David Von Pein

Thanks, Pat.

I find it interesting, however, to note that the "change" in Paul Stombaugh's Warren Commission testimony only SOFTENS the testimony and makes Stombaugh look a little LESS certain in his opinion that the fibers came from Oswald's shirt.

If the Warren Commission had been on a dastardly mission to paint Lee Oswald as the lone gunman at all costs, there's no way on this Earth that we would have had this comment....

"In my mind I feel that these fibers came from this shirt..."

....changed to this....

"There is no doubt in my mind that these fibers could have come from this shirt..."

If there was, in fact, any "change" made to Paul Stombaugh's above testimony, the final result of what we now see on
Page 88 of Warren Commission Volume #4 are altered words that nobody would have wanted to alter if their desire was to make people think that the fibers found on the butt plate of Mannlicher-Carcano Rifle #C2766 had come from the shirt worn by Lee Harvey Oswald on 11/22/63.

Some cover-up there.

~Yawn~

Clearly some of the published testimony was changed.

Whose testimony was changed? Can you cite it please?

Maybe this wider look of the TSBD will help....

Nolan, Bell, Wade, Connally, and the imaginary bullet....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/07/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-737.html

I guess it's out of the question that Gregory was wrong?

Of course that's out of the question. Because the one and only bullet that hit John Connally was CE399, which certainly wasn't plucked from the Texas Governor's left leg.

Do you think Shaw was lying?

No, he was just wrong. Not lying.

I think Gregory said what he had to say...

So you definitely DO think Gregory was lying. That's nice.

Sorry, David. I'll go with Shaw's immediate comments after leaving the operating theatre, not something said months later when agendas had been established.

So you think Dr. Gregory was lying through his teeth here?....

"We were disconcerted by not finding a missile at all."

Dr. Charles Gregory, who was responsible for Governor Connally's wrist injury, gave the following testimony, which proves that Dr. Robert Shaw did not have all the facts when he told the press that the bullet was still inside Connally's leg.

DVP's emphasis....

DR. GREGORY -- "I think again that bullet, Exhibit 399, could very
well have struck the thigh in a reverse fashion and have shed a bit of
its lead core into the fascia immediately beneath the skin, yet never
have penetrated the thigh sufficiently so that it eventually was
dislodged and was found in the clothing. I would like to add to that we

were disconcerted by not finding a missile at all. Here was our patient

with three discernible wounds, and no missile within him of sufficient

magnitude to account for them, and we suggested that someone ought

to search his belongings and other areas where he had been to see

if it could be identified or found, rather."

DVP: Assuming you're correct that Oswald did it alone, why have agencies of the U.S. Government fought so hard to reveal their files relating to the assassination?

Probably just bureaucratic red tape that none of the agencies ever wants to bother fighting.

But whenever a new and previously "classified" document does get released --- what's in it? Certainly nothing that has proven a conspiracy.

Stone's JFK-the movie set back WCR supporters and the report 25 years.... they've never recovered, and never will.

Only a rabid CTer could possibly think Stone's movie full of fantasy and sheer speculation has "set back" WCR supporters in any way whatsoever.

But, then too, Healy's current address is "Another Planet", so who knows what he's likely to believe (or swallow).

LEE HARVEY OSWALD, MARRION BAKER, ROY TRULY, AND THE COKE:

Excerpt.....

"Officer Baker's 9/23/64 statement is weird, I'll grant the conspiracy theorists that much. It's obviously not Baker's handwriting. It's someone else's. But Baker DID sign it and initial the cross-outs. There's no doubt about that either. If CTers want to think Baker was coerced into crossing out the "Coke" reference, I'll ask again -- Why didn't the FBI simply re-write the whole thing--sans any "Coke" reference--and then have Baker sign the revised statement? That would have taken--what?--an extra 5 minutes?

The fact that CROSS-OUTS exist in that document at all is pretty good proof that the FBI wasn't hiding anything concerning that document.

Heck, they could also have just as easily crossed out the word "Coke" entirely. But they didn't even do that. The word "Coke" can still easily be read underneath Baker's cross-out. Some cover-up there." -- DVP; January 11, 2013

jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/oswald-baker-truly-and-coca-cola.html

Baker supposedly stuck his gun in Oswald's gut for being in a second floor lunchroom. He thought the shots came from much further up. Don't you think if he catches someone on the 6th floor, he is going to hold him?

No. Not unless the person was carrying a gun. Baker very likely would have let him go from the sixth floor (just like he did on the 2nd floor) after Mr. Truly identifies LHO as just another employee. Baker originally thought the gunshots came from the roof, not the 6th floor (or any other floor).

The number one rule of a cop interrogation is to lie through your teeth at every opportunity.

Is that Rule #2A from "The CTer Guide To Make-Believe JFK Conspiracy Theories"?

But such a rule probably is in place for many Internet CTers. Otherwise, outer-fringe conspiracy theorists like James DiEugenio and Greg R. Parker wouldn't be able to build up their lists of never-ending liars in the JFK case nearly as easily.

Good imaginary rule, Greg. It keeps you from having to accept the reality of Lee Harvey Oswald's obvious guilt.

No I don't [think Bookhout lied on WCR Page 619].

Good. Then you agree that Oswald himself said he encountered the policeman on the second floor.

It's good to have that finally settled. Thanks.

Oswald's interrogations and the subsequent reports are different kettle of fish. I am working on a major piece about those.

Will the number of liars in that "major piece" be three dozen or four dozen?

Why didn't they put him on the 6th floor? Are you serious? That's hilarious! The Headline: DUMB DALLAS COP CATCHES SNIPER RED-HANDED BUT RELEASES HIM! HIS SUPERIORS DESCRIBE HIM AS SLOW WITTED. subhead: building superintended [sic] arrested as accomplice after vouching for shooter.

Yeah, right. Too funny. As if Baker and Truly KNEW the sniper had been on the sixth floor as of 12:31:30 on Nov. 22. (Is that going to be your next lame-ass theory, Greg --- that Baker & Truly knew the "sixth floor" was the Floor Of Death as of 12:31 PM?)

Regardless of the FLOOR NUMBER, this headline would still apply....

DALLAS COP CATCHES SNIPER BUT RELEASES HIM!

Greg,

You think Jim Bookhout lied on WCR Page 619 too, right? .....

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0322a.htm

In various statements, Truly and Baker between them had Oswald walking away from the stairway, sitting in the lunchroom, leaning on the table, and standing beside the coke dispenser.

And so you think BOTH Baker & Truly were so dumb, so stupid, so idiotic, they decided to alter their totally fabricated lie a half-a-dozen times??

And would you care to explain WHY the evil Baker/Truly twins decided to put Oswald on the SECOND floor via their lies---instead of the SIXTH floor?

How does putting him on the second floor do the patsy-framers any good at all?

But you do have something right. Roy Truly is going under the bus. No "if's" no "buts".

Gee, what a shocker.

At 23:45....

So, Greg, do you want to throw Truly under the bus because he (allegedly) said that Oswald was sitting at a table? Does that discrepancy mean the "encounter" never took place at all?

Egads indeed!

Ah... so it's okay for him to lie to the media all of a sudden? Your double standards would embarrass a lesser mortal!

If you take multiple statements made by the same witness to the same event, you'll likely find some minor differences in how they tell their story with each re-telling. Your inability to account for this reality would embarrass any reasonable and fair-minded mortal.

But, let's face it, your mind has been made up on this thing for years. You're going to toss Roy Truly under the bus no matter what. And to hell with common-sense inquiries like this one that I offered up earlier today:

If the whole Baker/Truly "encounter" was nothing but a lie in the first place, then why in hell didn't the Twins Of Deception (Baker and Truly) make their lie a much better one by saying they had encountered Oswald on the SIXTH FLOOR?

So, Greg, do you want to throw Truly under the bus because he (allegedly) said that Oswald was sitting at a table? Does that discrepancy mean the "encounter" never took place at all?

Egads indeed!

Have a good Holiday DVP.

And a good New Year.

I am trying to keep my resolution.

Same to you, Jim. Happy Holidays.

And here's my special holiday gift to you, Jim. It's an interview with Melvin Belli that I discovered just yesterday and added to my YouTube collection. It deals (in part) with one of your favorite people---Jim Garrison. ....

P.S. --- And here's another 1968 interview I had never heard before.

It's a radio interview with Bill Turner (also re: Garrison)....

http://bayarearadio.org/audio/knew/1968/KNEW_Joe-Dolan_Jan-1968.mp3

The deduction should be the opposite. Unless of course you post at McAdams' site, like Hank. Then you leave the logic outside the door. [it's] a requirement to post there.

And it's also a requirement to check your logic at the door if you were a conspirator trying to frame Oswald for JFK's murder in 1963.

They shot up Dealey Plaza within a "Let's Frame Oswald As The Sole Assassin" framework by firing bullets at Kennedy from a VARIETY of different locations (per CT mongers).

They wanted to make people think that Oswald carried a rifle into the TSBD by carrying it in a MAKE-BELIEVE bag that was way too small to hold that rifle (per CTers).

And, per CTers, "they" made up an "encounter" with LHO in the TSBD, but decided to have the meeting take place FOUR FLOORS away from the Death Floor---instead of just MAKING UP a good story about Baker & Truly actually seeing Oswald with a gun ON THE SIXTH FLOOR (where the shooting actually occurred).

Where does the LOGIC lie in ANY of the above things that many Internet CTers think really did happen?

Answer --- On the front stoop. Because all of those things are just plain ILLOGICAL to begin with.

LNers are the ones obsessed with "minutiae", Healy? That's hilarity (and irony) at its finest!

Healy's Pot/Kettle posts just never stop flowing.

And, BTW, I still post semi-regularly at Amazon, Healy. So we can chalk that up as yet another thing you don't have a clue about.