David Von Pein Posted May 1, 2015 Author Share Posted May 1, 2015 (edited) Gerald Ford (1978) ------> https://app.box.com/s/jdihp42tp51stkwn60z7hr5dl29hsx80 ------- Edited May 1, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Schmidt Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Good one, lol. We all know what Ford has said publicly. Now to the content of my question--do you think Valéry Giscard d'Estaing was lying about what Ford told him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted May 1, 2015 Author Share Posted May 1, 2015 (edited) Good one, lol. We all know what Ford has said publicly. Now to the content of my question--do you think Valéry Giscard d'Estaing was lying about what Ford told him? Yes. Plus, given what CTers think of Mr. Ford and the perpetual decades-long "cover-up" that Ford was supposedly a part of -- just THINK for two seconds about how utterly stupid it would have been for Ford to utter such a comment to ANYONE. Does it make ANY sense from that POV of the CTers who think it was Ford's job to keep quiet and "cover up" the truth about JFK's death? It's laughable. And it's even more laughable from my "LN" POV and what I've heard Ford say in public many times since 1964. So, yes, it's a lie. (Either that or somebody has severely misquoted Mr. Ford.) Edited May 1, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Schmidt Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 CTers range from thinking Ford's role was nefarious to thinking he was easily manipulated or perhaps even patriotic by keeping American institutions stable and the public safe from worry. I've said this before on another thread, but suppose the Warren Commission really did find out there was a plot but really couldn't figure out who was behind it. Would they be able to tell the American public there was a conspiracy but, gee, we don't know who it was or who they plan to kill next. Or worse, suppose they found out years later that some lower level players in a powerful institution like the CIA were acting on their own, or some powerful millionaires had it done? Would you tell the public? I probably wouldn't. It would compromise the whole US political system. In this sense, protecting the public from knowing too much might even be considered noble in people like Ford's mind. Might he tell another president what really went on? Perhaps, knowing that this conversation among equals would be kept in confidence. With this scenario in mind, it doesn't seem so far-fetched after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted May 1, 2015 Author Share Posted May 1, 2015 Brian, You and I have just proved that there's a "Scenario For Every Occasion" (and for everyone with a computer and a mouse). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon G. Tidd Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Brian, You offer that the Warren Commission members and staff believed they were acting correctly and morally in keeping the truth from the American people. Richard Russell didn't believe this. Apparently, in the end, neither did Hale Boggs nor John Sherman Cooper. My take is that Warren and Ford were team players, meaning they understood the team they were on and were loyal to it. My take further is that Dulles regarded his team as the CIA, and McCloy sided with his friend Dulles. Hardly a unified Commission in terms of loyalty and perspective. But on balance, I agree with you that the four majority Commissioners didn't regard what they did and aimed to do as incorrect or morally repugnant. They rationalized what they did. And that would be fine if the JFK assassination were a mere historical blip. But it's not. IMO, the task at hand is not to vilify the Warren Commission but rather to press the U.S. Government to release the millions of pages of documents relating to persons possibly connected to the assassination, pages that are currently suppressed. Footnote: If there is moral culpability in this matter, it rests chiefly with the autopsy physicians, who lacked the courage, not the ability, to describe clearly and cleanly with no doubt the nature of the damage inflicted on JFK's body. The mere fact DVP argues about the location of the back wound (he may or may not be correct) demonstrates how badly, deliberately badly, the autopsists, who were military officers, served the American people. They served those of higher military rank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted June 12 Author Share Posted June 12 (edited) Now available through DVP Home Entertainment and the CS&L [Common Sense & Logic] Foundation of North America..... 😁 "DEBATING THE JFK CASE" : THE COMPLETE 60-PART SERIES These sixty common-sense-filled volumes, which date back to my early days on the Internet [2005 to 2007], have now been electronically packaged in one space-saving mega-set (linked below). This series touches on virtually all of the various JFK assassination topics, including --- the Single-Bullet Theory...the Warren Commission...the HSCA...the Texas School Book Depository...the back of President Kennedy's head...Badge Man...Umbrella Man...the murder of J.D. Tippit...Lee Harvey Oswald's many lies...Dr. James Humes...Buell Wesley Frazier...the "Anybody But Oswald" conspiracy theorists...and, of course, Vincent Bugliosi and his comprehensive book "Reclaiming History". All of that "Lone Nut vs. Conspiracy" wrangling and squabbling, and lots more, can be found (somewhere) within this 60-part Super Set. So sit back, select a volume of your choice, and watch with joy as you observe one conspiracy theory after another crumble into dust via DEBATING THE JFK CASE: THE COMPLETE SERIES SET! ..... http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com / Debating The JFK Case (60-Part Series) ----------------- Just one highlight (from Part 10): A CONSPIRACY THEORIST SAID -- "I don't think the things you list tell anyone that Oswald murdered Tippit." DVP SAID -- "Oh, for heaven sakes! Step out of the CT clouds for once! How much stuff is required to prove Oswald guilty of Tippit's slaying? The bum's guilt couldn't be any clearer, even if he had shouted "I did it!" to the world on national television! There were gobs of witnesses....his bullet shells were found just yards from the murder victim (in a place where HE himself was seen dumping them!)....the murder weapon was on him half-an-hour later....he tried to kill a cop inside the theater....plus there were Lee's nicely-incriminating comments in the theater and then in the police car -- "It's all over now"; "This is it", and "Well, they say it just takes a second to die". Lee Harvey Oswald might as well have been drenched with Officer Tippit's blood when he was caught. His guilt is that obvious." Edited June 12 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Mileto Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 35 minutes ago, David Von Pein said: David, why aren't you including the most incriminating of Oswald's known statements - "Well, it's all over now. I've killed me a cop and a President. I'm gonna get me two more!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrOyrhKgTtE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted June 12 Author Share Posted June 12 (edited) 1 hour ago, Micah Mileto said: David, why aren't you including the most incriminating of Oswald's known statements - "Well, it's all over now. I've killed me a cop and a President. I'm gonna get me two more!" http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/05/jfk-assassination-media-errors.html#I-Got-Me-A-Cop-And-A-President Edited June 12 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Cairns Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 10 hours ago, David Von Pein said: Now available through DVP Home Entertainment and the CS&L [Common Sense & Logic] Foundation of North America..... 😁 "DEBATING THE JFK CASE" : THE COMPLETE 60-PART SERIES These sixty common-sense-filled volumes, which date back to my early days on the Internet [2005 to 2007], have now been electronically packaged in one space-saving mega-set (linked below). This series touches on virtually all of the various JFK assassination topics, including --- the Single-Bullet Theory...the Warren Commission...the HSCA...the Texas School Book Depository...the back of President Kennedy's head...Badge Man...Umbrella Man...the murder of J.D. Tippit...Lee Harvey Oswald's many lies...Dr. James Humes...Buell Wesley Frazier...the "Anybody But Oswald" conspiracy theorists...and, of course, Vincent Bugliosi and his comprehensive book "Reclaiming History". All of that "Lone Nut vs. Conspiracy" wrangling and squabbling, and lots more, can be found (somewhere) within this 60-part Super Set. So sit back, select a volume of your choice, and watch with joy as you observe one conspiracy theory after another crumble into dust via DEBATING THE JFK CASE: THE COMPLETE SERIES SET! ..... http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com / Debating The JFK Case (60-Part Series) ----------------- Just one highlight (from Part 10): A CONSPIRACY THEORIST SAID -- "I don't think the things you list tell anyone that Oswald murdered Tippit." DVP SAID -- "Oh, for heaven sakes! Step out of the CT clouds for once! How much stuff is required to prove Oswald guilty of Tippit's slaying? The bum's guilt couldn't be any clearer, even if he had shouted "I did it!" to the world on national television! There were gobs of witnesses....his bullet shells were found just yards from the murder victim (in a place where HE himself was seen dumping them!)....the murder weapon was on him half-an-hour later....he tried to kill a cop inside the theater....plus there were Lee's nicely-incriminating comments in the theater and then in the police car -- "It's all over now"; "This is it", and "Well, they say it just takes a second to die". Lee Harvey Oswald might as well have been drenched with Officer Tippit's blood when he was caught. His guilt is that obvious." I have a question for you, which a simple yes or no will suffice. In your opinion, is the case against Lee Oswald for the murder of President Kennedy and Officer Tippit; provable beyond a reasonable doubt? Does the physical evidence in both cases, meet the threshold of the beyond a reasonable doubt standard? If you’re answer is a yes to either question I would of course welcome your explanation to this opinion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted June 12 Author Share Posted June 12 (edited) 13 hours ago, Johnny Cairns said: In your opinion, is the case against Lee Oswald for the murder of President Kennedy and Officer Tippit provable beyond a reasonable doubt? Yes. Especially in the Tippit case [CLICK]. 13 hours ago, Johnny Cairns said: Does the physical evidence in both cases meet the threshold of the beyond a reasonable doubt standard? Yes, I think it does. Many people, of course, disagree. But unless virtually all of the evidence against Oswald in the JFK and Tippit cases was faked/manufactured (which IMO is a ridiculous and absurd claim), then Lee Oswald was a double-murderer. Speaking of the physical evidence.... Also See: https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/29767-the-burden-of-proof Edited June 13 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Brown Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 Oswald's guilt in the murder of J.D. Tippit is unquestionable. Just because some question the evidence does not automatically make the evidence questionable. Four shell casings were found at the scene. @Johnny Cairns, I have a question for you. In your opinion, were they automatic shells or were they from a .38 revolver? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denise Hazelwood Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 (edited) On 4/30/2015 at 6:23 PM, Cliff Varnell said: No, you were right when you correctly pointed out that JFK's jacket was bunched up just "a little bit" in the Croft photo (Z161). But is the Croft photo unaltered? Glen Bennett said in same-day notes reported by the WC that he saw JFK being hit "about four inches down from the right shoulder." Clint Hill viewed the body in the morgue in order to report back to the family and testified that the hole in the body was "about 6 inches below the neck line." Robert Frazier testified that the hole in Kennedy's coat was "5 3/8 inches below the top of the collar" and the hole in the shirt was "5 3/4 inches below the top of the collar." I'm pretty sure that the Croft photo was altered (See my essay at https://www.a-benign-conspiracy.com/the-altered-croft-photo.html), and I doubt that Kennedy's jacket would ever fit him that badly, even with the back brace on. Addendum: And do you really think that the photo that Croft was sure he took "at the exact instant of the head shot" actually couldn't be developed because of a "camera malfunction" (which was the excuse he was given when he got his developed pictures back after giving his undeveloped film to the SS or FBI)? Edited June 13 by Denise Hazelwood Added addendum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 BTW, the Ford quote is backed up by John Sherman Cooper in the book by his assistant Morris Wolff Lucky Conversations. Len had him on BOR. Like John Connally, Ford made a choice to sell out his morals for what he thought was the good of the country. In reality, the Warren Commission was a minority report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Cairns Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 9 hours ago, David Von Pein said: Yes. Especially in the Tippit case [CLICK]. Yes, I think it does. Many people, of course, disagree. But unless virtually all of the evidence against Oswald in the JFK and Tippit cases was faked/manufactured (which IMO is a ridiculous and absurd claim), then Lee Oswald was a double-murderer. Speaking of the physical evidence.... Also See: https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/29767-the-burden-of-proof Okay. Now that we have established that you believe both the Kennedy & Tippit cases can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then I would be quite happy to explore this further. Let’s start with the murder of Jack Kennedy. In any criminal case, the establishment of a motive is of vital importance to the states case, in order to convince the jury of the defendants guilt. So I will ask you this most basic of questions before we get into the physical evidence. What was Lee Oswald’s motive to murder President John Kennedy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now