David Von Pein Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Ken, You're assuming exactitude regarding the precise position of every box that cannot be ascertained. You should love this picture I post at the bottom of Page 10, because it shows an even more cramped space for the assassin. But the gunman was still able to fire shots out that window---and that's a provable FACT. Here's that pic again.... http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark%3A/67531/metapth339287/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneth Drew Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Time for a Vince Bugliosi "Common Sense" break.... Not sure why you put that up. Bug Man kinda sounded like a babbling idiot. He basically destroyed his own case. Did you hear his summation at about 44 minutes in when he started his spiel about there 'was no way they would have used Oswald as a patsy, he was a poor shooter and barely only qualified as a sharpshooter and he only had a 12 dollar rifle which wouldn't hit anything. That's what Bug Man said. Wycht tore him a new a**hole on his argument. Bug Man sounded like an idiotic amateur. No wonder he tookl off at the end so he wouldn't have to summarize his babbling idiocy. I believe I would delete my link to that one DVP. It does not enhance your image. Whenever Vince Bugliosi said in his many radio interviews that Oswald "would have been one of the last people in the world the conspirators would hire to kill the President", it is always based on the fact (based on the evidence) that Oswald DID KILL KENNEDY. IOW, in almost all the interviews he did in 2007, Vince establishes (in summary form, of course) Oswald's GUILT first. He then goes on to talk about how ridiculous it would be for anyone to actually hire this unstable loser with a 12-dollar gun to perform such a big "hit" for the Mafia or CIA or whoever else the CTers want to have involved. But the key in Vince's chronology is almost always to establish Oswald's guilt first. And from that POV and framework, Vince makes total sense to me, because it would be a situation where you'd have to believe (based on the clear evidence of Oswald's guilt) that the CIA or some other group actually DID hire Lee Oswald to murder the President for them, vs. the popular conspiracy theory we always hear about Oswald never firing a shot and then being used as the unwitting patsy for JFK's murder. Are you still spinning in a circle, is your head pointed to the front or back. So there is no way that LHO could have made the shot, he had a rifle that could not have made the shot, he had a scope that could not have made the shot and he was in a spot where he could not have been and no one else (including top marksmen) has ever made this shot, but old Bug Man is sure LHO did it. Let me know when you stop laughing and digging. And as I say, I'd ditch those links........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 (edited) Here's another view of the SN (CE512), which shows the shells on the floor (which means it's certainly NOT a "re-creation" photo; it was taken on 11/22). And notice how the stack of book cartons seems to END at the bottom of the photo. Therefore, based on this photo BEFORE ANYTHING WAS MOVED, I contend that you, Ken Drew, are incorrect when you claim the boxes were configured in such a manner that would have prohibited a shooter from sitting on the box near the corner and the pipes and firing a gun out the window (even a righthander). The boxes don't seem to be extending all the way into the area where the box was located that had Oswald's right palmprint on it (the box he probably sat on).... Edited July 1, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneth Drew Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 We all saw him hold the rifle up, we also saw the second rifle and we saw him point to a spot on the rifle and state that it said Mauser. Oh, great. We're back to your make-believe 11/22/63 "Mauser" TV footage again, eh? In reality, of course, no such footage exists, and never did. So did you, or did you not see that footage on tv on 11/22/23/63? I did. That's how I know it existed on that day. I can certainly agree it won't likely be seen today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneth Drew Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Kenneth, I wasn't calling Mark Knight a nincompoop. I was calling the alleged "patsy framers" nincompoops. Try reading for comprehension, Ken. It was quite clear who I was aiming the "nincompoop" at. I didn't say you were name calling. I was only responding to Mark's comment. Try reading for comprehension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 (edited) Are you still spinning in a circle, is your head pointed to the front or back. So there is no way that LHO could have made the shot, he had a rifle that could not have made the shot, he had a scope that could not have made the shot and he was in a spot where he could not have been and no one else (including top marksmen) has ever made this shot, but old Bug Man is sure LHO did it. Let me know when you stop laughing and digging. THINK for two seconds, Ken! THINK! Vince wasn't saying Oswald was INCAPABLE of the shooting. (Obviously he's not saying any such stupid thing, because Vince says LHO did it. Duh.) He's saying that Oswald---THE PROVEN ASSASSIN (regardless of his deficiencies)---would not have been a real good choice for any type of "professional" CIA or Mob hit on the President. Got it now? Or will you still pretend that you don't understand Bugliosi's obvious point? Edited June 30, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 (edited) Kenneth, I wasn't calling Mark Knight a nincompoop. I was calling the alleged "patsy framers" nincompoops. Try reading for comprehension, Ken. It was quite clear who I was aiming the "nincompoop" at. I didn't say you were name calling. I was only responding to Mark's comment. Try reading for comprehension. Oh, okay. Sorry. I thought you were (as usual) poking your sharp stick squarely in my eye. My fault. Edited June 30, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Dave You are continually stating that it is a provable fact that shots were fired from the Sniper's Nest on the 6th floor. How can you prove this, and how can you prove shots were not fired from the Dal-Tex Building? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneth Drew Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Mark, No re-enactment can reproduce with to-the-inch 100% accuracy the position of the gunman in the window. And you know that's true. Mark. The re-enactments are based on educated guesses regarding the angle and position of the rifle in the window. And I'm doubting that if Oswald had scooted just a few inches to his right, that fact would have suddenly made all of the FBI's trajectory data completely useless and worthless and invalid. That's not a reasonable thing to think, because there's got to be some "margin of error" built in to such trajectory studies. Plus, after looking at the Howlett re-creation photo again (below), I'm not sure Oswald would have needed to do any "scooting" to his right at all. We can't know exactly how much space there is between Howlett's left shoulder and the pipes. And why on Earth would you think it would have been impossible for Howlett to have used his RIGHT hand to simulate the rifle here (instead of the left hand/arm he is using)? I see no problem at all here for a right-handed shooter. But CTers "see" strange things all the time, don't they?.... Sorry DVP, that argument doesn't work. See where the agent right leg is? In the original, that space had a stack of boxes there, he couldn't have scooted any to the right and he also could not have been sitting where he is sitting. There's an old adage about knowing when to stop digging. Oh, it's a cramped space for sure. I've never denied that. But a rifle WAS being fired from the very window on Nov. 22. You know it, Ken (whether you'll admit it or not), I know it, and all reasonable people know it. So why pretend otherwise? BTW, here's an HQ pic (linked below) which shows part of the Nest with the shells still on the floor. So this pic was definitely taken on Nov. 22 itself, not later on. And the Texas History site also says "Nov. 22" for the date of this photo. And, yes, it is a tight squeeze for the gunman. We also know this from Luke Mooney's testimony. He said something about having to go in there sideways, I think. But since there can be no REASONABLE doubt about a rifle definitely having been fired from this cramped space, CTers really have nowhere to go with their arguments about how it "can't be done".... http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339287 Then why hasn't anyone been able to put a shooter on the 6th floor? How has anyone proven a shot was fired from there? When did they prove it? I've never seen any proof. I've never seen a picture of anyone in that window when the shots were fired. Have you? Why did most of the people,,including police officers run to the grassy knoll? No matter how much you'd like to be able to prove it. Can't do it. Has never been done and you're not going to be the one to prove it. The simple reason: It didn't happen. It's a dead issue. 75% of Americans think it was a conspiracy. You're on the losing side. live with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 (edited) Dave You are continually stating that it is a provable fact that shots were fired from the Sniper's Nest on the 6th floor. How can you prove this, and how can you prove shots were not fired from the Dal-Tex Building? Next question please. Because the one you just asked is too ridiculous to warrant any response. Edited June 30, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneth Drew Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Ken, You're assuming exactitude regarding the precise position of every box that cannot be ascertained. You should love this picture I post at the bottom of Page 10, because it shows an even more cramped space for the assassin. But the gunman was still able to fire shots out that window---and that's a provable FACT. Here's that pic again.... http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark%3A/67531/metapth339287/ the problem with that view is it doesn't show that the end where the photo was taken from is even more crowded. There was actually not enough room for an adult male to stand facing E or W because there was only about 15 inches available and most men's shoulders are wider than 15". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Are you still spinning in a circle, is your head pointed to the front or back. So there is no way that LHO could have made the shot, he had a rifle that could not have made the shot, he had a scope that could not have made the shot and he was in a spot where he could not have been and no one else (including top marksmen) has ever made this shot, but old Bug Man is sure LHO did it. Let me know when you stop laughing and digging. THINK for two seconds, Ken! THINK! Vince wasn't saying Oswald was INCAPABLE of the shooting. (Obviously he's not saying any such stupid thing, because Vince says LHO did it. Duh.) He's saying that Oswald---THE PROVEN ASSASSIN (regardless of his deficiencies)---would not have been a real good choice for any type of "professional" CIA or Mob hit on the President. Got it now? Or will you still pretend that you don't understand Bugliosi's obvious point? bug's point is regular or extra crispy? Or should one contact Dale Meyer's for the answer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 (edited) We all saw him hold the rifle up, we also saw the second rifle and we saw him point to a spot on the rifle and state that it said Mauser. Oh, great. We're back to your make-believe 11/22/63 "Mauser" TV footage again, eh? In reality, of course, no such footage exists, and never did. So did you, or did you not see that footage on tv on 11/22/23/63? I did. That's how I know it existed on that day. I can certainly agree it won't likely be seen today. You never saw it either. It only exists in your post-1963 mind. Happens all the time. Conflation runs amok. Edited July 1, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted July 1, 2015 Share Posted July 1, 2015 Translation = We cannot prove shots were fired from the SE corner of the 6th floor of the TSBD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneth Drew Posted July 1, 2015 Share Posted July 1, 2015 Dave You are continually stating that it is a provable fact that shots were fired from the Sniper's Nest on the 6th floor. How can you prove this, and how can you prove shots were not fired from the Dal-Tex Building? I can answer that. It can not, and has not, been proved that shots were fired from the sniper's nest. It can not, and has not, been proved that shots were fired from the DalTex building. It also has not been proven that shots were not fired from the DalTex building. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now