � �But not a hill.
> >
> > > "So, Milteer guessed at a way to kill Kennedy, and the same notion
> > > occurred to Oswald. It`s not a real poser, the President is pretty
> > > well protected up close, but it`s well known that rifles are lethal
> > > from a distance."
> >
> > > Well protected?
> >
>
> "More protected in close than from further away."
>
> ??????? Then please explain why every assassination in the world up
> to the JFK one had the assailant attack from close range.
Please explain why I shouldn`t think you are an idiot for writing
that.
> The JFK
> assassination was the first one in history to utilize a rifle and be
> successful (the attempts on DeGualle had failed).
You don`t think that MLK was assassinated with a rifle? How about
Sadat?
> > > You obviously have not seen photos of JFK in the
> > > midst of crowds on many, many occassions, the last being at Love
> > > Field.
> >
> > Usually on a whim from Kennedy, not something an assassin could plan
> > on, or count on.
> >
> > > He was a very easy target up close and JFK said this the night
> > > before his murder that someone could have shot him easy that night as
> > > he was surrounded by people.
> >
>
> "Up close is problematic for a variety of reasons, many assassins have
> been thwarted by spectators."
>
> It is NOT problematic for a man acting on his own that is why every
> assassination before this one had the person get up close to increase
> the chances of success.
Yah, it is problematic, and no, being up close does not increase
the chance of success. My brief search yielded three rifle attacks,
all fatal. A similar brief search indicated that about half the close
in attacks were unsuccessful.
Martin Shackelford
Martin
"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
news:5fcc73a6-e32c-4971...@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Gil Jesus
> And yet no other President was attacked with a rifle.
>
> Martin
>
Excellent point Martin. In the three previous successful presidential
assassinations, each victim was either stationary (Lincoln, McKinley)
or walking at 2 1/2 miles per hour (Garfield). Each victim was killed
by a man with a motive. And each victim was killed by a handgun
because it is easily concealable and gives the shooter an opporutnity
to get within point-blank range of his target.
That's the "modus operandi" of a REAL assassin.
use a handgun
get as close to the target as possible
shoot at a stationary target or one moving slowly at a walking pace
Isn't that what Ruby did ?
David Von Pein
>>> "And yet no other President was attacked with a rifle." <<<
Which means, of course, that Lee Oswald (or whatever imaginary set of
"real killers" a CTer wishes to dream up to replace LHO) can never be
considered "guilty"....because there's no prior precedent of a
President being killed with a rifle.
What a fabulous (legal) loophole Oswald had to aid him!!
Walt
Von Pea Brain.....Your asinine suggestions are getting to be a bore.
You've posted page after page of stupid crap that I doubt is read by
very many lurkers. It doesn't take long for anybody with even an
average IQ to realize that you're nothing but a shill, who's
attempting to get fools to buy into the nonsense that Vince Da Bug
published in his cinderblock doorstop.
Gil Jesus
>
> Von Pea Brain.....Your asinine suggestions are getting to be a bore.
> You've posted page after page of stupid crap that I doubt is read by
> very many lurkers. � It doesn't take long for anybody with even an
> average IQ to realize that you're nothing but a shill, who's
> attempting to get fools to buy into the nonsense that Vince Da Bug
> published in his cinderblock doorstop.
Bravo Walt, I couldn't have said it any better. "Davey Denial"'s
reasoning is always flawed, which is why he is such a favorite to be
ignored. It got him tossed out of forums in the past and it'll
probably get him thrown out of more in the future.
The point, of course, isn't that Oswald was innocent because no
President had ever been killed with a rifle. That's Von Pinhead
reasoning.
Historically, the SUCCESSFUL assassinations had been all done with a
handgun at a stationary or slow moving victim and all had been fired
at a distance of 3 feet or less. Deranged killers don't worry about
firing from a distance and escaping.
Their concern is to kill the target at any cost, even their own life.
Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, Ford twice and Reagan were all
fired at from a distance of more than 3 feet. TR and Reagan were the
only ones hit and they survived.
A shooter with a rifle firing at 85 yards does not fit the criminal
"profile" of a Presidential assassin. Not before Novemeber 22, 1963,
anyway.
In addition, it hadn't been done before because of the difficulty of
the task.
And THAT is the point.
Walt
The truely dedicated and lunatic assassin who is deranged enough to
think that killing a leader wants the world to know that he's a hero
who rid the world of a fatal infection. He has no concern for his
own life, his destiny is to kill the cancer that threatens the
nation. To be certain that he is sucessful he must get as close as
possible, and that he puts himself at risk is only icing on the cake.
Even if he's killed he'll still be thought of as a hero for killing
the cancer. His name will live on in glory.
Did Oswald fit this profile?? ......Not even close... He told Marina
that he admired President Kennedy. He harbored no animosity toward
JFK at all.
Did he tie a bomb to himself and try to jump into the limo as it
passed by?
Did he whip out a handgun and fire at the president? Did he prance
and crow about how he had rid the world of a despot? Well no not
exactly....In fact he denied shooting the President.
Those who think that Lee Oswald murdered President Kennedy are simply
kooks that can't think rationally.
Gil Jesus
> Did he whip out a handgun and fire at the president? �
He could have stepped off of the sidewalk and shot him point-blank.
Well said. I agree.
robcap...@netscape.com
> robcap...@netscape.com wrote:
> > On Apr 4, 2:26 pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > > robcap...@netscape.com wrote:
> > > > On Apr 4, 5:34�am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > > > > Martin Shackelford wrote:
> > > > > > He also predicted that Kennedy would be shot with a rifle from an office
> > > > > > building.
>
> > > > > � �But not a hill.
>
> > > > "So, Milteer guessed at a way to kill Kennedy, and the same notion
> > > > occurred to Oswald. It`s not a real poser, the President is pretty
> > > > well protected up close, but it`s well known that rifles are lethal
> > > > from a distance."
>
> > > > Well protected?
>
> > "More protected in close than from further away."
>
> > ??????? Then please explain why every assassination in the world up
> > to the JFK one had the assailant attack from close range.
>
"Please explain why I shouldn`t think you are an idiot for writing
that."
Here is what you said:
"More protected in close than from further away."
Then I said:
"??????? Then please explain why every assassination in the world up
to the JFK one had the assailant attack from close range."
What don't you get? You claimed the president is protected up close
better than far away, yet I posed the fact that EVERY assassination
before JFK was done by a man up close. Please explain yourself and
quit trying to change the subject.
> > The JFK
> > assassination was the first one in history to utilize a rifle and be
> > successful (the attempts on DeGualle had failed).
>
"You don`t think that MLK was assassinated with a rifle? How about
Sadat?"
No wonder you believe in the WC's theory, you are clueless about
everything. What part of "first one" don't you get? The two you cite
were AFTER the JFK assassination. Geez.
> > > > You obviously have not seen photos of JFK in the
> > > > midst of crowds on many, many occassions, the last being at Love
> > > > Field.
>
> > > Usually on a whim from Kennedy, not something an assassin could plan
> > > on, or count on.
>
> > > > He was a very easy target up close and JFK said this the night
> > > > before his murder that someone could have shot him easy that night as
> > > > he was surrounded by people.
>
> > "Up close is problematic for a variety of reasons, many assassins have
> > been thwarted by spectators."
>
> > It is NOT problematic for a man acting on his own that is why every
> > assassination before this one had the person get up close to increase
> > the chances of success.
>
"Yah, it is problematic, and no, being up close does not increase the
chance of success. My brief search yielded three rifle attacks, all
fatal. A similar brief search indicated that about half the close in
attacks were unsuccessful."
Your search is ridiculous as Lincoln, McKinley and Garfield were
killed up close. The mayor of Chicago was killed when an assassin
tried to shoot FDR in 1932 up close with a pistol. I agree it does
not guarantee success, but when only one person is doing the job it is
easier to do it up close than far away shooting through a tree with a
loose scope and a rusty firing pin.
Bud
His method worked.
> Well said. I agree.
David Von Pein
>>> "The point, of course, isn't that Oswald was innocent because no President had ever been killed with a rifle. That's Von Pinhead reasoning." <<<
Oh good! Now I get to explain the meaning of "satire" and "sarcasm" to
the kooks here. Lovely.
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/satire
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sarcasm
Maybe I should extend today's lesson, by including this word too:
===========================================
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/kook
KOOK [noun]:
"One whose ideas or actions are eccentric, fantastic, or insane :
screwball"
===========================================
Yep, the above definition fits many of the CTers here in the nuthouse
to a tee. To a perfect TEE!
aeffects
hey crankster, get Tim out on the dance floor, show us how Indiana
folk do it...... little trance music, DJ.... get it on Davey.....
Bud
Obviously he is. You can`t disarm a person from a distance. A
person far away can shoot untill he is killed or gotten to.
> yet I posed the fact that EVERY assassination
> before JFK was done by a man up close.
It`s also a fact that Presidents had little or no protection early
on. It`s also a fact that all the Presidents killed since the SS took
over protecting the President have been killed by rifle.
> Please explain yourself and
> quit trying to change the subject.
I`m not. My point was that it occurred to Milteer and Oswald that
killing the President with a rifle was a good idea. Speak to what I
said.
> > > The JFK
> > > assassination was the first one in history to utilize a rifle and be
> > > successful (the attempts on DeGualle had failed).
> >
>
> "You don`t think that MLK was assassinated with a rifle? How about
> Sadat?"
>
> No wonder you believe in the WC's theory, you are clueless about
> everything. What part of "first one" don't you get? The two you cite
> were AFTER the JFK assassination. Geez.
Yah, my bad, I missed "first one". I doubt it`s true that no one
was assassinated worldwide with a rifle prior to Kennedy, but I doubt
I`ll look into it.
> > > > > You obviously have not seen photos of JFK in the
> > > > > midst of crowds on many, many occassions, the last being at Love
> > > > > Field.
> >
> > > > Usually on a whim from Kennedy, not something an assassin could plan
> > > > on, or count on.
> >
> > > > > He was a very easy target up close and JFK said this the night
> > > > > before his murder that someone could have shot him easy that night as
> > > > > he was surrounded by people.
> >
> > > "Up close is problematic for a variety of reasons, many assassins have
> > > been thwarted by spectators."
> >
> > > It is NOT problematic for a man acting on his own that is why every
> > > assassination before this one had the person get up close to increase
> > > the chances of success.
> >
>
> "Yah, it is problematic, and no, being up close does not increase the
> chance of success. My brief search yielded three rifle attacks, all
> fatal. A similar brief search indicated that about half the close in
> attacks were unsuccessful."
>
> Your search is ridiculous as Lincoln, McKinley and Garfield were
> killed up close.
Apples and oranges. The protection of the President had changed
drastically by Kennedy`s time, as did the way the President moved
around in public.
> The mayor of Chicago was killed when an assassin
> tried to shoot FDR in 1932 up close with a pistol. I agree it does
> not guarantee success, but when only one person is doing the job it is
> easier to do it up close than far away shooting through a tree with a
> loose scope and a rusty firing pin.
How can you argue with success?
But, as usual, it is you dragging the topic further and further
from my initial point, which was that Milteer`s mentioning a rifle
isn`t a significant prediction. Tens of thousands of hunters shoot
deer and other animals from a distance with rifles, it`s no secret
that similar wounds can be created in humans with them. Hundreds of
thousand of men in the service (like Oswald) are trained with these
lethal weapons. Shooting a man surrounded by an entourage of armed men
with a rifle from a distance isn`t a remarkable prediction.
robcap...@netscape.com
No he isn't when he walks into a crowd or near a crowd as everyone in
the crowd is not searched. IF the best way is to shoot from a
distance the professional killer will use something far better than an
old, crappy gun (and this was pretty much said by the WC's own
experts) to do the job. I still say the way JFK wandered into crowds
he was a much easier target up close.
> > yet I posed the fact that EVERY assassination
> > before JFK was done by a man up close.
"It`s also a fact that Presidents had little or no protection early
on. It`s also a fact that all the Presidents killed since the SS took
over protecting the President have been killed by rifle."
It is true the SS was not created in the form it is today until after
McKinley's assassination, but the President did have protection before
the SS. Also, NO President has been assassinated since JFK,
therefore, your use of the plural is wrong yet again. In addition,
the attempted Presidential assassinations since JFK were done with
pistols (Ford & Reagan) and the other assassinations utilized a pistol
all except for MLK (RFK & Wallace).
> > Please explain yourself and
> > quit trying to change the subject.
>
"I`m not. My point was that it occurred to Milteer and Oswald that
killing the President with a rifle was a good idea. Speak to what I
said."
Why would it occur to LHO to be a good idea to use a rifle? He was a
terrible shot with one.
> > > > The JFK
> > > > assassination was the first one in history to utilize a rifle and be
> > > > successful (the attempts on DeGualle had failed).
>
> > "You don`t think that MLK was assassinated with a rifle? How about
> > Sadat?"
>
> > No wonder you believe in the WC's theory, you are clueless about
> > everything. What part of "first one" don't you get? The two you cite
> > were AFTER the JFK assassination. Geez.
>
"Yah, my bad, I missed "first one". I doubt it`s true that no one was
assassinated worldwide with a rifle prior to Kennedy, but I doubt I`ll
look into it."
The truth is the rifle has been used very little in political
assassinations since the vast majority have been for a cause or a
reason, thus, the perpetrators have the detail guarding the target in
on it. Once this is accomplished it is much easier to kill from a
close range.
> > > > > > You obviously have not seen photos of JFK in the
> > > > > > midst of crowds on many, many occassions, the last being at Love
> > > > > > Field.
>
> > > > > Usually on a whim from Kennedy, not something an assassin could plan
> > > > > on, or count on.
>
> > > > > > He was a very easy target up close and JFK said this the night
> > > > > > before his murder that someone could have shot him easy that night as
> > > > > > he was surrounded by people.
>
> > > > "Up close is problematic for a variety of reasons, many assassins have
> > > > been thwarted by spectators."
>
> > > > It is NOT problematic for a man acting on his own that is why every
> > > > assassination before this one had the person get up close to increase
> > > > the chances of success.
>
> > "Yah, it is problematic, and no, being up close does not increase the
> > chance of success. My brief search yielded three rifle attacks, all
> > fatal. A similar brief search indicated that about half the close in
> > attacks were unsuccessful."
>
> > Your search is ridiculous as Lincoln, McKinley and Garfield were
> > killed up close.
>
"Apples and oranges. The protection of the President had changed
drastically by Kennedy`s time, as did the way the President moved
around in public."
Not in the case of JFK as he got worse protection than any President
in history. Killing up close is the best way, that is why the
attempts on Truman, Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, Ford and Reagan all used
pistols, as did the successful assasinations of Lincoln, Garfield and
McKinley.
> > The mayor of Chicago was killed when an assassin
> > tried to shoot FDR in 1932 up close with a pistol. I agree it does
> > not guarantee success, but when only one person is doing the job it is
> > easier to do it up close than far away shooting through a tree with a
> > loose scope and a rusty firing pin.
>
"How can you argue with success?"
It was successful due to at least three teams of expert rifleman, not
one man.
"But, as usual, it is you dragging the topic further and further from
my initial point, which was that Milteer`s mentioning a rifle isn`t a
significant prediction. Tens of thousands of hunters shoot deer and
other animals from a distance with rifles, it`s no secret that similar
wounds can be created in humans with them. Hundreds of
thousand of men in the service (like Oswald) are trained with these
lethal weapons. Shooting a man surrounded by an entourage of armed men
with a rifle from a distance isn`t a remarkable prediction."
Deers and other animals don't have protection like the President is
supposed to have. The conversations of Milteer were recorded so we
know what he said and it turned out to be true. He also was in Dallas
and along the parade route. You can't change those facts.
> > > > > > > > It's unfortunate that David Kaiser didn't factor him in to his research in
> > > > > > > > The Road to Dallas, though it would have complicated his picture of
> > > > > > > > the event--he does mention Rose Cheramie, and unlike the Lone Nut
> > > > > > > > bozos, understands her significance.
>
> > > > > > > > Martin
>
> > > > > > > > "Neil Coburn" <daytonac...@webtv.net> wrote in message
> > > > > > > >news:9079-47F...@storefull-3335.bay.webtv.net...
> > > > > > > > > He said 'If Kennedy is shot they will arrest some body with in two
> > > > > > > > > hours.- Hide quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Bud
Why not speak to what I said?
> IF the best way is to shoot from a
> distance the professional killer will use something far better than an
> old, crappy gun (and this was pretty much said by the WC's own
> experts) to do the job.
Strawmen as far as the eye can see. Who said the best way to shoot
was from a distance? Who said Oswald was a professional killer? Who
said he couldn`t have selected a better rifle?
> I still say the way JFK wandered into crowds
> he was a much easier target up close.
And I pointed out the potential problems. Kennedy waded into crowds
on a whim, so an assassin wouldn`t know where this would occur. Also
the possibility of being thwarted by the SS or other spectators.
> > > yet I posed the fact that EVERY assassination
> > > before JFK was done by a man up close.
>
> "It`s also a fact that Presidents had little or no protection early
> on. It`s also a fact that all the Presidents killed since the SS took
> over protecting the President have been killed by rifle."
>
> It is true the SS was not created in the form it is today until after
> McKinley's assassination, but the President did have protection before
> the SS.
Apples and oranges.
> Also, NO President has been assassinated since JFK,
> therefore, your use of the plural is wrong yet again. In addition,
> the attempted Presidential assassinations since JFK were done with
> pistols (Ford & Reagan) and the other assassinations utilized a pistol
> all except for MLK (RFK & Wallace).
A study of the handgun attempts show why it is problematic. Only a
few seconds to do your damage before wrestled down. Little chance of
escape.
> > > Please explain yourself and
> > > quit trying to change the subject.
> >
>
> "I`m not. My point was that it occurred to Milteer and Oswald that
> killing the President with a rifle was a good idea. Speak to what I
> said."
>
> Why would it occur to LHO to be a good idea to use a rifle? He was a
> terrible shot with one.
He was trained by professionals to shoot, and those professionals
gave him the rank of "sharpshooter". You think this is something they
would do if he was a terible shot?
> > > > > The JFK
> > > > > assassination was the first one in history to utilize a rifle and be
> > > > > successful (the attempts on DeGualle had failed).
> >
> > > "You don`t think that MLK was assassinated with a rifle? How about
> > > Sadat?"
> >
> > > No wonder you believe in the WC's theory, you are clueless about
> > > everything. What part of "first one" don't you get? The two you cite
> > > were AFTER the JFK assassination. Geez.
> >
>
> "Yah, my bad, I missed "first one". I doubt it`s true that no one was
> assassinated worldwide with a rifle prior to Kennedy, but I doubt I`ll
> look into it."
>
> The truth is the rifle has been used very little in political
> assassinations since the vast majority have been for a cause or a
> reason, thus, the perpetrators have the detail guarding the target in
> on it. Once this is accomplished it is much easier to kill from a
> close range.
It depends on the circumstances, and the individual. Milteer`s
spitballing just happened to share some similarities to the method
Oswald emplyed.
> > > > > > > You obviously have not seen photos of JFK in the
> > > > > > > midst of crowds on many, many occassions, the last being at Love
> > > > > > > Field.
> >
> > > > > > Usually on a whim from Kennedy, not something an assassin could plan
> > > > > > on, or count on.
> >
> > > > > > > He was a very easy target up close and JFK said this the night
> > > > > > > before his murder that someone could have shot him easy that night as
> > > > > > > he was surrounded by people.
> >
> > > > > "Up close is problematic for a variety of reasons, many assassins have
> > > > > been thwarted by spectators."
> >
> > > > > It is NOT problematic for a man acting on his own that is why every
> > > > > assassination before this one had the person get up close to increase
> > > > > the chances of success.
> >
> > > "Yah, it is problematic, and no, being up close does not increase the
> > > chance of success. My brief search yielded three rifle attacks, all
> > > fatal. A similar brief search indicated that about half the close in
> > > attacks were unsuccessful."
> >
> > > Your search is ridiculous as Lincoln, McKinley and Garfield were
> > > killed up close.
> >
>
> "Apples and oranges. The protection of the President had changed
> drastically by Kennedy`s time, as did the way the President moved
> around in public."
>
> Not in the case of JFK as he got worse protection than any President
> in history.
The protection wasn`t the problem. It was the thought the the
President could parade in an open-topped car that was the problem.
Blaming the SS is like blaming a lifeguard because one of the wwimmers
in his care is killed by a shark. The problem wasn`t the lifeguard, it
was going in the ocean to swim.
> Killing up close is the best way, that is why the
> attempts on Truman, Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, Ford and Reagan all used
> pistols, as did the successful assasinations of Lincoln, Garfield and
> McKinley.
Up close attacks are problematic. Many are twarted. Milteer,
approaching assassination like it was a logic problem, came up with
the correct way to exploit the weaknesses in the protecting the
President. Oswald thought along the same path although his purchase of
the rifle was to assassinate a different target.
> > > The mayor of Chicago was killed when an assassin
> > > tried to shoot FDR in 1932 up close with a pistol. I agree it does
> > > not guarantee success, but when only one person is doing the job it is
> > > easier to do it up close than far away shooting through a tree with a
> > > loose scope and a rusty firing pin.
> >
>
> "How can you argue with success?"
>
> It was successful due to at least three teams of expert rifleman, not
> one man.
Thats what some idiots think.
> "But, as usual, it is you dragging the topic further and further from
> my initial point, which was that Milteer`s mentioning a rifle isn`t a
> significant prediction. Tens of thousands of hunters shoot deer and
> other animals from a distance with rifles, it`s no secret that similar
> wounds can be created in humans with them. Hundreds of
> thousand of men in the service (like Oswald) are trained with these
> lethal weapons. Shooting a man surrounded by an entourage of armed men
> with a rifle from a distance isn`t a remarkable prediction."
>
> Deers and other animals don't have protection like the President is
> supposed to have.
The point had nothing to do with that. It was that rifles being
lethal weapons was common knowledge, and neutralized the protection of
the armed men surrounding the President.
> The conversations of Milteer were recorded so we
> know what he said and it turned out to be true.
He was more wrong than right. And a careful examination of his
words shows him to be spitballing, with no real knowledge of an actual
plan.
> He also was in Dallas
> and along the parade route. You can't change those facts.
I can`t change that kooks will claim that things are facts when
they are unestablished. They thought it was Oswald in the doorway of
the TSVD, too.
robcap...@netscape.com
Bud, that is why the standing down of the Army was critical as they
provided snipers to watch all windows along the route. The first shot
they could have taken out the shooter. I still say it is far easier
for one person to be successful up close.
> > IF the best way is to shoot from a
> > distance the professional killer will use something far better than an
> > old, crappy gun (and this was pretty much said by the WC's own
> > experts) to do the job.
>
> Strawmen as far as the eye can see. Who said the best way to shoot
> was from a distance? Who said Oswald was a professional killer? Who
> said he couldn`t have selected a better rifle?
>
> > I still say the way JFK wandered into crowds
> > he was a much easier target up close.
>
> And I pointed out the potential problems. Kennedy waded into crowds
> on a whim, so an assassin wouldn`t know where this would occur. Also
> the possibility of being thwarted by the SS or other spectators.
>
> > > > yet I posed the fact that EVERY assassination
> > > > before JFK was done by a man up close.
>
> > "It`s also a fact that Presidents had little or no protection early
> > on. It`s also a fact that all the Presidents killed since the SS took
> > over protecting the President have been killed by rifle."
>
> > It is true the SS was not created in the form it is today until after
> > McKinley's assassination, but the President did have protection before
> > the SS.
>
"Apples and oranges."
In the case of JFK, NO president could have gotten WORSE protection
than he did.
> > Also, NO President has been assassinated since JFK,
> > therefore, your use of the plural is wrong yet again. In addition,
> > the attempted Presidential assassinations since JFK were done with
> > pistols (Ford & Reagan) and the other assassinations utilized a pistol
> > all except for MLK (RFK & Wallace).
>
"A study of the handgun attempts show why it is problematic. Only a
few seconds to do your damage before wrestled down. Little chance of
escape."
The WC alledged LHO had only 5.6 seconds, so the rifle shooter
wouldn't have an eternity either.
>
> > > > Please explain yourself and
> > > > quit trying to change the subject.
>
> > "I`m not. My point was that it occurred to Milteer and Oswald that
> > killing the President with a rifle was a good idea. Speak to what I
> > said."
>
> > Why would it occur to LHO to be a good idea to use a rifle? He was a
> > terrible shot with one.
>
"He was trained by professionals to shoot, and those professionals
gave him the rank of "sharpshooter". You think this is something they
would do if he was a terible shot?"
So what? I can train someone to work out properly, but it doesn't
mean they will or the motivation to do it on their own. He was a poor
shooter and there is NO proof he ever picked up a rifle following his
discharge from the Marines, therefore, he would have only gotten
worse. Sharpshooter is the bottom rung in the Marines, you are getting
up on titles that sound better than they really are.
> > > > > > The JFK
> > > > > > assassination was the first one in history to utilize a rifle and be
> > > > > > successful (the attempts on DeGualle had failed).
>
> > > > "You don`t think that MLK was assassinated with a rifle? How about
> > > > Sadat?"
>
> > > > No wonder you believe in the WC's theory, you are clueless about
> > > > everything. What part of "first one" don't you get? The two you cite
> > > > were AFTER the JFK assassination. Geez.
>
> > "Yah, my bad, I missed "first one". I doubt it`s true that no one was
> > assassinated worldwide with a rifle prior to Kennedy, but I doubt I`ll
> > look into it."
>
> > The truth is the rifle has been used very little in political
> > assassinations since the vast majority have been for a cause or a
> > reason, thus, the perpetrators have the detail guarding the target in
> > on it. Once this is accomplished it is much easier to kill from a
> > close range.
>
"It depends on the circumstances, and the individual. Milteer`s
spitballing just happened to share some similarities to the method
Oswald emplyed."
You have NOT proven LHO shot JFK, so you need to prove this first.
Milteer detailed the way the assassination was carried out by
professionals, NOT LHO.
The only idiots are those who do NOT understand classic military
ambushes. Why do you think DP was chosen in the first place?
Walt
Slick..... Nice try, but totally untrue. You need to read Abraham
Bolden's Book " Echo from Dealey Plaza" The Secret Service
Presidential detail's primary responsibility is the safety and
protection of the President. They are not merely life guards who can
only be reactive AFTER an event. Their job is to be PROACTIVE and
prevent the event, by eliminating the potential problem. Abraham
Bolden who was a Secret Service officer on the Presidential detail
until just a few days before Dallas, said that many Secret Service
agents on the Presidents guard detail were openly racist and obviously
hated President Kennedy.
With men like that on the guard detail, ...... to compare them to
life guards as you did. Those "life guards" would have chummed the
waters with buckets of blood and raw meat to draw the sharks, and then
told John Kennedy that the water's fine... "have a nice swim".
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Bud
Show that the Army provided sniper cover of all windows in previous
motorcades.
> The first shot
> they could have taken out the shooter.
Sure , if a sniper was positioned in such a way as to cover the
windows of the TSBD, and would have determined that to be the source
of the shots (many didn`t), then it is possible he could have shot Oz
after his first missed shot. If Oz would have been successful in his
suicide attempt, Kennedy might be alive today, what does this have to
do with anything?
> I still say it is far easier
> for one person to be successful up close.
I still think Milteer was right, a rifle at a distance is best, as
evidenced by Oswald..
> > > IF the best way is to shoot from a
> > > distance the professional killer will use something far better than an
> > > old, crappy gun (and this was pretty much said by the WC's own
> > > experts) to do the job.
> >
> > Strawmen as far as the eye can see. Who said the best way to shoot
> > was from a distance? Who said Oswald was a professional killer? Who
> > said he couldn`t have selected a better rifle?
> >
> > > I still say the way JFK wandered into crowds
> > > he was a much easier target up close.
> >
> > And I pointed out the potential problems. Kennedy waded into crowds
> > on a whim, so an assassin wouldn`t know where this would occur. Also
> > the possibility of being thwarted by the SS or other spectators.
> >
> > > > > yet I posed the fact that EVERY assassination
> > > > > before JFK was done by a man up close.
> >
> > > "It`s also a fact that Presidents had little or no protection early
> > > on. It`s also a fact that all the Presidents killed since the SS took
> > > over protecting the President have been killed by rifle."
> >
> > > It is true the SS was not created in the form it is today until after
> > > McKinley's assassination, but the President did have protection before
> > > the SS.
> >
>
> "Apples and oranges."
>
> In the case of JFK, NO president could have gotten WORSE protection
> than he did.
Lincoln had one guard, who wasn`t at his post. Booth could have
choked Lincoln to death. I`d say thats as bad as protection gets. In
Kennedy`s case, the problem wasn`t the protection, it was parading the
President in public like a prom queen.
> > > Also, NO President has been assassinated since JFK,
> > > therefore, your use of the plural is wrong yet again. In addition,
> > > the attempted Presidential assassinations since JFK were done with
> > > pistols (Ford & Reagan) and the other assassinations utilized a pistol
> > > all except for MLK (RFK & Wallace).
> >
>
> "A study of the handgun attempts show why it is problematic. Only a
> few seconds to do your damage before wrestled down. Little chance of
> escape."
>
> The WC alledged LHO had only 5.6 seconds, so the rifle shooter
> wouldn't have an eternity either.
"eternity" is your strawman. Oswald could have shot the driver
first, or stayed at the window shooting until shot or someone made
their way to his location. Hinckley had someone on his back in
seconds, as did Squeaky Fromme, Sara Jane Moore, Sirhan Sirhan, ect.
> > > > > Please explain yourself and
> > > > > quit trying to change the subject.
> >
> > > "I`m not. My point was that it occurred to Milteer and Oswald that
> > > killing the President with a rifle was a good idea. Speak to what I
> > > said."
> >
> > > Why would it occur to LHO to be a good idea to use a rifle? He was a
> > > terrible shot with one.
> >
>
> "He was trained by professionals to shoot, and those professionals
> gave him the rank of "sharpshooter". You think this is something they
> would do if he was a terrible shot?"
>
> So what?
Nothing to you, I`m sure.
> I can train someone to work out properly, but it doesn't
> mean they will or the motivation to do it on their own.
He attained a level of proficiency, numbnut.
> He was a poor
> shooter and there is NO proof he ever picked up a rifle following his
> discharge from the Marines,
Besides the photo of him holding one. And his wife saying he
practiced with it.
> therefore, he would have only gotten
> worse.
Shooting experts said he was a "sharpshooter". Idiots feel this
means he was a bad shot.
> Sharpshooter is the bottom rung in the Marines, you are getting
> up on titles that sound better than they really are.
Marksman is the lowest ranking.
> > > > > > > The JFK
> > > > > > > assassination was the first one in history to utilize a rifle and be
> > > > > > > successful (the attempts on DeGualle had failed).
> >
> > > > > "You don`t think that MLK was assassinated with a rifle? How about
> > > > > Sadat?"
> >
> > > > > No wonder you believe in the WC's theory, you are clueless about
> > > > > everything. What part of "first one" don't you get? The two you cite
> > > > > were AFTER the JFK assassination. Geez.
> >
> > > "Yah, my bad, I missed "first one". I doubt it`s true that no one was
> > > assassinated worldwide with a rifle prior to Kennedy, but I doubt I`ll
> > > look into it."
> >
> > > The truth is the rifle has been used very little in political
> > > assassinations since the vast majority have been for a cause or a
> > > reason, thus, the perpetrators have the detail guarding the target in
> > > on it. Once this is accomplished it is much easier to kill from a
> > > close range.
> >
>
> "It depends on the circumstances, and the individual. Milteer`s
> spitballing just happened to share some similarities to the method
> Oswald emplyed."
>
> You have NOT proven LHO shot JFK,
It`s been shown for decades.
> so you need to prove this first.
> Milteer detailed the way the assassination was carried out by
> professionals, NOT LHO.
Milteer didn`t say anything about professionals. He just mentioned
some ways it could be dne. Oswald bore him out on some details.
> > the correct way to exploit the weaknesses in the protecting of the
> > President. Oswald thought along the same path although his purchase of
> > the rifle was to assassinate a different target.
> >
> > > > > The mayor of Chicago was killed when an assassin
> > > > > tried to shoot FDR in 1932 up close with a pistol. I agree it does
> > > > > not guarantee success, but when only one person is doing the job it is
> > > > > easier to do it up close than far away shooting through a tree with a
> > > > > loose scope and a rusty firing pin.
> >
> > > "How can you argue with success?"
> >
> > > It was successful due to at least three teams of expert rifleman, not
> > > one man.
> >
>
> "Thats what some idiots think."
>
> The only idiots are those who do NOT understand classic military
> ambushes. Why do you think DP was chosen in the first place?
Oswald choose it because his workplace had a commanding view of
Dealy Plaza.
> > > "But, as usual, it is you dragging the topic further and further from
> > > my initial point, which was that Milteer`s mentioning a rifle isn`t a
> > > significant prediction. Tens of thousands of hunters shoot deer and
> > > other animals from a distance with rifles, it`s no secret that similar
> > > wounds can be created in humans with them. Hundreds of
> > > thousand of men in the service (like Oswald) are trained with these
> > > lethal weapons. Shooting a man surrounded by an entourage of armed men
> > > with a rifle from a distance isn`t a remarkable prediction."
> >
> > > Deers and other animals don't have protection like the President is
> > > supposed to have.
> >
> > The point had nothing to do with that. It was that rifles being
> > lethal weapons was common knowledge, and neutralized the protection of
> > the armed men surrounding the President.
> >
> > > The conversations of Milteer were recorded so we
> > > know what he said and it turned out to be true.
> >
> > He was more wrong than right. And a careful examination of his
> > words shows him to be spitballing, with no real knowledge of an actual
> > plan.
> >
> > > He also was in Dallas
> > > and along the parade route. You can't change those facts.
> >
> > I can`t change that kooks will claim that things are facts when
> > they are unestablished. They thought it was Oswald in the doorway of
> > the TSBD, too.
Bud
> swimmers
> in his care is killed by a shark. The problem wasn`t the lifeguard,
> it
> was going in the ocean to swim.
>
> Slick..... Nice try, but totally untrue.
You see anyone being attacked by sharks on city streets?
The potential for being assassinated exists whenever the President
is out in public, just like the potential for a shark attack exists
whenever you swim in the ocean.The President not being killed doesn`t
mean the SS did a good job, and the President being killed doesn`t
mean the SS did a bad job. It only means that in one place a person
didn`t make an attempt, and in another place someone did.
> You need to read Abraham
> Bolden's Book " Echo from Dealey Plaza" The Secret Service
> Presidential detail's primary responsibility is the safety and
> protection of the President. They are not merely life guards who can
> only be reactive AFTER an event. Their job is to be PROACTIVE and
> prevent the event, by eliminating the potential problem.
A President that can be seen is a President that can be shot. The
SS know this, even if you don`t.
> Abraham
> Bolden who was a Secret Service officer on the Presidential detail
> until just a few days before Dallas, said that many Secret Service
> agents on the Presidents guard detail were openly racist and obviously
> hated President Kennedy.
Has what to do with what?
> With men like that on the guard detail, ...... to compare them to
> life guards as you did. Those "life guards" would have chummed the
> waters with buckets of blood and raw meat to draw the sharks, and then
> told John Kennedy that the water's fine... "have a nice swim".
Kennedy himself knew that he was vulnerable to attack. He accepted
it as an unavoidable consequence of his position. The protection of
the President has evolved to the point where the President no longer
rides through cities in an open-topped car waving to spectators. The
reason they don`t is beacuse there is no way humanly possible of
protecting the President in this position of vulnerability.