How Could The Conspirators Have Been So Perfect? Were They Using A Crystal Ball?
David VP
taking the life of U.S. President John F. Kennedy in 1963 are also of
the belief that a massive cover-up operation took place (and fully
succeeded) following JFK's assassination. And, evidently, this
"cover-up" must have been put in motion almost from the very minute
President Kennedy was shot and killed in Dallas' Dealey Plaza.
Per some conspiracy theorists -- the FBI, the U.S. Secret Service, and
whoever else might have also been on the "Conspiracy & Cover-Up
Payroll" (circa 1963) evidently dismantled the President's limousine
almost immediately after the shooting, exclusively in order to "hide"
bullet holes inside the car that were caused by "frontal" gunshots; and
most specifically to hide the obvious damage to the limo that was
caused by a bullet that exited JFK's throat but did NOT enter fellow
victim John Connally's back. No other reason for the car's being taken
apart is ever considered by CTers, other than a "conspiratorial" one.*
* = That's one of the many theories CTers have adopted over the years
since JFK's murder; although, granted, it's not as popular a theory,
because most conspiracists want to believe JFK's throat wound was
caused by a frontal shot.
Anyway, per this "Limo Was Taken Apart To Conceal A Conspiracy"
nonsense, it should occur to anyone who thinks this through for a few
moments (using a little bit of common sense) just how silly and magical
some of this "cover-up" junk sounds, when it's based on the limited
timeframe that such hocus-pocus would have needed to have been
performed within.
That is to say, it seems that not only did the plot to frame Book
Depository employee Lee Harvey Oswald cover multiple agencies within
law enforcement (FBI, USSS, DPD), but it would seem that these plotters
had some magical built-in ability to know with 100% certainty when to
"plant" the proper "Oswald's Guilty" evidence (like bullet CE399's
"planting" in the hospital at a seemingly-silly and
potentially-plot-exposing time, prior to anyone having detailed
knowledge of where all the bullets were located in association with the
shooting victims). .....
-- Plus: --
These plotters also had the remarkable ability to know for certain
(within hours of the shooting) exactly what evidence needed to be
covered up, what bullets were "unwanted" in this "plot", etc. -- even
to the point of knowing what OSWALD-INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE to discard
and sweep under the rug (e.g.: any bullet that would have definitely
been fired from behind from {possibly} the Oswald gun AND any limo
damage that would have resulted from any "Oswald" shots).
Therefore, per many theorists, the authorities have in their hands
multiple bullets that came from REAR SHOOTERS (Oswald?), but they
decide to destroy that evidence that would probably AID their goal of
framing the "Patsy" (e.g.: evidence such as the "real" Connally
back-wound bullet and, as mentioned, per some CTers, the "real" bullet
that went cleanly through JFK's back and neck).
Did these plotters have ESP abilities? Could they see into the future?
Did they know on 11/22/63 itself -- a mere hours after the shooting and
before much of anything was known about the details of the shooting
scenario and timing -- that researchers would, years later, be able to
scrutinize the evidence to death via the Zapruder Film, and thereby
prove that Oswald couldn't have fired two separate shots into the backs
of both JFK and Governor Connally in the given timespan allotted him?
Those must have been some amazingly-prescient, crystal-ball-gazing
plotters indeed.
Which is, IMO, just one more reason to know that CTers only have looked
at the Kennedy assassination through "Post-November 22" eyeballs --
never taking into account the subtleties, implausibilities, and
incongruities of the stuff they actually believe took place in 1963.
Footnote --- And keep in mind that even the Warren Commission, months
after the assassination, was still contemplating and assessing the
exact shooting scenario (i.e., which bullets hit who; and when; etc.),
with the WC even considering for a brief time the idea that all three
bullets did hit a limo occupant.**
** = Which, in my view, is utter silliness for the WC to have believed
for even one minute. Why? Because the autopsy report should have told
the Commission right off the bat that such a "3 Shots & 3 Hits"
scenario was impossible by these words printed right there in the
Official Autopsy Report:
"The missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the neck
{of President Kennedy}, damaged the trachea, AND MADE ITS EXIT THROUGH
THE ANTERIOR SURFACE OF THE NECK." (Emphasis mine.)
Therefore, the Warren Commission panel should have known from the
get-go that a bullet came out of JFK's neck and went ... SOMEWHERE.
(This, despite the fact that the initial December 9, 1963, FBI report
on the assassination did state that each of the three bullets from
Oswald's rifle struck a victim in the limousine.)
But, via the WC testimony of the FBI's Robert Frazier re. "no limo
damage" to the seats of the car where there WOULD have been damage if
that mid-air bullet had NOT continued into a human being, the WC should
have known that the "Single-Bullet Theory" was the truth from
practically Day 1 of the Commission's existence, notwithstanding the
early FBI report which contradicted that fairly-obvious conclusion.
It seems to me, then, that the WC was working in kind of an
"inside-out" fashion. If they had examined the autopsy report FIRST
(and why didn't they do this?), they could easily see that the
transiting bullet that went completely through President Kennedy either
caused limo damage (which it didn't) or went into the body of a person
sitting in front of Kennedy in the vehicle (Texas Governor John
Connally).
Why on Earth the WC ever, for even a moment, thought that all three
shots from Oswald's rifle hit a victim is something I've never been
able to fully comprehend.
But at least, in the end, the Warren Commission got it right -- Three
shots; One miss; Two bullets striking victims; One assassin named Lee
Harvey Oswald. ..... That is the only conceivable conclusion to reach
given the physical evidence in the John F. Kennedy murder case.
David Von Pein
March 2006
Ben Holmes
says...
>
>Many people who are of the belief that a conspiracy was involved in
>taking the life of U.S. President John F. Kennedy in 1963 are also of
>the belief that a massive cover-up operation took place (and fully
>succeeded) following JFK's assassination. And, evidently, this
>"cover-up" must have been put in motion almost from the very minute
>President Kennedy was shot and killed in Dallas' Dealey Plaza.
It was. Within mere minutes the limo is being washed to eliminate evidence.
Later that same day, the FBI began taking over the investigation, although they
had *no* jurisdiction at that time.
As quickly as Friday, and certainly by early Saturday morning, the FBI was
already beginning to intimidate eyewitnesses.
The body of JFK was stolen at gunpoint, the *LIMO*, likewise, even though there
was *NO* explanation for such an action.
Yep... I'd agree with you... the cover-up *was* put into motion almost from the
very minute President Kennedy was shot and killed in Dallas' Dealey Plaza.
>Per some conspiracy theorists -- the FBI, the U.S. Secret Service, and
>whoever else might have also been on the "Conspiracy & Cover-Up
>Payroll" (circa 1963) evidently dismantled the President's limousine
>almost immediately after the shooting, exclusively in order to "hide"
>bullet holes inside the car that were caused by "frontal" gunshots; and
>most specifically to hide the obvious damage to the limo that was
>caused by a bullet that exited JFK's throat but did NOT enter fellow
>victim John Connally's back. No other reason for the car's being taken
>apart is ever considered by CTers, other than a "conspiratorial" one.*
The limo *was* taken, the limo *was* rebuilt without a proper investigation.
>* = That's one of the many theories CTers have adopted over the years
>since JFK's murder; although, granted, it's not as popular a theory,
>because most conspiracists want to believe JFK's throat wound was
>caused by a frontal shot.
That *is* what the evidence shows...
Bugs you, doesn't it?
>Anyway, per this "Limo Was Taken Apart To Conceal A Conspiracy"
>nonsense, it should occur to anyone who thinks this through for a few
>moments (using a little bit of common sense) just how silly and magical
>some of this "cover-up" junk sounds, when it's based on the limited
>timeframe that such hocus-pocus would have needed to have been
>performed within.
Of course, it actually occurred. The limo *was* removed from the jurisdiction
where the crime took place, it *was* cleaned prior to an investigation, proper
photographs were *never* taken...
>That is to say, it seems that not only did the plot to frame Book
>Depository employee Lee Harvey Oswald cover multiple agencies within
>law enforcement (FBI, USSS, DPD), but it would seem that these plotters
>had some magical built-in ability to know with 100% certainty when to
>"plant" the proper "Oswald's Guilty" evidence (like bullet CE399's
>"planting" in the hospital at a seemingly-silly and
>potentially-plot-exposing time, prior to anyone having detailed
>knowledge of where all the bullets were located in association with the
>shooting victims). .....
It seems rather pointless to keep pointing out that gutless LNT'ers would rather
fight a strawman than to argue the *actual* evidence that this bullet was merely
swapped.
>-- Plus: --
>
>These plotters also had the remarkable ability to know for certain
>(within hours of the shooting) exactly what evidence needed to be
>covered up, what bullets were "unwanted" in this "plot", etc. -- even
>to the point of knowing what OSWALD-INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE to discard
>and sweep under the rug (e.g.: any bullet that would have definitely
>been fired from behind from {possibly} the Oswald gun AND any limo
>damage that would have resulted from any "Oswald" shots).
Actually, they didn't. For several months, they kept trying to shoehorn the
evidence into a mold that wouldn't work. So when Tague was rather publicly
thrown in their face, they had to make a few changes.
I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm mistaken, but I seem to recall that it
wasn't until April before the WC suddenly decided that the SBT was the way they
needed to go...
>Therefore, per many theorists, the authorities have in their hands
>multiple bullets that came from REAR SHOOTERS (Oswald?), but they
>decide to destroy that evidence that would probably AID their goal of
>framing the "Patsy" (e.g.: evidence such as the "real" Connally
>back-wound bullet and, as mentioned, per some CTers, the "real" bullet
>that went cleanly through JFK's back and neck).
How can bullets that couldn't have come from the MC "aid" in their goal of
framing LHO?
How silly!
>Did these plotters have ESP abilities? Could they see into the future?
>Did they know on 11/22/63 itself -- a mere hours after the shooting and
>before much of anything was known about the details of the shooting
>scenario and timing -- that researchers would, years later, be able to
>scrutinize the evidence to death via the Zapruder Film, and thereby
>prove that Oswald couldn't have fired two separate shots into the backs
>of both JFK and Governor Connally in the given timespan allotted him?
This is, of course, why they *failed*. For even the year the WCR came out, they
couldn't convince a simple majority of the American people.
>Those must have been some amazingly-prescient, crystal-ball-gazing
>plotters indeed.
Only in *your* eyes.
>Which is, IMO, just one more reason to know that CTers only have looked
>at the Kennedy assassination through "Post-November 22" eyeballs --
>never taking into account the subtleties, implausibilities, and
>incongruities of the stuff they actually believe took place in 1963.
LOL!! I've pointed out many times the improbabilities that LNT'ers have to take
for granted in order to believe the WC fantasy...
>Footnote --- And keep in mind that even the Warren Commission, months
>after the assassination, was still contemplating and assessing the
>exact shooting scenario (i.e., which bullets hit who; and when; etc.),
>with the WC even considering for a brief time the idea that all three
>bullets did hit a limo occupant.**
A brief time? You *must* be smoking something... this *was* the official
verdict for MONTHS.
They quite clearly planned on ignoring Tague - until they realized that too many
people knew about him, and that people would not allow Tague to be ignored.
>** = Which, in my view, is utter silliness for the WC to have believed
>for even one minute. Why? Because the autopsy report should have told
>the Commission right off the bat that such a "3 Shots & 3 Hits"
>scenario was impossible by these words printed right there in the
>Official Autopsy Report:
>
>"The missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the neck
>{of President Kennedy}, damaged the trachea, AND MADE ITS EXIT THROUGH
>THE ANTERIOR SURFACE OF THE NECK." (Emphasis mine.)
What did the Warren Commission *think* the autopsy report said? Let's look:
From the Jan 27th WC executive session:
***************************************
Mr. Rankin. Then there is a great range of material in regard to the
wounds, and the autopsy and this point of exit or entrance of the
bullet in the front of the neck, and that all has to be developed much
more than we have at the present time.
We have an explanation there in the autopsy that probably a
fragment came out the front of the neck, but with the elevation other
shot must have come from, and the angle, it seems quite apparent now,
since we have the picture of where the bullet entered in the back,
that the bullet entered below the shoulder blade to the right of the
backbone, which is below the place where the picture shows the bullet
came out in the neckband of the shirt in front, and the bullet,
according to the autopsy didn't strike any bone at all, that
particular bullet, and go through.
*****************************************
Sounds to me like Rankin doesn't have the same autopsy report you have... I
wonder why...
But remember... ignorance can be cured... all you have to do is learn.
>Therefore, the Warren Commission panel should have known from the
>get-go that a bullet came out of JFK's neck and went ... SOMEWHERE.
Not if they didn't have the same autopsy report that you have...
Or do you suppose that Rankin simply can't read?
>(This, despite the fact that the initial December 9, 1963, FBI report
>on the assassination did state that each of the three bullets from
>Oswald's rifle struck a victim in the limousine.)
The same conclusion, by the way, that the Secret Service came up with.
>But, via the WC testimony of the FBI's Robert Frazier re. "no limo
>damage" to the seats of the car where there WOULD have been damage if
>that mid-air bullet had NOT continued into a human being, the WC should
>have known that the "Single-Bullet Theory" was the truth from
>practically Day 1 of the Commission's existence, notwithstanding the
>early FBI report which contradicted that fairly-obvious conclusion.
Yep... those idiots... not realizing the "truth" on the very first day... how
stupid of them! If they'd only had you around to give advice, this wouldn't
have happened.
>It seems to me, then, that the WC was working in kind of an
>"inside-out" fashion. If they had examined the autopsy report FIRST
>(and why didn't they do this?),
They did. It simply didn't say the same thing back then as it does now.
Perhaps this is why the autopsy report is undated, and the notes nonexistent.
>they could easily see that the
>transiting bullet that went completely through President Kennedy either
>caused limo damage (which it didn't) or went into the body of a person
>sitting in front of Kennedy in the vehicle (Texas Governor John
>Connally).
Of course, we have the bullet fragments that LNT'ers claim hit JFK in the head,
they ended up IN THE LIMO, and there was NO DAMAGE TO THE LIMO from those bullet
fragments.
This fact doesn't appear to faze them...
>Why on Earth the WC ever, for even a moment, thought that all three
>shots from Oswald's rifle hit a victim is something I've never been
>able to fully comprehend.
And that, in a nutshell... explains why you're a LNT'er.
>But at least, in the end, the Warren Commission got it right -- Three
>shots; One miss; Two bullets striking victims; One assassin named Lee
>Harvey Oswald. ..... That is the only conceivable conclusion to reach
>given the physical evidence in the John F. Kennedy murder case.
The only "conceivable" conclusion if you ignore much of the evidence. The fact
that you will snip and run, and cannot defend your posts, proves as much.
>David Von Pein
>March 2006
Snip and run... snip and run... Davey-Boy will snip and run...
--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth
David VP
Yeah, it sure looks that way alright. Absolutely does. Because only a
person who can't read simple English would conclude what Rankin did via
that transcript you provided.
I really haven't a clue what the hell Rankin or the others thought at
that time. But thanks for posting that January 27th, 1964, snippet. I
HAVE read that before, btw. I had forgotten the exact date of those
comments, however.
But I'll also tell you that the Official Autopsy Report of John F.
Kennedy is telling ANYBODY with a brain that a WHOLE bullet came out of
JFK's neck. Not a "fragment", as purported by Rankin. A WHOLE BULLET.
And why in the world Mr. Rankin, or anyone reading the autopsy report,
would feel that only a "fragment" surfaced from Kennedy's neck, is
mind-bogglingly stupid, in my view. Because that's not at all what the
autopsy report says. (So, yeah, I guess Rankin couldn't read.)
The autopsy report is not the slightest bit ambiguous in this
determination (at all)........
"This missile produced contusions of the right apical parietal pleura
and of the apical portion of the right upper lobe of the lung. The
missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the neck,
damaged the trachea, AND MADE ITS EXIT THROUGH THE ANTERIOR SURFACE OF
THE NECK. As far as can be ascertained, this missile struck no bony
structures in its path through the body." (Added emphasis mine.)
There is no doubt about what the three doctors thought (those being the
three doctors who EACH signed off on that "transiting missile"
conclusion) -- the friggin' WHOLE bullet came out the front of the
neck. Period.
Now, WHY Mr. Rankin, Mr. Warren, et al, felt the need to play around
with other possibilities regarding JFK's back and throat wounds, I have
no idea. But, IMO, it's just flat-out silly. Because the autopsy report
and the autopsy doctors had ALREADY SET THE SBT IN MOTION with these
words......
"...AND MADE ITS EXIT THROUGH THE ANTERIOR SURFACE OF THE NECK."
Plus these additional important findings re. this T&T bullet (which is
another portion of the very same autopsy report that, evidently, sailed
right over the heads of the WC members, initially anyway, before they
finally got it right)......
"This missile struck no bony structures in its path through the body."
Therefore, as far as the autopsy team was concerned, that whole bullet
is now hanging in mid-air just in front of John Kennedy's throat. It's
not the autopsy team's responsibility, of course, to determine where
that bullet then went. That was the Warren Commission's responsibility.
The WC, thankfully, arrived at the ONLY possible correct scenario to
answer the question of "Where Did That Bullet Go?" -- it HAD to have
gone into John B. Connally's body (without a shred of a doubt), given
the lack of any limo damage that would have been caused by such a
missile had it NOT gone into a human being in that vehicle on 11/22/63.
But I've always been perplexed by the initial apparent bewilderment of
the WC re. JFK's back and neck wounds and the path of CE399. Because
even via the FBI's 12/09/63 assessment of "3 shots & 3 hits", it's
still not a possible "3 Hits" conclusion to reach.
Why? Because the limousine wasn't damaged by any whole bullet that
would have come out of JFK's neck; and, moreover, no bullet was FOUND
where a bullet WOULD have been found if that missile had gone through
JFK but not into JBC.
Plus -- The FBI's initial determination is cockeyed via the Zapruder
Film analysis as well -- as anyone with one eye and an I.Q. of 22 can
easily see....because there's no possible way Oswald can fire separate
shots into the two victims in the allotted timeframe (which is
pert-near ZERO total seconds between the victims reacting to first
being struck by a bullet).
Plus -- There's the following additional "Oswald Couldn't Possibly Have
Done It This Way" snafu (which is a detail that the FBI probably wasn't
fully aware of when they rushed their silly first report to the WC on
December 9th)....
Oswald being able to strike Connally in the back without FIRST
penetrating Kennedy's entire body with the same bullet. Couldn't be
done by David Copperfield. Look.......
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/SOH_1061.jpg
But, as I said, at least Mr. Specter was there to sort out what
(evidently) none of the other blind Commissioners and Staff members
could see. And the WC finally did get it right....which IS the most
important thing. Because being blind and stupid does NOT a "conspiracy"
make. It just means that some people are ... well ... blind and stupid
about some things. The WC people were, after all, human. They were not
"Fact-Finding Robotic Machines" who were incapable of making any
mistakes.
"You call it the theory; I call it the conclusion; it was a theory
until we found the facts; that's why I refer to it as the Single-Bullet
Conclusion". -- Arlen Specter; circa 1965
aeffects
David VP wrote:
> >>"Or do you suppose that Rankin simply can't read?"
>
> Yeah, it sure looks that way alright. Absolutely does. Because only a
> person who can't read simple English would conclude what Rankin did via
> that transcript you provided.
is this the best your feeble mind can produce, "...only a person who
can't read simple ..."?
That's it? Doubt there'll be any more responses to your nonesene.
You're gonna be recalled to the .john looney bin pretty quick ....
Here I thought you might challenge Reitzes for sheer newsgroup posting
'tiara'
would you like to meet DMyers?
David VP
Mr./Mrs. Effects is supposed to mean. But, as long as Effects knows...I
guess that is all that matters.
aeffects
Anthony Marsh
>>> "Or do you suppose that Rankin simply can't read?"
>
> Yeah, it sure looks that way alright. Absolutely does. Because only a
> person who can't read simple English would conclude what Rankin did via
> that transcript you provided.
>
> I really haven't a clue what the hell Rankin or the others thought at
> that time. But thanks for posting that January 27th, 1964, snippet. I
> HAVE read that before, btw. I had forgotten the exact date of those
> comments, however.
>
That is why you need to read more than just the report.
> But I'll also tell you that the Official Autopsy Report of John F.
> Kennedy is telling ANYBODY with a brain that a WHOLE bullet came out of
> JFK's neck. Not a "fragment", as purported by Rankin. A WHOLE BULLET.
Not conclusive though. All of that was speculative since they did not
know it was a bullet wound in the throat. "Presumably."
> And why in the world Mr. Rankin, or anyone reading the autopsy report,
> would feel that only a "fragment" surfaced from Kennedy's neck, is
> mind-bogglingly stupid, in my view. Because that's not at all what the
> autopsy report says. (So, yeah, I guess Rankin couldn't read.)
>
But it was a very popular theory very early on.
> The autopsy report is not the slightest bit ambiguous in this
> determination (at all)........
>
The autopsy is quite ambiguous and intentionally so, because they did
even know about the throat wound.
> "This missile produced contusions of the right apical parietal pleura
> and of the apical portion of the right upper lobe of the lung. The
> missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the neck,
> damaged the trachea, AND MADE ITS EXIT THROUGH THE ANTERIOR SURFACE OF
Which is how I can know that the back wound bullet transited.
> THE NECK. As far as can be ascertained, this missile struck no bony
> structures in its path through the body." (Added emphasis mine.)
>
They were wrong about that.
> There is no doubt about what the three doctors thought (those being the
> three doctors who EACH signed off on that "transiting missile"
> conclusion) -- the friggin' WHOLE bullet came out the front of the
> neck. Period.
The day after, not on 11/22/63. The light came on when they heard from
Perry.
>
> Now, WHY Mr. Rankin, Mr. Warren, et al, felt the need to play around
> with other possibilities regarding JFK's back and throat wounds, I have
> no idea. But, IMO, it's just flat-out silly. Because the autopsy report
> and the autopsy doctors had ALREADY SET THE SBT IN MOTION with these
> words......
>
Here's a hint for you. Because they thought the autopsy doctors were not
reliable.
> "...AND MADE ITS EXIT THROUGH THE ANTERIOR SURFACE OF THE NECK."
>
No, the throat wound exit does not set the SBT into motion. It was the
timing problem which set the SBT into motion.
> Plus these additional important findings re. this T&T bullet (which is
> another portion of the very same autopsy report that, evidently, sailed
> right over the heads of the WC members, initially anyway, before they
> finally got it right)......
>
Well, it sailed right over the heads of Greer and Kellerman.
> "This missile struck no bony structures in its path through the body."
>
Wrong. Why should those autopsy doctors know any better?
> Therefore, as far as the autopsy team was concerned, that whole bullet
> is now hanging in mid-air just in front of John Kennedy's throat. It's
> not the autopsy team's responsibility, of course, to determine where
> that bullet then went. That was the Warren Commission's responsibility.
>
> The WC, thankfully, arrived at the ONLY possible correct scenario to
> answer the question of "Where Did That Bullet Go?" -- it HAD to have
> gone into John B. Connally's body (without a shred of a doubt), given
> the lack of any limo damage that would have been caused by such a
> missile had it NOT gone into a human being in that vehicle on 11/22/63.
>
Limited thinking.
How did the WC resolve the problem of the back wound being lower than
the throat wound? Simple. They lied.
> But I've always been perplexed by the initial apparent bewilderment of
> the WC re. JFK's back and neck wounds and the path of CE399. Because
> even via the FBI's 12/09/63 assessment of "3 shots & 3 hits", it's
> still not a possible "3 Hits" conclusion to reach.
>
Please explain what you think the FBI's conclusion means.
Which bullet hit which men?
> Why? Because the limousine wasn't damaged by any whole bullet that
> would have come out of JFK's neck; and, moreover, no bullet was FOUND
> where a bullet WOULD have been found if that missile had gone through
> JFK but not into JBC.
>
How do you know that the limousine wasn't damaged by any whole bullet
that would have come out of JFK's neck?
How do you know that no bullet was found?
> Plus -- The FBI's initial determination is cockeyed via the Zapruder
> Film analysis as well -- as anyone with one eye and an I.Q. of 22 can
> easily see....because there's no possible way Oswald can fire separate
> shots into the two victims in the allotted timeframe (which is
> pert-near ZERO total seconds between the victims reacting to first
> being struck by a bullet).
>
Please figure out for us the frames at which the FBI thought the bullets
hit each man.
> Plus -- There's the following additional "Oswald Couldn't Possibly Have
> Done It This Way" snafu (which is a detail that the FBI probably wasn't
> fully aware of when they rushed their silly first report to the WC on
> December 9th)....
>
Rushed?
Was their report intended to be sent to the WC?
> Oswald being able to strike Connally in the back without FIRST
> penetrating Kennedy's entire body with the same bullet. Couldn't be
> done by David Copperfield. Look.......
>
Dale Myers has a cartoon which shows that there is plenty of room to hit
Connally's armpit by a bullet going over JFK's right shoulder.
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/SOH_1061.jpg
>
Only at that particular frame. Connally was not always turned around
that way. He said he was facing forward when hit.
> But, as I said, at least Mr. Specter was there to sort out what
> (evidently) none of the other blind Commissioners and Staff members
> could see. And the WC finally did get it right....which IS the most
> important thing. Because being blind and stupid does NOT a "conspiracy"
> make. It just means that some people are ... well ... blind and stupid
> about some things. The WC people were, after all, human. They were not
> "Fact-Finding Robotic Machines" who were incapable of making any
> mistakes.
>
> "You call it the theory; I call it the conclusion; it was a theory
> until we found the facts; that's why I refer to it as the Single-Bullet
> Conclusion". -- Arlen Specter; circa 1965
>
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
Anthony Marsh
> In article <1144802232....@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, David VP
> says...
>> Many people who are of the belief that a conspiracy was involved in
>> taking the life of U.S. President John F. Kennedy in 1963 are also of
>> the belief that a massive cover-up operation took place (and fully
>> succeeded) following JFK's assassination. And, evidently, this
>> "cover-up" must have been put in motion almost from the very minute
>> President Kennedy was shot and killed in Dallas' Dealey Plaza.
>
> It was. Within mere minutes the limo is being washed to eliminate evidence.
> Later that same day, the FBI began taking over the investigation, although they
> had *no* jurisdiction at that time.
>
There was some discussion about what justification they could use to
become involved so in the beginning their role was only advisory to
assist the Dallas authorities as they routinely do in major murder
cases. But I think they could have legally taken over the case. It was a
case of treason, a federal crime.
> As quickly as Friday, and certainly by early Saturday morning, the FBI was
> already beginning to intimidate eyewitnesses.
>
> The body of JFK was stolen at gunpoint, the *LIMO*, likewise, even though there
> was *NO* explanation for such an action.
>
> Yep... I'd agree with you... the cover-up *was* put into motion almost from the
> very minute President Kennedy was shot and killed in Dallas' Dealey Plaza.
>
>> Per some conspiracy theorists -- the FBI, the U.S. Secret Service, and
>> whoever else might have also been on the "Conspiracy & Cover-Up
>> Payroll" (circa 1963) evidently dismantled the President's limousine
>> almost immediately after the shooting, exclusively in order to "hide"
>> bullet holes inside the car that were caused by "frontal" gunshots; and
>> most specifically to hide the obvious damage to the limo that was
>> caused by a bullet that exited JFK's throat but did NOT enter fellow
>> victim John Connally's back. No other reason for the car's being taken
>> apart is ever considered by CTers, other than a "conspiratorial" one.*
>
>
> The limo *was* taken, the limo *was* rebuilt without a proper investigation.
>
That was one of the major problems.
The limo was the Best Witness.
Ben Holmes
Snip snip... snip snip... snip snip...
Yellow coward that Davey-boy is, he can't respond to the refutation of his silly
posts... so he merely snips and runs...
In article <1144827226.1...@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, David VP
says...
>
>>>"Or do you suppose that Rankin simply can't read?"
>
>Yeah, it sure looks that way alright. Absolutely does. Because only a
>person who can't read simple English would conclude what Rankin did via
>that transcript you provided.
It seems meaningless to point out that Rankin mentioned "facts" that can't
*POSSIBLY* be pulled out of the autopsy report, no matter *how* badly you
misread it.
Once again, Davey-boy's arguments have been rendered into mush... BY THE ACTUAL
EVIDENCE.
I suspect that as much as they love the WCR, LNT'ers secretly hate the 26
volumes...
>I really haven't a clue what the hell Rankin or the others thought at
>that time. But thanks for posting that January 27th, 1964, snippet. I
>HAVE read that before, btw. I had forgotten the exact date of those
>comments, however.
So you admit that you actually already *KNEW* the proof that makes your
statements untrue.
That means that you're simply lying for the fun of it, doesn't it? Ignorance
isn't your excuse anymore... you simply lie.
>But I'll also tell you that the Official Autopsy Report of John F.
>Kennedy is telling ANYBODY with a brain that a WHOLE bullet came out of
>JFK's neck.
Why would it? It's not exactly a secret that officially, they didn't even
*KNOW* about that neck wound as a bullet hole *DURING THE AUTOPSY*.
>Not a "fragment", as purported by Rankin. A WHOLE BULLET.
>And why in the world Mr. Rankin, or anyone reading the autopsy report,
>would feel that only a "fragment" surfaced from Kennedy's neck, is
>mind-bogglingly stupid, in my view. Because that's not at all what the
>autopsy report says. (So, yeah, I guess Rankin couldn't read.)
It's not what the autopsy report says *NOW*. It seems that you can't wrap your
mind around a simple concept.
>The autopsy report is not the slightest bit ambiguous in this
>determination (at all)........
The evidence is, however.
>"This missile produced contusions of the right apical parietal pleura
>and of the apical portion of the right upper lobe of the lung. The
>missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the neck,
>damaged the trachea, AND MADE ITS EXIT THROUGH THE ANTERIOR SURFACE OF
>THE NECK. As far as can be ascertained, this missile struck no bony
>structures in its path through the body." (Added emphasis mine.)
You can keep quoting that paragraph as often as you want. For the simple fact
is, you can't *believe* in the autopsy report... it contradicts the BOH photo.
>There is no doubt about what the three doctors thought (those being the
>three doctors who EACH signed off on that "transiting missile"
>conclusion) -- the friggin' WHOLE bullet came out the front of the
>neck. Period.
You're a kook. Period.
>Now, WHY Mr. Rankin, Mr. Warren, et al, felt the need to play around
>with other possibilities regarding JFK's back and throat wounds, I have
>no idea. But, IMO, it's just flat-out silly. Because the autopsy report
>and the autopsy doctors had ALREADY SET THE SBT IN MOTION with these
>words......
>
>"...AND MADE ITS EXIT THROUGH THE ANTERIOR SURFACE OF THE NECK."
You have no idea because you can't accept the truth. How sad...
>Plus these additional important findings re. this T&T bullet (which is
>another portion of the very same autopsy report that, evidently, sailed
>right over the heads of the WC members, initially anyway, before they
>finally got it right)......
>
>"This missile struck no bony structures in its path through the body."
Which, of course, with more modern day knowledge, is known to be impossible.
>Therefore, as far as the autopsy team was concerned, that whole bullet
>is now hanging in mid-air just in front of John Kennedy's throat. It's
>not the autopsy team's responsibility, of course, to determine where
>that bullet then went. That was the Warren Commission's responsibility.
>
>The WC, thankfully, arrived at the ONLY possible correct scenario to
>answer the question of "Where Did That Bullet Go?" -- it HAD to have
>gone into John B. Connally's body (without a shred of a doubt), given
>the lack of any limo damage that would have been caused by such a
>missile had it NOT gone into a human being in that vehicle on 11/22/63.
Speculation isn't going to get you anywhere...
>But I've always been perplexed by the initial apparent bewilderment of
>the WC re. JFK's back and neck wounds and the path of CE399. Because
>even via the FBI's 12/09/63 assessment of "3 shots & 3 hits", it's
>still not a possible "3 Hits" conclusion to reach.
Perplexed, because you can't fit the evidence to the "conclusions"?
>Why? Because the limousine wasn't damaged by any whole bullet that
>would have come out of JFK's neck; and, moreover, no bullet was FOUND
>where a bullet WOULD have been found if that missile had gone through
>JFK but not into JBC.
Ah! A ballistics trajectory expert. Then you should know that the WCR theory
can't possibly be correct.
>Plus -- The FBI's initial determination is cockeyed via the Zapruder
>Film analysis as well -- as anyone with one eye and an I.Q. of 22 can
>easily see....because there's no possible way Oswald can fire separate
>shots into the two victims in the allotted timeframe (which is
>pert-near ZERO total seconds between the victims reacting to first
>being struck by a bullet).
Of course not. That's proof of multiple shooters...
>Plus -- There's the following additional "Oswald Couldn't Possibly Have
>Done It This Way" snafu (which is a detail that the FBI probably wasn't
>fully aware of when they rushed their silly first report to the WC on
>December 9th)....
>
>Oswald being able to strike Connally in the back without FIRST
>penetrating Kennedy's entire body with the same bullet. Couldn't be
>done by David Copperfield. Look.......
Of *course* it could be done. McAdams' silly image is a joke....
>http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/SOH_1061.jpg
>
>But, as I said, at least Mr. Specter was there to sort out what
>(evidently) none of the other blind Commissioners and Staff members
>could see. And the WC finally did get it right....which IS the most
>important thing. Because being blind and stupid does NOT a "conspiracy"
>make. It just means that some people are ... well ... blind and stupid
>about some things. The WC people were, after all, human. They were not
>"Fact-Finding Robotic Machines" who were incapable of making any
>mistakes.
>
>"You call it the theory; I call it the conclusion; it was a theory
>until we found the facts; that's why I refer to it as the Single-Bullet
>Conclusion". -- Arlen Specter; circa 1965
How sad that you can't defend this silly "conclusion".
Ben Holmes
says...
>
>Ben Holmes wrote:
>> In article <1144802232....@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, David VP
>> says...
>>> Many people who are of the belief that a conspiracy was involved in
>>> taking the life of U.S. President John F. Kennedy in 1963 are also of
>>> the belief that a massive cover-up operation took place (and fully
>>> succeeded) following JFK's assassination. And, evidently, this
>>> "cover-up" must have been put in motion almost from the very minute
>>> President Kennedy was shot and killed in Dallas' Dealey Plaza.
>>
>> It was. Within mere minutes the limo is being washed to eliminate evidence.
>>Later that same day, the FBI began taking over the investigation, although they
>> had *no* jurisdiction at that time.
>>
>
>There was some discussion about what justification they could use to
>become involved so in the beginning their role was only advisory to
>assist the Dallas authorities as they routinely do in major murder
>cases.
Why bother to lie, Tony? They were taking the evidence, *all* the evidence that
they could carry with them, Friday night. That is *NOT* an "advisory" role.
>But I think they could have legally taken over the case. It was a
>case of treason, a federal crime.
You'll have to do a whole lot better than that, if you want to defend the WC.
Anthony Marsh
> In article <443cf81f$0$14471$6d36...@titian.nntpserver.com>, Anthony Marsh
> says...
>> Ben Holmes wrote:
>>> In article <1144802232....@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, David VP
>>> says...
>>>> Many people who are of the belief that a conspiracy was involved in
>>>> taking the life of U.S. President John F. Kennedy in 1963 are also of
>>>> the belief that a massive cover-up operation took place (and fully
>>>> succeeded) following JFK's assassination. And, evidently, this
>>>> "cover-up" must have been put in motion almost from the very minute
>>>> President Kennedy was shot and killed in Dallas' Dealey Plaza.
>>> It was. Within mere minutes the limo is being washed to eliminate evidence.
>>> Later that same day, the FBI began taking over the investigation, although they
>>> had *no* jurisdiction at that time.
>>>
>> There was some discussion about what justification they could use to
>> become involved so in the beginning their role was only advisory to
>> assist the Dallas authorities as they routinely do in major murder
>> cases.
>
> Why bother to lie, Tony? They were taking the evidence, *all* the evidence that
> they could carry with them, Friday night. That is *NOT* an "advisory" role.
>
Learn to read English. I said "beginning."
So, what specifically did the FBI take on Friday night?
>> But I think they could have legally taken over the case. It was a
>> case of treason, a federal crime.
>
>
> You'll have to do a whole lot better than that, if you want to defend the WC.
>
>
You don't think it was treason? What do you think it was, environmental
lead poisoning? Accidental shooting?
*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***
Ben Holmes
says...
>
>Ben Holmes wrote:
>> In article <443cf81f$0$14471$6d36...@titian.nntpserver.com>, Anthony Marsh
>> says...
>>> Ben Holmes wrote:
>>>> In article <1144802232....@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, David VP
>>>> says...
>>>>> Many people who are of the belief that a conspiracy was involved in
>>>>> taking the life of U.S. President John F. Kennedy in 1963 are also of
>>>>> the belief that a massive cover-up operation took place (and fully
>>>>> succeeded) following JFK's assassination. And, evidently, this
>>>>> "cover-up" must have been put in motion almost from the very minute
>>>>> President Kennedy was shot and killed in Dallas' Dealey Plaza.
>>>>It was. Within mere minutes the limo is being washed to eliminate evidence.
>>>>Later that same day, the FBI began taking over the investigation, although they
>>>> had *no* jurisdiction at that time.
>>>>
>>> There was some discussion about what justification they could use to
>>> become involved so in the beginning their role was only advisory to
>>> assist the Dallas authorities as they routinely do in major murder
>>> cases.
>>
>> Why bother to lie, Tony? They were taking the evidence, *all* the
>> evidence that they could carry with them, Friday night. That is *NOT*
>> an "advisory" role.
>
>Learn to read English. I said "beginning."
And you lied. There was *NO* "advisory to assist" the DPD. The FBI TOOK IT
OVER almost immediately.
But you go right ahead, Tony... you can feel safe and secure, knowing that
others who *do* know the facts will continue to point it out when you lie or
misrepresent the evidence.
>So, what specifically did the FBI take on Friday night?
Virtually everything they could get their hands on. The DPD didn't turn
*everything* over immediately, the palm print, for example.
>>> But I think they could have legally taken over the case. It was a
>>> case of treason, a federal crime.
>>
>>
>> You'll have to do a whole lot better than that, if you want to defend the WC.
>
>You don't think it was treason?
How silly... make your case if you think you have one. The jurisdiction, BY
LAW, was in Texas... and nothing you can say will change the law.
tomnln
Marsh "Rescues" the WCR AGAIN.
TA DAAAAAAAAAA! ! ! ! ! !
"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:443e4a3b$0$14499$6d36...@titian.nntpserver.com...