JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS
(PART 720)


BERNICE MOORE SAID:

I was surprised that McAdams did not know apparently of the 3 paper bags.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Jim DiEugenio, like most conspiracists, enjoys basking in conspiracy-tinged speculation, such as with the "paper bag" issue. Jim evidently thinks that fellow CTer Pat Speer has proven that the bag that L.D. Montgomery of the DPD carried out of the TSBD on the afternoon of JFK's assassination (as seen in photographs) is not and could not be the same bag as the "Sniper's Nest" bag that is currently in evidence (which is CE142).

Pat Speer, of course, couldn't be more wrong on this issue, as he is attempting to do something with 2-dimensional photographs that simply cannot be done -- he's attempting to extract 3-dimensional information from a 2D picture. Ask anyone who knows a lot about photo analysis and photogrammetry (Dale Myers comes to mind), and they'll tell you how hopeless such an endeavor truly is:

"I don’t know how many ways to say it, but let me try it this way -- no one can deduce a three dimensional angle in space by holding a ruler or protractor against a two dimensional photograph or computer monitor. The principles of photogrammetry explain why this methodology leads to false results." -- Dale K. Myers; August 20, 2008

Also see:
http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/faq_01.htm

But DiEugenio WANTS to believe that there was some "mystery bag" removed from the Depository, and Pat Speer's incorrect photo analysis serves Jim's purpose just fine, thank you.

In reality, of course, there were TWO paper bags that were assigned "CE" numbers by the Warren Commission in 1964 -- CE142 (which is the bag seen in the Sniper's Nest by policemen Carl Day and Bob Studebaker, with Lt. Day's handwritten notations appearing on that bag).

And there is CE364, which is a "replica" bag that was made by the FBI at the TSBD on December 1, 1963. And the reason for the replica bag being created was fully and logically explained by James Cadigan of the FBI during his Warren Commission testimony:

JAMES CADIGAN -- "Commission Exhibit 364...is a paper sack similar to Commission Exhibit 142. It was made at the Texas School Book Depository on December 1, 1963, by special agents of the FBI in Dallas to show to prospective witnesses, because Commission's Exhibit 142 was dark and stained from the latent fingerprint treatment and they thought...it wouldn't be fair to the witness to ask, "Did you see a bag like that?", so they went to the Texas School Book Depository and constructed from paper and tape a similar bag."

I've gone a few rounds with Pat Speer on a similar (but not identical) JFK assassination sub-topic concerning the "paper bag". Two of those rounds can be found HERE and HERE.


MORE NOTES CONCERNING THE DEBATE BETWEEN
JOHN McADAMS AND JAMES DiEUGENIO:


Jim DiEugenio sounded especially ridiculous when he said to the Black Op Radio audience (during his 9/24/09 debate with John McAdams [which can be heard HERE]) that there were "three autopsies" performed on President Kennedy's body.

DiEugenio apparently thinks that when the Clark Panel was assembled to study the autopsy photos and X-rays in 1968, this qualified as an extra "autopsy" being done on JFK's body. Of course, as usual, Jim D. is off the rails of reality when he implied such a nonsensical thing.

The Clark Panel was created so that four pathologists could examine JFK's autopsy photos and X-rays, with the Panel then writing a report as to what information was revealed in those pictures and X-rays. And the Clark Panel did just that, reaching the only conclusion they could possibly reach, and that is: JFK was shot only TWO times, with both bullets entering Kennedy's body from BEHIND.

The Clark Panel also clarified the location of the entry wound in JFK's head, with the Panel (again) coming to the only possible rational conclusion in that regard too -- i.e., the entry wound was located high on Kennedy's head, near the cowlick area. And this declaration, per DiEugenio's way of thinking, means that the Clark boys performed another "autopsy" on the President. LOL.

More Laughs:

DiEugenio slipped ever deeper into "kook" territory when he declared that it was his belief that Lee Harvey Oswald was not the gunman who murdered Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit. I was smiling ear to ear when I heard Mr. DiEugenio say that on September 24, 2009.

Prior to that specific date of 9/24/09, I hadn't actually heard Jim D. come right out and say that he thought Oswald was innocent of Tippit's murder (in addition to LHO being innocent of JFK's assassination too; Jim, incredibly, evidently thinks that Oswald didn't shoot anybody on 11/22/63).

So it was nice to be able to hear DiEugenio himself say that he believes Oswald didn't shoot Tippit (although Jim almost certainly HAS said it before September 2009, either on radio or TV or somewhere within his written articles and books, but I had not been aware of it prior to 9/24/09), because such a belief will forever ensure his enrollment in the "Anybody But Oswald" Kook Club. And that particular type of horribly misguided "ABO" conspiracy theorist is always super-easy to combat and dismantle....because his "ABO" beliefs are so totally silly (and provably wrong) right from the get-go.


QUOTING JOHN McADAMS:

"I want the listeners to start making a count of the number of people that, if you believe Jim [DiEugenio], had to be involved with faking evidence. What he said about [Silvia] Duran was just absurd."

[Later....]

"I'm just sitting here doing a count of the number of evil conspirators in Jim's theory, and of course it includes all the autopsists, it includes everybody who worked for the House Select Committee and every other panel, and now it includes the Dallas Police.

For example, he talks about the paper bag. .... He doesn't mention that Oswald's palmprint and a fingerprint were found on that bag. So the [allegation of the] bag in evidence being different from the bag brought out from the Depository, I'm afraid that's just crackpot photo analysis along the lines that Jack White would probably do."
-- John McAdams; September 24, 2009


Also see:



David Von Pein
September 26, 2009