Debating The JFK Assassination
David Von Pein
Conspiracy" Debate.
FEATURED TEXT -- Archived JFK Forum Messages From March 2006, April
2006, and May 2006.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CTer (A CONSPIRACY THEORIST) -- So you're saying they can't close down
roads for the President?
DVP (DAVID VON PEIN) -- Of course they (the police) can close down
roads, etc. -- in fact, they DID do this...all throughout the motorcade
route.
But a "Main Street to Stemmons Freeway" access route (circa 1963)
wasn't just a matter of closing down some roads and re-routing traffic.
A portion of the street would physically have needed to be ripped apart
in order to allow the motorcade access to Stemmons directly from Main
Street. A concrete barrier between Elm and Main would need to be
removed (then replaced afterward obviously) to get the President
directly from Main to Stemmons. ....
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0282b.htm
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0283a.htm
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- {Lee Harvey Oswald was seen} in the break room 90 seconds
{after the assassination}, and was not out of breath, but had been
there for some time.
DVP -- A wild guess on your part re. Oswald having "been there for some
time". If you're basing that comment on Carolyn Arnold's testimony
about seeing Oswald at either 12:15 or 12:25 on Friday (11/22/63), it's
a weak argument....because Arnold's account has conveniently changed
over the years, and it still wouldn't give Oswald an alibi for the
precise time of the assassination as well (12:30 PM).
And the "not out of breath" argument has always been a very weak one in
this case when it comes to discussing Oswald's trip DOWN four flights
of stairs. Anyone who is not significantly overweight can easily
descend four flights of stairs and not be panting like mad. This has
always been a crazy CT argument, IMO.
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- Ruby was let inside {the DPD basement} by one of his many
police friends.
DVP -- I don't suppose it matters to you that there's no proof
whatsoever that Jack Ruby was "let inside by one of his many police
friends", does it?
The most-likely-to-be-correct solution is that Ruby simply walked down
the ramp just like he told the Warren Commission on July 18, 1964.
Let's listen:
JACK RUBY -- "As I left the Western Union, I walked toward the ramp,
and as I walked down, Lieutenant Pierce's car was parked already on the
curb, partly on the curb and partly some of it was on the ramp, and
some officer was talking to him...?"
ARLEN SPECTER -- "Did you walk by his car?"
MR. RUBY -- "Yes."
MR. SPECTER -- "At the same time it was parked there?"
MR. RUBY -- "Yes."
MR. SPECTER -- "So that the officer did not see you..."
MR. RUBY -- "That's correct."
~~~~~~
Now, I'm not going to say that comments made by criminals in custody
are the best way to arrive at "the truth"; because, obviously, that's
not the case. With a good example being Lee Oswald and the many lies he
told almost non-stop after his arrest. But criminals don't always lie.
Oswald told a few truths mixed in with his wealth of falsehoods.
And Ruby's details surrounding his basement/garage entry into the DPD
are rather interesting and convincing overall. How did Ruby know that
Pierce was talking to another officer at just that time if he (Ruby)
wasn't there? Or do CTers think that that info was "leaked" to Ruby in
his Dallas jail cell before he testified with the above quote in front
of the WC?
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- The HSCA determined the bullet path {through JFK's upper back
and neck} was in a slightly UPWARD direction.
DVP -- Yes...and it's an incorrect determination too. And contradicts
what the autopsy doctors have said; i.e., the back wound was positively
HIGHER than the exit (neck) wound.
And all a person needs to do is try a simple test on themselves or
another person...and measure 5.5 inches from their "Mastoids" (at the
lower tip of the ear) and then compare it with the area of the neck
below the Adam's Apple to determine the slightly DOWNWARD trajectory
(back to front) between these two points.
Obviously, that kind of simplistic test is not going to be perfect,
since the autopsy measurements were based on Jack Kennedy's body and
not yours or mine or John Doe's. But it gives a good general idea of
the downward path the SBT bullet took through JFK's body.
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- The Warren Commission managed to publish 26 volumes of
evidence, yet missed the very first document created--the death
certificate.
DVP -- So what? Are you saying JFK isn't really dead? Or that Admiral
Burkley, who signed the death certificate, is one of the main
"conspirators" in the case? What IS your point here? I see none. Except
the probable CT suspicion of "moving wounds" on JFK's back. But the
death certificate placement of the back wound says "back", not "neck",
which is perfectly consistent with the autopsy photograph of President
Kennedy's back wound. So, again, what's your point?
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- You have no clue about how many shots might have been fired
that were inaudible or nearly simultaneous with other audible shots.
DVP -- Via this argument, NO crime involving guns could ever be
thoroughly solved or blamed on a lone shooter....because there COULD
have always been another gunman somewhere who fired an "inaudible" or
"simultaneous" shot.
Great argument, huh? Nobody hears that shot over there, and there's no
physical evidence of it either....meaning: there MUST have actually
been a shot from over there (of a totally-silenced and unprovable
variety).
That's akin to the proverbial pro-conspiracy argument of:
"Since virtually all the evidence leads to only Oswald...that must mean
just the OPPOSITE (i.e., Oswald's perfectly innocent somehow)!"
Logical? Hardly.
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- Oh my God! You are appalled at the idea that Oswald might steal
some curtain rods, but think nothing of accusing him of a double
murder?
DVP -- In the "He's Innocent, But Is Part Of The Plot In Some Fashion"
CT scenario (which almost all CTers believe, if they have at least one
active brain cell, that is) --- "stealing" the curtain rods from Ruth
Paine's home, and not saying a thing about any "curtain rods" to either
Ruth Paine or his wife Marina, is a stupid act on LHO's part. Because,
in such a case, the more people who can verify the package as "curtain
rods", the better Oswald is going to be.
Of course, to believe such a silly thing as: "Oswald Was Part Of The
JFK Plot, But Didn't Shoot Anybody, And Only Went To Irving On An
Unannounced Thursday Night Instead Of Friday In Order To STEAL Some
Curtain Rods From Ruth Paine" -- we'd have to believe, I suppose, that
Lee Oswald was the dumbest of all Patsies to come down the pike. ....
In such a crazy scenario, Oswald knows he's bringing a
perfectly-innocent, non-lethal item into work on 11/22/63 (unless he
figured he was going to be assigned the job of beating the passing
President to death with the curtain rods) .... and he knows there's a
plot brewing to kill Kennedy that very day from the very Plaza that his
workplace overlooks. ....
And yet he carts the bulky package into work wrapped up like a mummy
anyway (having to KNOW what the consequences of doing this might be
later on, because he KNOWS there's a plot to kill the President, and,
per Oliver Stone, Oswald is going to be some useless type of "contact"
on the 2nd Floor of the Depository; as he "waits for a call that never
comes"; what call this was supposed to be is never defined) .... and
even though the package has only innocent curtain rods in it, he
decides to hide the package somewhere in the building where nobody'll
see it. ....
And then he decides to leave the rods behind in the TSBD after 12:33 on
Nov. 22, and then decides he's going to tell lies to the police about
taking any bulky package into work (even though the package contains
only perfectly-innocent curtain rods).
Gee, what a nice "Patsy" Lee Harvey Oswald was. He tried to frame
HIMSELF it would seem. He was just "aiding" his fellow Patsy-Framing
conspirators when he wouldn't tell the police he really had curtain
rods with him that morning. And he was trying to help his frame-up even
more by making the "curtain rod" incident look more "suspicious" and
covert by stealing them from the Paine garage, instead of creating a
better alibi for himself by simply asking Ruth Paine if he could have
the rods.
You don't find cooperative patsies like Lee Harvey every day of the
week. Good thing for the "real killers" they had such a nice guy like
Oswald working for them....in that he was willing to take the WHOLE
blame for TWO murders he evidently never committed on November 22.
And he was also willing to "play along" with the Patsy-Framers by
ACTING LIKE THE GUILTIEST MAN IN DALLAS just after BOTH the Kennedy and
Tippit murders were committed by OTHER people.
What a guy!
Maybe Lee's mom was right after all when she said this about her boy
shortly after he was killed by Jack Ruby:
"Lee Harvey Oswald, my son, even after his death, has done more for his
country than any other living human being." -- Marguerite Oswald
~LOL!~
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- Just a few inches one way {the SBT bullet's path, that is, per
this CTer's Oscar-worthy fantasy account of the event} and then it
suddenly stops, reverses direction...Anyway, I don't believe LHO even
was a shooter...And that piece-of-junk rifle...
DVP -- Okay. I'll stop you right there. You're babbling the
nearly-verbatim pro-conspiracy nonsense as thousands before you have
also babbled. (It was the "I don't believe LHO even was a shooter"
line, btw, that cemented your status as a person who hasn't the
slightest idea what you're talking about).
Then there's also:
The zig-zag SBT path....
Oswald was the lousiest shot in America....
That crappy POS rifle!....
Joseph Milteer said this....
James Files said that....
Gerry Ford's a crook too (right?)....
The SBT is a ruse.
Perhaps you'd like to add these items too:
Kennedy wasn't even killed.
Neither was Malcolm X.
Barbara Eden has got them both in her bottle right now.
And Khrushchev is cute as a button.
Fantasies....it's hard to live without them.
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- Because Ruby killed Oswald before the trial, Oswald is
innocent. Innocent of killing Kennedy and Tippit.
DVP -- This argument won't hold up in any way. Because, based on the
overwhelming evidence in the case, Oswald was certainly NOT "innocent"
of killing either man in 1963.
Via this "He was killed, therefore he's innocent" logic, would you have
said O.J. Simpson was "innocent" of the two murders he so obviously
committed in 1994 if Simpson had been shot and killed prior to his
trial?*
* = Yes, I know that Simpson was found "Not Guilty" by the jury; but
that is a long way from declaring him "innocent", and I think everybody
realizes the difference of course. If ever a jury came to a wrong
verdict, that was the one. But my main point is that O.J. would have
been just as guilty (based on the evidence in his case), even if he had
died before his trial commenced. Death wouldn't have taken him off the
hook for knifing Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman. No way. Same goes
with Lee Harvey Oswald. Jack Ruby's bullet didn't suddenly WIPE OUT the
vast evidence that tells us Oswald is guilty.
tomnln
My Live Audio Chat Room is Debate.
I Advertise/Encourage WCR Supporters to Debate me.
No Takers in 7 Years.
I have a Live Audio Chat Room on www.paltalk.com
Download & Use for FREE.
Once Logged on select Rooms, Social Issues & Politics.
Then select Government & Politics.
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
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1165854673.7...@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
Chad Zimmerman
"tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:K0qfh.313$RR4...@newsfe22.lga...
> ONE-Sided dialogue is NOT "Debate".
>
> My Live Audio Chat Room is Debate.
>
> I Advertise/Encourage WCR Supporters to Debate me.
>
> No Takers in 7 Years.
Probably because you have a habit of not fully discussing things, Tom. I've
tried to
correspond with you many times on this NG, but you keep leaving the
discussions.
Chad
tomnln
You've been aware of it for years.
"Chad Zimmerman" <Doc...@cableone.net> wrote in message
news:457e...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
Chad Zimmerman
> The subject was my Live Audio Chat Room Chad.
"I Advertise/Encourage WCR Supporters to Debate me."
Tom, I've tried to engage you in debate. Debate simply involves
communication. Communication can come in many forms: radio, television,
email, letters, etc. You've instigated many conversations on this board,
some of which I've replied to. You've abruptly ended almost every debate
when I provide a substative reply.
Now you seem to be saying that you only want to debate on your internet
broadcast.
>
> You've been aware of it for years.
Actually, a year might be pushing it. I only seem to remember your blanket
advertising of your debates since I moved out here last year.
Chad