MISC. JFK ASSASSINATION TALK
David Von Pein
>>> "The landlady of Oswald [it was actually the "housekeeper", not the "landlady"] reported on the day of the murder of JFK that Oswald returned home (to his room) at a certain time, was wearing certain clothing, left at a certain time, wearing certain clothing, and she described his mannerisms. All this testimony was accepted without question; however, she also stated a Dallas police car came up to the house just prior to Oswald's leaving and blew its horn. This testimony was not accepted. It was stated that the Dallas records did not show any police car in the area at that time. I don't get it. If they accepted the landlady's testimony on Oswald's time of arrival, and his time of leaving, his clothing and mannerisms why didn't they accept her testimony on the police car? This makes it look like the authorities were picking their evidence. What do you think?" <<<
Hi Alan Dale Daniel,
The Warren Commission was in a bit of a tough spot regarding some of
the witness testimony...I don't deny that fact. I.E., they had to sort
out the witness accounts that were probably true and reliable from
other testimony (sometimes coming from the very same witness) that was
not as reliable and therefore not likely to be very accurate.
And the WC came to the conclusion that it was very likely that Earlene
Roberts (the housekeeper at 1026 Beckley where Oswald was renting a
shoebox-sized room for $8 a week at the time of JFK's assassination)
was definitely telling the truth when she said that Lee Oswald came
into the roominghouse, in a hurry, at about 1 PM on 11/22/63. This is
almost as certain as certain can be--based on three other things too:
1.) The location where cab driver Bill Whaley dropped off his
passenger (Oswald), which was a mere 3 blocks away from 1026 Beckley.
2.) The fact that Oswald was definitely not wearing his gray zippered
jacket when he left the Book Depository at approx. 12:33 PM, but WAS
wearing it when he was seen killing Officer Tippit on Tenth Street at
approx. 1:15 PM.
3.) And Lee Oswald's own admission that he went back home after the
assassination. (It's not always a good idea to believe the accused
murderer when he says something, that's for sure....but in this case,
Oswald's "I went home" story is corroborated by Mrs. Roberts.)
But the WC decided Roberts was probably wrong about the police car
honking its horn when Oswald was inside his room for those very few
minutes on Nov. 22nd (btw, it's my personal opinion that Oswald wasn't
in that small room of his for any longer than 1 minute--tops; despite
Roberts' own estimate of "3 or 4 minutes"; no way he was in there up
to 4 minutes, IMO).
With respect to the horn-honking police car -- It must be kept in mind
that Mrs. Roberts testified that it was not unusual at all for a
police car to stop in front of the roominghouse and toot its horn. It
happened on multiple OTHER days, according to Roberts.
So even if such an occurrence DID take place on November 22nd, it
could be looked upon as a NORMAL occurrence, not an ABNORMAL or
unusual one.
Or do some conspiracy theorists think that the Dallas Police were so
shrewd in their advanced planning of the so-called "Frame-Up" of Lee
Harvey Oswald that they had a police car stop in front of 1026 N.
Beckley Avenue every so often in the weeks and/or months BEFORE the
assassination, just so the car could honk its horn in front of the
house...in order to make it look like an ordinary occurrence?
I'd like to know how the conspiracy theorists who think that a police
car was "signalling" to Oswald on November 22 can possibly explain
away the very same kind of horn-honking which took place at that exact
same residence on multiple OTHER days when Presidents WEREN'T being
murdered?
When we look at the horn-honking topic from that point-of-view, it
makes any 11/22 horn-honking incident seem much less sinister. And if
it WAS "sinister", then it's an awfully strange coincidence that the
horn was honked ("tip-tip", says Roberts) in the exact same manner in
which it was honked by other policemen on OTHER days prior to November
22nd. Wouldn't you agree?
>>> "When viewing photos of the JFK assassination I noted the car carrying Lyndon Johnson, which is right behind the Kennedy car, has secret service agents on the back (two) and two or three on each side." <<<
You're confusing JFK's Secret Service follow-up car with LBJ's car.
Johnson wasn't sitting in the car directly behind JFK's limo. LBJ's
car is behind JFK's Secret Service car. You can even see LBJ and Lady
Bird in the back seat of their rented Lincoln convertible in the
Altgens picture (linked below):
www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/images/Altgens.jpg
>>> "I have also been given to understand the route was changed just prior to the motorcade starting off. Is that true?" <<<
That's an enduring conspiracy myth, and is 100% false. More at the
link below:
WAS THE MOTORCADE ROUTE CHANGED AT THE LAST MINUTE?:
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/fbacd51dfe2f074c
David Von Pein
Great "Patsy Plot" there --- They try to frame Oswald by planting a
Mauser (which Oz didn't own)...and then plant bullets and shells from
Oswald's Carcano to further complicate the ridiculous "Patsy Plot"
that almost all CTers believe in.
The plotters must have all been smoking crack (in Dave Healy's
basement) at the time they mapped out that idiotic plan.
And then the unnamed "they" apparently performed EXACTLY the same kind
of gun-switching foolishness over on 10th Street too. Because per most
CT-Kooks I've talked with (you know, the morons who want Oz to be
innocent of the Tippit murder too, even with 13 witnesses there to
I.D. Ozzie ~shrug~)....those kooks have Tippit being killed by an
"automatic" pistol, but then (within a pre-determined "LET'S FRAME
OZZIE" plot remember) they decide to plant shells from Oswald's .38
S&W revolver.
Evidently the crack-smoking plotters thought that mass confusion
amongst the evidence would signal "No Conspiracy At All" to the
authorities looking into the case, and that this inconsistent evidence
would also somehow result in a situation where the cops would have no
choice but to pin it all on ONLY Lee Oswald.
Crazy.
Like I said, the plotters were all high.
David Von Pein
ON APRIL 17, 2008, AT 5:38 A.M. EASTERN DAYLIGHT TIME, A CONSPIRACY-
HAPPY KOOK NAMED DAVID G. HEALY WROTE THE FOLLOWING BATCH OF
INCOHERENT BABBLE (I suspect it was written immediately after
consuming another dose of mind-altering drugs):
>>> "That money in those Lone Nut bank accounts finally got to ya, eh? Chalk it up to not knowing your ass from a hole in the ground....show your disdain, become my assistant here....I'll show you how to oput [sic] together a few sentences [LARGE "LOL" REQUIRED AT THIS POINT IN THE KOOK'S RAMBLING, CONSIDERING THE BUILT-IN IRONY OF SUCH A STATEMENT!], the real way....the way you can make some mmoney [sic] and get out of that dreaded place called Indiana." <<<
I THEN RESPONDED (AS MR. VADER) 18 MINUTES LATER:
Healy must major in "Irony I Never See" there at Crackpipe Tech.
What's NOT to love about this kook? He can't possibly be for real.
(Can he?)
[Darth on:]
"Come with me [Healy-Kook], my son. I can show you the way to
the Dark Side [CTism]! Take my hand, Luke...er...I mean 'Von Pea
Brain'! The power of The Kook Force shall be with you! And I've got
lots and lots of needles too! New ones! No more dumpster-digging! No
more awaking in your own vomit! No more having to rely on the only
bullets in the case! You can be free to theorize with your father,
Luke! Free to think what you want to think! Free to see NO ZAPRUDER on
that pedestal! (And you'll get to wear black all the time too. It's a
great perk. Makes you look cool and studly.)"
[/Darth, my main heavy-breathing dude, off.]
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/7f529726a93cfc01
David Von Pein
>>> "Any ideas about why no men were on the back of the Kennedy car? Was that Secret Service practice? It just seems a bit odd to me. Perhaps Kennedy wanted it that way." <<<
Yes, it's been reported that JFK didn't like the SS agents riding on
the back of the car any more than was absolutely necessary.
Some conspiracy theorists like to think that the motorcade in Dallas
on 11/22/63 was totally different than ANY other previous JFK
motorcade with respect to Secret Service agents (not) riding the back
bumper of Kennedy's limo.
But this assumption is simply not true...and provably so by taking a
look at the following pre-Nov. 22 photos of JFK motorcades which
depict NO AGENTS riding the back bumper of Kennedy's vehicle (and NO
AGENTS even walking along side the car either). So WHY would anybody
expect anything different regarding the specific "ride the bumper"
procedures on Nov. 22nd?.....
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/Hawaii2.jpg
http://media.abqtrib.com/albq/content/img/photos/2007/03/15/031507_KENNEDY_t600.jpg
http://www.big13.net/JFK%20In%20Tampa/JFKMacDilldeparture.jpg
In addition, there's the following Warren Commission testimony from
Secret Service agent Clint Hill (who rode on the front-left running
board of the SS follow-up car in the Dallas motorcade):
ARLEN SPECTER -- "Did you have any other occasion en route from Love
Field to downtown Dallas to leave the followup car and mount that
[back bumper] portion of the President's car?"
CLINTON J. HILL -- "I did the same thing approximately four times."
MR. SPECTER -- "What are the standard regulations and practices, if
any, governing such an action on your part?"
MR. HILL -- "It is left to the agent's discretion more or less to move
to that particular position when he feels that there is a danger to
the President, to place himself as close to the President--or the
First Lady as my case was--as possible, which I did."
MR. SPECTER -- "Are those practices specified in any written documents
of the Secret Service?"
MR. HILL -- "No, they are not."
MR. SPECTER -- "Now, had there been any instruction or comment about
your performance of that type of a duty with respect to anything that
President Kennedy himself had said in the period immediately preceding
the trip to Texas?"
MR. HILL -- "Yes, sir; there was. The preceding Monday, the President
was on a trip in Tampa, Florida, and he requested that the agents not
ride on either of those two steps."
MR. SPECTER -- "And to whom did the President make that request?"
MR. HILL -- "Assistant Special Agent in Charge Boring."
aeffects
with yourself is cause for concern
David Von Pein
>>> "Does his {Gerald Posner's} single bullet theory make sense?" <<<
Yes. Of course. It's exactly the same SBT put on the table by the
Warren Commission (although Posner believes that the exact Z-Film SBT
frame can be established, as do I -- Z224).
>>> "And what about the exit wound on the back of Kennedy's head?" <<<
What exit wound on the back of JFK's head? There is none:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0061b.htm
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/be46d0872dbcf3c6
>>> "And what about all the alleged CIA connections with Oswald that I heard were proven and documented?" <<<
You heard wrong.
"Since it has been established beyond all doubt that Oswald
killed Kennedy, the conspiracy theorists who propound the idea of the
CIA being behind Oswald's act are necessarily starting out in a very
deep hole before they even take their first breath of air. This is so
because Oswald was a Marxist, and a Marxist being in league with U.S.
intelligence just doesn't ring true." -- Vince Bugliosi; Page 1195 of
"Reclaiming History" (c.2007)
www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/3200862-post.html
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/oswald.htm
>>> "What was Posner's motivation in writing this?" <<<
To reveal the real truth behind the assassination of President
Kennedy. What else?
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/1dfff254d0b191a2
David Von Pein
>>> "You've completely ignored how weak the chain of evidence for #399 is/was. The Dallas FBI office wouldn't vouch for it; Tomlinson and Wright wouldn't vouch for it and the FBI agent who is supposed to have interviewed Tomlinson and Wright, Bardwell Odum, wouldn't vouch for it, either. Nor did Odum say he'd even interviewed Tomlinson and Wright. He said: It never happened. Period." <<<
Then it was pretty gosh-darn stupid of the INSIDE PLOTTERS & COVER-
UPPERS (whoever the hell you think "they" were) to place a bullet into
evidence that those plotters MUST SURELY HAVE KNOWN WASN'T GOING TO BE
IDENTIFIED BY THE WITNESSES AS THE REAL STRETCHER BULLET.
Wouldn't you agree, Gary?
BTW, who were the people who failed to receive that all-inclusive
"We're Framing Oswald" memo on 11/22 and in the days and weeks prior
to 11/22, Gary? --- Odum? Rowley? Frazier? Todd? Didn't the plotters
KNOW they had placed into evidence a bullet that looked NOTHING like
the real stretcher bullet?
In other words, why not just simply sweep the "pointy" bullet under
the rug (like CT-Kooks believe DID happen with the "real" pointy-nosed
stretcher bullet and with scads of other assassination evidence too,
like the several OTHER "real" bullets that CTers think hit JFK & JBC
by multiple non-Oswald guns but were never seen by human eyes after
the shooting), instead of performing the asinine mistake of switching
bullets and replacing it with a bullet that "they" (i.e., the
proverbial and always-unnamed plotters/conspirators) had to know would
never be IDed as the real stretcher bullet?
Did the bullet-switchers merely assume that Tomlinson and Wright (et
al) would lie their asses off and say that 399 WAS the bullet they
saw, even though (per CTers) it definitely wasn't?
Which reminds me of an interesting point that I don't think anyone's
ever brought up before --- Why didn't the evil conspirators who were
orchestrating this supposed "multi-gun, one-patsy" assassination plot
bother to "plant" the appropriate number of bullet shells under
Oswald's window THAT WOULD PERFECTLY MATCH THE "REAL" NUMBER OF SHOTS
FIRED THAT DAY BY ALL SHOOTERS?
Seems to me that should have been done...instead of planting only
three shells in the window. Did these boob plotters think that the
additional 2, 3, 4, or more gunshots from all those non-Oswald guns
would not be heard by anybody among the 300+ witnesses in and near
Dealey Plaza?
Or maybe these goofs just didn't give a damn that they were firing
TWICE the number of total shots at JFK that could have been fired by
Oswald (per Oliver Stone's flick), so they only bothered planting 3
shells, and just hoped against hope that all or most of the witnesses
would say they heard just three shots fired (which, of course, DID
happen, with virtually all witnesses [90%+] hearing three or fewer
shots). Lucky plotters indeed. ....
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/shots3.jpg
Anyway, the whole idea of planting and/or switching the stretcher
bullet is loony on EVERY front...even from a CT front.
Why can't you see that fact?
==============================================
TOO MANY CE399 BULLET FRAGMENTS IN JOHN CONNALLY? HARDLY:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/7bf79593cce78406
IF CE399 DIDN'T WOUND CONNALLY, WHAT BULLET DID?:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/f90802d6225a380e
==============================================
aeffects
setting up your own comments and questions, then responding/answering
your own postings is so unbecoming, David Von Pein.... sigh....
...Lone Nut have sunk to talking to themselves? More bad PR, David Von
Pein
robcap...@netscape.com
> >>> "I'm not here to speculate, just to analyze the facts, which tell me that a roomful of Dallas's finest would not mistake a German rifle for an Italian rifle. It's not like they had to ID the weapon from the sound of a richochet or something, they had the thing in their hands." <<<
"Great "Patsy Plot" there --- They try to frame Oswald by planting a
Mauser (which Oz didn't own)...and then plant bullets and shells from
Oswald's Carcano to further complicate the ridiculous "Patsy Plot"
that almost all CTers believe in."
Poor DVP logic yet again. Who said they planted the Mauser to frame
LHO? It was used in the assassination and was NOT supposed to be
found for examination, but some poor schmuck uncovered it anyway. IT
is impossible to confuse the two because the Carcano had "Maid in
Italy" and "6.5 MM" stamped on it. Were the DPD officers blind too?
"The plotters must have all been smoking crack (in Dave Healy's
basement) at the time they mapped out that idiotic plan."
Who knows, but they were NOT supposed to find the Mauser, but the
Carcano was left on the 4th or 5th floor by accident in all
liklihood.
"And then the unnamed "they" apparently performed EXACTLY the same
kind of gun-switching foolishness over on 10th Street too. Because per
most CT-Kooks I've talked with (you know, the morons who want Oz to be
innocent of the Tippit murder too, even with 13 witnesses there to
I.D. Ozzie ~shrug~)....those kooks have Tippit being killed by an
"automatic" pistol, but then (within a pre-determined "LET'S FRAME
OZZIE" plot remember) they decide to plant shells from Oswald's .38
S&W revolver."
"They" are unnamed because the fine DPD and FBI did NO investigation
to find who "they" were. Why was it a gun switch? The Mauser was
used and the Carcano was brought along for a plant, but the DPD's
finest found the Mauser first without knowing they weren't supposed to
find it. It is NOT a matter of wanting LHO to be innocent, Dave never
gets this point, it is what the physical evidence the WC put forth
shows.
"Evidently the crack-smoking plotters thought that mass confusion
amongst the evidence would signal "No Conspiracy At All" to the
authorities looking into the case, and that this inconsistent evidence
would also somehow result in a situation where the cops would have no
choice but to pin it all on ONLY Lee Oswald."
Dave is making light of this, but in all reality the shooters' main
goal was killing JFK, they hastily planted incrminating evidence
against LHO, but they did not do a perfect job. But it was of little
consequence as they knew the forces behind the plot controlled the
investigation and autopsy, thus, all would work out in the end.
"Crazy."
The only thing crazy is believing LHO is guilty based on the crappy
evidence the WC put forth.
"Like I said, the plotters were all high."
No, they knew they would control the investigation.
David Von Pein
FYI for Rob (The ABO Moron),
You can stop replying to my posts at any time, Rob-Kook. Over the last
several weeks, I have read through very few (if any) of your ABO
responses to my posts.
So, don't feel obligated to respond just on my behalf, because you're
wasting your time--precious time that could be used to invent one
additional conspiracy-tinged theory that doesn't involve Lee H. Oswald
as a culprit in the two murders he committed in '63.
Perhaps, though, the one "lurker" per month who wanders into the
asylum (by accident) will enjoy the multiplicity of belly-laughs that
inevitably ensue after reading any of your "Anybody But Ozzie"
garbage.
But I stopped reading your trash weeks ago, mainly because you
provided me with more than enough easy-to-refute conspiracy-flavored
junk during your first few months here at the nuthouse. In fact, as I
told this aggregation previously, Robcap is practically an "LNer's
dream come true", i.e., he's so incredibly WRONG about virtually every
single thing he says and believes regarding the JFK assassination,
he's very nearly a perfect over-the-top "ABO" (Anybody But Oswald)
"caricature" and microcosm of all the many different ABO Kooks who
have preceded him into Forums/Asylums like this one (or onto
bookshelves around the world).
I have considered myself very fortunate indeed when confronted with a
kook who (after SUPPOSEDLY having a grasp of the actual evidence in
the JFK and Tippit double-murder case) actually had the 'nads to say
the following with a straight face and sans any embarrassment at all
(evidently) --- "LHO shot no one that day" ["Robcap"; 10/22/2007]
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/cb6da7263046ee6a
What LNer WOULDN'T love the opportunity to expose the idiocy of a
person who has the gall and the lack of common sense to write the
silly words "LHO shot no one that day" (with Nov. 22, 1963, being
"that day", of course)?
I've often felt, as I've also said previously, that "Robcap" is quite
possibly not "for real" when it comes to his grossly "over-the-top"
type of ABO assassination opinions. OTOH, he could be "for real" (aka:
a complete Mega-Kook of the First Order), but it's truly difficult to
believe that ANYBODY would have deliberately placed themselves THAT
far down into the CT Abyss of Absurdity.
However, you never can tell when you're dealing with a kooky CTer
mindset. So, I'll continue to remain "on the fence" regarding whether
Robby is the "real kook deal" or not.
But at least Rob has provided me with a good opportunity to build up
my archive of CT-bashing posts (starting in late October 2007 when
Robby started posting his outrageous ABO inanities, ad nauseam).
So, I thank him for his absurd ABO type of posts, because it afforded
me ample chances to electronically bash him over the head with the
real evidence in the case, time and time again....only to receive the
same type of ABO response as a retort (time and time again), such as
when Robby took audacity to new heights of laughable absurdity when he
actually had the balls to say this to me on January 30, 2008 --- "Your
long-winded posts NEVER have ANY real evidence in them!" [Emphasis is
via the original post written by Rob-Kook, linked below.]
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/72b5c284fa37598d
Your Honor, I think it's quite obvious that Mr. Robcap has snapped his
(rob)cap, as that last quote fully demonstrates beyond all reasonable
doubt.
I rest my case.
========================
KOOK BONUS! --------
HERE'S AN "INSTANT REPLAY" POST COPIED BELOW (ACTUALLY A RE-POST OF A
RE-POST), HIGHLIGHTING (ONCE AGAIN) WHAT AN UNBELIEVABLE KOOK MR.
"ROBCAP" IS, OR AT LEAST WHAT A KOOK HE'S CURRENTLY PRETENDING TO BE
AT ANY RATE. ENJOY IT. I KNOW I DO, EVERY TIME I READ IT. .....
========================
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/d59adb8ececbf653
IT'S ALWAYS A GOOD IDEA TO REMIND THE C.T.-KOOKS ON A REGULAR BASIS
THAT THEY REALLY ARE KOOKS, AND ALSO BEAT THEM OVER THE HEAD WITH THE
ACTUAL EVIDENCE IN THE KENNEDY CASE AS OFTEN AS POSSIBLE...EVIDENCE
THAT THE KOOKS THINK WAS (SOMEHOW) ALL "FAKED".
THE FOLLOWING IS A RE-POST FROM A SESSION I HAD WITH A CONSPIRACY KOOK
NAMED "ROB" IN LATE 2007. A QUINTESSENTIAL "NOTHING IS WHAT IT SEEMS
TO BE" KOOK, ROB KEPT COMING BACK FOR MORE, AND WAS BEATEN BACK INTO
THE WOODS EACH TIME (WITH THE EVIDENCE).
ROB, THOUGH, THINKS HE WON EVERY DEBATE WE HAD. AMAZING, HUH? ......
===================================================
Let's begin with this lovely gem from the e-lips of Rob The Mega-Kook
(it's worth highlighting every so often...just for the laughs this
quote invariably elicits):
"LHO shot no one that day." -- Robcap; October 22, 2007
===================================================
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/a4c6818d6cdc7c89
>>> "Don't get me wrong..." <<<
You're always wrong.
>>> "...there are some crazy theories out for conspiracy..." <<<
Like the "LHO shot no one" theory. Yeah, that's one for the KookBooks,
to be sure.
>>> "...but the craziest one of all is the official theory." <<<
To a kook like you, sure it's "crazy". That's because it actually
relies on something called THE ACTUAL EVIDENCE in the case (as opposed
to made-up claptrap gushed forth by CT-Kooks).
After all, why would anyone even BEGIN to suspect dear sweet Lee
Oswald of any wrong-doing on 11/22/63? It was only HIS gun on the 6th
Floor, shells from HIS gun in the SN, HIS prints all over the exact
same teeny-tiny area where JFK's assassin was located during the
assassination itself, HIS gun that killed Tippit, HIS bullets in the
limousine where the President was shot, HIS bullet in the hospital
where the victims were taken, HIS face identified as the one and only
killer of Tippit, and HIS face identified by Howard Brennan as JFK's
murderer too.
Yeah....Rob's right. I've got "nothing".
It's a wonder the silly ol' Warren Commission got ANYBODY to believe
such flimsy, threadbare evidence...huh Mr. Rob-Mega-Kook?
>>> "Maybe the cop that found {the Tippit shells} and initialed them only to have other bullets entered as evidence..." <<<
More extraordinary conclusions arrived at by a mega-kook (when
ordinary scenarios can work just as easily...even better). Go figure.
And there's no proof that Officer Poe marked ANY shells on Tenth
Street on November 22. Maybe he did mark them; but maybe he didn't.
Poe just flat-out wasn't sure. I showed you his WC testimony
previously...which you totally ignored, no doubt. Here it is again
anyway.....
JOE BALL -- "Did you put any markings on the hulls?"
J.M. POE -- "I couldn't swear to it; no, sir."
[Later...]
MR. BALL -- "Did you make a mark?"
MR. POE -- "I can't swear to it; no, sir."
MR. BALL -- "But there is a mark on two of these?"
MR. POE -- "There is a mark. I believe I put on them, but I couldn't
swear to it. I couldn't make them out any more."
MR. BALL -- "Now, the ones you said you made a mark on are you think
it is these two? Q-77 and Q-75?"
MR. POE -- "Yes, sir; those two there."
MR. BALL -- "Both marked Western Special? They both are marked Western
Special."
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/poe.htm
(No mention of any "automatic" shells at all. It's all in a kook's
mind.)
>>> "LHO's handgun had a bent firing pin anyway." <<<
Not when he plugged Tippit four times with it.
Kook.
>>> "Which witness said they saw the killer shaking out bullets? It could appear to be that way from a distance to a terrified witness as the bullets automatically eject, thus the term automatic." <<<
Good God...you really ARE clueless re. the evidence, aren't you? (And
yet you're so POSITIVE that "LHO shot no one" on November 22nd. You're
Super-Pathetic!)
Virginia Davis AND Barbara Davis saw Lee Oswald (UP CLOSE, within just
a few feet of their own bodies), and both Davis girls saw Oswald
dumping shells out of his gun as LHO cut across their yard.
In both of the Davises' 11/22 affidavits, they mention the fact that
they saw a man crossing their yard "unloading his gun":
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/bdavis.htm
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/vdavis.htm
~~~~~
BARBARA DAVIS -- "I heard a shot and jumped up and heard another shot.
I put on my shoes and went to the door and I saw this man walking
across my front yard unloading a gun. .... When the police arrived, I
showed one of them where I saw this man emptying his gun and we found
a shell."
VIRGINIA DAVIS -- "We heard a shot and then another shot and ran to
the side door at Patton Street. I saw the boy cutting across our yard
and he was unloading his gun. .... Jeanette {Barbara Davis} found a
[sic] empty shell that the man had unloaded and gave it to the police.
After the police had left, I found a [sic] empty shell in our yard."
~~~~~
BTW, Domingo Benavides saw the killer (whom he later stated on CBS-TV
was positively LHO) dumping shells from his gun too. .....
BENAVIDES (Via his WC session) -- "Then I seen the man turn and walk
back to the sidewalk and go on the sidewalk and he walked maybe five
foot and then kind of stalled. He didn't exactly stop. And he threw
one shell and must have took five or six more steps and threw the
other shell up, and then he kind of stepped up to a pretty good trot
going around the corner."
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/benavide.htm
>>> "12 {Tippit witnesses} initially became two, and then one, as Benevides [sic] was very hesitant and never gave a firm, definitive ID." <<<
Yes he did. Very definitively too (in front of an audience of millions
in June 1967):
EDDIE BARKER -- "Is there any doubt in your mind that Oswald was the
man you had seen shoot Tippit?"
DOMINGO BENAVIDES -- "No, sir; there was no doubt at all. Period. I
could even tell you how he combed his hair and the clothes he wore and
what-have-you and the details....and if he'd had a scar on his face, I
could have probably told you about it. You don't forget things like
that."
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/6b2a00b13bdc81ae
>>> "You got nothing {as far as "Tippit witnesses" go}." <<<
Yeah, I've only got:
1.) Helen Markham
2.) Domingo Benavides
3.) Jack Tatum
4.) William Scoggins
5.) Ted Callaway
6.) Barbara J. Davis
7.) Virginia Davis
8.) Warren Reynolds
9.) B.M. "Pat" Patterson
10.) L.J. Lewis
11.) Harold Russell
12.) B.D. Searcy
13.) Sam Guinyard
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/1bdb7e56f0427853
A couple of the above Tippit-murder witnesses don't fall into the
"Positive I.D. Of Oswald" category....but every one of them saw an
"Oswald-like" person with a gun either on 10th Street or on Patton
Avenue (approaching Jefferson Blvd.) on 11/22/63.
And the above-mentioned "baker's dozen" doesn't even count the Brocks
(Mary and Robert), who saw an Oz-like man passing through the Texaco
Station just after Tippit was shot, with Mary Brock positively
identifying the man she saw as Lee Harvey Oswald (via a January 1964
FBI Report re. Mary Brock's Nov. 22 observations, linked below):
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/brock_m.htm
So, as you can see, I've practically got "nothing"....right Mr. Kook?
>>> "I haven't heard this." <<<
You haven't heard much of anything, it would seem (except junk spewed
forth by conspiracy authors).
>>> "Let's see some links on the verification of the gun being the {Tippit} murder weapon." <<<
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/nicol.htm
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/cunningham2.htm
MR. EISENBERG -- "Now, for the record, these cartridge cases were
earlier identified as having been fired by the FBI in Commission
Exhibit No. 143, the revolver believed to have been used to kill
Officer Tippit. Also for the record, I obtained these cartridge cases,
both Exhibit 595, which are test cases, and Exhibit 594, which are
cases from the murder scene, from the FBI, and transmitted them
directly to Mr. Nicol for his examination. Mr. Nicol, did you examine
the cartridge cases in Exhibit 594 to determine whether they bad been
fired from the weapon in which the cartridge cases in Exhibit 595 had
been fired?"
JOSEPH D. NICOL (Independent Firearms Expert from Illinois) -- "Yes,
sir; I did."
MR. EISENBERG -- "And can you give us your conclusions?"
MR. NICOL -- "It is my opinion, based upon the similarity of class and
individual characteristics, that the four cartridge cases in 594 were
fired in the same weapon as produced the cartridge cases in 595."
[Re. the bullets recovered from Tippit's body...]
MR. NICOL -- "On specimen 602--I'm sorry--603, which I have designated
as Q-502, I found sufficient individual characteristics to lead me to
the conclusion that that projectile was fired in the same weapon
{CE143, Oswald's revolver} that fired the projectiles in 606."
MR. EISENBERG -- "That is to the exclusion of all other weapons?"
MR. NICOL -- "Yes, sir."
MR. EISENBERG -- "By the way, on the cartridge cases, that was also to
the exclusion of all other weapons?"
MR. NICOL -- "Correct."
~~~~~~~~~~
CORTLANDT CUNNINGHAM (FBI) -- "As a result of my examination, it is my
opinion that those four cartridge eases, Commission Exhibit 594, were
fired in the revolver, Commission Exhibit 143, to the exclusion of all
other weapons."
>>> "We know they substitued the casings, since they lacked the officer's initials he put there at the crime scene." <<<
Prove that the officer (Poe) put his initials on them at the crime
scene. You can't. Even Officer Poe HIMSELF said he couldn't be sure he
marked them. Why isn't HIS OWN WORD good enough for you kooks?
>>> "I want those reports by those cops." <<<
You're the one who wants to believe that Poe initialed some
"automatic" shells....YOU find the "reports" saying so. It's not up to
me to prove your make-believe case.
I've provided Poe's WC testimony above. And there's no mention of
"automatic" shells within that testimony. Obviously, you don't want to
believe anything put forth by the evil "Government", though, right?
Anyway, the facts are still the facts...and those FACTS do not include
ANY "automatic" bullet shells. None.
Sergeant Gerald Hill, who initially (incorrectly) thought the Tippit
shells were from an automatic weapon, tried to clear up the confusion
when he said this in 1986:
"I assumed that it was an automatic simply because we had found
all the hulls in one little general area. .... If you find a cluster
of shells, you have to assume that they were fired from an automatic."
-- Quote by Gerald Hill (Taken from Dale Myers' book, "With Malice";
Pages 260-261)
>>> "I'll keep trying to enlighten you..." <<<
Oh, you mean with wondrous "enlightening" kook statements like these
gems authored by Robert C.?:
"LHO shot no one."
"Which witness said they saw the killer shaking out bullets."
"It wasn't LHO that shot JDT."
"You are trying to distort evidence to make it be LHO just like the WC
did."
"I haven't heard this."
"It was impossible since the gun had a bent firing pin."
"Let's see some links on the verification of the gun being the murder
weapon."
"We know they substitued the casings."
"That is not what I have read."
"LBJ thought he could control him {Senator Richard Russell}."
"You are clueless."
"LHO shot no one." (This one here is worthy of a repeat performance,
due to its extreme idiocy.)
[END KOOK QUOTES.]
When gazing upon the assortment of oddball quotes I've offered above,
it looks like it's Robby who could use a tad bit of "enlightenment"
re. the JFK and Tippit murder cases.
But, per Rob-Kook, DVP is the one who is "clueless". Go figure.
~shrug~
>>> "...but I'm sure the money you make to push the official theory will make it a tough assignment." <<<
Yeah, the evil Government hasn't got anything better to spend their
money on, so they hired a few of us "clueless" LNers to type
meaningless messages into a Google Groups JFK Assassination database,
to be seen by a whopping dozen or so people per day (at best).
For this I make $49,000 a year (dental insurance included too).
All-in-all, not a bad deal. And just for taking candy from a baby too.
[CIA'S "DISINFO CENTRAL" LINKED BELOW:]
========================
robcap...@netscape.com
> FYI for Rob (The ABO Moron),
"You can stop replying to my posts at any time, Rob-Kook. Over the
last several weeks, I have read through very few (if any) of your ABO
responses to my posts."
So what, I don't respond for your benefit as I know you are speading
disinformation, but others who do not know the case shouldn't come
away thinking your lies are the true version of events.
"So, don't feel obligated to respond just on my behalf, because you're
wasting your time--precious time that could be used to invent one
additional conspiracy-tinged theory that doesn't involve Lee H. Oswald
as a culprit in the two murders he committed in '63."
I guess Dave has raised the white flag, huh? He realizes he has NO
evidence and proof so he is going to debate himself instead where he
can control the outcome. I don't do it for your benefit by the way, I
do it for anyone who may read the propaganda you are paid to write.
"Perhaps, though, the one "lurker" per month who wanders into the
asylum (by accident) will enjoy the multiplicity of belly-laughs that
inevitably ensue after reading any of your "Anybody But Ozzie"
garbage."
I don't buy this thought either as you can search on many things and
find Google-based discussions, including this one, so I will not let
you spread lies on the conspiracy board. If you want to do that go to
the moderated, and heavily slanted aaj board.
"But I stopped reading your trash weeks ago, mainly because you
provided me with more than enough easy-to-refute conspiracy-flavored
junk during your first few months here at the nuthouse."
Easy to refute? How come you NEVER refute any of it with real
evidence and proof then? You are delusional as well.
"In fact, as I told this aggregation previously, Robcap is practically
an "LNer's
> dream come true", i.e., he's so incredibly WRONG about virtually every single thing he says and believes regarding the JFK assassination, he's very nearly a perfect over-the-top "ABO" (Anybody But Oswald) "caricature" and microcosm of all the many different ABO Kooks who have preceded him into Forums/Asylums lik this one (or onto bookshelves around the world)."
It is sad you can't refute and show your theory to be true then since
I'm just a "caricature", how come? You are the pathetic one as you
make money spreading lies and betray your country. One you never
served either by the way.
"I have considered myself very fortunate indeed when confronted with a
kook who (after SUPPOSEDLY having a grasp of the actual evidence in
the JFK and Tippit double-murder case) actually had the 'nads to say
the following with a straight face and sans any embarrassment at all
(evidently) --- "LHO shot no one that day" ["Robcap"; 10/22/2007]"
I stand by my words as the "evidence" your beloved WC put forth proves
my point, where is your proof? How ironic that the WC actually
support the CTers better than the LNers!
> www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/cb6da7263046ee6a
"What LNer WOULDN'T love the opportunity to expose the idiocy of a
person who has the gall and the lack of common sense to write the
silly words "LHO shot no one that day" (with Nov. 22, 1963, being
"that day", of course)?"
You have tried and tried to show "how silly my words are" but you fail
each and every time, why? BECAUSE you have NO evidence and proof for
your ridiculous theory.
"I've often felt, as I've also said previously, that "Robcap" is quite
possibly not "for real" when it comes to his grossly "over-the-top"
type of ABO assassination opinions. OTOH, he could be "for real" (aka:
a complete Mega-Kook of the First Order), but it's truly difficult to
believe that ANYBODY would have deliberately placed themselves THAT
far down into the CT Abyss of Absurdity."
You obviously are as clueless about the true events of that day as you
are about the truth as many CT reaearchers have said the same things.
I feel the same about you as NO reasonable (well maybe that is the
problem with you), intelligent adult could read the WCR and come away
with any idea other than it was a conspiracy. But you make your
living mucking up the waters and lying to people and betraying your
country, so that is your goal.
"However, you never can tell when you're dealing with a kooky CTer
mindset. So, I'll continue to remain "on the fence" regarding whether
Robby is the "real kook deal" or not."
If telling the truth is being "kooky" then put me down as a kook.
"But at least Rob has provided me with a good opportunity to build up
my archive of CT-bashing posts (starting in late October 2007 when
Robby started posting his outrageous ABO inanities, ad nauseam)."
You archive of lies you mean, because in all our your replies to me I
have NEVER seen any real proof or evidence regarding your theory. No
shock as the governement never put any forth.
"So, I thank him for his absurd ABO type of posts, because it afforded
me ample chances to electronically bash him over the head with the
real evidence in the case, time and time again....only to receive the
same type of ABO response as a retort (time and time again), such as
when Robby took audacity to new heights of laughable absurdity when he
actually had the balls to say this to me on January 30, 2008 --- "Your
long-winded posts NEVER have ANY real evidence in them!" [Emphasis is
via the original post written by Rob-Kook, linked below.]"
What evidence? I have NEVER felt like you bashed me over the head
with any evidence. You have NO evidence, it is all in your make-
believe head. Some people will do anything for money, it is sad.
> www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/72b5c284fa37598d
"Your Honor, I think it's quite obvious that Mr. Robcap has snapped
his (rob)cap, as that last quote fully demonstrates beyond all
reasonable doubt.
I rest my case."
It is a shame you can't prove I snapped my head off by showing real
proof and evidence. Sad for you. What case? You never had a case to
start with. I guess they pay well as DVP is up all night every night
writing his lies. He is a liar for hire.
David Von Pein
HERE'S A SAMPLING OF TODAY'S DAILY BATCH OF INSANITY
FROM A KOOK NAMED "ROBCAP" [RC]:
========================================
"He [DVP] realizes he has NO evidence." -- RC
"I do it [i.e., WRITE KOOKSHIT] for anyone who may read the
propaganda you are paid to write." -- RC
"How come you NEVER refute any of it [i.e., ROB'S INSANE
KOOKSHIT] with real evidence and proof? .... You are delusional as
well." -- RC
"How ironic that the WC actually support the CTers better than
the LNers!" -- RC
[ROB'S DRIFTING VERY NEAR A "KOOK" CLASSIFICATION I DIDN'T THINK WAS
EVEN ATTAINABLE BY THE NUTTIEST OF "ABO" MEGA-KOOKS -- THAT OF
"INCONCEIVABLE KOOK"; i.e., HE'S JUST ABOUT OFF OF ANY MEASURABLE
"KOOK" SCALE AT THIS POINT.]
"You make your living mucking up the waters and lying to people
and betraying your country, so that is your goal." -- RC
"You have tried and tried to show "how silly my words are" but
you fail each and every time, why? BECAUSE you have NO evidence and
proof for your ridiculous theory." -- RC
[DRIFTING EVER CLOSER....]
"You are the pathetic one as you make money spreading lies and
betray your country." -- RC
"In all our your replies to me I have NEVER seen any real proof
or evidence regarding your theory. No shock as the government never
put any forth." -- RC
[ROB MADE IT! HE'S NOW THE FIRST-EVER "INCONCEIVABLE KOOK"! VERY NICE
JOB, ROBERT! WHERE SHOULD I SEND YOUR PLAQUE? THAT IS, WHICH HOSPITAL?
WHICH INSANE ASYLUM CURRENTLY HAS CUSTODY OF YOU? I FORGOT.]
"What case? You never had a case to start with." -- RC
"I guess they pay well as DVP is up all night every night
writing his lies." -- RC
"He [Mr. Von Pein, my secret hero] is a liar for hire." -- RC
Rob is 100% right. I am a liar. I confess. I'm a liar because I just
now read one of Rob's insane posts all the way through after having
just said the following to Robby only yesterday:
"I stopped reading your trash weeks ago." -- DVP
I guess you caught me in a whopper of a lie there, Rob. Now, if you
could only prove I'm a "liar for hire". Any chance you can back up
that statement, Mr. "LHO Shot No One"? I'd love to see you try.
But, then too, kooks like you don't need EVIDENCE or PROOF or anything
substantive of that sort in order to make your words "true". Right,
Robby? The only thing a conspiracy kook needs to do is to say that a
certain person is a "liar for hire" and--Voila!--it becomes a fact!
Like I said -- "Inconceivable".
robcap...@netscape.com
"HERE'S A SAMPLING OF TODAY'S DAILY BATCH OF INSANITY FROM A KOOK
NAMED "ROBCAP" [RC]:"
It is ONLY insanity to those who support lies.
> ========================================
>
> "He [DVP] realizes he has NO evidence." -- RC
>
> "I do it [i.e., WRITE KOOKSHIT] for anyone who may read the
> propaganda you are paid to write." -- RC
>
> "How come you NEVER refute any of it [i.e., ROB'S INSANE
> KOOKSHIT] with real evidence and proof? .... You are delusional as
> well." -- RC
>
> "How ironic that the WC actually support the CTers better than
> the LNers!" -- RC
>
"[ROB'S DRIFTING VERY NEAR A "KOOK" CLASSIFICATION I DIDN'T THINK WAS
EVEN ATTAINABLE BY THE NUTTIEST OF "ABO" MEGA-KOOKS -- THAT OF
"INCONCEIVABLE KOOK"; i.e., HE'S JUST ABOUT OFF OF ANY MEASURABLE
"KOOK" SCALE AT THIS POINT.]"
Again, NO refutation, just nominations for a silly award to distract
and make me seem like the kook. The only kook here is Dave because he
supports a theory that has NO proof or evidence to back it up.
>
> "You make your living mucking up the waters and lying to people
> and betraying your country, so that is your goal." -- RC
>
> "You have tried and tried to show "how silly my words are" but
> you fail each and every time, why? BECAUSE you have NO evidence and
> proof for your ridiculous theory." -- RC
>
"[DRIFTING EVER CLOSER....]"
Another failed opportunity to present meaningful evidence wasted.
>
> "You are the pathetic one as you make money spreading lies and
> betray your country." -- RC
>
> "In all our your replies to me I have NEVER seen any real proof
> or evidence regarding your theory. No shock as the government never
> put any forth." -- RC
>
"[ROB MADE IT! HE'S NOW THE FIRST-EVER "INCONCEIVABLE KOOK"! VERY NICE
JOB, ROBERT! WHERE SHOULD I SEND YOUR PLAQUE? THAT IS, WHICH HOSPITAL?
WHICH INSANE ASYLUM CURRENTLY HAS CUSTODY OF YOU? I FORGOT.]"
Another wasted opportunity. Why does he NEVER present REAL evidence?
>
> "What case? You never had a case to start with." -- RC
>
> "I guess they pay well as DVP is up all night every night
> writing his lies." -- RC
>
> "He [Mr. Von Pein, my secret hero] is a liar for hire." -- RC
>
"Rob is 100% right. I am a liar. I confess."
We don't need your confession, it is obvious to all who read you daily
long-winded, debating with yourself posts.
"I'm a liar because I just now read one of Rob's insane posts all the
way through after having just said the following to Robby only
yesterday:
"I stopped reading your trash weeks ago." -- DVP
I guess you caught me in a whopper of a lie there, Rob. Now, if you
could only prove I'm a "liar for hire". Any chance you can back up
that statement, Mr. "LHO Shot No One"? I'd love to see you try."
More off-topic mumbo jumbo. He can't present any real evidence so he
is playing games. It is easy to prove you are a "liar for hire" (I'm
working on copyrighting that one too, so you'll have to pay me to use
in the future) by just reading the WCR and then reading your posts.
You have no truth in your posts as you have NO evidence supporting
your allegations.
"But, then too, kooks like you don't need EVIDENCE or PROOF or
anything substantive of that sort in order to make your words "true".
Right, Robby? The only thing a conspiracy kook needs to do is to say
that a certain person is a "liar for hire" and--Voila!--it becomes a
fact!"
Kooks like me? Notice the same tactics that VB uses here. His theory
(a.k.a. WCR) has NO evidence and proof yet he acts like it is the
other people theories that lack this. In your case, and anyone who
supports a lying document like the WCR, it is true.
"Like I said -- "Inconceivable"."
Why don't you ever say "Here is the evidence?"
David Von Pein
What would qualify as "real" evidence in your (kook) book, Robby?
Please enlighten us, O Great One.
Because evidently NONE of the DPD's and WC's evidence against Oswald
qualifies as "real" evidence in Robby's book. None of it! Zilch.
Therefore, there is NO evidence in the whole case at all, per Robby.
None! He's thrown it all away, merely because it was never entered as
"evidence" in a court of law.
Which means (per the kook): Oswald MUST be considered innocent,
despite the fact that the evidence being chucked in the garbage
disposal by the kook is really STILL THERE and able to be examined
(just as if LHO had lived and he was sitting in a courtroom facing the
charges against him).
As I said previously----
Inconceivable.
aeffects
> What would qualify as "real" evidence in your (kook) book, Robby?
you should ask timmy that, David --- timmy from down-undah that is....
> Please enlighten us, O Great One.
alright, Tim, your roommate
> Because evidently NONE of the DPD's and WC's evidence against Oswald
> qualifies as "real" evidence in Robby's book. None of it! Zilch.
nor does the WCR, moron (what the hell you think Winnie, er Vinnie
(and a various amount of ghost-writers, exposed by David Lifton,
thankfully) wrote Reclaiming History. I have to fill you in on
everything?
> Therefore, there is NO evidence in the whole case at all, per Robby.
> None! He's thrown it all away, merely because it was never entered as
> "evidence" in a court of law.
thats right, and I doubt the Zapruder film would be admitted as
evidence today....
> Which means (per the kook): Oswald MUST be considered innocent,
> despite the fact that the evidence being chucked in the garbage
> disposal by the kook is really STILL THERE and able to be examined
> (just as if LHO had lived and he was sitting in a courtroom facing the
> charges against him).
which means the Lone Nut KOOKSTER'S don't have a case..... nor does
HBO and Tom Hanks....
> As I said previously----
>
> Inconceivable.
welcome top Oz, ya moron!
David Von Pein
SOME MISCELLANEOUS JFK ASSASSINATION DISCUSSIONS:
==================================================
>>> "Thus, it seems, a shot from the rear will move an object in {the} direction of its flight, but one from the front will not." <<<
Why on Earth are you saying something silly like this? Vince Bugliosi
certainly never, ever implied any such stupid thing.
The reason you won't find any initial bodily movement going BACKWARD
in the Z-Film is due to the fact that no shot hit a victim from the
front. Period. (And Duh!)
BTW, another good example of a bullet from the rear pushing a victim
FORWARD (in the direction the bullet is travelling) is at Zapruder
frame 224, when we can watch John Connally's right shoulder being
pushed slightly FORWARD and DOWNWARD by the impact of the SBT bullet
striking him at exactly Z224 (and that's not even counting the
additional sign of the bullet striking at exactly that Z-Frame, i.e.,
the lapel of Connally's coat being moved significantly also at Z224).
Mr. Bugliosi, however, feels that the precise "SBT" Z-Frame cannot be
determined beyond all reasonable doubt...and I can appreciate that
conclusion by Vince. After all, the Warren Commission said the same
thing via its "range" of frames for the SBT hit at Z210-Z225.
But I'll wager the homestead I could convince Vince that Connally and
Kennedy were, indeed, hit at exactly Z224, via the following excellent
toggling 2-frame Z-Film clip, which I'm pretty sure VB has never seen
(although I'm perplexed, to a degree, as to why Dale Myers couldn't
convince Vince of the 223-224 SBT hit). ~shrug~ .....
http://216.122.129.112/dc/user_files/4540.gif
==================================================
>>> "He {VB} blindly accepts the word of his friends/contacts at the CIA that they had "no operational interest in LHO", when documentary evidence from the ARRB and even before them proves otherwise." <<<
And just how did the ARRB "prove" that?
Vince B. has an interesting line of thought on the CIA (one which is
really quite humorous...and forthright, IMO). Let's listen:
"Even though normally innocent they insist on acting guilty so
that conspiracy theorists will have more fodder for their charges.
(They do so because being innocent, they have no guilty conscience and
continue to be angered and shocked when they are later accused of a
"cover-up.")" -- VB; In "RH"
"The CIA had nothing to hide in thousands of previous documents
the agency initially refused to release voluntarily but ultimately did
release under court order. The CIA specializes in always acting
guilty, even when it is not, and always being, from a public relations
standpoint, its own worst enemy." -- VB
"To the point, arguably, of perversity, the silly spooks at
Langley--like the pathological liar who lies even when it would be to
his benefit to tell the truth--will fight Morley and his lawyer every
inch of the way, thereby helping them, every inch of the way, to
convince everyone that it has something to hide--Joannides's and
perhaps its own complicity in the assassination. .... Joannides and
the CIA conspired with Oswald to kill Kennedy as much as you and I
did." -- VB
==================================================
>>> "Some might think it was CE 399 {that went into JFK and stopped}." <<<
Not even remotely possible, of course (and Tony [Marsh] knows this
full well...he just wants to argue the obvious), because Kennedy's
stretcher was never even close to that corridor where CE399 was found
by Tomlinson. Why this major fact is totally ignored by many CTers can
only elicit a shoulder shrug from yours truly.
==================================================
>>> "How about Posner's bullet which hits a tree branch which strips off the jacket entirely allowing the lead core to go on to hit the curb near Tague?" <<<
That's what I certainly believe happened--although, admittedly, it's
just a guess...but I think it's by far the best guess, and it's a
guess that solves two problems.
One, if the bullet hit the tree and separated the jacket from the lead
core....the lead can go on out to hit Main St. and then Tague; hence,
no copper tracing on the curb. Perfectly reasonable, IMO.
Two, with the bullet now split into two parts, the copper jacket can
strike Elm St., resulting in the "sparks" that some witnesses said
they saw near JFK's limo. While the other portion of the bullet can
separately go on out to meet Mr. Tague.
I completely disagree with Vince Bugliosi's explanation re. the first-
shot miss and the Tague wounding...which, btw, Vince only briefly
mentions in his book. He gives the whole matter two short paragraphs
on pages 471 and 472.
Vince thinks that the first Oswald (missed) shot hit the Elm pavement
on the fly, and then the same bullet (somehow) finds its way (at grass
level) over to Main Street to hit the Main curb and cause Tague's
cheek injury.
I, myself, find that hopping & skipping bullet scenario hard to
swallow, although I cannot disprove it, of course; nor can anyone
else. Since we're talking about a shot that missed the limo occupants
and was never recovered, all we can do is guess. But I find Posner's
"guess" to be the best guess....in that it can explain multiple
questions re. the shooting -- e.g., the sparks on the Elm pavement and
the non-copper tracings on the Main curb and Tague's wounding.
I respect Vince Bugliosi's opinion re. the first shot at Z160...I just
don't agree with his complete scenario of the path that bullet
followed on November 22. (At least we agree about one thing about the
first shot though -- when it was fired by Oswald -- Z160. I agree with
VB on that 100%.)
As a footnote to the above discussion re. the Tague wounding --- I
must also point out that Mr. Bugliosi does mention in "Reclaiming
History" (in an endnote on the CD-ROM disc that comes with the book)
that Gerald Posner's tree-branch deflection theory "is possible" (VB;
footnote on page 315 of endnotes).
==================================================
>>> "In the end, I tend to agree with the line in [Oliver Stone's film] "JFK", about how the only good reason to wait until the limo is on Elm is to get the triangulation of fire into effect." <<<
Not a chance....especially within the framework of the type of crazy
PRE-arranged multi-gun, 1-patsy plot that Stone & Garrison have
advocated over the years.
What in the world would have been going through the plotters' heads
when pre-arranging such a stupid, impossible-to-pull-off Patsy Plot
like that? Were they ALL total morons?
If just one non-LHO shot hits anyone in Dealey Plaza, the ballgame's
over. Period. And via Stone's "JFK", it doesn't even appear that
Oswald's rifle is even used AT ALL during the shooting. Again...were
total morons leading this group of assassins?
They attempt to frame a solo patsy named Oswald (per Oliver's silly
film), but they don't even bother firing a single shot from Oz's
rifle? Per the film, three shells are "planted" in the SN after the
shooting, indicating that not a single bullet was actually fired from
the "planted" Carcano.
Idiots all!
Back to reality.....
Oswald waited to fire until the cars were on Elm Street. The exact
reasons he did this? -- Who can know for certain. Nobody can. But the
sum total of evidence says he DID do this. (Oliver Stone's
unbelievably-stupid "Triangulation Of Crossfire Within A Single-Patsy
Assassination Plan" notwithstanding.)
==================================================
Discussing Vincent Bugliosi's "RECLAIMING HISTORY" at another Internet
forum:
www.ambackforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=50341&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
==================================================
>>> "The missing weight of CE399 comes from a piece being taken off the bullet for testing by the government." <<<
And once more, per the above belief re. CE399's weight, we have
virtual proof that whoever the people were who decided to "plant" or
"switch" the Parkland bullet were (without question) total morons.
I.E.: Somebody decided to plant (or switch) the bullet(s)....and they
decided it was wise to place "CE399" into evidence, a bullet that (per
the idiocy spelled out by the CTer above) had absolutely NO GRAINS
MISSING from its total weight AFTER it supposedly went through at
least one of the two Dealey Plaza victims.
Can these plotters get any more feeble? Is it truly POSSIBLE to be
that stupid?
Yes, a goodly portion of the missing 2+ grains of CE399 could very
well be portions the Government sliced off of the bullet for testing.
But CTers still haven't a leg to stand on....because the fragments
taken out of Connally were never weighed officially (that I'm aware
of; are you?) and, therefore, we can only guess as to their weights
(and the weight of the very small flakes left inside JBC as well).
And, as previously mentioned, the TOTAL WEIGHT of all the fragments in
question is very, very small....and certainly is a total weight that
does not exclude CE399 as being the bullet that could have deposited
those fragments in Mr. Connally's body.
And common sense alone tells a rational person (i.e., a person who
isn't inclined to scream "It was planted!" every time he turns around)
that CE399 HAD to have been inside Governor Connally's body.
Given the sum total of evidence, CE399 is THE ONLY POSSIBLE BULLET
that could have been inside John Connally's body on November 22,
1963. .....
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/0b30398a449c05b7
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/648e0882dfd6c419
==================================================
E-Mail Subject: Hi Jerry [Dealey] (JFK Chatter)
Date: 7/30/2007
From: David Von Pein
To: Jerry Dealey
----------------------------
Hi again Jerry,
Thanks for the link to your "Bothered" webpage [linked below]. I had
not seen that page before.
Some good thoughts in your "Bothered" article (as always). But I think
a whole bunch of the things that "Bother" you can be reconciled with
the following explanation from Mr. Bugliosi.
This VB statement below wouldn't negate the whole notion of a
conspiracy BEHIND Oswald's lone-gunman actions, true....but I think it
makes a lot of sense from the standpoint of arriving at the FACT that
Lee Oswald shot JFK (which is a raw fact that so many conspiracists
simply refuse to accept):
"With respect to the Kennedy assassination, once you establish
and know that Oswald is guilty, as has been done, then you also
NECESSARILY know that there is an answer (whether the answer is known
or not) compatible with this conclusion for the endless alleged
discrepancies, inconsistencies, and questions the conspiracy theorists
have raised through the years about Oswald's guilt." -- Vincent
Bugliosi; Page 953 of "Reclaiming History"
As you know, so many people tend to micro-analyze every tiny little
thing surrounding the JFK case. Everything is looked at with a wary
eye of potential "conspiracy"; when, in fact, all of these things that
CTers "over-manage" (IMO) do not necessarily lead down a "CT" path at
all.
For example -- Take two very small incidents that Vince mentions (at
some length too) in his book -- the "Dial Ryder" incident (where an
Oswald-like person had a scope mounted on a rifle prior to
11/22)...and the "Bogard" incident (which has "Oswald" taking a high-
speed test drive in a new car shortly before the assassination).
Those things are certainly "fringe" things, at best. But to hear the
kooks at the various forums tell it, these things (in some way)
"prove" a conspiracy existed, with these "imposter Oswalds" running
all around Dallas.
But CTers fail to see the built-in illogic being exhibited by any
string-pullers and "patsy"-creators when it comes to incidents like
this. The CTers who think things like this lead down a CT path must
also think that the plotters were performing these peripheral NEEDLESS
acts of silliness to frame Oswald, even though each of these incidents
goes against the grain of the overall patsy plot they are trying to
pull off.
Example: The "used car" incident has Oswald apparently telling the car
dealer he'd be coming into some money in "2 or 3 weeks". That'd be
silly for any plotters to do....i.e., to essentially tell people that
Oswald will be PAID for something he'll be doing right about the time
of the assassination! Just...dumb.
And in the Ryder example, evidently some Oswald imposter was getting a
scope mounted on a NON-Carcano rifle (which is a weapon the plotters
won't be using to frame their patsy with on 11/22 anyway).
So what were these plotters trying to do here? Were they trying to
blow their plot wide open by announcing to the world (in a fashion)
that Oswald had a SECOND rifle in his possession, when we know he
really had only one rifle, his Carcano?
Anyway, those are just 2 of the dozens of similar examples of things
that GO NOPLACE, but CTers love to dredge them up anyway...because
such CTers fail to see the inherent illogic of these things; and those
same CTers, let's face it, WANT a conspiracy in this case. They NEED
it. And they'll do whatever it takes and skew as much evidence as
possible in order to work the word "conspiracy" into this murder case.
Simple as that.
Because, to borrow from VB once again, to face the Oswald Probably Did
It Alone reality is, for them, to forfeit a large section of their
lives. And who likes the idea of doing that?
Regards,
David Von Pein
==================================================
>>> "If VB doesn't say that LHO didn't do any work all day long, why comment on an unfilled order when half a day's work remains to be done?" <<<
Fair point, Gerry, I'll readily admit that.
>>> "Did VB speak further on this?" <<<
I don't think so. But it's possible he mentions it further in an
endnote. There's so much stuff in the book, it's difficult to say for
sure if one particular small sub-topic is dealt with or not. It's
possible that it is dealt with further; but I just cannot recall at
this time.
But, IMO, the biggest factor re. the clipboard "incident" (if we can
even call it an "incident"; I'd prefer to say the "clipboard
placement") is, in fact, the LOCATION where that clipboard was found
-- very near those stairs and very near the boxes where Oswald
(without a shred of a doubt, given the sum total of evidence that
tells us he's guilty) stashed the rifle after the shooting.
Whether or not there were 3 or 33 unfilled orders on the clipboard
isn't really too germane to this issue, in my view. I suppose it could
be considered a small factor in the wake of the events that did
transpire that same day...i.e., LHO's mind was elsewhere (on killing a
President and figuring out how he could do it in privacy) on November
22; therefore he shirked his regular Depository duties.
But we know that Oswald did perform at least a little bit of his
regular TSBD work on November 22. We know this via the following
portion of James Jarman's WC testimony:
MR. BALL -- "Did you talk to Oswald that morning {11/22/63}?"
MR. JARMAN -- "I did."
MR. BALL -- "When?"
MR. JARMAN -- "I had him to correct an order. I don't know exactly
what time it was."
~~~~~
I suppose I could start speculating further on this rather peripheral
matter of Oswald needing to have one of his November 22nd TSBD book
orders "corrected" by the "checker" (which was Jarman's job at the
Book Depository at the time).
Perhaps I should start talking about how Oswald's mind was on other
things that morning....and therefore he wasn't able to concentrate on
filling his book orders accurately....and therefore one or more of his
orders had to be "corrected" after Checker James Jarman took a look at
them.
That could conceivably move in the direction of Lee Harvey Oswald's
11/22 mindset too....don't you agree?
Could be. But nobody can know for sure, of course.
==================================================
>>> "Do you know anything about how bullets are identified as having been fired from a particular gun?" <<<
Oh, I'm sure you (a kook) think you know a whole lot more about
firearms identification techniques than the guy who was assigned as
the LEAD F.B.I. FIREARMS EXPERT IN THE BIGGEST MURDER CASE OF THE 20TH
CENTURY. Right, kook?
You must know WAY more than Robert A. Frazier of the FBI. Right?
So, why not tell us how Frazier lied through his teeth...over and over
again.
I like fantasy. And the tripe being spewed by a Super-Kook named Walt
could fill a whole library with such fiction.
==================================================
>>> "The SBT stands debunked, and the counter scenario outlined here fits all the established evidence." <<<
Bull. You've got ZERO bullets to back up any anti-SBT scenario. None.
Where did the bullets go? Where?
And where's the JFK neck/back damage from those two non-transiting
missiles? Where?
And where are the many fragments that SHOULD be present in JFK's neck/
back if TWO bullets just stopped? Where are the fragments? Those
bullets hit something to stop them, didn't they? So, what was it that
stopped TWO bullets inside Kennedy's body?
Plus: Where's the Connally bullet? (I.E., the "real" one, if you think
399 is a 'plant' -- you surely think it was planted, right? Virtually
all CTers do.)
Why aren't these simple questions EVER answered by the ant-SBT bunch?
(I'll answer that --- They CAN'T be answered logically, or with a
straight face.)
==================================================
>>> "These LN idiots promote the "factoid" that the coat was bunched in defense of their belief that there was an entry hole in the base of the neck." <<<
Think again. No LNer thinks the upper-back wound was/is in the "neck".
It is where it is -- 14cm. south of Mr. Mastoid Process, just like
Boswell said.
And, as Jean Davison has so magnificently conveyed, any movement of
that wound NORTHWARD destroys the SBT trajectory. Just look:
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/bf3ae3c6c0993e13
==================================================
>>> "There is at least one major book coming out near the same time which hopefully will help to offset {Bugliosi's} nonsense." <<<
Yeah, I think Fetzer, Groden, Marrs, and Lane are releasing a 64,500-
page behemoth entitled:
"BEHIND EVERY ROCK: THE JFK CONSPIRACY: THE COLLECTIVE CONCOCTED
CRAP OF FOUR KOOKS DISGUISED AS RESEARCHERS" [Harper & Row; $79.95
MRP; ISBN: 0039-415-00989].
==================================================
>>> "Here is what the evidence indicates: First bullet through JFK's neck (and planted butt-first in JBC's thigh): CE399. ... Second bullet went through JBC's chest, wrist." <<<
Bull. The evidence supports no such nonsense.
Your first-bullet scenario is totally impossible, given the [approx.]
1,775fps velocity of the bullet coming out of JFK's neck. It would
have certainly shattered Connally's femur at that speed, plus done
lots more leg damage to boot (per Lattimer's tests and via WC
testimony from others with an opinion on the matter as well).
And your second bullet scenario is also impossible for another variety
of reasons -- The most obvious is: NO WAY THAT BULLET GETS TO CONNALLY
WITHOUT FIRST GOING THROUGH MR. KENNEDY.
Plus, without going through JFK, his wrist would probably have been
pulverized beyond repair. Lattimer did tests on that too, with much-
greater wrist damage sustained by mock JBCs if the bullet does not go
through a simulated neck first.
You can spit on Dr. Lattimer's tests if you so desire -- but try to
answer this:
How likely is it that virtually EVERY test that John K. Lattimer
performed with a Carcano rifle and WCC/MC ammunition would end up
supporting and buttressing the general "LN" scenario if, in fact,
multiple shots from varying angles had actually struck the victims?
Were the plotters so incredibly fortunate that even SIMULATIONS and
exacting RE-CREATIONS of the shooting variables and evidence could be
duplicated with such sterling "Pro-LN" results (even when, per CTers,
the shooting was really achieved in a totally-different, multi-gun
fashion)?
Is there no END to the conspirators' good fortune?
==================================================
E-Mail Subject: Shaw, Ferrie, Oswald, And The CT-Kooks
Date: 2/26/2007
From: David Von Pein
To: Patrick Collins
----------------------------
Hi Pat:
I'm unable to answer your question re. Tannenbaum specifically....but
here is the photo in question, supposedly showing Ferrie, Shaw, and
Oswald together....
www.assassinat-jfk.com/media/image/les3_2.jpg
Now, Pat, if you can positively identify ANYONE in that miserable-
looking picture....then you're a much better man than I.
It's just another murky, cloudy "What If?" for the conspiracy kooks to
drag out of their stale closet every so often, in an attempt to tie
those three guys together. And even if they DO tie them together,
there's still not a speck of hard evidence to show that the threesome
conspired to kill JFK.
And, almost of equal importance, there's no hard evidence to show that
the Government would have then had a desire (following the
assassination) to frame the VERY SAME PATSY that Shaw and Ferrie, et
al, wanted to frame for JFK's murder.
Are we to actually believe that some low-life druggie like Dave Ferrie
had the power and influence to make the United States Government want
to go along with the "Triangulation Of Crossfire" One-Patsy plot that
Oliver Stone advocates in his movie?
Now, granted, Mr. Shaw probably had a little more clout than Ferrie
(what with Shaw being a respected and leading businessman in New
Orleans), but I don't for one second believe that even Shaw had the
mighty clout to get the Government of our country to just go with the
"Oswald Did All Of This" flow following an assassination that involved
THREE different shooters.
That's where most rabid CTers make one of their biggest mistakes, IMO
-- i.e., falling for such wild and crazy PRE-11/22 planning of an
event that wouldn't have been carried out in such a loony manner in a
million years. Which, IMO, is a major stepping stone to believing that
such a Patsy Plot never occurred in the first place.
Later,
David V.P.
==================================================
>>> "My position is the same as 3 of the 7 members (Boggs, Russell, Cooper) of the Warren Commission." <<<
Senator Russell, for one, comes across as a total goofball (IMO). But,
then again, the 7 WC heads did virtually none of the hard work in
their investigation...Belin, Specter, Ball, and Liebeler (and a few
others) did the legwork. The WC merely observed from a distance most
of the time. Belin fully admits that in his forthright '73 book.
Or, to quote VB yet again......
"The Warren Commission might not have done much work, but its
staff was prodigious." -- Vincent Bugliosi; 1992
Vince then goes on to correctly point out......
"He {Oliver Stone} deliberately twisted and warped the record.
There was nothing mysterious about Oswald's shots. The first was from
only 57 yards, the second from only 83 yards; all were fired at a
stagnant target with a favorable angle. My firearms guy says he was a
sitting duck." -- VB
==================================================
>>> "They (Ford) decided to go with that which worked for the SBT, the drawing, and therefore changed the wording in the final report from "back" to "neck"." <<<
The Rydberg drawing doesn't really "work" for the SBT....but the
ACTUAL autopsy photo (and the "14cm. from the Mastoid" measurement)
certainly work for it. Those two things most closely represent the
WC's SBT, as can easily be seen in CE903. The wound in is the UPPER
BACK, not the "NECK", via the CE903 demonstration:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/pages/WH_Vol18_0055b.jpg
Moving the wound UP to the neck doesn't enhance the SBT -- it ruins
it.
==================================================
>>> "...An unfixed point like the mastoid process..." <<<
Wrong. The mastoid IS a fixed body landmark. But, then, I guess you
must know more than James Humes, huh? From Humes' ARRB testimony:
QUESTION -- "When you recorded it as being from the right mastoid
process, was it your understanding that the right mastoid process was
a fixed body landmark?
DR. HUMES -- "Oh, sure. It doesn't move around in most people. You're
really in trouble if it does."
==================================================
David Von Pein
>>> "Demonstrating that the previous solution was incorrect is enough." <<<
Which is something that no conspiracy theorist (or group thereof) has
ever done.
Conspiracists THINK they've "demonstrated" that the official version
is wrong, but the unsupportable and forever-unprovable opinions of a
bunch of armchair theorists couldn't possibly matter less, IMO. (And
perhaps major news outlets like ABC and CBS, et al, feel the same
way.)
A brief look at the assassination inventory:
Conspiracy theorists have no non-Oswald guns, they have no bullets
other than those which came from Oswald's guns (or which were
consistent with coming from his guns), they have no bullet shells
other than those that go directly back into the two guns of Oswald
(including the four Tippit shells), and they have no witnesses who saw
anyone other than Lee Harvey Oswald firing a gun at either JFK or J.D.
Tippit.
When assessing anything of a "PHYSICAL" nature, about the only thing I
can think of (offhand) that the conspiracy theorists possess in this
"physical" regard (and I'm including "witness observations" in this
definition of things "physical"; aka: "Direct Evidence") would be the
several Parkland and Bethesda witnesses who said they saw a large
wound in the back of JFK's head.
But those witnesses (yes, ALL of them) are proven 100% incorrect/
mistaken by taking just a brief glance at the following
"unaltered" [HSCA determination] photograph, which proves beyond all
possible doubt that the "BOH" witnesses were wrong (no matter how many
of those witnesses existed):
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0061b.htm
How can Patrick Speer (or any conspiracy believer who thinks that JFK
was shot in the head from the front) possibly explain away the above-
linked X-ray of President Kennedy's cranium? How?
>>> "As far as your assessment of the TV programs you watch--please!!! If you can't see the bias of these programs then you really need to watch them again." <<<
This isn't always the case at all, IMO. For example, Robert Stone's
2007 PBS-TV documentary ("Oswald's Ghost") allows several pro-
conspiracy people to have their say--lots of "say", in fact--including
one of the "deans" of conspiracy, Mark Lane.
www.amazon.com/DVP-REVIEW-OSWALD'S-GHOST/review/R1S95P93PLA7OF
robcap...@netscape.com
> What would qualify as "real" evidence in your (kook) book, Robby?
"Please enlighten us, O Great One."
Physical evidence that TIES LHO to the crime(s). By this I mean proof
he fired a weapon that killed JFK and JDT. This is accomplised by
showing he fired a rifle, that the act was witnessed, and that the
bullets/fragments that link to the murder weapon were shown to have
been INSIDE the victim. Proof of ownership of said murder weapon
would be nice too. Fingerprints on the rifle and shells would be very
helpful. Of course a motive would be very helpful for an
investigation. There is more but this is a good start. In a
nutshell, I want all the proof the WCR DIDN'T have.
"Because evidently NONE of the DPD's and WC's evidence against Oswald
qualifies as "real" evidence in Robby's book. None of it! Zilch."
Because it isn't. NONE of it would have convicted LHO in a trial and
that is why he was murdered (also to shut him up).
"Therefore, there is NO evidence in the whole case at all, per Robby.
None! He's thrown it all away, merely because it was never entered as
"evidence" in a court of law."
That and because it is NOT evidence that ties LHO to the crimes. It
is all very poor circumstantial evidence, if I should even use that
word, and it would have not convicted him.
"Which means (per the kook): Oswald MUST be considered innocent,
despite the fact that the evidence being chucked in the garbage
disposal by the kook is really STILL THERE and able to be examined
(just as if LHO had lived and he was sitting in a courtroom facing the
charges against him)."
If NOT innocent then certainly very unlikely to be the prime suspect
in the shooting aspects, therefore, the authorities should have began
looking for other suspects. Why didn't they?
"As I said previously----
Inconceivable."
Only to someone either ingorant of the evidence put forth by the WC,
or paid to continue the lies.
Ben Holmes
robcap...@netscape.com says...
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means, what you think it means." -
Inigo Montoya
aeffects
David Von Pein
>>> "Slightly unstable does not equal tumbling." <<<
The bullet (CE399) was most-likely not tumbling very much at all
INSIDE Kennedy's body itself. Most of the yawing effect on the exiting
bullet probably occurred after the bullet struck the trachea and then
JFK's tie knot.
How can we know this?
Because the exit wound in JFK's throat (as observed by Dr. Perry at
Parkland before he performed the tracheotomy right through the wound)
certainly was not of sufficient size or proportion (according to Perry
and others who saw that wound, like Audrey Bell) to be considered a
wound through which an ALREADY-completely-unstable bullet had passed.
I think it's quite likely (though not provable, granted) that the
CLOTHING of John Kennedy probably added just enough instability to the
flight of Bullet CE399 to cause it to yaw into Connally's back
sideways.
And Dr. John Lattimer offers up another viable explanation that is
certainly worth considering when talking about the question of why the
exit wound in JFK's throat was so small. Lattimer, during his
extensive shooting experiments with a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle and
Oswald's exact WCC ammunition, learned something quite interesting
about the clothing of John Kennedy and its possible effects on a
passing bullet:
"These experiments {involving the firing of MC/WCC bullets at a
simulated JFK upper back and neck} confirmed beyond all of my doubts
that the smallness of the exit hole in the front of Kennedy's neck was
due to the fact that the skin was supported by a firm collar band,
which restrained it from bulging and bursting open ahead of the
exiting bullet. .... If the bullet had not exited from the President's
neck just AT the collar band, the exit wound might have been much
larger." -- Dr. John K. Lattimer; Page 239 of "Kennedy & Lincoln" (c.
1980)
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/4f18bcb78b94d9d8
David Von Pein
Pat Speer,
You don't have anywhere to go with your silly "at the hairline"
argument and you surely must know it....because Dr. Boswell's Face
Sheet (drawn at the time of the autopsy itself on 11/22/63!) is
definitely NOT consistent with your theory about an inshoot wound down
at the "hairline". It's not even close. Just LOOK:
http://pages.prodigy.net/whiskey99/facesht.jpg
Plus: Your theory about JFK being hit THREE separate times by three
bullets is so far out in left field, I doubt even Ken Griffey Jr. in
his late-'80s prime would be able to chase down and catch that one.
I'll ask again:
On what authoritative basis can you (Patrick Speer) possibly make the
bold claim that President Kennedy was struck by THREE separate bullets
in Dallas on November 22nd, 1963?
David Von Pein
>>> "Dr. Clark, who declared Kennedy's death, believed Kennedy's large head wound was a tangential wound of both entrance and exit, and that the throat wound was either an entrance of the bullet exiting the skull, or an exit of a piece of bone from the head wound. This suggests he was open to the idea there were two head wounds as well, and that a bullet had descended in the neck." <<<
And did Kemp Clark perform the autopsy?
Face it, Pat, you've got nowhere to go with your "3 SHOTS HIT KENNEDY"
made-up theory....because it has no basis in fact at all. None. There
is no evidence anywhere to indicate that JFK was struck by more than
TWO bullets. None. Only theories. And you're happy with your theories
(evidently). I'm happier, however, with the provable and verifiable
FACT that President Kennedy was wounded by only TWO bullets on
11/22/63.
>>> "Now riddle me this, why does Bugliosi say Kellerman heard a third shot, just as he was getting on the radio, when Kellerman testified to hearing a "flurry of shots" at this time?" <<<
Your mind wandered, eh? (Or is this still the same "3 Shots Hit JFK"
subject?) ~shrug~
To answer your riddle -- I haven't the foggiest. Go ask Vince.
But you know what Roy Kellerman's "flurry" was, don't you? (It's
obvious once you know what the real evidence is.)---
Kellerman was obviously hearing the sound of the ONE single head-shot
bullet fragmenting in the front of the limousine, right next to
Kellerman's ear in the front seat (i.e., the fragmented head-shot
bullet striking the windshield and also striking the chrome topping
near the windshield).
Hence, Kellerman said he heard "a flurry of shells come into the car".
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/kellerma.htm
BTW, Within Roy Kellerman's Warren Commission testimony, we also find
this interesting passage regarding the specific number of gunshots he
heard that day:
ARLEN SPECTER -- "You have drawn a conclusion, in effect, by saying
that there were four wounds for the President and three wounds for the
Governor; and from that, you say there must have been more than three
shots in your opinion or your view. But my question is: Do you have
any current recollection of having heard more than three shots?"
ROY KELLERMAN -- "No, I don't. I will have to say no."
David Von Pein
>>> "There are mountains of evidence that this was a conspiracy, the head snapping backward being the most crucial of all." <<<
And if you'd stop to think about it for just two seconds, you'd HAVE
to conclude this:
It doesn't make a bit of difference HOW the President's head behaves
after being struck by the bullet.
Why?
Because it's a verified and proven-beyond-all-doubt scientific FACT
that JFK was hit in the head by just ONE bullet--and that bullet
entered from BEHIND.
Therefore, given this irrevocable fact, it doesn't matter if JFK's
head were to have spun around 40 times after the bullet hit him...the
end result would still be exactly the same -- One bullet entered John
Kennedy's cranium FROM THE REAR.
Done deal.
Plus, there's the further undeniable fact of JFK's head moving FORWARD
at the most critical moment in the head-shot timeline--i.e., the
INSTANT OF THE BULLET'S IMPACT.
And this is a "moving forward" fact that many CTers still seem to want
to deny (or ignore) even to this day....and even with crystal-clear
PHOTOGRAPHIC evidence to show the head of the President being driven
forward at impact (via the slo-mo Z-Film clip below):
www.jfkmurdersolved.com/images/Headshot-large.gif
>>> "And then of course there is the magic bullet theory. What kind of person would believe such ridiculous nonsense?" <<<
Typical CTer. Latch onto chaff and ignore the wheat field in front of
his/her nose.
The only way the SBT is NOT true, is to believe in some stuff that is
much (MUCH) more unbelievable (and filled with "nonsense") than is the
SBT.
Why CTers don't realize this basic fact is simply amazing. But none of
them do seem to realize it. (Go figure.)
============================================
IN A (LONE) NUTSHELL -- THE SINGLE-BULLET THEORY:
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/0b30398a449c05b7
============================================
drgonz...@aol.com
> >>> "I'm not here to speculate, just to analyze the facts, which tell me that a roomful of Dallas's finest would not mistake a German rifle for an Italian rifle. It's not like they had to ID the weapon from the sound of a richochet or something, they had the thing in their hands." <<<
>
>
> Great "Patsy Plot" there --- They try to frame Oswald by planting a
> Mauser (which Oz didn't own)...and then plant bullets and shells from
> Oswald's Carcano to further complicate the ridiculous "Patsy Plot"
> that almost all CTers believe in.
>
> basement) at the time they mapped out that idiotic plan.
>
> of gun-switching foolishness over on 10th Street too. Because per most
> CT-Kooks I've talked with (you know, the morons who want Oz to be
> innocent of the Tippit murder too, even with 13 witnesses there to
> I.D. Ozzie ~shrug~)....those kooks have Tippit being killed by an
> "automatic" pistol, but then (within a pre-determined "LET'S FRAME
> OZZIE" plot remember) they decide to plant shells from Oswald's .38
> S&W revolver.
>
> amongst the evidence would signal "No Conspiracy At All" to the
> authorities looking into the case, and that this inconsistent evidence
> would also somehow result in a situation where the cops would have no
> choice but to pin it all on ONLY Lee Oswald.
>
> Like I said, the plotters were all high.