The Motorcade Route -- Was It Changed? Or Are The Conspiracy-Loving Kooks Just Plain Nuts? (I'll Choose That Latter Option)

[David Von Pein]

WAS THE 11/22/63 DALLAS MOTORCADE ROUTE ALTERED AT THE LAST
MINUTE?......

THE EVIDENCE PROVIDED BY THE WARREN COMMISSION GIVES US THE OBVIOUS
ANSWER TO THE ABOVE QUESTION......

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

In the years since President John F. Kennedy's assassination in 1963,
many conspiracy theorists have latched onto the
completely-unsupportable notion that the motorcade route was changed at
the eleventh hour just prior to President Kennedy's drive through
downtown Dallas on November 22, 1963.

The "Motorcade Route Was Changed" allegation is pure malarkey....and
provably so. (Unless the conspiracists who continually tout such an
unsupportable theory actually believe, and can prove, that the Warren
Commission somehow "faked" Commission Exhibits 1362 and 1363, which
consist of photographs of two Dallas newspapers, both from Tuesday,
November 19, 1963, which verify the finalized motorcade route,
including the turn from Houston Street onto Elm Street, which is a turn
that took JFK's car directly in front of the Texas School Book
Depository Building, from where Lee Harvey Oswald shot and killed
President Kennedy.)

CE1362 and CE1363 were utilized as official exhibits by the Warren
Commission to demonstrate the fact that JFK's assassin, Lee Harvey
Oswald, could very easily have had ample foreknowledge as to the
precise motorcade route through Dallas that JFK would travel on
November 22nd.

Do conspiracy theorists think that both of those WC newspaper exhibits
were "fabricated" in some fashion (with the references to "Elm Street"
somehow added into the text of the two newspaper editions at a later
time by cover-up agents)?

Obviously, such crazy fakery and skullduggery never happened, which
means that the whole idea of the motorcade route being "altered" at the
last minute (in order to conveniently take the President close to the
building where the supposed "Patsy" was located) is a specious idea to
begin with.

The motorcade route was never "changed" from its original
configuration. To begin with, the route wasn't even finalized until
November 18th, just four days prior to Kennedy's visit to Dallas. The
route was then published in BOTH Dallas papers on November 19th.

On November 20 and November 22, the Dallas papers then mentioned the
general routing of the motorcade (but lacking specific street details).
But this lack of "Elm Street" detail in the two later papers on the
20th and the 22nd can't possibly be used by conspiracy buffs to promote
a "Route Was Changed" theory, unless these buffs actually want to
believe that the route was changed TWICE -- with the last "change"
mirroring the exact Houston-to-Elm route that was already published in
the November 19 papers, which is the EARLIEST of the Dallas newspaper
examples I mentioned above.

And, as an aside here, Oswald didn't even obtain his job at the Book
Depository until the middle of October '63, a full month prior to the
finalized motorcade route being decided upon. The timing of these
events, therefore, illustrates how utterly ridiculous the
largely-accepted theory of "Oswald Was An Innocent Patsy" really is.

Here's a direct passage from the Warren Commission Report (an
outstanding document, regardless of what any CTers believe):

"On November 19, the Times-Herald afternoon paper detailed the precise
route: 'From the airport, the President's party will proceed to
Mockingbird Lane to Lemmon and then to Turtle Creek, turning south to
Cedar Springs. The motorcade will then pass through downtown on Harwood
and then west on Main, turning back to Elm at Houston and then out
Stemmons Freeway to the Trade Mart'." -- WCR; Page 40*

* = Footnote attached, "54", which, per the Warren Report's footnotes
index, leads us to "CE1362", which is this Exhibit....

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0322b.htm

....which positively PROVES that the "Elm St. turn" was being planned
as of the date of that paper (11/19/63).

Page 40 of the WR also tells us that the Dallas morning paper on
November 19th also mentions the specific turn onto Elm Street -- "Main
to Houston, Houston to Elm". With a footnote ("55"), taking us to
"CE1363", which is this Exhibit....

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/pages/WH_Vol22_0323a.jpg

Moreover, the turn onto Elm Street was essential in order to avoid the
concrete divider in the middle of Main Street that would have caused
even greater violation of standard Secret Service practice with respect
to the slowing down of the President's limousine. Sans the Elm St.
turn, JFK's car (as well as the three bulky press buses at the rear of
the motorcade) would have had to negotiate this obstruction on Main
Street....

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0282b.htm

There are also these additional pertinent facts re. the motorcade
routing (taken directly from the Warren Report):

"To reach the Trade Mart {President Kennedy's destination on 11/22/63}
from Main Street the {Secret Service} agents decided to use the
Stemmons Freeway (Route No. 77), the most direct route. The only
practical way for westbound traffic on Main Street to reach the
northbound lanes of the Stemmons Freeway is via Elm Street, which Route
No. 77 traffic is instructed to follow in this part of the city." --
WCR; Page 32

"The Elm Street approach to the Stemmons Freeway is necessary in order
to avoid the traffic hazards which would otherwise exist if right turns
were permitted from both Main and Elm into the freeway. .... Traffic
proceeding west on Main is directed to turn right at Houston in order
to reach the Dallas-Fort Worth Turnpike, which has the same access road
from Elm Street as does the Stemmons Freeway." -- WCR; Page 39

The above section of WCR text from page 39 is followed by footnote
number "46", which takes the reader to a reference to "CE2967", which
is a photo showing a sign on Main Street (just east of Houston Street)
that specifically instructs traffic to turn right on Houston in order
to gain access to the Turnpike (and, hence, to the Stemmons Freeway
ramp as well).

CE2967......

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh26/html/WH_Vol26_0243a.htm

As can be easily seen from these WC exhibits, the motorcade needed the
Houston-to-Elm turn to gain access to Stemmons Freeway. And as the
exhibits further show, Oswald had ample time to read about the
motorcade route (including the specifics re. the Elm St. turn) prior to
his November 21 trip to Ruth Paine's home in Irving to retrieve his
rifle.

Given these facts about the published motorcade route, Lee Harvey
Oswald could (and obviously did) know about the President's planned
parade route through Dealey Plaza when he took his "package" to work
with him (and told a lie about its contents) on the morning of the
assassination on Friday, November 22nd, 1963.

Plus -- It's always been my opinion that Oswald would probably have
attempted the assassination even if JFK's car didn't proceed down Elm
Street. If the car had gone straight down Main Street, Oswald could
still have attempted the shooting. It would have been a longer, and
more difficult shot, true. But IMO he still probably would have
attempted it. Sadly, he had an even better chance to kill the President
via the much-easier "On Elm Street" target.

The people who continue to spout the crackpot "Motorcade Route Was
Changed" balderdash should not even be discussing any aspect of the
John F. Kennedy murder case in the first place...for it's obvious that
such a person has no idea what he/she is talking about in so
discussing.

David Von Pein
November 2006

[mike...@roadrunner.com]

The question is who planned the motorcade route, the original unaltered route? The rest is a straw man diversion from the real issue. Who came up with the idea for the official motorcade route? Do you honestly believe that it is a coincidence or chance that Kennedy was brought directly to his assassin's sniper perch? Who planned the motorcade route?.. BTW, Oswald was in a fixed position for over a month before the Kennedy assassination. The issue is not how Oswald could have known what the motorcade route would be. THE PRESIDENT WAS DELIVERED TO HIM. There is no way Oswald could have planned that, or bring the president to him. This is the polar opposite of the phony lone gunman theory. Oswald did not stalk or hunt down the president. The president was brought directly to his killer... The mathematical odds for this happening by chance are nil and none. A man can hate a president, with rifle in hand waiting by his home or workplace window for the president to show up so he can take a shot at him, and it would not happen in a thousand years... It was a crime of opportunity?.. The same oddball misfit leftist defector who got all kinds of attention before the assassination, the perfect patsy to divert attention away from the far right, he just got real lucky?.. That would like somebody winning the lottery without even buying a ticket first... If Oswald was a lone gunman operating on his own was only guilty party, then why was he himself assassinated?.. The most absurd conspiracy theory is the official story itself.

[lazu...@gmail.com]

There sure are a lot of conspiracy loving kooks who worked at Parkland Hospital, and Bethesda Naval Hospital, and were in Dealey Plaza by the droves,policemen even.

[tomnln]

all motorcade through dealy plaza went from west to east before "and" after the assassination ! ! !

see>>> http://www.whokilledjfk.net/parades_in_dallas_always_went_we.htm
===============================================================================================

[david.t...@aol.com]

Who planned the motorcade/parade route? That's the question. Everything else is a distraction. The Secret Service drove or led the motorcade, but who planned the motorcade/parade route? Who put the president into the kill zone? Who are those traitors by name? I don't care what the reasoning was for the route. The president was scheduled to go here, then there. I don't care. Who planned the route? Does anyone have names? Some have said that it was the Secret Service who planned the route, but I don't think so. Too political.

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 23:48:53 -0700 (PDT), david.t...@aol.com
wrote:

The Secret Service was largely responsible for the route. Lawson &
Sorrels were probably the two that held the largest "responsibility."

Once the Trade Mart was chosen, the route was the natural one, so the
decision of the Trade Mart is just as important as the route.

But you ignore the fact that two previous assassination attempts,
Chicago & Tampa - occurred. It didn't matter *where* the motorcade
route went - planning for the assassination would have moved forward.

Those who planned the assassination need not have been involved in
placing JFK in a particular place *AT ALL*... they merely needed to
know a few days in advance in order to get their people there.

It's clear that the Secret Service was involved at some level... but
there's far more to this case that merely identifying who selected the
parade route.

[Bud]

On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 5:10:46 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 23:48:53 -0700 (PDT), david.t...@aol.com
> wrote:
>
> >Who planned the motorcade/parade route? That's the question.
> > Everything else is a distraction. The Secret Service drove or led
> > the motorcade, but who planned the motorcade/parade route?
> > Who put the president into the kill zone? Who are those traitors
> > by name? I don't care what the reasoning was for the route.
> > The president was scheduled to go here, then there. I don't
> > care. Who planned the route? Does anyone have names?
> > Some have said that it was the Secret Service who planned
> > the route, but I don't think so. Too political.
>
> The Secret Service was largely responsible for the route. Lawson &
> Sorrels were probably the two that held the largest "responsibility."
>
> Once the Trade Mart was chosen, the route was the natural one, so the
> decision of the Trade Mart is just as important as the route.
>
> But you ignore the fact that two previous assassination attempts,
> Chicago & Tampa - occurred.

Lets see you establish that they did occur.

[Ben Holmes]

On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 17:27:20 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:

>On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 5:10:46 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 23:48:53 -0700 (PDT), david.t...@aol.com
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Who planned the motorcade/parade route? That's the question.
>> > Everything else is a distraction. The Secret Service drove or led
>> > the motorcade, but who planned the motorcade/parade route?
>> > Who put the president into the kill zone? Who are those traitors
>> > by name? I don't care what the reasoning was for the route.
>> > The president was scheduled to go here, then there. I don't
>> > care. Who planned the route? Does anyone have names?
>> > Some have said that it was the Secret Service who planned
>> > the route, but I don't think so. Too political.
>>
>> The Secret Service was largely responsible for the route. Lawson &
>> Sorrels were probably the two that held the largest "responsibility."
>>
>> Once the Trade Mart was chosen, the route was the natural one, so the
>> decision of the Trade Mart is just as important as the route.
>>
>> But you ignore the fact that two previous assassination attempts,
>> Chicago & Tampa - occurred.
>
> Lets see you establish that they did occur.

Let's see you lie and claim they didn't.

[David Von Pein]

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/motorcade-route.html

[Ben Holmes]

On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 20:30:54 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/motorcade-route.html

If you're too afraid to post statements here, and defend them against
critical review, what are you doing? (Other than pointing out your
cowardice...)

[Bud]

On Wednesday, June 21, 2017 at 8:59:08 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 17:27:20 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
> wrote:
>
> >On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 5:10:46 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> >> On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 23:48:53 -0700 (PDT), david.t...@aol.com
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Who planned the motorcade/parade route? That's the question.
> >> > Everything else is a distraction. The Secret Service drove or led
> >> > the motorcade, but who planned the motorcade/parade route?
> >> > Who put the president into the kill zone? Who are those traitors
> >> > by name? I don't care what the reasoning was for the route.
> >> > The president was scheduled to go here, then there. I don't
> >> > care. Who planned the route? Does anyone have names?
> >> > Some have said that it was the Secret Service who planned
> >> > the route, but I don't think so. Too political.
> >>
> >> The Secret Service was largely responsible for the route. Lawson &
> >> Sorrels were probably the two that held the largest "responsibility."
> >>
> >> Once the Trade Mart was chosen, the route was the natural one, so the
> >> decision of the Trade Mart is just as important as the route.
> >>
> >> But you ignore the fact that two previous assassination attempts,
> >> Chicago & Tampa - occurred.
> >
> > Lets see you establish that they did occur.
>
>
> Let's see you lie and claim they didn't.

Typical of your shifting of the burden. You state these things as fact, when called on to support them you run.

[Bud]

You make a lot of statements here. You just refuse to support any of them.

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 09:48:06 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

No need to "support" facts that you refuse to publicly deny... and
implicitly accept as true.

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 09:49:27 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:

You're lying again, "Bud."

[Bud]

It isn`t about me, stop trying to shift the burden on to me and start supporting the things you say. Until you do nothing you say carries any weight.

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 10:10:03 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

> It isn`t about me...

You're the only one requesting citations on something you already
accept as true.

[Bud]

You are lying of course. I only challenged you to support what you claimed. You refused, as usual.

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:10:22 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

Empty claim.

[Bud]

You claim I accept it as true. That is a lie.

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 17:30:40 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

You're lying again.

[Daddy Master]

On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 23:48:53 -0700 (PDT), david.t...@aol.com
wrote:

>Who planned the motorcade/parade route? That's the question. Everything else is a distraction. The Secret Service drove or led the motorcade, but who planned the motorcade/parade route? Who put the president into the kill zone? Who are those traitors by name? I don't care what the reasoning was for the route. The president was scheduled to go here, then there. I don't care. Who planned the route? Does anyone have names? Some have said that it was the Secret Service who planned the route, but I don't think so. Too political.

This is all easily findable through Google.

- Special Agent Winston G. Lawson, a member of the White House detail
who acted as the advance agent, and Forrest V. Sorrels, special agent
in charge of the Dallas office.
- On November 14, Lawson and Sorrels attended a meeting at Love Field
and on their return to Dallas drove over the route which Sorrels
believed best suited for the proposed motorcade.
- Lawson and Sorrels met with Dallas Chief of Police Jesse E. Curry,
Assistant Chief Charles Batchelor, Deputy Chief N. T. Fisher, and
several other command officers to discuss details of the motorcade.
- The route was further reviewed by Lawson and Sorrels with Assistant
Chief Batchelor and members of the local host committee on November
15. The police officials agreed that the route recommended by Sorrels
was the proper one and did not express a belief that any other route
might be better. On November 18, Sorrels and Lawson drove over the
selected route with Batchelor and other police officers, verifying
that it could be traversed within 45 minutes. Representatives of the
local host committee and the White House staff were advised by the
Secret Service of the actual route on the afternoon of November 18.

[mike...@roadrunner.com]

On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 5:10:46 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:

> Those who planned the assassination need not have been involved in
> placing JFK in a particular place *AT ALL*... they merely needed to
> know a few days in advance in order to get their people there.

That is a very good point. It was a setup and a conspiracy either way, because Oswald did not plan the motorcade route nor did he place himself at the Texas School Book Depository Building. Both were arranged by a third party.

It is self-evident that a third party was involved in placing Oswald and Kennedy in the same place at the same time. This was not a crime of opportunity on the part of a "lone gunman".

That theory could only make some sense if it was Oswald who brought himself to Kennedy. If Oswald had been stalking the president during his public appearances, then one day leap from the crowd with a handgun, and shooting the president at point-blank range. Then it would at least look like the actions of a lone gunman.

But what actually happened on November 22, 1963 was the polar opposite of that. The assassin was in a fixed position for over a month in advance, after being placed there by a third party. Then that same third party delivered the mark directly to his assassin.

Sometimes the truth hides in plain view.

For Oswald to have acted alone would have required him winning the hit man lottery without even buying a ticket first.

Lets say that someone is some kind of political fanatic and attention whore like Oswald was, and they're sitting by a window, with their rifle in hand, and swearing that as soon as an American president drives by, they are going to shoot the guy.

Relying on chance alone, such a person could wait a thousand years, and no American president is going to just happen to be driving by. All people would see a thousand years from now is a human skeleton sitting by a window with a thousand year old rifle in his hands.

Oswald didn't have to wait a thousand years, he only had to wait for a month or so. Then the president was delivered to him.

I am not a conspiracy theorist, I analyze actual conspiracies, and I leave out the nonsense. Nothing frustrates me more than conspiracy nonsense being mixed with conspiracy fact or probability, because the nonsense is then used as a straw man to discredit any and all dissenting views, including the correct ones.

You just look at the means, motive and opportunity, and it's very clear that Oswald could not and did not act alone. He was the only actual shooter that day in Dallas, but that is incidental compared with the rest of the facts. Without that third party involvement, Oswald and his rifle would have accomplished nothing.

So, what was the motive?.. A foreign policy coup by equally fanatical cold war warriors who saw Kennedy as a threat and a problem. There were other powerful parties who also wanted the Kennedys gone and a change in policies.

The problem I have with the statists? is that they are all too willing to embrace endless coincidences. Investigators consider too many coincidences as at least prima facia evidence that warrants further investigation. They never just ignore coincidences.

Reasonable people go with probability, not mere possibility... Is it possible that Oswald acted alone before, during and after the shooting? Maybe... Is it probable that Oswald acted alone?.. No way.

If it was up to Oswald alone, the assassination in Dallas would not have occurred. That, reasonable people would conclude, is a fact.

The government in Washington is not our government, and hasn't been for a long, long time. Far too much treachery for far too long. For 100-plus years.

Whether it was the creation of the stock market, public ownership, the Act of 1871 that formed a corporation called THE UNITED STATES, or World War 1, or the 1944 Bretton Woods conference that established the U.S. dollar as the world's reserve currency... America was gradually subverted, step by step... Long before Kennedy became president, a system had been created that would not tolerate a national and world leader like President Kennedy. He was too much of a change agent to be allowed to live.

If President Kennedy wasn't murdered in Dallas, he would have been murdered somewhere else, and he probably knew that going in. So, why not drive down the street in a convertible? He wasn't being protected, and he knew it.

[chucksch...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 3:05:46 PM UTC-5, mike...@roadrunner.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 5:10:46 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>
> > Those who planned the assassination need not have been involved in
> > placing JFK in a particular place *AT ALL*... they merely needed to
> > know a few days in advance in order to get their people there.
>
> That is a very good point. It was a setup and a conspiracy either way, because Oswald did not plan the motorcade route nor did he place himself at the Texas School Book Depository Building. Both were arranged by a third party.

The entirety of this declarative statement is begging the question.

>
> It is self-evident that a third party was involved in placing Oswald and Kennedy in the same place at the same time.

You're begging the question again.

>This was not a crime of opportunity on the part of a "lone gunman".

Everything the WC was able to uncover pegged this as a crime of opportunity on the part of a lone gunman. You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.

>
> That theory could only make some sense if it was Oswald who brought himself to Kennedy.

Begged again. Circular.

>If Oswald had been stalking the president during his public appearances, then one day leap from the crowd with a handgun, and shooting the president at point-blank range. Then it would at least look like the actions of a lone gunman.

So would firing three shots at the POTUS from the TSBD look like the actions of a lone gunman.

>
> But what actually happened on November 22, 1963 was the polar opposite of that. The assassin was in a fixed position for over a month in advance, after being placed there by a third party.

The third party(s) was Ruth Paine and Roy Truly. Were they a part of the plot?

>Then that same third party delivered the mark directly to his assassin.

Begged. You need to show a third party delivered JFK to Oswald. You don't get to state it and have it assumed as factual without providing a case for it.

>
> Sometimes the truth hides in plain view.

Indeed.

>
> For Oswald to have acted alone would have required him winning the hit man lottery without even buying a ticket first.

Or just bringing his rifle to work in a paper bag and pointing it out the window when JFK rolled past it.

>
> Lets say that someone is some kind of political fanatic and attention whore like Oswald was, and they're sitting by a window, with their rifle in hand, and swearing that as soon as an American president drives by, they are going to shoot the guy.
>
> Relying on chance alone, such a person could wait a thousand years, and no American president is going to just happen to be driving by.

JFK didn't happen to pass by. It was part of a planned trip to Texas. Oswald most likely read in the newspaper that JFK's motorcade was going to pass through Dealey Plaza. This was a happenstance of history. You don't get to assume a diabolical plot without being challenged to produce it. So, produce it.

>All people would see a thousand years from now is a human skeleton sitting by a window with a thousand year old rifle in his hands.

A thousand years is how long the world is going to wait before you guys produce your conspiracy. Big claims require big proof. Start providing it.

>
> Oswald didn't have to wait a thousand years, he only had to wait for a month or so. Then the president was delivered to him.

You are aware that Oswald tried to get himself to Cuba through Mexico City right before he returned to Dallas, correct? If he'd been successful, there would've been no Oswald in the sixth floor of that building. Happenstance. A twist of fate.

>
> I am not a conspiracy theorist,

Yet you lay out a conspiracy that involves JFK being presented to Oswald on a silver platter by some malignant group.

>I analyze actual conspiracies, and I leave out the nonsense.

Which conspiracy have you analyzed, and which ones did you find to be nonsense?

>Nothing frustrates me more than conspiracy nonsense being mixed with conspiracy fact or probability,

Then stop.

>because the nonsense is then used as a straw man to discredit any and all dissenting views, including the correct ones.

Which ones are the correct ones? I'd love to hear them.

>
> You just look at the means, motive and opportunity, and it's very clear that Oswald could not and did not act alone.

It isn't clear at all that Oswald could not and did not act alone. The WC found that Oswald fired the shots and could not find evidence of a conspiracy. The HSCA found that Oswald fired the shots, and the supposed fourth shot from the grassy knoll has been debunked. You know this already.

>He was the only actual shooter that day in Dallas, but that is incidental compared with the rest of the facts. Without that third party involvement, Oswald and his rifle would have accomplished nothing.

Then present your case. You've done nothing but trot out a series of easy to recognize logical fallacies.

>
> So, what was the motive?.. A foreign policy coup by equally fanatical cold war warriors who saw Kennedy as a threat and a problem. There were other powerful parties who also wanted the Kennedys gone and a change in policies.

That's why we have elections.

>
> The problem I have with the statists? is that they are all too willing to embrace endless coincidences.

And conspiracists are unwilling to accept any coincidences.

>Investigators consider too many coincidences as at least prima facia evidence that warrants further investigation.

There were several investigations.

>They never just ignore coincidences.

Again, there were several investigations.

>
> Reasonable people go with probability, not mere possibility... Is it possible that Oswald acted alone before, during and after the shooting? Maybe... Is it probable that Oswald acted alone?.. No way.

Way.

>
> If it was up to Oswald alone, the assassination in Dallas would not have occurred. That, reasonable people would conclude, is a fact.

Your penchant for circular arguments/begging the question is duly noted.

>
> The government in Washington is not our government, and hasn't been for a long, long time. Far too much treachery for far too long. For 100-plus years.

Okay, here comes the big conspiracy in 3...2...1...

>
> Whether it was the creation of the stock market, public ownership, the Act of 1871 that formed a corporation called THE UNITED STATES, or World War 1, or the 1944 Bretton Woods conference that established the U.S. dollar as the world's reserve currency... America was gradually subverted, step by step... Long before Kennedy became president, a system had been created that would not tolerate a national and world leader like President Kennedy.

>Lol, inadvertently funny, because some think Mayor Daley in Chicago and some creative vote counting in >Texas got JFK elected. Good old fashioned American election shenanigans.

>He was too much of a change agent to be allowed to live.

Or Oswald just took advantage of his opportunity. He failed with Walker, but unfortunately got it right with JFK.

>
> If President Kennedy wasn't murdered in Dallas, he would have been murdered somewhere else, and he probably knew that going in.

More begging the question. You're a pro. Boris and Ben should be taking notes.

>So, why not drive down the street in a convertible? He wasn't being protected, and he knew it.

Everything you laid out is based on begged questions. Fix your premises. To fix your premises, you need to argue in favor of something without assuming your points, and you need to provide evidence and proof of the specific things you allege. Saying, "Everybody knows," or "He was too much of a change agent to be allowed to live," etc. is very weak and rests on your subjective views.

[David Healy]

after 2+ years you are still foaming mightly... relax you, oh Queen of the Pale White Thighs Tribe!

[Ben Holmes]

On Sun, 15 Sep 2019 19:09:04 -0700 (PDT), chucksch...@gmail.com
wrote:

>A thousand years is how long the world is going to wait before you guys produce your conspiracy.

My Scenario - Part 1
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/y0hdkKgWvtI/3uukYgXeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 2
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/jSfe1BrGfJc/SOXAOQbeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 2a
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/kGfZPR4C-Lw/AlnRq1HeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 3
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/IShoUFao5OU/VuYGWFTeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 3a
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/JFuasrnWRqA/l1vih03eAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 4
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/LRMeWBFE1ug/bfjGTAbeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 5
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/S1ddVKc3Jj4/IESJbFPeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 6
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/b5ODl3yA4uk/g77N-UreAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 7
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/rwmZjz92YC8/P-9Mn07eAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 8
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c6e29olW6XA/Os29-FveAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 9
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/ixNqGISHbrU/gd06wVHeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 10
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/3Di6kuseb2Q/aHbAQmLeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 11
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/sYEyPH0A_eI/IH-UZgbeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 11a
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/aGduj6uaGUk/3eDp513eAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 11b
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/8rAmKZBOCiY/yCELq27eAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 12
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/OnrH5R6ryHE/stjdfgbeAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 12a
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/J0A8N12PPHU/CcxpiU7eAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 13
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/8hD-q0gTa_c/Co3ZJE7eAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 14
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/lsaXwhPRbEg/hZ7ZmEveAAAJ
My Scenario - Part 15
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/UA86YdJXEgY/JhG8o0reAAAJ
My Scenario - The Conclusion
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/UWfco_sGxYw/yApSPFXeAAAJ

Still unanswered by **ANY** believer.

[Bud]

Still not a case.

A thousand conspiracy idiots pounding away on a thousand keyboards will produce a thousand "scenarios". But not one case.

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 10:24:57 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:

And *STILL* not answered by **ANY** believer...

[Bud]

Not a case.

[chucksch...@gmail.com]

You didn't provide a conspiracy theory. It's a regurgitation of your same old, same old. It's a massive Fringe Reset.

I'll summarize your magnum opus:

Ben:

"In summary, we know a conspiracy killed JFK and we know the WCR lied about it. Although it's possible LHO was involved, he most likely was the designated patsy."

The end.


You provided no tests.

No shot sequence.

No explanations for the things you allege.

No backstory for a specific plot.

No elimination of any other theories.

And you claim your magnum opus is superior to the body of work already out there?

You're so delusional it's almost funny, in a sad way.

[David Healy]

I'll summarize your summary: Oh shit! They've got it figured out...

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 10:59:24 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 11:04:31 -0700 (PDT), chucksch...@gmail.com

>You didn't...

I did.

You provably lied and ran...

[Ben Holmes]

Yep.

And amusingly, they've ALL run from it.

[Bud]

If you want to believe stupid shit, why does that require an answer from others? If you want to believe there were assassination plots in other cities believe it, it is free country.

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 13:23:57 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

> If you...

Nothing I do or say can force you to stop being a coward and a liar.

Once again, **STILL** no answer...

[Bud]

Nothing I can say can stop you from believing stupid shit.

[Ben Holmes]

On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 13:29:06 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

Is that what you think?

>>Once again, **STILL** no answer...

Still correct... no answer from any of the cowards...

[David Von Pein]

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/motorcade-route.html

JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:

[Carl] Freund [of the Dallas Morning News] wrote a story on the sixteenth [11/16/63], which said the motorcade would come down Main Street.

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0323a.htm

Freund then printed the story above, on the 19th, that included the dogleg.

On the 20th, the DMN changed it to the Main Street only directions.

Then on the 22nd, it printed a map which only included the Main Street route.

Therefore, if you go by the stories...the route was changed after the 19th.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Notice how Jim totally ignored (once again) the Dallas Times Herald November 21st map that I posted [below]. (Jim likes to rely only on the Dallas Morning News, I guess. The Times Herald doesn't count at all evidently.)

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-fuC8QLUleu4/WwoJXPQKXtI/AAAAAAABO0U/f43vLhupwLs3V1CMQoW0jjanmNv-nuDZwCLcBGAs/s5000-h/Dallas-Times-Herald-11-21-63.jpeg

So, when we include the Times Herald of Nov. 21 (which Jim is avoiding at all costs), let's try to follow the Bouncing Motorcade Route from day to day....

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

November 16 --- Main Street only (DMN).

November 19 --- Elm Street turn (Both Dallas papers---the DMN and DTH).

November 20 --- Main Street only (DMN).

November 21 --- Elm Street turn (DTH).

November 22 --- Back to Main Street only (DMN).

November 22 --- Elm Street turn (via the actual motorcade route taken by JFK that day).

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

Now, it would require a massive amount of tortured logic to conclude that the above newspaper reports truly indicate that the motorcade route was *actually* changed back and forth a total of FIVE different times over the course of a six-day period.

The route was never changed, and these two items below--which are identical--prove that fact (IMHO)....

November 19 --- Elm Street turn (Both Dallas papers---the DMN and DTH).

November 22 --- Elm Street turn (via the actual motorcade route taken by JFK that day).

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/search?q=Motorcade+Route&start=2