How To Frame A Lone "Patsy" For JFK's Assassination -- How Would YOU Go About Accomplishing That Task?
David VP
MURDER?
(A BETTER QUESTION MIGHT BE -- WOULD *ANYONE* IN THEIR RIGHT MIND HAVE
DONE IT THE WAY MANY CONSPIRACY THEORISTS THINK IT *WAS* DONE IN 1963?)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many JFK assassination conspiracists favor the idea that President John
F. Kennedy's killer (Lee Harvey Oswald) was "set up" from the
beginning, and framed as the "Patsy" to take the blame (alone) for the
President's murder in Dallas, Texas, on November 22nd, 1963.
Such a complicated Patsy scheme might seem like a reasonable solution
to some Warren Commission disbelievers when looking at selected pieces
of evidence in hindsight, many years after the event. But I'm just
wondering how many of those same people (if given the wretched
responsibility of "setting up" Oswald as the one lone fall guy) would
really have chosen to frame Mr. Oswald in the manner that is so widely
believed by CTers?
Now, if I was a rotten, dirty, lowlife killer who was planning the
assassination of an American President in a large U.S. city with many
witnesses potentially watching (and filming) my every move -- and also
wanting to pin this crime on ONE LONE PATSY named Oswald, who worked in
a building to the rear of the President's vehicle......
I would:
1.) Use only one shooter. (I most certainly would NOT, under any
circumstances, use gobs of extra gunmen located at various places
throughout Dealey Plaza. That multi-gun idea is just plain nutty to
begin with.)
2.) Shoot from where my one and only "Patsy" is supposed to be located
-- the southeast corner window on the 6th Floor of the Texas School
Book Depository Building on Elm Street.
3.) Use Lee Harvey Oswald's own Mannlicher-Carcano rifle (Serial
#C2766).
4.) Fire three shots (or however many this single shooter could squeeze
off in the allotted time while Kennedy was in his sights; then place a
corresponding number of spent hulls/shells below the "Sniper's Nest"
window -- of course, these really won't be "planted" shells near the
window; because, via this plan, Oswald's own gun IS being utilized;
therefore, the appropriate number of shells will drop to the floor
accordingly).
5.) To reiterate the obvious -- Absolutely no frontal shots can be
fired. Frontal shots striking the target would have been suicide for me
and my other lowlife, conspiratorial plotters/cohorts.
6.) I'd find a way to keep my Patsy on the "floor of death" during the
shooting, thereby ensuring the fact that Oswald (my one and only Patsy)
does not have a viable and supportable alibi at precisely 12:30 PM on
November 22nd.
7.) I'd probably then also shoot and kill Oswald dead right there on
the 6th Floor of the Depository, and "stage" this Oswald murder as a
"suicide". This way, there's certainly no need for Jack Ruby's
intervention two days later. Letting the "Patsy" live for even an hour
after the assassination just does not make any sense in the overall
"Patsy" plot. If there's going to be a need to "rub him out", waiting
until November 24th (AFTER he's had a chance to spill his guts to a
National TV audience for two solid days) is simply a foolhardy plan on
the part of the plotters. Kill him immediately (in the Depository) and
be done with it.
In my opinion, the above scenario is the only conceivable way such a
"Frame The Lone Patsy" plot could have possibly been pulled off
successfully (and the only type plan of this sort that any sane and
non-suicidal plotters/conspirators would have considered utilizing on
11-22-63).
The originators and developers of any "Frame The Patsy" scheme that
involves multiple shooters firing weapons at the same target at the
very same time would have been better off if they had attempted to
frame TWO different "Patsies" that day in Dallas (Oswald plus a second
fall guy firing from the front). Because trying to hide the obvious
evidence from 3 or 4 shooters (and 5 to 10 potential bullet wounds from
all of these missiles) is a task that even Superman wouldn't want to
tackle.
More contradictory CT brilliance.........
Many CTers seem to feel that if the conspirators had gotten a "JFK Kill
Shot" from the REAR immediately after the shooting started, then no
frontal shots would have been needed (or fired) -- and therefore the
"Frame Oswald" plan would have proceeded in a more orderly manner.
However, it seems that many of these same CTers ALSO favor the
likelihood that Shot #1 was a shot from the front (that hit President
Kennedy in the throat).
This first shot from the front totally destroys the other theory that
has the first shot definitely coming from the REAR (which many
theorists feel also served as a "diversionary" shot to get everyone
looking toward the Sniper's Nest, where the "Patsy" is supposed to be
located).
That's another example of CTers not knowing which "theory" to follow,
it seems. For, how can a person who believes that the first shot was
the proverbial "Diversionary & Hopefully 'Kill' Shot from the Rear"
ALSO believe that the first shot came from the front and hit JFK in the
neck?
So many conspiracy theories -- so little sense do they make.
David Von Pein
October 2005
tomnln
Make sure you are in charge of the evidence.
Make sure you Delete evidence you Don't want.
Make sure you DIRECT all testimony.
Make sure you can Alter testimony you Don't want.
Make sure you Control that testimony/evidence.
Make sure you have people like you who will say anything you want for 30
pieces of silver.
THAT's how you can Frame Anyone.
Apparently you haven'r read the evidence/testimony David.
"David VP" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1144520288.3...@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Ben Holmes
Davey-boy the troll posts alot, but doesn't have the knowledge or the balls to
answer refutations of his posts.
Wonder why?
In article <1144520288.3...@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, David VP
says...
--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth
David VP
Make sure you Delete evidence you Don't want.
Make sure you DIRECT all testimony.
Make sure you can Alter testimony you Don't want.
Make sure you Control that testimony/evidence.
He actually BELIEVES all the above COULD conceivably have been
accomplished on 11/22/63! (That says a lot about "CTer gullibility"
right there.)
But....perhaps Tom-boy has a point. His ultra-brief and simple(ton)
analysis via just a few quick keystrokes describing how all the non-LHO
evidence (from 466 different guns, approx.) could easily get
transformed into only Oswald evidence makes a lot of sense when you
come right down to it. (Only problem being: it's not "common" sense.
It's "CTer Sense". Which means...it's kooky.)
It was as easy as the snap of the plotters' fingers it would appear --
or an arm-folded blink by a magician named "Jeannie".
Thanks Tom for your detailed analysis re. how such an intricate Patsy
Plot would have worked in '63. Obliged.
------------------
"Make sure you have people like you who will say anything you want for
30
pieces of silver."
I haven't taken more than 25 pieces of graft for any of my LN
postings....and you know that damn well, Sir Tom! So don't start that
vicious rumor again please.
tomnln
"Ben Holmes" <bnho...@rain.org> wrote in message
news:e1950...@drn.newsguy.com...
tomnln
You coulda addressed the points of evidence destruction with LESS work.
Less Dialogue.
Less Effort.
Less "Opinion".
Less Time.
I Never asked you for Opinions.
I asked you to Address FACTS.
It's your Opinions without aBasis that makes the authorities Look Bad.
"David VP" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1144527848....@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
JLeyd...@aol.com
element of control. How do you control an innocent patsy to get him to
do what your want him to do when you want him to do it? For example,
if you were Oswald's "handler" would you let him go out to Irving on
the night before the assassination with Frazier, risking an accident or
auto mechanical problem that would keep him out of work the next day?
I think not. More importantly, how would you keep him out of sight
during the assassination itself? All he had to do was wander out on to
the front steps, stand next to Lovelady (Look two Oswalds) and game
would have been up. And how did they get him to flee the building
within a few minutes of the shooting, run to his pad and pick up his
gun, etc., etc., etc. A very cooperative Patsy, you have to admit.
JGL
aeffects
JLeyd...@aol.com wrote:
> I've always thought the weak point in the "patsy" argument is the
> element of control. How do you control an innocent patsy to get him to
> do what your want him to do when you want him to do it? For example,
> if you were Oswald's "handler" would you let him go out to Irving on
> the night before the assassination with Frazier, risking an accident or
> auto mechanical problem that would keep him out of work the next day?
> I think not.
Hey, perhaps Frazier worked for his handler?
tomnln
below.
Short Sleeved
Broad Red & White Stripped
Vertical Stripes
This FBI Report is Accompanied with Lovelady IN THAT Shirt.
Does that sound like the shirt on the man in the doorway in the Altgens
photo?
If Anyone want copies of that Report WITH Pictures Just Ask.
<JLeyd...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1144606773.1...@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Ben Holmes
JLeyd...@aol.com says...
>
>I've always thought the weak point in the "patsy" argument is the
>element of control.
And I've always been amused at LNT'ers inability to follow the evidence and do
any *thinking* on their own.
Speculation seems to be considered the height of LNT'er thought.
Okay... let's see if I'd be a good LNT'er... I'll avoid the evidence, and just
do some speculation here...
>How do you control an innocent patsy to get him to
>do what your want him to do when you want him to do it?
You offer to pay him the same amount he paid for his rifle - hence the amount of
money found on him after the assassination - and the rifle in the building that
day. The backup plan, of course, involved a number of rifles that were seen in
the TSBD just days earlier.
If necessary, you can even confiscate a rifle from a potential patsy's home, as
was done.
>For example,
>if you were Oswald's "handler" would you let him go out to Irving on
>the night before the assassination with Frazier, risking an accident or
>auto mechanical problem that would keep him out of work the next day?
Of course! For anyone who's got the intelligence of a snail would have backup
options in place. If, for example, LHO broke his leg getting out of the car
that morning, and was at the hospital getting a caste, LNT'ers everywhere would
be describing how no-one saw Frazier during the assassination...
>I think not.
Ah!! Perhaps Oswald could have been ordered to bring a sleeping bag, and sleep
in the TSBD on Thursday night... this would have *completely* eliminated this
possible problem.
But if we wanted LHO's rifle, he *had* to go pick it up. And it would be sloppy
intelligence procedures to have Hosty drive him to pick up his rifle.
>More importantly, how would you keep him out of sight
>during the assassination itself?
He didn't. Eyewitnesses saw and reported on his whereabouts. But as everyone
knows (or does after the JFK assassination), eyewitness testimony is the least
reliable form of evidence. [Did I get that right?]
And you can always simply "lose" or alter the more believable statements. (See
Carolyn Arnold's FBI statement for an example of how to do this)
>All he had to do was wander out on to the front steps, stand next to
>Lovelady (Look two Oswalds) and game would have been up.
He was told to stay inside... away from cameras. And, of course, we already
know that the press vehicles were moved far back in the motorcade, so the only
photos we needed to worry about were from amateurs. Really, we have it covered!
>And how did they get him to flee the building
>within a few minutes of the shooting, run to his pad and pick up his
>gun, etc., etc., etc.
He was told to go meet his control if anything unusual happened. His designated
meeting place was the Texas Theater - since it wasn't too far from his
residence.
As for "fleeing" the building, it really didn't matter... a case would have been
made against any designated patsy if he'd stayed there in the building just as
easily.
Someone who was *truly* trying to flee wouldn't have gone to a theater... they'd
have gotten on Greyhound, or taken a plane...
>A very cooperative Patsy, you have to admit.
Very engaging... to deal with speculations, instead of the eyewitness testimony
and evidence. Perhaps I'll try this some more...
>JGL
tomnln
"tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote in message news:...
>I have an FBI Report stating that on 11/22/63 Lovelady wore the shirt I D's
>below.
> Short Sleeved
> Broad Red & White Stripped
> Vertical Stripes
>
> This FBI Report is Accompanied with Lovelady IN THAT Shirt.
>
> Does that sound like the shirt on the man in the doorway in the Altgens
> photo?
>
> If Anyone want copies of that Report WITH Pictures Just Ask.
>
>
>
>
>
> <JLeyd...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1144606773.1...@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> I've always thought the weak point in the "patsy" argument is the
>> element of control. How do you control an innocent patsy to get him to
>> do what your want him to do when you want him to do it? For example,
>> if you were Oswald's "handler" would you let him go out to Irving on
>> the night before the assassination with Frazier, risking an accident or
>> auto mechanical problem that would keep him out of work the next day?
>> I think not. More importantly, how would you keep him out of sight
>> during the assassination itself? All he had to do was wander out on to
>> the front steps, stand next to Lovelady (Look two Oswalds) and game
>> would have been up. And how did they get him to flee the building
>> within a few minutes of the shooting, run to his pad and pick up his
>> gun, etc., etc., etc. A very cooperative Patsy, you have to admit.
>>
>> JGL
>>
>
>
JLeyd...@aol.com
patsy thing (and, oh, backup rifles), Not original but certainly
resourceful. No wonder the "conspirators" got away with it. They
thought of everything. Keep posting though -- you're up over 850 for
the year now. You just might be making a difference.
JGL
JLeyd...@aol.com
year and could hit 900 this month alone based on your current rate.
But you still haven't worked up the courage to sign your real name.
Hey, who could blame you?
JGL
tomnln
Are you a Felon Supporter Also?
WHY don't you come to the chat room JGL?
<JLeyd...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1144691394....@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
I have a Live Audio Chat Room on www.paltalk.com
Download & Use for FREE.
Once Logged on select Social Issues.
Scroll down to room called "Who Killed John F. Kennedy?"
I start between 8-9 pm e.s.t. EVERY NITE.
We can transfer files to one another Instantly.
ANY Exhibits of Evidence, ANY Testimony from WC/HSCA Volumes.
Look forward to seeing you there.
tomnln
Todd W. Vaughan
His real name is Thomas Rossley. His wife is Ellen Rossley. The name
"Tomnln" is possibly some freaky version of "Tom-n-Lynn".
Oh, he's also a nutcase.
Todd
Ben Holmes
And yet again, we have another example of a LNT'er who snips everything, and
refuses to respond to points made.
Was this recently added to the LNT'ers Handbook?
Or is this cowardice just natural for LNT'ers?
In article <1144690466.9...@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com>,
JLeyd...@aol.com says...
And, once again, you fail to mention that probably 800+ of those posts WERE IN
RESPONSE TO A LNT'er!
But facts don't faze LNT'ers, do they?
tomnln
Can't be individual because they are NOT allowed to represent themselve.
Like ALL "Cults" they are Limited to "The Party Line". (commie?) (sounds
like it)
"Ben Holmes" <bnho...@rain.org> wrote in message
news:e1eb1...@drn.newsguy.com...
tomnln
Something Totally Foreign to Filth like you.
All our kids have Only 1 Dad & 1 Mom. Eat yer heart out toddy.
Eat your heart Out. Ya don't see that where you are up on "Brokeback
Mountain".
You still have to answer for Baker's 4 different stories toddy.
Still embarrassing your Parents with ALL your Gutter Talk I see toddy.
"Todd W. Vaughan" <twvaug...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1144696931.1...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Todd W. Vaughan
>Still embarrassing your Parents with ALL your Gutter Talk I see toddy.<
You took God's name in vain when you wrote "G D", over and over again,
Tomnln.
Hyporcrite.
Oh, and you're a nutcase.
Todd
Todd W. Vaughan
Tom Rossley, Ben Holmes' little "yes" man.
Todd
tomnln
"Todd W. Vaughan" <twvaug...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1144698850.7...@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
My "G D" stands for "Gosh Darn".
Oh, and You're a Felon Supporter.
You Condone Lies Under Oath.
"Todd W. Vaughan" <twvaug...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1144698509.8...@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
Anthony Marsh
If you are really interested in such an aspect then research other cases
and explain how a patsy was set up in another crime.
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
JLeyd...@aol.com
Sirhan, O.J. Simpson, Bruno Hauptmann? That's why you CTs never get
anyplace? You just play games.
JGL
Todd W. Vaughan
>My "G D" stands for "Gosh Darn". <
Sure it does. (wink, wink)
Lied again, I see.
Todd