JFK Assassination Forum Archives -- Misc. Topics Of Interest (Part 125)

Almost all conspiracy theorists (that I am aware of) think that the
throat wound was caused by a bullet (or a poisoned dart) that ENTERED
the President's throat from the front.

Which means that those CTers have DOUBLE the disappearing bullets than
they'd have in trying to explain Paul May's thread-opening question
about where just the ONE bullet went after exiting JFK's throat.

This is a point I've made repeatedly on the Web for years -- i.e., the
absurdity in believing something that is far more unbelievable than is
the SBT.

CTers who advocate a frontal shot for the throat wound are
automatically making themselves look ridiculous, because those
conspiracists must now explain why TWO separate bullets went into
JFK's upper back AND throat, and then just vanished WITHOUT EXITING.

And those CTers should also feel the need to explain to the world why
President Kennedy had NO INTERNAL DAMAGE significant enough to even
remotely suggest that even ONE bullet (let alone TWO) could have
stopped dead inside his back/neck after entering.

But, in the conspiracy world, apparently there is no obligation on the
part of those people advancing such nutty theories to REASONABLY
EXPLAIN why and how these bullets failed to exit and then BOTH
DISAPPEAR into thin air.

IOW--The mere SUGGESTION that something is true (like the silly-beyond-
all-tolerance "2 Bullets Went Into JFK, Did Not Exit, And Then
Disappeared" claptrap) is more than enough for conspiracy theorists to
embrace it as the absolute truth.

Silly, isn't it?

Yes, it is.

http://Single-Bullet-Theory.blogspot.com

http://The-JFK-Assassination.blogspot.com

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

Feb 17, 2010, 4:11:03 AM2/17/10

to

AT IMDB.COM, "SEAVER41" SAID:

>>> "Well I just found one total lie [in Vincent Bugliosi's 2007 book, "Reclaiming History"]: He's going over Kennedy's morning, only a couple hours before he's killed and Kennedy mutters in his hotel room "it would be so easy for someone to kill a president. A high powered rifle from a high building..." .... I'm not sure how Bugliosi knows Kennedy would have said that but either way, he didn't -- in 'JFK: 3 days that changed America' (which just came out on DVD), the guy Kennedy said that to says he said it on a plane a couple months earlier to him. So clearly either Bugliosi made it up there or just figured it was a good spot for him to say it for dramatic purposes, which makes me question everything he's writing, which I can't stand because I've always liked Bugliosi." <<<

DVP SAID:

"JFK: 3 SHOTS THAT CHANGED AMERICA" (not "3 Days..." as mentioned by
"Seaver41" above) is a 3-hour documentary that consists of nothing but
archived TV and film footage from November 1963 only.

It's a very good program (I recently purchased the DVD), which in a
large sense mirrors my own YouTube channel of "as it happened" JFK
material. I sure don't recall Kenneth O'Donnell being part of the live
Nov. '63 footage, however. It's possible he appeared on camera on
November 24 or 25, but I don't recall it at the moment.

The only times I've ever heard that story recounted, it's always been
a quote that was being spoken by Kennedy (to O'Donnell) on the day of
the assassination itself--November 22.

I'll also add this:

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh7/html/WC_Vol7_0232b.htm

In addition to Ken O'Donnell's Warren Commission testimony [at 7 H
456, linked above], which is the sole citation used by Vincent
Bugliosi for the remarks allegedly made by President Kennedy about
assassination on 11/22/63, there is also a similar reference in Jim
Bishop's 1968 book "The Day Kennedy Was Shot".

According to Bishop, JFK made the statement in question concerning
assassination (or one very close to it) while the President was
sitting in his hotel room in Fort Worth between the hours of 7:00 and
8:00 AM (CST) on November 22, 1963, which would be about three hours
earlier than the O'Donnell/Bugliosi timeframe for this statement.
Quoting from Bishop's book:

"The room was now quiet for a moment. Mrs. Kennedy returned to
her bedroom as the waiter, George Jackson, wheeled in a second table
with scrambled eggs and crisp bacon for her. Mr. Kennedy sat sipping
coffee. Then, glancing at Kenny O'Donnell, he murmured: "Anyone
perched above the crowd with a rifle could do it."" -- Page 29 of "THE
DAY KENNEDY WAS SHOT" [via the 1983 hardcover edition]

http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/01/3-shots-that-changed-america.html

http://JFK-Assassination-As-It-Happened.blogspot.com

http://Amazon.com/review/RYD6JTWASP90K

-----------

ADDENDUM:

I could be wrong about this, but I'm just wondering if Seaver41 could
possibly be mixing up his conversations that he heard during the "3
SHOTS" documentary.

There is some live network footage from 11/22/63 where a news reporter
talks about being on a plane with Lyndon Johnson during the 1960
Presidential campaign.

The conversation between the newsman and LBJ was about whether or not
Johnson would run as Vice President during the campaign.

Nothing was discussed about assassination, though, so maybe I'm wrong.
But when Seaver41 mentioned "plane", I recalled that commentary made
by a newsman (which is footage that is likely part of the "3 SHOTS"
program).

BTW, Tom Terrific was one of my favorite ballplayers (mainly because
he played for my Cincinnati Reds from 1977 to 1982). ;)

In 1981, with the Reds, Seaver went 14-2 during the awful "split
season".

Listen to the last out of Tom Seaver's only no-hitter (6/16/78) here:

http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/11/cincinnati-reds-memories.html

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

Feb 22, 2010, 1:47:41 AM2/22/10

to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/d7b7b7affb5834c5/24faee0588951659?#24faee0588951659

In an endnote in his book "Reclaiming History", Vincent Bugliosi
wrote:

"Fritz writes, “Claims 2nd Floor Coke when Off [Officer] came
in, to 1st fl had lunch, out with Bill Shelley in front. Left wk
[work] opinion nothing be done that day.” "

>>> "Do you see those little marks between "in" and "to" and "lunch" and "out"? They are called commas, David. And they do not appear in Fritz' original note. Adding them gives a certain meaning which may not have originally been intended." <<<

Greg,

The "commas" added by Mr. Bugliosi are necessary (and they are not
deceiving in the slightest way). They simply serve as the "breaks" in
paragraphing. The commas substitute for the physical paragraphing that
we find in Captain Fritz' original handwritten notes.

Without the commas that Bugliosi has inserted in his book, it would
look like all of Fritz' words were one continuous thought, which they
obviously were not.

I will admit my earlier error, however, when I said that Bugliosi had
added NO punctuation at all. He did add the commas. I stand corrected.
Thank you.

I suppose Bugliosi COULD have written the Fritz notes in the same
"line-by-line" structure that Fritz himself used on 11/22/63 when he
wrote those notes (sans the commas), but Vince didn't do that on page
537 of "RH" endnotes.

Fritz wrote the notes in such a manner so that each line (or
paragraph) of text was representing a SEPARATE OBSERVATION or a
separate thought:

http://www.jfk-info.com/notes1.htm

But the alternate manner in which VB printed out the Fritz notes on
page 537 (with commas inserted) is, IMO, definitely correct, in order
to give the proper meaning of the original notes.

Perhaps Bugliosi should have placed brackets [] around each comma. But
most people only utilize brackets when they're adding WORDS, not
punctuation, like VB did with [Officer] and [work], for clarity.

Footnote -- You were wrong, though, when you accused ME of adding the
punctuation. I never added a thing.

http://ReclaimingHistory.blogspot.com

David Von Pein

unread,

Feb 25, 2010, 9:44:52 AM2/25/10

to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/d7b7b7affb5834c5/4748a6b6dee23441?#4748a6b6dee23441

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/c5100dda2260f37e

>>> "It [Captain Fritz' handwritten notes] makes absolutely no sense. There is no "spacing" or extra line breaks to help make sense of it--let alone punctuation." <<<

Captain J. Will Fritz' handwritten notes make perfect sense, per
Vincent Bugliosi's book (and the punctuation that Bugliosi properly
and correctly added to those Fritz notes).

Why is this so?

Because Bugliosi KNOWS WHAT THE MEANING OF THE NOTES IS.

And Bugliosi knows this because he's not relying on JUST Fritz'
handwritten notes. He's relying also on Fritz' final typewritten
report, which was based partly on his notes.

Therefore, when Bugliosi added his two "commas", he did so with the
knowledge of WHERE exactly those commas (i.e., breaks) should go,
because Bugliosi had also read Fritz' final typed report [WR, Pg. 600,
below].

Why isn't that fact obvious to everyone, even Greg?

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0312b.htm

http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html

aeffects

unread,

Feb 25, 2010, 11:37:47 AM2/25/10

to

On Feb 25, 6:44 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/th...

>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/c5100dda2260f37e
>
> >>> "It [Captain Fritz' handwritten notes] makes absolutely no sense. There is no "spacing" or extra line breaks to help make sense of it--let alone punctuation." <<<
>
> Captain J. Will Fritz' handwritten notes make perfect sense, per
> Vincent Bugliosi's book (and the punctuation that Bugliosi properly
> and correctly added to those Fritz notes).
>
> Why is this so?
>
> Because Bugliosi KNOWS WHAT THE MEANING OF THE NOTES IS.
>
> And Bugliosi knows this because he's not relying on JUST Fritz'
> handwritten notes. He's relying also on Fritz' final typewritten
> report, which was based partly on his notes.
>
> Therefore, when Bugliosi added his two "commas", he did so with the
> knowledge of WHERE exactly those commas (i.e., breaks) should go,
> because Bugliosi had also read Fritz' final typed report [WR, Pg. 600,
> below].
>
> Why isn't that fact obvious to everyone, even Greg?
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0312b.htm
>
> http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html

still conversing with yourself Mr. David Von Pein (sic)?

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

Feb 26, 2010, 6:35:07 AM2/26/10

to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/d7b7b7affb5834c5/2d7f0f549ef0e132?#2d7f0f549ef0e132

>>> "You weren't even aware that the Bug [Vincent Bugliosi] had changed anything in the notes till I pointed it out, and it has taken several days since for you to formulate this response--which has taken approximately 5 minutes for me to demolish." <<<

You've demolished nothing. Bugliosi's "commas" are in the proper
places to align with Fritz' typed report (which begins on page 599 of
the Warren Report). And this is true regardless of whether I was
initially aware that Bugliosi had inserted any commas or not.

>>> "Clearly Fritz' report was not based on the interrogations. It was based on what his assistants dredged up from other sources e.g. Truly's false report of 11/23. If it had been based on the interrogations, it would reflect the same information as the Holmes and Hosty/Bookhout reports (as his own notes in fact do when read with the correct punctuation!)" <<<

LOL. What a bunch of crap.

Captain Fritz, in his final typewritten report (beginning on page 600
of the WR), says these words over and over again: "I asked him". And
then Fritz goes on to say what Oswald's replies were after he was
"asked" the various questions by Fritz himself.

Let me guess, you think Captain Fritz merely used the words "I asked
him" dozens of times in his final, formal report just to throw people
off, right Greg?

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=946&relPageId=624

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

Feb 27, 2010, 7:15:49 PM2/27/10

to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/d7b7b7affb5834c5/7ca5cb3c0d5c38a3?#7ca5cb3c0d5c38a3

>>> "Oswald says he is having lunch on the first floor when the motorcade passes but Fritz recalls Truly telling him that a cop stopped him "somewhere near the back stairway". This of course, could only be a reference to the first floor." <<<

Why does it have to mean ONLY the first floor?

That reference made by Captain Fritz obviously DOES NOT have to
indicate only the first floor?

How do we know this?

Because the encounter between Oswald and Baker did not occur on the
first floor, it occurred on the second floor. So, quite logically,
that reference to "somewhere near the back stairway" MUST be referring
to WHERE THE OSWALD/BAKER ENCOUNTER ACTUALLY TOOK PLACE. And it wasn't
on Floor #1.

Plus, the place where Marrion Baker stopped Lee Oswald WAS, indeed,
"somewhere near the back stairway" on the second floor. It was very
close to the "back stairway", in fact, otherwise Officer Baker would
NEVER HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SEE OSWALD as Baker was hurriedly climbing
those back stairs.

And in the following 1963 Secret Service reconstruction video, we can
see just how close the "back stairway" is to the door which leads to
the second-floor lunchroom (at the 23:15 mark near the very end of the
video):

http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/01/1963-secret-service-film.html

>>> "What is more interesting is that, according to Fritz, Oswald disagrees with Truly and insists he was on the 2nd floor DRINKING a coke. Oswald is giving a worse alibi than that initially offered up for him by Truly!" <<<

Any additional hairs you wish to split today?

The "Coke" thing has been over-emphasized by conspiracy theorists for
40+ years. Oswald was probably in that lunchroom within sixty seconds
of firing his third and last rifle bullet at President Kennedy.

The trip from the sixth-floor Sniper's Nest to the second-floor
lunchroom was reconstructed by John Howlett of the Secret Service in
only 74 seconds, and that was with Howlett moving at merely a "fast
walk" [WR; Pg. 152]:

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0088b.htm

No test was done by the Secret Service or the Warren Commission (as
far as I'm aware) that had someone attempting to get from the sixth
floor to the second floor while RUNNING. The only tests mentioned on
Page 152 of the Warren Report are two "walking" tests. And even there,
we've got Howlett getting to the second floor in 78 seconds or less on
each of his two "walking" re-creation tests.

BTW, the re-creation of the agent going from the 6th Floor to the 2nd
Floor that is shown in the above-linked Secret Service video is not
one of the two re-creations that are mentioned on Page 152 of the
Warren Report. The two WC/USSS reconstruction tests were performed on
March 20, 1964, whereas that Secret Service video was made in late
1963.

The man representing the gunman in the video is moving at a snail's
pace during the time he is on camera. Oswald would have unquestionably
been moving much faster than the man is moving in that Secret Service
reconstruction video.

And Oswald would have also very likely been moving quite a bit faster
than John Howlett's "walking" re-creations that were done in March
1964.

Plus, as has been mentioned by others on these forums in the past,
it's quite possible (but not provable, of course) that Oswald could
have merely grabbed himself a Coke bottle off of one of the tables
just after he entered the lunchroom.

There are photos taken of the lunchroom, in fact, which show Coke
bottles on one of the tables, with the picture below being one such
photo (and, FWIW, one of the two Coke bottles in this photograph is
nearly full). I do not know, however, exactly when this picture was
taken, or if it was taken on 11/22/63 or not:

http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/265.+TSBD+SECOND+FLOOR+%28LUNCHROOM%29?gda=7UB2P1gAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQU_1jBZtuO4x9La_ldTPlpgdLYIksl6p3A5p1tiOLQf12zqxZP1mG3W3eVdwvsqStIL2SN1nDIEIZh8UGhWqUWBo1YHcDYvgcK1MwRk9oTs4&gsc=-Odk8QsAAADnMfmBZJ8X8ZQK18fO34dy

In any event, even if Oswald bought his Coke out of the soda machine
on the second floor, he still would have had enough time, IMO, to
travel the distance from his sixth-floor sniper's perch to the second-
floor lunchroom and purchase a Coke from the vending machine before he
encountered Officer Baker. And that's because it's highly doubtful
that Lee Harvey Oswald was merely "walking" from the sixth floor to
the lunchroom.

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

RELATED "SODA POP" LINKS:

LEE HARVEY OSWALD, MARRION BAKER, ROY TRULY, AND THE COCA-COLA:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/9213fb839278ac33

DR. PEPPER TALK:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/61f644cfaeee6415

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