Re: JFK Assassination Forum Archives -- Misc. Topics Of Interest (Part 141)

Lee Harvey Oswald's possible motives are discussed in the Warren
Report (Chapter VII). Perhaps not as definitively as Paul May would
like, but I think Chapter 7 does a pretty decent job at describing the
kind of person Oswald was and his potential motive(s) for the murder
of President Kennedy.

Essentially, I'd say the Warren Commission, within Chapter 7, is
letting America (and the world) make up its own mind regarding
Oswald's motive.

But the evidence presented in the Warren Report prior to Chapter 7
certainly establishes Oswald as the murderer of both JFK and Officer
Tippit, beyond a reasonable person's reasonable doubt (note the way I
worded that there). ;)

Therefore, since Oswald's guilt has been established in Chapters 1
through 6 of the Warren Report, the subject of motive is really
secondary. Plus, any single motive ascribed to Oswald for Kennedy's
murder can never really be "definitive", since Oswald was killed two
days after the assassination. It will always be a subject of debate
and guesswork--from now till the end of time.

But let me ask Paul May this related question:

Do you think the Warren Commission should have simply GUESSED as to
what Oswald's motive was, and written about this GUESS in the WC's
final report as if it were the ONLY possibility regarding this key
"motive" topic?

Or, alternately, are you of the opinion that the WC just simply didn't
look hard enough to establish a clear and concrete motive on the part
of Oswald?

IMO, I think the WC was wise when they didn't place a final stamp of
FINALITY on some of the things that are part of the Warren Report--and
Oswald's specific and forever-unknowable "motive" is one of those
things.

And another one is: the SBT timeline. I think the WC was smart to not
get themselves pinned down to picking out one specific frame of the
Zapruder Film and label that exact frame as the "SBT Frame".

Instead, the Commission, based on the on-site re-creation that was
done at Dealey Plaza on 5/24/64, placed the SBT within a bracketed
series of Z-Film frames (Z210-Z225). And I happen to think that the
SBT is, indeed, occurring within that 16-frame bracket.

So, I think the Commission did a good job by not trying to pretend
they had all the answers to every single question about the
assassination--or the assassin.

Another instance of this is the topic of "Which Shot Missed?"

The Warren Commission readily admitted it really didn't know with 100%
certainty which one of Oswald's three shots missed the President's
limousine entirely. The WC speculated and guessed to some degree (as
we all have when it comes to certain things connected to this case),
and the Commission's conclusions that are found at the end of Chapter
3 of the Warren Report, on Page 117, include words like
"probably" (twice), "preponderance", and "approximately". And, IMO,
that's a good thing, not a bad thing:

"The Commission has concluded that the shots which killed
President Kennedy and wounded Governor Connally were fired from the
sixth-floor window at the southeast corner of the Texas School Book
Depository Building. Two bullets probably caused all the wounds
suffered by President Kennedy and Governor Connally. Since the
preponderance of the evidence indicated that three shots were fired,
the Commission concluded that one shot probably missed the
Presidential limousine and its occupants, and that the three shots
were fired in a time period ranging from approximately 4.8 to in
excess of 7 seconds." -- From The Warren Commission Final Report; Page
117

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0071a.htm

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0200a.htm

aeffects

unread,

May 27, 2010, 3:47:12 AM5/27/10

to

On May 26, 4:21 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:

no advertising shithead.....

aeffects

unread,

May 27, 2010, 3:48:27 AM5/27/10

to

On May 26, 7:32 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:

<snip>

no advertising moron..... you know the rules!

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

May 30, 2010, 5:52:35 PM5/30/10

to

RE: THE WINDSHIELD OF JFK'S LIMOUSINE:

"Special Officer Davis of the Secret Service and SA Gies stated
that they noticed the damage to the windshield when the car [SS-100-X]
arrived at the [White House] garage, that both of them ran their hands
over the outside surface of the windshield and found it to be smooth
and unbroken. Both were present when the windshield was removed from
the car by the Arlington Glass Company and noticed that the removal
caused the cracks in the glass to lengthen, but the outside surface
still remained unbroken and there is no hole or crack through the
windshield." -- Page 2 of Commission Document #80 [Secret Service
Report of January 6, 1964]

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10482&relPageId=2

aeffects

unread,

May 30, 2010, 6:46:10 PM5/30/10

to

On May 30, 2:52 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:

no advertising shithead.....

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

May 30, 2010, 9:30:34 PM5/30/10

to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/1efde3daabb05ad1/068f191f3011051c?#068f191f3011051c

>>> "You are wrong. He [Bill Newman] was there!" <<<

No, Bob. You are wrong.

In 2003, William Newman specifically said that his initial statement
about where he thought the shots came from was based not so much on
what he HEARD, but instead was based on what he SAW. (And, btw, during
his WFAA-TV interview on 11/22/63, Bill Newman said he heard only two
shots, which certainly doesn't harm the overall LN scenario at all.)

Newman SAW the RIGHT-FRONT portion of President Kennedy's head
explode, and he therefore utilized that VISUAL sign to attribute the
origin of that head shot to a location directly behind him ("on the
mound of ground" there on the "garden"), which, btw, is a location
that would be to the EAST of Abraham Zapruder's position, which is a
location that nobody (not even the wackiest conspiracy theorists) has
ever claimed a gunman was shooting from.

Bill Newman can be heard talking about where he thought the shots came
from in the following video (at approx. the 5:30 mark), which is an
Oral History interview that Bill and Gayle Newman did for the Sixth
Floor Museum At Dealey Plaza on July 10, 2003:

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/287932-101

And in the above video, William Newman says this:

"I thought it [the head shot] came from straight behind me. ....
It was a visual impact that it had on me, more so than the noise.
Seeing the side of the President's head blow off; seeing the President
go across the car seat into Mrs. Kennedy's lap, in her direction. It
gave me the sensation that the shots were coming from directly behind
where I was standing." -- William E. Newman; 7/10/2003

http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/02/interviews-with-bill-and-gayle-newman.html

David Von Pein

unread,

Jun 1, 2010, 12:22:32 AM6/1/10

to

Does anyone have any idea where the following alleged (and ridiculous)
quote from Lee Harvey Oswald originated?

At least one radio newsman quoted Oswald as having said these words on
November 22 as LHO was being hauled out of the Texas Theater:

"I got me a President and a cop, and I'm gonna get me two more."

If only we had a tape recording of Oswald confessing to BOTH murders
in such a manner.

But I doubt that even such a recording would be enough to silence the
Anybody-But-Oswald conspiracy crowd. They would probably declare it to
be a fake tape, with Dave Ferrie imitating Oswald on the recording.
(Gary Oldman would have been too young to do the impersonation, since
Gary was only five years old in 1963.)

==========================

Related Warren Commission Testimony:

DAVID W. BELIN -- "Were you asked ever to make a report of any
conversation you had with him [Lee Oswald]?"

POLICE OFFICER C.T. WALKER -- "No; they called me on the phone a
couple of days after, and some supervisor asked me, there had been a
rumor got out that Oswald had said, "Well, I got me a President and a
cop. I should have got me two more." Or something like that. But that
conversation was never said, because I was with him from the time that
he was arrested until the time the detectives took him over."

David Von Pein

unread,

Jun 6, 2010, 2:47:53 AM6/6/10

to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/865fc4f8fac777ba

>>> "Who else [besides Dallas Police Detective Paul Bentley] claims they heard [Lee Harvey Oswald] say "It's all over now" and "This is it"?" <<<

Dallas Police Officer Nick McDonald is also on record as having heard
Oswald make BOTH of those statements.

On 11/23/63, in an interview for WFAA-TV, McDonald said that LHO said
"This is it". And a few months later, in a CBS interview with Eddie
Barker that was filmed inside the Texas Theater, McDonald told Barker
that Oswald said "Well, it's all over now".

McDonald can be heard talking about both of those LHO statements in
the video linked below:

http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/06/nick-mcdonald-and-paul-bentley.html

David Von Pein

unread,

Jun 11, 2010, 4:38:58 AM6/11/10

to

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Point-blank question for Bob Harris:

Do you believe the people who said they saw a large hole in the right-
rear of JFK's head were correct, even with the X-ray below staring you
in the face, which is an X-ray that proves for all time that there was
no great-big deficit in the right-rear portion of JFK's head?

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/00JFKHeadX-Ray2.jpg?t=1276171275

ROBERT HARRIS SAID:

>>> "I have not seen evidence for such a wound [in the right-rear portion of President Kennedy's head]..." <<<

DVP SAID:

Thank you, Bob.

ROBERT HARRIS SAID:

>>> "...but Boswell described the defect as going all the way back to the occiput, so the piece of skull just below and to the right of the large piece in the upper-rear might also have been broken out." <<<

DVP SAID:

Then why isn't there a single bit of the BACK OF THE HEAD missing (or
"broken out") in the X-ray below? The entire back of the head is
FILLED WITH SKULL BONE. None of it is missing or "broken out". There
are some radiating fracture lines, yes. I'm certainly not denying the
fact that there is some damage to the rear of the skull (in the form
of radiating fractures). But there are no MISSING CHUNKS of skull in
the rear of the President's head here:

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/00JFKHeadX-Ray2.jpg?t=1276171275

======================================

WHAT DO THE EXPERTS SAY?

Robert Harris, incredibly, thinks that ALL of the people quoted below,
who were people responsible for investigating President Kennedy's
death and the details of his injuries, were dead wrong about their
conclusions concerning JFK's head wounds. Let's take a look and see
just how many different people and committees Robert Harris has to
believe were either liars or total boobs:

"It is our opinion that the deceased died as a result of two
perforating gunshot wounds inflicted by high velocity projectiles
fired by a person or persons unknown. The projectiles were fired from
a point behind and somewhat above the level of the deceased." -- Via
Page #6 of JFK's Official Autopsy Report, signed by Drs. James Humes,
J. Thornton Boswell, and Pierre Finck in November 1963 [See Page 543
of the Warren Commission Final Report]

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0284a.htm

"The Commission has concluded that the shots which killed
President Kennedy and wounded Governor Connally were fired from the
sixth-floor window at the southeast corner of the Texas School Book
Depository Building. Two bullets probably caused all the wounds
suffered by President Kennedy and Governor Connally. Since the
preponderance of the evidence indicated that three shots were fired,
the Commission concluded that one shot probably missed the
Presidential limousine and its occupants, and that the three shots

xere fired in a time period ranging from approximately 4.8 to in
excess of 7 seconds." -- Page 117 of the Warren Commission Final
Report

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0071a.htm

"In the final analysis, the committee based its finding that the
shots that struck President Kennedy were fired from the Texas School
Book Depository on the quantity and quality of the evidence, to wit:
The findings of forensic pathologists that the shots that hit the
President came from behind..." -- Page 51 of the HSCA Final Report

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/html/HSCA_Report_0041a.htm

"It is the firm conclusion of the [forensic pathology] panel
members...that beyond all reasonable medical certainty, there is no
bullet perforation of entrance any place on the skull other than the
single one in the cowlick...and we find no evidence to support
anything but a single gunshot wound of entrance in the back of the
President's head." -- Dr. Michael Baden; 1978 HSCA Testimony [at 1
HSCA 301]

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol1/html/HSCA_Vol1_0153a.htm

"Examination of the clothing and of the photographs and X-rays
taken at autopsy reveal that President Kennedy was struck by two
bullets fired from above and behind him, one of which traversed the
base of the neck on the right side without striking bone and the other
of which entered the skull from behind and exploded its right side."
-- Summary of the Clark Panel in 1968

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/clark.txt

"On the basis of the investigation conducted by its staff, the
Commission believes that there is no evidence to support the claim
that President Kennedy was struck by a bullet fired from either the
grassy knoll or any other position to his front, right front or right
side, and that the motions of the President’s head and body, following
the shot that struck him in the head, are fully consistent with that
shot having come from a point to his rear, above him and slightly to
his right." -- Page 264 of the Rockefeller Commission Final Report

http://history-matters.com/archive/church/rockcomm/html/Rockefeller_0138b.htm

"There was no defect or wound to the rear of Kennedy's head
other than the entrance wound in the upper right part of the head." --
Dr. Michael Baden; January 8, 2000; Via telephone conversation with
Vincent Bugliosi [See Source Note #168 on Page 408 of Bugliosi's 2007
book, "Reclaiming History: The Assassination Of President John F.
Kennedy"]

http://ReclaimingHistory.blogspot.com

======================================

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

Jul 8, 2010, 5:30:58 AM7/8/10

to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/c618998dc2fa0327/99d1c14b19ef7622?#99d1c14b19ef7622

JOHN McADAMS SAID:

>>> "What a kook." <<<

[The "kook" Professor McAdams is referring to is Jim "LHO Never Shot
Anyone" DiEugenio.]

DVP INTERJECTS:

~LOL~

And I see ol' Jimbo has decided to harp on McAdams "making stuff up"
again.

Jim gets closer to the Liftons and Fetzers every day, it seems. I love
it.

His "Frazier & Randle Made Up The Paper Bag Out Of Thin Air"
crackpottery is a recent highlight of hilarity from Jim's delusional
mind.

I'd sure like to know how DiEugenio can get around all of this "There
Really Was A Bag" FIRST-DAY verification?:

http://JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-26.html

http://Battling-A-Conspiracy-Kook.blogspot.com

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

Jul 11, 2010, 11:21:40 PM7/11/10

to

http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=16168&view=findpost&p=197093

JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:

>>> "Hidell's name is not on the form. Knowing it was from Klein's, the rifle should have been returned. .... The weight of the evidence says Oswald never picked up the rifle." <<<

DVP SAID:

But the rifle WASN'T returned to Klein's by the Dallas Post Office,
was it? No, it wasn't. Therefore, SOMEBODY must have picked it up at
the Dallas Post Office.

Let do some simple math here:

1.) We know for a fact that Klein's Sporting Goods in Chicago shipped
Rifle #C2766 to "A. Hidell" at P.O. Box 2915 in Dallas, Texas, on
March 20, 1963. Waldman Exhibit No. 7, linked below, proves this fact
for all eternity. And I've yet to hear any conspiracy theorist make
the allegation that Waldman #7 is a fake. Maybe James DiEugenio will
be the first.

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/WaldmanExhibitNo7.jpg?t=1278901624

2.) Klein's NEVER GOT THAT RIFLE BACK after shipping it to P.O. Box
2915.

3.) There's no indication that the "Hidell" rifle package got lost in
transit between Chicago and Dallas.

4.) The "Hidell" package isn't still sitting in a "dead letter" bin
somewhere at the Dallas Post Office.

5.) Lee Harvey Oswald IS "A. Hidell". We know that. It's a proven
fact. Oswald used the alias "Hidell" many times throughout his adult
life.

6.) Lee Harvey Oswald is the person who rented P.O. Box 2915 in
Dallas. We know that. It's a proven fact. Therefore, Oswald had full
and easy access to that P.O. Box anytime he needed it.

7.) A Mannlicher-Carcano rifle with the serial number C2766 on it (and
with a palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald's on it) was found on the sixth
floor of the TSBD on 11/22/63 and was connected via other ballistics
evidence to the assassination of President Kennedy.

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

So, given the above list of things to consider (and item #7 is really
just a bonus when it comes to this particular discussion), is it more
reasonable to come to the conclusion that Jim DiEugenio and other
conspiracy theorists have come to -- i.e., Oswald never took
possession of Carcano Rifle #C2766 at all?

Or is it more reasonable to conclude that Lee Harvey Oswald, in late
March 1963, took a piece of paper that he found in P.O. Box 2915 to
the front desk at the Post Office and was given a package that
contained Mannlicher-Carcano Rifle #C2766?

Even if some postal regulations regarding the sale of firearms weren't
followed to the letter by either the Dallas Post Office or Klein's
Sporting Goods of Chicago (or both), the above list of items certainly
suggests that Lee H. Oswald did, indeed, take possession of Rifle
C2766 by picking up that gun at the Dallas Post Office. In fact, the
above list pretty much PROVES that Oswald took possession of that
rifle.

As far as I see it, the only avenue that people like Jim DiEugenio can
travel down in their constant and fruitless efforts to try and take
that rifle out of the hands of Lee Oswald is by pretending that
SOMEBODY ELSE gained access to Oswald's P.O. Box in Dallas, and that
this SOMEBODY ELSE was really the person who took possession of the
rifle that was shipped by Klein's to Hidell.

What other REALISTIC choice does DiEugenio have here (when taking my
above list into consideration)?

Does Jim want to pretend that every person involved in this Hidell
rifle transaction at Klein's Sporting Goods was a liar?

Or does Jim want to pretend that the rifle was really NEVER SHIPPED AT
ALL from Klein's in Chicago?

DiEugenio must want to pretend that Klein's never shipped it at all.
Because since we know that the Klein's package sent to Hidell was NOT
returned to Klein's in Chicago, it must mean that SOMEBODY picked up
that gun at the Dallas Post Office.

And who is more likely to have picked up something at OSWALD'S P.O.
Box -- some stranger who didn't have a key to the box, or Lee Harvey
Oswald himself?

Or, as an alternative theory that kooks like Mr. DiEugenio could
always utilize in their zeal to take the gun out of the hands of JFK's
murderer, I suppose DiEugenio could pretend that the rifle really WAS
sent back to Klein's (due to a lack of the proper firearms forms being
attached to the package), but that Klein's lied by never admitting to
the authorities that the rifle was sent back to them.

In the final analysis, no matter which alternative theory Jim
DiEugenio chooses to endorse, that theory is going to be much sillier
and highly improbable than the truth -- with that truth being:

Lee Harvey Oswald, using his alias A. Hidell, took possession of
Mannlicher-Carcano Rifle #C2766 by picking it up at the Dallas Post
Office in late March of 1963.

Conspiracy theorists like James DiEugenio, of course, always have a
hard time figuring out the simplest of truths. Heck, Jim can't even
figure out that Lee Oswald shot and killed JFK and J.D. Tippit.
DiEugenio, instead, prefers to pretend that Oswald didn't shoot
anybody on November 22, 1963.

Silly, isn't it?

David Von Pein
July 11, 2010

lazu...@webtv.net

unread,

Jul 12, 2010, 3:36:04 AM7/12/10

to

Did anyone see Oswald pick up the rifle? No..nobody remembers it..does
anybody remember Oswald leaving work and picking up a rifle? No, and why
wouldn't the post office have a receipt in their files until 1966 when
they were required by law to do so?

Then you can't get the rifle into the depository without making Oswald a
real knuckledragger ( he could tie his shoes standing up if we listen to
the nutters)
after that there are no fresh prints on the rifle, and hell..nobody from
the dallas Police sniffed the barrel to see if it was even recently
fired! ...Laz

David Von Pein

unread,

Jul 12, 2010, 4:41:30 AM7/12/10

to

Who picked up the rifle that Klein's shipped to LHO's PO Box, Laz?

If Oswald didn't pick it up, who did? Somebody sure as heck did.

robcap...@netscape.com

unread,

Jul 12, 2010, 9:29:51 AM7/12/10

to

All of this is a fancy way of saying there is NO evidence showing LHO
ordered or received a 40" Carcano. Dave's side has no such evidence
so we are stuck with this long-winded posts to hide the FACTS!

David Von Pein

unread,

Jul 12, 2010, 11:36:24 AM7/12/10

to

Same question for Rob The Mega-Kook---

If Oswald didn't pick up that rifle Klein's shipped to Oswald's P.O.
Box---who did pick it up?

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

Jul 14, 2010, 2:06:56 AM7/14/10

to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/f99a9297f4e06138?

>>> "BK [Bill Kelly]: Hi DVP, how ya doin'? Why bring Jimmy D's thread here and respond to it where he won't see it? Why don't you just join the Ed Forum and correct him directly?" <<<

You should know the answer to that question, Bill. You've been a
member of Simkin's conspiracy house since October 20, 2005. I joined
the Education Forum in July 2006, and was booted out the door after a
whopping four days. Ask John Simkin why that happened.

>>> "Agreed. Somebody picked up the rifle in the package at the Post Office where it was delivered to PO box 2915, but it wasn't Oswald, who was working that day at Jaggers/Chiles/Stoval [sic]." <<<

We have no idea exactly what day Oswald picked up his rifle at the
post office. Why are you pretending to know this type of unknowable
information, Bill?

We know that Klein's shipped the rifle to Hidell/(Oswald) on March 20,
1963. And we know that Oswald had the rifle in his possession by at
least Sunday, March 31, 1963 (for the backyard photo session).

But that's all we know about the precise dates (and even the March
31st date is a little bit up in the air; Marina was able to pin it
down somewhat during her Warren Commission testimony, and the
Commission thought that the pictures were most likely taken on
3/31/63).

So, please inform the masses, William Kelly, as to how you are privy
to such detailed information about the pick-up date at the post office
for Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle.

Somehow, Kelly's crystal ball is telling him things that nobody else
on Planet Earth has been privy to in 46+ years. Amazing indeed.

>>> "Regardless of what Jimmy D and other CTs believe, the REALISTIC choice is that someone other than Oswald picked up the rifle and pistol at the Post Office." <<<

Oh, sure Bill. Sure. Even though both of those weapons were positively
ORDERED BY LEE OSWALD, which means (obviously) that LEE OSWALD HIMSELF
would have been expecting them to arrive at the P.O. Box that HE HAD
THEM MAILED TO....you still think that it's more "realistic" to
believe that "someone other than Oswald picked up the rifle and pistol
at the Post Office".

Brilliant deductive reasoning there, William. Just brilliant!

So, if I order a gun from a mail-order house, and have it shipped to a
P.O. Box at my local post office here in Indiana (a P.O. Box that I AM
RENTING AT THE TIME and a P.O. Box that I SPECIFIED FOR THE GUN TO BE
MAILED TO), according to William Kelly's logic and reasoning, it's
much more likely that SOMEBODY ELSE went to the post office and picked
up that gun instead of the person who ordered it and would have been
expecting it to arrive at his P.O. Box within just a few days.

Gotta love CTer reasoning. It's always weird. And dead wrong. But it
sure provides the humor.

>>> "DVP, I resent your calling Jimmy D a Kook, as he might be a conspiracy theorist, or misguided, or a progressive liberal, but he's not a Kook." <<<

Yes, he is a kook. And I don't care whether you "resent" my opinion
about Jimmy or not. A kook is a kook. And when it comes to the JFK
assassination, Jim DiEugenio is certainly a kook.

My definition of a "JFK Conspiracy Kook" hasn't changed over the
years. It's still the same. The definition I almost always go by is
this one:

JFK CONSPIRACY KOOK (noun) -- A person who believes that Lee Harvey
Oswald was innocent of shooting BOTH President John F. Kennedy AND
Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit on November 22, 1963.

Anyone who falls into the above category, given the evidence in the
JFK case, is most definitely worthy of being labelled a "kook" in my
book. (Particularly someone with James DiEugenio's encyclopedic
knowledge concerning the evidence in the JFK case.)

BTW, the Merriam-Webster definition of "kook" applies to all of the
"JFK Conspiracy Kooks" of the world too:

KOOK (noun) -- "One whose ideas or actions are eccentric, fantastic,
or insane: screwball."

http://Merriam-Webster.com/dictionary/kook

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

Jul 23, 2010, 9:49:59 PM7/23/10

to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/c618998dc2fa0327/a099d7772abee112?#a099d7772abee112

Bottom Line (re: the "missed" shot):

Nobody can know for certain what happened to that bullet. And nobody
can know for certain whether the "oak tree" theory is accurate or not.

But, given the overall evidence (which certainly indicates that three
shots and only three shots were fired during the assassination, with
all three of those shots coming from Oswald's Sniper's Nest in the
TSBD and from Oswald's MC rifle, with two of those three bullets
striking the victims in the limousine), I think the best guess re: the
one missed shot is that that bullet did, indeed, hit the oak tree
(which is a tree, btw, that was located to the RIGHT of Oswald at the
time he fired that shot at approx. Z160 [see photo from CE875 below],
which fits in pretty well with a misaligned scope that might very well
have been aiming "HIGH AND TO THE RIGHT" during the shooting, although
that's another thing we'll never know for sure; it's quite possible
that the scope became misaligned when Oswald dropped the gun amongst
the boxes after the assassination).

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0454a.htm

I certainly think the "oak tree" theory is better than Vincent
Bugliosi's "bouncing bullet" theory. Vince has Oswald's first bullet
hitting Elm Street (but not the oak tree), and then the same bullet
bounces all the way over to Main Street to strike that curb and cause
the small wound on James Tague's face.

That theory, in my opinion, isn't as plausible as the "oak tree"
theory. (Unless perhaps the WCC/MC bullets that Oswald was using that
day had a little bit of rubber in them too.)

From Gerald Posner's book:

"Art Pence, a competition firearms expert, told [Gerald Posner],
"If a 6.5mm bullet struck a hard tree branch, it could tear itself
apart by its own rotational speed. It would then fragment, with maybe
the largest fragment, the tip, being up to one-third of the bullet,
flying off. And if the tree was oak--[it was]--it has tremendous
compressive strength, and the wood could easily suffer less damage
than the bullet that hit it."" -- Page 325 of "Case Closed: Lee Harvey
Oswald And The Assassination Of JFK" (Via an interview author Gerald
Posner had with Art Pence on February 21, 1992)

Posner also adds this:

"When Dr. John Lattimer performed shooting experiments with the
same 6.5mm ammunition as that used by Oswald, he discovered that the
lead core "often" separated from the jacket." -- Gerald Posner; Page
325 of "Case Closed" (footnote)

In addition:

We also have the proof in this very case (the JFK assassination) that
the lead core and a sizable portion of the copper jacket of a Western
Cartridge Company/Mannlicher-Carcano bullet can, in fact, separate
after hitting a hard object, because that very thing did occur in
Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963, with the proof coming in the form
of the two large bullet fragments that were found in the front seat of
the Presidential limousine (CE567 and CE569).

One of those two fragments didn't contain any lead at all (CE569,
linked below), and thus was not utilized for testing purposes by Dr.
Vincent Guinn when he performed his NAA tests for the HSCA.

So, portions of the copper jacket and lead core of Oswald's bullets
CAN, indeed, separate from each other after striking a hard object.

CE569:
http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/1/12/Photo_naraevid_CE569-2.jpg

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

Jul 26, 2010, 3:11:12 PM7/26/10

to

http://www.JFKAssassinationForum.com/index.php/topic,2939.msg55022.html#msg55022

A kook named Roderick A. MacKenzie was interviewed on Internet radio
in May 2010, and he told a nice rambling tale about how he was a part
of a team of many different conspirators (all affiliated with the Mob
in some fashion) in the assassination of President Kennedy.

MacKenzie says he knew J.D. Tippit (and "went shooting with him"), and
he also personally knew Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby and David
Ferrie and Guy Banister and Malcolm Wallace and Johnny Roselli and an
assortment of other bigshots who were evidently all involved in having
Kennedy killed.

Apparently MacKenzie's main function in the assassination plot against
JFK was to produce a number of fake identification cards and badges
(which, evidently, were passed out to the various assassins and co-
conspirators which littered Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63 like ants at a
picnic, as indicated via my list below).

MacKenzie even says he was the person who created one of Lee Oswald's
fake I.D. cards with the name A.J. Hidell on it! How's that for a
whopper of a lie?

According to Kook MacKenzie (by way of a conversation he had with
Malcolm Wallace a couple of days after the assassination), there were
SIX teams of assassins and conspirators in Dealey Plaza on November
22, 1963. These teams were located in the following locations:

1.) On the second floor of the Texas School Book Depository. This was
supposedly the "command area" that was utilized by the plotters on
November 22nd. MacKenzie doesn't know if anybody actually shot any
guns from the second floor "command area", however.

And according to Mac Wallace, among the group of four conspirators on
the SECOND FLOOR OF THE BOOK DEPOSITORY when Kennedy was shot were
none other than Carlos Marcello and Jack Ruby!

I've got to give MacKenzie some points for originality here, because
the theory about Ruby and Marcello being inside the TSBD when JFK was
assassinated is certainly one I hadn't heard before.

MacKenzie, however, said he doesn't believe that Marcello was really
in the TSBD on November 22. Marcello, of course, is known to have been
in a New Orleans courtroom at the time when JFK was murdered.

Of course, the second floor of the TSBD in 1963 was reserved for
office space. Unlike the upper floors of the building, the second
floor wasn't a big wide-open "warehouse" space.

So, perhaps Ruby and Marcello and Company were successful at renting
one of the second-floor offices to use as their Assassination Command
Center on 11/22/63. And they did so without a single TSBD employee
noticing this activity. (Right, Mr. MacKenzie?)

2.) On the sixth floor of the TSBD, in the famous "Sniper's Nest", was
another batch of four Presidential assassins. And this team of killers
included a female conspirator named Ruth Ann Martinez. (On pages 919
and 920 of Vincent Bugliosi's book "Reclaiming History", an alleged
conspirator associated with Malcolm Wallace by the name of "Ruth Ann"
is mentioned. But Bugliosi doesn't say anything about her last name
being "Martinez".)

Also located in the Sniper's Nest were Malcolm Wallace and Lawrence
"Loy" Factor. And Factor was "one hell of a shot", according to the
kook telling this fable, Rod MacKenzie.

And the other person who was part of this four-member TSBD hit team
was Lee Harvey Oswald, who was also jammed into the sixth-floor
Sniper's Nest with the other three killers. Oswald, per MacKenzie, was
"under a spell" of some kind on 11/22/63.

Of course, not a single person who was employed at the Depository ever
mentioned seeing any strangers in the building on November 22nd,
except for an old man who went to the bathroom and left the building
prior to the assassination.

But, amazingly, these two hit teams on the second floor and the sixth
floor of the Book Depository were able to waltz in the building (and
walk out again) without being noticed by any of the regular Depository
workers. This little detail, naturally, doesn't mean a thing to a kook
with a fantasy to tell named Roderick A. MacKenzie.

Another logical question to ask here would be this one: Why on Earth
would there have been any need for as many as FOUR conspirators to be
in the Sniper's Nest at 12:30 PM on 11/22/63? MacKenzie didn't say.

The same logical question should also be asked about the OTHER FIVE
shooting locations that MacKenzie has dreamed up out of thin air. Why
the need for FOUR assassins in each location?

3.) Another team of assassins was located in the Dal-Tex Building.
Among the four killers assigned to the Dal-Tex was Eugene Brading (aka
Jim Braden).

4.) And then we have another group of four conspirators/killers
located on the roof of the Dallas County Records Building. This team
of plotters included--are you sitting down?--Dallas Deputy Sheriff
Roger Craig. (Score another point for MacKenzie in the "That's A New
One" department.)

5.) And, of course, there are more shooters on the Grassy Knoll. This
team also consisted of four assassins, none of whom I've ever heard of
before.

6.) And then there was a back-up team of four additional killers on
the west side of the Triple Underpass (just in case the other five
teams failed to kill JFK). This team included a couple of favorite
"tramps" that conspiracy theorists like to drag out of the closet from
time to time -- Charles Harrelson and Chauncey Holt.

So, the final tally of "assassins/conspirators" in Dealey Plaza is 24.

I wonder why MacKenzie didn't put a seventh team of hit men in the
sewer on Elm Street? I guess it would have been a little difficult to
get 4 assassins in that small sewer pipe. And it appears that "four"
is the only number of people that could be used to comprise a hit team
in Dallas, per MacKenzie's detailed figures. Maybe that's why they
didn't use the sewer system that day.

To listen to Rod MacKenzie's complete hilarious tale of assassination
fantasy, click on the audio link below:

http://psiopradio.com/media/2010/POR100516a.mp3

David Von Pein

unread,

Jul 30, 2010, 8:14:02 PM7/30/10

to

http://IMDB.com/title/tt0102138/board/flat/167341546?d=latest&p=2#167903254

>>> "I still say Jerry Lewis was the grassy knoll gunman. Has anyone ever checked his whereabouts on the 22nd of November, 1963?" <<<

I have no doubt that Jerry Lewis was involved in the assassination in
some manner.

That fact becomes obvious when we look at this film--starring JERRY
LEWIS:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0058456

And in the above-mentioned 1964 motion picture, Lewis plays a
character called "Stanley Belt". His initials, therefore, are also
sinister -- "SB" -- the first two-thirds of "SBT".

No question about it--Jerry's in the plot.

Jason Burke

unread,

Jul 30, 2010, 8:36:48 PM7/30/10

to

Okay, I'm convinced. But more importantly, will Blubaugh buy it?

David Von Pein

unread,

Jul 30, 2010, 8:40:28 PM7/30/10

to

Blubaugh might buy it if I were to include Groucho Marx as part of the
plot too.