Jump to content
The Education Forum
Paz Marverde

Who changed the motorcade route?

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Dead right, no turn, no dogleg. And it ain't no sketch. Its [sic] an illustration of the route. It proves there was a disagreement about the route.

Bull. It shows the motorcade turning directly onto STEMMONS from MAIN. And how does one manage to get from Main to Stemmons?

Answer --- Hop over to Houston and then Elm. That's how. Traffic is not permitted to go directly from MAIN to STEMMONS. Therefore, as I mentioned before in this thread, the HOUSTON and ELM turns are, in effect, IMPLIED in this 11/22 DMN map, even though those two turns aren't spelled out specifically on the map.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rich:

Don't get to worked up about  DVP.  Note how he ignored 95 percent of my post above.  So why do it.

He's a diversion who does not even take himself seriously. Anyone who can read 2,646 pages of RH and not find one serious error of fact or statement in it, I mean please.  Bugliosi out and out lied right at the beginning of the book and DVP swept it under the rug.

https://kennedysandking.com/content/von-pein-colbert-replies-and-the-comedy-continues

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Anyone who can read 2,646 pages of RH [sic; the Reclaiming History page count is actually 2,824, including all Source Notes and unnumbered pages] and not find one serious error of fact or statement in it, I mean please.  Bugliosi out and out lied right at the beginning of the book and DVP swept it under the rug.

Just like with the word "discredited", CTers also have their own unique definition of the word "lied".

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-124/The Way Vincent Bugliosi Presents The CTers' Arguments

https://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/#Reclaiming-History-Errors

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rich Pope said:

BTW...my copy of the November 22, 1963 Dallas Morning News just arrived today and the map clearly shows NO turn onto Houston or Elm.  It was the best $100 I spent

Rich, you are the kind of person I like. Thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Vince and Jim DiEugenio stressed, and as Rich Pope shows, till the last moment there would have been not that fatal change of the motorcade turning on Elm Street. This is extremely interesting if you consider that Italian investigation shows that Carcano Oswald was accused to have shoot with is connected to a friend of Licio Gelli, head of P2, and that the Italian journalist Michele Metta discovered there is a connection between Byrd, owner of 411 Elm Street, and a Centro Mondiale Commerciale member, and besides that CMC and P2 are all in all the same thing. It was all staged. It was a farse. The most tragic one, since it killed the best POTUS ever and for no real reason if not money, war, egoism, paranoia 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paz Marverde said:

Rich, you are the kind of person I like. Thank you

 

1 hour ago, Paz Marverde said:

As Vince and Jim DiEugenio stressed, and as Rich Pope shows, till the last moment there would have been not that fatal change of the motorcade turning on Elm Street. This is extremely interesting if you consider that Italian investigation shows that Carcano Oswald was accused to have shoot with is connected to a friend of Licio Gelli, head of P2, and that the Italian journalist Michele Metta discovered there is a connection between Byrd, owner of 411 Elm Street, and a Centro Mondiale Commerciale member, and besides that CMC and P2 are all in all the same thing. It was all staged. It was a farse. The most tragic one, since it killed the best POTUS ever and for no real reason if not money, war, egoism, paranoia 

Rich:  I'm not sure you are aware of this but on the 50th anniversary, there were thousands of these 11/22/63 DMN's published and available, starting weeks before that event.  So the "supply" was there, and I'm surprised the cost for this item (unless it was an actual 11/23/63 "original") was that high.

DSL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

Carcano Rifle C2766 was Lee Harvey Oswald's gun, as of March 20, 1963.

(Tons of paperwork to prove that fact.)

Arrows.png

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/12/oswald-ordered-rifle.html

A rifle was seen by Marina in the Paine garage in Sept. or Oct. of 1963.

That rifle was missing from its known storage location in Ruth Paine's garage on 11/22/63.

C2766 was the JFK murder weapon.

C2766 was found on the sixth floor, TSBD, on 11/22.

A newborn baby could do this math. But for some reason, it always eludes a conspiracy theorist.

No, that may be just the WC apologists going to extreme assumptions rather than having the courage to examine the facts...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Rich Pope said:

For days, news anchors such as Walter Cronkite reported the rifle that was found to be a 7.65 Mauser.  Suddenly it morphed into the Carcano.  

 

Rich, you should make some attempt at being more accurate. You often come off as a sensationalist, and it does little good for you or us. The Mauser identification lasted into the evening on Saturday; some 30 hours. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pamela Brown said:

No, that may be just the WC apologists going to extreme assumptions rather than having the courage to examine the facts...

Irony Alert (re: "extreme assumptions")!!!

Hilarious!

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

The Mauser identification lasted into the evening on Saturday; some 30 hours. 

Well, not really. It didn't last even that long. And the proof is in the three videos that I've put on my webpage linked below, in which Dan Rather of CBS News (in the first video), another newsman (in the second video), and Lieutenant J.C. Day of the Dallas Police Department (in the third video) identify the TSBD rifle as an "Italian 6.5 millimeter" weapon. 

At precisely 6:16 PM CST on 11/22/63, less than 6 hours after JFK was shot, Lieutenant Day announced to the world that the rifle he was holding over his head for the press to see was (quoting Lt. Day) .... "6.5, apparently made in Italy, in 1940"....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/01/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-591.html#An-Italian-Gun

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you've driven through Dealy Plaza enough times you will realize that the map of the Presidential Motorcade route in the Dallas Morning News by Mr. Pope a page back is ambiguous.  It does not show the dogleg from Main via Houston to Elm to access Stemmons. It does Not show the route going under the triple overpass to Industrial.  The triple underpass is denoted as the point where the turn right on to Stemmons from Main occurs.  

Which means, jumping the curb.  Or building the plywood ramp.  Not the modern day slanted 2-3" curb depicted on the other side of the triple underpass in a picture earlier in this thread.  But a 4-5" one like Buddy Wathers is crouching by where James Tague was wounded.  Not an insignificant thing for a presidential limo.

It doesn't show the dog leg.  It doesn't detail how they went from Main to Stemmons.  It shows they curved from Main through the right half of Dealy Plaza to Stemmons.  Right through the grass, over the curbs.

A longer shot for Oswald but still doable for an expert marx man.  (I'm not a Communist I'm a Marxist).

Edited by Ron Bulman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.  Vincent Bugliosi l-i-e-d when he said he would present the evidence in the case not as he wanted it presented, but as the critics did. Now, DVP, VB's biggest fan, did not even know Bugliosi wrote that in the intro to his book.  I had to show him where it was.

 Then, for two solid weeks on this site, I pointed out 25 different instances where I demonstrated that Bugliosi did not do this.  And I showed how he had to have known what the critical facts were according to his own footnotes.  DVP gave up about five points into the demonstrations and he said, "Alright if you want to call him a  l-i-a-r" 

I did not call VB a l-i-a-r, he made a l-i-a-r out of himself.  He should have never said what he did in his introduction, since anyone will tell you if you present all the evidence about each issue fairly, the WC will lose.  That was true as shown by Sylvia Meagher. It is even more true with all the declassified files we have today. DVP did not have the honesty or courage to call him out on this.  All he could do was whine, "If you want to call him a l-i-a-r."

2.  The Argentine Mauser does show the 7.65 inscription on it.  David Josephs proved that to Bob Prudhomme's surprise.  

On 11/22/63 various  media reports went out that the murder weapon was either an Enfield or a Mauser. But no one in authority ever identified the murder weapon in the TSBD as an Enfield.  Now in addition to Weitzman writing an affidavit saying it was a Mauser.  Boone said the same in not one but two written reports.

 In the wee hours of the next morning, Wade said the same.  Boone said that Fritz thought it was a Mauser also.

This got so disturbing that the WC, as it usually did, tried to l-i-e about it.  McCloy got Curry to say there were no police reports  to that effect.  In fact, there were three. (Meagher, pp 95-100)

Federal agent Frank Ellsworth also said that the first rifle found in the TSBD was a Mauser.

3.  If anyone discredited herself as a witness its Marina Oswald, who, as DVP leaves out, in her very first interview said she did not know rifles had scopes.Oswald's did not have one.  She also said that she never saw LHO with a handgun.  

Lee Harvey Oswald never ordered the rifle in evidence.  Period.  End of story.  He never picked up the rifle in evidence.  Period. End of story.  Further, there were  many rifles of that manufacture made with duplicate serial numbers.  The late Tom Purvis proved this on this site many times.  

The rifle Oswald allegedly ordered was the wrong length, the wrong weight, and the wrong classification.  The rifle in evidence is a 40.2 inch 7.5 lb short rifle.  The one allegedly ordered is a 36 inch carbine weighting 5.5 pounds.  Somehow Davey cannot do this arithmetic. 

David Belin knew this and he deliberately covered it up.  Whenever I mention this to rational people, they raise their eyebrows in disbelief.  Because the WC fruitcakes do not reveal this to anyone since they know how fatal it is to their case. When you add in the wrong bullet to the wrong rifle,  I mean, what an absurd case. (I won't even go into it being the wrong brain.) But hey , things get boring in Indiana.  How many times can you watch Hoosiers.You have to do something, and since Davey does not travel like his brother, this is what he does.

 

 

 

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

1.  Vincent Bugliosi l-i-e-d when he said he would present the evidence in the case not as he wanted it presented, but as the critics did. Now, DVP, VB's biggest fan, did not even know Bugliosi wrote that in the intro to his book.  I had to show him where it was.

 Then, for two solid weeks on this site, I pointed out 25 different instances where I demonstrated that Bugliosi did not do this.  And I showed how he had to have known what the critical facts were according to his own footnotes.  DVP gave up about five points into the demonstrations and he said, "Alright if you want to call him a  l-i-a-r" 

I did not call VB a l-i-a-r, he made a l-i-a-r out of himself.  He should have never said what he did in his introduction, since anyone will tell you if you present all the evidence about each issue fairly, the WC will lose.  That was true as shown by Sylvia Meagher. It is even more true with all the declassified files we have today. DVP did not have the honesty or courage to call him out on this.  All he could do was whine, "If you want to call him a l-i-a-r."

2.  The Argentine Mauser does show the 7.65 inscription on it.  David Josephs proved that to Bob Prudhomme's surprise.  

On 11/22/63 various  media reports went out that the murder weapon was either an Enfield or a Mauser. But no one in authority ever identified the murder weapon in the TSBD as an Enfield.  Now in addition to Weitzman writing an affidavit saying it was a Mauser.  Boone said the same in not one but two written reports.

 In the wee hours of the next morning, Wade said the same.  Boone said that Fritz thought it was a Mauser also.

This got so disturbing that the WC, as it usually did, tried to l-i-e about it.  McCloy got Curry to say there were no police reports  to that effect.  In fact, there were three. (Meagher, pp 95-100)

Federal agent Frank Ellsworth also said that the first rifle found in the TSBD was a Mauser.

3.  If anyone discredited herself as a witness its Marina Oswald, who, as DVP leaves out, in her very first interview said she did not know rifles had scopes.Oswald's did not have one.  She also said that she never saw LHO with a handgun.  

Lee Harvey Oswald never ordered the rifle in evidence.  Period.  End of story.  He never picked up the rifle in evidence.  Period. End of story.  Further, there were  many rifles of that manufacture made with duplicate serial numbers.  The late Tom Purvis proved this on this site many times.  

The rifle Oswald ordered was the wrong length, the wrong weight, and the wrong classification.  The rifle in evidence is a 40.2 inch 7.5 lb short rifle.  The one allegedly ordered is a 36 inch carbine weighting 5.5 pounds.  Somehow Davey cannot do this arithmetic. 

David Belin knew this and he deliberately covered it up.  Whenever I mention this to rational people, they raise their eyebrows in disbelief.  Because the WC fruitcakes do not reveal this to anyone since they know how fatal it to their case. When you add in the wrong bullet to the wrong rifle,  I mean, what an absurd case. (I won't even go into it being the wrong brain.) But hey , things get boring in Indiana.  How many times can you watch Hoosiers.You have to do something, and since Davey does not travel like his brother, this is what he does.

 

 

 

Jim DiEugenio:

Your post states: " The rifle Oswald ordered was the wrong length, the wrong weight, and the wrong classification.  The rifle in evidence is a 40.2 inch 7.5 lb short rifle.  The one allegedly ordered is a 36 inch carbine weighting 5.5 pounds.  Somehow Davey cannot do this arithmetic."

Waldman was the President of Kleins.  He testified before the Warren Commission and brought the original documents (or printouts from microfilm) with him.

The shipping invoice was admitted into evidence as "Waldman Exhibit #7." (Volume 21, p. 703).

That document clearly demonstrates --by specifying the serial number ("C 2766")-- that the rifle shipped to LHO's PO box is the one in evidence.

I often discussed this matter with the late Gary Mack.  Going by catalog number, the ordered rifle and the shipped rifle had similar (but not identical) alpha numeric designations.

The ordered rifle was "C20 - T750";*  the shipped rifle (per the shipping invoice) was "C 750".

      *Error in original post corrected per subsequent post by DVP

I prepared an exhibit to illustrate this, but I do not know how to upload it to this post.

In any event, you ought to stop making these exaggerated overstatements--and then asserting, with the wave of your hand-- that the Warren Commission "lied.. .about everything."  Pure nonsense. Yes, it would appear that the rifle shipped ("C 2766") is not the same model as the rifle ordered (so take that up with Klein's "Customer Service") , but if you are going to behave like a responsible historian,  then please have the integrity to inform your readers  that the shipping invoice appears to establish that it is in fact the one in evidence.

ALSO:  Your statement that Marina "never saw Oswald with a handgun" is another one of your whoppers.  What about the fact that  Marina described repeatedly---both to Robert Oswald, and also under oath to the WC--how one day in late April, LHO got dressed up in a suit, showed her his pistol, and said  that Nixon was in town, and so he (LHO) was going to go out and "take a look".  And how that then led to a big fight (with comical overtones) in which she was shoving him and he ended up in the bathroom, where he sat down on the pot, requested that she please hand him some books through the door, and then spent some time reading.  

And you write that she "never saw Oswald with a handgun"?

Do you think she made all that up?  And continued telling and re-telling that account to others (including me) over the years?

Instead of glibly spouting these broad over statements and generalizations, perhaps you should take a closer look at the record.

DSL

6/9/18 - 11:30 AM PDT

 

 

Edited by David Lifton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there were no rifle traceable to Lee Oswald, his framing would not be feasible. Thus, Lee had to have (own) the rifle at some points. However, it is also true that there were obvious problems with the paper trail related to the purchase of this rifle which has been convincingly demonstrated by John Amstrong. In my view, it is one more example of Lee's deceptive actions: the rifle was traceable to his post box via A.J. Hidell, however, the documents would not prove that he, in fact, had purchased that rifle. Thus, if Lee's case would ever come to a trial, the rifle would most likely be dismissed as evidence against him as there were major discrepancies regarding the purchase of the rifle, summarised by Jim. 

The backyard pictures also bear a mark of plausible denial. Lee was photographed by Marina with his rifle, handgun and two newspapers on March 30. However, the photographs clearly show major problems suggesting photographic manipulations, which Jack White and others have shown, also convincingly. Lee immediately pointed out to the falsification of the pictures during the interrogations and said he would demonstrate the manipulations when the time came. Unfortunately, the time never came. The point is that the backyard pictures were both genuine and manipulated, and would be dismissed as evidence during a trial based on the latter. With Marina not testifying against his husband, the backyard photographs would not be admissible in a trial against Lee Oswald.

This is how Lee had been moving in the world which was harsh, secretive and very dangerous - he agreed to risky moves but always ensured that there was a plausible deniability intertwined in the matter. I strongly believe that Lee Oswald was not on the sixth floor during the shooting but that he had some foreknowledge of some risky enterprise, such as a phony assassination attempt on the President. So, how did he ensure plausible deniability for himself in that case? Well, I guess he went out just when shots rang out and let himself filmed. A man who was positively outside during or just after the shooting could not be the shooter, phony or real.

Edited by Andrej Stancak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...