MISC. JFK ASSASSINATION TOPICS OF CONVERSATION
David Von Pein
>>> "Let's see the ENTIRE conversation." <<<
Here is the entire phone call between President Lyndon Johnson and
Georgia Senator Richard Russell (from November 29, 1963):
Plus: How stupid WAS Lyndon Johnson (according to the conspiracy-giddy
crowd that wants to paint LBJ as an underhanded, devious "plotter" and
"cover-up agent")?
That is to say....Per these kooky conspiracy theorists, Johnson KNOWS
full well that some of the things he's going to be saying to Senator
Richard Russell in the above-linked telephone conversation are lies or
half-truths or things being done by a person (LBJ) who has a willful
desire to "cover up" a bunch of stuff...so what does Johnson do
anyway? He decides to TAPE RECORD the phone call.
And then, months later, LBJ decides to RECORD another phone call with
Russell (on September 18, 1964), wherein both Russell and Johnson say
that each of them doesn't believe that the same bullet that hit JFK
went on to hit John Connally (which, in essence, destroys any "lone
assassin" conclusion right there).*
* = Although Senator "Goofball" Russell, who only attended 6 of 94
witness sessions during his time spent on the Warren Commission, was
probably so stupid he didn't realize that at the time he was berating
the SBT on 9/18/64 he was also, in effect, completely undermining and
destroying the entire WC's "lone assassin named Oswald" declaration.
I guess, therefore, the conspiracy theorists who want to have
President Johnson "involved" in some way in an assassination cover up
(from the get-go) must also think that LBJ was one stupid SOB too,
huh? (Akin to the type of dumbbell burglars who videotape themselves
robbing a 7/11.)
Here's the 9/18/64 phone call too (for anyone who is interested):
========================================
LBJ PHONE CALLS (STREAMING LINKS FOR INSTANT ACCESS):
www.box.net/static/flash/box_explorer.swf?widgetHash=kt8qtb3408&v=1
MORE ON RICHARD "GOOFBALL" RUSSELL:
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b9af777b0e813fd7
========================================
David Von Pein
>>> "[Oswald's] alibi was he was ''on the second floor at the time of the shooting"; he never said ''I went up to the second floor to get a Coke''." <<<
You're wrong (as is normally the case when dealing with members of the
"Anybody But Oswald" fraternity).
Lee Harvey Oswald told Captain Will Fritz of the DPD that he (LHO) was
"having his lunch about that time [of the assassination] on the first
floor" (quote from Fritz' police report).
And Oswald further told Fritz during that very same November 22
interrogation session that he (Oswald) was "on the second floor
drinking a Coca-Cola" when police officer Marrion Baker encountered
Oswald (which we know was within just a couple of minutes after the
shooting).
Therefore, quite obviously, Oswald (per his own account of events as
he told them to Captain Fritz) would have had no choice but to travel
up one flight from the first floor to the second floor to get his Coke
right around the time of the shooting.
All of this can be verified on Page 600 of the Warren Commission
Report:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0312b.htm
Better luck next time, "simplychic".
Plus........
I'll add the following two excerpts from "Reclaiming History" as a
bonus here (with these excerpts emphasizing the obvious fact that Lee
Oswald couldn't get his own story straight when it came to telling his
lies to the various authorities on November 22-24):
"During Sunday's [11/24/63] interrogation Oswald slipped up and
placed himself on the sixth floor [of the Depository] at the time of
the assassination. .... In his Sunday-morning interrogation he said
that at lunchtime, one of the "Negro" employees invited him to eat
lunch with him and he declined. .... He said before he could finish
whatever he was doing, the commotion surrounding the assassination
took place and when he "WENT DOWNSTAIRS," a policeman questioned him
as to his identification, and his boss stated that he was one of their
employees. .... WHERE WAS OSWALD AT THE TIME THE NEGRO EMPLOYEE
INVITED HIM TO LUNCH, AND BEFORE HE DESCENDED TO THE SECOND-FLOOR
LUNCHROOM? [Answer:] The sixth floor." [All emphasis Bugliosi's.] --
Vincent Bugliosi; Page 957 of "Reclaiming History" (c.2007)
~~~~~~
"There is yet another reason why Oswald's statement that he was
on the first floor eating lunch at the time of the shooting makes no
sense at all. If he had been, once he heard the shots and the
screaming and all the commotion outside, if he were innocent, what is
the likelihood that he would have proceeded to go, as he claims, up to
the second floor to get himself a Coke? How could any sensible person
believe a story like that?" -- Vincent Bugliosi; Page 958 of
"Reclaiming History" (c.2007)
David Von Pein
>>> "2 shots in jkf's [sic] back..." <<<
God, what an illiterate we've got here. You can't even spell "JFK".
And there's not a shred of evidence to support the notion of TWO
separate shots to JFK's back. (Or even "JKF's" back, for that matter.)
Naturally, you've just made up this crappola out of whole cloth, like
all kooks of your ilk are wont to do.
>>> "There was a bullet hole in the windshield." <<<
Lookie! A kook is wrong. Again.
Naturally, the kook thinks Robert A. Frazier of the FBI is a rotten
liar. Right? Because Frazier testified (in great detail) to there
being NO HOLE in the windshield of the limo when Frazier personally
examined it on November 23rd.
>>> "And tague's [sic; sigh] wound is IMPOSSIBLE from any of the ''alleged'' 3 shots." <<<
So which one of your make-believe shots wounded Tague then? -- Was it
the "dart" shot from Umbrella Man perhaps? Or a shot from the sewer?
Or a blast from Badge Man on THE KNOLL? (Some great shooters these
guys were, huh? They must've thought James T. Tague was the intended
victim way up the street on Main.)
Truth is -- Tague was either wounded by the first (missed) shot from
Oswald's rifle or by a fragment from the head shot, also from Oswald's
rifle of course.
I favor the former instead of the latter option, with the shot
glancing off the oak tree and partially fragmenting, thereby causing
the copper jacket to spark off of Elm Street, which explains the
witness testimony in that regard. The lead portion of the bullet
deflected out to Main St., near Tague.
>>> "Sorry buddy, only ''TWO'' and only 2 bullet casings were found; are you about to call police chief curry [sic] a liar as well?" <<<
You're nuts. When did Jesse Curry EVER say that only "two" bullet
shells were found in the Sniper's Nest?
Try counting to "three shells" in this picture:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0124a.htm
David Von Pein
>>> "Why were there fake [Secret Service] men on the knoll?" <<<
Answer: There weren't.
And furthermore you can't prove there were any SS men on the "Knoll"
after the shooting. Nor can anyone else prove this theory.
Vincent Bugliosi had an interesting segment in his book relating to
this matter....it deals with Lee Oswald's statement to police after
his arrest. Oswald told the authorities that he had encountered a
"Secret Service man" outside the Depository just after the shooting.
But, of course, we know that LHO didn't encounter any such "Secret
Service man" at all -- he actually encountered either Pierce Allman of
WFAA-TV or Robert MacNeil of NBC-TV (probably Allman). Each man was
wearing a press badge and a suit and tie, which made Oswald think
(incorrectly) that the man he saw and directed to a telephone was a
"Secret Service" agent.
Main point being: the very same type of confusion regarding the so-
called "SS agents on the Knoll" could have occurred with respect to
other eyewitnesses just after the assassination too.
People thought (incorrectly) that they were seeing Secret Service
agents when, in fact, we know they weren't. In the wild, frenzied
confusion following the unexpected shooting of the President, such
innocent mistakes and misidentifications are likely to occur.
We need to look no further than the real killer himself (Lee Harvey
Oswald) for verification of what I just said above being true when it
comes to people innocently mistaking other people for "Secret Service
agents" immediately after the assassination of President Kennedy.
David Von Pein
>>> "Lattimer is the guy who lied about the SBT and made JFK into a hunchback to get the back wound higher." <<<
El-Oh-El.
Why would he need to do such a silly thing (which he obviously never
did anyway)?
CE903 provides perfect SBT-favoring data (sans any "hunchbacking"):
robcap...@netscape.com
> www.amazon.com/forum/Fx2TVHW5I0UEY9A/TxTA2SHXGVS0PM/1/ref=cm_cd_et_md...
>
> >>> "[Oswald's] alibi was he was ''on the second floor at the time of the shooting"; he never said ''I went up to the second floor to get a Coke''." <<<
"You're wrong (as is normally the case when dealing with members of
the "Anybody But Oswald" fraternity)."
This coming from someone who is ALWAYS wrong!!! LOL!!!
"Lee Harvey Oswald told Captain Will Fritz of the DPD that he (LHO)
was "having his lunch about that time [of the assassination] on the
first floor" (quote from Fritz' police report)."
Fritz is a liar. There is a witness to LHO saying he was going up at
12:00 PM to eat. Eddie Piper said LHO told him he was going up to eat
(to the second floor lunchroom). LHO then purchased a sandwich and a
coke from the vending machines there. He would be seen by Carolyn
Arnold eating his lunch as well at 12:15 PM. This is from Piper's
affadavit:
"There has been a man that I know only as "Lee" who has been working
there about 5 weeks. He fills the orders and I pack the orders.
Yesterday at about 12:00 Noon, this fello Lee says to me, "I'm going
up to eat" and I went on to my lunch." 11/23/63
"And Oswald further told Fritz during that very same November 22
interrogation session that he (Oswald) was "on the second floor
drinking a Coca-Cola" when police officer Marrion Baker encountered
Oswald (which we know was within just a couple of minutes after the
shooting)."
It was within 90 seconds of the shooting!!! I like how you are adding
some time.
"Therefore, quite obviously, Oswald (per his own account of events as
he told them to Captain Fritz) would have had no choice but to travel
up one flight from the first floor to the second floor to get his Coke
right around the time of the shooting."
First of all, we DON'T KNOW that this was LHO's own account of things
because the liar Fritz said they did not record or take notes of LHO's
many hours of interrogations, therefore, it is quite easy for Fritz to
write in stuff later on when LHO is dead. He was already on the
second floor eating his lunch.
"All of this can be verified on Page 600 of the Warren Commission
Report:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0312b.htm
Better luck next time, "simplychic"."
What??? You have proved nothing beyond the fact Fritz is a liar. He
lied multiple times on 11/22/63 and in the following days. NO wonder
you like to debate yourself.
"Plus........
I'll add the following two excerpts from "Reclaiming History" as a
bonus here (with these excerpts emphasizing the obvious fact that Lee
Oswald couldn't get his own story straight when it came to telling his
lies to the various authorities on November 22-24):
"During Sunday's [11/24/63] interrogation Oswald slipped up and
placed himself on the sixth floor [of the Depository] at the time of
the assassination. .... In his Sunday-morning interrogation he said
that at lunchtime, one of the "Negro" employees invited him to eat
lunch with him and he declined. .... He said before he could finish
whatever he was doing, the commotion surrounding the assassination
took place and when he "WENT DOWNSTAIRS," a policeman questioned him
as to his identification, and his boss stated that he was one of their
employees. .... WHERE WAS OSWALD AT THE TIME THE NEGRO EMPLOYEE
INVITED HIM TO LUNCH, AND BEFORE HE DESCENDED TO THE SECOND-FLOOR
LUNCHROOM? [Answer:] The sixth floor." [All emphasis Bugliosi's.] --
Vincent Bugliosi; Page 957 of "Reclaiming History" (c.2007)"
There are no recordings of the many interrogations, so they basically
can claim LHO said anything that suits them. He was not on the sixth
floor and the WC failed miserably to prove he was at the time of the
shooting. Even if he said this, this does NOT relieve the WC, or any
other official, or WC apologists from PROVING LHO was on the sixth
floor at the time of the shooting to make their case. They CAN'T DO
THIS, because there is NO proof because he WAS NOT there at the time
of the shots. Don't fall for watching the shell move about on the
table. Make them prove their assertions.
> ~~~~~~
"There is yet another reason why Oswald's statement that he was
on the first floor eating lunch at the time of the shooting makes no
sense at all. If he had been, once he heard the shots and the
screaming and all the commotion outside, if he were innocent, what is
the likelihood that he would have proceeded to go, as he claims, up to
the second floor to get himself a Coke? How could any sensible person
believe a story like that?" -- Vincent Bugliosi; Page 958 of
"Reclaiming History" (c.2007)"
Beyond Fritz, who said he said (LHO) that he was on the 1st floor at
the time of the shots? I don't know of anyone. LHO went to the second
floor lunchroom PRIOR to the shots, he went at 12:00 pm and was still
there at 12:31/32 when Truly and Baker came in.
David Von Pein
DVP SAID:
>>> "The wind was blowing briskly from the NW toward the SE [in Dallas on 11/22/63], perfectly consistent with the blood cloud (or at least portions thereof) being blown from JFK's head into Hargis and Martin on their cycles." <<<
DEAN JACKSON SAID:
>>> "Sorry, the wind was blowing in the Dallas area at 12:30 pm at 13 knots (15 mph) that day. Not enough force to blow back a sheet of blood, nor pieces of skull. I know when I'm walking in the rain, a 15 mph wind DOESN'T spray me with water! And blood is heavier than water!" <<<
DVP NOW SAYS:
Per most CTers, JFK's large, gaping exit wound in his head was located
at the FAR RIGHT-REAR portion of Kennedy's head (and, yes, most of the
Parkland witnesses did also claim this as well--I'm not denying
that).....but if this is to be believed, then it seems to me the
source of that shot couldn't have been the famous "Badge Man" location
on the Knoll behind the picket fence.
A shot from the so-called "Badge Man" position would hardly have
caused a massive EXIT wound at the FAR RIGHT-REAR of Kennedy's head.
Such a BM shot would have probably blown out the LEFT-REAR portion of
the head.
And how would Hargis & Martin on their motorcycles get splattered with
blood and brain tissue if the wound was located at the RIGHT-REAR of
JFK's cranium? Such a blow-out should have showered motorcycle officer
James Chaney with blood, instead of Hargis & Martin.
Plus: Where in Dealey Plaza could a gunman have possibly been located
to have achieved such a massive FAR RIGHT-REAR exit wound in JFK's
head? Logic would dictate that any such exit wound would have been the
result of a rifle shot that originated from the area of the Underpass
or the SOUTH side of Elm Street, not the north side (where the famous
"Grassy Knoll" was situated).
Now, yes, CTers can argue the true fact that bullets can change
direction after hitting a hard object like a human skull (and I do
think Oswald's Carcano bullet did change directions inside Kennedy's
head--albeit very slightly--after the bullet entered his head at the
rear of the skull).
But keeping in mind the basic common-sense fact that bullets will
still (generally) travel in a straight line as they go into and out of
an object, and even accounting for a "deflection" factor of many
degrees for the CTer's "from the front" bullet that struck JFK in the
head....those same theorists are going to have some trouble convincing
anyone who has studied such matters in detail that a bullet being
fired from the north-side Grassy Knoll in Dealey Plaza could have
possibly blown a huge exit hole in the FAR RIGHT AND REAR portion of
John Kennedy's head.
That's taking a "deflected" bullet to absurd extremes of
deflection.....as Dale Myers amply demonstrates on his website here:
www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/concl4.htm
So, overall, things just do not add up for conspiracy theorists who
think that JFK was fatally wounded by a bullet that struck him in the
head from the front (i.e., from the Knoll on the north side of Elm
Street). And they never did add up.
And lately, whenever I get involved in conversation that includes the
location of President Kennedy's largest head (exit) wound, I enjoy
propping up the following autopsy X-ray directly in front of the
conspiracy theorists -- because this X-ray (which was declared by the
HSCA's photographic panel to be a genuine X-ray of John F. Kennedy's
head that "had not been altered in any manner" [7 HSCA 41]) shows some
very interesting things. And not a one of them indicates "conspiracy".
Question for CTers -- Where's the great-big FAR RIGHT-REAR blow-out in
this X-ray pictured below?
Answer -- It ain't there....and it never was:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0061b.htm
David Von Pein
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=12852&view=findpost&p=146140
CHARLES DRAGO SAID:
>>> "I'll never forget the impact of Vince [Palamara's] initial screening, to a JFK Lancer audience in Dallas, of the footage he discovered of Henry Rybka being ordered to stand down at Love Field." <<<
DVP:
This is a laugh. Charles seems to think that Vince Palamara
"discovered" (i.e., "unearthed" for the very first time ever??) the
long-time-available WFAA-TV footage of Henry Rybka shrugging his
shoulders with his arms outstretched as the motorcade left Love Field
on 11/22/63.
But, in fact, that WFAA footage showing Rybka at Love Field has almost
always been readily available to view and scrutinize....and that's
because that very TV footage is shown (in its entirety) in the 1964
feature film "Four Days In November", which premiered in USA theaters
in October and November of '64, just weeks after the Warren Report was
released to the public.
And the "Four Days" movie has been available on a home-video format
(VHS) since 1988, twenty years ago. Which means the Rybka/Love Field
footage had been easily obtainable and viewable for 9 years prior to
Palamara's "discovery" at the 1997 Lancer conference.
It's quite possible, of course, that nobody really paid much attention
to the Rybka footage in the "Four Days In November" movie prior to
Vince P.'s '97 Lancer appearance. I really don't know. But that
footage was certainly far from being buried and unavailable as of
1997.
I wonder, too, how the conspiracy theorists who think that David
Wolper and his people who put together the LN-favoring "Four Days In
November" film in 1964 (the CTers, that is, who view "Four Days" as
nothing but junk and a work of pure "propaganda") get around the fact
that something was placed into that movie (Rybka being left behind at
Love Field while shrugging his shoulders) that they feel virtually
PROVES a conspiracy existed to murder the President in Dallas?
Were Wolper's people just stupid for placing such an "obvious" sign of
"conspiracy" in their feature film -- a film that was designed, to
hear certain CTers tell it, to skew the truth of JFK's death?
Or maybe the "Four Days" crew just didn't realize that Rybka's arm-
waving antics at the airport signalled anything "conspiratorial" at
all?
Fact is: Rybka's actions at Love Field on November 22, 1963, prove
absolutely NOTHING with respect to the assassination of the President
which followed about a half-an-hour later. And no CTer alive can
possibly prove otherwise.
David Von Pein
Here's another fine article by Dale Myers, debunking still more of the
non-stop nonsense gushed forth by the conspiracy-happy crowd.......
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2008/05/mystery-of-tippits-clipboard.html
============================
"The Mystery of Tippit’s Clipboard"
by DALE K. MYERS
============================
"On the UK’s Education Forum newsgroup [linked below], where
conspiracy theorists from both sides of the pond congregate these
days, questions are being raised about the “mystery” surrounding
information contained in and on the clipboard mounted in Dallas police
officer J.D. Tippit’s squad car.
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=12856
Several members of the UK forum, who have been posting their research
into the Kennedy and Tippit shootings since 2004 (representing a
combined total of over 14 years of research and more than 8,300
announcements) are chatting it up over one member’s question about a
crime scene photograph that depicts the dashboard of Tippit’s squad
car, a “clipboard” mounted to it, and what appears to be “a photograph
pinned to it.”
A number of “super” and “advanced” members (a classification
apparently based on the number of postings each has made since joining
the forum), have already drawn conspiratorial inferences from this
supposedly new find:
“Fascinating photo! Stupid question: Is that Tippit's car? The image
on the clipboard certainly looks like a photo of a person, perhaps a
mugshot?...”
“Great find. New to me, as well. I'd bet [were I a betting man] the
photo was who Tippit was trying to make contact with earlier and did -
to his fatality. I'd love to know what happened to the clipboard and
photo [no doubt physical description too] - likely down that very wide
DPD rabbit-hole. May well explain how he knew who to stop on the
street. Likely a trap for Tippit. For some reason he needed to be
sacrificed…”
“…the clipboard and its contents (again, to my knowledge) seems to
have vanished into thin air…it should be possible for someone to get
an original print from the negative, or at least a near-generation
copy, such that they'd perhaps be able to magnify the area in question
to gain some hint of what's there. If the former, it is possible that
a similar item can be obtained through the Dallas City Secretary's
office.”
All of these posters seem to be completely ignorant of the fact that
the question of what was on Tippit’s clipboard was answered ten years
ago in the book “With Malice: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Murder of
Officer J.D. Tippit,” (Oak Cliff Press, 1998) the only book ever
written on the Tippit case.
It’s certainly no surprise that these educators of the Internet
conspiracy crowd know little of what’s between the cover boards of
“With Malice” given the fact that they regularly trash the author of
the book – yours truly – calling him a charlatan, liar, and worse.
Had they looked on page 63 of this decade old publication they would
have seen an enlargement of the pertinent portion of a Dallas police
crime lab photograph which depicts the dashboard of Tippit’s squad
car. (See Figure 1 below)
www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/images/news/clipboard_052508.jpg
Figure 1 [above-linked photo]. Detail from a Dallas crime scene
photograph (#91-001/016) depicting Tippit's dash-mounted clipboard
(left) and a closeup of the metal, spring clip clutching an open
spiral notebook (right).
Allegations had been made for years that the Dallas crime scene
photograph seemed to show a mugshot pinned to the clipboard, all of
these claims based on multi-generational copies of the photograph. To
answer the questions, I went to the source – the Dallas Municipal
Archives and Records Center in Dallas, Texas – where I viewed original
1963 prints of the image and obtained new prints pulled from the
original 1963 prints as well as new prints from the original negative.
These images clearly show that what appears to be a mugshot in the
multi-generational photographs available from other sources is
actually a metal, spring clip clutching an open spiral notebook. I
published the results of my inquiry into this and many other questions
about the Tippit murder in “With Malice.”
And just for the record, while crime lab Sergeant W.E. “Willie” Barnes
testified to the Warren Commission that “We never read his clipboard,”
former homicide Detective James R. Leavelle, who led the investigation
into Tippit’s death, told me in 1983 that he looked at Tippit’s
clipboard and there was nothing there to indicate why Tippit stopped
Oswald. End of mystery.
While it may be forgivable that the so-called “super and advanced”
researchers on the UK’s Educational Forum would be unaware of what was
in a book they had chosen to shun, how did they miss this, posted on
the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) page at www.jdtippit.com, and
just a Google click away:
Did police ever read what was on the dash-mounted clipboard in
Tippit's squad car?
Yes. Conspiracy theorists have bitterly complained about the apparent
lack of interest that the Dallas police had in Tippit's dash-mounted
clipboard, citing Dallas police crime lab sergeant W.E. "Pete" Barnes'
comment to the Warren Commission in 1964, "We never read his
clipboard." (7H274). Traditionally, the clipboard held a spiral
notebook which officers could use to write notes on. Theorists
speculated that Tippit wrote something on that clipboard that police
didn't want the public to know, or perhaps something that contradicted
the Warren Commission's conclusion about the murder.
But, in 1983, former homicide detective Jim Leavelle, who led the
investigation into the Tippit shooting, told me that he did check
Tippit's spiral notebook.
"I looked at some of the stuff that Tippit had in the car but, to my
knowledge, there was nothing ever found - that was written - in
regards to the man he stopped," Leavelle told me. "There was no
reference as to why he stopped to talk to him. From my own experience,
I doubt very seriously that he would have written anything on the
clipboard about the man he was stopping. From the way the witnesses
described it, Tippit was very nonchalant. It wasn't as though he was
expecting anything. He probably figured he'd do a routine check, talk
to him, look at his identification, and send him on his way. I know,
from my own experience, that I have done that thousands of times -
talked to people, maybe look at their identification, and then, send
them on their way, and never think another thing about it. I'm sure
that's what he had in mind."
The Warren Commission was also curious about one crime scene
photograph taken of Tippit's car that seemed to show the photograph of
a man mounted on Tippit's clipboard. An enlargement of the crime photo
referred to by the Commission, however, reveals that the "photograph
of a man" is actually the spring, metal clip clutching Tippit's open
spiral notebook.
I’ve often said that no one will ever learn anything of importance
reading the voluminous chatter from the presumed experts on the
Kennedy assassination newsgroups. This latest UK Education Forum
posting only reaffirms my opinion."
--Dale K. Myers; 05/25/2008
David Von Pein
>>> "As for [Vincent] Bugliosi making the statement that "Oswald did it, so anything new that says otherwise must have some explanation as to why it just isn't so" (my paraphrase), well that just makes my skin crawl." <<<
But Bugliosi isn't saying that a "conspiracy" is totally DISPROVED by
proving that Oswald is guilty of being the ONLY SHOOTER (or at least
the only shooter who HIT a victim, which he, of course, was).
Vince was attacking and debunking the many "Anybody BUT Oswald"
conspiracy clowns when he said this.....
"With respect to the Kennedy assassination, once you establish and
know that Oswald is guilty, as has been done, then you also
NECESSARILY know that there is an answer (whether the answer is known
or not) compatible with this conclusion for the endless alleged
discrepancies, inconsistencies, and questions the conspiracy theorists
have raised through the years about Oswald's guilt." -- VB
IOW, once Oswald's guilt is known for a fact (i.e., beyond a
reasonable doubt)...and it certainly is known to be a fact, per the
evidence, in the JFK and Tippit crimes....then any further talk about
Oswald being totally "innocent" of shooting anybody on November 22 is
pointless, groundless, baseless, and just a plain waste of energy.
(Not to mention, just plain silly.) Period.
But, as mentioned, that doesn't mean there couldn't have been a
"conspiracy" too (with people urging Oswald on, etc.). But once LHO's
guilt is established and confirmed beyond all reasonable doubt...why
does further discussion on THAT singular issue need to be debated
further? It doesn't.
Oswald did the crimes. Stamp them with Dragnet's "Mark VII" hammer.
As for any possible "conspiracy behind Oswald" angle -- Vince covers
that very well elsewhere in "Book Two" (the latter one-third) of
"Reclaiming HIstory".
Can the existence of such a lower-level "plot" involving Oswald and
someone else ever be completely refuted? No. Probably not. But is such
a conspiracy likely to have occurred? No. It is not.
For confirmation of that last "No", just read Chapter 5 of "Reclaiming
History", plus all of Jean Davison's "Oswald's Game".
That guy named Lee worked solo. You can pretty much take that to the
bank.
David Von Pein
August 1, 2007
David Von Pein
>>> "The clipboard was found by the stairwell. The clipboard is therefore evidence that Oswald left his clipboard on the sixth floor when he came down for lunch." <<<
Or is evidence that Oswald left his clipboard there at some other
time.
Why on Earth does it have be evidence of "innocence"? Or that he left
it there before coming down "for lunch"? That's crazy. Esp.
considering WHERE the clipboard was found. And even more especially
considering the evidence saying Oswald killed Kennedy from that 6th
Floor.
>>> "It simply makes no sense that Oswald would pick up his clipboard after firing some shots, and then leave it in the stairwell." <<<
Why on Earth do you think something like that happened?
He obviously left the clipboard where it was found PRIOR to shooting
at JFK.
>>> "Bugliosi's use of the clipboard as evidence against Oswald is symptomatic of his desperation." <<<
Desperation certainly isn't required to solve this case. Oswald signed
his name to the crimes (including Tippit's, of course). It's a popcorn
trail to Oswald that never ends.
Now, all that theorists have to do is prove that the popcorn was
PLANTED there by evil, unseen forces. Right? And that's what the CTers
have tried to do for decades. And have come up empty for decades.
THAT'S what is known as true "desperation", Pat.
As Vince B. once said -- "You could throw 80% of the evidence against
him {LHO} out the window and there would still be more than enough
left to convince any reasonable person of his sole role in the crime."
>>> "He {Evil Vince} is no more rational than the CTs he seems to despise." <<<
And yet VB has every bullet in his favor. How many do CTs have?