How many people did it take to assassinate JFK

[David Von Pein]

I don't even know what the heck this question means.

LOL. Oh, for Pete sake.

Jimbo knows exactly what my question means--and it's a perfectly reasonable question, and one that no CTer can possibly answer in a reasonable, believable way.

IF OSWALD WAS THE ONE & ONLY "PATSY" IN DALLAS, THEN SETTING HIM UP BY UTILIZING MANY DIFFERENT GUNMEN IS JUST PLAIN SUICIDE. Such a multi-gun, one-patsy scheme would not have been attempted by even the most bumbling of conspirators.

I think he means that somehow Oswald was the shooter or one of them, and that it would be stupid to put other gunmen in Dealey Plaza.

If I am right about this, then its his usual Von Peinian solipsistic view of the universe. Once you step out of the solipsism, the answer is simple. Oswald would not have tried to kill JFK since he liked him and worked for him.

LOL. But the plotters who were framing him didn't know this about Oswald, eh? They just hoped that nobody else would find out that LHO admired and liked JFK, is that it?

Hilarious.

And the "worked for him" crappola was a nice touch, Jimbo. It's pure BS, of course, but it's the first time I've ever heard one of you guys state it in such a fashion.

Even if somehow you could have snookered him into it, why do it? The guy could not have hit Kennedy in ten run throughs under those conditions. The shooting was so difficult that you needed three professional gunmen to guarantee a kill shot. Just ask Craig Zirbel or Carlos Hathcock.

More bullxxxx from Jim D.

The shooting "feat" by Oswald was not that difficult at all. The "feat" was accomplished on camera by multiple CBS marksmen in 1967. Naturally, however, DiEugenio will dismiss those CBS tests...because CBS is part of the "MSM cover-up".

Reprise (just to prove my "Patsy" point from a slightly different angle):

Even if somehow you could have snookered him into it, why do it? The guy could not have hit Kennedy in ten run throughs under those conditions. The shooting was so difficult that you needed three professional gunmen to guarantee a kill shot. Just ask Craig Zirbel or Carlos Hathcock.

Yeah, right, Jim. That's why your bumbling patsy-framers decided to FRAME OSWALD AS A SOLO PATSY, even though the shooting in Dealey Plaza "was so difficult that you needed three professional gunmen to guarantee a kill shot".

Hilarious. Benny Hill was never funnier than the ABO conspiracy theorists.

Edited September 23, 2010 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

Again, someone help DVP. I don' t understand the above. Isn't that what happened? The evidence that the shot was nearly impossible is in the WC. Did that stop Dulles, McCLoy and Ford from saying LHO did it? Did it stop the Ny TImes? Did it stop CBS? Does it stop John McAdams or DVP? So where is the logic here? The conspirators knew that LHO would not fire, and if he did, he would miss. So they needed three experts to be sure to do the job. They did. The WC covered it up. The MSM bought it. End of story.

The delusions never stop gushing from the fertile mind of James DiEugenio, do they?

The PRE-assassination plotters who were framing Oswald as a SOLO PATSY, even though the shooting "was so difficult that you needed three professional gunmen to guarantee a kill shot", just GOT LUCKY when the cops and the MSM and the WC decided to play along and FRAME THE SAME SOLO PATSY NAMED OSWALD TOO!

And yet *I* am the one who supposedly needs "help" here, per DiEugenio. Hilarious.

DiEugenio's next bladder-buster will undoubtedly be:

Oh, who gives a damn if the people framing Oswald didn't keep an eye on their patsy at 12:30 on Nov. 22?! What difference does it make if a bunch of people see the patsy on the first floor of the TSBD at the exact moment he's supposed to be up on the sixth floor killing the President?! The DPD and Hoover and the WC's Troika will fix everything afterwards anyway. So who gives a xxxx if the patsy garners for himself seventeen different alibi witnesses in the Depository at 12:30? Big f---ing deal, Davey Boy!

Edited September 23, 2010 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

BENNY HILL REPRISE:

The evidence that the shot was nearly impossible is in the WC.

What WCR page number is that on, Jimbo?

(Oh, my weak bladder.)

[Bernice Moore]

NOT TO DIVERT BUT...ROBERT ; QUOTE ''Many of the Secret Service agents on the ground were just following the orders of their superiors,'' THERE IS NO KNOWN DOCUMENTATION OF ANY KIND, THAT ANY OTHER REAL SECRET SERVICE AGENTS WERE ON THE GROUND WITHIN DEALEY THAT DAY, THERE WERE MANY REPORTS OF MEN WHO SAID THEY WERE AND SOME SHOWING I.D BUT WHEN THE STATS WERE CHECKED THEY WERE NOT, THE ONLY ONE MENTIONED ON THE GROUND WITHIN THE PARK AREA WAS SSAIC DALLAS SORRELS...WHOM CAMERMAN ORVILLE NIX KNEW AND SPOKE TO, BOTH SAYING SHOTS OR A SHOT CAME FROM THE FENCE AREA, IF YOU HAVE ANY PLEASE LET US KNOW, THANKS B...

By "on the ground," I do not mean at Dealey Plaza, where there were no real Secret Service men, only imposter Secret Service men working for the assassins. I mean the Secret Service men in Kennedy's detail who made sure the bubble top was not on; who were not close to his limo, who did not check the buildings for snipers or open windows.

The vast majority of these guys were "just following orders" of corrupted superiors who were involved in the JFK assassination plot. Ditto the Dallas motorcycle police who were NOT surrounding JFK's limo and allowed Kennedy to be in such a line of fire. They were just "following orders" to scale back the security protection and leave the limo open and vulnerable.

Understood robert, yes they failed that day some like roberts seen as very deliberately as well as kellerman in not following through in their known duties, and the ss has and will continue to live with it on their record...though the bubble top was not bullet proof nor the glass windows, the top i believe may have diverted the assassins view and perhaps bullets...some reports have stated..there were many warnings but none were heeding the seriousness it appears...thanks b

Edited September 24, 2010 by Bernice Moore

[David Von Pein]

Yes, you're right, Jim, about the 30-foot-high shooting tests done by the WC, vs. the proper height of 60 feet. And Vince Bugliosi does a little WC-bashing in his book when the topic comes around to those WC rifle tests.

And the "MSM" that Jim D. thinks was bending over backwards to convict Oswald also raked the WC over some hot coals too in 1967, when Walter Cronkite ridiculed the Commission on that "30 foot vs. 60 foot high" topic.

Paraphrasing Cronkite from the 1967 CBS-TV program "A CBS News Inquiry: The Warren Report":

"CBS built a tower to match the height of the sixth floor; so surely it wasn't beyond the capabilities of the FBI to do the same."

But the FACT is that some of the CBS shooters (from a 60-foot-high perch) were able to duplicate (and beat) Oswald's Dallas shooting performance. One shooter (which might have been Howard Donahue, but I'm not 100% sure of that at this moment) got off three shots in 4.1 seconds, but he only got 1 hit on the silhouette target.

And another CBS marksman achieved three hits on the target in just 5.2 seconds.

So it CAN be done.

And Monty Lutz of the HSCA Firearms Panel also beat Oswald's performance.

So, perhaps it's time for the conspiracy theorists to stop peddling the "IT CANNOT BE DONE AND HAS NEVER BEEN DONE" myth when it comes to the subject of Lee Harvey Oswald's so-called "impossible" shooting feat in Dealey Plaza.

Don't you think that's a good idea, Jim?

[David Von Pein]

BTW, Davey if you are having physical problems--weak bladder--why don' t you leave and go back to the Pigpen?

My goodness, that doesn't sound very friendly, James my friend.

But, of course, there's no need to tell me to go back to John McAdams' forum....because I still post there daily too, including cross-posting from here, in order to inform the several very astute LNers who monitor Prof. McAdams' aaj newsgroup (e.g., Jean Davison, Joe Elliott, Bud, John Fiorentino, BigDog, Steve Barber, Dave Reitzes, Tim Brennan, and Prof. McAdams himself, among others) of the ultra-brilliant work being done here by the Education Forum's conspiracy theorists--like in this recent thread at aaj:

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/b0fd04d8a9ee47a9

Edited September 23, 2010 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

Well, Jim, if you were to change the timing for the three shots to the accurate time of approx. 8 seconds, I'm all for it.

But your "6 seconds" time is too short and you (of course) know it.

Oswald's shots:

Shot 1 -- Z-frame 160 (approx.).

Shot 2 -- Z224.

Shot 3 -- Z313.

Total time = 8.36 seconds.

[David Von Pein]

Actually, I'd very much like to see a test like that performed, Jim. And in Dealey Plaza too.

Of course, there's one major stumbling block to the kind of test you're proposing, Jim. And Gary Mack informed me about the roadblock in an e-mail he wrote to me in July 2009.

Gary's e-mail was in response to this question that I had asked about the "Inside The Target Car" documentary:

"I'm wondering why the test shots couldn't have simply been done in the best possible place to perform such a test -- right in Dealey Plaza itself (and from the 6th-Floor window inside the Book Depository itself)?

The Discovery people already had arranged for the police to completely close off Elm Street and Dealey Plaza for a period of time for their initial "looking through the rifle scope" tests (to see whether certain angles within the Plaza were feasible ones or not for the head shot), so I wonder why they didn't just go the whole nine yards and perform the actual test shots that were fired into the surrogate skulls from Dealey Plaza as well?

I know that Oswald's Sniper's-Nest window is now technically "off limits" to visitors of Mr. Mack's Sixth Floor Museum. But surely an exception could have been made to allow Mr. Yardley to use that corner window to fire just that one shot at a dummy's head.

If the test shots could have been fired right at the scene of the crime itself (Dealey Plaza), I think it would have been better all the way around, and mainly to silence even more critics of the lone-assassin conclusion.

But by doing the actual shooting tests in California, the naysayers can now argue that the tests weren't set up right...or that the distances cannot be confirmed...or that the height of Oswald's window wasn't measured with accuracy...etc., etc.

But I'm guessing that some legal restrictions (or some kind of roadblock anyway) prohibited the shooting tests from being done right there in Dealey Plaza. That's too bad, too, because unless I miss my guess, a head-shot test performed from the actual crime scene would have been even MORE powerful and conspiracy-refuting." -- DVP; November 2008

===============================

Gary Mack then said:

"As for why the test shots weren't fired in Dealey Plaza, there was no reason to do so. Such actions would be dangerous, pure exploitation and probably against the law, since the Plaza is a city park and a National Historic Landmark." -- Gary Mack; July 4, 2009

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/08/jfk-inside-target-car-part-1.html

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/08/jfk-inside-target-car-part-3.html

[Greg Burnham]

How many shots were fired--and by how many persons--to kill Kennedy? As many as it took to do the job. If the number fired hadn't been sufficient, then more would have been fired. If there had been a need for more snipers than were employed that day, then more would have been supplied.

The real difficult "trick" to pull off is--and was--the cover-up. That required a lot of personnel--to this day. Right Dave? You betcha it did and still does.

As for the "Secret Service on the ground" that day, Bernice is spot on as far as the official reports are concerned.

[David Von Pein]

Should you draft the letter [to Gary Mack of the Sixth Floor Museum At Dealey Plaza; 411 Elm St., Dallas, Texas 75202] or should I?

No need for that, Jim. Gary will see these posts right here at The Education Forum.

Edited September 23, 2010 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

We are doing what the WC says happened.

If you're talking about the WC saying that Oswald positively did the shooting in 5.6 seconds, you're wrong. That was their best guess, yes. But the WC wasn't confining itself to only "5.6 seconds" as most conspiracy theorists seem to want to believe. Just read Page 117 of the Warren Report and see for yourself:

Further, you just said that CBS did it in less than six seconds. So why chicken out right after you said it could be done?

Oh, it certainly CAN be done--even by a Marine sharpshooter who scored a 212 on the U.S. Marine rifle range in 1956. We KNOW it can be done--because your favorite patsy DID IT in 1963, James.

BTW, who's chickening out?

Perhaps you missed this comment by me in an earlier post:

"Actually, I'd very much like to see a test like that performed, Jim. And in Dealey Plaza too." -- DVP

That comment means I'm "chickening out"?

If we were on a school ground in high school or JHS right now, I would be flapping my arms like wings and making chicken sounds at you.

And watching you performing that childish task (even though I said I'd LIKE to see such a rifle test performed in Dealey Plaza) would do WONDERS for your stellar reputation, James. So, please, borrow these plastic chicken wings of mine and have a ball.

Edited September 23, 2010 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

He [Gary Mack] does not get many letter from people like you or me, let alone co signed.

As I said previously....I'm all for it. Such a test would be excellent.

But it'll never happen in Dealey Plaza. Didn't you read this part of Post #27 of this thread?:

"As for why the test shots weren't fired in Dealey Plaza, there was no reason to do so. Such actions would be dangerous, pure exploitation and probably against the law, since the Plaza is a city park and a National Historic Landmark." -- Gary Mack; July 4, 2009

Or do you, Jim, have a lot of "pull" with the city managers in Dallas?

[David Von Pein]

Two more problems with Jimmy's proposed "test firing" in Dealey Plaza (as Jimbo tries to make things harder and harder for anyone who might try to duplicate the "feat" that Lee Harvey Oswald positively did perform on 11/22/63):

5. Getting a rifle just like the MC the WC says Oswald had. Then misaligning the scope, making the bolt very difficult to work, and then making the trigger pull a two stage process.

The part about the "misaligned scope" is pure guesswork on Jimmy's part.

I'm not denying that Oswald's scope on Rifle C2766 was misaligned (and it fired high and to the right) AFTER the assassination. But there is no proof whatsoever that the scope was misaligned when Oswald was using it to shoot at President Kennedy.

The scope might very well have been damaged and misaligned only after Oswald threw the rifle on the floor behind the box stacks in the northwest corner of the sixth floor. Nobody can ever know for sure how roughly (or smoothly) Oswald placed his rifle on the floor that day.

And I think even most conspiracy theorists will agree that if that rifle had bounced on the floor a time or two before settling (scope up) on the floor between the book cartons, such rough handling of the weapon could very possibly have jarred the very cheap telescopic sight out of alignment.

7. Do not let him live practice in advance at all.

You don't know whether Oswald ever practiced with his C2766 Carcano or not, Jim.

Of course, I realize you want to pretend that LHO never had that gun in his hands AT ALL in the year 1963, but as all reasonable people know, that idea is just a flat-out silly one, given all of the firm evidence that indicates he did ORDER, PAY FOR, WAS PHOTOGRAPHED WITH, and therefore TOOK POSSESSION OF Mannlicher-Carcano Rifle #C2766 in early 1963.

Plus, we do know for a fact that Oswald definitely "practiced" dry-firing the rifle on his porch in New Orleans in the summer of 1963. Now, that's not the same thing as practicing with live ammo in the gun, that's true. I'm not saying it is the same thing.

But via that front-porch dry-firing, I'm guessing that Oswald probably knew the ins and outs of working that bolt and "two-stage trigger" that you claim were ultra-crappy. And I'll bet he knew how to work that rifle pretty well too. After all, it WAS his gun (despite DiEugenio's constant whining to the contrary).

So, Jim, you're going to have to remove those two biased requirements from your letter to Mr. Mack.

Edited September 23, 2010 by David Von Pein

[Richard Pullen]

Was epileptic man and the abulance drivers in on it?

Was the the black lady who yelled to officer Baker, "They're shooting the president from the bushes," in on it?

My study says;

1. Yes

or

2. No, but she did die quickly(that night?)by someone who was in on it.

>>Jim Root asks>>>>> How many Dallas police officers were involved? <<<<

Its Plainly Proven, that the 6 or 9 dallass cops who claim they '''DID NOT''' see, or hear, or talk, to Officer Roger Craig, who we now know Provenly, stood 3 feet from them ... Conspired on him With Lies. IM sure some of these sick cops only covered-up verbally. They did it to cover for their sick cop bosses who physically helped with 'it'.

So we know this TRUTH! Cops will conspire to hide the facts regarding a presidents death in..., 1 minute or Maybe 6 minutes? Whats wrong with their brains I wonder? Whats wrong with anyones brain who denies or lies about these proven truths?

[Lee Forman]

Nothing like seeing your thread highjacked by little people.

The good news is that this type of setting, speaking personally, propels me into action - simply cannot stand the bs. So, I will make some inquiries and make some progress; after the intermittent fashion to which I am accustomed.

Chairs and a bigtime Felix Unger. Got a few calls to make - and all thanks to this rubbish.

- lee