Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Debating The John F. Kennedy Assassination (Part 38)

8 views
Skip to first unread message

David Von Pein

unread,
Feb 26, 2007, 1:08:27 AM2/26/07
to
DEBATING THE JFK CASE (PART 38):

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

SUBJECT -- The JFK Assassination: The Ongoing "Lone Assassin vs.
Conspiracy" Debate.

FEATURED TEXT -- Archived JFK Forum Messages From July 2003, December
2004, February 2005, June 2005, July 2005, and February 2007.

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

CTer (A CONSPIRACY THEORIST) -- According to you, at least 3 shots
came from the rear. Are you absolutely positive that all 3 of these
came from the 6th-floor window?

DVP (DAVID VON PEIN) -- Well, I know that TWO of them did, because
both CE399 and the head-shot bullet were scientifically linked to Lee
Oswald's C2766 rifle (which was found on the 6th Floor of the TSBD).

Now, since we've got THREE spent cartridges lying beneath the window
of the Sniper's Nest and THREE shots were heard by a vast majority of
earwitnesses....

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/shots3.jpg

....and since TWO-THIRDS of the bullets that were capable of being
traced to a weapon were traced to Oswald's rifle -- what does this
SUGGEST to anyone researching the crime?

Logic would dictate that ALL THREE shots had come from the same
location.

The ONLY possible way that those TWO KNOWN TRACEABLE BULLETS weren't
fired from the Depository's sixth floor (but, instead, from the Dal-
Tex, as suggested by some CTers) is if -- somehow -- someone managed
to fire C2766 from the Dal-Tex, and then transport the weapon to the
6th Floor of the Depository, where it was found. Logical? I think
not.*

* = Actually, that scenario wouldn't really work either -- because the
KNOWN PATH through the victims doesn't line up to the Dal-Tex Building
(and certainly not the SECOND floor of that building as you have
claimed). Instead, the wound path lines up very nicely (thank you) to
a high floor of the Book Depository, which is exactly where Rifle
#C2766 was found. Go figure. ;)

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

CTer -- David, I would like you to explain how you can believe the LN
theory when the WC just cobbled something together to make everyone
think "the government is taking care of it".

DVP -- Mainly because the alternative is to believe that so much of
the evidence has been "manipulated" and "faked" and "distorted" by
"conspirators" or "cover-uppers" to render any such CT hypothesis a
virtual impossibility for even the most skilled of professional
"plotters". Could not have happened in a million years.

Such a vast amount of stuff would have had to conveniently funnel down
all to the feet of Lee Harvey Oswald, that IF such a "plot" did
actually take place on November 22, 1963, I think it's safe to say
that those plotters/conspirators were not only highly skilled at their
covert task(s) beyond belief, but they were also the luckiest plotters
ever to grace the planet.

If you choose to buy into the CT motto of "If you don't like the
evidence, just say it's all fake" -- okay. But I'll stay out of that
playpen, thanks.

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/7448f602cc9b26e3

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

CTer -- There is NO POSSIBLE WAY {for witness Howard Brennan} to
determine either height OR weight/build {of the assassin Brennan saw
in the TSBD window on 11/22/63}. It simply can't be done with any
accuracy, because you can't see enough of the person in question to
make either of those determinations.

DVP -- And yet isn't it amazing that that is EXACTLY what Howard
Brennan went ahead and did ANYWAY, despite your protestations that it
is impossible.

And isn't it also somewhat remarkable that out of ALL THE MASS OF
HUMANITY on the planet that Mr. Brennan COULD have conceivably seen in
that window -- he would pick a description out of his hat to give to
the police that CLOSELY MATCHES LEE H. OSWALD, THE VERY SAME PERSON
WHO JUST HAPPENS TO OWN THE RIFLE THAT IS FOUND ON THE VERY FLOOR
WHERE BRENNAN SAW THIS MAN WHO YOU SAID WAS IMPOSSIBLE TO I.D.?

And isn't it amazing that Brennan IDed Oswald POSITIVELY, under oath
in front of the Warren Commission, running the risk of prison time
himself. Granted, Oswald was dead by this time, but to believe Brennan
would do such a thing just on a whim or a "partial" I.D. is slapping a
good and decent man in the face without probable cause to do so.

The following is worth repeating yet again --- Even though you state
that positive identification of people in the TSBD from Brennan's
position on Elm is totally impossible -- Brennan, just minutes after
the shooting (and via his 11/22/63 affidavit as well!), gives a
physical description of the gunman in the window that FITS THE ONE MAN
WHO HAPPENS TO OWN THAT WEAPON UP THERE ON THE SIXTH FLOOR (and a man
who happens to be employed in the very building as well).

And Howard L. Brennan, at 12:45 PM on November 22nd, had never seen
Lee Harvey Oswald before in his life, and had no idea a man named
Oswald worked in that building.

Pure coincidence (yet again)? Or did Brennan just MAKE UP his Oswald-
like description at approx. 12:45 and just happen to GET LUCKY AND
DESCRIBE OSWALD VERY CLOSELY IN DESCRIPTION?

Or did the police have a pre-arranged description of Oswald all ready
to go at about 12:45 PM? But, if they did, why not go all the way and
include OTHER descriptive details too -- like hair color and clothing
description, which weren't given out in the initial broadcast?

Of course, in the latter option, this makes Howard Brennan a complete
"dupe" I guess, and a bald-faced liar when he IDed Oswald (at DPD and
to the WC) without ever REALLY having seen him.

Anyone out there willing to buy this bill of conspiracy-filled goods
(which has been marked down to $1.99, because it ain't worth much
more)?

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/a83751f6ce319004

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

CTer -- Are you not aware that some people believe that because the
alleged assassin's rifle wasn't tested to see if it had been recently
discharged, that maybe it had not been fired at all on 11/22/63?

DVP -- Sure, I've heard that. It, like most/(all) CT nonsense is
totally absurd -- since we KNOW that every bullet/fragment leads back
to Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle (serial number C2766) -- whether
you wish to think so or not.

The "wasn't even used" theory is even stupid from a CT POV -- for WHY
would the conspirators not fire at least one shot from C2766 in order
to "frame" their "patsy" named Oswald? (Did all the conspirators just
ASSUME that no one would bother to check to see if the rifle had been
fired recently?)

All these little "tidbits" of singular CT-based info look much better
when isolated versus when packaged as a whole into the complete
assassination scenario. .... Like the rifle not being fired at all; or
CE399 being planted (in actuality, utter silliness even for the
plotters); or the planting of the Backyard Photos; and even Jack
Ruby's killing of Oswald. Looks good on "CT" paper, but falls apart
when examined in its totality.

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

CTer -- David, how can you justify convicting a man of murder in a
case where the evidence was handled, or mishandled, in the way it was
in this case?

DVP -- Very easily, that's how. .....

1.) It was Oswald's rifle;
2.) Oswald carried an (approx.) rifle-sized package to work;
3.) Oswald had no alibi for 12:30 PM;
4.) Oswald left the TSBD immediately following the shooting;
5.) Oswald had a past history of political assassination and
threatening public figures;
6.) Oswald lied to co-worker Wes Frazier about having "curtain
rods" (if he wasn't spinning a tale here, then where did the rods
go?);
7.) Oswald murdered a policeman while in flight (in front of multiple
witnesses);
8.) Oswald told lie after lie to authorities after his arrest;
9.) A man closely matching Oswald's description was seen firing from
the SN window.

Look again at the laundry list of items above. Now tell me how many of
these items fall under the "mishandled evidence" banner that CTers
like to cite?

The answer, of course, is: None.

Obviously I'm beating a dead horse when it comes to convincing any
CTer that all (or any) of the above points are true. But I cannot help
that. CT skepticism doesn't magically change Lee Harvey Oswald into an
innocent man. Given the sum total of the situation -- Oswald is as
guilty as Ruby of murder.

There's enough evidence in total (both physical and circumstantial) to
convict Oswald three times over. You disagree, I know. But I disagree
when you claim all the evidence was "mishandled" to the point where we
can never know Oswald's guilt or innocence.

The items I listed above are FACTS, and it didn't matter WHAT the
Dallas Police Department, the Secret Service, or the FBI did after the
assassination -- because the cops could have stood around eating
doughnuts or mumbling to themselves in the corner, and such negligence
STILL wouldn't change one single item in my list above (all of which
point toward Oswald's guilt in two 11/22 murders).

NOTHING that anyone on Earth did can change the above list. Because
the authorities had absolutely nothing to do with any of these points.

Now, when we get into other items, like....

All bullets match Oswald's rifle;
LHO's prints on the rifle and boxes and paper bag;
X-rays and photos prove only rear shots hit JFK;
Was the autopsy botched?....

....then you can begin to argue (but never prove) the "Authorities
Mishandled Everything" scenario. You won't get me to buy into these
theories; but obviously many people foolishly believe that many of the
various people in authority were total crooks and/or complete and
utter morons when it came to investigative skills.

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

CTer -- LNers do not study any evidence that points to any other
solution besides the SBT to explain JFK's and JBC's 7 wounds. They
stick to their cartoon animations.

DVP -- You do realize, do you not, that your (or any) "CT alternative"
to the SBT necessarily MUST include the amazing "coincidence" of a
SEPARATE back wound to John B. Connally hitting him in exactly the
same spot where it's been determined that a bullet would also have
struck him IF the same bullet that went through JFK had also hit
Connally?

The odds on that one must be off the charts in favor of
"impossibility".

Not even to mention the little items (without the SBT in place) of --
Where did the bullets go that hit JFK? Did the plotters dig them out
without a single non-conspirator noticing?

There's also the "angle" problem with regard to a separate Connally
hit. The SBT works perfectly for the JBC wounds from the TSBD's
Sniper's Nest. So, unless the OTHER shooter was standing right beside
Oswald in the SN, the angle is wrong to have caused the chest exit
wound, etc. Which, of course, is also an impossibility, given the fact
that the "Nest" POV required any bullet to go through JFK in order to
even touch JBC.

Kennedy had Connally completely BLOCKED from a SN POV, which is
another large reason to support the SBT in this case. Given the wounds
to Connally, and the angles involved, nobody could even have struck
Connally without hitting Kennedy first. This major point is constantly
overlooked or ignored or skewed by CTers; and that fact speaks
volumes, IMO.

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/e06a29392572c072

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/284975f119fe13c0

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

CTer -- For one, CE399 could have simply been fired from the Dal-Tex
building, which would completely refute the Warren Report by making
Oswald not the shooter.

DVP -- Amazing. Accept everything BUT the "Official" version, right?
That'd be a fate worse than death no doubt. But making up "plots" and
shooting locations (like the Dal-Tex) makes MUCH more sense, doesn't
it? Geez-Louise.

Tell us, then, just exactly from WHERE in the Dal-Tex Building the SBT
shot was fired to result in virtually perfect alignment (at a 17-
degree declination) that leads back to the SN of the TSBD?

And then perhaps you can fill us in on the number of witnesses who
heard ANY shots coming from the Dal-Tex?

Good luck.

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

CTer -- So you are aware that the DPD "RE-CREATED" photos?

DVP -- Studebaker Exhibit J, yes. But Studebaker ADMITTED up front to
the WC that Exhibit J represented a "re-creation" of the boxes in the
Sniper's Nest. .....

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo3/exhibits/studej.jpg

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/studebak.htm

JOSEPH A. BALL (WC) -- "The picture of the boxes; this is after they
were moved?"

ROBERT L. STUDEBAKER (DPD Detective) -- "Yes, sir; they were moved
there. This is exactly the position they were in."

MR. BALL -- "It is?"

MR. STUDEBAKER -- "Yes; this was after they were moved, but I put them
in the same exact position."

MR. BALL -- "Were they that close - that was about the position?"

MR. STUDEBAKER -- "Yes."

MR. BALL -- "Let's take one of these pictures and mark it the next
number, which will be Exhibit J. After the boxes of Rolling Readers
had been moved, you put them in the same position?"

MR. STUDEBAKER -- "Yes."

MR. BALL -- "And took a picture?"

MR. STUDEBAKER -- "Yes, sir."

MR. BALL -- "And this is Exhibit J ... is that right?"

MR. STUDEBAKER -- "Exhibit J. Yes, sir."

~~~~~

If the DPD was underhanded and crooked, would Studebaker have ADMITTED
to a photo re-creation? An HONEST conspirator, eh? That's somewhat
strange for the vast "Let's Frame Oswald" crew, don't you think?

But we also have a number of DPD pictures verified by Studebaker and
Day that show the boxes as they were WHEN FOUND (which definitely
includes the angled box on the window ledge, which Tom Dillard's photo
validates without a doubt):

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo3/exhibits/ce482.jpg

So you have no case for "conspiracy" here--even WITH a picture or two
that depict a "re-created" box stacking.

Do you think Studebaker was lying his ass off when he said that CE509/
Studebaker Exhibit D has "fingerprint dust" all over the boxes?

Also -- Does a "re-created" photo suddenly WIPE OUT Oswald's prints on
the boxes? Or does the re-created picture WIPE OUT the fact that
Oswald was seen pulling the trigger? Or does it wipe out the fact that
LHO's shells and gun were found on that same 6th Floor?

Plus, I'm still wondering HOW moving around a few boxes somehow serves
the LET'S GET OSWALD brigade in the long run? Oz could have gotten the
job done without any rifle rest, I'm pretty sure.

I guess the cops just wanted something to do...so they needlessly
started pushing boxes around in order to "frame" their patsy.

Yeah...that's logical. ~eyeroll~

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

CTer -- They {the proverbial unknown "plotters"} didn't want an
accidental death. They wanted a public execution.

DVP -- Why? Why did it matter to these lowlifes HOW Kennedy died? It
was just important to kill him so that Johnson would continue the war,
blah blah blah, et al. Right?

Are you telling me that there wouldn't have been a MUCH quieter,
smoother, less-public method of eliminating the President other than
parading him in front of hundreds of witnesses in an open city Plaza,
with scads of cameras rolling, possibly cataloging every step of the
"plot"?

Would WE have assassinated Castro this way? Or would we have tried to
do it in some quieter fashion (like the "poisoning his food" method)?

(Poisoned) food for thought??

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/606503e4d63e74ad

http://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/discussions/start-thread.html/ref=cm_rdp_dp/002-2065385-6525668?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1589791398&authorID=A1FDW1SPYKB354&store=yourstore&reviewID=RJTEB6UY458I8&displayType=ReviewDetail

0 new messages