JFK - 3 shooters 6 shots

[profmunkin]

[Prouty is a crackpot. He was a colonel when he retired and was awarded a Commendation Medal for his retirement. A colonel being awarded a Commendation Medal for his retirement is a slap in the face. It is the equivalent of saying, "Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out." If he had been any thing other than an office boy who fetched coffee for the general he would have received at least a Meritorious Service Medal.

IF they are not on your side they are crackpots, got it.
What is more likely
Prouty gets a inadequate commendation while leaving the military so he fingers his old boss in the JFK assassination as retribution?
Or Prouty believes his oath actually means something "I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic" and acts accordingly.

Prouty "the flake" worked for 9 years in the pentagon working closely with the >CIA<

Why flake? Because Prouty fingers Ed Lansdale in a picture taken in Dealey Plaza
Marine Lietenant General Victor Krulak agreed with Prouty "That is indeed a picture of Ed Lansdale"
he goes on to ask "It's Lansdale. What in the world was he doing there?"

[profmunkin]

Tip O'Neill has a direct knowledge of the conversation he had between himself Powers and O'Donnell, period. It is not hearsay no matter what you want to call me.

That is what hearsay evidence is!!!

Dictionary: "unverified, unofficial information gained or acquired from another and not part of one's direct knowledge"

Tip O'Neill is stating that he had a conversation with Powers and O"Donnell, that conversation is within his direct knowledge, it is not hearsay.
Tip O'Neill is not saying that he has any first hand knowledge of the assassination or what Powers or O'Donnell knows other then what he was told directly by them during the conversation

Or that he heard from someone that Powers and O'Donnell said this or that, which would be hearsay.

[profmunkin]

Tip O'Neill carries more then enough weight to be taken seriously.
Yes, this is exactly what I call evidence.

It's a good thing you aren't a lawyer, then.

Are you implying conversations are not admissible as evidence in a court of law?
or implying my regard for Tip O'Neill's integrity is misplaced?

[LunarOrbit]

Tip ONeill, former Speaker of the House, is documented on film in JFK movie extras, states that Ken O'Donnell (JFK top aid) and Dave Powers (JFK Special Assistant) both candidly claim the shots came from the front

Assuming for a second that they actually said what you're claiming they said...

It doesn't matter who they are, their claims about where the shots came from are only their opinion. They are human like all of the other witnesses and are therefore equally prone to the same errors in judgement. They are not experts in ballistics or acoustics, so I don't trust their judgement when it comes to determining where the shots came from.

[Chew]

[Prouty is a crackpot. He was a colonel when he retired and was awarded a Commendation Medal for his retirement. A colonel being awarded a Commendation Medal for his retirement is a slap in the face. It is the equivalent of saying, "Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out." If he had been any thing other than an office boy who fetched coffee for the general he would have received at least a Meritorious Service Medal.

IF they are not on your side they are crackpots, got it.

The implication being, if they are on your side they must be telling the truth.

What is more likely
Prouty gets a inadequate commendation while leaving the military so he fingers his old boss in the JFK assassination as retribution?
Or Prouty believes his oath actually means something "I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic" and acts accordingly.

False dichotomy. Look it up.

There is at least one more option: he is a crackpot.

Prouty "the flake" worked for 9 years in the pentagon working closely with the >CIA<

In other words, he was passed over for command, shuffled from one pissant job to another; i.e. he was never billeted as a commanding officer. Not something a colonel can be proud of.

When my commodore, a full bird Captain, got orders to the Pentagon I asked him what he was going to do there. "Make coffee for admirals", he said. He was joking, of course, he was to head up some special submarine project. The point being is the Pentagon is not some cherished tour that all military personnel dream of. 25,000+ people work there. It's just another job, but with worse than average parking.

Why flake? Because Prouty fingers Ed Lansdale in a picture taken in Dealey Plaza
Marine Lietenant General Victor Krulak agreed with Prouty "That is indeed a picture of Ed Lansdale"
he goes on to ask "It's Lansdale. What in the world was he doing there?"

The picture that allegedly showed Lansdale shows him walking past the tramps with his back to the camera. Prouty said, "I'd recognize that back anywhere." Tell me again he isn't a crackpot?

[Chew]

Tip O'Neill has a direct knowledge of the conversation he had between himself Powers and O'Donnell, period. It is not hearsay no matter what you want to call me.

That is what hearsay evidence is!!!

Dictionary: "unverified, unofficial information gained or acquired from another and not part of one's direct knowledge"

Tip O'Neill is stating that he had a conversation with Powers and O"Donnell, that conversation is within his direct knowledge, it is not hearsay.

Until he told someone else, then it became hearsay. He told someone else, right? That's how you know about it, right?

[profmunkin]

Which brings us full circle on Tip O'Neill
If Tip is lying then what he said is not important.
BUT For what reason would he lie about a conversation that could be disproved with phone calls to Powers and O'Donnell and be fully discredited?

Tip is telling the truth about the conversation, you now have direct evidence that in the opinions of both Powers and O'Donnell they were persuaded by the FBI to alter and fabricate their testimonies to the WC so as to be aligned with the official story line.

[profmunkin]

Tip ONeill, former Speaker of the House, is documented on film in JFK movie extras, states that Ken O'Donnell (JFK top aid) and Dave Powers (JFK Special Assistant) both candidly claim the shots came from the front

Assuming for a second that they actually said what you're claiming they said...

It doesn't matter who they are, their claims about where the shots came from are only their opinion. They are human like all of the other witnesses and are therefore equally prone to the same errors in judgement. They are not experts in ballistics or acoustics, so I don't trust their judgement when it comes to determining where the shots came from.

I am not claiming they said anything, Tip O'Neill is making that claim, I am referencing video of Tip stating the content of the conversation.

Not the point.
The point is the FBI agents persuaded Powers and O'Donnell to alter and fabricate their testimony
FBI agents persuaded Powers and O'Donnell to lie before the WC.
FBI agents persuaded Powers and O'Donnell to lie to you and me.

[Chew]

Which brings us full circle on Tip O'Neill
If Tip is lying then what he said is not important.
BUT For what reason would he lie about a conversation that could be disproved with phone calls to Powers and O'Donnell and be fully discredited?

Great question. Did any conspiracy authors talk to them?

Tip is telling the truth about the conversation, you now have direct evidence

Evidence twice removed from the witness is not direct evidence; it is hearsay evidence.

that in the opinions of both Powers and O'Donnell they were persuaded by the FBI to alter and fabricate their testimonies to the WC so as to be aligned with the official story line.

Well, they didn't do a very persuasive job on Powers:

My first impression was that the shots came from the right and overhead, but I also had a fleeting impression that the noise appeared to come from the front in the area of the triple overpass. This may have resulted from my feeling, when I looked forward toward the overpass, that we might have ridden into an ambush. ^Link

O'Donnell, however, toed the official line.

Mr. SPECTER. And what was your reaction as to the source of the shots, if you had one?
Mr. O'DONNELL. My reaction in part is reconstruction---is that they came from the right rear. That would be my best judgment.
Mr. SPECTER. Was there any reaction by any of the other people around in any specific direction?
Mr. O'DONNELL. The agents all turned to the rear. I would think, watching the reaction of the President when the shot--the first shot hit--that it would be automatic it would have to have come from the rear. I think any experienced agent would make that assumption immediately.
Mr. SPECTER. And was the reaction of the agents which you have referred to as coming from the rear, to the right rear or to the left rear?
Mr. O'DONNELL. The reaction I note would be right rear. And, again, looking at the manner of the President's movement, I would think you would have to feel the thrust of the shot was from the right rear.
Mr. SPECTER. Now, what was there about the President's movement which leads you to that conclusion?
Mr. O'DONNELL. He was leaning out waving. He may have just been withdrawing his hand. And the shot hit him, and threw him to the left. He slumped on Mrs. Kennedy. ^Link

[LunarOrbit]

Not the point.
The point is the FBI agents persuaded Powers and O'Donnell to alter and fabricate their testimony
FBI agents persuaded Powers and O'Donnell to lie before the WC.
FBI agents persuaded Powers and O'Donnell to lie to you and me.

No, the FBI allegedly persuaded Powers and O'Donnell to change their testimony. Since we're not hearing this directly from the people involved it's just hearsay. Did it really happen? You accept it as fact because you think it supports your beliefs, you don't seem to mind that you're hearing it second or third hand from someone who wasn't in the room when it happened.

[profmunkin]

Until he told someone else, then it became hearsay. He told someone else, right? That's how you know about it, right?

The conversation is in Tip's direct knowledge, period.
It is not hearsay.
The video of Tip relaying the conversation from his direct knowledge, is in my direct knowledge.

If you have not seen the video then it is hearsay, when you see it, it will be in your direct knowledge.
But if you read this, you are in direct knowledge of this exchange of words concerning direct knowledge. If you don't read this and someone tells you what I wrote or think I wrote, that would be hearsay.

[LunarOrbit]

The conversation is in Tip's direct knowledge, period.
It is not hearsay.
The video of Tip relaying the conversation from his direct knowledge, is in my direct knowledge.

I think your inability to understand what hearsay is plays a big role in why you believe in conspiracy theories so easily. You put too much stock in second or third hand information.

If someone tells you that someone else told them something about an event, that is hearsay. You did not witness the event and neither did the person who told you about it. The information is second hand by the time you hear it. That is hearsay.

[profmunkin]

Evidence twice removed from the witness is not direct evidence; it is hearsay evidence.

It is not Hearsay!
Chew, Tip O'Neill IS the witness here, he has direct evidence ONLY of the conversation he had with Powers and O'Donnell.
Tip's direct knowledge of this conversation has nothing to do the possibility that Powers and O'Donnell where telling the truth.

I hope you can understand this.

[LunarOrbit]

It is not Hearsay!
Chew, Tip O'Neill IS the witness here, he has direct evidence ONLY of the conversation he had with Powers and O'Donnell.
Tip's direct knowledge of this conversation has nothing to do the possibility that Powers and O'Donnell where telling the truth.

I hope you can understand this.

If we were asking about the colour of the wallpaper in the room where Tip O'Neil had that conversation with O'Donnell and Powers, then yes, he would be a perfect witness. But the subject of the story is what allegedly happened between the FBI, O'Donnell, and Powers. Tip O'Neil did not personally witness that event, he's only repeating what he was told. That makes it second hand knowledge... hearsay.

[profmunkin]

They told Tip the shots came from front right not the rear but were persuaded by the FBI to change their stories.
So what point are you proving, that they lied in testimony to the WC or that Tip O'Neill is a liar?