"DIVERSIONARY" GUNSHOTS IN DEALEY PLAZA?
David Von Pein
>>> "The body was removed from the casket sometime while AF-1 was still on the ground, possibly during the swearing in of Johnson and while Mrs. Kennedy was in the front of the plane." <<<
So -- the "body thieves" somehow took JFK out of the bronze casket ON
BOARD THE AIRCRAFT, stuffed some other 170-pound "weight" in the
coffin, and waltzed out of the plane -- all without one single
solitary person on the tarmac at Love Field OR anyone ON THE PLANE
ITSELF noticing ANY of this odd activity. Correct or incorrect?
And the "tarmac" witnesses would include several press people and who
knows how many guards and USSS Agents who were by this time guarding
the plane with eyes peeled for strange occurrences, due to the fact
that LBJ and others suspected a possible "plot" of some kind, and
rightly so at this time, very shortly after JFK was killed. No one
knew it was just one lone stock clerk who did the shooting at this
time; so, obviously, security was VERY high around that Boeing 707 at
Love Field.
And the CTers, under this kind of stringent security, believe that a
team of pallbearers (with a second casket in tow) just walked on AF1
and swiped the body out from under everybody's noses. How believable
is this nonsense? Not even a sci-fi writer would write unbelievable
stuff like this.
To believe this silliness for even ONE SECOND requires a very, very
fertile imagination.
>>> "The military plane with the President's body departed an hour to an hour and a half BEFORE AF-1 took off for the return trip to Washington." <<<
You'd better change your "body stealing" timeline then.
Because: you cannot possibly have a second plane CARRYING THE STOLEN
BODY OF JFK taking off 1 to 1.5 HOURS BEFORE AF1 if the body was
stolen off of AF1.
Because: only 29 minutes elapsed between the time JFK's body was
placed on board AF1 (at 2:18 PM Dallas time) and the time AF1 took off
(at 2:47 PM).
So HOW can you possibly purport that a military plane carrying JFK
could have departed Dallas up to 90 minutes PRIOR to AF1?
>>> "The first sound came from the rear, some described it as a "firecracker" sound. This is known as a diversion, and the "logic" of it is to get the security men, the SS and the DPD to look to the rear while the real shots are fired from the front." <<<
Your "logic" is "illogical" based on the MAIN PURPOSE of any
conspiracy in the JFK murder -- with this MAIN (#1) purpose obviously
being: "KILL JFK AT ALL COSTS -- HE CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO ESCAPE
ALIVE".
Right? Right.
Therefore, these silly low-powered, non-fatal "diversionary" shots
would never have been used in a "Must Kill" case like this -- because
(obviously) it allows the victim to possibly get out of the way of the
LATER kill shot -- which is just stupid on the part of the Killing
Team.
Not to mention these "other" frontal shots are dumb from a "Patsy" POV
as well. Firing ALL shots from Oswald's window is THE ONLY POSSIBLE
WAY to have utilized a Patsy scenario and have it succeed. Using two
or three OTHER gunmen in a "Pin it all on one Patsy" plan is just
plain .... let's face it folks ... Dumb!
>>> "The low powered shots were only to the back and the throat, the head shots were high velocity. The fact that back and throat wounds were created by lower velocity bullets (because [they] never left the body), and the head shots were obviously made by high-powered rifles, indicates multiple weapons and thus multiple shooters in the assassination of JFK." <<<
And it also indicates (as stated previously) a "suicide" mission on
the part of the shooters. It's just stupid to use up precious seconds
by firing non-lethal, dum-dum rounds into JFK's neck & back, while the
Kill Shot comes several seconds later (with the interim time,
possibly, being used by the USSS to protect their charge).
The fact that the USSS did NOT protect their charge quickly during
these seconds between shots is NOT an excuse either. The PRE-11/22
plan by these crack shooters SHOULD have anticipated EVERY contingency
and should have accounted for a QUICK reaction to those useless, non-
lethal shots. Which, in itself, complicates the plotters' plan (and
ultimate success thereof) considerably -- to the point of rendering
those weak-sister FIRST SHOTS completely foolish and unwanted.
David Von Pein
January 3, 2005
David Von Pein
GIL JESUS SAID:
>>> "It could have been switched at Love Field, arriving there about an hour prior to its "official" arrival at 2:18." <<<
DAVID VON PEIN THEN SAID:
Huh? What in the world are you talking about here? Are you claiming
the two "hearses" rendezvoused somewhere in an airplane hangar; moved
the body to the shipping casket; then the bronze casket (weighed down
with ????) proceeded to AF1?
All of this would have occurred, you realize, with MRS. KENNEDY IN THE
HEARSE while her husband's body is being switched from one coffin to
the other. Ridiculous!
You're making up unsupportable theories as you type. Inexcusable!
>>> "You also ASSUME that there were "tarmac witnesses" including the press, but in fact the press and public were not allowed anywhere near AF-1 after the shooting. The area around AF-1 was sealed off." <<<
Sure it was "sealed off"; but some pictures STILL exist of AF1 at this
time. And, yes, of course, I "assume" there were at least SOME tarmac
witnesses. Because there were. There HAD to have been. Guards,
bystanders looking beyond fences, anyone. Do you REALLY think it was a
GHOST TOWN (populated by ZERO people) surrounding that highly-guarded
aircraft at Love Field? There HAD to have been people around the
plane; and they certainly WOULD have seen a SECOND casket go on board;
or a casket coming OFF the plane.
>>> "But the casket switch could also have easily been done at Parkland." <<<
Now you're back-pedaling with both feet. You say it was done at Love
Field one minute; now maybe it was Parkland.
But, obviously, if the body was NEVER in the bronze casket that was
placed on AF1, there would be NO REASON for the so-called "pink"
casket to ever be loaded on the plane...right? Why would the plotters
be silly enough to do that, if no body needed to be "switched"?
>>> "But no one ever opened it or was allowed to open it until it reached Bethesda..." <<<
WHY on Earth WOULD it be opened? Why would it NEED to be opened
between Dallas & Washington? Answer -- There was NO reason for anyone
to have opened the coffin at this time. None. So your "not allowed to
open" argument is moot -- because no one would have had ANY NEED to
open it at any time prior to reaching Bethesda.
>>> "Your next boobery, your assumption that low-powered bullets would not be used in a "kill" situation is laughable. In the previous three Presidential assassinations, all three Presidents were killed by handguns and were killed at point blank range." <<<
What a ridiculous argument this is! For if these previous
assassinations were done at "point-blank" range, then (obviously) a
"handgun" would have been quite efficient ENOUGH to get the job done
at that close range!
But the JFK case isn't comparable at all, and you know it. The
shooters would ALL have had "scoped" weapons (rifles); and they would
have all been HIGH-powered weapons to cover the distances to the
target on the street. The use of low-powered weapons is, IMO, totally
foolish in this NON-POINT-BLANK shooting.
>>> "Mr. Von Pein: You really have no idea about anything. You are sir, a bore." <<<
Thank you. I'll take that as a compliment. I would expect to "bore"
someone (like yourself) who is now changing his story from one minute
to the next. I'm sticking by the WR, true. But your "varying"
scenarios are truly pathetic -- lacking ANY solid credible, hard
evidence to back up ANY of it (other than your own beliefs -- and even
those wobble around like a marble on a tile floor -- they're all over
the freakin' place, just like most other Conspiracy Theories as well).
You couldn't care less that there is no solid evidence to back up the
"casket/body-switching" scenarios. The mere fact it's in your brain as
having happened is obviously good enough -- even though none of it
fits "together", logically. And never mind the tiny fact that the
"body stealing" couldn't possibly have been accomplished without some
non-plotters seeing this activity -- that apparently has no bearing
whatsoever. Pitiable.
In short -- There is absolutely no possible way for the CTers to get
from Point A (JFK lying on a table at Parkland at 1:00 PM) to Point B
(JFK lying on a table at Bethesda with "altered wounds") without using
a great deal of CT imagination and a limitless leap of faith with
regard to the details of just HOW the dead President went from "Point
A" to "Point B". *
* = Mainly because: Not a single solitary person has ever backed-up
the "casket/body-switching" theories at any time since 1963. All there
is, therefore, is pure CT conjecture to make the "A to B" connection.
And NOTHING more.
David Von Pein
>>> "I think that a good reason to shoot JFK with low powered shots first would be to increase the odds of a mortal wound and also to incapacitate him, so that he could not take cover after the first rifle shot." <<<
LOL! Like a "First Kill (Head) Shot" wouldn't have done the job of
incapacitating him??
Just fire the KILL SHOT immediately and be done with it. Needlessly
complicating and clogging the works with ANY unneeded, non-fatal shots
would be foolish.
>>> "Oswald lasted two days, and may not have shot anyone." <<<
More foolish behavior on the part of your high-level, strong-arming,
unstoppable conspirators. -- To allow Oswald to live for TEN MINUTES,
if a conspiracy of this nature was taking place, after waltzing out
the front door of the Texas School Book Depository Building, is
totally illogical (esp. if you feel that the conspirators had planned
to plug Oswald at some point ANYWAY).
A plan of this nature would have had Oswald eliminated a minute & a
half after leaving 411 Elm Street, and could very easily have been
accomplished (as Oswald walked the city streets after the JFK
killing). Or, better still for the plotters, "stage" Oswald's
"suicide" right there in the Sniper's Nest. If these guys were smart
enough to (somehow) set up LHO as a lone "patsy" (using MULTIPLE
gunmen), then "setting up" a fake suicide inside the TSBD should be a
piece of cake. *
* = And Oswald's background would STILL, of course, have come to the
forefront (implicating him in the crime), along with every other fact
(i.e.: he owned the rifle; he was seen with package that morning; he
left his ring and $170 on the dresser; he would soon be the prime
suspect in the Edwin Walker shooting; etc.).
And to think that a mob "hit" (on NATL. TV!) would be better for these
conspirators than rubbing out LHO in a "quieter" fashion (with no
cameras rolling) is to believe in the ultimate fantasy.
What could POSSIBLY have been MORE SUSPICIOUS-LOOKING than what
occurred in that basement on Nov. 24th?
>>> "...would be to increase the odds of a mortal wound..." <<<
INCREASE the odds?! Surely you jest.
Such a non-fatal shot could only have decreased (significantly) the
odds of getting a kill shot, for it gave the victim the extra TIME to
escape the fatal blow (either on his OWN, or via the USSS, or Jackie
pulling him down possibly).
Such a non-fatal blow MIGHT have also resulted in knocking down JFK,
putting him in a position where a later, FATAL blow would be
impossible to achieve.
INCREASE the odds????
Heavens to Betsy, what backward and oddball thinking!
David Von Pein
January 4, 2005
David Von Pein
>>> "It seems to me that firing a shot from the front at the early stage of the shooting sequence would fly in the face of what they were trying to accomplish here." <<<
Indeed. There's is no way any "Patsy" plan would have included ANY
frontal shooters. It's just plain suicide if any frontal guns go off
with such a "patsy" plan in place.
If the Oswald "lookalike" sniper didn't get the job done with his
allowable shots -- so be it. As many CTers probably believe anyway,
they'd have killed him somewhere else if not in Dallas -- and Dallas
would have been similar to "plots" that failed in Chicago and Miami
earlier in 1963, right? And Oswald certainly wasn't going to be
implicated in THOSE earlier "plans/plots".
Which begs another question -- If multiple "plans" were set in motion
in other cities, has anybody ever wondered who was being set up as the
"Patsies" in those other cities' plans?
Did these conspirators have an "Oswald" in each and every city of the
country?
Furthermore -- ANY "professional hit" on JFK most certainly would
NEVER have even been ATTEMPTED on the crowded streets of a major city
(like Dallas, or Miami, etc.).
There would have been so many OTHER, alternative ways to get their
man. So, what do they do? -- They kill JFK (per CTers) in the middle
of a crowded city, with 30 cameras filming all the action! You'd
almost have to believe they WANTED to have the plot spoiled from the
get-go to believe such reckless planning.
David Von Pein
January 6, 2005
www.amazon.com/DVP's-ASSESSMENT-OF-BUGLIOSI's-RECLAIMING-HISTORY/review/RZD82270D69E8
robcap...@netscape.com
> www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=3&topic_id=...
>
> >>> "It seems to me that firing a shot from the front at the early stage of the shooting sequence would fly in the face of what they were trying to accomplish here." <<<
"Indeed. There's is no way any "Patsy" plan would have included ANY
frontal shooters. It's just plain suicide if any frontal guns go off
with such a "patsy" plan in place."
How does accomplishing their mission "fly in the face" with the
shooting sequence? I'm not sure why this "other person" has an issue
with in regards to an early frontal shot, as this is why DP was
perfect as it made a triangulation of fire quite easy.
"If the Oswald "lookalike" sniper didn't get the job done with his
allowable shots -- so be it. As many CTers probably believe anyway,
they'd have killed him somewhere else if not in Dallas -- and Dallas
would have been similar to "plots" that failed in Chicago and Miami
earlier in 1963, right? And Oswald certainly wasn't going to be
implicated in THOSE earlier "plans/plots"."
Dallas was one of the last, if NOT the last good chance before the
1964 election season kicked off as most presidents limit their travel
during the holiday season (Thanksgiving to New Year's). This was a
key part of the plot, eliminate him prior to the election starting in
earnest in 1964. There were other plots, but NOT every city in the
U.S. had the people in place to pull it off. One city was well setup
with rogue Cubans and CIA backed groups - Los Angeles - and it is
ironic another Kennedy would meet his end there.
"Which begs another question -- If multiple "plans" were set in motion
in other cities, has anybody ever wondered who was being set up as the
"Patsies" in those other cities' plans?"
They did have patsies in place, I read the name of the guy allegedly
picked out for Los Angeles, can't remember now but can look it up - he
owned a bookstore - if that was where it happened. Do you think LHO
was the only agent they had in the whole country they could setup?
"Did these conspirators have an "Oswald" in each and every city of the
country?"
Maybe, maybe not, most likely in key areas where they had other
ingredients in place (i.e. Cubans, mobsters, etc...)
"Furthermore -- ANY "professional hit" on JFK most certainly would
NEVER have even been ATTEMPTED on the crowded streets of a major city
(like Dallas, or Miami, etc.)."
How do you know this? Dallas was not a top 50 city in 1963, yes it was
no small town, but it was not a New York or Chicago, or Los Angeles.
They also had the situation under control with the Gov. and Johnson
going along with things. The main point is when JFK's body was removed
from the state, the whole case was moot at that point according to
Texas law. They could never have tried LHO as it was NOT a federal
crime in 1963 to shoot a president, and the removal of the body passed
the jurisdiction to the FBI, which did not have the rightful, legal
ownership of the crime. This is why the many mistakes by the
"investigators" really don't amount to a hill of beans as they knew
none of them would ever be brought to justice.
"There would have been so many OTHER, alternative ways to get their
man. So, what do they do? -- They kill JFK (per CTers) in the middle
of a crowded city, with 30 cameras filming all the action! You'd
almost have to believe they WANTED to have the plot spoiled from the
get-go to believe such reckless planning."
You have never pondered perhaps this is EXACTLY the way the wanted to
get the man, huh? A public murder, the V.P. a few cars back, other
dignataries there to witness the crime, a brutal crime that sent the
message they wanted to be sent, never thought of that, huh? True,
they did not foresee so many movie cameras and regular cameras as they
did try to limit this as they put the press vehicle way back when it
was always in close proximity to the Presiden't vehicle in all other
motorcades. But this only helped in the long run as the visual image
of JFK's death was a great warning to all who followed what happens
when you don't play ball they way the power groups want. The plot was
NEVER in jeopardy of being spoiled as you had some of the most
powerful groups in the world involved, and you had the law broken by
the removal of JFK's body, thus they were never in any danger.
> David Von Pein
> January 6, 2005
>
> www.amazon.com/DVP's-ASSESSMENT-OF-BUGLIOSI's-RECLAIMING-HISTORY/revi...
Ben Holmes
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On May 18, 2:01=A0am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>> www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=3Dshow_topic&forum=3D3&topic_id=
>=3D...
>>
>> >>> "It seems to me that firing a shot from the front at the early stage o=
>f the shooting sequence would fly in the face of what they were trying to ac=
In both Tampa and Dallas attempts, officials were looking for a
young man in his early twenties, white with a slender build, who
had been in recent contact with a small pro-Castro group called
the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. In Dallas, that man was Lee
Harvey Oswald, but in Tampa, he was Gilberto Policarpo Lopez,
who, like Oswald, was a former "defector" to Russia. Lopez
*also* made a trip to Mexico, attempting to get to Cuba. Like
Oswald, Lopez was also of interest to Naval Intelligence.
Interestingly, unconfirmed newspaper stories put Lopez in Dallas
the day JFK died... looks like another "patsy" was available if
needed - for example, if Oswald had an unshakable alibi that
couldn't be covered up.
robcap...@netscape.com
> In article <12402896-1557-4754-8dab-468ec9ac9...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On May 18, 2:01=A0am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
Good info Ben.
> >>www.amazon.com/DVP's-ASSESSMENT-OF-BUGLIOSI's-RECLAIMING-HISTORY/revi...- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
YoHarvey
wrote:
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
roflmao, roflmao, roflmao
Ben Holmes
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On May 18, 11:42=A0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com> wrote:
>> In article <12402896-1557-4754-8dab-468ec9ac9...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.=
>com>,
>> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On May 18, 2:01=3DA0am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >>www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=3D3Dshow_topic&forum=3D3D3&topi=
>c...
>> >=3D3D...
>>
>> >> >>> "It seems to me that firing a shot from the front at the early stag=
>e o=3D
>> >f the shooting sequence would fly in the face of what they were trying to=
> ac=3D
>> >complish here." <<<
>>
>> >"Indeed. There's is no way any "Patsy" plan would have included ANY
>> >frontal shooters. It's just plain suicide if any frontal guns go off
>> >with such a "patsy" plan in place."
>>
>> >How does accomplishing their mission "fly in the face" with the
>> >with in regards to an early frontal shot, as this is why DP was
>> >perfect as it made a triangulation of fire quite easy.
>>
>> >"If the Oswald "lookalike" sniper didn't get the job done with his
>> >allowable shots -- so be it. As many CTers probably believe anyway,
>> >they'd have killed him somewhere else if not in Dallas -- and Dallas
>> >would have been similar to "plots" that failed in Chicago and Miami
>> >earlier in 1963, right? And Oswald certainly wasn't going to be
>> >implicated in THOSE earlier "plans/plots"."
>>
>> >Dallas was one of the last, if NOT the last good chance before the
>> >1964 election season kicked off as most presidents limit their travel
>> >key part of the plot, eliminate him prior to the election starting in
>> >U.S. had the people in place to pull it off. =A0One city was well setup
>> >with rogue Cubans and CIA backed groups - Los Angeles - and it is
>> >ironic another Kennedy would meet his end there.
>>
>> >"Which begs another question -- If multiple "plans" were set in motion
>> >in other cities, has anybody ever wondered who was being set up as the
>> >"Patsies" in those other cities' plans?"
>>
>
>"In both Tampa and Dallas attempts, officials were looking for a young
>man in his early twenties, white with a slender build, who had been in
>recent contact with a small pro-Castro group called the Fair Play for
>Cuba Committee. In Dallas, that man was Lee Harvey Oswald, but in
>Tampa, he was Gilberto Policarpo Lopez,
>who, like Oswald, was a former "defector" to Russia. Lopez *also*
>made a trip to Mexico, attempting to get to Cuba. Like Oswald, Lopez
>was also of interest to Naval Intelligence.
>
>Interestingly, unconfirmed newspaper stories put Lopez in Dallas the
>day JFK died... looks like another "patsy" was available if needed -
>for example, if Oswald had an unshakable alibi that couldn't be
>covered up."
>
>
>Good info Ben.
Wasn't any research of mine... it came from "Ultimate Sacrifice," if I recall
correctly.
How about the assassination plot against Jimmy Carter... by Raymond Lee Harvey
and Osvaldo Espinoza Ortiz?
>> >They did have patsies in place, I read the name of the guy allegedly
>> >picked out for Los Angeles, can't remember now but can look it up - he
>> >owned a bookstore - if that was where it happened. =A0Do you think LHO
>> >was the only agent they had in the whole country they could setup?
>>
>> >"Did these conspirators have an "Oswald" in each and every city of the
>> >country?"
>>
>> >Maybe, maybe not, most likely in key areas where they had other
>> >ingredients in place (i.e. Cubans, mobsters, etc...)
>>
>> >"Furthermore -- ANY "professional hit" on JFK most certainly would
>> >NEVER have even been ATTEMPTED on the crowded streets of a major city
>> >(like Dallas, or Miami, etc.)."
>>
>> >How do you know this? Dallas was not a top 50 city in 1963, yes it was
>> >no small town, but it was not a New York or Chicago, or Los Angeles.
>> >They also had the situation under control with the Gov. and Johnson
>> >going along with things. The main point is when JFK's body was removed
>> >from the state, the whole case was moot at that point according to
>> >Texas law. =A0They could never have tried LHO as it was NOT a federal
>> >crime in 1963 to shoot a president, and the removal of the body passed
>> >the jurisdiction to the FBI, which did not have the rightful, legal
>> >ownership of the crime. This is why the many mistakes by the
>> >"investigators" really don't amount to a hill of beans as they knew
>> >none of them would ever be brought to justice.
>>
>> >"There would have been so many OTHER, alternative ways to get their
>> >man. So, what do they do? -- They kill JFK (per CTers) in the middle
>> >of a crowded city, with 30 cameras filming all the action! You'd
>> >almost have to believe they WANTED to have the plot spoiled from the
>> >get-go to believe such reckless planning."
>>
>> >You have never pondered perhaps this is EXACTLY the way the wanted to
>> >get the man, huh? =A0A public murder, the V.P. a few cars back, other
>> >dignataries there to witness the crime, a brutal crime that sent the
>> >message they wanted to be sent, never thought of that, huh? =A0True,
>> >they did not foresee so many movie cameras and regular cameras as they
>> >did try to limit this as they put the press vehicle way back when it
>> >was always in close proximity to the Presiden't vehicle in all other
>> >motorcades. But this only helped in the long run as the visual image
>> >of JFK's death was a great warning to all who followed what happens
>> >when you don't play ball they way the power groups want. =A0The plot was
>> >NEVER in jeopardy of being spoiled as you had some of the most
>> >powerful groups in the world involved, and you had the law broken by
>> >the removal of JFK's body, thus they were never in any danger.
>>
>> >> David Von Pein
>> >> January 6, 2005
>>
>> >>www.amazon.com/DVP's-ASSESSMENT-OF-BUGLIOSI's-RECLAIMING-HISTORY/revi...=
robcap...@netscape.com
> In article <06a7c1b9-a09d-420c-8960-400a769a0...@24g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On May 18, 11:42=A0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com> wrote:
> >> In article <12402896-1557-4754-8dab-468ec9ac9...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.=
> >com>,
> >> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
> >> >On May 18, 2:01=3DA0am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
I have only heard the very basics of this, any info you provide would
be appreciated.
Ben Holmes
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On May 19, 9:53=A0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com> wrote:
>> In article <06a7c1b9-a09d-420c-8960-400a769a0...@24g2000hsh.googlegroups.c=
>om>,
>> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On May 18, 11:42=3DA0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com> wrote:
>> >> In article <12402896-1557-4754-8dab-468ec9ac9...@x41g2000hsb.googlegrou=
>ps.=3D
>> >com>,
>> >> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>>
>> >> >On May 18, 2:01=3D3DA0am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >> >>www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=3D3D3Dshow_topic&forum=3D3D3=
>D3&t...
>> >c...
>> >> >=3D3D3D...
>>
>> >> >> >>> "It seems to me that firing a shot from the front at the early s=
>tag=3D
>> >e o=3D3D
>> >> >f the shooting sequence would fly in the face of what they were trying=
> to=3D
>> > ac=3D3D
>> >> >complish here." <<<
>>
>> >> >"Indeed. There's is no way any "Patsy" plan would have included ANY
>> >> >frontal shooters. It's just plain suicide if any frontal guns go off
>> >> >with such a "patsy" plan in place."
>>
>> >> >How does accomplishing their mission "fly in the face" with the
>sue
>> >> >with in regards to an early frontal shot, as this is why DP was
>> >> >perfect as it made a triangulation of fire quite easy.
>>
>> >> >"If the Oswald "lookalike" sniper didn't get the job done with his
>> >> >allowable shots -- so be it. As many CTers probably believe anyway,
>> >> >they'd have killed him somewhere else if not in Dallas -- and Dallas
>> >> >would have been similar to "plots" that failed in Chicago and Miami
>> >> >earlier in 1963, right? And Oswald certainly wasn't going to be
>> >> >implicated in THOSE earlier "plans/plots"."
>>
>> >> >Dallas was one of the last, if NOT the last good chance before the
>> >> >1964 election season kicked off as most presidents limit their travel
>a
>> >> >key part of the plot, eliminate him prior to the election starting in
>e
>> >> >U.S. had the people in place to pull it off. =3DA0One city was well se=
>tup
>> >> >with rogue Cubans and CIA backed groups - Los Angeles - and it is
>> >> >ironic another Kennedy would meet his end there.
>>
>
>> >> >in other cities, has anybody ever wondered who was being set up as the=
>
>> >> >"Patsies" in those other cities' plans?"
>>
>> >"In both Tampa and Dallas attempts, officials were looking for a young
>> >man in his early twenties, white with a slender build, who had been in
>> >recent contact with a small pro-Castro group called the Fair Play for
>> >Cuba Committee. In Dallas, that man was Lee Harvey Oswald, but in
>> >Tampa, he was Gilberto Policarpo Lopez,
>> >who, like Oswald, was a former "defector" to Russia. Lopez *also*
>> >made a trip to Mexico, attempting to get to Cuba. Like Oswald, Lopez
>> >was also of interest to Naval Intelligence.
>>
>> >Interestingly, unconfirmed newspaper stories put Lopez in Dallas the
>> >day JFK died... looks like another "patsy" was available if needed -
>> >for example, if Oswald had an unshakable alibi that couldn't be
>> >covered up."
>>
>> >Good info Ben.
>>
>all
>> correctly.
>>
>
>"How about the assassination plot against Jimmy Carter... by Raymond
>Lee Harvey
>and Osvaldo Espinoza Ortiz?"
>
>I have only heard the very basics of this, any info you provide would
>be appreciated.
The story can be found in the May 21st 1979 issue of Newsweek... page 34.
Perhaps later this week I can type the whole story into a post for those
interested. I believe that there's also a thread over on the Education Forum
about this - you can probably locate it by going to the JFK section of the
Education forum, and searching for Carter, or the two names I mentioned...
>> >> >They did have patsies in place, I read the name of the guy allegedly
>> >> >picked out for Los Angeles, can't remember now but can look it up - he=
>
>> >> >owned a bookstore - if that was where it happened. =3DA0Do you think L=
>HO
>> >> >was the only agent they had in the whole country they could setup?
>>
>> >> >"Did these conspirators have an "Oswald" in each and every city of the=
>
>> >> >country?"
>>
>> >> >Maybe, maybe not, most likely in key areas where they had other
>> >> >ingredients in place (i.e. Cubans, mobsters, etc...)
>>
>> >> >"Furthermore -- ANY "professional hit" on JFK most certainly would
>> >> >NEVER have even been ATTEMPTED on the crowded streets of a major city
>> >> >(like Dallas, or Miami, etc.)."
>>
>> >> >How do you know this? Dallas was not a top 50 city in 1963, yes it was=
>
>> >> >no small town, but it was not a New York or Chicago, or Los Angeles.
>> >> >They also had the situation under control with the Gov. and Johnson
>> >> >going along with things. The main point is when JFK's body was removed=
>
>> >> >from the state, the whole case was moot at that point according to
>> >> >Texas law. =3DA0They could never have tried LHO as it was NOT a federa=
>l
>> >> >crime in 1963 to shoot a president, and the removal of the body passed=
>
>> >> >the jurisdiction to the FBI, which did not have the rightful, legal
>> >> >ownership of the crime. This is why the many mistakes by the
>> >> >"investigators" really don't amount to a hill of beans as they knew
>> >> >none of them would ever be brought to justice.
>>
>> >> >"There would have been so many OTHER, alternative ways to get their
>> >> >man. So, what do they do? -- They kill JFK (per CTers) in the middle
>> >> >of a crowded city, with 30 cameras filming all the action! You'd
>> >> >almost have to believe they WANTED to have the plot spoiled from the
>> >> >get-go to believe such reckless planning."
>>
>> >> >You have never pondered perhaps this is EXACTLY the way the wanted to
>> >> >get the man, huh? =3DA0A public murder, the V.P. a few cars back, othe=
>r
>> >> >dignataries there to witness the crime, a brutal crime that sent the
>> >> >message they wanted to be sent, never thought of that, huh? =3DA0True,=
>
>> >> >they did not foresee so many movie cameras and regular cameras as they=
>
>> >> >did try to limit this as they put the press vehicle way back when it
>> >> >was always in close proximity to the Presiden't vehicle in all other
>> >> >motorcades. But this only helped in the long run as the visual image
>> >> >of JFK's death was a great warning to all who followed what happens
>> >> >when you don't play ball they way the power groups want. =3DA0The plot=
> was
>> >> >NEVER in jeopardy of being spoiled as you had some of the most
>> >> >powerful groups in the world involved, and you had the law broken by
>> >> >the removal of JFK's body, thus they were never in any danger.
>>
>> >> >> David Von Pein
>> >> >> January 6, 2005
>>
>> >> >>www.amazon.com/DVP's-ASSESSMENT-OF-BUGLIOSI's-RECLAIMING-HISTORY/revi=
>...
aeffects
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> roflmao, roflmao, roflmao
nervous laugh, eh? Perhpas Justme1952 is spurning your advances? Told
ya, you old fart. You aren't prepared for 20 year old youngsters