Tom Neal Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 You're going to need WAY more than just J. Edgar in this frame-up, Tom. You're going to need Fritz and Curry and many others from the DPD. And you'll need the Secret Service too. Plus the Dallas Sheriff's office. JEH alone controlled all the evidence. DPD was removed from the investigation on day 1 - Fritz/Curry said nothing contrary to what the WC would eventually conclude. Alleged 'need' fulfilled... Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 (edited) Because - oh, deaf one - the EVIDENCE IS NOT AUTHENTIC. Yeah, so I've been told (thousands of times) by CTers. But, to date, I've yet to see a smidgen of something called PROOF to back up the non-stop allegations of evidence fakery that we keep hearing about from conspiracy theorists. For a change, let's see some PROOF that shows that ALL of the evidence that incriminates Mr. Oswald is fake evidence. Got any PROOF, David? Or should we just rely on CTer instinct and guesswork like we've been doing for the last 51 years? So, you'll have to pardon me for not hopping on board the "Everything Was Faked To Frame Oswald" gravy train. That train was doomed to derail before it ever left the station. Many conspiracy theorists will travel to the ends of the Earth to pretend that ALL of the evidence is phony. And it's no wonder that they do. Because if they DON'T, then their patsy is guilty of two murders. And it's really just that simple. And the Internet conspiracy theorists just don't like the idea of a guilty Lee Harvey Oswald at all. Edited July 11, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 (edited) JEH alone controlled all the evidence. Ridiculous. Hoover wasn't "controlling" the evidence when the DPD collected it. You think everything got switched to "LHO Did It" evidence by Hoover, Tom? Do you really believe that? And do you think Hoover was "controlling" each of the witnesses who gave statements to the Dallas police or Sheriff's office saying it was Oswald they saw near the Tippit shooting? I get a big kick out of the idea that J. Edgar Hoover--of all people on the planet!--would have wanted to frame an INNOCENT Lee Harvey Oswald for the two murders in Dallas in November 1963. In reality, of course, Hoover would have probably been about the LAST person in America who would have wanted to frame Oswald. And everybody here should know why that is so. Just think about it for a couple of minutes and maybe the light bulb will go on. Edited July 11, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 Looking sillier by the day, Davey. Must be hard walking with no butt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 (edited) Looking sillier by the day, Davey. Must be hard walking with no butt. I take it, then, from that brilliant comment you just graced us with, Bobby, that you CAN prove that all the evidence connected with the murders of President John F. Kennedy and Dallas Patrolman J.D. Tippit is fraudulent. Correct? I'm all ears. For some reason, you seem to think that my hind quarters are missing; but I have really good hearing. So let's hear that "proof" I've been waiting for forever. Any chance you'll be supplying any? Edited July 11, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted July 11, 2015 Author Share Posted July 11, 2015 (edited) DVP: Yeah, so I've been told (thousands of times) by CTers. But, to date, I've yet to see a smidgen of something called PROOF to back up the non-stop allegations of evidence fakery that we keep hearing about from conspiracy theorists. From the WR: "[Hall} said he had visited Mrs. Odio. He was accompanied by Lawernce Howard..and one William Seymour from Arizona. He stated that Seymour is similar in appearance to Lee Harvey Oswald..." From Accessores after the Fact: "That FBI report indicates that only two days after the original locating of Loran Eugene Hall on September 16, 1964, an interview with William Seymour...elicited a denial that he was even in Dallas in September 1963 or had ever had any contacts with Sylvia Odio. " (p. 387) Edited July 11, 2015 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 (edited) DVP: Yeah, so I've been told (thousands of times) by CTers. But, to date, I've yet to see a smidgen of something called PROOF to back up the non-stop allegations of evidence fakery that we keep hearing about from conspiracy theorists. From the WR: "[Hall} said he had visited Mrs. Odio. He was accompanied by Lawernce Howard..and one William Seymour from Arizona. He stated that Seymour is similar in appearance to Lee Harvey Oswald..." From Accessores after the Fact: "That FBI report indicates that only two days after the original locating of Loran Eugene Hall on September 16, 1964, an interview with William Seymour...elicited a denial that he was even in Dallas in September 1963 or had ever had any contacts with Sylvia Odio. " (p. 387) Wow! That's the best you can do, Jimmy? One very hazy and indistinct report regarding people who have NOTHING whatsoever to do with the physical evidence in the JFK assassination? Mighty weak, Jim. In fact, pathetic. But thanks for illustrating that the BEST the mighty James DiEugenio can do in an effort to PROVE that ANY evidence was faked in the JFK case is a reference to a quote in Sylvia Meagher's 1967 book, which is a blurb involving the Odio incident, which everybody knows (even me) is a great-big huge QUESTION MARK to begin with. As Jimbo's favorite of all female authors (hehe) said in her 1983 book.... "When these men visited Odio's apartment, Kennedy's trip to Dallas had not even been scheduled, let alone announced. ... No one on earth could have known that Oswald would ultimately land a job in a building that would overlook a Kennedy motorcade. But the frame-up theory's ultimate weakness involves the critics' conception of Lee Harvey Oswald. In every conspiracy book, Oswald is a piece of chaff blown about by powerful, unseen forces -- he's a dumb and compliant puppet with no volition of his own. If the man Odio saw was an impostor, how could the plotters be certain no witnesses would be able to establish Oswald's presence somewhere else that evening -- unless they ordered the unsuspecting patsy to stay out of sight? And if the real Oswald was used, how did the anti-Castro plotters get their Marxist enemy to stand at Odio's door to be introduced as a friend of the Cuban exiles? No one has come up with a plausible scenario that can answer those questions. ... The point to be stressed is this: Sylvia Odio gave testimony of obvious, even crucial importance, and no one could explain what it meant." -- Jean Davison; Pages 193-195 of "Oswald's Game" http://oswalds-game.blogspot.com Edited July 11, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 Looking sillier by the day, Davey. Must be hard walking with no butt. I take it, then, from that brilliant comment you just graced us with, Bobby, that you CAN prove that all the evidence connected with the murders of President John F. Kennedy and Dallas Patrolman J.D. Tippit is fraudulent. Correct? I'm all ears. For some reason, you seem to think that my hind quarters are missing; but I have really good hearing. So let's hear that "proof" I've been waiting for forever. Any chance you'll be supplying any? I only need one thing from you, Davey, and without that one tiny thing, the entire WC case falls to pieces. As requested before, explain to me how a bullet entered JFK's back, approximately 1.5-2 inches to the right of the spinal midline, passed through his neck, and exited about the centre of his throat, after passing through the right side of his trachea, WITHOUT PASSING THROUGH THE RIGHT SIDE OF ONE OF HIS VERTEBRAE. Big ears and no butt. You DO look silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted July 11, 2015 Author Share Posted July 11, 2015 (edited) I love this. You prove he is wrong and he says it does not matter. The FBI lied Davey. And the WC bought the lie. OK. But Davey likes leading with his chin, right? The following is from Reclaiming Parkland, p. 128 This exchange was on 2/13/96 between counsel Jeremy Gunn and James Humes for the ARRB. Gunn had the X-rays for Humes in front of him. Q: Do you recall having seen an X ray previously that had fragments corresponding to a small occipital wound? A: Well I reported that I did, so I must have. But I don't see them now. Again, I could not find this exchange in Reclaiming History. Yet it is surely one of the most gripping and important revelations of the ARRB. Humes is here denying his own autopsy report and what he himself saw during the autopsy of President Kennedy. When Gunn pressed him ever so slightly on this, Humes became visibly frustrated. Humes had written that a trail of metal fragments connected the low shot at the rear of the skull to the higher region in the head. But yet, today, no such trail exists in the x rays. What do you think happened to them Davey? Was Humes hallucinating when he wrote about them back in 1963? Let's get physical. Edited July 11, 2015 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 (edited) The X-rays themselves answer your last question, Jim. And this X-ray was proven to be a legit and unaltered X-ray by the HSCA....."The evidence indicates that the autopsy photographs and X-rays were taken of President Kennedy at the time of his autopsy and that they had not been altered in any manner." -- 7 HSCA 41Now, tell me again how those 20 experts on the HSCA's Photographic Panel were all rotten liars when they signed off on 7 HSCA 41.And then you can tell everybody about your fantasy about there being a huge hole in the BACK of Kennedy's head---which, of course, doesn't exist at all in the X-ray pictured above.More fakery...More Government liars...More fake reports...Right, Jimmy?Does the fakery ever end in this case (or, I should say, in your colorful imagination)? Edited July 11, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Mitcham Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 (edited) Sandra Spence to ARRB On November 23, 1963, she received three or four duplex film holders (six or eight shots) of color negatives from a federal agent named Fox, which she understood to be autopsy photographs. She developed the negatives, made prints and gave all materials back to Fox. The president's body was "very clean" unlike other autopsy photographs she had seen. There was a circular wound at the base of the front of the president's neck, about the size of a person's thumb. There was a wound in the back of the president's head, at about the center, 3 or 4 inches above the hairline. It was about 2 to 2.5 inches wide, which she described as a "blown out chunk." She saw no damage to the side of the president's head. She could not tell whether or not there was damage to the top of the head because the negatives she processed did not show it. Q. Are you able to - let’s start with a conjecture as to whether the photographs that you developed and the photographs that you observed today, could have been taken at different times/ A I would definitely say they were taken at different times. Q. Is there any question in your mind whether the photographs that you saw today were photographs of President Kennedy? There is no doubt they are pictures of President Kennedy. Q. Is there any doubt in your mind that the photographs that you saw in November 1963 also were of President Kennedy No, that was President Kennedy, but between those photographs and the ones we did, there had to be some massive cosmetic things done. to the President;s body. And DVP believes the HSCA. Now who would you rather believe the Parkland witnesses who all saw a hole at the rear of the President's head or the HCSA autopsy doctors who only looked at photos (from whatever source.) Edited July 11, 2015 by Ray Mitcham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 (edited) But, Ray, the autopsy photos and X-rays are in AGREEMENT with another piece of photographic evidence -- the Zapruder Film. The Z-Film shows that the BACK of President Kennedy's head was not "blown out". So, along with the autopsy photos, you must also think the Z-Film was altered too, right Ray? Is there ANY point in this case when you feel it's okay to put on the brakes when it comes to this "Massive Fakery Overload" thing you CTers have got going on? (Just wondering.) Edited July 11, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 Do I detect a hint of desperation in Davey's posts? Probably not fair of us to gang up on him. Oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 (edited) Do I detect a hint of desperation in Davey's posts? Probably not fair of us to gang up on him. Oh well. Desperation? When battling this group of "Anybody But Oswald" and "Pert-Near Everything's Fake" conspiracy theorists that inhabit this forum? Surely you jest, Bobby. And I love Jimbo's post about the FBI lying about the Seymour/Hall/Odio matter. But it apparently never occurred to Jim that the FBI was evidently ALSO telling the unvarnished TRUTH about the very same Seymour/Hall/Odio matter in another one of the FBI's own reports (or was it the same FBI report, Jim?). DiEugenio posted this quote from Sylvia Meagher's book.... "That FBI report indicates that only two days after the original locating of Loran Eugene Hall on September 16, 1964, an interview with William Seymour...elicited a denial that he was even in Dallas in September 1963 or had ever had any contacts with Sylvia Odio. " (p. 387) So, evidently the VERY SAME FBI that lied, per James DiEugenio, to the Warren Commission about Loran Hall and William Seymour decided to tell the truth about those men (or at least about Seymour) just two days later. Go figure that. ~shrug~ Edited July 11, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 So how about my SBT question that you have been dodging for the last few months, Davey? Care to have a go at that or do you not want to get your hair mussed up? 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