"HAPPENSTANCE" OR "CONSPIRACY"?
David Von Pein
GO IN ORDER TO PROP UP THEIR JFK ASSASSINATION "PLOT"?......
====================================================
Here's something I found rather interesting (and quite telling, in a
"non-conspiracy" kind of fashion).....
I occasionally go back to my favorite orange-colored paperback edition
of the 888-page Warren Commission Report and refresh my knowledge
about certain things regarding JFK's assassination....things I had
possibly forgotten about over the years....or while looking for an
exact quote or WCR passage.
And when re-examining Page 31 of the WCR (linked below) I found this
interesting sentence (which I had read multiple times previously, but
had actually completely forgotten about):
"Kenneth O'Donnell made the final decision to hold the luncheon at the
Trade Mart." -- WCR; Page 31
Now, at first blush, I suppose the above statement that refers to
trusted and loyal Presidential aide Kenny O'Donnell might not mean too
much to someone who is reading the WCR volume for the first time.
But the more I think about that one simple sentence, it becomes clear
that there could have been no "conspiracy plot" with respect to
President Kennedy's ULTIMATE DESTINATION ON NOVEMBER 22, 1963 (THE
TRADE MART).
Or do some conspiracy buffs actually want to point an accusing finger
of conspiratorial guilt at Kenny O'Donnell, who was one of the top
aides on JFK's staff and a very good friend of John F. Kennedy's?
Now, I've read about a lot of different kinds of conspiracy
theories....e.g., "The Mob did it", "Castro did it", "The CIA did it",
"The Secret Service was involved", "The FBI and Dallas Police were
involved", "LBJ had JFK killed", etc.
But I don't think I've ever heard a theory that has members deep
within John F. Kennedy's "inner circle" (so to speak) being involved
in a plot to kill their boss and very good friend (which would include
JFK top aides like O'Donnell, Dave Powers, Larry O'Brien, Ted
Sorensen, and McGeorge Bundy (among other aides and cabinet members).
And since the Dallas motorcade route (which ultimately took JFK right
past Lee Harvey Oswald and the Texas School Book Depository on Elm
Street) was contingent, naturally, on WHERE the luncheon was going to
be held on November 22, 1963....this means, in effect, that Ken
O'Donnell was the FINAL WORD with respect to what would end up being a
motorcade route that had to take the President to the Trade Mart, a
location that O'Donnell put the final stamp of approval on (and,
obviously, a location he could also have nixed, if he so desired;
there were two other potential luncheon locations being considered
prior to O'Donnell approving the Trade Mart on November 13 or 14).
WCR; Page 31:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0028a.htm
Almost every time I read portions of the excellent Warren Report, I
find something in there that forces me to say to myself -- "Gee, I
wonder how in the world THAT could be possible if JFK had really been
killed as a result of a vast conspiracy of some sort?".
There are many small examples just like that O'Donnell one I pointed
out above....i.e., innocent things that all led to the President being
where he was at 12:30 PM on 11/22/63....and additional pieces of pure
coincidence and happenstance that allowed Lee Harvey Oswald to be in
the position he was in at 12:30 PM on that same November day, which
allowed Oswald to pull off this crime in total solitude on the 6th
Floor of his workplace with his own cheap Mannlicher-Carcano rifle.
The assassination was an act of madness....to be sure. But it was also
the act of pure garden-variety happenstance in just about every single
aspect that I can think of. To believe otherwise is to believe in a
sordid Oliver Stone-like morass of conspiracy complications and CT
constructs that would have certainly involved not just a FEW select
people (given the logistics, the guns, the shells, the bullets, the
body of JFK, the witnesses, and a massive cover-up that would have HAD
to involve literally HUNDREDS of people).
In short -- It was a RIGHT PLACE AT THE RIGHT TIME situation for Lee
Harvey Oswald that enabled him to kill the President.
And it was just the opposite for the unfortunate victim -- as JFK most
certainly just happened to be in the WRONG place at the WRONG time on
Elm Street -- and under sunny skies after a rainy morning too, which
is yet another totally-random and completely-uncontrollable factor
that also falls under the headings of "pure happenstance" and "luck"
for assassin Lee Harvey Oswald (in that the bubbletop was not on the
President's limousine at the critical time of 12:30).
HAPPENSTANCE, not CONSPIRACY, led to the death of President John F.
Kennedy.
And happenstance cannot be controlled. Even if Oliver Stone, Jim
Garrison, and Mark Lane think it can be.
David Von Pein
April 2007
====================================================
RELATED "HAPPENSTANCE" ARTICLES...........
A LEE HARVEY OSWALD "TIMELINE" FOR 11/22/63:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/3a3d654f3c43ed16
THE ABSURDITIES OF THE "OSWALD-AS-PATSY" PLOT:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/606503e4d63e74ad
THE "CRYSTAL-BALL-GAZING" CONSPIRATORS:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/747e6695f071ec3f
WAS OSWALD "PLACED" IN THE DEPOSITORY BY EVIL PLOTTERS?:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/64195df0086af9b4
WHAT ARE THE ODDS...?:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/7e70b829247b4a49
A SHORTCUT TO BECOMING AN LNer -- THE LIVE TV COVERAGE OF 11/22/63:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/addeb5d529d1fb03
====================================================
tomnln
That's why Page 31 of the Government Printing Office edition says NO Such
Thing.
I suggest you spend a buck & get the GPO edition of the WCR.
WHY is it that you NEVER quote Official Records KOOK-SUCKER?
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1177717488.6...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
David Von Pein
And even if that is true, how does that CHANGE THE FACT THAT KEN
O'DONNELL PUT THE FINAL STAMP OF APPROVAL ON THE TRADE MART FOR THE
LUNCHEON?
>>> "I suggest you spend a buck & get the GPO edition of the WCR." <<<
LOL. Why in the world would I want an abridged edition when I've got
the unabridged variant (which includes just what I said earlier re.
O'Donnell)?
The online version at History-Matters is unabridged as well. .....
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0028a.htm
tomnln
Liar on Multiple ocassions.
http://whokilledjfk.net/tom_lowery.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/Evid%20Tamp.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/spy.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/danrather.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/horne__report.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/RACE%20TO%20TSBD.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Rifle.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/single_bullet.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/media_page.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Lattimer.htm
THOSE are Official Records Rinky-Dink.
and you're STUCK with them.
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1177736339.5...@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
David Von Pein
Yep. Indeed it was.
And don't forget it was also Mr. O'Donnell who was chiefly responsible
for taking JFK's dead body out of Dallas and back to Washington.
In other words -- O'Donnell is firmly fixed in MANY different places
where conspiracy buffs NEED A CONSPIRATOR CONTROLLING STUFF!
And since it's obvious to even a blind rat that Mr. Kenneth P.
O'Donnell was NOT on any kind of Assassination Conspiracy Payroll on
November 22, 1963, how do the CTers (who need an "inside plotter"
doing things and approving things that Mr. O'Donnell did and approved)
explain the stuff O'Donnell did as "conspiratorial"?
Did the REAL (non-O'Donnell) plotters just GET LUCKY when O'Donnell
did many things that greatly aided the conspiracy plot?
Things like:
1.) Selecting the Trade Mart as the Dallas luncheon site (with another
non-plotter's major assistance, John Connally's).
2.) Ordering the bubbletop to definitely be "off that car" if the rain
cleared in Dallas.
3.) And by practically bulldozing JFK's casket past Dr. Rose at
Parkland Memorial Hospital.
That's called HAPPENSTANCE...not CONSPIRACY. And those things were
controlled chiefly by someone who cannot possibly be painted as a
"plotter".
So, either the plotters just got unbelievably lucky ALL DAY LONG on
November 22nd....or: THERE WAS SIMPLY NO CONSPIRACY AT ALL IN DALLAS.
~Mark VII~
David Von Pein
Guess so. After all, this silly book was published wasn't it?....
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0786718323
>>> "Nonsense. Jackie could have said "Leave the body in Dallas and follow the law." Did she? No?" <<<
And Jackie didn't say "Take JFK to Walter Reed" either, did she? So
the CT after-the-shooting at-the-autopsy cover-up plot that many, many
CTers advocate requires Jacqueline Kennedy to be involved too.
Or: it requires another layer of PURE LUCK for those amazing plotters.
Lookie..."They" just GOT LUCKY once again when Jackie said "Bethesda".
Yes, JFK was a Navy man, so the plotters could have guessed right on
this one fairly easily...but how do they "control" Jackie AND
O'Donnell AND O'Brien AND Kilduff AND on and on?
How do "they" control all of these people who could have nixed a
Washington autopsy at any point in time?
They just GOT LUCKY (again), right?
Like I said...the horoscope for "Assassination Plotters" revealed this
on the morning of November 22, 1963:
TODAY IS YOUR LUCKIEST OF LUCKY DAYS! GO FOR IT! NOTHING CAN STOP YOU!
NOT EVEN JACKIE! NOT THE PRESIDENT'S DEVOTED STAFF! NOT JOHN CONNALLY!
NOBODY! KILL THE PRESIDENT AND A PATSY WILL AUTOMATICALLY FALL INTO
PERFECT PLACE!
>>> "More nonsense." <<<
You're picking up Marsh's habits. The "N" word is his favorite too.
>>> "O'Donnell was not involved in a conspiracy. The more you try to say other people think he was, the more silly your theory becomes. Your premises are all wrong." <<<
You still don't get my main point at all, do you?
Of course O'Donnell was not part of any conspiracy. Which means, by
default, that if the general type of conspiracy exists that many CTers
advocate, the plotters were the luckiest bums since Lucky Lindy in
'27.
>>> "If JFK wanted the bubble top to stay on, it would have stayed on. If Jackie wanted the body to remain in Dallas, it would have remained in Dallas." <<<
Right. Which also indicates the whole day of Nov. 22 revolved around
PURE HAPPENSTANCE, CHANCE, AND REGULAR ORDINARY-LIKE DECISIONS.
I.E.: Nothing is being "controlled" by any evil forces on Nov. 22.
Jackie, O'Donnell, O'Brien, and Connally prove that to be the case.
Are you starting to get the whole drift of my "Happenstance" thread?
Or should I get Umbrella Man to beat it into you? ;) (Just a little
joke, .John. No need for a refusal mail here, okay?) ;)
>>> "Are you now going to tell us that what JFK and JACKIE wanted was unimportant." <<<
WTF?
I can only shrug. I think I will....
~shrug~
>>> "Do you believe O'Donnell would just walk all over JFK and Jackie?" <<<
Yet another ~shrug~ of bewilderment.
I guess you still really DON'T understand my main underlying point, do
you?
Should I give up yet...or continue trying to talk to this brick wall
named Peter F.?
>>> "Then why try to pretend some people think he was, or that a conspiracy required his involvement when the facts are otherwise." <<<
If anyone is to believe anything in Oliver Stone's movie, or if they
believe anything uttered by Jim Garrison, then they have no choice but
to believe one of the following two things:
1.) Ken O'Donnell and John Connally and Jackie Kennedy must have been
part of the plot too.
Or:
2.) The plotters who were orchestrating the "Let's Kill JFK And Blame
Everything On Oswald" plot were the luckiest assholes on the planet
when the three above-named individuals did things that made that patsy
plot succeed to absolute perfection.
>>> "You are really on a wild tangent here." <<<
Another ~shrug~ needed here I see.
>>> "Trouble is NO ONE believes what you say they believe, nor is it necessary for them to believe what you say they believe to believe in a conspiracy." <<<
Depends on how deep into Absurdville a CTer wants to go. If a CTer is
in bed with Garrison or Groden or Stone (and a whole bunch of them
are), then YES such a CTer must believe in one of the two options I
offered above.
If you're in a CT camp of a lesser-kooky nature, then you're correct.
(But not by much really.)
But when I talk about "CTers", I have a habit of "aiming" my comments
at the more extreme kooks within that faction. It's a habit that's
hard to break.
And since gobs of people I've talked with DO sincerely believe that
Oliver Stone's "Triangulation Of Crossfire" craziness is the Gospel
re. the shooting scenario in Dealey Plaza...I tend, therefore, to aim
my comments at them more than the conspiracists who possess the
following mindset -- "Oswald Was A Shooter, But I Still Think There
Was A Conspiracy Even Though I Have No Bullets Or Other Hard Evidence
To Support That Belief".
>>> "More nonsense. No one needs O'Donnell to do anything. At any time his "arrangements" could have been altered by JFK or Jackie." <<<
LOL. Which is proving my MAIN POINT all the more, Pete.
Thanks.
>>> "Do you have a phobia over facts?" <<<
And do you have a phobia when it comes to common sense?
>>> "You mean when JFK wanted {the} bubbletop removed? You mean when Jackie agreed to the moving of her husband's body?" <<<
More proving of my main "Happenstance, Not Conspiracy" point.
Thanks again.
>>> "The Trade Mart has nothing to do with the conspiracy." <<<
Sure it does. (Per Stone's "Triangulation on Elm St." crap anyway.)
If the limo wasn't headed to the Trade Mart, that Elm St. turn would
never have occurred...and Stone's/Garrison's whole PRE-PLANNED "Blame
It On The Patsy In The TSBD" and "Triangulation" theories are shot
down right there.
Garrison/Stone (and those who prop them up) definitely NEED the
luncheon site to be at the Trade Mart. Because they need the car on
Elm. Or else the shooting is much more difficult.
>>> "Oswald could have assassinated the President from any building." <<<
And could he have cleared himself as an employee from any building,
too?
>>> "I hope Bugliosi uses better logic than you are." <<<
Do you really think that VB WON'T be mentioning something very similar
in nature to what I've been saying here re. "Pure Chance" and
"Happenstance" and "Those Plotters Sure As Hell Got Lucky", etc.?
If he doesn't mention a lot of stuff like that I'll be severely
disappointed...because such arguments positively need to be made (with
zeal). And such arguments, all by themselves, go a long way toward
debunking many of the conspiracy theories that have been offered up
since '63.
It seems as though you, Peter, are using CTer logic here. And that's
ALWAYS a fatal mistake.
In short -- Oswald shot the President mainly BECAUSE THE PERFECT
OPPORTUNITY WAS AFFORDED HIM...FROM HIS OWN WORKPLACE (where he could
blend in with other employees and BE CLEARED AS AN EMPLOYEE, which did
occur).
The President probably lives past November 22nd if Oswald had not been
hired by Roy Truly on October 15th, 1963.
YMMV re. that last declaration. And I will readily admit that's just
my own opinion. But since I know that Oswald was not suicidal in any
way (he proved that several times on 11/22; mainly on Tenth St. when
he encountered Tippit), I have my doubts that he would have attempted
to kill the President if he had not been employed in a tall building
which he knew, days in advance, would overlook the motorcade route.
Again, allow me to repeat the proverbial "YMMV" here.
>>> "And if JFK didn't want it {bubbletop} removed?" <<<
Then he probably lives to see his 47th birthday. Or at least he's got
a much better chance of reaching it anyway. Oswald might very well
have shot through the bubbletop though; but it might have deflected a
fatal shot; nobody can know.
Plus: I also wonder if Oswald could have possibly known for certain
whether the bubbletop was bulletproof or not. Knowledge of that
important detail re. the car's bubbletop roof would probably have
affected his decision to shoot, if he had seen the bubbletop on the
car as it approached the TSBD that day. If he thought the bubbletop
was bulletproof (which it wasn't of course), there would obviously be
no point in shooting at all.
>>> "And if Jackie didn't want the body moved?" <<<
Then David Lifton has to reconfigure his 700+ pages of body-stealing
idiocy. And a lot of other CTers must alter their "cover-up plots"
too. Because many CTers certainly have Humes, Finck, and Boswell (and
other military bigshots) up to no good at Bethesda.
No worries though....those same CTers can just accuse Dr. Rose of
phonying-up the autopsy, right?
Right.
>>> "A conspiracy depends on certain factors occurring in ADVANCE of the attempted assassination. If they don't, the assassination does not occur." <<<
Once again, you're proving my main point for me. Some of the important
"IN ADVANCE" stuff was done by people like Connally and O'Donnell. And
since nobody paints them as plotters...where do the CTers go from
there?
Do you get it now?
>>> "Nonsense." <<<
Great. Marsh II.
>>> "You are looking in a rear view mirror and saying because things happened a certain way then it would have been impossible for them to happen another way with the same result." <<<
LOL. Sounds more like you're talking about the patsy-loving CTers
here.
>>> "In other words, you are saying that if O'Donnell had not been present, the entire trip to Dallas would have unfolded differently." <<<
I'm saying that O'Donnell's decisions happened in a PERFECT way for
the so-called "plotters" who wanted things to happen in a certain
way....the exact way O'Donnell arranged them (or at least he was
deeply involved in making them happen and approving them, etc.).
And since O'Donnell was positively NOT A CONSPIRATOR ON NOV. 22....
Oh, what's the use.
Peter has put up his "I'M A BRICK WALL" sign today. So I guess I'll
just have to go around it and avoid it for now.
David Von Pein
>>> "The doctors mistook a dab of tissue on top of the hair for a bullet entry wound." <<<
DVP PONTIFICATED:
Oh, for God sake, what an idiotic thing to say.
THE KOOK SAID:
>>> "There was no wound of any kind on the back of the head near either the EOP nor the cowlick area." <<<
THE NON-KOOK UTTERED BACK:
Gee, I guess JFK must still be alive then (being that he had NO hole
in the back of his head AT ALL where EITHER official Govt. panel
placed one).
Jack Kennedy must be looking forward to celebrating his 90th birthday
on the day that Mr. Bugliosi's book (all about his murder) hits the
streets.
David Von Pein
Even within the Oliver Stone/Jim Garrison patsy plot, eh?? (Which is a
plot that a huge number of people actually believe in.)
LOL. This is a riot.
Per the Stone crowd, assassins fire 6 shots at the President (all of
which COULD have hit JFK, of course, from varying angles/
directions)...and then "they" try to blame the whole nine yards (6
shots) on Lee Harvey Oswald by planting only THREE bullet shells and
firing the 6 shots so close together that there's no way in hell that
all of those shots could all have been fired by the resident "Patsy
For All 11/22/63 Murders".
And Peter The Great thinks this way --- "The plotters had no need to
worry about an autopsy".
Yeah, that's right. The plotters just had a feeling that all of the
autopsists would hide the bullets and cover up everything that looked
like a frontal shot....right? The plotters just had a INKLING that the
U.S. Government would be wanting to frame the very same lone patsy
that the pre-arranging plotters were attempting to frame.
~~Awaiting Pete's or Tony's proverbial "Not my theory" response~~
But, of course, I don't care if it's particularly YOUR theory or not.
I was talking about the people who DO buy into Ollie Stone's fairy
tale...which is a high number of people (right here at Google in
fact).
And THAT type of plot requires a good deal of pre-planning....some of
which was done by John Connally (who was almost killed himself on
11/22 and who was responsible for approving ANY motorcade through
Dallas in the first place) and Kenneth O'Donnell and others who aren't
accused of being plotters.
So, more lucky breaks for the plotters. Their luck never ran out. And
it still hasn't, as long as people continue to prop up Stone's film
(or similar nutty theories) as the truth of 11/22/63.
=============
Addendum..........
Just name any location on the "JFK Assassination Map" (so to speak),
and I'll give you the names of at least two people (plus the wealth of
associated "lone assassin" evidence that comes from said locality) who
debunk the notion that any conspiracy theory or cover-up plot could
have occurred from such a location....including all of Dealey Plaza,
the TSBD, Tenth Street, Parkland, Bethesda, the DPD, and right on in
to the places where the Warren Commission assembled and/or questioned
witnesses.
There are conspiracy-refuting people in all of those locales,
including the previously-mentioned Kennedy aides (plus Governor
Connally), whose actions and decisions PRIOR to November 22 would have
made it virtually impossible for the kind of conspiracy plot that many
CTers advocate to have been pulled off in the first place.
The only type of "conspiracy" that cannot be thoroughly trashed is the
type that would have involved JUST OSWALD as the lone shooter in
Dealey Plaza and on 10th Street (which he so obviously was) and the
aid of one or more behind-the-scenes co-plotters who encouraged Oswald
or (in some small way) helped him to reach his ultimate goal of
killing John F. Kennedy.
But even THAT type of smaller "JUST OSWALD AND ONE OTHER PLOTTER WHO
NEVER PICKED UP A GUN" conspiracy is very, very unlikely....and for an
obvious reason. That reason being: Oswald's SOLO-LIKE actions
following the assassination of JFK.
If LHO had had "help" of some kind....where was that other plotter
when Lee Harvey Oswald needed him most -- i.e., just after Oswald shot
the President and needed a getaway driver fast?
In short, just about the only location where a JFK conspiracy cannot
be almost totally debunked is A RABID CONSPIRACIST'S MIND. That
fertile "CT" ground can probably never be exorcised of its conspiracy-
tinged demons.
Anthony Marsh
None of the assassination conspiracy planning depended on or needed any
help from John Connally or Kenneth O'Donnell.
> So, more lucky breaks for the plotters. Their luck never ran out. And
> it still hasn't, as long as people continue to prop up Stone's film
> (or similar nutty theories) as the truth of 11/22/63.
>
Their luck ran out when Oswald's rifle jammed.
> =============
>
> Addendum..........
>
> Just name any location on the "JFK Assassination Map" (so to speak),
> and I'll give you the names of at least two people (plus the wealth of
> associated "lone assassin" evidence that comes from said locality) who
> debunk the notion that any conspiracy theory or cover-up plot could
> have occurred from such a location....including all of Dealey Plaza,
> the TSBD, Tenth Street, Parkland, Bethesda, the DPD, and right on in
> to the places where the Warren Commission assembled and/or questioned
> witnesses.
>
Mumbo Jumbo.
> There are conspiracy-refuting people in all of those locales,
> including the previously-mentioned Kennedy aides (plus Governor
The previously mentioned Kennedy aides were the ones who said the shots
came from the grassy knoll and convinced Tip O'Neill to allow the
formation of the HSCA, which found conspiracy.
> Connally), whose actions and decisions PRIOR to November 22 would have
> made it virtually impossible for the kind of conspiracy plot that many
> CTers advocate to have been pulled off in the first place.
>
Governor Connally's insistence that the SBT is impossible is one factor
which caused people to doubt the WC scenario.
> The only type of "conspiracy" that cannot be thoroughly trashed is the
> type that would have involved JUST OSWALD as the lone shooter in
> Dealey Plaza and on 10th Street (which he so obviously was) and the
> aid of one or more behind-the-scenes co-plotters who encouraged Oswald
> or (in some small way) helped him to reach his ultimate goal of
> killing John F. Kennedy.
>
Ah ha, so now you come clean and admit that you think it was a
conspiracy with Cuba paying Oswald.
> But even THAT type of smaller "JUST OSWALD AND ONE OTHER PLOTTER WHO
> NEVER PICKED UP A GUN" conspiracy is very, very unlikely....and for an
> obvious reason. That reason being: Oswald's SOLO-LIKE actions
> following the assassination of JFK.
>
> If LHO had had "help" of some kind....where was that other plotter
> when Lee Harvey Oswald needed him most -- i.e., just after Oswald shot
> the President and needed a getaway driver fast?
>
According to your theory, his coconspirators were still in Cuba.