Kenneth Drew

And note that the man's feet are further apart. LHO's left leg is way further left, not even under his shoulder, while the other photo the left foot is directly below the shoulder, plus the LHO photo is turned to make LHO appear to be standing a little more erect. Who ever did the 'reconstruction' photo did an excellent job of non duplication, proving that he couldn't do it. look at the dark board/post behind LHO left foot, his foot is left (right in photo) of the post, the recreation is right (left in photo) of the post, about 6 inches further right. But DVP threw in the towel, so even he has now admitted it has to be a fake.

Robert, while I wasn't a kid 50 years ago, I couldn't be fooled on the photos back then either. First, his standing posture is impossible. His shadow is not at the same angle as the other shadows in the photo. You can see the boards and grass and sprigs off the plants "through" his body/legs. The head was put on the body, the body was put into the picture. Only a total fool would believe this is a 'real' photo.

DVP, are you saying that Marina used magic when taking the photo? Oh, you quoted the Bug, so you must know what he's talking about. Thanks for the morning laugh. Laugh of the day, we'll call it. Is that a US patent on that 'shrug'? If so, what is the patent number?

Thanks for the morning laugh, DVP, I've heard that now the whole JFK shooting is a conspiracy myth, that's he's still alive and living in Indiana. Is that right?

I don't have to pretend as long as you nor anyone else can prove it's real. We're all waiting. Okay?

You can't get anything right, can you Ken? Even when I quote my statements back to you, you still get them wrong. My previous statement regarding your silly "handgun" post was perfectly stated. I said you said that "just maybe" JFK was shot with a handgun. Do try to keep up. .... "To show just how pathetic and miserable the case for conspiracy is at this forum, Ken Drew is running around trying to pretend that just maybe JFK was killed by a pistol shot--or a handgun of some type. Even with CE567/569 staring him in the face (assuming he even knows what those are). The case for "denying the evidence" doesn't get much stronger than that." -- DVP "" Do try to keep up. ...." Welll, geez DVP I'm only trying to give you the opportunity to dazzle us with your brilliance? When does the show start?

Now wait a second, Bob. Isn't the most popular theory for the "fake backyard photos" the one that has a REAL PERSON standing in the Neely backyard holding a rifle and that only the HEAD of Oswald was pasted onto this "other person's" body? So, if that's the theory, the Oswald stand-in would still have a THUMB on his left hand too. So the "stand-in" would be the "freak" with the weird thumb. Just HOW MANY things can you guys come up with that "don't quite look right" in the BY pictures? Is there any limit? So, Bob, I guess you think that NOBODY was really standing in the Neely backyard at all, is that right? And pretty much everything except the background was added into the picture artificially? Including the freakish left thumb that apparently belonged to NO flesh-and-blood person? Is that correct? And don't forget the alleged "impossible" leaning posture being exhibited by the "person" (or the drawn-in person) in the picture too. And the stubby fingers on the "person's" right hand too. Don't forget that. (Plus the "impossible" shadows.) And the cropped chin. Did I leave anything out? Keep looking at the pic below. I'm sure before the end of the day, you can add a dozen more things that you see in the photo that are "impossible". And keep ignoring Marina whatever you do. She has always said she took the backyard pictures. But she was probably just dreaming the whole thing. Right, Bob? "And keep ignoring Marina whatever you do. She has always said she took the backyard pictures." Not always DVP, only after she was told the WC had her return flight booked to Russia unless she took those photos. Remember, I'm fairly sure that's in the WCR. "Now wait a second, Bob. Isn't the most popular theory" Now wait a minute DVP, you're not allowed to use 'theory' only WCR 'facts', so you're gonna have to re phrase that question.....okay?

There is one thing that gives this photo away as being faked more than anything else. If we look at the enlarged version, which DVP has been so gracious to provide us with, there is something very unnatural about the left hand, holding the rifle. Comparing the left hand with the right hand, we can see the entire length of the four fingers of the left hand. Looking at your own hand, you can see the thumb begins quite far back on the hand, and even when laid along the fore finger, does not even extend to the second knuckle of the fore finger. In the photograph, you can see the thumb of the left hand in an impossible position on the opposite side of the rifle from where the thumb joins to the hand. The left thumb in this photo would have to be about 8 inches long to do what we are seeing. Was LHO a circus freak, as well? P.S. Perhaps DVP would be so good as to take a "selfie" of himself, holding a rifle, and recreate this impossible positioning of fingers and thumb. Dave?? and the fact that you can see the twigs of the plant and the slats of the fence through the overlay of the body gives it away a little also. But DVP has proof the A Hidell is the guy with the long thumb, not LHO, right DVP?

Chuck, that's all a waste of time. You will not find what DVP says by viewing that video. It can not and does not show that the MC as found in the condition at the time it was produced would be capable or did actually ever fire any shots at all. Not even one. He's sending you off on a DVP smoke and mirrors chase.

DVP no. 227 Too Easy DVP, too easy...."Take another look at CE567 and CE569 again, Kenneth. How do you think those two bullet fragments from the C2766 rifle managed to get into the front seat of the President's limousine?" and so? no evidence they were fired from that rifle, no evidence they were fired while JFK was in the limo. No evidence they were not planted there. How much more you need DVP? "Could have been with a handgun" is not equivalent to "was done with a handgun" English 101 there DVP. Try to keep up. "And that statement--all by itself--ranks as one of the dumbest statements" and of course you have no rebuttal, none.......... To put it plain and simple DVP, you got nothing. LOL....just a plain ole Nutter shilling for the WC. All smoke and mirrors, no substance......

The C2766 rifle that Klein's mailed to Oswald/(Hidell) has LHO's prints on it, David. Three prints, in fact. That's definitive proof that Oswald had the C2766 weapon in his possession at some point in time. And since it's obvious that OSWALD had the C2766 weapon in his possession at some point in time, then why would you think that OSWALD did not ORDER the weapon himself from Klein's (especially in light of all that paperwork that proves he DID order it)? Or are you going to argue that the three LHO prints were planted there too? (And, yes, I'm including the two trigger guard prints.) Good luck in pretending those three LHO prints are "tainted" and "worthless" too. How dumb can one human be? DVP is attempting to reach that achievement.. Of course he knows that the palmprint that was on the rifle was put on the rifle while LHO was lying in the mortuary. Doesn't DVP know that? Before the C2766 was sent to the FBI and while at the FBI lab, it had no prints. They only showed up after LHO was dead. Right DVP? you do agree? I wouldn't have thrown in the dumb word there DVP but apparently before you wrote 227, you had been eating dumb pills all day and kept spitting out the seeds. I love it where David Josephs asks for dVP to give us just one solid piece of evidence that OSWALD, not A Hidell ordered a rifle from Kleins and he had to decline as he had no proof. NONE.....zip.........

tell us again DVP why the limo was flown to Detroit and the windshield replaced. Or do you mean there was no hole in the windshield before the first shot was fired?

Good point, Bruce. I had never even thought of that point you just brought up. If the "thingie"/"object" that CTers claim is a "sling mount" in the backyard photo is really a MOUNT for a SLING, then why isn't Oswald's SLING attached to that SLING MOUNT in the picture? It sure doesn't look like it is. And part of the sling is certainly visible in the photo too.... It is connected to it. Look at your larger photo, you can see the strap run to alongside the stock to the mount.

"That was the reason the Warren Commission was formed in the first place---to get the facts and find out what the truth was." Not true DVP: the reason the Warren Commission was formed in the first place---to get the facts and figure out how to make them fit our truth. Now we got it right.

1.) Bullet hole of entry in the upper back. 2.) Bullet hole of either entry or exit in the front of JFK's neck. 3.) No bullets inside JFK's body at all. 4.) No bullet FRAGMENTS inside JFK's neck/back either. 5.) Very little damage to any internal structures of JFK's upper back and neck. Logical conclusion (and the only possible reasonable conclusion that Humes & Company could have arrived at).... The bullet that entered JFK's upper back had to have exited through the OTHER bullet hole on the opposite side of his body (in the lower throat). What OTHER conclusion should the autopsists have come to (given the above set of facts), Ian? "What OTHER conclusion should the autopsists have come to" maybe the correct one?

"The corpsman who wrote the memo for the Sibert report wrote "missile" when it should have said "fragments"." Really? Where is your absolute proof? "While Rankin appears to have used the wrong word ("fragment") instead of the correct word ("bullet")." Really? So Rankin was just throwing out random words thinking no one would care if he were right about it being a 'fragment' vs a 'bullet', what the hell, they're interchangeable, right? Let's see, I think I've got DVP partially figured out here. If a CTer questions something it's because they're wrong. But if a Nutter questions it, it's because it's something that 'didn't really matter', After all why would Rankin be concerned whether he used the word fragment vs bullet, it's all one and the same. Right? I'm sure that 'the only time' that anyone writing on the WCR thought that it didn't 'really matter', it's only semantics we're drowning in, it's not as it's lies or something.

And yet there are still very few Internet CTers who seem to want to accept the obvious truth regarding Oswald's rifle purchase. We still have people insisting Oswald never ordered any rifle at all from Klein's. This thread is in response to that 50-year myth. I posted it to set the record straight and to show that Oswald definitely DID order a rifle from Klein's in 1963. And only someone who is desperate to disregard all kinds of proof of that rifle transaction could possibly believe LHO did not order that rifle. I'll repeat something I said to James Gordon in a private message last month.... "Yes, my opinion is pretty firm on the "LN" and "WC" side of things, but that's because I believe ALL of the physical evidence supports Oswald's guilt (and supports the SBT as well). And when someone decides to (IMO) misrepresent things...then I think I should call them on it and point out those misrepresentations (and/or errors in their thinking). And most of the "LNer vs. CTer" debates, IMO, really DO come down to pointing out and correcting the misrepresentations made over and over again by the CTers on forums. I see it all the time---on Edu. Forum, on Facebook, on Duncan MacRae's forum, on McAdams' newsgroup, on IMDB---everywhere. CTers perpetuate myth after myth, year after year, and that's a big reason I post on forums today---to give the other side to anyone who cares to absorb it. Most CTers, of course, think that it's I who "misrepresent" the facts. I feel strongly otherwise. So there's the perpetual stalemate --- Who's right? Who's wrong? That debate will likely never end." -- David Von Pein; May 16, 2015 "And yet there are still very few Internet CTers who seem to want to accept the obvious truth regarding Oswald's rifle purchase. We still have people insisting Oswald never ordered any rifle at all from Klein's. This thread is in response to that 50-year myth. I posted it to set the record straight and to show that Oswald definitely DID order a rifle from Klein's in 1963." All total BS. 'obvious truth'? what is an 'obvious truth'. And why do we still have people insisting Oswald never ordered any rifle at all from Klein's? Why? Because NO ONE has evered shown ANY proof that he did. NONE. It's not a MYTH, it's a FACT. So let's give you one more chance to prove it 'absolutely'. Don't show us anything that someone has to make a judgment on or decide who did or whatever, lay it out in blackl and white where there IS NO DOUBT. Don't try to prove to us that A HIDELL ordered it and 'everyone knows' that A HIDELL is LHO. NO WE DON'T, there is not now and never has been any proof that A HIDELL and LHO are the same person.

"So you simply have nothing to say and no way to confuse the issue regarding the questions I asked Dave? That's DVP's standardized format. Comes in, makes a lot of statements of "fact" presents none, because the Nutters don't have any. Gets the CTers to discussing 'his' facts, which as he knows is all smoke and mirrors while he then presents his 'proof' which is usually totally unrelated to what it's supposed to prove then goes on to the next 'new fact'. An example, he says I am trying to say that JFK was shot with a handgun. Clearly anyone that read my statement knows that's not true. My statement clearly only said that 'there is no proof that he was shot with a rifle'. And, of course, there is no 'proof' that he was shot with a 'rifle'. No bullet from JFK's body has ever been proven to have been fired from 'any specific' weapon. NONE. It is easy for me to prove my statements, because no one can prove they are not correct. Not one person has ever been linked, by evidence, to the shooting. No gun is associated with the shooting. The location of any shots has ever been proven. The number of shots has never been proven. Yes, DVP will state the obvious, but my proof is easier. When I say 'no gun is associated with the shooting' to disprove that someone would have to prove that a specific gun 'has been' and since none have, then they can't do that.

Stephen, I try to stick with the truth, which is that someone knows who shot the president. Who? is not known to the public. I try to be realistic.

Yeah, right, Ken. Kennedy must have been shot with a bow and arrow instead of a rifle --- even though there were bullet fragments from a RIFLE found right there in the car. And those were fragments from not just any ol' rifle. They were from the C2766 rifle. But that little fact means zilch to a conspiracy hobbyist and fantasist like you. Perhaps you think those bullet fragments were already there in the limousine BEFORE the car passed the Depository on November 22, eh? Your posts are getting more ridiculous with each passing hour. Time for a new hobby, Ken. Maybe croquet. Or bird watching. Because you're really lousy at this "JFK" thing. Yeah, all those witnesses who saw a gun in the sixth-floor window (Brennan, Couch, Euins, Jackson, and Worrell) must have all been imagining it. They must have really seen a bow & arrow instead. And those three spent bullet shells in the Sniper's Nest must have been figments of Luke Mooney's imagination when he found the Nest at 1:12 PM on Nov. 22. Right, Ken? And Williams, Jarman, and Norman must have been dreaming when they heard the shots coming from over their heads. And Norman was also dreaming when he heard three shells hit the plywood floor directly above him. Must have been nails or screws instead, just as Gerry Spence laughably suggested to Harold Norman when he had Norman on the witness stand in 1986. Right, Kenny? During his cross-examination of Harold Norman, Spence was actually suggesting to the jury that perhaps--just perhaps--the jury should consider the possibility that the metal objects Norman heard hitting the floor on 11/22/63---at the exact same time JFK was being shot with rifle bullets from the Depository---were not bullet shell casings at all....but were, instead, possibly screws or nails striking the floor. IOW, somebody just happened to be dropping some screws or nails on the floor directly above Norman at the same time somebody was ALSO shooting at JFK with a gun in the same location on the sixth floor. If I had been on that jury in London in '86, I doubt I could have kept from busting a gut with laughter when Spence threw that one up for the jury's consideration. But, incredibly, Gerry threw it up there just the same. "Kennedy must have been shot with a bow and arrow instead of a rifle" Certainly could have been with a handgun. There are alternatives to bows and arrows. "even though there were bullet fragments from a RIFLE" Rifle? actually a 'firearm'. No proof of weapon. "They were from the C2766 rifle." Good vivid imagination. "Your posts are getting more ridiculous with each passing hour." Well, at least you don't have that to worry about. Your posts have always been ridiculous. "Yeah, all those witnesses who saw a gun in the sixth-floor window" Le's see now; seeing a gun equals shooting a gun. See what I mean? "three spent bullet shells" you're incluing the one with the bent edge, right? So spent shell equals someone shot someone? See what I mean? or do you prefer; Okay? "During his cross-examination of Harold Norman, Spence was actually suggesting to the jury" Wow, a fake trial, you should see how my fake trial turned out. I do know that tv show trials usually turn out how the writer writes them. Okay? All your time spent collecting artifacts hasn't helped you one bit, though I think you might know the truth, for some reason you don't want it revealed. One day I'm going to show my home video, then you won't be able to deny any longer. uh, okay?

You're confusing Internet CT clowns (such as yourself; and it becomes a much easier task to label Kenneth Drew a "clown" after reading all of the stupid things he says in the quote below) with the average man on the street who has an opinion on the case. Maybe you should check out the 2003 ABC News poll. Hardly anybody thinks "Lee shot John", eh? Think again.... "Do you think Lee Harvey Oswald was the only gunman in the Kennedy assassination, do you think there was another gunman in addition to Oswald there that day, or do you think Oswald was not involved in the assassination at all?": ONLY OSWALD ----------- 32% ANOTHER GUNMAN ------- 51% OSWALD NOT INVOLVED -- 7% NO OPINION ------------- 10% http://PollingReport.com/news3.htm#Kennedy Good gosh Almighty, you really do reside in Fantasy Land, don't you? Why not just pretend JFK wasn't killed at all? Well, DVP, you need to wipe your Pigpen slop off your eyeballs and quit pretending you 've been misled by the WCR and the Nutters. Seriously, you've never considered LHO to be the person that shot John, have you? I mean you know the truth so surely you can't be on that list. That's just a list of the uninformed. I know that you have to 'claim to believe' the WCR, but, let's face it, nobody really believes that crap, right? "Good gosh Almighty, you really do reside in Fantasy Land, don't you? Why not just pretend JFK wasn't killed at all?" And you pretend my memory is faulty and you can't remember for 30 seconds what the question was that you're answering. Did I say JFK wasn't shot? I said 'there is no proof he was shot with a rifle" Well, can you, or anyone prove that? No. I said; there is no proof of what type of weapon was fired at him? well, is there? what type do you have 'proof' of? I said there is not one piece of evidence linking any human of having fired at him. Is there? What is that proof and who is the person? Remember not guessing now, must be absolute. Spit it out. Who was it? And last, but not least, there is not any evidence of any shot ever having been fired from the snipers nest. If there were evidence of it, we would have heard of it by now. Oh, I'm well aware that you can throw out all kind of smoke and mirrors, but that's not what we're talking here, We're talking evidence of a crime. You don't have it. So, I willl concede that JFK was 'likely' shot in Dealey Plaza, but there is no absolute proof of anything else.

The forward sling mount ring is the only outstanding difference between the BYP rifle and the 6th floor rifle. While the M91/38 was manufactured with side mounted rings, both on the forestock and the buttstock, it is unusual in the extreme to see an M91/38 with a bottom mounted forward sling ring, but not unheard of. I have read through a Carcano registry, and the odd M91/38 is registered as having bottom mounted rings on the forestock. I believe these exist due to the condition of many of the Carcanos sold as surplus by the Italian government, following WW II. These were a mixed bag of carbines, short rifles and long rifles, and both the long rifles and most of the carbines were made with bottom mounted sling rings. Some carbines had both bottom AND side rings. As a good percentage of these rifles were in pieces and various states of disrepair, it was often necessary to rob parts from rifles beyond repair to make complete rifles of other rifles. There would have been nothing stopping a gunsmith from robbing a bottom mounted sling ring from a carbine to replace the missing side mounted ring on an M91/38. There was also nothing stopping someone from replacing the bottom mounted ring with a side mounted ring after the BYP's were taken but before the rifle arrived on the 6th floor. Robert is is interesting that you state that the rifle in the BYP and TSBD are identical but then state that forward sling mount is different on the two rifles. Maybe the word identical means something different to you than I think the recognized defintion means. Doesn't identical mean 'no different', not well only one thing is different? I think it would be hard to locate a gunsmith that had robbed a part from one Carcano to put on this rifle just to make it identical to the TSBD rifle. How would he have known which ring to change to match the photo? I think it is pretty well accepted that the rifles are different rifles and for the most part, only nutters tend to maintain the fiction that they are the same rifle. You really do have comprehension difficulties. If you would clean your glasses and read my posts again, you would see that I said both rifles were most definitely the same model of Carcano, that being the M91/38 short rifle, but not necessarily the same rifle. I did offer the opinion, though, that it would be a bit dumb for the conspirators not to plant the same rifle that was used in the back yard photos. "You really do have comprehension difficulties. If you would clean your glasses and read my posts again, you would see that I said both rifles were most definitely the same model of Carcano, that being the M91/38 short rifle, but not necessarily the same rifle." Well, you got me there Robert. I was reading what you were saying as 'the byp rifle and the TSBD rifle were the same rifle', not that you were saying they were the same model of rifle. I even went back and looked and couldn't find an obvious place where you said the models were the same. But now we're in agreement that the rifles were both MC's of the same model,but not the 'same' MC rifle. And by TSBD MC rifle I'm referring to the one that turned up after they had taken the Mauser away from the SBD and produced the MC that later became the one they have tried to claim was mailed to a PO Box in Dallas. Maybe they had bought several of the rifles just in case they had to use a different scenario. Accept my apology for interpreting you incorrectly.

The flechette scenario leads to Persons of Interest -- the Staff Support Group within US Army Special Operations Division at Ft. Detrick, MD, especially individuals described by flechette developer Charles Senseney as an Air Force colonel and an Army colonel who were conducting CIA ops with military cover. http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/vol1/pdf/ChurchV1_6_Senseney.pdf Agreed, Cliff. Establishing the existence of any type of exotic projectile in this assassination beyond a home made hollow point bullet, such as the flechettes you speak of or the highly complex (and unheard of in 1963) frangible bullets I speak of, automatically eliminates 99.999999% of the population as suspects, and points directly at agencies of the US Government with access to high tech weaponry. I agree Robert. If I were the planner, I would not plan for a shot through the windshield, but somebody must have known something we don't and thought it was a worthwhile effort. Maybe the type projectile had been tested as firing through a windshield. And Ron, exactly right. We don't know who did it. Don't know what kinds of projectile hit him, don't know what kind or type of weapon fired it or from where it was fired. Other than that? Of course, we also don't know which direction the bullet went through the windshield, either. I would assume since the bullet hit JFK in the front of the throat, it would come from in front. But, I realize there is NO PROOF that is the bullet that hit JFK.

"because he's a conspiracy hobbyist who loves to invent new (and more) reasons to pretend Oswald never fired a shot, plus new ways to pretend the FBI was incompetent." Pretend? If it's such an open and shut case DVP why can't anyone prove LHO ever fired a rifle in Dallas? Very few people that I know have ever accepted that LHO was actually the one that killed JFK, he's always been considered to be the "patsy". I find it strange for someone to make such a statement and yet can not provide even one single piece of evidence or one single fact that points to ANYONE, much less LHO. There is no proof JFK was shot with a rifle, there is no proof of what weapon was fired at him, there is not one piece of evidence linking any human to having fired at him and there is not one piece of evidence that any shots have ever been fired from the snipers nest. To sum it all up, your total is Zero. Just because you choose to believe what you choose to believe has zip to do with 'who shot John'.

I know it didn't happen because the rifle you inaccurately claimed Weitzman said on TV was a "Mauser" (via Weitzman himself seeing a "Mauser" stamp on the weapon) wasn't really a Mauser at all --- it was Oswald's C2766 Italian Carcano. Even Weitzman himself in 1967 (in a real TV broadcast this time, not just one that your false memory has invented) said that the rifle he saw was not a Mauser. Therefore, Weitzman had no opportunity to see the word "Mauser" stamped on the TSBD rifle, since there was no "Mauser" found in the TSBD that day for Weitzman to see. Simple. And the price of eggs in China today is what? Do you think a policeman holding a rifle in his hands, looking at the print on the rifle and saying that it is a Mauser and showing that to other officers there at the scene, then going to the office and signing a sworn affidavit is going to 'get it wrong'. Roger Craig refused to bow to play their games and see what it got him. You notice that Weitzman said something entirely different in '63, are you assuming he doesn't have a faulty memory as you attribute to me? Weitzman was apparently not willing to go against 'better judgment', as in, he preferred to live a few more years. I suspect that had Weitzman continue to say it was a Mauser, he likely would not have survived as many years as he did. 'see Roger Craig'.