Jump to content
The Education Forum
Rich Pope

Number of shots

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Rich Pope said:

Robert,

When single-bullet theory supporters claim that most people in Dealey Plaza heard three shots and that they came from the Book Depository, they're including witnesses such as JFK's two closest aides, Dave Powers and Kenny O'Donnell, both riding in the limousine behind JFK's, who, at first testified that two shots came from the right front of the motorcade-the area of the "grassy knoll" with its picket fence but later admitted they were pressured to change their testimony by the FBI.  Author Henry Hunt discovered in 1986 that at least 60 witnesses claimed the FBI altered what they had reported.  In other words, the FBI just changed reported testimony just to make their single-bullet theory work.   Many more such claims have emerged since then and this has been well documented.  So these silly graphs posted by David have ZERO value.   There's a difference between misinformation and disinformation.  David practices the art of disinformation.  

^This^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

I can't answer that question. Nor can you.

But if you think the reason was because Chaney would have testified to things the WC just didn't want to hear, that reason is just so silly, since the Warren Commission called MANY other witnesses who testified to things that could lead to a conclusion of "conspiracy". E.G., the witnesses I mentioned in this 2014 exchange with conspiracy theorist and Education Forum veteran Ray Mitcham....

RAY MITCHAM SAID:
I can see why the Warren Commission didn't want them [Bill and Gayle Newman] to be interviewed.

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Yeah, right Ray. They avoided the Newmans, but had no problem publishing the testimony of Sam Holland, Mark Lane, Jean Hill, Jack Dougherty, Victoria Adams, Clint Hill, Marguerite Oswald, and several other "conspiracy" type witnesses. But they were just scared to death of Bill and Gayle Newman, huh?

 

You can't answer, or you don't want to answer?

I"m asking for an opinion, that's all, based on critical thinking.  Chaney was the closest law enforcement person to JFK, 4-6ft away; cops respond to crimes all day long, so probably a better eyewitness.  Chief of Police, Jesse Curry, in the lead car, immediately thought the shots came from the grassy knoll, and directed his men by radio to that spot.  Dorothy Kilgallen obtained the radio transcripts that proved Curry wrong in his WC testimony.  Wow, the Dallas Chief of Police is a CTer, outside of the WC, that is. 

The bloody condition of Chaney's clothes and motorcycle was noted by Sgt Stavis Ellis at Parkland, and this is why Curry believed there to be two shooters, that Chaney went through a blood spray.  Do you think this could be a reason why the FBI never interviewed Chaney after the shooting, except for asking about his meeting with Jack Ruby on the 23rd?

Edited by Robert Card

Share this post


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

You need to look at the underlying data that John McAdams has relied on to arrive at the figures seen in his pie charts....

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/earwitnesses.htm

McAdams doesn't include Dave Powers as a "Depository" earwitness at all. McAdams has Powers in the "Not Sure" category.

And, yes, McAdams does list Ken O'Donnell in the "TSBD" category, but I think it's interesting to note that among the other authors and researchers that McAdams has listed in his comparison chart above (two of which are noted CTers), only one of those researchers lists O'Donnell as a "Knoll" earwitness. Even long-time veteran conspiracy advocate Josiah Thompson said that O'Donnell heard the shots come from his "Right Rear".

 

Didn't big-a$$ Jesuit, Kenneth O'Donnell tell his friend, Tip O'Neill, that the FBI pressured him into saying the shots came from the rear?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Roy Wieselquist said:

Above from R Card was in response to R Pope asking, "Were the shots that hit Connally meant for JFK?"  (I don't know how to double-quote.)

NO, the two shots that hit JBC were not mistakes.  It would take me too long to explain it fully, but in brief:

-- Ozzie the Wiz had figured out the plot.  AND he hated JBC with the most purple of passions, for many reasons.  I believe it was Rich Pope who noted that page 17 of LO's address book had the four men he hated the most, and at the head of that list, with a red dagger with blood dripping off it, was JBC.  Incidentally, that page went missing, just like the Harper fragment, the Hosty note, and over 100 other pieces of material evidence.  Which doubly shows how much the Kennedy-haters feared it.  AND he knew JBC had to be crucial to the plot.  Which just poured more gasoline on Ozzie's fire.

-- Mac Wallace, LBJ's personal murderer-for-hire, and Oz became quick friends not long before the coup.  With Loy Factor in tow, MW found out Oz was wise to the plot, and said to him, "We can foil it from the very building that you have found yourself employed in."  Ozzie, dubious, said, "Uh, OK."  These may not be exact quotations.

-- SO, by 12:30, ensconced on the sixth floor:  MW in the far southeast window ("sniper's nest"), LF in the far southwest window, and the Wiz most likely two windows east of LF.  Ozzie sees, early, that the fascist basta*ds are gonna pull it off, but he's ready with his fallback plan: pop Johnny Con.  The Carcano shot high and to the right, explaining JBC's wounds.  BTW, the ding in the chrome ashtray that hangs on the back of the front seat is highly neglected.  You can tell by the angle of JBC's wounds that the two shots came from the western end of TSBD, not the east end.  Ozzie's third shot hit the chrome around the windshield, broke in two, and one piece dinged the front side of the rearview mirror and cracked the windshield itself.  The pieces found in the front compartment of the limo came from the Carcano, and they didn't have blood or flesh on them.  That was the only true bullet evidence that made it to the end.

 

 There's more, a lot more, but you guys figure it out.  Neither of the shots that hit JBC was a mistake.  None of the three shots that hit JFK, two from front left and one from front right, was a mistake.  Well, that first shot that hit him in the throat (and out the back) from South Knoll was intended for the head, but...you know, the plans of mice and men often go awry.

 

So, again, six shots hit in the limo and at least three missed the limo, for a total of at least NINE shots.

When I used the term 'mistake', that may have been the wrong thought I was trying to convey.  I was saying that JFK was the focus, and the hits to JBC were collateral damage.  Just my opinion though.

I honestly don't think LHO fired a rifle that day.  Parrafin test proved negative for his face.  

We have this from the Dallas Chief of Police, Jesse Curry:

 "We don't have any proof that Oswald fired the rifle, and never did. Nobody's yet been able to put him in the building (Texas School Book Depository) with a gun in his hand."

I think LHO was just what he said he was:

 

Edited by Robert Card

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Roy Wieselquist said:

One of my best friends, a Texan, a Lubbocker, studies religion and history as the key to everything. 

No truer words spoken on this site.   I mentioned that I let go JFK, and some other issues 15 years ago, and this awakening was due to 'religion and history as the key to everything'.  I know it's tough to swallow, so I don't go into it with too much depth.   If the whole world suddenly woke up to this realization, I think there would be mass suicides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Robert Card   

  • Experienced Member
  •  
  • Robert Card
  • Members
  •  
  • 76 posts
11 hours ago, Rich Pope said:

Robert,

When single-bullet theory supporters claim that most people in Dealey Plaza heard three shots and that they came from the Book Depository, they're including witnesses such as JFK's two closest aides, Dave Powers and Kenny O'Donnell, both riding in the limousine behind JFK's, who, at first testified that two shots came from the right front of the motorcade-the area of the "grassy knoll" with its picket fence but later admitted they were pressured to change their testimony by the FBI.  Author Henry Hunt discovered in 1986 that at least 60 witnesses claimed the FBI altered what they had reported.  In other words, the FBI just changed reported testimony just to make their single-bullet theory work.   Many more such claims have emerged since then and this has been well documented.  So these silly graphs posted by David have ZERO value.   There's a difference between misinformation and disinformation.  David practices the art of disinformation.  

Rich,

Do you have any links or info on Henry Hunt / 60 altered testimonies?  I can't find anything on the internet.  All of my searches go McAdams, Von Pein, and other lone gunner sites.  I get mixed responses to Henry Hurt for Henry Hunt.  Can you be more specific on the 60 altered witnesses testimony.  Who are they and what was changed?  I have done some work on witness testimonies and how they relate to where the President was when shots were fired and I am well aware of how witness testimonies evolved over time.  The FBI would interrogate witnesses until they told the right story which is often different than their original testimony.

Anything you have would be appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Robert Card said:

Didn't big-a$$ Jesuit, Kenneth O'Donnell tell his friend, Tip O'Neill, that the FBI pressured him into saying the shots came from the rear?

Yes, he did tell that to Tip O'Neill.  I have documentation of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Robert Card said:

You can't answer, or you don't want to answer?

I can't answer your question. Nobody can. Nobody can say they KNOW for sure why James Chaney wasn't called by the WC.

You aren't actually implying that you KNOW with total certainty why Chaney wasn't called to appear before the WC, are you? If you ARE saying such a thing, you're being disingenuous.

My guess (i.e., opinion) would be that he wasn't called because the Commission didn't feel it was necessary to call him. (That's fairly obvious to me, seeing as how he wasn't called.)

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Robert Card said:

The bloody condition of Chaney's clothes and motorcycle was noted by Sgt Stavis Ellis at Parkland, and this is why Curry believed there to be two shooters, that Chaney went through a blood spray.  Do you think this could be a reason why the FBI never interviewed Chaney after the shooting, except for asking about his meeting with Jack Ruby on the 23rd?

No.

Share this post


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

 

You aren't actually implying that you KNOW with total certainty why Chaney wasn't called to appear before the WC, are you? If you ARE saying such a thing, you're being disingenuous.

 

I'm not implying in anyway that I'm certain about any aspect of this case.  I'm only asking you to be the same way.   there could be innocent answers to anything we're discussing, but then again I'm seeing all kinds of contradictions in the WC, and DPD.

I have no clue who James Chaney is, or why he was not called before the WC, and in fact not questioned at all by the FBI until 1975.  He was in a perfect position being only 4-6 feet away from JFK, and had a good view to the grassy knoll.  There may be an innocent answer, i don't know, but you could at least agree with me, and say that it's quite weird that he was not called before the WC, or questioned by the FBI at all.  The only other person with a better view would be CIA agent, Jackie Kennedy.  I'm just asking for a thumbs up on a little major strangeness there.  I think we all are.

Then there's your quotes to Bugliosi's book, where he appears to be contradicting himself when it comes to the DPD, and WC.  I was living in Los Angeles at the time of the OJ trial.  Each night about, Bugliosi gave a recap of the trial, and it was totally unprofessional how he tore apart the LAPD, and the lead prosecutor, Marsh Clark, and I forget the black guys name.  He portrayed all of them as being the biggest idiots to ever hit town.  Night after night, nothing but how incompetent the prosecution was.  But in Reclaiming History, the WC/DPD/FBI are the reincarnation of Sherlock Holmes.  They're all geniuses.  Something not right in Bugliosi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Robert,

Von Pein posted this:

  • David Von Pein
  • Members
  •  
  • 5,453 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indiana, USA

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/09/dealey-plaza-earwitnesses.html

 

Pie+Chart+(With+Caption)+--+Number+Of+Sh                Pie+Chart+(With+Caption)+--+Location+Of+

Where the shots came from and how many shots were fired are legitimate questions that everyone thinks about.  My problem is I don't trust the info on this due to the FBI influencing witnesses after the assassination beginning perhaps the next day.  Early statements are more truthful then later.  If you track witnesses sometimes through 4 statements, I use Bonnie Ray Williams as an example, you will note that some witness statements evolve towards the official position.

These are sensible questions but they may not be the best question.  I feel that they cover up a more important question.  This is where was the President when the witness heard shooting.  If you track this question through many witnesses you will get a different picture of the assassination.  One that is different from most everyone's perceptions. 

Your comments questioning the behavior of Bugliosi are dead on.  Supposedly, he won 103 out of 104 court cases as a prosecutor.  Which makes me wonder whether he used the same tactics in his court cases as he did in his book and the mock trial.  If that is so then one has to question what he did as a prosecutor. 

Edited by John Butler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, John Butler said:

Robert,

Von Pein posted this:

  • David Von Pein
  • Members
  •  
  • 5,453 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indiana, USA

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/09/dealey-plaza-earwitnesses.html

 

Pie+Chart+(With+Caption)+--+Number+Of+Sh                Pie+Chart+(With+Caption)+--+Location+Of+

Where the shots came from and how many shots were fired are legitimate questions that everyone thinks about.  My problem is I don't trust the info on this due to the FBI influencing witnesses after the assassination beginning perhaps the next day.  Early statements are more truthful then later.  If you track witnesses sometimes through 4 statements, I use Bonnie Ray Williams as an example, you will note that some witness statements evolve towards the official position.

These are sensible questions but they may not be the best question.  I feel that they cover up a more important question.  This is where was the President when the witness heard shooting.  If you track this question through many witnesses you will get a different picture of the assassination.  One that is different from most everyone's perceptions. 

Your comments questioning the behavior of Bugliosi are dead on.  Supposedly, he won 103 out of 104 court cases as a prosecutor.  Which makes me wonder whether he used the same tactics in his court cases as he did in his book and the mock trial.  If that is so then one has to question what he did as a prosecutor. 

John,

You are right.  My mother grew-up with Lee Bowers.  They went to church together every Sunday in Red River County.  He was as honest as the day is long and he said the government tried to influence his testimony to fit their own opinions.  

Share this post


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

...he [Lee Bowers] said the government tried to influence his testimony to fit their own opinions.  

I think Mark Lane did that---not "the Government".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, David Von Pein said:

I think Mark Lane did that---not "the Government".

Not according to Lee Bowers.  David, again, you don't know what you're talking about.  Lee said the shots came from in front of the limo, not from the back.  The government officials who interviewed him tried to get him to change his story.

Share this post


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

Lee [Bowers] said the shots came from in front of the limo, not from the back.

Citation please.

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

×