Debating The John F. Kennedy Assassination (Part 49)
David Von Pein
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT -- The JFK Assassination: The Ongoing "Lone Assassin vs.
Conspiracy" Debate.
FEATURED TEXT -- Archived JFK Forum Messages From April 2006, May
2006, February 2007, and March 2007.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CTer (A CONSPIRACY THEORIST) -- Can you name the officer who testified
about finding the {bus} ticket?
DVP (DAVID VON PEIN) -- You're SURELY not going down the "Bus Transfer
Was Planted" route...are you?
I know that some CTers have indeed proceeded down that ridiculous
path....but the only thing such a CT mindset shows is the sheer
desperation on their part to taint every last piece of evidence in
this case...regardless of how meaningless and silly such claims are.
In the bus transfer "plant" theory, for example .... In the eyes of
those who would have planted such an article, tell us WHAT exactly
would be gained by planting the transfer? How would it make Lee Oswald
any MORE guilty of killing JFK?
And, of course, the "planting of the paper transfer" theory goes
sliding down the tubes forever once it's revealed that Oswald REALLY
WAS ON THAT BUS. Mary Bledsoe's positive IDing of LHO seals that deal.
And she knew Oswald before 11/22/63. She didn't make any mistake re.
his I.D.; she knew him.
But even if Oswald had never been on the bus....it's a "So What?" type
of thing. Who cares? It means zilch in the larger scheme of things,
because we know Oswald DID leave the TSBD at about 12:33 and we know
he DID arrive back home at around 12:59-1:00. The manner of locomotion
that transported him between these two points in Dallas is fairly
immaterial.
Of course, perhaps you were just tossing me a bone to chew on re. the
officer's name who took the transfer off of LHO. Because you seemed to
believe (via an earlier post) that Oswald did have that transfer with
him when he left 1026 Beckley (implying that he moved the item from
one shirt to the other). But with rabid CTers, who can tell what they
might be thinking??
My normal rule with respect to this faction of CTer is to pretty much
think that they think that "Everything Was Planted, Faked, And/Or
Tainted If It Leads In Any Fashion To Lee Harvey Oswald".
Some CTers don't want to believe Oswald was in William Whaley's cab
either. I guess, therefore, Oswald managed to hitch a ride on
Superman's back after leaving work on Friday in order to get to his
roominghouse on Beckley by about 1:00 PM.*
* = Oh, that's right...I forgot...the "Rambler/Roger Craig Theory".
How could I be so stupid?! Mr. DCM gave LHO a ride to Beckley on
11/22....and then Rambler Man/DCM (instead of waiting for Oswald for a
minute or so as Lee picked up his gun) decided to leave his cohort
hanging out in the wind to hoof it over to Tenth Street on his own.
Which, btw, brings up this additional point when applying the "Oswald
In Rambler" theory --- Why did Oswald even NEED to return to his
roominghouse at all on November 22nd (to retrieve his own gun or to
change shirts or otherwise) if he's being given a lift by a fellow
conspirator?
Did Rambler Man forget to bring the appropriate number of weapons with
him too? Hence, Oswald must risk getting caught by police at his
residence to go and retrieve his own gun?
Why wouldn't Oswald have already had his gun and clothing change in
the Rambler prior to 12:30? Wouldn't Oswald, even in an "Unwitting
Patsy Mode" have insisted upon at least that little bit of pre-
planning if he knows he's going to rendezvous with Mr. Rambler Guy on
Elm Street at 12:40?
Seems to be a Dumb-Leading-Dumber getaway plan here. NOBODY involved
has a good escape plan it seems. Oswald gets a ride away from Dealey
Plaza in a Rambler station wagon (per many CTer beliefs)....but then
is dropped like a hooker after sex at his own house and then has to
walk to other getaway locales. Nice arrangement there.
Of course, CTers who feel that Oswald needed to be eliminated
immediately after the shooting always fail to ask the logical question
of -- Why didn't DCM/Rambler Man kill Oswald when he had the chance to
do so?
But, then again, I guess it was a much better plan to let Oswald live
for 46 hours to potentially spill any beans he might know about the
"plot" to the Live TV audience....and then have Ruby kill him while
millions watched on television. (Fair is fair, right?)
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/craig.htm
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/4dd73f8e676a5db8
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- The graphics {in Mark Fuhrman's book "A Simple Act Of Murder"}
are pretty good.
DVP -- You can't be serious. IMO, those graphics are childish and far
from convincing in any manner whatsoever.
Mr. Fuhrman slapped together that book in a very short time
(relatively-speaking, for a JFK volume that is) -- 2.5 to 3 years
total from its inception (via a 05/12/2006 quote from Mr. Fuhrman
himself on CBS-TV).....
www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/12/earlyshow/main1614016_page2.shtml
In comparison, Vincent Bugliosi's massive JFK volume will be released
after approximately 21 years of studying the case at hand.
That's not to say that a lot of stuff cannot be gleaned in 2.5 to 3
years' time. Certainly, it can be. But most publications on the JFK
assassination are normally only produced after many, many more years
of study and researching the case (including the additional murders of
J.D. Tippit and Lee Oswald, which are two subjects that are barely
even grazed by Mr. Fuhrman in "A Simple Act Of Murder"; plus the
details concerning Jack Ruby, which are also not tackled at all by
Fuhrman).
And the Tippit killing -- unquestionably committed by Oswald -- is,
indeed, a HUGE piece of the "JFK murder" puzzle. And to treat the
Tippit crime as a sidebar (for all intents and purposes) is, IMO, a
large error right off the bat.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/4c7616a35ac60e22
-------------------------------------------
DVP -- And you're goofy as all get out if you think Oswald's "hurried
state" was not verified in the official record.
CTer -- Feel free to supply all the citation that you can.
DVP -- Okay. Let's take a quick look at what Earlene Roberts had to
say to the Warren Commission on April 8th, 1964.....
MRS. ROBERTS -- "He {Lee Oswald} was walking unusually fast..."
MR. BALL -- "You mean he was walking faster than he usually was?"
MRS. ROBERTS -- "Yes."
MR. BALL -- "Did he run?"
MRS. ROBERTS -- "He wasn't running, but he was walking pretty fast; he
was all but running."
~~~~~~
MRS. ROBERTS -- "He was walking fast; he was making tracks pretty
fast."
MR. BALL -- "What is the only thing you said to him from the time he
came in the house until he left?"
MRS. ROBERTS -- "'You sure are in a hurry'."
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/robertse.htm
~~~~~~
So, tell me again how Oswald's "rushed"/"hurried" manner is not part
of the "evidence"? Mrs. Roberts is yet another scheming lying lowlife,
right? Yeah, that must be it.
Because, as we all know by this time...IF IT LEADS TO OSWALD, THERE'S
SOMETHING ROTTEN IN DENMARK (AND DALLAS TOO)! That's the Rule Of Thumb
-- if you're a Conspiracy Kook.
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- The fact is, one or ten people could have been shooting at JFK
with the amount of buildings and surroundings.
DVP -- Sure. But where's the evidence (the bullets, the guns, the
witness who can claim "There's the killer!"; anything!) that shows
there WERE multiple shooters firing from the other "buildings and
surroundings"?
Answer -- The evidence does not exist...and never did.
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- Two bullets probably hit Connally.
DVP -- There is ample evidence suggesting that John Connally was
struck by just one bullet. Connally said so...Dr. Shaw said so on Live
TV on 11/22...and the LACK of any bullets inside Connally also
supports the idea that CE399 was the only bullet inside him on
November 22.
Via a 2-bullets-hit-JBC theory, you now have upped the absurdity of
ANY anti-SBT theory to monstrously-silly heights. You do realize that,
right?
You'll need to explain away FOUR disappearing bullets (instead of just
three). Four bullets just vanish, never entering the record in the
case. Logical? Even slightly so? Hardly.
With each misstep, you and other CTers make yourselves look more
foolish in an "anti-SBT" manner.
You're actually saying that FOUR magically-vanishing bullets is a more-
reasonable conclusion than the SBT (which has all of its bullets {1}
accounted for right in the hospital where the victims were taken).
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/00a4ecbb835edc89
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- The amount of lead left in {Connally's} body doesn't do well
for the pristine bullet.
DVP -- Bullshit. The amount of lead left in JBC's body wouldn't amount
to a half-a-grain probably. You're spouting another misleading
conspiracy-tinged theory that has no merit at all.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/61fe27a14fb7dd35
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/7cadae96b63d3d5b
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- Parkland doctors said that JFK's throat wound was a wound of
entry. Two doctors there said the bullet was lodged in the chest or
lung.
DVP -- So what? Who cares? It means zilch. Because --- DID a bullet
"lodge in the chest or lung"?
Answer -- No, of course it did not. The entire body of JFK was X-
rayed, and what was discovered in his body?
Answer -- No bullets whatsoever (head to toe).
But...let's just ignore that hunk of Officialdom. It's better for your
CT purposes.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/humes.htm
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- When the SBT is patently false, it's just one step to knowing
that there is a greater possibility of multiple shooters.
DVP -- Bull. The SBT is a bona fide fact (based on the sum total of
the evidence that supports it, inside and out). And every physical re-
construction and animated re-creation that has been performed since
'63 has had the SBT passing the "It Was Doable" test with flying
colors, and everybody knows it.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/69758897e673c5a2
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/24f8834034ebccf7
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- Simply line it up with the hole in the windshield, and follow
the line.
DVP -- And suppose you tell the rest of the world just exactly WHERE
this "frontal" shooter could have been situated (with rifle in tow)
within Dealey Plaza in order to achieve that "BOH" (far right-rear)
wound on JFK's head that most/many CTers believe existed in 1963.
Where was this killer?
On the Overpass, amongst Holland, Dodd, Simmons (et al), plus TWO
Dallas policemen?
On the south side of Elm someplace?
Perhaps James Tague was really the killer. Hey, there's a theory I've
never heard before. You could write a new book!
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- Do you even know where the mastoid process is?
DVP -- No....I just took a wild guess. Duh! <chuckle>
http://www.upstate.edu/cdb/grossanat/imgs/sklattp5.jpg
I've been harping on the "Mastoid" measurement for years.
A 2005 example.....
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- The location Boswell gave is IN THE BASE OF THE NECK!!
DVP -- Nonsense. 5.5 inches south of the Mastoid in positively in the
upper back, just where the photo shows the wound to be.....
http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/images/BE5_HI.jpg
And all anyone has to do to verify this for themselves is to take a
ruler and measure 5.5 inches (14 cm.) below the bottom of the earlobe
(which equates to the location measured from on JFK's body at the
Bethesda autopsy).
Do this experiment on yourself, or better still, do it on somebody
else (your mom, dad, or fellow CT-Kook of your choosing), and you'll
see where "5.5 inches below the tip of the right Mastoid Process"
really is located (give or take a little bit, since every person's
body is slightly different).
And it's NOT in the neck. It's right here, just as Dr. Boswell said
via his written-in notes on the Face Sheet:
http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/images/BE5_HI.jpg
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/issues_and_evidence/head_wound/bradford_22_mar_00/Extras/Facesheet.jpg
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/ec8a92379fee1159
eca...@tx.rr.com
* "My normal rule with respect to this faction of CTer is to pretty
much
think that they think that "Everything Was Planted, Faked, And/Or
Tainted If It Leads In Any Fashion To Lee Harvey Oswald."
* "And the Tippit killing -- unquestionably committed by Oswald -- is,
indeed, a HUGE piece of the "JFK murder" puzzle. And to treat the
Tippit crime as a sidebar (for all intents and purposes) is, IMO, a
large error right off the bat.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/4c7616a35ac60e22
* CTer -- The fact is, one or ten people could have been shooting at
JFK
with the amount of buildings and surroundings.
DVP -- Sure. But where's the evidence (the bullets, the guns, the
witness who can claim "There's the killer!"; anything!) that shows
there WERE multiple shooters firing from the other "buildings and
surroundings"?
Answer -- The evidence does not exist...and never did."
-------------------------------------------
* "CTer -- Two bullets probably hit Connally.
DVP -- There is ample evidence suggesting that John Connally was
struck by just one bullet. Connally said so...Dr. Shaw said so on Live
TV on 11/22...and the LACK of any bullets inside Connally also
supports the idea that CE399 was the only bullet inside him on
November 22.
Via a 2-bullets-hit-JBC theory, you now have upped the absurdity of
ANY anti-SBT theory to monstrously-silly heights. You do realize that,
right?
You'll need to explain away FOUR disappearing bullets (instead of just
three). Four bullets just vanish, never entering the record in the
case. Logical? Even slightly so? Hardly.
With each misstep, you and other CTers make yourselves look more
foolish in an "anti-SBT" manner."
------------
Nicely done as always David.. Here's
my favorite quote:
"You'll need to explain away FOUR disappearing bullets (instead of
just
three). Four bullets just vanish, never entering the record in the
case. Logical? Even slightly so? Hardly."
Regards and Happy St Patrick's Day!
MR ;~D 1035Mar1707
> http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=3&to...
>
> -------------------------------------------
>
> CTer -- The location Boswell gave is IN THE BASE OF THE NECK!!
>
> DVP -- Nonsense. 5.5 inches south of the Mastoid in positively in the
> upper back, just where the photo shows the wound to be.....
>
> http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/images/BE5_HI.jpg
>
> And all anyone has to do to verify this for themselves is to take a
> ruler and measure 5.5 inches (14 cm.) below the bottom of the earlobe
> (which equates to the location measured from on JFK's body at the
> Bethesda autopsy).
>
> Do this experiment on yourself, or better still, do it on somebody
> else (your mom, dad, or fellow CT-Kook of your choosing), and you'll
> see where "5.5 inches below the tip of the right Mastoid Process"
> really is located (give or take a little bit, since every person's
> body is slightly different).
>
> And it's NOT in the neck. It's right here, just as Dr. Boswell said
> via his written-in notes on the Face Sheet:
>
> http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/images/BE5_HI.jpg
>
> http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/issues_and_evidence/head_wound/bradford_...
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/ec8a92379fee1159
aeffects
>
> read more ยป
a little feint here, a little feint there, here a feint, there a
feint, everywhere a feint-feint...
You gott'a present your case mr.prosecutor, then you gott'a deal with
the defense mr.prosecutor, tis not a vacum.....mr. prosecutor