Debating The John F. Kennedy Assassination (Part 27)
David Von Pein
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT -- The JFK Assassination: The Ongoing "Lone Assassin vs.
Conspiracy" Debate.
FEATURED TEXT -- Archived JFK Forum Messages From January 2007.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CTer (A CONSPIRACY THEORIST) -- I wanna see the first comments of many
of the closest witnesses, stating at least one of the shots came from
the front (Brehm, Sitzman, Chism, The Newmans, J. Hill, Sorrels,
Decker, Landis, Simmons, Todd, Holland, J.C. Price, Murphy, etc.).
DVP (DAVID VON PEIN) -- What I'd like to see is some CTer reconcile
the likelihood of having over 95% of all witnesses polled or asked
agreeing that ALL of the shots they heard came from ONE distinct
direction/general location -- rather than two or more locations, as
virtually all CTers believe happened?
I don't think that any of the witnesses just mentioned above qualify
as "Multi-Directional Witnesses". This John McAdams poll (covering 104
witnesses with a firm opinion) has a mere five witnesses claiming they
heard shots coming from more than just one direction/location. .....
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/shots4.jpg
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/earwitnesses.htm
And since even CTers agree that SOME shots came from the REAR, that
"4.8%" two-direction stat speaks loudly. Logically, it means that ALL
of the gunshots came from THE VERY SAME PLACE (i.e., the TSBD, where
even most hardline CT-Kooks will admit that at least one of the shots
came from).
It's also interesting to note that zero of the 104 witnesses via
McAdams' poll are in a "3 Directions" category. That says a lot about
the likelihood of an Oliver Stone-like, three-gunmen, three-
directional ambush being very accurate.....when ZERO PERCENT of the
witnesses can back up such a 3-location scenario (via earwitness
testimony).*
* = I will readily admit, however, that shots coming from the east end
of the TSBD and any shot that CTers purport coming from the Dal-Tex
Building might very well blend together into sounding very much the
same (location-wise) to some earwitnesses.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/7b06a89bd4042363
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- Officer Baker's testimony includes what Chaney told him: JFK
shot in the face; JBC shot in the chest.
DVP -- Great witness re. those points you've got there, indeed.
Chaney's dead-wrong on both counts.
So I imagine this means that certain pro-conspiracy kooks will prop
Officer Chaney up even further on their "Important Witnesses To A
Conspiracy" list. Right?
~Large-Sized LOL~
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- Is this your denial that Connally said, "I turned to my right
and saw the President slump"? Are you DENYING that Connally said that?
DVP -- Yes. Exactly. Precisely.
I am denying Connally said those precise words....because he DID NOT
say those exact words. Which was my whole point of this DVP post:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/3f086fea924b8775
"JBC said --- 'The President had slumped'." -- DVP; 01/21/2007
Now, let's look at a transcript of the 11/27/63 bedside interview
conducted by Martin Agronsky:
http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/governors/modern/connally-agronsky-1.html
Via the transcript linked above:
"I turned to my left to look in the back seat--the President had
slumped. He had said nothing. Almost simultaneously, as I turned, I
was hit and I knew I had been hit badly." -- JBC
The exact four words I claimed JBC said are the exact words he did
actually say -- "The President had slumped". He did NOT say "I saw the
President slump".
Also -- Anyone who wishes to "link" the two pieces of Connally's
bedside statement listed below is going to have some difficulty there
too....
1.) "I turned to my left to look in the back seat."
Which is immediately followed by:
2.) "The President had slumped."
....seeing as how there's no possible way that Connally could have
physically SEEN the President as a result of a Connally LEFT TURN.
Now, let's add the following JBC Warren Commission testimony to the
above:
"This almost sounds incredible, I am sure, since we were in the car
with them. ... I never saw either one of them {JFK or Jackie} after
the firing started. ... I could not see into the back seat, so I
didn't see either one of them." -- John Connally; 1964
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/conn_j.htm
Plus.....
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/741a872f58796bfe
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- He {Lee Bowers} probably saw more than his testimony
{reflects}.
DVP -- Yeah, prob'ly so. Damn witnesses. Always lyin'. Always covering
up. Always being strong-armed and man-handled by evil forces. Always
somethin'.
I think Bowers once said he saw Jack Ruby firing darts at JFK near Abe
Zapruder's pedestal. But he might have been mistaken....because TUM
had dibs on the darts nonsense that day...didn't he?
Lumpy Rutherford and Larry Mondello were flipping rubber bands at the
limo behind the Grassy Knoll fence, too. Maybe that's who Bowers saw.
(Those rubber bands were pert-near as effective as the darts too.)
Leave it to Lee (Bowers) to get everything fouled up.
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- I think she {Marguerite Oswald} was pushing for the {LHO}
exhumation.
DVP -- Yeah, she wanted to mount Lee's head on her bedboard at home,
for a souvenir of her beloved son....a son who (to hear a kook named
Marguerite tell it) probably should have been President himself.
Lee Harvey had such wonderful traits, you see -- like "defection to a
hostile nation", "spousal abuse", "attempted assassination",
"successful assassination", "supporting that wonderful guy named
Fidel", and "virtual pauper/worthless asshole who can't even support
his family, so they have to sponge off the generosity of people like
Ruth Paine and the Russian emigre population".
Nice guy indeed. And per Marguerite "A Nutcase Herself" Oswald:
"Lee Harvey Oswald, my son, even after his death, has done more for
his country than any other living human being." -- Marguerite O.
I need that "LOL" thing again here...please!!
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- The men who killed JFK did not intend to frame Oswald as a
lone nut. They carried out the operation in a way that it would point
to Oswald and OTHERS as being involved.
DVP -- Then why the need to "fake" ANY evidence at all (per almost all
CTer accounts of the event, with fake evidence said to exist all over
the place...from the TSBD, to the limo, to Parkland)?
Once more, we're confronted with conspiracy theories contradicting
each other. How many contradictory theories does it take for some
theorists to realize the obvious? With that obvious being: Lee H.
Oswald (alone) killed Jack Kennedy and J.D. Tippit in 1963.
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- Oliver Stone's recreation of the autopsy...obviously proves
that the President was shot from the front and the back
simultaneously.
DVP -- Are you nuts?! You think Oliver Stone's autopsy-room "re-
creation" PROVES anything?! Get a grip.
Obviously, per the Marrs/Garrison multi-shooter movie script, Stone
was certainly going to purport something akin to this in his film (see
the links below) -- which is a view of JFK on the autopsy table that
is an outright lie; i.e., a view of wounds in the President's head
that are not represented anywhere in the official documented records
of John F. Kennedy's assassination:
http://www.fxsmith.com/pg68.html
http://www.fxsmith.com/pg69.html
Why would you expect anything else from Mr. Stone? And why would you
think it was PROOF of anything whatsoever? It's a movie set. Nothing
more.
Plus, you seem to think that Stone's film implies that JFK was shot in
the head twice (simultaneously from the front and the rear). But this
is incorrect too....because Stone's shot chronology per his "6-Shot, 3-
Gunmen" theory only purports ONE single head shot...not two.
Try reading Dr. James Humes' testimony instead (if you want the truth
regarding JFK's true wounds). Do you truly think Humes is lying
through his teeth here? Really? (And he got Finck & Boswell to join
him in these lies too?).....
"The area in which the greatest loss of brain substance was
particularly in the parietal lobe, which is the major portion of the
right cerebral hemisphere. .... It is impossible for it {the bullet
that struck JFK's head} to have been fired from other than
behind. .... We reached the conclusion that this missile was fired
toward the President from a point above and behind him." -- Dr. J.J.
Humes
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/humes.htm
A real autopsy photo (which didn't come from Mr. Stone's fantasy
factory):
http://www.jfklancer.com/pub/md/jfk03clr.JPG
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- When not one person can duplicate the crime....it is then
impossible.
DVP -- Has there EVER been a murder in the history of murders where it
has been MANDATORY for the crime to be "duplicated" to the Nth degree
by "experts" (or anybody else) in order to prove a defendant's guilt
beyond a reasonable doubt?
The answer to that question is an undeniable: No.
CTers think ALL of the evidence is lying to them, and they think ALL
of the people in charge of that evidence are lying to them. And those
are ridiculous and extraordinary beliefs.
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- The normal method for locating a wound on the back was not
followed.
DVP -- Even if it wasn't -- so what? The fact still remains that JFK's
upper-back wound WAS measured from A KNOWN BODY LANDMARK (the Mastoid
Process). And we have a picture of the wound being just where Dr.
Boswell (et al) said it was located via the Face Sheet (the written-in
anatomical measurements on that sheet, that is) and the testimony of
the doctors.
Just because the wound wasn't measured from something that conspiracy
kooks deem appropriate or "more proper", does that make the wound any
LESS in the location we see it here?.....
http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/images/BE5_HI.jpg
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- These holes {in JFK's back and head} evidence entry by bullets
with approximate forty-five and sixty-five degree angles of incidence.
DVP -- BULLETIN: Jack Ruby, in a stealth helicopter hovering above
Dealey Plaza, fires two bullets into JFK!! Stay tuned for further
details!!
Okay, where could those shots have come from if not from the Texas
School Book Depository, which was the only known and verified source
of gunfire on November 22nd?
You're micro-managing the JFK entry wounds...and in the process you're
leaving out the common-sense factor, coupled with all of the OTHER
STUFF that says JFK was hit twice from the TSBD and hit by bullets
coming from only Lee Harvey Oswald's C2766 bolt-action Mannlicher-
Carcano rifle.
Other stuff such as:
1.) The C2766 fragments found in the front seat of the limo.
2.) A bullet fragment taken from JFK's head which was very likely from
a bullet fired in Rifle C2766 (within a very good degree of
probability, as I stop short of saying "with 100% certainty", so I
won't get jumped on by members of the "Vince Guinn Haters Club Of
America").
3.) CE399 had to have been the bullet that hit Governor John
Connally. ....
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/dc55aaccc592797a
4.) And if CE399 (from C2766, which was in the TSBD at the time of the
shooting) was in JBC, it had no CHOICE but to have been the exact
bullet that went through JFK's upper back and neck as well. No way
around that fact; because, literally, there was NO WAY AROUND John F.
Kennedy for Bullet CE399!
Let's take a quick Vince B. break, okay?.....
"So we KNOW, not just beyond a reasonable doubt, we know beyond ALL
doubt that OSWALD'S RIFLE WAS THE MURDER WEAPON!!" -- Vince Bugliosi
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/e68af2a823062f43
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- So let's hear your explanation of how the SBT can stand with
this uncontested evidence.
DVP -- In short (again) -- WHERE ARE THE DAMN BULLETS that must
replace CE399 if the SBT is a wet dream? And, via the most-commonly-
believed anti-SBT scenario, this would include multiple bullets (and/
or fragments of same) that went INTO two victims and were never, ever
seen again and never entered into the record of this murder case.
Where are they?
And -- How could any "plotters" have gotten so lucky on November 22nd
to have (by pure chance) performed a NON-SBT shooting which
miraculously mimicked a pretty damn good-looking SINGLE-bullet
shooting event?
Any rational thoughts on those questions? I'd love to hear something
of a believable nature come from the lips of a conspiracist re. ANY
anti-SBT scenario. Alas, I've yet to hear anything resembling that
from CTers. Should I hold my breath waiting for such a rational/
believable anti-SBT explanation that actually dares to use the
EXISTING BALLISTICS EVIDENCE in this case?
The SBT is a fact. Live with it. Or forever keep spinning your anti-
SBT wheels while promoting a BULLET-LESS multi-shot alternative.
-------------------------------------------
CTer -- So a book {"Oswald's Game"} of speculation is really
great...so says DVP.
DVP -- "Oswald's Game" author Jean Davison does do some speculating
within her book, yes. I don't deny that. But it's REASONABLE
speculation, being based on Lee Oswald's character and actions and
activities leading up to 11/22/63.
Jean has speculated that Oswald killed JFK (alone) on behalf of
Castro, after Castro made a threatening statement against U.S. leaders
in early September of 1963 (although Castro later denied the comment
was a "threat" of any kind...but it obviously appeared on paper to be
such).
But Jean's documented accounts of Oswald's KNOWN ACTIVITIES AND
STATEMENTS TO OTHER PEOPLE are not "speculation"....those things are
FACTS. Oswald did and said those things, without question (unless you
want to think that a whole boatload of people are lying about every
movement and statement Oswald ever made in his life; which would be
merely unsupportable "speculation" on a CTer's part, if he/she chooses
to go down that "Nothing Is What It Seems To Be" path, as many CTers
are wont to do re. every aspect of the JFK case).
As I said in my review of Jean Davison's top-notch publication.....
"After reading 'Oswald's Game', it's very nearly impossible to NOT say
to yourself dozens of times throughout these chapters: This guy Oswald
was just EXACTLY the type of crackpot Marxist who just might want to
take a potshot at the President of the United States if given THE
GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO (which he was afforded -- on 11/22/63 in
Dallas, Texas)." -- DVP
And Davison herself summed up the assassination very nicely near the
end of her book with this simple and to-the-point paragraph (which is
a paragraph of text that is almost certainly accurate, based on the
physical evidence in the case COMBINED with Oswald's politically-
motivated personality).....
"The assassination of John Kennedy was neither an act of random
violence nor a conspiracy. It was carried out as a result of Oswald's
character and background interacting with circumstance." -- J.
Davison; Page #297 of "Oswald's Game" (c.1983)
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/9c2238388f0a72c3