Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

It does not work I think with the low skull wound.

I just wonder if this is another reason they changed it.

Also, if you recall the smaller, dust like particles were forward in the skull.

The larger ones were in the back.

Very puzzling in that regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/9/2019 at 11:16 PM, James DiEugenio said:

Everyone knows that the Magic Bullet made seven wounds, smashed two bones and then reverse trajectories out of JBC's leg.

We also know that the head shot, according to the WC ended up with two fragments in the front floor of the car.

But yet, there is the dented front chrome around the windshield , the cracked windshield itself, and the dented dashboard.

(Am I missing anything?) 

What made those because it certainly could not have been the Magic Bullet.

 

It's impossible today with any certainty.  Especially since the limo was so quickly sanitized and you can't trust Secret Service/FBI reports regarding that night and the next day.  I think of Kellermans statement about a "flurry" of shots.  Not just a couple that hit and one that went way overhead to hit the curb and wound Tague.  

For the chrome around the windshield I lean to a shot at JFK's head in round two of shots that missed JFK's head from behind at the Dal Tex Building.  I've thought before a high powered rifle bullet would do more than dent the chrome but it would have steel backing.  But a direct hit would have done more than dent.  It would have exposed the steel backing.  And on impact with an immovable object the shards created by the impact would have gone backwards (wouldn't they?), not creating the windshield or dashboard damage.  I don't know, just thoughts.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are correct about the FBI and the trust factor.

They knew this created a problem and tried to conceal it by saying the chrome had been dented previously.

But people had pictures from that day showing it had not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/10/2019 at 12:16 AM, James DiEugenio said:

Everyone knows that the Magic Bullet made seven wounds, smashed two bones and then reverse trajectories out of JBC's leg.

We also know that the head shot, according to the WC ended up with two fragments in the front floor of the car.

But yet, there is the dented front chrome around the windshield , the cracked windshield itself, and the dented dashboard.

(Am I missing anything?) 

What made those because it certainly could not have been the Magic Bullet.

 

Add to "dented front chrome windshield frame, the cracked windshield itself, and the dented dashboard" the much-neglected dent in the rearview mirror backside (which faces front).

Other than the dashboard damage, the other three damages are in somewhat of a line.  I believe these were all caused by a Carcano shot from the WEST end of TSBD.  Which large fragments, CE567 and 569 were found in the front seat compartment.  And, after exploding JFK's head, supposedly, there was absolutely no blood or flesh on those fragments or in all the damages in the windshield areas.  Because they hit no body.

As Joe Bauer notes, "...that dent (in the chrome-plated steel windshield trim) has an entry angle that looks as if it came in more from the right, versus a straight on angle..."  Eureka.  There's another problem, the vertical angle, which I'll address to David Von Pein's post.

 

ALSO, there is another damage to the limo, also much-neglected: "...a severe dent in the lower left corner of the chrome panel surrounding the ashtray in the back of the front seat." (p. 245 in J. Fetzer's Assassination Science, Part IV, section "The Wounding of Governor John Connally" by Ron Hepler)  I believe this was also by a Carcano bullet originating from the same place, no more than two windows east of the West end of TSBD.  The great angle, 20 to 25 degrees right to left through Gov. Con.(just like the round that first struck the chrome windshield frame), eliminates the "sniper's nest" (6th floor SE window) as where that bullet came from, as well.

Edited by Roy Wieselquist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/10/2019 at 1:19 AM, David Von Pein said:

Fragments from the Head Shot bullet caused the damage to the limo's windshield and the chrome topping. And such a conclusion is a perfectly logical and reasonable one, given the sum total of physical (bullet) evidence in the JFK case.

After striking the President's head from behind, the bullet fragmented and continued its FORWARD course toward the front of the limousine --- which is perfectly consistent with the "Oswald Did It" scenario.

The two front-seat bullet fragments had no overlapping areas, with one of the fragments being a NOSE section of a bullet, while the other fragment was the BASE section of a bullet. The fragments were, therefore, very likely part of the same bullet.

One thing that even most conspiracy theorists should be sure of is this ---- Those two large front-seat bullet fragments most certainly were NOT fired from the FRONT of President Kennedy's vehicle.

Therefore, among other obvious things (such as Governor Connally's BACK wound and JFK's BACK wound), the existence of those two fragments in the front seat of the Presidential limousine pretty much destroy David Lifton's crazy "All Shots Came From The Front" theory.

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/02/The Head Shot & The Bullet Fragments

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/09/CE567 And CE569

 

DVP,

CE 567 and CE 569 had no flesh or blood on them.  This is impossible for the damage the original bullet was supposed to have done to Kennedy's head.

Another insurmountable with that WC scenario: the angle from JFK's head to the windshield frame, which is practically flat.  But the vertical angle from the "sniper's nest" to the head was 18 to 20 degrees.  And practically no angle side to side.  Are you saying the bullet ricocheted off his head like off a rock?  In that case the bullet would have lost too much force to have caused all that damage on that chrome-plated steel, which is unbelievably hard.  And that chrome had no blood and brains in the dent.  This is all so physically impossible.  More impossible than the SBT.

 

And this nettles: there is no "David Lifton's crazy 'ALL Shots Came from the Front' theory".  In the last few years, he has come around to "All shots THAT HIT JFK came from the front."  Big difference.  Coincidentally, that's the same as me -- all shots, three, that hit JFK came from the front.  I say two from left front, and one from right front.  And it's also much different than all shots, one or (more likely) two, that hit JBC came from the far right rear.  And the shot that bounced all around the windscreen area came from that same right rear.

Then there were other shots that missed the limo, but let's leave it at those simple five or six shots that hit inside the presidential car.

 

PS to DVP: this could be one of your many Eureka moments that leads you to the realization that this was an obvious, massive plot.  Ozzie, that great American hero who tried to stop the murder of democratic sovereignty, could have shot John Con from the other end of TSBD (for aiding and abetting the plot, along with LHO's personal beefs), but there is no way he could have fired the other shots from at least three other locations.  It's all simple physics.  When all the genuine physical evidence is admitted.  So it still obeys Occam's Razor.  Simple, but not impossibly simple like the geocentric universe.

Edited by Roy Wieselquist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roy:

Do you have pics of those two other places, the rearview mirror backside and back ashtray to front seat?

I would really like to see that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

James:

I have to hit the hay.  I did a brief search.  There are a few pics of the dent in the rearview mirror.  CE 350 shows it sort of accidentally; it's trying to be a photo of the windshield crack from the front of the car.  That's where the mirror damage is seen many times, from various pics of the front side of the windshield.

Pam Brown has some good essays about the damage, mirror noted often.

As for the ashtray that was between the Connallys hanging on the back of the front seat, I've looked for a photo of that lately.  I know I have seen it but haven't been able to find it in a long time.  I'm thinking Groden.  Livingston?  High Treason?

One problem with googling both of these dents, the back-and-forth about whether there's a through-and-through hole in the windshield seems to take up all the space.  IMO there was no shot THROUGH the glass.

I'm such a computer dumbkopf, the only way I know how to do it is a laborious way through bookmarks in these postings.

In brief, the mirror damage is commonly seen, though not easily found except in pics of the front side of the windshield.  The ashtray-plate dent is noted in many places in text, but it seems like years since I saw a photo of it.

Edited by Roy Wieselquist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/13/2019 at 10:00 PM, Roy Wieselquist said:

Add to "dented front chrome windshield frame, the cracked windshield itself, and the dented dashboard" the much-neglected dent in the rearview mirror backside (which faces front).

Other than the dashboard damage, the other three damages are in somewhat of a line.  I believe these were all caused by a Carcano shot from the WEST end of TSBD.  Which large fragments, CE567 and 569 were found in the front seat compartment.  And, after exploding JFK's head, supposedly, there was absolutely no blood or flesh on those fragments or in all the damages in the windshield areas.  Because they hit no body.

As Joe Bauer notes, "...that dent (in the chrome-plated steel windshield trim) has an entry angle that looks as if it came in more from the right, versus a straight on angle..."  Eureka.  There's another problem, the vertical angle, which I'll address to David Von Pein's post.

 

ALSO, there is another damage to the limo, also much-neglected: "...a severe dent in the lower left corner of the chrome panel surrounding the ashtray in the back of the front seat." (p. 245 in J. Fetzer's Assassination Science, Part IV, section "The Wounding of Governor John Connally" by Ron Hepler)  I believe this was also by a Carcano bullet originating from the same place, no more than two windows east of the West end of TSBD.  The great angle, 20 to 25 degrees right to left through Gov. Con.(just like the round that first struck the chrome windshield frame), eliminates the "sniper's nest" (6th floor SE window) as where that bullet came from, as well.

You are incorrect, Roy, in your claim "there was no blood or flesh" on CE 567 and 569. Not only was their blood and flesh, but this blood and flesh is the scientific proof there was more than one head shot, and thus, almost certainly, a conspiracy.

From patspeer.com, chapter 16b:

 

In any event... at least one skull fragment had hair on it. This fragment could not have come from the small entrance wound on the back of the head, and must have come from the large defect on the top of the head. 

This marked the large defect as an entrance, or more logically, a tangential wound of both entrance and exit.

Now that, by itself, represents one of the most important and OVERLOOKED facts about the case.

But, get this, that's not the only thing to be learned from the missing scalp! 

Yep, the “missing” scalp returned to center stage on 1-21-00, when the government released a report on tests conducted on CE 567, the nose of a bullet found on the driver’s seat of Kennedy’s limousine. Although the FBI's Robert Frazier, in his 3-31-64 testimony before the Warren Commission, claimed that when he inspected CE 567 and 569 on 11-23-63 "there was a very slight residue of blood or some other material adhering" to the fragments that "was wiped off to clean up the bullet for examination," it had long been observed that some foreign material remained within the crumpled ridges of CE 567, and the HSCA asked that tests be conducted on this material. These tests were not conducted, however, until after the uproar surrounding Oliver Stone’s film JFK brought the ARRB into existence. The results of these tests, initially reported on 9-16-98, were that 3 of the 4 pieces of foreign material were human SKIN, and that the fourth was human tissue. As CE 567 was linked via the neutron activation analysis to the bullet fragments found in Kennedy’s brain, and as there was little scalp missing at the small entrance near the EOP, this finding essentially confirms the tangential entrance I’ve theorized. 

Those wishing to read the complete report on the CE 567 foreign material should go here 

http://www.jfklancer.com/LNE/fragments/fragreport.html

The significance of this skin is further amplified when one considers that, according to Dr. Vincent J.M. DiMaio, in his standard text Gunshot Wounds, of all the tissues likely to be found on a bullet, "Skin was the least commonly encountered." DiMaio further specifies that "In regard to gunshot wounds of the head, bone chips, skeletal muscle, connective tissue, and strips of small vessels were commonly identified. Fragments of brain were present but were not readily recognizable as neural in origin." Skin didn't even make the list.

 

And DiMaio is no outlier, at least not on this subject. Here's Bernd Karger, in his article Forensic Ballistics, published in Forensic Pathology Reviews (2008): "Human trace evidence on bullets has been investigated by routine cytological methods but individualisation is commonly not possible, and cells or even cell layers can be found in the cavities of hollow point bullets but are rarely found on the smooth surfaces of FMJ bullets." 
 
So, there it is. Beyond that not enough skin was missing from either of the proposed entrance wounds on the back of Kennedy's head to support that the skin on CE 567 came from the back of his head, the likelihood of skin becoming attached to the nose of the bullet while it was undeformed, at either its entrance or its exit, is next to nothing.  
 
Well, this proves it: the fatal bullet impacted at the large defect.
 
Let's sum up, then, what we've recently discussed. From the available forensic literature and eyewitness evidence it is clear that 1) the absence of skin from a bullet wound is a sign it's an entrance wound; 2) skin was missing from the large defect; 3) skin is not normally found on bullets; 4) a significant amount of skin was found on a bullet fragment linked to the fragments in Kennedy's brain; and 5) the amount of skin on this fragment is best explained by accepting the proposition this bullet busted up at the site of the large defect after striking the skull at an angle.

It all adds up. It simply makes NO SENSE to believe this skin got attached to the nose of the bullet as it entered the back of Kennedy's skull, and then stayed attached to the nose as it tumbled through his brain, as there was very little skin missing from the supposed entrance on the back of the skull. Simultaneously, it makes NO SENSE to believe this skin attached itself to the bullet upon exit after transiting the skull, as the bullet would have little or no contact with the skin exploding outwards from the skull at the exit. No, the discovery of this skin on the bullet is best explained--no, scratch that, can only be honestly explained--by the bullet's having impacted Kennedy's skull at the large defect, where skin was actually missing. Yes, the skin on the bullet nose proves it. The large defect was a tangential wound, precisely as proposed by Dr. Clark on 11-22-63. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

 

But Pat, the four particles of tissue that are in the same container as the nose fragment (collectively labled CE 567) are completely separate and there is no evidence that they were attached. I am aware of nothing from the 1960's FBI investigation that acknowledges the tissue. Robert Frazier claimed that he wiped BLOOD off of the nose fragment, he mentioned nothing about tissue, and I am not aware of any blood sample that was catalogued onto evidence. The 1990's FBI re-examination of CE 567 only found non-tissue fibers embedded on the nose fragment. The tissue could have been a totally separate artifact that was added later.

Edited by Micah Mileto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The Secret Service and FBI got JFK's body, the limo and many other items of evidence out of Dallas as quickly as they could.

The one crucial thing they left behind in the hands of the Dallas PD was the most important of all - Lee Harvey Oswald himself.

And it couldn't have turned out any worse for Oswald than if they had turned him over to a screaming murderous lynch mob on the street outside.

Edited by Joe Bauer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/10/2019 at 12:19 AM, David Von Pein said:

Fragments from the Head Shot bullet caused the damage to the limo's windshield and the chrome topping. And such a conclusion is a perfectly logical and reasonable one, given the sum total of physical (bullet) evidence in the JFK case.

After striking the President's head from behind, the bullet fragmented and continued its FORWARD course toward the front of the limousine --- which is perfectly consistent with the "Oswald Did It" scenario.

The two front-seat bullet fragments had no overlapping areas, with one of the fragments being a NOSE section of a bullet, while the other fragment was the BASE section of a bullet. The fragments were, therefore, very likely part of the same bullet.

One thing that even most conspiracy theorists should be sure of is this ---- Those two large front-seat bullet fragments most certainly were NOT fired from the FRONT of President Kennedy's vehicle.

Therefore, among other obvious things (such as Governor Connally's BACK wound and JFK's BACK wound), the existence of those two fragments in the front seat of the Presidential limousine pretty much destroy David Lifton's crazy "All Shots Came From The Front" theory.

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/02/The Head Shot & The Bullet Fragments

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/09/CE567 And CE569

 

The legal (and historical) record in this case clearly establishes a serious bifurcation in the record (i.e., the medical record) between the wound observations at Parkland Hospital  and what was reported at Bethesda, at the time of autopsy.

The fact that the two FBI agents present (Sibert and O’Neill) would report that, when JFK’s body was laid out on the autopsy table, it was “apparent” that there had been “surgery of the head area, namely, in the top of the skull,” should afford a rather clear explanation as to what the explanation is for this bifurcation: the wounds had been altered, somehow, in the six hour period between the time of the Parkland observations and the official start of the Bethesda autopsy.

All of that was established and spelled out in my 1981 book Best Evidence.

If the body was altered, then—as I have said—this was a body-centric plot: that is, the alteration of the body and the concomitant planting of ammunition linking Oswald’s rifle to the crime was the basic modus operandi of this crime.

Let me remind those reading this post of the basic definition of that important term: “modus operandi” - - “a particular way or method of doing something, especially one that is characteristic or well-established.”

I haven’t visited the London Forum in quite a while*, and perhaps it should come as no surprise that David Von Pein is still at it, beating a dead horse, basically denying the evidence that JFK’s wounds were altered prior to autopsy; in other words, the President’s body was a medical forgery by the time of autopsy.  But Von Pein, ignoring all that, and employing “kindergarten logic,”  basically argues that since ammunition found in the presidential limo ballistically matched Oswald’s rifle, that that somehow validates the case against Oswald. 

     *I originally wrote "in years."  That was incorrect.

I can only speculate as to what would happen if DVP were involved in a card game and it turned out, from simple card-counting, that there were two “Ace of spades” or three Jack of Diamonds?  Would he continue to play? Or would he understand that the game was permeated with fraud?

As I have stated in public lectures, JFK’s body was akin to the sun in the solar system of evidence.  Once its established that the body was altered, the evidence that there was fraud in the evidence (and that the Dallas sniper’s nest evidence was a source of artifacts, not legitmate “facts”) becomes “the” major issue; and has logical consequences.

Von Pein doesn’t seem to understand that.  He wants to keep dealing the cards, and keep playing the game, with the stacked deck; i.e., even though there’s clearly fraud in the evidence.

His attempt to focus on the limousine, and cite one of the two fragments (that matched Oswald’s rifle) as legitimate evidence is both pathetic and illogical.

Von Pein doesn’t seem to understand that once fraud is established in the most basic evidence in this case—i.e., the body of the deceased, which was the basis for the Naval autopsy—the entire legal case is kaput.

It is almost comical to see him, all these years later, focusing on one of the two “Oswald fragments” recovered from the limousine, and attempting to use that as the basis for arguing that the sniper’s nest evidence is legitimate because. . .because why?  Because (of course, in DVP’s world!) Oswald assassinated the President!

By that flawed methodology and absurd logic, why stop with the fragments?  Why not cite the rifle found on the sixth floor of the TSBD as evidence that Oswald was JFK’s assassin; ergo, the body was not altered (to create that false appearance)!

If this is the way DVP “reasons,” I can only image what would have happened if he had displayed this sort of reasoning in a mathematics class or one on basic geometry.

DSL

Edited by David Lifton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/15/2019 at 10:55 PM, Joe Bauer said:

The Secret Service and FBI got JFK's body, the limo and many other items of evidence out of Dallas as quickly as they could.

The one crucial thing they left behind in the hands of the Dallas PD was the most important of all - Lee Harvey Oswald himself.

And it couldn't have turned out any worse for Oswald than if they had turned him over to a screaming murderous lynch mob on the street outside.

The SS got JFK's body and the limo out of Dallas in a hurry.  E.G. the gun confrontation with the coroner at Parkland.  I have to wonder if three-four-five of them might have known before the assassination that such would be necessary afterwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5/20/2019 - 11:20 PM EDT

Ron,

The way events evolved is not what was supposed to happen.

JFK's body was supposed to be altered, in Dallas, and then there was to be a Dallas autopsy.

But none of that happened, once Connally was unexpectedly shot.

The result: the focus shifted to getting JFK's body out of Texas, without an autopsy, and focusing on Connally's medical treatment, so that his unexpected shooting did not foul up "the best of well laid plans."

I'll be publishing about this soon. 

DSL

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, David Lifton said:

The legal (and historical) record in this case clearly establishes a serious bifurcation in the record (i.e., the medical record) between the wound observations at Parkland Hospital  and what was reported at Bethesda, at the time of autopsy.

The fact that the two FBI agents present (Sibert and O’Neill) would report that, when JFK’s body was laid out on the autopsy table, it was “apparent” that there had been “surgery of the head area, namely, in the top of the skull,” should afford a rather clear explanation as to what the explanation is for this bifurcation: the wounds had been altered, somehow, in the six hour period between the time of the Parkland observations and the official start of the Bethesda autopsy.

Not surprisingly, I see that David Lifton is still desperately clinging to really bad information with respect to the "surgery of the head area" remark that appears on Page 3 of the 11/22/63 Sibert & O'Neill Report.

Mr. Lifton, however, knows full well that the co-author of that 1963 report—James W. Sibert—also made the following statement to the HSCA in 1978:

"When the body was first observed on the autopsy table, it was thought by the doctors that surgery had possibly been performed in the head area and such was reflected in my notes at the time. However, this was determined not to be correct following a detailed inspection." -- James Sibert; October 24, 1978

So, Mr. Lifton, what about that 1978 statement by Jim Sibert? Was he lying when he made those comments to the House Select Committee? I guess you must think he was.

I'll also add this excerpt from Vincent Bugliosi's book:

"In a 1999 telephone conversation from his retirement home in Fort Myers, Florida, Sibert told me that when the casket was opened in the autopsy room, "The president was wrapped in two sheets, one around his body, another sheet around his head." He said the sheet around the head was "soaked in blood," and when it was removed, Dr. Humes "almost immediately upon seeing the president's head—this was before the autopsy—remarked that the president had a tracheotomy and surgery of the head area." When I asked Sibert what Humes was referring to when he used the word surgery, he said, "He was referring to the large portion of the president's skull that was missing." When I asked him why he was so sure of this, he replied, "Well, if you were there, it couldn't have been more clear that that's what he was talking about. He said this as soon as he saw the president's head. He hadn't looked close-up for any evidence of surgery to the head when he said this. I'm positive that's what he was referring to."" -- Page 1060 of "Reclaiming History"

And after I utilized the above Bugliosi quote at a JFK forum in May 2013, I followed up the quote with these remarks:

"Why conspiracy theorists continue to cling to inaccurate information is anyone's guess--but they do it--all the time. Sibert and O'Neill merely wrote down what Dr. Humes said at the start of the autopsy. And that information was proven to be wrong. And even most CTers know and think it was wrong--because there are very few CTers who are idiotic enough to actually believe David Lifton's theory about there being "surgery" done to JFK's body before the autopsy." -- DVP; May 5, 2013
 

Quote

I haven’t visited the London Forum in years...

That's not true at all. You posted once earlier this year; and you posted dozens of times in 2018.

 

Quote

...perhaps it should come as no surprise that David Von Pein is still at it, beating a dead horse, basically denying the evidence that JFK’s wounds were altered prior to autopsy; in other words, the President’s body was a medical forgery by the time of autopsy.  But Von Pein, ignoring all that, and employing “kindergarten logic,”  basically argues that since ammunition found in the presidential limo ballistically matched Oswald’s rifle, that that somehow validates the case against Oswald. 

I can only speculate as to what would happen if DVP were involved in a card game and it turned out, from simple card-counting, that there were two “Ace of spades” or three Jack of Diamonds?  Would he continue to play? Or would he understand that the game was permeated with fraud?

As I have stated in public lectures, JFK’s body was akin to the sun in the solar system of evidence.  Once its established that the body was altered, the evidence that there was fraud in the evidence (and that the Dallas sniper’s nest evidence was a source of artifacts, not legitmate “facts”) becomes “the” major issue; and has logical consequences.

Von Pein doesn’t seem to understand that.  He wants to keep dealing the cards, and keep playing the game, with the stacked deck; i.e., even though there’s clearly fraud in the evidence.

His attempt to focus on the limousine, and cite one of the two fragments (that matched Oswald’s rifle) as legitimate evidence is both pathetic and illogical.

Von Pein doesn’t seem to understand that once fraud is established in the most basic evidence in this case—i.e., the body of the deceased, which was the basis for the Naval autopsy—the entire legal case is kaput.

It is almost comical to see him, all these years later, focusing on one of the two “Oswald fragments” recovered from the limousine, and attempting to use that as the basis for arguing that the sniper’s nest evidence is legitimate because. . .because why?  Because (of course, in DVP’s world!) Oswald assassinated the President!

By that flawed methodology and absurd logic, why stop with the fragments?  Why not cite the rifle found on the sixth floor of the TSBD as evidence that Oswald was JFK’s assassin; ergo, the body was not altered (to create that false appearance)!

If this is the way DVP “reasons,” I can only image what would have happened if he had displayed this sort of reasoning in a mathematics class or one on basic geometry.

Well, David L., you'll have to forgive me if I choose not to follow you down your "Body Alteration" and "Body-centric Plot" roads. (And I doubt there are more than a couple of conspiracy theorists at this forum who buy into your fantastically impossible version of events either.)

And what is truly "comical" is that Mr. Lifton seems to be implying that it's only me who believes in Lee Oswald's lone guilt....and it's only me who thinks the evidence is legitimate throughout the JFK case. When, in reality, there are millions of "Lone Assassin believers" in the world. I'm certainly not in the LN boat all by myself.

And, YES!, of course I'm going to "cite the rifle found on the sixth floor of the TSBD as evidence that Oswald was JFK’s assassin". What Lone Assassin believer wouldn't be citing that Carcano rifle as one of the most important pieces of evidence in the whole case (if not THE most important)? Get real, David L.!

Here's a rifle-related question I have repeatedly asked conspiracy believers over the last several years:

"At ANY given point in time after Lee Oswald acquired his Mannlicher-Carcano rifle via mail-order in March 1963, WHO IS MORE LIKELY to have used it -- on ANY day, including November 22, 1963 -- than its owner, LEE HARVEY OSWALD? .... For, if rifle-owner OSWALD didn't use OSWALD'S own rifle on November 22nd, then WHO DID use OSWALD'S VERY OWN RIFLE to fire bullets from it at John F. Kennedy in Dealey Plaza? On the basis of OWNERSHIP ALONE, Lee Harvey Oswald is very, very likely to have been the man squeezing the trigger of Rifle C2766 on November 22 (or any other day of the year). If conspiracy theorists think it's MORE likely for Malcolm Wallace (or anyone else) to have been up on that sixth floor using Oswald's gun on 11/22/63, they've got a huge hurdle to overcome. And that hurdle is -- NOBODY OWNED THAT RIFLE EXCEPT FOR LEE HARVEY OSWALD." -- DVP; November 18, 2007

~~~~~~~~~~~

"Who is more likely to have used Mannlicher-Carcano rifle #C2766 on 11/22/63 (or any other day of the year)? The owner of the gun (Lee Harvey Oswald)? Or some stranger who didn't purchase the weapon? Based on those "odds", alone, the Anybody But Oswald kooks are cooked. And when we start adding in all the other stuff that incriminates Sweet Lee, it's Katie, bar the door (e.g., Oswald leaving the building immediately; Oswald killing Tippit; Oswald's actions and statements within the Texas Theater, which practically amount to Oswald confessing to some horrible act; plus those fingerprints on the rifle's trigger guard, identified as being Oswald's prints by Vincent Scalice in 1993). This case is a prosecutor's wet dream." -- DVP; September 18, 2012

ALSO SEE:

The-Oswald-Never-Ordered-The-Rifle-Myth-Logo.png

And, yes, I'm also going to cite the two large bullet fragments recovered from the limousine (which came from OSWALD'S rifle) as strong evidence that is was, indeed, OSWALD who was firing that rifle at President Kennedy on November 22nd. Again, what LNer wouldn't be citing such incredibly incriminating physical evidence of Oswald's guilt?

You, David S. Lifton, actually seem to think it's surprising that a person (like me) who strongly believes that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone assassin of JFK would dare to assert that the various pieces of ballistics evidence associated with JFK's murder are actually legitimate (i.e., non-phony) pieces of evidence in this case—such as the C2766 Carcano rifle and the two bullet fragments found in the front seat of the President's car.

And despite the popular trend among JFK conspiracists to believe that virtually all of the physical evidence in the Kennedy and Tippit murder cases is fake and worthless, there hasn't been a speck of PROOF to substantiate that ANY of that evidence was actually manufactured, planted, or fraudulent (including the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle and the two front-seat bullet fragments).

And the last time I checked, the massive amount of SPECULATION and ACCUSATIONS and WISHFUL THINKING being done by JFK conspiracy theorists does not come close to rising to the level of PROOF.

Get real, DSL! You're the one beating the dead horse. Not me.
 

Edited by David Von Pein

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...