Part 1359 of my "JFK Assassination Arguments" series includes a variety of my posts and comments covering the period of December 1—31, 2022. To read the entire forum discussion from which my own comments have been extracted, click on the "Full Discussion" logo at the bottom of each individual segment.
MILES MASSICOTTE SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
That doesn't really matter. The important thing is was what Oswald himself thought and believed (even if the things he believed were skewed).
And Oswald seemed to have a fairly strong dislike for America in general (as evidenced by some of the things LHO said in this letter [CE295] written to his brother, Robert, on November 26, 1959, while Lee was living in the Soviet Union; see excerpts from that letter in the Vincent Bugliosi book excerpt pictured below). That could have created a pretty strong motive in Oswald's warped mind right there.
The bottom line is --- we'll never ever know for certain what "motive" Lee Harvey Oswald had for taking his own rifle to work on 11/22/63 and murdering the President. But one thing is a certainty (in my opinion) --- he had one. Because Oswald did kill John F. Kennedy.
David Von Pein
December 1, 2022
================================
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
This Cincinnati newspaper has an interesting tidbit in the article in the lower-right corner (re: limousines). It says:
I have never heard about the existence of such a companion car. Anybody know anything about it? And do any photos exist of it?
17 MINUTES LATER, DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Upon digging a little deeper into this, I have now answered my own question (via the Cincinnati Enquirer newspaper article seen below, from June 27, 1962).
Click to enlarge:
Also See:
http://Kennedy-Photos.blogspot.com
David Von Pein
December 7, 2022
================================
KIRK GALLAWAY SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Why did Jack Ruby kill Lee Oswald, you ask?
Because Jack Ruby held a grievance against Lee Oswald. Ruby was convinced that Oswald had killed President Kennedy. It's really as simple as that, IMO.
And in many ways, Ruby's killing of Oswald was the same in the "perfect opportunity" departmant as Oswald's killing of Kennedy. Ruby was presented the perfect opportunity on Sunday morning (via pure chance and ideal timing).
And the fact that Ruby regularly carried a revolver on him and was the type of person who would often take matters into his own hands (e.g., such as acting as his own bouncer at his nightclub) only enhanced the likelihood that Ruby would act upon his grievance when he discovered (by pure accident and happenstance) that Oswald had not yet been moved to the County Jail as of the time when Jack was downtown near the City Hall sending a money order to one of his nightclub employees.
As it turned out, happenstance and good fortune were on the side of Lee Harvey Oswald at 12:30 PM on November 22nd (in the form of Bonnie Ray Williams deciding to vacate the sixth floor of the Book Depository just minutes before Oswald required complete solitude to perform his evil deed from that same sixth floor).
And, similarly, happenstance and good fortune were also on the side of Jack Ruby at 11:20 AM on November 24th (in the form of police officer Roy Vaughn stepping away from the Main Street ramp at City Hall just far enough and just long enough to allow Ruby to slip into the police basement undetected).*
* Although I do allow for the slight possibility of Ruby entering the DPD basement in another manner (via a side door), as discussed here.
David Von Pein
December 13, 2022
================================
WALT CAKEBREAD SAID:
There's not a single item on this list that is proof of Lee Oswald's guilt. Bugliosi should have been ashamed of producing such a POS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Here we have another CTer who is incapable of "Adding Up" the various unusual things that Lee Oswald did on 11/21 and 11/22. (I.E., the things that unquestionably "Add Up" to LHO's guilt in the two murders he committed in Dallas on November 22nd.)
But, then too, I've known for many years that the individual named Cakebread has never been any good at all when it comes to mathematics, especially addition. He takes after his fellow goofy conspiracy fantasist, Ben Holmes, in that regard.
MARTIN WEIDMANN SAID:
Translation for "adding up" is making assumptions to "connect" one thing somehow "unusual" with another thing somehow "unusual".
But perhaps you can help us out here, David.
For about six months now, I have been asking Richard Smith to provide evidence for his claims that (1) Oswald was on the 6th floor of the TSBD when the shots were fired and (2) that he came down the stairs unnoticed within roughly 75 seconds after the last shot. Richard told me to look [it] up in the WC report, but I couldn't find any evidence to support either claim in Chapter 4, which deals with the assassin.
All I could find is that the WC somehow considered the presence of the MC rifle (allegedly bought by Oswald) on the 6th floor as proof that Oswald was there when the shots were fired, which is, on so many levels, completely absurd.
Do you, David, know of any evidence that puts Oswald on the 6th floor of the TSBD when the shots were fired and/or that he did indeed come down the stairs unnoticed within 75 seconds of the last shot?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Yes. That evidence is "Howard Brennan".
I know CTers will forever toss Mr. Brennan into the nearest gutter, practically treating him as if he had witnessed nothing at all in Dealey Plaza, but Brennan's Warren Commission testimony will forever be part of the record of the JFK case, whether conspiracists like it or not.
And if Brennan's WC testimony and positive identification of Oswald as the assassin is to be believed (and I think it is), then that means Lee Oswald was on the sixth floor with a gun at 12:30 PM, which also therefore has to mean he did manage to get from the sixth floor down to the second floor (unnoticed) in less than (approx.) 90 seconds, because we know (via Roy S. Truly's verification) that Oswald did encounter Police Officer Marrion L. Baker in the lunchroom at approximately 12:32 PM.
Plus, of course, there's also the circumstantial evidence of the JFK murder weapon positively being the C2766 Carcano rifle that was found on the 6th floor. And that's a rifle that was owned by Lee Oswald, whether stubborn CTers want to admit that fact or not. And on any given day—including 11/22/63—please tell me who is MORE likely to be using OSWALD'S gun if not Lee Oswald himself? That's very good circumstantial evidence right there——especially when it's ADDED TO Howard Brennan's Warren Commission testimony.
No conspiracy believer, however, wants to face up to the fact that the "rifle" evidence is, in fact, excellent circumstantial evidence pointing to Lee Harvey Oswald as the President's murderer.
David Von Pein
December 15, 2022
================================
GENE KELLY SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Bulls**t. You don't have a speck of proof to back up your above speculation....and you damn well know it.
Plus, if you think Ruth Paine was part of some plot to "plant" LHO in the TSBD, then you have no choice but to bring Linnie Mae Randle into the plot too.
Are you sure you want to do that, Gene?
DENNY ZARTMAN SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
But here's something else for the CTers to think about....
Even if we were to make the wholly ridiculous (IMO) and outlandish (IMO) assumption that Ruth Paine was, indeed, working for the CIA in 1963....and if we make the further wholly insane (IMO) assumption that Ruth was Lee Oswald's "handler" in October and November of '63....and if we make the additional absurd (IMO) and preposterous (IMO) assumption that Ruth had a desire to "plant" Oswald in the Book Depository Building before JFK came to Dallas....
It seems to me that the conspiracy theorists still have no choice but to admit and accept the fact that there simply must have been a fair amount of coincidence and happenstance and pure luck that must have accompanied Ruth Paine's CIA-sponsored handiwork with respect to Lee Harvey Oswald getting hired at the TSBD on 10/15/63.
Because without the coincidental fact of Buell Wesley Frazier getting hired at the Depository in September of 1963....and without the coincidental fact that had Ruth Paine living just a half-block down the street from Linnie Mae Randle's house....and without the luck and happenstance that resulted in Roy Truly actually hiring the alleged "patsy" named Lee Oswald....then even if Ruth Paine had been deeply involved in a plot to plant Oswald in the TSBD and frame him for JFK's murder, such a plot couldn't possibly have worked out without all of those examples of luck, happenstance, and ordinary coincidence I just discussed.
Unless....
Conspiracy theorists also want to theorize that all of that "luck", "coincidence", and "happenstance" circulating around those people in Irving, Texas, and at the Book Depository in 1963 (people like Randle, Frazier, and Truly) wasn't really luck and/or happenstance at all.
Do some conspiracists think that Buell Frazier was "planted" in the TSBD also---one month ahead of Oswald's alleged "planting"?
And do some CTers think that the close proximity of the Paine and Randle houses in Irving was deliberately arranged (somehow) by the CIA or other sinister forces who were bent on murdering the President?
And do some conspiracy believers believe that Depository Superintendent Roy S. Truly was somehow forced (or coerced) into hiring Lee Oswald? Or maybe Truly was part of the "CIA" too?
Food for coincidental thought....don't you think?
DAVID VON PEIN ALSO SAID:
Another "coincidental fact" that can be added to the discussion concerning Lee Harvey Oswald getting his job at the Texas School Book Depository is the information supplied by Roy Truly in the testimony below [3 H 237]:
ROY S. TRULY -- "Actually, the end of our fall rush—if it hadn't existed a week or two weeks longer, or if we had not been using some of our regular boys putting down this plywood, we would not have had any need for Lee Oswald at that time, which is a tragic thing for me to think about."
The above testimony by Mr. Truly makes me wonder if some conspiracists think the installation of the new plywood floor on the upper floors of the Book Depository Building in November 1963 was something that was pre-planned by conspirators so that Lee Harvey Oswald's employment at the Depository could be extended through the day of President Kennedy's visit to Dallas on November 22nd. (JFK CTers, of course, believe a lot of strange things, so if they were to endorse a "Plywood Floor" conspiracy theory, it wouldn't surprise me one bit.)
JOHN COTTER SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
You really should be much more careful when you utilize the word "facts", John. Because in many instances, the things you regard as ironclad "facts" relating to the JFK case are not really proven "facts" at all. They are merely suppositions or outright guesswork on your part (and on the part of other CTers who also toss around that word—"facts"—in a loose fashion, as if they could actually prove anything they say---which, of course, they cannot, and never once have).
An excellent example of what I just said occurred in John Cotter's last post, when he boldly gushed forth the following batch of pure conjecture and guesswork as if it were an "undeniable fact" (John's own words), when, in fact (pun, pun), nothing in this paragraph has been remotely proven to be a "fact" at all:
"The undeniable fact of the persistent sheep-dipping of Oswald implies that there was a longstanding conspiracy to assassinate JFK and that this conspiracy involved scapegoating Oswald for the assassination. That being the case, placing Oswald in the TSBD was part of the plot and Ruth Paine was wittingly or unwittingly implicated in it." -- John Cotter; 12/17/2022
DAVID EMERLING SAID:
I love your [DVP's] laundry list of additional instances of luck and coincidences even if Ruth Paine was a CIA handler.
One additional piece of "luck" is that Roy Truly could have assigned Oswald to a different warehouse, not necessarily the one overlooking Elm Street.
I've seen Ruth Paine interviewed many times. She strikes me to be exactly what is claimed about her: a soft-spoken, intelligent, modest woman.
It's pointless arguing this point with ardent conspiracy believers. I once heard this quote from Sam Harris, a neural scientist, philosopher, author:
"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn’t value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?"
This is why debating a diehard conspiracy believer always goes nowhere. No matter how compelling your argument, they simply will not accept your evidence or logic. They usually ignore your argument and rapidly move on to some other topic --- "Yeah, but what about...."
Then, when you address that with a solid argument, again, they ignore you and then they move on to the next topic. They just keep playing the same "hits" over and over again. Their play list is on "shuffle."
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Hi David E.,
Thanks for your input today.
And I love that Sam Harris quote that you supplied. It fits the JFK assassination CTers to a tee!
And I just thought of an additional "coincidental fact" regarding the topic of Ruth Paine. And that is:
The coincidence/luck/happenstance of Ruth Paine, Linnie Mae Randle, and Dorothy Roberts all knowing each other and wanting to get together at Dorothy's house for coffee on Monday, October 14, 1963.
Even though the Paine and Randle houses were only separated by one-half of one block (as we can see for ourselves in this photograph taken by the FBI in 1964), that close proximity of the two houses certainly didn't automatically mean that the people living in those homes would personally know each other or have any desire to know each other or have any desire to want to get together for a coffee klatch at another neighbor's house (Dorothy Roberts) on 10/14/63 (or any other day).
So, given these basic undeniable "coincidental facts", it makes me wonder if certain conspiracy theorists also want to pretend that the October 14th coffee klatch was somehow "pre-arranged" by someone connected with "The Plot", so that people like myself would later be able to make this assertion with some confidence:
There's no way everything connected with the way Lee Oswald got his TSBD job could have been planned in advance by a band of CIA-sponsored housewives on Fifth Street in Irving, Texas.
SANDY LARSEN SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Oh, brother. What a spectacular load of make-believe B.S. that was/is.
Sandy Larsen is so deep in his fantasy-based conspiratorial weeds, he'll likely never get out.
In Sandy's post linked above, he proposed a theory I don't think I had ever heard coming from the mouth of a CTer before --- this one:
"The coverup artists invented the story of Ruth and Linnie Mae Randle talking about where Oswald might get a job." -- S. Larsen
Which means, of course, that not only Ruth and Linnie Mae had to do their "patriotic duty in preventing WW3" (LOL), but Marina Oswald also had to go along with the "fake story" in her testimony too.
And if Dorothy Roberts had provided Warren Commission testimony, she too would have been added to Sandy's Liars List. But Dorothy wasn't called to testify by the Commission, so Sandy's list of lying Irving housewives is a little bit smaller than it could have been.
Sandy's theory goes a long way toward proving the longstanding motto/mantra of JFK CTers---which is:
If you don't like the evidence (or the testimony) in the JFK and Tippit cases....just pretend it's all fake (or lies).
David Von Pein
December 15-19, 2022
================================
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Eleven years ago, in December of 2011, I was engaged in some discussions [archived HERE] concerning the question of why there were evidently no official "FD-302" FBI forms associated with the interviews the FBI conducted for Warren Commission Exhibit No. 2011.
At that time, in 2011, I had speculated this:
"It's possible that an official FD-302 report by Odum (or Shanklin) would not really be required in the instance of the FBI interviews with Tomlinson, Wright, Rowley, Johnsen, and Todd.....and that's because the July 7, 1964, FBI report essentially COULD serve as the FD-302 report regarding those interviews. In other words, the FBI report of 7/7/64 (seen in CE2011) says the exact same thing that a 302 would also say." -- DVP; December 2011
Well, thanks to an Education Forum post written by Tom Gram on December 18, 2022, I saw for the first time this June 27, 1964, FBI Airtel, which seems to confirm my above speculation that there were no FD-302 reports filed by the FBI agents for the individual interviews they conducted for the FBI report which eventually became Commission Exhibit 2011.
Quoting from the 6/27/64 Airtel (also pictured below):
"Inasmuch as this investigation was conducted at the specific request of the President's Commission, information contained in the letterhead memorandum will not be set forth in a subsequent report UACB [which means: Unless Advised to the Contrary by the Bureau]."
And even though the above 6/27/64 FBI Airtel message doesn't specifically say the words "We're not going to bother with all the individual FD-302s in this matter", I think that that Airtel does provide enough information ("will not be set forth in a subsequent report") to at least cast a lot of doubt over whether Bardwell Odum filed any FD-302s at all for the interviews he conducted at Parkland Hospital in June of 1964. (And Tom Gram, in his post I linked to above, obviously thinks that way as well.)
So, should the issue of "The Missing FD-302s" now be considered a non-issue altogether? I think so. Just like Steve Roe's discovery of Elmer Todd's initials on Bullet CE399 should forever silence the CTers who for years kept asking "Where are Todd's initials?!"
I'd say that 2022 has been a good year for debunking tired old conspiracy theories.
David Von Pein
December 18, 2022
================================
FRED LITWIN SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
It's good to see a Warren Commission lawyer, Burt Griffin, come to the defense of Ruth Paine. [See Fred Litwin's post above.] Kudos to Mr. Griffin for doing that.
But if Mrs. Paine ever decided she wanted to take legal action against Max Good for the slanderous conjecture that appears in his 2022 film ["The Assassination & Mrs. Paine"], I'm not sure if the case that Ruth would present would be a fruitful one.
I say that because even though some of the things presented in Max Good's film are no doubt slanderous and just flat-out wrong (and ridiculous), the fact is that Ruth Paine herself was willing to be a part of Good's film and to be interviewed by him on camera--and, hence, defend herself from the crazy conspiratorial accusations that have been made against her over the last 50+ years.
So might not that fact diminish her chances at winning any such lawsuit, since she herself was an active participant in the film, and as such she very likely was fully aware that she would be forced to defend herself on camera from many of the charges that have been made against her?
So, in the case of Good's film, Ruth certainly had to know what she was getting into when she agreed to be interviewed for the film. Of course, if bits and pieces of the film that were favorable to Mrs. Paine were left on the cutting room floor, then Ruth's "case" against Mr. Good would obviously be a bit stronger.
But, in my view, Ruth definitely would likely have a solid legal case (if she ever chose to go down that road) against some of the slanderous things that have been written about her on the Internet and in books over the years. In those instances, Ruth never had a camera shoved in her face in order to respond directly to some of the insane charges that have been made by various conspiracy theorists on the Internet in the last several years.
I've tried my best to defend Mrs. Paine from many of the preposterous claims that have been made against her. (See link below.)
David Von Pein
December 28, 2022
================================
PAT SPEER SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Why are you saying "no one saw it there", Pat? Marina saw the rifle in the Paine garage, sometime in late September. She testified about seeing it in the blanket:
"There was only once that I was interested in finding out what was in that blanket, and I saw that it was a rifle." (WC Testimony of Marina Oswald)
Re: the blanket looking "undisturbed"....
I think Oswald, after removing the rifle from the blanket, probably arranged the empty blanket in such a way to make it appear (as much as he could) that the gun was still inside the blanket. Not a difficult task really.
Re: Buell Wesley Frazier saying that Lee Oswald did not take any paper with him to Irving on Nov. 21st....
I think Oswald made an effort to try and conceal the paper from Frazier.
Does anybody have any idea how big the pockets were in the blue jacket that Oswald wore to work on Nov. 22 (which is, I would assume, the same jacket he wore to Irving on 11/21)? And were there any pockets on the inside of that jacket?
The answers to those questions might prove quite useful indeed.
Re: nobody seeing Lee Oswald going to the garage to wrap up his rifle....
Well, nobody saw Oswald get up on Friday morning either.
And, as far as I know, nobody saw (or heard) LHO make himself that cup of instant coffee in Ruth Paine's kitchen on Friday morning either.
And nobody (AFAIK) saw or heard Lee physically leave the Paine house either.
And he surely was making some sound (noise) when he did all of those things on Friday morning that nobody saw or heard.
And that's probably because everybody in the house was asleep at that hour. Which might very well be the answer to this "problem", Pat:
LHO could very well have been smart enough to wait until early Friday morning to go into the garage to wrap up the rifle. But Lee could have possibly constructed (i.e., taped together) the paper gun case the previous day before he ever left the Book Depository, which would mean he wouldn't have needed to spend nearly as much time sneaking around the Paine garage handling and taping together the crinkly paper package. That task could have been performed on Nov. 21 while he was still at work in Dallas.
Via the above scenario, of course, it would mean that it probably wasn't Lee who left the light on in the garage at all. Like Pat Speer said above, there were, indeed, multiple other candidates who could have conceivably left that garage light burning on the evening of 11/21.
Re: Frazier and Randle saying that Oswald's paper bag was too small to hold a rifle....
But the fact is: LHO DID definitely carry a long-ish paper bag into the TSBD on 11/22/63. That fact is beyond debate, unless CTers are willing to call both Buell Frazier and Linnie Mae Randle liars (which many CTers now do).
And there just happens to be a 38-inch empty paper sack (CE142) in the evidence pile connected to the JFK investigation. And that bag has two of LHO's prints on it. More fake evidence? Most CTers seem to think so.
Re: the fact that several police officers failed to notice the paper bag in the TSBD Sniper's Nest....
But there are about a half-dozen DPD officers who DID testify that they saw the empty brown bag in the Sniper's Nest. So, to me, that's a "huge problem" for the CTers who try to exonerate Oswald.
Re: all the "holes" that Pat Speer thinks exist in the case for a Lone Assassin....
In every murder case, there are invariably some things that don't quite "add up". But if Oswald really took a SHORTER bag into the Book Depository Building (as claimed by Linnie and Buell), then where did THAT bag disappear to? Why wasn't a 27-inch bag found instead of that 38-inch bag?
And if LHO really did take some curtain rods into the TSBD, then where did those things go?
Do conspiracy theorists really believe that some curtain rods were found later in the Depository, despite Roy Truly's statement in CE2640?
In my opinion, the "Conspiracy" version of the JFK assassination is filled with ten times more holes than the "Lone Assassin" version of that same event.
David Von Pein
December 31, 2022
================================
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Long-time JFK Assassination author and researcher David Lifton passed away (at the age of 83) on December 6th, 2022.
Mr. Lifton's book Best Evidence was the very first book I ever bought (or read) about President Kennedy's assassination. I purchased a hardcover First Edition of the book in January of 1981. (And I wish I still had it in my collection, but unfortunately I do not.)
I disagree with just about every single conclusion that Mr. Lifton came to in the book, but I still found Best Evidence to be a fascinating read. I can even recall the unique (and very pleasant) smell that the book emanated. It was always a pleasure to open it up and take a big whiff. (It's funny the things that make an impression on one's memory, isn't it?)
Yes, I think David S. Lifton's "body alteration" and "casket switching" theories are pure bunk, but, boy oh boy, that man could sure write an impressive forum post. And I even had some friendly interactions with him from time to time too. :-)
David's 1,252 posts at The Education Forum cover a wide range of sub-topics concerning JFK's assassination, spanning a period of more than sixteen years, from September 7, 2006, to his last post on October 31, 2022.
RIP, DSL. 😞
David Von Pein
December 8, 2022
================================
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
A brief recap of this 14-part video series featuring David S. Lifton, which was recorded in November of 2013:
Here's a partial list of some of the preposterous things that Mr. Lifton believed happened on November 22, 1963:
1.) A Secret Service agent was, indeed, killed on 11/22/63. And the body of this dead SS agent was then placed on board Air Force One at Love Field in Dallas. And apparently nobody noticed this occurring at all.
2.) All of the films taken in Dealey Plaza on November 22 were altered/faked (e.g., the Zapruder Film, the Nix Film, the Muchmore Film, etc.). A direct quote from David Lifton in 2013: "All the films have been altered."
3.) Prior to departing Dallas, JFK's body was evidently (per Lifton) placed on some sort of "ledge" in the cargo area of Air Force One, and then, sometime during the flight, his body fell from this ledge, resulting in a situation where one of JFK's arms was left dangling toward the floor of the cargo hold. And as a result of this, at the start of the autopsy at Bethesda, Kennedy's arm (due to the onset of rigor mortis) was sticking up, stiff as a board, and could not be lowered until Dr. Humes actually got up on the autopsy table (per Lifton's account, which comes via an interview with autopsy eyewitness Richard Lipsey) and forced the stiffened arm down by JFK's side.
4.) To avoid the prying eyes of the media, Air Force One made an unscheduled stop near the end of the runway after landing at Andrews Air Force Base. This was done so that JFK's corpse could be secretly taken out of the airplane's cargo hold and transferred to a helicopter.
5.) Secret Service agent John Ready "threw himself" into the Presidential limousine after the shooting, and (according to Mr. Lifton) it is Ready's foot we see sticking out of the back seat of the car in the David Miller photograph.
For this theory of Lifton's to be correct, it would mean that John Ready lied in this report.
6.) Quoting David Lifton in 2013: "He [John Connally] got shot as a result of this fight in the car [with Secret Service agent John Ready]."
I think it's now time for one of these:
WTF?!
So now we know how David Lifton managed to keep John Connally from sustaining any wounds from the rear during the period when the assassination of JFK was taking place on Elm Street. He (Lifton) merely invented this fantasy story about Secret Service agent John Ready leaping into the limousine and shooting Connally. And then John Connally, in all of his many post-1963 interviews, decided to never once mention this "fight" that he had with Ready.
Oh, brother.
7.) Lifton, as of 2013, apparently believed that President Kennedy's wounds were altered (with lightning-like speed evidently) while JFK was still aboard Air Force One at Love Field in Dallas.
I had always thought Lifton believed that the body-altering surgery was performed at Walter Reed Hospital. But I guess David decided to change the location of that part of his fanciful tale. ~shrug~
8.) Lee Harvey Oswald did, indeed, fire a rifle from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building on November 22nd....but David Lifton thinks it was merely a "mock attack" and Lee was only firing "blanks".
Well, have you had enough of this fantasy stuff for today?
Yeah, me too.
David Von Pein
December 9, 2022
================================
DAVID ANDREWS SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Yeah, the "Limo Drivers Were Switched" theory is another one of the too-numerous-to-count crackpot theories proposed by Mr. Lifton in his 2013 video interview series.
Lifton wants us to take seriously the idea that Secret Service agent Paul Landis ran from the SS follow-up car and took the place of Bill Greer as the driver of President Kennedy's SS-100-X limousine immediately after JFK was shot, and that it was Landis (and not Greer) who actually drove the limo most of the way from Dealey Plaza to Parkland Hospital.
The question would then be: Why in heaven's name would there be a need to change limo drivers, especially at that critical point in time when every second counts in trying to get the wounded President to a hospital in an attempt to save his life? It makes no sense at all. [See later posts on this topic. And you can also listen to this 2013 interview with Paul Landis and this 2016 interview with Mr. Landis. In those interviews, Landis, needless to say, does not say a word about having driven the limo on the day of the assassination.]
Another of Lifton's dozens of unprovable make-believe cloak-and-dagger episodes is the one about how the wounded JFK was supposed to be transferred to an ambulance at the Trade Mart. Lifton says this transfer to the ambulance was going to be done in order to get JFK's body away from Jackie and other members of the Kennedy party. But this "ambulance" part of the plot didn't go off as planned (although I don't think Lifton, in his 2013 video interview, ever explains why it didn't).
Also: Lifton thinks Connally was shot THREE separate times (by Agent Ready, of course).
And: At the very beginning of Part 4 of Lifton's 14-part interview (see my full playlist below), we hear the interviewer say: "So the original plan was not to have the driver shoot the President...", which (I guess) means that Lifton turned into a "Greer Shot Kennedy" CTer. It sure sounds that way to me, based on the interviewer's remark at the start of Part 4.
PAT SPEER SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Oh my! This just keeps getting better and better (i.e., goofier and goofier).
So does that mean that Bill Greer is the dead Secret Service agent? (Because, Pat, you now know that Lifton DID believe a SS agent WAS killed, and his body was secretly stashed on AF1 and disguised as "Lyndon's Luggage".)
But if Greer was shot dead by John Connally, I wonder who it was who gave this testimony in front of the Warren Commission?
But I guess that wasn't a problem for a creative thinker like David Lifton. He probably thinks "the plot" provided for such a contingency, and a "Greer Double" popped up out of the woodwork to testify instead of the real Bill Greer.
Or does Lifton think it was Paul Landis who was killed in the limo? Or maybe John Ready? Or perhaps Roy Kellerman? Any idea, Pat? [Click Here.]
If we get any more people crowding into that limo, we're going to need a shoehorn to wedge them all in.
Oh, BTW, Pat, did Lifton ever tell you if Connally supposedly shot William Greer with the gun that some CTers have told me Connally would sometimes carry in an ankle holster?
PAT SPEER SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
OK. Thanks, Pat.
VINCE PALAMARA SAID THIS AND THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Here's what Secret Service Agent John Ready said in his official report (emphasis is mine):
"I left the follow-up car in the direction of the President's car but was recalled by ATSAIC Emory Roberts as the cars increased their speeds. I got back on the car and seated myself beside Mr. Roberts in the right front seat."
--------------------------
And here's what SS Agent Paul Landis said in his very detailed and lengthy official Secret Service report, much of which, if we're to believe what David S. Lifton has said during his November 2013 video interview, is nothing but one big lie (emphasis is DVP's):
"After we rode under the overpass I again looked at the President's car and saw Special Agent Clint Hill lieing [sic] across the trunk. He was looking back towards the Follow-up car shaking his head back and forth and gave a thumbs-down sign with his hand. ATSAIC Roberts asked if anyone got the exact time of the shooting and someone said "about 12:30 p.m."; then someone told me to get inside the car and pulled me by the arm. My sun glasses fell off and Special Agent Bennett handed them to me. By now we were on an Expressway and a few people were standing in spots along the way waving as we went by. ATSAIC Roberts was telling the other agents in the Follow-up car to cover Vice President Johnson as soon as we stopped. Sometime around 12:37 p.m. we arrived at Parkland Memorial Hospital. I immediately ran to the left rear side of the President's car, reached over and tried to help Mrs. Kennedy up by taking hold of her shoulders. She did not want to let go of President Kennedy whose head she held in her lap and she was bending over him."
David Von Pein
December 11-12, 2022
================================
ROGER ODISIO SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
I think a logical question of equal importance that should be asked by everybody is this one:
WHY would any powerful group even want to develop a plan involving such a complex mechanism of murder such as the one that has been theorized by Mr. David S. Lifton since 1966?
With that complex mechanism, per Mr. Lifton, including a PRE-PLANNED cloak-&-dagger "hide-the-body and alter-the-body and fake all the films and frame the designated patsy by shooting the victim from the other direction" plot.
Couldn't these professional assassins have found a much "quieter" way of ridding the world of Mr. Kennedy?
Or were the plotters/assassins only interested in being able to set the Guinness record for "Most Evidence Faked And Manufactured In One Single Day"?
ROGER ODISIO SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
You're assigning a sinister motive to something that certainly doesn't have to be sinister at all --- i.e., the message about Oswald being the only assassin....which was, indeed, a true statement, both at that time and now.
Yes, I'd say it was a bit premature to say that LHO had positively "acted alone" at that early stage (prior to 6 PM on 11/22), but the message was merely relaying the information that was available as of that moment. Why does it have to mean anything above and beyond what I just said?---i.e., that at that moment in time on 11/22 while AF1 was still in flight on the way to Washington, the best information from the DPD was that the one and only assassin had been caught. That wouldn't necessarily have to mean that the situation couldn't change in the coming days if/when more info becomes available to implicate more conspirators, right? Right.
I feel the same about the Katzenbach memo too. CTers assign sinister meanings to every paragraph in that memo, when none need be there at all. And, in fact, logic should tell everyone that if Katzenbach had really intended his Nov. 25 memo to be a "cover-up at all costs" memo, he wouldn't have committed such an admission of guilt on his part to paper.
And, therefore, since only a total fool or a brain-dead moron would have committed such a "sinister" memo to paper, that has to mean that the covert and sinister meanings that conspiracy theorists have been assigning to the Katzenbach memo for the last 50+ years are not actually covert or sinister at all.
David Von Pein
December 12, 2022