(PART 82)


[Quoting the Warren Commission Report:]

"Oswald disembarked at Le Havre on October 8. He left for England that same day, and arrived on October 9. He told English customs officials in Southampton that he had $700 and planned to remain in the United Kingdom for 1 week before proceeding to a school in Switzerland. But on the same day, he flew to Helsinki, Finland, where he registered at the Torni Hotel; on the following day, he moved to the Klaus Kurki Hotel." (WCR 690)

Any normal reading of that paragraph will give you the idea that Oswald left England for Helsinki on October 9th. But once again, it's a lie that is in provable conflict with their own evidence: Anyone can turn to CE 946 pg 7 and read the stamp which states: "Embarked 10 October 1959".


Oh boy! The dates are a WHOLE DAY off! I guess this MUST mean that a
massive conspiracy to kill future President John F. Kennedy FOUR YEARS
LATER was afoot!

Or maybe that horrendous 24-hour discrepancy in the dates means that
Lee Oswald was in the employ of the CIA or the military or ONI or
Boeing Aircraft Company or Castro or the National Biscuit Company or
_______ (fill in the agency of your choice). Right, Ben?

Geesh. (And a chuckle.)

BTW, while digging into this matter concerning the October 1959 dates
a little deeper, I found that the Warren Commission fully understood
and dealt with the discrepancy that Ben thinks the Commission just flat-out
"lied" about....because the WC, via its abundant source notes, states in
Source Note #480 on Page 862 of the WCR (which is a Source Note that
pertains to CE2677) that "Oswald could have arrived at 5:05 p.m.,
flying via Copenhagen, or at 5:35 p.m., via Stockholm. See Official Airline
Guide, North American Edition, October 1959, p. C-721. But he would have been too late to visit the Russian consulate that day. See CE 2714"

So it's fairly obvious that the Commission knew that there were some slight
discrepancies regarding the exact flight that Oswald might have taken
from London to Helsinki. But the fact is, the WC acknowledges the
discrepancy and deals with it accordingly....otherwise WHY would they
even be referencing CE2677 at all in that Source Note that I mentioned?

Just about every little thing you can think of is sourced in the Warren Report,
which is quite strange, don't you think, if the WC wanted to hide something
or keep the public from finding out the truth or keep people from looking
up a source, etc?


Why does the "truth" require a lie to support it?


And why can't kooks like Benjamin Holmes ever slap together a cohesive conspiracy plot that makes some semblance of reasonable sense?

Instead, all Ben can do is pick apart the Warren Commission's very extensive
investigation, and whenever he finds something that doesn't look quite
right (like his silly One Day Off attempt above at calling the WC "liars"),
even though that "something" doesn't really mean a hill of beans in the
long run, Ben will prop up that slight discrepancy like it proves that a
covert plot of some kind existed regarding JFK's murder.

And, as mentioned, in the instance propped up by Ben The Super-Kook
above, it is something that occurred FOUR YEARS before JFK's assassination
(when Oswald was 19 years of age).

Does Ben think Oswald was employed by some covert agency when he was a
teenager? And was it that Ben-imagined covert agency that was controlling
Oswald and perhaps forced him to apply for that hardship discharge from
the Marine Corps in 1959 (at just exactly the same time when Oswald's
mother had suffered a disabling injury, so that Lee could conveniently use
that accident of Marguerite's as an excuse to lie to his Marine superiors
and get out of the Corps on that "hardship" excuse)?

Maybe the "covert agency" controlling Oswald's destiny also "arranged"
Marguerite Oswald's "accident" in late 1959 too. Huh, Ben?

Ben's silly "Provable Lies" threads are nothing but endless nit-picking to
the Nth degree.

And it's quite obvious to me why kooks like Ben perform this daily nit-
picking task as they pore over the WC and HSCA (or whatever document
they might choose to look at sideways on a particular day) --- It's
because those conspiracists of Ben's strange ilk have got nothing else
that they can resort to (in order to keep the idea of their imagined
multi-gun conspiracy alive) EXCEPT nit-picking to death such stupid and
meaningless crap like the "October 9 vs. October 10" discrepancy
propped up by Ben above.

Ben, in essence, prefers the "October 9 vs. 10" chaff rather than the
"Oswald's Guns Killed JFK and Tippit" wheat.

Ben has a curious chaff-seeking hobby indeed.

Another excellent example of Ben's attraction toward meaningless stuff
in the JFK case is the "Dial Ryder/Gun Scope" incident. Ben loves that
piece of chaff too.

Vincent Bugliosi (as usual) summed up the thinking of conspiracy-happy
kooks quite nicely, via the words reprinted below:

"The Warren Commission critics and conspiracy theorists have succeeded in transforming a case very simple and obvious at its core--Oswald killed Kennedy and acted alone--into its present form of the most complex murder case, BY FAR, in world history.

"Refusing to accept the plain truth, and dedicating their existence for over forty years to convincing the American public of the truth of their own charges, the critics have journeyed to the outer margins of their imaginations. Along the way, they have split hairs and then proceeded to split the split hairs, drawn far-fetched and wholly unreasonable inferences from known facts, and literally invented bogus facts from the grist of rumor and speculation.

"With over 18,000 pages of small print in the 27 Warren Commission volumes alone, and many millions of pages of FBI and CIA documents, any researcher worth his salt can find a sentence here or there to support any ludicrous conspiracy theory he might have. And that, of course, is precisely what the conspiracy community has done."
-- Vince Bugliosi; Via "Reclaiming History" (c.2007)


Why do the trolls & LNT'ers [Lone Nut Theorists] keep running away from these ["Provabe Lies Of The Warren Commission"] posts?


Probably because they're meaningless and ultra-trivial, and because
each silly thread contains stupid, unsupportable, and (frankly) vile
allegations against the Warren Commission and its staff.

In addition: Those forum threads are often ignored because the junk in
them is being uttered by a kook of the "mega" variety named Benjamin

Do I need still more reasons to avoid them? Granted, I didn't avoid
this particular thread....and that's because the trivial and idiotic
nature of the thread struck me as even more idiotic and trivial than
Ben's norm (as incredible as that might seem). So, I responded with a
dose of CS&L [common sense & logic]....which is common sense that
will, of course, be tossed in the trash by a certain rabid conspiracist,

Ben The Mega-Kook, of course, will continue to disgorge more and more
"October 9 vs. 10"-like hunks of ridiculous chaff in the future too.
He's got to....because he's made it his life's work to try and discredit
the perfectly acceptable lone-assassin conclusion reached by the
Warren Commission.

But what we'll never see out of Ben is proof of the massive conspiracy
he so desperately WANTS to uncover by way of his chaff-hunting

In short, we'll never see Ben place on the table anything of SUBSTANCE
as he tries to prove his make-believe "plot(s)". For, if he had
anything truly substantive to place on the evidence table, we
certainly would have seen it by this December 2007 date. Right, Ben?

David Von Pein
December 2007