Harold Weisberg

[David Von Pein]

HAROLD WEISBERG:
TOP-NOTCH RESEARCHER?
OR JUST ANOTHER ANYBODY-BUT-OSWALD CONSPIRACY NUT?

By David Von Pein

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

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/10/harold-weisberg.html

The audio clip that can be found at the webpage above was taken from a
radio interview in the 1980s featuring famous JFK assassination
researcher Harold Weisberg. And it's a clip that should make any
reasonable person have serious doubts about the accuracy of anything
else Mr. Weisberg had to say concerning the assassination of President
Kennedy, because it's a clip that has Weisberg saying something so
incredibly silly and provably incorrect that you'd almost have to ask
yourself this question after hearing Weisberg make such a stupid
claim: Is Weisberg really talking about the JFK case here, or is he
referring to some other case entirely?

Here's what Harold Weisberg said:

"I'm inclined to think that Oswald did no shooting at all, and I
have no reason to believe that any of the shooting came from the sixth
floor. All of the evidence that tends to indicate that is corrupted in
one way or another."


Now I know that the late Mr. Weisberg is considered by many JFK
conspiracy theorists to be one of the "deans" among the first
generation of Warren Commission critics, with many people propping up
Weisberg as the very best of all assassination researchers -- but when
a critic makes statements like the ones I just quoted above, I have to
scratch my head and wonder why on Earth ANYONE would place any faith
in this guy whatsoever and prop him up as some kind of "God" among
researchers?

The part about Weisberg actually believing that NO SHOTS AT ALL were
fired from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository on
11/22/63 is so far out and so provably wrong that I have to wonder
whether all of Mr. Weisberg's marbles were present and accounted for
when he made such a patently crazy statement in the 1980s.

For, the evidence that proves that multiple gunshots were fired from
the southeast corner window on the sixth floor of the Depository is
not just beyond any reasonable doubt, the evidence to prove that fact
has unquestionably been established beyond all possible doubt. And
even most conspiracy theorists will acknowledge that some shots were,
indeed, fired from the sixth floor.

Only a person who wants to ignore or deliberately mangle and
misrepresent ALL of the following physical evidence and eyewitnesses
can possibly believe that no shots at all came from the sixth floor of
the TSBD:

1.) The first-day (11/22/63) interviews and affidavits and statements
from several eyewitnesses, in which various witnesses told their story
about having seen a gunman (or a gun) in the southeast window on the
sixth floor of the Book Depository.

These witnesses include: Howard Brennan, Amos Euins, Robert Jackson,
and Mal Couch (and a couple of others). And most (if not all) of these
people told their eyewitness accounts within literally hours of the
shooting (or even less), either via written affidavits that they
filled out at the Dallas Sheriff's Department, or by way of live radio
interviews, such as WFAA-TV cameraman Mal Couch's live report that was
broadcast on WFAA-Radio very shortly after the assassination on
11/22/63 (which can be heard below).

http://dvp-potpourri.blogspot.com/2011/05/mal-couch.html

The above Mal Couch interview, all by itself, totally destroys
Weisberg's fantasy (or anyone else's similar fantasy theory) about NO
SHOTS coming from the sixth floor of the Book Depository Building.
Couch's statement on live Dallas radio on the very day of the
assassination has Couch confirming (for all time) that he actually saw
a rifle being pulled in from an upper floor of the TSBD.

Couch said it was the "fifth or sixth floor" of the Depository, and he
also said this: "There were people underneath the rifle, who looked up
to see where the shots had come from."

And that can mean only one thing: Mal Couch had to have seen the rifle
protruding from the SIXTH floor of the building, because the people he
saw "underneath the rifle" were on the fifth floor, a fact that is
confirmed by
Tom Dillard's photograph.

Therefore, in order to believe (as Weisberg believed) that no shots
were fired from the sixth floor at all, you'd have to believe in one
of these two things (both of which stretch reasonable thinking to the
breaking point):

Mal Couch was either a liar or was mistaken when he said that he saw a
rifle being pulled back into the sixth-floor window.

Or:

The person who was sticking a rifle out of the sixth-floor window was
not really using his rifle as an assassination weapon that day -- the
gunman was merely pointing it out the window as a prop or just for
"show", but he didn't really fire any shots with that rifle.

Both of the options above, of course, are just plain silly.

2.) Three spent shells from Lee Harvey Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano
rifle were found underneath the sixth-floor window -- i.e., underneath
the very same window that eyewitnesses said they saw a rifle
protruding from.

3.) Oswald's very own Carcano rifle was also found on the same sixth
floor. And it was proven that that exact Carcano rifle of Oswald's was
the weapon that fired bullets at JFK, via the fact (among other
things) that bullet fragments from that exact gun were found in the
front seat of the limousine. (Did Mr. Weisberg really think that
bullet fragments CE567 and CE569 were planted in the President's car
in order to frame Oswald?)

4.) Witnesses on the fifth floor of the TSBD, Harold Norman in
particular, heard a rifle being fired directly over their heads as the
shooting was occurring, with Norman even hearing three cartridge cases
hitting the plywood floor above him. (Is Harold Norman a liar too?)

In the face of all of this evidence, Harold Weisberg (who knew this
case like the back of his hand) actually had the nerve to utter this
statement on a San Francisco radio station:

"I'm inclined to think that Oswald did no shooting at all, and I
have no reason to believe that any of the shooting came from the sixth
floor. All of the evidence that tends to indicate that is corrupted in
one way or another."

There's only one additional thing that needs to be said here:

Un-be-liev-able.

David Von Pein
October 6, 2011

[aeffects]

On May 10, 5:13 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> HAROLD WEISBERG:
> TOP-NOTCH RESEARCHER?

<snip the lone nut lunacy>

you're priceless, looney-tunes, you keep coming back hon, we need you
and your lone nut idiocy.

[David Von Pein]

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/99efdb031906b427/175071350aa520d3?#175071350aa520d3


ANTHONY MARSH SAID:

>>> "Couch saw something in that window, but did he SEE the shots being fired by THAT rifle?" <<<


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Oh, come now, Tony. Add it up, for Pete sake. It's not difficult at
all:

1.) Sniper fires from SE corner window on 6th floor of TSBD.
2.) Shells beneath SE corner window came from LHO's gun.
3.) Bullet fragments from LHO's gun are found in JFK's limo.
4.) LHO's gun is found on the 6th floor.
5.) Mal Couch sees rifle in SE corner window.
6.) Bob Jackson sees rifle in SE corner window.
7.) Amos Euins sees "pipe" in SE corner window.
8.) Howard Brennan sees man firing rifle from SE corner window.

Via the above batch of stuff, do you still really believe that Mr.
Couch didn't see "THAT rifle" being pulled back into the Sniper's Nest
window?

And after glancing at the above eight items for a second time, does
any reasonable and sensible person really think that the following
quote from Harold Weisberg is a legitimate, fair, and correct
statement?:

"I have no reason to believe that any of the shooting came from

the sixth floor." -- H. Weisberg

Even if you want to throw out ALL of the physical rifle evidence
(bullet shells, bullets, bullet fragments, and Rifle C2766), the above
quote by Weisberg is totally nutty.

Why?

Because of numbers 5 through 8 listed above.

[David Von Pein]

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/99efdb031906b427/10725660c45022fa?#10725660c45022fa


ANTHONY MARSH SAID:

>>> "I guess you're trying to reply to me, but you still haven't figured out this InterNet thingy and learned Usenet protocols for quoting messages." <<<


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I couldn't care less about "Usenet protocols". I format my messages
the way I want to -- mainly for my own files and archiving. I'll enjoy
revisiting the silly things you conspiracy theorists have said to me
in the year 2032.

And I don't like Usenet's formatting. So I elect to delete everything
after hitting "Reply", and then start from scratch, focusing on just
the part of a post I'm replying to (and eliminating all the junk I
don't need).

And I put your name ("Tony") in the first line of my response (the one
you said it took you "hours" to "figure out").

How many Tonys post on this board?


>>> "Never rely on witnesses." <<<

Tony Marsh tells us to never rely on any witnesses--ever. Which means,
if we were to follow such broad and silly advice, we actually are then
forced to give some credence to this idiotic comment uttered by Mr.
Weisberg:

"I have no reason to believe that any of the shooting came from the
sixth floor."

Because only by totally ignoring all of the witnesses who said they
saw a gun (or "pipe") sticking out of the sixth-floor Depository
window can a person like Weisberg feel confident enough to make the
absurd statement quoted above.

So, Tony, should all JFK researchers REALLY just ignore the testimony
of Brennan, Euins, Couch, and Jackson (with respect to each of those
persons saying they definitely saw a gun in the SN window)?