MORE KOOK BASHFESTS (A NEVER-TIRING EXPERIENCE)
David Von Pein
>>> "So Bugliosi spent 20 years of his life writing a book to silence the kooks?" <<<
Not entirely, no. .....
"It might sound corny, but the truth is I feel an obligation to write
this book. I've read every book that's been published {re. the JFK
assassination} since 1964, and 85% of them feel that there's been a
conspiracy of some kind. My book will tell the other side, and I feel
I'm equipped to do it. ... Every book that comes out alleges a
conspiracy. Someone has got to debunk these absurd conspiracy
theories." -- Vince Bugliosi; January 1988
And the following VB quote deserves a replay every now and again, too
(just because it's so fun...and appropriate as well):
"Though there are some notable exceptions, for the most part the
persistent rantings of the Warren Commission critics remind me of dogs
barking idiotically through endless nights." -- Vince Bugliosi;
November 1986
>>> "You spend all of your waking hours here to silence the kooks?" <<<
No. Mainly just to ridicule them. (And to earn my VB-sponsored "shill"
salary. $2000 per week now, btw. Vince is no cheapskate.) ;)
>>> "That mock trial they put on, that was to silence the kooks?" <<<
No. That was done to simulate Oswald's "day in court". And it did
that.
I'm sorry you didn't like the prosecutor, or the "Guilty As Charged"
verdict from the jury. But them's the breaks.
Although you certainly haven't seen anywhere NEAR the entire 5.5-hour
mock trial. You've merely seen the few snippets from YouTube that I
provided through links.
You should try to get a copy of the whole 5.5-hour "trial"....and pay
particular attention to how Gerry Spence presents NO HARD EVIDENCE OF
CONSPIRACY....and then watch Ruth Paine as she spells out her thoughts
on Lee Harvey Oswald, who was a man that Mrs. Paine thought shot the
President and did it alone. .....
RUTH PAINE -- "I do think for the historical record it's important
that people understand that Lee was a very ordinary person -- that
people can kill a President without that being something that shows on
them in advance."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b3a8181c73cfa095
>>> "The House Assassination Commitee [sic; 2 Ts needed here, Professor]..." <<<
The HSCA was a total waste of time and money. It was an unneeded
investigation entirely. It was created mainly because of the
persistent (unfounded) cries of "conspiracy", which were being spouted
by certain CTers around the country.
But the HSCA arrived, of course, at the exact same "Oswald Shot The
President" conclusion as did the WC. And since the Dictabelt crap is
null and void, we're back to a total "LN" conclusion again. .....
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/acoustic.htm
>>> "Gawd, did Bugliosi actually say that? What a crappy primary school education he must have had. A scintilla is one. Proper usage would have been, "There has not been a scintilla of proof"." <<<
Oh, for Pete sake. Are you serious here?
"One" can be a synonym for "a", Professor.
Any more dictionary hairs you care to split?
BTW, did you really just say "Gawd"?
>>> "Oh, and I love the part about Oswald had the "skill" to kill President Kennedy." <<<
Yeah....me too. Because it's definitely true. And the sum total of
evidence PROVES that to be true, whether you want to believe it or
not.
Oswald was ranked as a "sharpshooter" in the Marines. And, as fellow
LNer Bud has pointed out in past posts, evidently CTers think that
"sharpshooter" equates to "shitty shooter". Seems like a curious
conclusion to jump to, doesn't it?
Of course, the reality is that CT-Kooks WANT Lee Oswald to be a "poor
shot", because such a (false) belief helps them spin their CT fairy
tales.
But the truth is this (via the 1986 TV Docu-Trial):
VINCENT BUGLIOSI -- "Mr. Delgado, I believe you testified before the
Warren Commission, that on the rifle range Oswald was kind of a joke,
a pretty big joke."
NELSON DELGADO (served with Oswald in Marine Corps) -- "Yes, he was."
BUGLIOSI -- "You're aware that at the time Oswald was doing poorly on
the range, he was about to be released from the Marines, is that
correct?"
DELGADO -- "Yes, he was."
BUGLIOSI -- "Are you aware that in 1956, when Oswald first joined the
Marines, and was going through Basic Training, he fired a 212 on the
rifle range with an M-1 rifle, which made him a 'sharpshooter' at that
time -- are you aware of that?"
DELGADO -- "Yes."
BUGLIOSI -- "Given the fact that Oswald was about to get out of the
Marines when he was in your unit, and the fact that he showed no
interest in firing on the range -- you don't attribute his poor
showing on the range to his being a poor shot?"
DELGADO -- "No."
BUGLIOSI -- "He could have done better, you felt, if he tried?"
DELGADO -- "Certainly."
>>> "You're out of step with 3/4s of the population." <<<
Thank the Maker.
>>> "You believe in a theory most accurately called "the Magic Bullet Theory"." <<<
There's not a damn thing "magical" about the SBT. It's by far the best
scenario to explain an event that CTers can only GUESS about. Any CT
"version" of the event is filled with so many additional
"unexplainables", it makes the SBT look solid as a rock by comparison.
Why the conspiracists can't see that fact is a bigger mystery than the
SBT and the JFK head snap put together.
"IT'S THE ONLY WAY IT *COULD* HAVE HAPPENED":
http://youtube.com/watch?v=2kEh3Kgwhk0
WHERE'S THE LOGICAL CONSPIRACY-ORIENTED ALTERNATIVE TO THE SBT?:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/8ee3ea6cfa4a58c9
MORE SBT TALK (WITH A LARGE DOSE OF COMMON SENSE INCLUDED):
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/d16a5df97cccb32c
ANOTHER SINGLE-BULLET THEORY ESSAY:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/c19abd308e0026e1
>>> "You think Oswald had "the skill" to hit his target in the time alloted even though 10 out of 11 Olympic class marksmen couldn't do it." <<<
I have no idea where this "10 out of 11" business comes from (probably
from some kook book, wherein Oz wears a halo and says his prayers
every night before beddy-by time)....but the fact is that MANY people
have accomplished a "2-for-3" score on a target in less than 6 or 7
seconds while using a Carcano rifle.
In 1967, several gunmen hired by CBS-TV performed the "Oswald feat"
multiple times. One guy scored a 3-for-3...and it WAS on a MOVING
TARGET (60 feet up). One CBS shooter even got off 3 shots in 4.4
seconds, something even the Warren Commission said was impossible.*
* = That shooter managed only 1 "hit", however; but the firing time
was amazingly low, proving that the shooting, with a Carcano, could be
done in LESS time than even the WC claimed. Grain of salt required,
though, since Oswald's exact C2766 rifle was not used in the tests.
Different Carcanos were utilized by CBS-TV.
Oh, by the way, you need a comma after "alloted" above. And you
spelled "allotted" incorrectly. It needs a second T. ;)
>>> "You say no matter that it was physically impossible for Oswald to get to the Tippit crime scene in the time required, he somehow managed to get there." <<<
Why do you even want to start down this crooked street, Ric? Why? It's
a dead end. Always has been.
Obviously, Oswald DID get to 10th St. in time to kill Tippit. He did
it. Every scrap of hard evidence proves that fact, Ric. Every scrap.
Don't let the various "timelines" dominate your thinking with respect
to the Tippit case. If you want the "timelines" of certain witnesses
to dominate your thinking (and OVERRULE the hard evidence that says
LHO killed Tippit), then, sure, you'll be able to get Oswald off scot-
free (I guess).
But such one-dimensional thinking is just plain silly, in light of WHO
it was that some of those SAME witnesses identified as Tippit's
killer. Plus the shells. Plus the jacket. Plus Oswald's behavior in
front of the shoe store. Plus LHO's sneaking into a dark theater WITH
THE TIPPIT MURDER WEAPON (in an obvious effort to hide from the cops).
How much more do you NEED? Do you need a Zapruder Film from Tenth
Street too?
J.D. TIPPIT'S MURDER AND THE ABSURD DEFENSE OF LEE OSWALD:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/85fe573544d89f90
>>> "You say the 30 or 40 people who say they heard shots from the grassy knoll were wrong." <<<
Yes. They were wrong. All of them. Here's why....
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/7b06a89bd4042363
>>> "You say all the people who saw men behind the picket fence were wrong." <<<
Name a single witness who saw "men behind the picket fence" (WITH A
GUN OR GUNS!) during the shooting of JFK.
Not even Lee Bowers said that. He saw some people near the picket
fence...but he SAW NO GUNS AT ANY TIME. None.
Bowers, in actuality, is a fairly-decent "LN" witness. Here's why....
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/617cf567207b9159
>>> "You say the people who described a man not fitting Oswald's description on the wrong end of the 6th floor of the SBD with a "hunting rifle" were wrong." <<<
Oh, dear. It looks like Walt has gotten to you. That's truly a shame.
For, it appears you'll believe ANYBODY (as long as that "anybody"
resides in the "Anyone Except LHO" club, which is where Walt resides,
of course).
The word "people" is incorrect in your last sentence too. Only Arnold
Rowland saw a man with a rifle on the WEST end of the TSBD. And the
"hunting rifle" bit you got straight from Walt. Here's what Rowland
said about the rifle he saw:
ROWLAND -- "In proportion to the scope it appeared to me to be a .30-
odd size 6, a deer rifle with a fairly large or powerful scope."
Key phrase there -- "It appeared to me to be". Rowland was about half-
a-block away from the window and the window was 60 feet up.
>>> "You say all the people who say Oswald and Ruby knew each other are mistaken." <<<
No credible evidence has ever surfaced to back up the idea that Ruby
knew the man he murdered. None.
If you've got some evidence...please present it.
Plus: Within the type of grandiose "Mob hit" that many CTers like to
suggest re. LHO's murder, do you truly think it would have been a WISE
move on the Mob's part (or whoever's) to assign Ruby to kill Oswald IF
IT COULD VERY EASILY BE PROVEN LATER ON THAT RUBY AND OSWALD KNEW EACH
OTHER?
Pretty careless, don't you think? Couldn't they have gotten a total
stranger (from Oswald's POV) to rub out the patsy in the police
station? Why would they have knowingly used an acquaintance of the
patsy?
They certainly didn't need an expert marksman to get rid of LHO at
point-blank range, right? Heck, an old lady with arthritis in both
hands could have pulled that off for Marcello & Company...or whoever
the hell the kooks want to put in the "_____ Did It" blank.
>>> "You say the witnesses to the Tippit murder who described killers not fitting Oswald's description were wrong." <<<
Wrong use of the plural again. One witness, Acquilla Clemons, said she
saw two men running from the scene. But Clemons did not see the actual
shooting, remember. She only saw the aftermath.
Clemons might very well have seen Ted Callaway and another WITNESS
running toward Patton Avenue from the area of Tippit's squad car. The
timing would seem to be off in that scenario, though, since Callaway
wasn't at the scene immediately after the shooting took place.
But one thing's a certainty (given the totality of evidence): If
Clemons DID see the "killer", she saw Lee Harvey Oswald.
>>> "The list goes on and on and you do what kooks do -- you ignore everything on lists of hard evidence/testimony such as the one above." <<<
Oh, come now, my good man. You've provided NOTHING of a hard and
definitive nature to support your CT claims. Nothing. You've only
recycled the already-trampled kookshit spewed by other CTers here
(mainly Walt, who's a MEGA-kook, btw).
Come up with your OWN theories. Those you've used are really
weak...and have been trashed by other, harder evidence (esp. relating
to Tippit). How anyone with a brain cell can still be arguing in favor
of Oswald's possible innocence in the Tippit murder is just simply
staggering.
Given the evidence against him, it is literally impossible (from EVERY
P.O.V.) for Oswald to be innocent of murdering Patrolman Tippit.
Live with that fact...or be a Mega-Kook. The choice is yours to make
there.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/1bdb7e56f0427853
>>> "What's your answer to the CT argument that it was impossible for Oswald to be at the Tippit murder scene in the time required?" <<<
The "time" issue is a moot point re. Tippit's death and his killer's
identity, and everybody knows why (or should know). We don't know if
Oswald RAN part of the way to 10th St., or whether he trotted/jogged
part of the way. But what we DO know, based on gobs of evidence, is --
Oswald WAS at 10th St. when Tippit was killed, because Oswald and
Oswald's own gun murdered J.D. Tippit (regardless of whether it was
1:06, 1:10, 1:14, 1:16, or 10:00).
Lee Harvey Oswald's guilt in the Tippit slaying could not possibly be
any clearer. CTers who try to make excuses for Oswald with respect to
Tippit's murder are truly reprehensible in my book.
And, in addition to my previous answers re. the Tippit murder (and the
links provided), here's yet another batch of "Oz Did It" stuff
concerning J.D. Tippit....
VARIOUS DVP POSTS RE. THE TIPPIT MURDER "TIMELINE":
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/d9456c10c7229bbd
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/038d2ea4f25dc75a
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/9d499a8cd7d96909
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/9ef349732b8e8bdb
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b76b91b5466cc213
THE MURDER OF DALLAS POLICE OFFICER J.D. TIPPIT (PART 1):
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/cbcca847390ffca8
THE MURDER OF DALLAS POLICE OFFICER J.D. TIPPIT (PART 2):
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/3959008382f45641
David Von Pein
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/7d042b8eee5dde9c
>>> "I was just wondering what the Basis is for your views." <<<
1.) Common sense.
2.) Logical thinking.
3.) Hard facts and evidence leading to nobody but a person named
Oswald.
4.) A non-paranoid mindset that does not have me screaming
"Conspiracy" every few seconds (or when every single thing doesn't
quite "add up" -- eg: the "Mauser"/"Carcano" nonsense that so many
CTers feel is virtual PROOF of conspiracy. Which, of course, is pure
idiocy from any "Patsy Plotters'" pre-shooting POV -- WHY on Earth
would they plant the WRONG kind of rifle to be found by police in
order to frame Oswald -- a "Patsy" who didn't own a Mauser...he owned
a Carcano).
And, no, I haven't read every single word of every single one of the
WC 26 volumes. I know of Zero persons who have done that. (Therefore,
I suppose my LN views are totally worthless now, correct? Pffft.)
If you have managed to read all volumes, bravo to your stalwart effort
in that regard.
But if you think that by missing a few words in those published
volumes, that fact is going to change the vast evidence that says LHO
is a double-murderer -- you'd better take a horizontal position on the
couch until the shrink arrives.
David Von Pein
November 2005
David Von Pein
E-MAIL SUBJECT: The JFK Case
DATE: 6/26/2007
----------------------------
PABLO PENA WROTE:
>>> "You're not being very respectful. There are dozens of crazy theories about the Kennedy assassination which I did not indulge. I only mentioned the "hardest" facts about the case. So accusing me of "believing every conspiracy theory out there" is unfounded." <<<
DVP SAID:
Hi again Pablo,
Yes, you're right. I over-reacted in that regard. It's a fault I have.
I tend to "lump" all CTers together on occasion, and seeing as how you
were discussing many provably-false scenarios in a prior mail, I did
some "lumping". My apologizies for that.
>>> "Even if the SBT is valid, that doesn't mean Oswald took the fatal shot. In fact, from the Zapruder film, it's obvious the shot came from the front. A projectile traveling at several thousand feet per second has tremendous mass, the head would have lurched forward at least a little. Not even in one frame of the Zapruder film is there any forward motion." <<<
You are 100% wrong here. There is very discernible FORWARD motion of
JFK's head at the exact moment of impact (Z313). And no Z-Film clip
shows that better than this excellent clip [below], which I always
offer up to CTers to prove my point re. the fatal shot positively
coming from the REAR:
www.jfkmurdersolved.com/images/Headshot-large.gif
BTW, the forward head motion was first discovered by the Itek people
in 1975. So it's certainly not a new discovery.
>>> "Certain basic points are never answered by "lone shooter" fanatics. --- 1.) Why would Oswald, a communist sympathizer, shoot a president thought to be "soft on communism"? And if for notoriety then why deny the whole thing?" <<<
Nobody can know Oswald's motive (or motives). But it's likely, IMO,
that Castro (not Russia or Khrushchev) played the biggest political
role in LHO's motive.
Oswald hated the USA. That's undeniable from his "Historic Diary" that
he kept. He also adored Fidel Castro. We know that. And the U.S.
didn't exactly have a warm relationship with good ol' Fidel, circa
1962-1963. Oswald might very well have shot JFK "for Castro". (Oswald
acted alone, without very much doubt...but he, alone, "did it for
Castro".)
Why didn't he confess if he did it for a political cause? Who knows.
Nobody can know for sure. But it's obvious Oswald was not suicidal,
and he wanted to live beyond November 22.
When this subject crops up, I usually resort to my own personal
thoughts -- i.e., it's very hard to put yourself into the mind of a
fruitcake who is willing to take a gun to work and take some potshots
at the U.S. President. It's a mindset that is very hard to reconcile
(as I think you'll agree).
>>> "2.) Am I actually to believe that after killing the president this man coolly stashed away a rifle, went down six flights of stairs being seen by no one, reached into his pocket, extracted change, purchased a soft drink and was calmly drinking it less than 2 minutes after the assassination? Is he James Bond?" <<<
He did like James Bond-like adventure and mystery. That is true. ;)
And Oswald was also very secretive. And he was positively a kook
beyond all belief (e.g., defecting to Russia at the height of the Cold
War; no further proof of his "kook" status is required beyond this
"defection" point).
More about Oswald's post-12:30 actions:
EVERYTHING OSWALD DID REEKS WITH GUILT:
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/8845d85a86407d31
>>> "3.) By most accounts Oswald was acting "erratic" after the assassination. Stopping a bus in the middle of the street by banging on the window. His landlady said he was pacing frantically. Was he surprised? By what? His own assassination?" <<<
I don't think he was "erratic" after the shooting. He did things I
would have expected ONLY A LONE-NUT GUNMAN to do. For example:
Stopping a bus in the middle of the block, for one. Nothing funny
there.
Rushing into his roominghouse, grabbing a gun, and rushing out again.
Nothing odd there (if he's guilty and forgot that gun previously,
which is what I think might have happened).
Killing a cop who stopped him just 45 minutes after Kennedy was shot.
Resisting arrest in the theater and shouting "This is it!" (or "It's
all over now") for many to hear, plus pulling his gun on more
policemen.
All of that spells: OSWALD'S GUILTY! And, just as importantly, it
spells: Oswald's probably in this thing ALONE.
>>> "4.) Ruby: Family man. Business owner with a wife and children. Let's see if I got this right -- this man is going to throw his entire life away (including jeopardizing his family's welfare) to protect a woman [Jackie Kennedy] he doesn't know from testifying at a trial? Do you actually believe that?" <<<
Oh my goodness, Pablo. You're really mixed up here. Jack Ruby was
certainly not a "family man" with a wife and kids (unless you want to
count his dogs, which he often referred to as his family and wife).
He was single. He had no children. He lived with a male roommate in a
Dallas apartment. And his whole life was wrapped up in his sleazy
nightclubs.
Also: Ruby had organic brain damage, he was a person who loved to be
where the action was, he knew a lot of cops in Dallas, and he also had
a tendency to want to take the law into his own hands. Plus, he loved
John Kennedy.
These are the things that added up to Ruby, alone, killing Oswald.
More on Ruby:
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/77edb3f67ec3350a
Regards,
David Von Pein
aeffects
> E-MAIL SUBJECT: The JFK Case
> DATE: 6/26/2007
>
> ----------------------------
>
> PABLO PENA WROTE:
>
> >>> "You're not being very respectful. There are dozens of crazy theories about the Kennedy assassination which I did not indulge. I only mentioned the "hardest" facts about the case. So accusing me of "believing every conspiracy theory out there" is unfounded." <<<
>
> DVP SAID:
>
> Hi again Pablo,
<snip>
nobody believes anything from you David! Who knows Pablo could be your
roommate, Tim
YoHarvey
Must be one more conspiracy huh toots? roflmao.
tomnln
"YoHarvey" <bail...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6d4ea9a7-d406-44bb...@e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
This ASShole can't even see the Conspiracy between his wife & the 17 of us
from this newsgroup.