Thursday, June 5, 2014

Steve Anderson MA has dropped out of that "Expert" program. Take a look:

http://www.allexperts.com/ep/672-64602/U-S-History/Steve-Anderson-MA.htm

That's him. That is SV Anderson. His name is Steve Anderson. He has a M.A. And listen: I know for a fact that he used the name Steve Anderson. He went by Steve Anderson on one of the JFK forums. He considers Amazon his roost, but he did go on another JFK forum briefly as Steve Anderson. 

Now remember: I don't give a Kleep, and I don't give a Klopp for coincidences. I believe what V told us, that there are no coincidences, only the illusion of coincidence. There are not two Steve Andersons who are history teachers who focus on the JFK assassination. No can accept. SV Anderson is Steve Anderson M.A.

Fortunately, we still have SV Anderson's answers on that Expert site. And I went ahead and made copies of every page, Anderson. So, I've got them even if you have them taken down. And you better think about it before you do because if you have them taken down, it's going to be a Smoking Gun that YOU are HIM. 

But here's an answer of Steve Anderson M.A. and you'll notice that it sounds just like SV Anderson:

Well, let's look at your points one by one and see how valid they are.

 1.  "Well it's all over now."  My source for this direct quote from Oswald was officer Nick McDonald who arrested Oswald and was the closest at the time Oswald's comment was made.  It was Officer McDonald that Oswald struck in his feverish attempt to resist arrest.

 Now what is YOUR source for your statement, "This is it."  Let me guess...you don't have a clue.  Besides, Oswald clearly could have said more than one thing while he struggled with police in hopes of escaping.  

 2.  "He was being paid and was to meet someone probably Ruby at the Movie Theatre to get."  I would LOVE to read your source for this bit of ridiculous speculation.  Of course you are aware that Jack Ruby was no where near the Texas Theater at the time of Oswald's arrest and I would assume you are also aware that as of this writing (5:10 PST November 28, 2008) there is not one scrap of hard evidence that Ruby and Oswald EVER met prior to the moment Ruby shot him.  If there IS such evidence that has been verified please provide it.  I would love to read it...(you won't, because there is no such evidence.)

 3.  "He knew when JFK was shot something had happened and was starting to piece together why he was hired and was to be at work that day in the TSBD."  This ridiculous statement implies several things.  First, that Oswald knew ahead of time of the plot to murder Kennedy yet he was NOT the shooter.  If that is the case, then why didn't Oswald make sure he had others around him at the time of the assassination to establish his innocence?  Why would he go out of his way to be all alone at the time of the shots and then later lie about his whereabouts when questioned?  Why not simply state honestly where he was since it would surely prove his innocence? Second, Oswald, even though he didn't witness the assassination is able in only a few seconds piece together that this alleged plot to kill Kennedy has been successful even though he never even knew that Kennedy had been struck or for that matter that ANYONE in the car had been struck.  Simply running on a hunch that Kennedy was struck and killed he flees the scene in some ridiculous attempt to establish his innocence.  And incidentally, if Oswald was NOT involved in the assassination, what was Ruby supposed to be paying him for?  Are you seriously implying that he was being paid NOT to shoot the president.  Clearly even you can see that your inane theories are bumping into one another and falling apart.  Third, are you even aware that Oswald was hired to work at the TSBD several WEEKS before the motorcade route was even decided in Washington D.C.  Why would it be unusual for Oswald to be at work on a day he was scheduled to be at work?  There is nothing nefarious or sinister about an employee going to work on a regular work day.

 4.  Why were no shots fired on Houston Street?  (Better shot location)  Two points here:  First pointing out that another shot location could have been used is a non-issue.  That isn't evidence of any other gunman nor does it point to Oswald's innocence in any way.  For instance, John Wilkes Booth shot and killed Abraham Lincoln with a single shot to the right temple while Lincoln watched "Our American Cousin."  Why didn't Booth fired the bullet into the BACK of Lincoln's head, thus insuring a clear brain shot.  A shot to the temple runs the risk of the bullet traveling too low for a clear brain shot and possibly sparing the life of Lincoln.  Now...has this statement of mine established that Booth was innocent of Lincoln's assassination?  Of course not.  It is a non issue, just like your comment about Houston street.  Second, Houston is NOT a better shot it is a much, MUCH worse shot.  Kennedy was blocked by Governor Connally as they traveled directly towards the TSBD along Houston Street.  Whoever the conspiracy nut was that came up with this ridiculous claim ought to be ashamed of themselves.  Once Kennedy turned the corner onto Elm Street, Oswald had a clear shot at Kennedy's upper back and head TOTALLY unobstructed by anything in the vehicle and Elms Street ran in a straight line away from Oswald, making all three shots much easier.

 And here your inane theories run into one another because you claim that the shooter were located directly on Houston Street right above Kennedy as he passed beneath them.  Using your own flawed logic, why didn't THEY fire when Kennedy was directly beneath them giving THEM the closest shot of all.  Why wait until Kennedy turned the corner onto Elm Street and was now hundreds and hundreds of feet away from them.  Huh?   Clearly, you haven't thought through your conflicting theories too much have you?


 5.  "why did the motorcycle patrolman's radio pick up a shot on Houston Street?"  Apparently you haven't read a great deal since 1980.  The alleged motorcycle police microphone that allegedly captured the sounds of "shots" was incorrect.  Dale Myers has recently concluded beyond any doubt that officer Bobby Hargis was NOT in the position he had to be in at the time of the shots to have recorded ANY shots on his motorcycle microphone.  Read a bit more on this bogus claim and you will delete this allegation from any further discussions or debates.

 6.  "JFK's head went to the back and to the rear."  You are correct.  But obviously you misinterpret this to mean there was a shot from the front.  If there WAS a shot from the front as you claim then please explain for us all the following:
     a.  Why there were NO metallic fragments found in the left rear portion of the president's head as one would expect if a bullet entered the right front and then broke apart upon impact.
     b.  Why wasn't Jackie sprayed with brain matter and blood--remember she would have been directly in the line of debris had he been struck from the front as you claim.
     c.  Why were ALL bullet fragments found in FRONT of Kennedy and Connally and NONE were found to the left rear.  Huh?  This is the single most damning lack of evidence that destroys your theory of a front gunman.
     d.  Why did the autopsy photographs and x-rays all confirm two and only two entrance shots to Kennedy's body--both from above and behind.  There is NO medical evidence of ANY frontal shots from ANY direction in front of the motorcade.  None.

 7.  "Why did Oswald not have his revolver with him for the escape if he was going to commit a murder in the TSBD?  Seems silly not to have an escape weapon...If he really killed the President he wouldn't be walking the street in broad daylight...."  No one knows why Oswald didn't have his revolver with him.  He never explained this.  But that doesn't detract from the evidence already pointing directly at Oswald and ONLY Oswald does it?  Please keep in mind that there is no standard operating procedure for murders, every one is done by free-thinking people that have engaged in various levels of planning.  It is clear that Oswald hadn't planned much of this murder out too far in advance.  He had to even bring his weapon on the morning of the assassination rather than bring it a few days earlier to avoid suspicion.  He also didn't have a valid alibi when questioned by police.  Clearly Oswald was thinking on the fly and for that reason he didn't take his revolver to work with him but only picked it up later when he knew he had been successful.  Besides, if Oswald had been stopped after the assassination and he was carrying a revolver wouldn't that scream guilt to the police that detained him.  Remember Officer Marion Baker came within seconds of detaining Oswald in the 2nd floor break room and if he had done so and searched Oswald and found a pistol, how smart would that have been for Oswald if he was going to allege he didn't do it?  Hmmm???

 8.  "he was being paid and was a decoy for the "hit" and Ruby knew where his escape route would be to be paid for "nothing" at the Theatre.  Makes perfect sense."  If this crackpot plan of yours makes perfect sense then it is clear that you have a much more convoluted idea of "perfect sense" than do I. First of all, if Oswald was being paid for doing nothing then why didn't' Oswald ever say that after his arrest?  Why did he implicate all of these alleged co-conspirators?  What possible reason would Oswald have to take the fall for a murder he never committed?  And where is your evidence of ANY money in the hands of Jack Ruby?  What happened to this money when Oswald was arrested.  Remember we know every single move of Ruby's between the time of the assassination and the time of his arrest.  Please enlighten us all as to what happened to this "money" Ruby was to pay Oswald.  Additionally, why would an innocent Oswald have shot and killed Officer Tippit, (of which there is NO serious debate) if her were innocent of murdering Kennedy?  How would Ruby have known about the Tippit murder and Oswald's new escape plan?  Wouldn't Ruby have met Oswald at his boarding house right after the assassination for your imagined pay-off?  How did Ruby know where Oswald was going if these two had never met (which as I stated earlier has never been established.) 

 9.  "The shooters were in the other Building, on the North side of Houston Street."
     So you believe there were multiple gunmen all firing from the SAME building?  Yet you also believe there was at least one gunman located at the front of Kennedy also?  Are you aware that less than 2% of all witnesses in Dealey Plaza stated that they heard shots coming from more than one direction?  That means that 98% of ALL witnesses who stated they had an opinion as to the location of origin of the shots said they all came from one and only one location.  Would you be willing to wager your family's home on those odds?  Additionally, if they fired from the Dal-Tex Building or the Dallas Country Records building (the only two buildings on Houston Street within firing distance) why did all shots line up with the SE corner of the TSBD and no other building.  Additionally, how did a bullet enter Kennedy's upper back and exit his throat traveling in a right to left path if the bullets were fired from a left-to-right direction from the buildings you refer to?  Additionally why was Governor's entrance wound to his back oblong rather than perfectly round as Kennedy's was unless that bullet had been thrown off its trajectory by someone or something?  Hmmmm???

 10.  "Why did LBJ reverse the Vietnam war the next week?  JFK was debating on a new running mate for 1964...."
 Both of these comments have nothing to do with Oswald's guilt therefore they merit no serious response.

 11.  "he was very calm and collected when he was taken into custody...he was going to unravel the whole conspiracy...it had to be the perfect plan and they got away with it."  What is your source for this claim?  And where did you get the idea that all guilty people run around the police station tipping over furniture, tearing off their clothing, and screaming "I'm guilty!!  I'm guilty!!"  Do you really think that ALL guilty people act guilty after their arrest?  If you were a police officer or a detective, THAT is what you would base your case on?  I would love to hear you answering question for the media after you released a serial killer back into the community, "Well Joseph can you please explain for the people of Seattle why this man is back on the streets after only three hours in custody?"  "Yes, I'll be happy to answer that question:  He looked calm therefore we let him go."  Thank goodness YOU are not in charge of ANY investigations of dangerous people.  You would be fired the first hour you were on the job.  


 Now some information you obviously are not aware of.  Take note:

 1.  Oswald was witnessed by two people carrying a mysterious brown package into work the morning of the assassination--however he DIDN'T take his lunch that day for some reason.
 2.  That same wrapping paper was found at the SE corner window of the TSBD with Oswald's and ONLY Oswald's prints on it.
 3.  Oswald was witnessed by five individuals either before or during the assassination holding a rifle out the SE corner window of the 6th floor of the TSBD.  One eyewitness even recognized Oswald when he saw him in a police line-up later that night.
 4.  Oswald's palm prints were found on boxes surrounding the sniper's nest from which the shots were fired.
 5.  The rifle matched to the bullet and bullet fragments was proven to have been purchased by Oswald, owned by Oswald, and brought to work that morning by Oswald.
 6.  Fibers matching Oswald's shirt were found in the butt plate of the rifle after it was discovered later that afternoon.  
 7.  Oswald was the ONLY employee that fled the scene and never returned to work later that day.
 8.  Oswald raced seven blocks to catch a bus that WOULD have made a regular stop right across the street from the TSBD
 9.  Oswald fled the bus once he realized it was stopped in clogged traffic and caught a cab instead in hopes of fleeing the murder scene as quickly as possible.
 10.  Oswald asked cab driver William Whaley to drive him four blocks PAST his North Beckley street boarding house so he could get out and walk the four blocks back.
 11.  Oswald changed his clothing after entering his boarding house before leaving again?  Why?  Are these the actions of an innocent man wrongfully accused of a murder he didn't commit or the conscientious actions of a man who fears he will be identified as Kennedy's assassin?
 12.  Oswald grabs a loaded revolver for (as you claim) his moment of payment by Jack Ruby.  Of course this is a ridiculous scenario.  He takes his revolver in the event he is stopped police, which is exactly what DID happen and it resulted in Oswald's second murder of the day when he shot and killed Officer J.D. Tippit with the gun that was later matched to some of the slugs removed from Tippit's body and which was found ON Oswald at the time of his arrest.
 13.  Oswald fled the scene of his second murder and ducked into the Texas Theater without paying admission--again an obvious act of guilty flight.  If Oswald didn't want to draw any attention to himself why would he risk arrest for entering a movie theater without paying when he had over $10 in his pocket at the time?  Does this sound like an innocent man hoping to get all of his alleged "pay-off" money?  How could he get paid if he were arrested by police for entering a theater without a ticket?
 14.  When arrested, Oswald never asked why he was being arrested?  He never talked of any conspiracy?  He never talked of Jack Ruby or any pay-off nor did he even protest his arrest initially?
 15.  When his wife Marina visited him in jail that evening he never told her he was innocent he never protested his false arrest, he never demanded to be released since they had the "wrong man" he simply told he he was being treated "well enough."



 I loved  your reference to Ray Charles.  However you got it backwards.  Even Ray Charles could spot all the holes in your ridiculously illogical and fanciful plot.  The only way one could buy into YOUR explanation is to ignore ALL of the evidence that points to Oswald and ONLY Oswald.  Which is exactly what YOU'VE done--ignored all the evidence.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.