DEBUNKING MORE CONSPIRACY MYTHS (YET AGAIN)
David Von Pein
>>> "How did Officer McDonald know that Oswald was the suspect when his name was never disseminated on the DPD radio system? I have all the transmissions that day, have listened to them numerous times, but I can't for the life of me figure out how he knew how to call out "Oswald" when he entered the theatre." <<<
Where did that CT Myth about McDonald come from? Never heard that one
before. Must be a new myth from the CT vine. McDonald never called the
name "Oswald" when he entered the theater; and that's because the name
"Oswald" was not known by any of the DPD officers at the time of LHO's
arrest.
The police got a tip from Julia Postal's phone call. Postal (with
Johnny Brewer's info at the ready too) told the police that a
suspicious-acting man had entered the theater, with Postal also
telling the police "This man is running from them for some reason".
But the name "Oswald" was most certainly never mentioned by Postal,
Brewer, or anyone else until after the police had Oswald in custody
and seated in a police car.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/postal.htm
So, the DPD had all the info they needed to act on Postal's tip. They
knew a man who was acting in a suspicious manner had gone into the
theater. And this was just a few blocks from the Tippit murder site
(and just a few minutes after that murder).
McDonald didn't know the suspect was "Oswald" by name when he
encountered him in the theater. The suspect was pointed out to
McDonald and the other officers by Johnny Brewer. But Brewer certainly
didn't say the name "Oswald" to anybody.
Why in the world would ANYONE (other than Oliver Stone) find the above
chain of events leading to Oswald's arrest the least bit strange or
mysterious or conspiratorial in any fashion whatsoever?
I wonder if Oliver Stone thinks Postal and Brewer were co-plotters
too?
CTers....a strange (empty) lot indeed.
>>> "And I still can't figure out how Oswald had three wallets either; maybe you could explain that. That's a lot of wallets for one person, wouldn't you agree?" <<<
Yeah. But you've got three heads, don't you? (And none of them
contains a working brain that can process information accurately. So,
strange things happen sometimes. Go figure.)
BTW, even if the "extra wallet" on 10th Street WAS Oswald's (and I
think it was probably Tippit's and not LHO's), how does this extra
wallet being found WHERE WE KNOW OSWALD SHOT AND KILLED TIPPIT somehow
get Oswald off the hook for that murder on Tenth Street?
A "planted" wallet? Why? What the heck for? There were many witnesses
watching Oswald shoot Tippit, and there were the shells from Oz's gun
left behind too. Why the need to plant any wallet? That idea is just
too goofy for further discussion.
>>> "It is amazing how a witness who said, beyond a doubt, he could pick out the sixth floor shooter, failed to do so on the day of the shooting, huh?" <<<
Not at all. Howard Brennan fully explained all of that in his WC
testimony and in his earlier FBI interviews. But, naturally, CTers
don't want to accept Brennan's "I Feared For My Life And The Safety Of
My Family" explanation. So, per CTers, Brennan is a teller of tall
tales.
It was lucky for Howard, though, that his initial descriptions (via
affidavit and to the police for the APB bulletin) just happened to
generally match Oswald. After all, Brennan could have initially said
he saw a black man in his 60s with a bushy beard firing a gun at JFK
that day, couldn't he have?
And, given the brain-free nature of the bumbling Patsy-Framers who the
CT-Kooks think were arranging the assassination, I'm kinda surprised
those bumblers DIDN'T utilize a black man in his 60s to "double" as
Lee Oswald in the window.
>>> "It is amazing how a fully metal jacketed bullet acted like a hollow point bullet that day, isn't it?" <<<
And yet the "hollow point" bullet still (somehow) managed to RETAIN
ITS POINTY-NOSE STATUS after striking the bones in John Connally and
making its way onto that stretcher (per some CTers who think Tomlinson
found a "pointy", INTACT bullet inside Parkland Hospital).
Amazing, huh? CTers think that CE399 could never in a million decades
do what LNers and the WC and the HSCA say 399 did to the two victims
in 1963....and yet, somehow, some way, this "pointy-tipped" bullet
that many CTers think was the "Real" bullet found by Tomlinson was
able to cause extensive bony damage to Connally....without even
crushing the pointy tip of the bullet.
How'd that happen, Mr. Conspiracy?
Or was the "pointy" bullet a "plant" too?
If so, your team of plotters/planters just got dumber (if that's even
possible). They plant a bullet that can't possibly be tied to their
"Patsy", and then have to switch the bullets later.
Why not just NOT plant ANY bullet? That'd make much more sense. But
when you've got to make up ridiculous accusations about planted
evidence, you know that such a scenario can never make any sense. And,
of course, it doesn't. Not even from the "CTer" POV.
>>> "It is amazing how one cab driver says LHO was in his cab, but never picked him out in a lineup." <<<
You're goofy. Whaley positively identified Oswald as being the person
who was in his cab on November 22, 1963. Let's have a look:
WILLIAM WHALEY (To the WC) -- "I knew he {Oswald} was the right one as
soon as I saw him {in the police line-up}."
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/whaley1.htm
Also, there's the added fact that Lee Oswald admitted to having ridden
in a cab on November 22.*
* = You see, Oswald didn't ALWAYS lie to the police after his arrest.
His many, many lies (logically so) centered mainly on his whereabouts
at 12:30 PM and when he was questioned about the assassination itself
and the topic of Oswald's guns.
But the cab ride wasn't important enough for him to lie about, so he
didn't lie about it. Same with the bus ride. He admitted to that too.
Plus, the paper bus transfer in his pocket provides ironclad proof he
was on McWatters' bus on 11/22/63.
And, btw, the cab ride is an interesting topic for multiple other
reasons as well....in that it is circumstantial evidence, itself, of
Oswald's guilt on November 22. And that's because Oswald was a
tightwad/cheapskate/skinflint of the first order.
I doubt, in fact, that you could find one other example of LHO
spending his cash on a taxi ride within the United States. And he
certainly never spent his money on a cab ride JUST TO GO HOME FROM
WORK. (I do believe, though, that he rode in a few cabs while he lived
in Russia.)
Also -- If Oswald were innocent of killing Kennedy....WHY WAS HE IN
SUCH A BIG HURRY TO GET HOME ON NOV. 22?
He walks PAST a perfectly-good bus stop right there at Elm & Houston
and walks several blocks east on Elm and gets on a bus in the middle
of a block that he normally would not have gotten on to take him to
his lodgings on Beckley Avenue in Oak Cliff.
Why?
And then he's in such a hurry that he only stays on the bus approx.
four minutes or so and gets a transfer from driver Cecil McWatters
(which, btw, might mean MORE wasted money down the drain for el-cheapo
Oswald IF he doesn't use the transfer in the allotted timeframe, which
he might NOT do at all that day, since he decides to switch
transportation modes entirely and get in a taxi cab instead of getting
on another Dallas bus).
Why the big hurry to get out of downtown Dallas IF HE'S COMPLETELY
INNOCENT OF ANY CRIME?
And then, even though he's obviously in a pretty big HURRY (to get
home?), he has cab driver William W. Whaley drive him BEYOND his
roominghouse at 1026 N. Beckley, with Whaley dropping Oswald off in
the 700 block of Beckley (at Neely & Beckley).
Obviously, Oswald didn't want Whaley to drop him off right in front of
his roominghouse. Why, if he's got nothing to hide at all?
>>> "Five witnesses place him {Oswald} in a Nash Rambler." <<<
The whole "Oswald Got In A Rambler" story is proven to be the bunk it
is with just one good look at the OTHER evidence that proves Oswald
was getting on a bus at that precise time (about 12:40).
Or did the driver of the Rambler suddenly get mad at his co-
conspirator and throw Oswald out of the station wagon, leaving Lee to
his own locomotion devices for the rest of the afternoon?
>>> "It is amazing how two witnesses place him {Oswald} on the first floor, while at the same time, people on Elm Street see someone that looks like him on the sixth floor, isn't it?" <<<
Who besides Carolyn "I NEVER SAID A WORD ABOUT SEEING OSWALD IN THE
SECOND-FLOOR LUNCH ROOM UNTIL 1978" Arnold said they saw Oswald on the
first floor around the time of the assassination?
Carolyn Arnold, btw, gave two FBI statements shortly after the
assassination....in one of those statements she said she might have
caught a glimpse of LHO on the first floor shortly before the
assassination. But in her other FBI interview, Arnold never said
anything about seeing Oswald anywhere in the building on November 22.
But in NEITHER of her FBI statements did Mrs. Arnold say anything
about seeing Oswald sitting in the SECOND-FLOOR lunch room, alone,
eating his lunch. She made up that tale for Anthony Summers fifteen
years after the assassination.
So much for Carolyn Arnold's credibility.
When talking about additional sightings of Oswald on the FIRST floor
shortly before 12:30....are you talking about Eddie Piper? Or Bill
Shelley?
Well, if so, you'd better re-think that CT strategy. Because neither
of those witnesses can possibly rescue your beloved Saint Oswald. Not
at all. Or have you thought up a new "1st-Floor Witness" to help clear
the dear, sweet patsy?
>>> "Isn't is amazing that 5' 10", 165-175 describes Malcolm Wallace rather than Lee Harvey Oswald?" <<<
Back to Malcolm again, eh? Similar to gum on the ol' shoe, Mac just
kinda sticks there, doesn't he (for CTers without anything ELSE to
rely on anyway)? He sticks there, even though no TSBD workers who were
working on the 6th Floor on November 22 saw any "strangers" in the
building that day. Nor did any other TSBD workers (except possibly one
old man being seen on the FIRST floor, but certainly not the sixth
floor).
So, apparently Wallace now looks so much like Lee Harvey Oswald that
Howard Brennan actually was totally FOOLED by Malcolm's presence in
the 6th-Floor window, huh?!
Mac MUST have been an excellent "Oswald Look-alike" indeed.
David Von Pein
October 2007
a1e...@verizon.net
> www.amazon.com/forum/Fx2TVHW5I0UEY9A/TxR9QNQTFC20JF/29/ref=cm_cd_et_m...
>
> >>> "How did Officer McDonald know that Oswald was the suspect when his name was never disseminated on the DPD radio system? I have all the transmissions that day, have listened to them numerous times, but I can't for the life of me figure out how he knew how to call out "Oswald" when he entered the theatre." <<<
>
> Where did that CT Myth about McDonald come from? Never heard that one
> before. Must be a new myth from the CT vine. McDonald never called the
> name "Oswald" when he entered the theater; and that's because the name
> "Oswald" was not known by any of the DPD officers at the time of LHO's
> arrest.
The arrest report on Lee Harvey Oswald states, "This man shot and
killed President John F. Kennedy and Police Officer J. D. Tippit. He
also shot and wounded Governor Connally."
http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/00/0043-001.gif
A statement such as the suspect resisted interrogation by assaulting
an officer would have been a far more proper comment in the section
entitled "other details of the arrest."
Do you think that M. N. McDonald was an insider or just plain
clairvoyant?
Herbert
David Von Pein
>>> "The arrest report on Lee Harvey Oswald states, "This man shot and killed President John F. Kennedy and Police Officer J. D. Tippit. He also shot and wounded Governor Connally." .... Do you think that M. N. McDonald was an insider or just plain clairvoyant?" <<<
Well....duh!
Quite obviously, by the time that arrest report was filled out, the
DPD (including Officer McDonald) had gathered enough information and
ample evidence to know that Lee Oswald had, in fact, shot JFK & JBC
(in addition to killing Tippit).
Why do simplistic things like this even need to be spelled out for
people? Unbelievable.
David Von Pein
DEBUNKING STILL MORE CONSPIRACY MYTHS........
>>> "The single-bullet shot has never been replicated, not even close. Unfortunately, the Discovery Channel's 'Beyond the Magic Bullet' was an absolute farce." <<<
Bullshit. Horsefeathers. (And Balderdash.)
>>> "I break it down and analyze it {the 2004 Discovery Channel SBT program} in detail in the Single-Bullet Fact chapter at patspeer.com." <<<
I analyze it in a much-better manner at the link below (with ample
amounts of common sense being thrown in, to boot):
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/69758897e673c5a2
>>> "I read David's opinion-laden blog {re. the Discovery Channel program, "JFK: Beyond The Magic Bullet"}, stating things could have happened, and we never can recreate the events of that day." <<<
We can't re-create the SBT right down to the "Nth" degree, and
everybody should know why. That'd be like trying to shoot the same
bear in the woods TWICE through the very same small bullet hole in the
bear's head from about 100 yards away. And that's just....silly.
BUT -- What the Discovery Channel program did accomplish in 2004 is to
generally reconstruct the SBT shot using mock human-like torsos, a
Carcano rifle like Oswald's, and a WCC/MC bullet like CE399.*
* = And the Australian team of researchers re-created the SBT scenario
with as much accuracy as could be humanly obtained, which is why the
gunman used a much-better scope than Oswald's cheap Japanese
type...and the test shooter STILL missed the exact spot on JFK's back
(even WITH the higher-quality scope on his rifle), proving my previous
point all the more re. the shooting being very nearly impossible to
duplicate to the inch and to the Nth degree.
The end result of the Discovery Channel test wasn't a perfect "SBT Re-
creation", no. That is true. But it was so CLOSE to being spot-on
perfect that any REASONABLE person watching that SBT test would have
no choice but to ask himself the following question:
"Gee, I wonder how that team of Australian researchers was able to
almost mimic the SBT if the SBT was really TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE, as I've
been told it was for lo these many years by conspiracy theorists and
pro-conspiracy authors?"
I'd sooner believe that Kennedy and Connally were never shot through
their respective backs at all, than to believe the silly anti-SBT
nonsense that's been spouted by CTers over the years -- i.e., the CT
belief that up to THREE separate bullets all came together in the
bodies of TWO different victims on Elm Street on November 22, 1963,
with those multiple bullets (THREE of them by most CTer accounts,
since nearly all conspiracists think there was a shot that entered
JFK's throat from the front) almost perfectly mirroring what the ONE
bullet (CE399) is said to have done via the Warren Commission's SBT.
Plus: All three of those anti-SBT make-believe bullets disappear too.
Don't forget that. And TWO of the three DIDN'T EVEN EXIT JOHN
KENNEDY'S BODY AT ALL IN DEALEY PLAZA! (Go figure that "magic" being
exhibited by those two AWOL missiles. I can't.)
Argue about the "third thoracic" and the "spine", etc., all you want
to. But until a more-reasonable scenario comes along that is way more
plausible than what CTers currently think must have happened with
respect to the initial injuries sustained by JFK and Governor
Connally, then the Single-Bullet Theory is positively the most logical
and believable version of the double-man wounding that occurred in
Dealey Plaza in 1963.
Walter Cronkite summed things up fairly well (IMO), when he made the
following remarks to his CBS-TV audience in June of 1967 (on the CBS-
produced television documentary special, "A CBS NEWS INQUIRY: THE
WARREN REPORT")......
"Our own view on the evidence is that it is difficult to believe
the Single-Bullet Theory. But, to believe the other theories is even
MORE difficult. If the Governor's wounds were caused by a separate
bullet, then we must believe that a bullet passed through the
President's neck, emerged at high velocity on a course that was taking
it directly into the middle of the automobile, and then vanished
without a trace.
"Or, we can complicate matters even further--as some do--by
adding a second assassin, who fires almost simultaneously with Oswald
and whose bullet travels miraculously a trajectory identical with
Oswald's and that second assassin, too, vanishes without a trace.
"Difficult to believe as the Single-Bullet Theory may be, it
seems to be the LEAST difficult of all those that are available.
"In the end, like the Commission, we are persuaded that a single
bullet wounded both President Kennedy and Governor Connally."
=================
In addition, we have Cronkite stating the following......
"We have shown, by carefully-controlled experiments, that a
Mannlicher-Carcano rifle CAN be fired more rapidly and accurately than
the {Warren} Commission believed.
"Now these points strengthen the Warren Report's basic finding.
They make it MORE likely that Oswald shot the President. They
significantly weaken a central contention of the critics....their
contention that Oswald could NOT have done it because he did not have
enough time to fire.
"It is now reasonable to assume that the first shot, fired
through a tree, missed its mark....and that it was this shot that
Governor Connally heard. The Governor has insisted all along that he
was not struck by the first shot. It now appears he was correct. Now
we can answer all our secondary questions ---
"Did Oswald own a rifle? .... He did.
"Did Oswald take a rifle to the Book Depository Building? ....
He did.
"Where was Oswald when the shots were fired? .... In the
building, on the sixth floor.
"Was Oswald's rifle fired from the building? .... It was.
"How many shots were fired? .... Three.
"How fast could Oswald's rifle be fired? .... Fast enough.
"What was the time span of the shots? .... Seven or eight
seconds.
"Did Lee Harvey Oswald shoot President Kennedy? .... CBS News
concludes that he did."
www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=015D59B2C24BA191
=================
Question -- Is respected TV anchorman Walter Cronkite a rotten liar
too? And was the entire CBS staff filled with liars and cover-up
agents of some kind too in 1967, when they also endorsed the "Lone
Assassin Named Oswald" conclusion?
And what about the riflemen who simulated Oswald's shooting
performance for CBS in that same 1967 documentary (via a specially-
constructed moving track that was built to match the Dealey Plaza
sniper's perch and the distances and speed of the limo, etc.)?
All lies? Even when multiple gunmen (firing Carcano bolt-action
rifles) were able to duplicate and even EXCEED Lee Harvey Oswald's 2-
for-3 shooting performance in well under 8 seconds for the CBS-TV
cameras?
The "truth" of the JFK assassination, of course, was arrived at in
November of 1963. But when a rabid conspiracy theorist doesn't like
the taste of something, he usually spits it out and puts something in
his mouth that's a little more tasty.
And "chaff" seems to be a conspiracy theorist's delicacy of choice
when it comes to things relating to the death of the 35th U.S.
President (and it has been the favorite food of CTers for 44 years
now).
Food for thought.
aeffects
...
> Food for thought.
I'll take mine with catsup and facts...... thanks (remember no free
advertising or blogging on this board, verboten!)
a1e...@verizon.net
The details that appeared on the arrest report belonged on the
investigative report, usually filled by someone other than the
arresting officer.
So, David, tell us which DPD form documented Oswald's armed assault
upon McDonald?
Herbert
David Von Pein
>>> "So, David, tell us which DPD form documented Oswald's armed assault upon McDonald?" <<<
Here's the best answer I can find with regard to that question:
Who the hell cares?!
Only a CTer looking for things to gripe about could possibly care
about such trivial and meaningless paperwork.
It's a verified and known FACT that Lee Harvey Oswald positively DID
resist arrest in the theater by pulling a gun on Officer M.N. McDonald
and by hitting McDonald in the face. We have multiple eyewitnesses
(including civilian Johnny Brewer) to verify the theater struggle
beyond all doubt.
So the "DPD form" that was utilized to document the theater struggle
isn't an item that anyone needs later on in order to find out the
truth about what happened in the theater. Johnny Brewer's observations
suffice very nicely:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=O30qr4VRDkI&fmt=18
Coupled with this:
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2005/Jan-29-Sat-2005/photos/mcdonald.jpg
Do CTers think that McDonald slashed his own face while shaving on the
morning of November 22, 1963?