JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS
(PART 74)


CONSPIRACY KOOK WALT CAKEBREAD SAID:

>>> "[Howard Brennan's] affidavit was written in plain ol' English, and that's why the conspirators had to get him in front of a "Blue Ribbon committee" of silver-tongued shyster lawyers who could "clear up" what Howard Brennan meant to say. .... Brennan's affidavit reveals at least a half-a-dozen MAJOR and KEY discrepancies in the Warren Commission's THEORIZED version of the event." <<<


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Actually it reveals ZERO such discrepancies between the affidavit that
Howard Brennan signed on 11/22/63 and Brennan's Warren Commission testimony a few months later.

Let's see.....


>>> "The W.C. ignored or twisted Brennan's descriptions." <<<

The WC did no such thing, of course. They let Brennan talk freely, and
Howard was free to say any damn thing he wanted, after such MULTIPLE
open-ended questions like:

"Did you see any other people in any other windows that you can
recollect?"

"Just tell what else you saw during that afternoon."

"Anything you would like to add?"


But to a kook named Walter, the above type questions were being asked
by crooks and liars who wanted to "twist" Brennan's words.


>>> "Brennan said the gunman was in his early thirties..." <<<

Which is just exactly what he said in BOTH his affidavit and his
Warren Commission session.


>>> "He said the gunman weighed between 165 and 175 pounds..." <<<

Which is almost identical to his WC testimony.

Affidavit: "165-175 pounds."

Warren Commission Testimony: "160-170 pounds."

You're really showing those "discrepancies" thus far, Mr. Walt-Kook.
Are you planning on proving your point sometime during this laundry
list?


>>> "The two discrepancies in clothing color have already been counted." <<<

And Brennan said "light-colored" regarding the clothing in BOTH his
11/22 affidavit and his WC testimony.

Next....


>>> "Brennan said the man was STANDING..." <<<

When talking about the "standing vs. sitting" topic, Brennan actually
used the word "sitting" in his affidavit and not "standing":

"He was just sitting up there looking down apparently waiting for the same thing I was, to see the President." -- Via Brennan's 11/22/63 Affidavit

But in front of the WC, Brennan said that he saw Oswald BOTH sitting
and standing at various times. So, there's really no "discrepancy" in
this regard either.

Next....


>>> "Brennan said that the window where he saw the gunman was WIDE OPEN. The Warren Commission theorized that it was only part of the way open." <<<

This point is never even mentioned in Brennan's affidavit. It only came
up during the WC session. So, therefore, there can be no "discrepancy"
in this regard either (from the affidavit to the testimony), since Brennan
never mentions the window "height" in his November affidavit.


>>> "I believe that's six major discrepancies." <<<

No. It's really this many -- Zero.

I guess Walt-Kook really meant to say that the "discrepancies" exist
with respect to Brennan's UNIFORMLY CONSISTENT observations (when
comparing his WC testimony and his 11/22/63 affidavit) vs. the actual
physical description of Lee Harvey Oswald.

But, of course, that isn't what Walt implies above (and what he
certainly implied in a previous post or two on this subject earlier on
December 1, 2007; [see quotes below direct from the lips of the kook
himself]).

Instead, Walt is implying that the WC had to "clear up" (per Walt's
verbiage) Brennan's language that exists in the affidavit, because
(quoting the Mega-Kook again) "Hoover and Johnson knew they had to
discredit Howard Brennan, because the naive fool had stepped right out
of the crowd and started speaking about what he's seen,"
so the WC
"decided to make him a 'Star Witness' where they could get their pack
of silver-tongued lawyers to 'clarify' the plain English of Howard
Brennan's affidavit."


Hilarious stuff Walt.

It's hilarious because the Warren Commission did NO SUCH THING AT ALL.
And that's obvious because Brennan's affidavit and his WC testimony are
almost IDENTICAL in substantive content. There's virtually no differences
at all. But Walt thinks there are substantial differences that needed to be
"cleared up" (i.e., hidden from view, no doubt) by the Warren Commission.

Walt (evidently) thinks that Howard L. Brennan's original November
22nd affidavit and Brennan's WC testimony are totally different
versions of what Brennan saw in Dealey Plaza. When, in fact, they are
almost identical.

And, quite obviously, the Warren Commission was not on a mission to
"twist" Brennan's words or to keep certain things out of the written
record, because they let Brennan speak freely and openly about what he
saw on 11/22, and (don't forget) the Commission published all of Brennan's
verbatim testimony right there in the supporting volumes of the Warren
Report for everybody to look at ("discrepancies" regarding Oswald's exact
physical description and all).

Let's face it folks -- Walt's ready for a Kook Award. He's long overdue
for one of those, in fact.

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

I'm not going ALL the way around your insanity bush with this Brennan
thing for the 95th time, Walt.

I've destroyed you handily 94 previous times [such as in these two examples
HERE and HERE]...but, like a firm piece of log-like shit in a swimming pool,
you just keep popping back up to the surface to get bludgeoned yet again.

Walt thinks there was a gang of Good Humor Men (dressed all in white
from head to toe--so as to not attract any attention, I
guess...)...and the GH men really killed the President and
set up Ozzie in the WRONG window.

Even with a slight discrepancy in the trouser color, Oswald's still
guilty as Jeffrey Dahmer and everybody knows it.

But, to a kook, that one discrepancy regarding clothing colors is
enough to let LHO off the hook, despite the other 109 things (approx.)
that tell us he's guilty.

And I see Walt is still lying about the "hunting rifle" bullshit
(Brennan never said that). But at least he's stopped telling the "35
year old" lie about Oz's age, per Brennan. Now, Walt has decided to
say "33 years old", even though Brennan never specified that exact age
either.

Why Walt can't just tell the truth re. Brennan's actual verbiage
("early 30s") is anyone's guess. He likes to stamp things with
specificity when certain things can never actually be stamped that
way....like the "age" thing and all of the timelines associated with
the JFK & JDT murder cases.

But, no matter how many times these facts are brought to Walt's
attention, he'll do his "shit floating in the pool" routine and pop
back up with those lies over & over again.

It's part of the "Can't Let Go Of A Lie" disease. Nothing can cure it.

Well, looks like I went almost all the way around that Absurd Tree
after all.

Just call it a bonus.

David Von Pein
December 1, 2007
December 1, 2007


video