(PART 29)


>>> "He [Lee Harvey Oswald] was part of an undercover plot and he thought he was helping to prevent an assassination." <<<


Ah, yes. The ol' "He Was Trying To Save The President" dodge. A total
kook (Judyth Baker) invention, of course. Can the hilarity from the conspiracy
kooks reach any greater heights than this? I doubt it.

BTW, just exactly how was Oswald doing his part to try to "prevent"
the assassination by casually eating his lunch on the 2nd Floor of the
Depository when JFK was being murdered outside on Elm Street (as many,
many of you conspiracy quacks believe was the truth)?

Some "Assassination Prevention Plan" Oz had working for him there,
huh? (But, I guess eating his lunch had priority over saving the
President's life.)

>>> "He [Saint Oz] did not shoot J.D. Tippit." <<<

You kooks are amazing. (Not to mention hilarious.)

>>> "His gun had a bent firing pin." <<<

Not when LHO fired four bullets from that gun into the body of Officer
Tippit. If there was any "firing pin" damage to that gun, it occurred
after Tippit was killed with that gun. But the gun was positively in
good working order at approx. 1:15 PM on November 22, 1963. To believe
otherwise is to be a rabid kook (like you). And who'd want to do
something silly like that?

>>> "I'm not trying to prove he was a saint, just not guilty of the crimes the government claimed he committed." <<<

And you're failing miserably in that endeavor to clear your patsy,
too. But don't let the fact that you've got ZERO pieces of physical
evidence pointing to anyone on Earth except Oswald stop you from
continuing your daily quest of seeking that "Not Guilty" verdict on
behalf of your favorite patsy for all November 22 murders.

>>> "He may have been involved in some way, but he did not shoot anyone that day." <<<

You kooks are amazing. (Not to mention hilarious.)

>>> "How involved he was we will never know, since he was killed so quickly." <<<

More silliness from the fertile minds of "Kook Kwarters, Inc.", I see.

Fact is, we knew how deeply Oswald was "involved" in the JFK & JDT
murders many hours before he was plugged by Mr. Ruby on Sunday

A good deal of the evidence had been assessed by Sunday morning, and
the police had confirmed via many witnesses that Oswald was certainly
guilty of killing Officer Tippit (at least).

By Sunday, the police and FBI also knew that Oswald's rifle was
missing from the Paine garage where it had been kept since late
September of '63. And the police knew that the rifle found on the 6th
Floor of the Depository was bought and paid for by Lee Oswald (aka:
"Alek James Hidell", the same name that appeared on the Selective
Service ID card found in Oswald's wallet within minutes of his arrest
on Friday afternoon).

Hence, we have Captain Will Fritz making the bold claim to the world
via live TV on November 23:


Yes, there was still lots more information confirming Oswald's guilt
in both 11/22 murders AFTER he was shot and killed by Ruby on
Sunday....but there was ample proof of Oswald's guilt in those two
killings before he was killed too [as Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry
demonstrates HERE] -- and no evidence of ANY kind to lead the
authorities down any path except a "Lone Assassin" path either.

>>> "Put yourself in his place for just one second -- if you had the police coming after you and you didn't commit a crime, maybe you would snap too." <<<

LOL. I'm loving this reasoning here.

If I HADN'T done anything to warrant my being arrested (i.e., I'm
completely INNOCENT of killing a President and a policeman on November
22 in Dallas), I'm suddenly going to GIVE THE COPS A GOOD REASON TO
SUSPECT ME AND TO SHOOT ME DOWN by drawing a pistol and start waving
it around as if I'm going to shoot some people with it??

Not to mention Oswald's verbal comments that he made within the
theater (which reek of guilt) -- "This is it!" and/or "It's all over now!"

I'm lovin' the kook reasoning!!

>>> "The only thing we know is he had a defective gun." <<<

The gun was not "defective" 30 minutes before Oz's arrest, because WE
KNOW beyond ALL doubt that Oz murdered Officer Tippit with that gun.

No amount of assorted obfuscation from you kooks will make Oswald any
less guilty of killing Tippit than he is today, and was on 11/22. But
you'll keep trying, won't you?

>>> "Why did LBJ force him [Richard Russell] to be on the WC when he didn't want to?" <<<

Beats me. But LBJ and Russell were evidently very good friends (old
"southern boys" who got along, I suppose), and Johnson was determined
to make Senator Goofball Russell "My man on that Commission" (per
LBJ's own words).

I don't know why exactly either. But I'll tell you this -- if some CTers
want to now look back, in hindsight, and claim that Johnson was
stacking the deck with shills who would do LBJ's "Lone Assassin"
bidding for him right from the get-go, those CTers better re-think
that position. Because Russell was hardly a "Lone Nut" lapdog for
President Johnson (or for anybody else either).

For, if he had been, why in the world would he have been so vocal
about his displeasure with the Warren Commission's "Single-Bullet
Theory" or about the fact he thought there WAS a conspiracy
involved in the case?

Here's the famous arm-twisting phone call made by LBJ to Russell on
the very day that Johnson announced the formation of the Warren
Commission (November 29th, 1963):

>>> "All big ego VB [Vincent Bugliosi] is trying to do is show he could have convicted LHO, which he couldn't." <<<

He already did "convict" Oswald in a court of law....21 years before
"Reclaiming History" was published. Vince got a "guilty" verdict out of
12 sworn-in Dallas jurors in late July of 1986 in London, England (at

Sure, it was only a mock trial. I don't deny that. (Why would I?) But
it was treated the same as the Real McCoy, with 21 real witnesses
called to the stand and placed under OATH to tell the truth. A real
Texas Federal judge presided over the courtroom in London, and the
jury was picked the normal way, from the Dallas files.

And Oswald was declared "Guilty" by that Dallas jury. Like it or not.

>>> "[Bugliosi] didn't even address all the issues that have caused the debate for 44 years, that the WC did a horrible job." <<<

The WC did a magnificent job of arriving at the truth. A very good
example of this is the SBT and the WC's "bracketing" of the Zapruder Film
frames for when the Commission said that shot occurred. Very, very
good work, because they got it RIGHT, decades prior to today's more
sophisticated techniques of computer enhancements, etc., that can fine-
tune things so much more than they could in 1964.

But even without such advanced technology, the WC figured it out
anyway, thanks to their 5/24/64 detailed reconstruction of the event
in Dallas' Dealey Plaza, using surveyor's tools, a measuring stick,
the Z-Film as a general guide, and a whole lot of common sense as

The Warren Commission's range of "SBT frames" (Z210-Z225) perfectly
meets with the later computer animations done by Dale Myers, who
places the SBT shot at Z223-Z224.

So, you can screw your "horrible job" claptrap when it comes to the
Warren Commission's investigation and re-enactment of JFK's
assassination. Because the WC went a lot further down the
"investigation" road in this case than they really had to go...and
it's probably about time more people start realizing what a very good
overall job the WC did during the relatively short 9+ months of their
existence in 1964.

And I, for one, am thrilled to see comments being made in print about
the effectiveness of the Warren Commission (like the ones shown below
that come from Vincent Bugliosi's book, "Reclaiming History"):

"In my opinion, the Warren Commission's investigation has to be considered the most comprehensive investigation of a crime in history." -- VB


"The very fact that the Warren Commission, by its noncategorical language ("very persuasive evidence"), did not unequivocally rule out the possibility that Kennedy and Connally were struck by separate bullets (in effect, not ruling out the possibility of a conspiracy) is itself extremely powerful evidence that not only didn't the Commission, or any portion thereof, set out to suppress the truth from the American people, but that its conclusion of no evidence of a conspiracy was not, as conspiracy theorists believe, a predetermined conclusion." -- VB


"The dreadful illogic and superficiality of the conspiracy theorists' modus operandi has inevitably resulted in the following situation: Though they have dedicated their existence to trying to poke holes in the Warren Commission's findings, they have failed abysmally to tell us (if the Warren Commission was wrong) what actually did happen.

"In other words, other than blithely tossing out names, they have failed to offer any credible evidence of who, if not Oswald, killed Kennedy. Nor have they offered any credible evidence at all of who the conspirators behind the assassination were.

"So after more than forty years, if we were to rely on these silly people, we'd have an assassination without an assassin (since, they assure us, Oswald didn't kill Kennedy), and a conspiracy without conspirators. Not a simple achievement." -- VB


"[Oliver Stone] wanted his movie, he wrote with towering arrogance in the January 1992 edition of "Premiere" [magazine], to "replace the Warren Commission Report." Can you imagine that? A Hollywood producer wants his movie to REPLACE the official and most comprehensive investigation of a crime in history. .... Arrogance thought it already had a bad name. That was before it met Oliver Stone." -- VB

>>> "Like this loser is a mental giant, he [Bugliosi] convicted a whack job [Manson] and put innocent people away." <<<

Please list the names of the "innocent people" who were "put away" by
Vincent Bugliosi, Esq.

(You surely DO have a list of those names, right Mr. Mega-Kook?
Otherwise you'd have never been so stupid to open your yap about VB
putting away "innocent people", right?)

>>> "Nobody would even know who he [VB] is without this propaganda, and I think that is why he wrote this book along with the money -- to get press." <<<

And Vince sweats for 21 long years just to get some "press" when he's
73 years of age (which the Minnesota native, VB, now is).....right

It's not like he HADN'T received any "press" for his three #1 Best
Sellers ("Helter Skelter", "And The Sea Will Tell", and "Outrage"). He
got plenty of press and attention for those books.

But I guess he needed still more "press" in his senior years, huh, so
he took 21 years to write the ultimate JFK assassination book, which
is a book that (per you kooks) Vincent knows full well belongs in the
toilet, rather than on somebody's bookshelf....is that about right,
Mr. Kook?

Back to reality again -- Vincent Bugliosi is a good and decent and
honorable man who served the State of California as Deputy District
Attorney for eight years, and now the conspiracy clowns of the
Internet treat him like he was no more than a slimy worm under a rock.

You anti-Bugliosi kooks turn my stomach.

>>> "Ballistic experts have stated numerous times that a fragmentation bullet was used on JFK's head. That is the reason for the unbelievable damage." <<<


The skull damage isn't unbelievable at all. I guess you are totally
ignorant of the skull tests done for the Warren Commission by Dr.
Alfred Olivier of the Army, which were tests that positively proved
that a Carcano bullet can and WILL cause significant damage to a human
skull after entering that skull at full velocity from behind (just exactly
like what happened on Elm Street to JFK).


ARLEN SPECTER -- "And at what distance were these tests performed?"

DR. ALFRED G. OLIVIER -- "These tests were performed at a distance of 90 yards."

MR. SPECTER -- "And what gun was used?"

DR. OLIVIER -- "It was a 6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano that was marked Commission Exhibit 139."

MR. SPECTER -- "What bullets were used?"

DR. OLIVIER -- "It was the 6.5 millimeter Mannlicher-Carcano Western ammunition lot 6,000."

MR. SPECTER -- "What did that examination or test, rather, disclose?"

DR. OLIVIER -- "It disclosed that the type of head wounds that the President received could be done by this type of bullet. This surprised me very much, because this type of a stable bullet I didn't think would cause a massive head wound. I thought it would go through making a small entrance and exit, but the bones of the skull are enough to deform the end of this bullet causing it to expend a lot of energy and blowing out the side of the skull or blowing out fragments of the skull."


Dr. John Lattimer did similar skull tests in the 1970s, with his tests
corroborating Olivier's tests (i.e., the skull wounds via Lattimer's
experiments were remarkably similar to that of President Kennedy's
head wounds). You can have a look for yourself:

Did Olivier lie to the Warren Commission when he said those things
that I've reprinted above? And did Lattimer also lie when he said a
Carcano bullet like Oswald's did the severe damage to the test skull
we see in the photo above?

But, just ignore all of that stuff, Rob. After all, you have an "I CAN
IGNORE EVERYTHING THAT IS OFFICIAL" badge pinned to your chest.
So you're off the hook forever.

You, being a kook, never have to prove anything. All you have to do is
the same thing many other CTers like you do to try and skirt around
virtually all of the evidence in this case -- just claim that it's phony.

>>> "A normal military bullet would not have done that kind of damage. It would have left a hole a little bigger on exit but it would not have blown half the brains and half the skull away." <<<

See above.

You don't have the slightest effing idea what you're babbling about
from one sub-topic to the next. But it's fun to watch the self-implosion

Re: the brain -- You are, as usual, dead wrong about "half the brain"
being blown away by Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano bullet.

Quoting Dr. Michael Baden (another person whom you no doubt would much
rather ignore than listen to):

"Basically, the president's whole brain was still there. The right hemisphere was severely damaged and torn, but less than an ounce or two of his brain was actually missing from the cranial cavity." -- M. Baden

>>> "Who did the test? Probably not very reliable." <<<

The U.S. Army.
Aren't they "reliable" enough for you?

>>> "Remember, the Carcano is a low-velocity gun." <<<

But of high enough velocity (2,100+ fps muzzle velocity) to do what
Oswald's bullet obviously did to JFK's head in 1963.

You seem to think the Carcano was little more than a long bean-shooter
disguised as a WORLD WAR 2 MILITARY RIFLE.

>>> "But many tests have been done since this [1964] test. Many experts have weighed in in the last 15 years. You can't keep using the same tainted 1964 data." <<<


The 1964 data done by the UNITED STATES ARMY experts is somehow
"tainted", but the newer tests are much more valid, is that it?

In other (kook) words --- If you don't like the results you get in '64,
wait around until some better "Anybody But Oswald" type of data
comes down the pike that can be used to discredit and supplant the
'64 stuff.

Only problem there is -- The 1964 Olivier/Army tests ALREADY PROVE
BEYOND ALL DOUBT that Oswald's gun and Oswald's bullets can and WILL
inflict wounds just like those sustained by President Kennedy in Dallas.

And also please remember that Olivier used Oswald's EXACT RIFLE
(CE139) for the Army's 1964 skull tests. It wasn't just a similar
"Mannlicher-Carcano". It was CE139 (#C2766) used by Olivier, and he
also used bullets from one of the exact same lot numbers used by
Oswald (Lot #6000).

Think up some more silly excuses. Because your arguments are
laughable when it comes to this subject of the skull wounds.

>>> "You ignore the more experienced [doctors] at Parkland that all say he [JFK] was hit in the forehead from the front." <<<

Name one single Parkland doctor who boldly claimed that JFK was hit
"in the forehead from the front". You can't name one, because no
Parkland physician made such a stupid claim in the first place.

Plus, the Parkland doctors were not "more experienced" with autopsies.
And it was AT THE AUTOPSY where the body was fully examined in detail
to determine the entry and exit wounds and the precise locations of
said injuries, etc.

To think that the Parkland people were studying and examining every
last inch of JFK's body to determine the exact locations of the
entrance and exit holes is just patently absurd in the first place.

Most of the Parkland personnel saw what they THOUGHT was a wound of
exit in the back of JFK's head, yes. I cannot deny that. But they were
proven wrong AT THE AUTOPSY, when no such "BOH" hole was discovered
or documented on paper or photographed or X-rayed.

Michael Baden said it well when he said this to Mr. Bugliosi (which
Vince puts in his JFK book on Pages 407 and 408):

"The head exit wound was not in the parietal-occipital area, as the Parkland doctors said. They were wrong. Since the thick growth of hair on Kennedy's head hadn't been shaved at Parkland, there's no way for the doctors to have seen the margins of the wound in the skin of the scalp. All they saw was blood and brain tissue adhering to the hair. And that may have been mostly in the occipital area because he was lying on his back and gravity would push his hair, blood, and brain tissue backward, so many of them probably assumed the exit wound was in the back of the head." -- M. Baden

>>> "The lower back [bullet?] hit him [JFK] a second or two prior to the head shot, thus he was moving forward for a second before impact of the head shot." <<<

Anybody who has not fallen to the floor in fits of laughter after reading
the above silliness regarding JFK's sharp and sudden head movement
FORWARD at exactly Z-Film frame 313 must either be graveyard dead
or has no sense of humor whatsoever.

David Von Pein
November 2007


(PART 28)


>>> "Maybe he [Oswald] was suicidal." <<<


Then why didn't he commit suicide at 12:31 PM CST on 11/22/63 after
killing JFK?

Instead of committing suicide, why did he leave the TSBD in a hurry
and go to Oak Cliff and get his pistol and then kill J.D. Tippit on

Oh yes, I forgot, you think Snow White Oswald never shot anybody, so
you think the 13 witnesses at the Tippit murder site were all having
an "IT WAS OSWALD" mirage at the same time. Nice.

Plus -- Why did Oswald try to kill policemen within the Texas Theater

It's kinda hard to deny this little theater scuffle, isn't it kook?
But, of course, we do have some CTers in our midst who are silly
enough to try and deny the fact that Oswald pulled his gun on the
police in the theater -- Walt The Super-Kook comes to mind (to name
one such nutcase).

>>> "JFK was the first shooting of a president with a rifle." <<<

First time for Oswald too. Therefore, the best retort I can come up
with here is this logical one---


>>> "Why did even Dick Russell not believe in the SBT?" <<<

Partially due to the fact that Richard Russell was a goofball (simple
as that).

And, interestingly enough, two to three months later (in May or June
of 2007), I discovered that the author of the new JFK Assassination
Bible (Vince Bugliosi) evidently feels the exact same way that I do
about the late Senator Russell.

BTW, Russell died in January 1971, and since he was one of the very
few WC members who didn't embrace the SBT and who also voiced his
opinion that a "conspiracy" likely existed with respect to JFK's
murder, I'm wondering why he wasn't "bumped off" by the "Mystery Death
Squad" too? But he's not mentioned on Jim Marrs' "Death List". Go

Anyhow, I found it very reassuring when I saw the following VB remarks
in the endnotes (CD) section of "Reclaiming History":

"What [Senator Richard] Russell essentially said [in a 1970 interview] is that there were too many things he had questions about, and because of these unanswered questions, instead of concluding he didn't know what happened, he tended to believe there was a conspiracy.

"Maybe if Russell had acted like a responsible public official, he would have learned the answers to his questions. But he did not. .... His attendance at the hearings where 94 witnesses testified before the Commission was nothing short of disgraceful, Russell only attending the testimony of 6 witnesses. And if Russell had a little more common sense, that would have also helped.

"Russell is the same person who on October 22, 1962, right in the middle of the Cuban missile crisis...actually urged war rather than a peaceful resolution to the crisis. ....

"Can you imagine that? To Russell, possession of nuclear weapons wasn't a deterrent to war but a golden opportunity to blow up the planet. I must confess: when a mental giant like Russell says he believes there may have been a conspiracy in the Kennedy assassination, I listen."
-- Vincent T. Bugliosi; Pages 297-298 of "Reclaiming History" (Endnotes)

>>> "The bullet that hit [JFK's] head shattered, remember? It couldn't have done that type of damage." <<<

You just refuse to look at the REAL evidence in the case, don't you?
There's ample proof to show that your above statement about the head-
shot bullet is complete bullshit.

The bullet fragments found in the front seat could most certainly have
"done that type of damage" to the windshield and the chrome topping of
the limo. Robert Frazier testified regarding this point specifically, and
I've shown you his testimony.

And if you think that a FMJ/MC bullet like Oswald's wouldn't have left
large enough fragments behind after striking a human skull....think
again. Because such large fragments resulting from a bullet hitting a
skull can (and have) occurred....multiple times, in fact.

Multiple tests have been done to show that a Carcano bullet just like
LHO's ammunition can (and will) fragment in the exact same "2 Larger
Fragments" style of CE567 and CE569.

The WC (Dr. Olivier) did tests on this subject; and then Dr. John
Lattimer did the same type of skull tests too (years later).

The results (with photos for proof) are to be found in Lattimer's book
"Kennedy And Lincoln" (via the chart linked below):

But I suppose it's best if kooks like Robert Caprio just merely ignore
those skull tests (and the large fragments that were left behind
following such tests).

It'd be better for their fantasy telling in the future if the kooks
continue to claim that Olivier and Lattimer never performed those
detailed tests, with WCC/MC ammunition being fired directly into human
skulls and the bullets coming out looking very similar to front-seat
fragments CE567 and CE569.

>>> "And secondly, and most importantly, the head shot came from the front..." <<<

Yeah, it's also better for you CT-Kooks if you ignore all seventeen of
those trained pathologists who all said that JFK was hit in the head
by one bullet which came from BEHIND the President's car.

And it's best if the CTers ignore the following Z-Film slo-mo clip
too, which shows JFK's head moving discernibly FORWARD at the critical
MOMENT OF IMPACT, indicating a bullet has just struck him FROM BEHIND:

>>> "Good try though." <<<

If I were to type all of my responses to you while I was sleeping,
they'd still be better "tries" than your flimsy, unsupportable retorts.

You must enjoy being made a complete fool of, day after day. Go figure
that curious hobby.

David Von Pein
October 2007


(PART 66)

In the March 24, 2011, Black Op Radio segment embedded above, conspiracy crackpot James DiEugenio said the following:

"Are you going to tell me that they found this weapon that Oswald killed Tippit with, and they [the FBI] never went to the office where Oswald picked it up at?! Uh-huh. If that would have happened, those guys would have been fired about 24 hours after we learn this. They went to the REA [Railway Express Agency] office. And do you know what happened when they went there? Why do you think there's no evidence in the record about their visit there? What happened was, they interviewed all the clerks there, and guess what they said? 'We never saw that guy here. That guy never came in here to pick up that revolver'. .... So now they [the FBI] know they have a problem. They have a serious problem now."

Here is my response to DiEugenio's silliness about Oswald's revolver:

The FBI had no "serious problem" at all regarding Oswald's obvious guilt in J.D. Tippit's murder. And the FBI certainly had no "serious problem" when it came to proving that Lee Oswald was in possession of the Tippit murder weapon within literally minutes of Officer Tippit being killed.

My best (logical) guess as to why the FBI didn't bother interviewing everyone at the Railway Express office would be this:

The FBI probably felt they didn't need to go to the offices of the Railway Express Agency and they didn't need to interview everyone in connection with Oswald's revolver purchase because they already knew that Lee Harvey Oswald had been caught red-handed with the Tippit murder weapon in his hands just 35 minutes after Officer Tippit was killed with that very same gun!

Therefore, since the FBI knew that Oswald had certainly come into possession of Smith & Wesson Revolver #V510210 at some point in time prior to Tippit's murder on November 22, 1963, the FBI very likely decided that they didn't need to search high and low for specific documents that would establish Oswald's ownership of that gun.

Now, yes, it's true that some investigation was done by the FBI to establish Oswald's ownership of Revolver V510210 [via this document and this document], in much the same way that they established Oswald's ownership of the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle that he purchased from Klein's Sporting Goods.

But the big difference between these two issues of "gun ownership" is the fact that we know that in one of the instances (the instance of the revolver), Oswald was caught with the gun in his hands as he tried to kill a policeman with it in the Texas Theater, which occurred a mere 35 minutes after Tippit had been slain with that same gun and by that same man, per witness testimony.

In the case of the rifle, however, Oswald was not caught with that gun in his hands after President Kennedy was assassinated in Dealey Plaza. So, Oswald had to be linked to that weapon via circumstantial evidence (which, of course, he was linked to--via his palmprint on the rifle and by way of a paper trail that most definitely established the fact that Oswald was the owner of the Kennedy murder weapon--Carcano Rifle #C2766).

So, the FBI didn't really even need to track down ANY ownership documentation as far as the revolver was concerned. Because, what difference would it make if no ownership papers could be obtained for the handgun at all? Oswald would still have been caught red-handed with the Tippit murder weapon in his hands on the day of Tippit's death.

Oswald could have fished the gun out of a trash dumpster behind a McDonald's hamburger joint for all I care, and it still wouldn't change the verifiable and provable FACT that Lee Oswald murdered Officer J.D. Tippit on Tenth Street in Dallas on 11/22/63, and it also wouldn't change the irrevocable fact that Oswald had the Tippit murder weapon in his very own hands just thirty-five minutes after Officer Tippit had been shot and killed.

I mean, how much GUILTIER can a guy get? He's apprehended a short distance from the crime scene with the murder weapon in his OWN HANDS only a half-hour after the crime was committed, and yet conspiracy theorists STILL want to pretend he never had possession of the Smith & Wesson revolver?!
That's insane.

I know that the JFK conspiracy kooks can get really silly sometimes, but this business about having to have in our possession every last conceivable document and postal form and notification card from the Railway Express Agency in order to prove that Lee Harvey Oswald ever took possession of that revolver is just beyond silly -- even for the looniest of the conspiracy theorists of the world.

David Von Pein
March 26, 2011


(PART 65)




The above is why Gary Mack (Larry Dunkel) has no credibility left with anyone but DVP, and maybe VB [Vincent Bugliosi].

Listen to this utter goofiness:

Someone orders a product that you are out of. So instead of mailing them a note saying: "Would you like a credit toward something else or a refund", the company just decides to send the person something else instead. Sure, how about "Mr. Mack we are out of that particular shoe style, but we have something close in a bit larger size, hope you like it."

What nuttiness. That has never ever happened to me on any mail transaction which I have done in decades. They always ask you what you would like to do first. Since it is your money.

Oh and then Dr. Pangloss (Dunkel) says Oswald could have left anytime that morning. Duh, Gary, did you see the time cards? Are you saying they are fake? Did you check with Dave Perry on this first? You may be going a bit off his reservation here. Better call him.

Then comes the capper: the postmark being in a different zone is not out of the ordinary!

WTF? If anything tells us just how far Gary Mack has gone around the bend, it is that. Only a guy who could change the exit on Kennedy's head--which Mack did to make ITTC ["Inside The Target Car"] work--could do something like that and not bat an eyelash.

The post office where the money order was allegedly purchased was two zones away from where the envelope was mailed--which is revealed in that postmark. Sure, Oswald mailed the envelope in one zone, but they just marked it as being picked up from another. Why? They didn't know their own zones?

Well, Gary I will say this for you: Like Pangloss, you sure know how to make serious problems disappear. First you moved the exit wound in JFK' s head, and now you say mail employees mismark envelopes all the time--so what's the big deal?

Gary Mack not only has no credibility left to him, he also has no self-respect left either.

And for DVP to trot this clown out, and to endorse this utter propaganda is shocking and disgusting, even for him.

Which, sadly, as we know from painful experience, says a lot.

Please Davey, go back to the Pigpen. The hogs there like to roll around in this kind of muck and excrement. Here, I read something like this from you and Mack, I feel like I need to take a long hot shower to get all this crap off of me.


Easy, Jimbo. You should be saving some of those anti-Mack and anti-Von Pein histrionics for your next laughfest on Anybody But Oswald Radio. Don't you agree?

The fact is, of course, that every single thing Gary Mack said here makes perfect sense. Naturally, Jim "ABO" DiEugenio has to spit on everything uttered by Mr. Mack and drag Gary through the mud--which is just exactly what I knew Delusional DiEugenio would do before he ever did it.

If somebody were to dig hard enough, I'd be willing to bet that a postal zone mark on an envelope could be found and could be proven to have been different from the zone where the envelope had been physically mailed.

And by the way, this is just another (of the hundreds) of examples of DiEugenio's "Let's Frame Oswald" plotters doing things that only a total retard would want to do -- i.e., they are framing Oswald, per the conspiracy kooks like DiEugenio, with a fake money order that was supposedly purchased at the main post office in Dallas.

So what do these brainless morons do this time to clog the works of their own patsy scheme? They decide to have the envelope stamped with a different postal zone from the one where the money order was purchased.


The plotters could just as easily have stamped the "fake" envelope (which has the "fake" Oswald writing on it) with the CORRECT ZONE, right Jimbo? But, instead, they apparently wanted to leave conspiracy-hungry goofs like DiEugenio a whole bunch of bread crumbs throughout their LFO [Let's Frame Oswald] plan, by deliberately stamping the wrong zone on the envelope containing the money order.

And then the retard plotters compound their idiocy by also deciding to make the money order arrive in Chicago at an impossibly early time (in 24 hours), per conspiracy theorists like Jim D.

The fact that anomalies and discrepancies like this exist AT ALL is probably better proof of NO CONSPIRACY than they are of CONSPIRACY.


Because in a plot where EVERYTHING is fake and totally controlled by the evil plotters (which is certainly what James DiEugenio believes--because he thinks EVERYTHING connected with Oswald's guilt in the Kennedy and Tippit murders is phony), then NONE of these types of goofy anomalies would exist in the first place. Unless, as I mentioned, the plotters were, literally, ALL retarded.

Continuing on.....

And then the plotters also decided to frame Oswald by creating ADDITIONAL fake backyard photos, even though we know there were several other copies of the backyard photos that the plotters could not possibly have controlled that depicted THE EXACT SAME THING in the pictures (Oswald in the Neely St. yard holding guns) -- like the one found in George DeMohrenschildt's possession in 1977. Was that "planted" and "fake" too, Jimbo? And the picture that Marina and Marguerite destroyed in their hotel room shortly after the assassination. Was that one a fake picture of Oswald holding a rifle too?

And the retard plotters decided to frame Oswald by killing Kennedy FROM THE GRASSY KNOLL, per almost all CTers on the Internet. This is the silliest goof of all, of course. But conspiracy mongers want to believe those two things can realistically co-exist (the patsy frame-up AND a Grassy Knoll gunman), so the conspiracists decide to throw all common sense out the nearest window.

And on and on to retard infinity with these goofball frame-up idiots that people like DiEugenio think were out to get Oswald.

In short, Jimmy DiEugenio doesn't have a clue.

And the fact that DiEugenio is still a Jim Garrison supporter in this day and age only further supports my last sentence.

David Von Pein
March 25, 2011

(PART 64)



>>> "Davey Boy gets Von Peinian about the other issue: Well see, he made out the coupon in January but did not get around to mailing it until March. Sure, happens every day right? You date a coupon and then leave it there for 40 days." <<<


It's fairly obvious that Lee Harvey Oswald did, indeed, hang on to his Seaport coupon for about seven weeks or so before he mailed it....and the virtual proof is the Michaelis exhibit (shown below) which shows an invoice date of "3/13/63".

Does Jimbo DiEugenio think that Oswald would have mailed the coupon in late January, but then have Seaport Traders not write up the invoice until March 13th? That's nutty.*

Gary Mack inserted another very good theory in an e-mail he sent me this morning (March 24, 2011):


The simple answer to why Oswald delayed mailing his order for the revolver could be he didn't have the extra money at the time. So he kept the coupon until he did.


Gary's point is a good one. Oswald, of course, wasn't exactly rolling in dough at any time in his life. It's quite possible that the reason he waited to send in the revolver coupon is simply because he didn't have the ready cash until mid-March to pay for the weapons (both the revolver and the rifle).

Naturally, though, Mr. Anybody But Oswald (DiEugenio) will throw some more mud on the perfectly-reasonable comment about Oswald's finances that was offered up by Gary Mack this morning. But, such is the way with conspiracists like Jim -- they WANT Oswald to remain innocent. So, therefore, they'll try everything in the book to take BOTH guns out of Lee Harvey Oswald's hands.

* = Of course, what DiEugenio really believes (incredibly) is that ALL of the paperwork connected with BOTH the revolver sale and the rifle sale is fake, phony, and worthless. Which means, of course, that we're dealing with yet another one of the dozens of examples of DiEugenio's patsy-framers running around acting like morons and retards.

In this latest instance, if we're to believe that Oswald really DIDN'T wait approximately seven weeks to mail in his revolver order form, we'd have to believe that the silly plotters who were wanting to frame Oswald decided to fake Oswald's handprinting by putting a JANUARY 27 date on the order form for the revolver--but then the same conspirators or cover-up agents decided to date the invoice for that gun purchase with a MARCH 13 date.

Which will it be, Jimbo? Were your plotters totally retarded? Or is there another (less extraordinary) explanation--like, say, the one provided by me yesterday about Oswald waiting for several weeks to mail his order form and the additional reason provided by Gary Mack this morning about Oswald possibly waiting until he had the needed funds to pay for the guns he was ordering via mail-order?


I was recently re-watching the outstanding 1967 CBS special "A CBS News Inquiry: The Warren Report" (all 4 hours of which can be viewed HERE), and while watching Part 2 of the program, I realized that Parkland employee Darrell C. Tomlinson did a really interesting flip-flop in his story between the years 1964 and 1988.

In 1967, on CBS-TV, Tomlinson was absolutely positive that the bullet he found on 11/22/63 had come from a stretcher that he had taken off of the elevator.

But in 1988, during the PBS-TV program "Who Shot President Kennedy?", Tomlinson said that the bullet was positively found on a stretcher that he had NOT taken off of the elevator.

In his '67 CBS interview, when asked if he was certain that the bullet had come from a stretcher that had come off the elevator, Tomlinson said "well, I know that. That I know. I just don't know who was on that stretcher".

During his Warren Commission session in 1964, Tomlinson seemed to be stuck somewhere in-between his 1967 posture and his 1988 stance, with Tomlinson stating numerous times in '64 that he just was "not sure" which of the two stretchers in question he had taken off of the elevator.

David Von Pein
March 24, 2011

(PART 63)



My goodness, what a nice little diatribe by Jim DiEugenio above [top link].

What did I ever do to deserve such a devoted puppy-dog pal like DiEugenio?

The fact is, Jimbo, that I do indeed value the evidence in the JFK murder case (your last ranting-and-raving session notwithstanding).

I value the ACTUAL hard, physical evidence that proves (for all eternity) that
Lee Harvey Oswald was guilty of TWO murders, even though Oswald is a person whom you think was TOTALLY INNOCENT of committing EITHER of those murders. (Talk about laughable. To deny Oswald's involvement in President Kennedy's murder is ridiculous enough, but for conspiracy theorists to extend that denial to
Officer Tippit's slaying is beyond ridiculous--it's pathetic.)

So, yes, I value the REAL evidence in the case (things like the palmprints and the fingerprints and the bullet shells and the guns and the bullets and the fibers and the paper bag with Oswald's prints on it and the many eyewitnesses who fingered your prized patsy, plus Oswald's own highly-incriminating actions on both November 21st and November 22nd of 1963).

And if you think that by taking a trip to Dallas or New Orleans or Clinton/Jackson (to discuss Jim Garrison's sham of a case against Clay Shaw) is going to suddenly make me see "the light of conspiracy", I beg to differ. Thanks to the Internet, I can evaluate just about every piece of evidence in the whole case by staring at this computer screen.*

* = Unfortunately, Vince Bugliosi doesn't even realize that fact to this day, although I tried to get word to him on this subject of "massive Internet content being available on the JFK case" in the past. But my messages apparently never got through to him.

In short -- I disregard "evidence" conjured up by conspiracists that has no basis in fact -- e.g., your contention that Lee Oswald had NO LARGE BAG at all with him on the morning of 11/22/63. (Don't you ever even have the decency to blush when you spout such silly theories? Even if you're only on Black Op Radio saying the silly things about Randle and Frazier and Paine and Ford and Dulles, et al, I'd think you'd turn beet-red with embarrassment when such unsupportable hunks of junk escape your lips, like the stuff about Frazier and Randle just MAKING UP the paper bag.)

But, alas, you think you're doing a great service to the heroic "JFK research community" by saying the vile things you have said (in print and on Internet radio) about such people as future President Ford and Ruth Paine and Wes Frazier and Linnie Randle (and so many others whom you have dragged through the mud without a speck of evidence to support your imaginary theories about any of these individuals whom you have verbally abused).

Gil Jesus wants some CTer to sue me because I merely called them a "kook" at one time or another. But what I'd really like to see is a headline in the Dallas Morning News next month saying that Buell Wesley Frazier and Ruth Paine have joined forces in a defamation lawsuit against a big-mouth high-school teacher named James DiEugenio of Los Angeles, California. A headline like that would be worth more than three of my large "CIA Disinfo Agent" checks that I'm currently receiving each month from Langley.

>>> "You then have the gall or blindness to say that you are not political. When in fact the WC was probably the most politically oriented murder investigation in history. Run by four of the most arch conservative thugs in 20th century American history: Hoover, Dulles, McCloy and Ford." <<<

What was I just saying about DiEugenio's defaming remarks about certain people? Well, I see Jimbo just can't contain himself.

And, btw, what do your last sickening remarks have to do with MY OWN political beliefs?

Answer: Nothing.

The fact that the Warren Commission was composed of mainly politicians doesn't mean a thing to me. The EVIDENCE speaks for itself in the case that those politicians were assigned to investigate -- the JFK assassination.

Are you implying that because you believe that some of the WC members were, to repeat your vile phrase, "four of the most arch conservative thugs in 20th century American history", this therefore means that anyone who agrees with their "Oswald Did It Alone" conclusions about JFK's murder also falls into that same category ("arch conservative thugs")?

If that's not what you're implying, then please spell it out for me. After all, I'm just a dumb-as-a-stump lil' ol' Hoosier boy here (who has never known a "nice girl" in his life).

David Von Pein
March 16, 2011

(PART 27)


>>> "If only you had an extra non-Oswald bullet to rely on. Too bad." <<<


>>> "I've got extra bullets, Dave. Too bad for you. I have the windshield bullet, the curb bullet and the bullet that hit the sidewalk, plus the 3 for JFK and 2 for JBC." <<<


>>> "Hidden in your basement, huh?" <<<


>>> "Why would they be in my basement? I have a permit for my gun. They are near the gun safe." <<<


Lord H. God! I even need to talk Robby through my "basement" retort.

Well, I'm not going to. Let him figure it out (some month/year).


>>> "Where are they [all the extra bullets] indeed?" <<<


Oh, I can tell you, if you want to know. .... They're all in your

The overwhelming and huge preponderance of evidence indicates that
only 3 shots were fired on 11/22/63 in Dealey Plaza, with all 3 of
those bullets coming from Oswald's gun and from the TSBD's Sniper's

The 3 spent cartridges in that SN just about prove that fact beyond
reasonable doubt, when those shell casings are coupled with this stat
right here regarding the number of shots heard by the vast majority of

Robby, of course, has a big problem when trying to reconcile the above
chart's stats into his make-believe "8 or 9 shot" shooting scenario,
because it would mean that more than NINE OUT OF EVERY TEN
witnesses in the Plaza--incredibly--missed hearing up to TWO-THIRDS
of the shots that day (if a kook named Robby is correct).

Or would Rob like to now purport that all but the 3 TSBD/SN shots were
"silenced"? Well, if so, he's got more problems and contradictions in
his theory to iron out...because that would mean that Robby-boy (and
other CT-Kooks who believe these same crazy things) will have to now
disbelieve any and all witnesses who said they DID hear some shots
coming from the FRONT of President Kennedy's car.

And I doubt that any conspiracy kook would dare abandon great
witnesses like Jean Hill and Skinny "Smoky Knoll" Holland, etc.,
because those witnesses are part of a CT-Kook's general mosaic,
which forms the fabric for the standard CTer's dreamed-up multi-
shooter conspiracy that never happened.

So, feast your eyes on this chart once again, Rob. Maybe its
significance will one day sink in:



>>> "Too bad the pictures of the windshield frame, sidewalk and curb couldn't be done away with as easily as the brain and other bullet traces (save for some fragments from the brain and JBC's wrist)." <<<


Yeah, a few photos would be MUCH harder to dispose of than a WHOLE
BRAIN taken from a dead President's head, huh Mr. Kook? (Geez.)


>>> "Talk with your government, but in the meantime check out the sidewalk and windshield bullet photos, as these are two more shots not accounted for." <<<


I've already fully explained what the official position is (and mine)
concerning the windshield bullet (actually 2 fragments from Oswald's
head-shot bullet, which fully and logically explain both damaged limo
items, the windshield crack and the dent in the chrome molding).

Why have you decided to ignore that perfectly-reasonable explanation?
(Silly question, I know; it's because you're an "Anybody But Oswald"
Conspiracy Club member, of course. You HAVE to reject the wheat and
reach for the chaff.)


>>> "Check out "The Killing of a President" by Robert Groden. Open to p. 41 and you see a photo for the manhole cover/sidewalk where a bullet hit and was found moments after the shooting." <<<


And while you're looking at TKOAP by Bob Groden, be sure to check
out Pages 20 through 40, and take note of how Groden has the giant-
sized 'nads to purport that NO SHOTS likely came from Oz's SN window
at all.

He's got only ONE trajectory line drawn from the Oswald window during
his entire 8-to-10-shot shooting spree in Dealey, but even that ONE
bullet from the SN he really doesn't think belongs there. He says that
Shot #4 "more probably" came from the Dal-Tex instead of from the

Groden probably just put in the one token "possible" shot from the
Perch in the Depository) because he knew he might be laughed out of
the country if he didn't include just a LITTLE bit of truth in his
otherwise-tripe-filled narrative in TKOAP.

I will say, though, that TKOAP is probably my favorite conspiracy kookbook,
but only due to the good job Groden does with the photos themselves
(it's certainly not based on his always-skewed and misrepresented
interpretation of those pictures, however). But the pictures and films that
are presented in Groden's book, "The Killing Of A President", and his
DVDs are very good.

It's just too bad that all of the written words and Bob's narration
couldn't be excised from his book and video materials. That would
raise them to an A+ grade indeed.

BTW, the picture of the manhole cover on Page 41 of TKOAP does nothing
whatsoever to convince me that ANY bullet (or fragment thereof) struck
that manhole cover. I see absolutely NOTHING in that photo that could
be interpreted as a definitive mark resulting from a "bullet".

And there was most certainly NO BULLET picked up by anybody in Dealey
Plaza on 11/22/63. That's a CT Myth and nothing more. Buddy Walthers'
sheriff's report talks about the mark on the curb, but his report says
NOTHING about a bullet being recovered. Nothing. CTers have made that
story up. Period.

Anyway, the search is apparently over for the other bullets, since Rob
has admitted that he's got them near his "gun safe" in his house.
Please snap a few photos and post them here, Rob. The world's been
waiting to see those bullets for nearly 44 years.

BTW #2, also on Page 41 of TKOAP, Mr. Groden does a nice job of
totally misrepresenting what the Warren Commission said with respect
to the limousine's chrome damage, when Groden claims that the Warren
Commission "ignored" the dent in the chrome strip in the limousine,
which is a blatant lie.

Truth is, the Commission confronted the chrome damage head-on, both in
its Final Report (see the bottom of Page 77 of the WCR, linked HERE)
and via the testimony of the FBI's Robert Frazier, when the WC's Allen
Dulles had this verbal exchange with Frazier:

DULLES -- "...The indentation in the chrome around the
windshield....could that have been caused by a fragment of a bullet?"

FRAZIER -- "Yes, it very easily could have. It would not have been
caused, for instance, by a bullet which was traveling at its full
velocity from a rifle, but merely from a fragment traveling at fairly
high velocity which struck the inside surface of the chrome."

DULLES -- "Could that have been caused by any of the fragments that
you have identified as having been found on the front seat or near the
front seat of the car?"

FRAZIER -- "Yes. I believe it could have by either, in fact, of the
two fragments of rifle bullets found in the front seat."

David Von Pein
October 2007


(PART 26)


>>> "There were many better opportunities for a single assassin to attack. One is when JFK is on the truck platform at Ft. Worth giving a morning speech and the crowd is not far off; and secondly would have been at Love Field as JFK came right up to the crowd. Why do you suppose LHO would choose the hardest option, with the worst rifle known to modern man, when he could have gotten real close and shot him with a revolver? Makes no sense to sane people, only nutjobs like you." <<<


[--- huge laugh commences, as per usual after reading anything written by
a kook named Rob Caprio. ---]

LHO's one-man Book Depository assassination plan made perfect sense,
from every "LHO POV". You're just a kook who doesn't want Saint Oz to
be involved....so naturally you have to act like a total moron and
pretend that LHO should have performed the deed in a different manner.

But, Lee Oswald didn't travel to Love Field or Fort Worth to shoot the
President UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL with his Smith & Wesson .38-caliber
revolver because:

1.) Lee Oswald couldn't drive.

2.) He had no car even if he could drive.

3.) It's doubtful that he'd be willing to ask Wes Frazier for a ride
to the airport or for a ride to Fort Worth so that he could shoot the
President. I doubt if Lee wanted to ask Frazier for the following

"Hey, Wesley, can I get a lift to Love Field this morning? I know we'll already be at work by the time JFK arrives at the airport at around 11:40 AM, and we'll already be at work by the time JFK gives his pre-Chamber of Commerce parking-lot speech in Fort Worth at about 8:30 AM too....but why don't we skip work and go see the President so I can get a better shot at him? You don't mind, do you Wes? And if you wouldn't mind, can I also get a ride away from the murder scene too, after I kill the President (either at the airport or in Fort Worth)? Come on, Wes, be a good sport and help me out so I won't have to use a bus as a getaway vehicle."

4.) Oswald knew he would have a BUILT-IN INITIAL ALIBI after shooting
the President from the Book Depository, because he WORKED THERE and
could be cleared as just another of the building's many regular workers
(which he was, by Roy Truly at about 12:32 PM, just two minutes after
Oswald shot Kennedy).

Therefore, why would LHO go looking for alternate shooting
opportunities and locations when President Kennedy was going to be
COMING TO OSWALD at noontime on November 22nd?

And the biggie:

5.) Oswald wasn't suicidal. He was a murderer with a lousy getaway
plan, yes. But he wasn't suicidal. He proved that multiple times after
12:30 PM on November 22.

Therefore, shooting JFK while secreted (to a large degree) in his
Sniper's Nest on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository
(a place where nobody would be suspicious of him in the slightest way
prior to the assassination attempt at 12:30...and nobody WAS
suspicious in any way whatsoever) was the perfect choice for the
24-year-old ex-Marine sharpshooter who happened to have at his
disposal (thanks to that unusual Thursday-night visit to the Paine
house in Irving) a rifle that was more than capable enough to fire a
lethal bullet into the body of a person who was less than 100 yards
away from the muzzle of that rifle.

But travelling to Fort Worth or the airport to kill Kennedy (two places
where Oswald WASN'T EMPLOYED and therefore couldn't use the
perfect "I Work Here" initial alibi) would have been much riskier, and
probably would have been a suicide mission had he chosen either of
those locations to shoot JFK out in the open (and with a handgun!).*

* = Or, alternately, was Oz supposed to manage to hide himself inside
the Texas Hotel someplace after he carried his Carcano rifle inside
the hotel, which was crawling with Secret Service men and police
officers that morning? Or was he supposed to go into another nearby
building in Fort Worth (or at Love Field) to pull off his murderous

Ask yourself: WHY would he take such chances when he already had at
(the very building he worked in every day since mid-October -- the TSBD)?

>>> "I don't think professional assassins worry about that part [framing the "patsy"] much. They do their job and make a getaway. .... They left the framing of LHO and cover-up to the people who hired them. Boy Davy, you are naive." <<<

And when given the choice of "Conspiracy Kook" vs. "naive", I'll choose
"naive" every time, thanks.

BTW, can you tell me how many "Multi-Shooter" assassination plots have
EVER been pinned on "Solo Patsies" in the past? Just how many times
has that neat little trick been pulled off (and provably so)? Just curious.

Surely you can name at least ONE other occasion when a batch of brain-
dead plotters shot up a victim with many different guns and then tried
to pin the whole nine yards on some schnook who never even fired a
shot. Can't you? (That probably happens every day of the week, right
Mr. Kook?)

>>> "Close to 90% of Americans don't believe he [Saint Oswaldovich] was involved or did it alone." <<<

The percentage isn't nearly that high. You've probably been reading
too much of Ben Holmes' kookshit regarding the "conspiracy" percentiles.

The latest polls that I've seen (from November 2003) indicate that 83%
of those polled believe that Oswald WAS INVOLVED AS A SHOOTER IN

Only 7% (via the ABC poll in question, linked below, which included a
total of 1,031 respondents) think Oswald was "Not Involved" at all.
Only 70%, not 90%, think there was a conspiracy surrounding John F.
Kennedy's death (per that ABC poll from 2003).

And another separate question within that same ABC poll (a question
specifically about who was firing the gun/guns at JFK on 11/22/63)
reveals that only 58% of those with an opinion on the matter believe
that there was a gunman in Dealey Plaza besides Lee Harvey Oswald:

http://PollingReport.com/Kennedy Assassination

>>> "Only you delusional 10% nutjobs believe the official garbage." <<<

Actually, the correct figure (as of this writing) is approximately 19%.
That is to say, about 19% of Americans believe that the Warren
Commission got it right:


One Man -- 19%
Others Involved -- 75%
No Opinion -- 6%

>>> "LHO didn't hit anyone....all data regarding the "hits" comes from the government." <<<

And the evil "Government" should always be looked at sideways and
should always be considered the enemy, right? For, there's no possible
way they would ever tell the truth about a murdered Chief Executive,

Of course, the BULLETS in evidence and the LACK of non-Oswald bullets
in evidence are also telling a reasonable person a good deal about the
shooting too. Plus, there are the WOUNDS on the two victims and the
wound locations, which generally line up to produce an amazing "SBT"-
like pattern.

And if those wounds had been caused by more than one bullet, it's a
truly incredible coincidence, a coincidence that CTers embrace to
their bosoms without batting an eye....even though OTHER
"coincidences" are totally impossible to believe (per some members of
the CT-Kook Brigade).


Oswald getting hired in a building along the motorcade route;
and a guy named Lovelady coincidentally also working in the same
building with Mr. Oswald in November of 1963.

In truth, the "Government" went where the evidence led them....and
that was to Lee Oswald and Lee Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle.

There's not a shred of ballistics evidence that undermines the
immutable fact that ONLY Oswald's rifle was involved in the
assassination. Kooks attempt to undermine the "LHO Did It Alone"
conclusion. But since when do the unsupportable opinions of rabid
conspiracy nuts really matter very much when weighed against the
actual ballistics evidence in the case?

>>> "The other bullet no LNer ever wants to address is the windshield frame one. Which one hit the windshield frame below the rearview mirror if all the other 3 are accounted for?" <<<

How can you possibly not know the answer to this question?

A separate shot/bullet isn't required to account for the windshield/
chrome damage at all. One of the two front-seat fragments from
Oswald's gun (via the fatal shot to JFK's head) almost certainly
caused the chrome damage; while the other front-seat fragment almost
certainly caused the windshield crack and lead smear on the inside of
the windshield.

Everything aligns perfectly from the LN/LHO/Windshield perspective
too....i.e., TWO damaged areas to the front portion of the limousine
(the chrome dent and the windshield crack with lead residue deposited
on the inside of the glass), which perfectly match the number of
bullet fragments (two) from Oswald's rifle that were found in the
front seat of the limo.

Via Robert Frazier's Warren Commission testimony:

ALLEN DULLES -- "I wonder if I could go back just a moment to the
indentation in the chrome around the windshield at the top of the
windshield, but on the inside, could that have been caused by a
fragment of a bullet?"

ROBERT A. FRAZIER -- "Yes, it very easily could have. It would not
have been caused, for instance, by a bullet which was traveling at its
full velocity from a rifle, but merely from a fragment traveling at
fairly high velocity which struck the inside surface of the chrome."

MR. DULLES -- "Could that have been caused by any of the fragments
that you have identified as having been found on the front seat or
near the front seat of the car?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes. I believe it could have by either, in fact, of
the two fragments of rifle bullets found in the front seat."





>>> "You're using faulty data." <<<

I'm using the data that is agreed upon by every official agency
which has investigated JFK's murder.

Naturally, you kooks think it's incumbent upon you to merely ignore
everything "official". After all, you've got shadows to chase and
extra killers to give guns to. And there's nothing "faulty" about
shadow-chasing, right?

>>> "JFK was hit 3 times..." <<<

Which must be why 17 different pathologists who have examined either
the actual body of President Kennedy or the photos, X-rays, and
associated evidence connected with the President's murder said that
JFK was hit by just TWO bullets (with both of those bullets coming
from above and behind the President when he was shot).

But, being a kook who likes to make up his own evidence (while
ignoring 17 respected pathologists as you sprint toward the Kook Goal
Line), you want to think that JFK was hit "3 times". Go figure.

>>> "Connally [was hit] 2 times..." <<<

You can't get anything right, can you? Not even this easy one.

Governor Connally was positively hit by just one single bullet...and
that bullet was positively CE399. No other conclusion is even
remotely possible, given the evidence that's on the table. (Naturally,
you, being a kook, MUST think this evidence is "fake". Go figure.)

Of course, by saying JFK was hit three times and JBC twice, you really
only manage to increase the absurdity of any anti-SBT scenario to
laughable levels of improbability and impossibility.

Because you'll now need FOUR SEPARATE BULLETS to do what CE399 is said
to have done....with ALL of these bullets either totally disappearing
from view immediately after the shooting, or having at least one of
them (399) moved from JFK's stretcher to Connally's (while the other
THREE completely vanish into a puff of smoke).

Yeah, that's WAY more believable than my fairy-tale belief in the SBT,
isn't it?

And yet I'M supposed to be the "naive" one, folks. Ain't that a hoot?!

>>> "1 [bullet] hit the windshield frame..." <<<

That was a fragment from the head shot (of course), as any non-idiot
could easily figure out. There's no way that a bullet travelling at
full velocity hit that chrome strip (molding)....or the non-bulletproof
windshield glass either.

Bob Frazier testified that a bullet moving at full speed would have
most likely gone clean through the chrome and would definitely have
gone through the windshield easily at such a velocity. Obviously,
therefore, the fragments that hit those things in the car were
severely slowed down before hitting them.

>>> "1 [bullet] hit the curb near Tague..." <<<

You finally got one right. Good going.

>>> "And one or two more [bullets] hit the street and curbs." <<<

I thought you said these gunmen were "professionals" all the way. LOL.
Some great "pros" these blind-as-a-bat assassins were, huh? They
totally miss the huge Presidential stretch limo up to THREE times!

Care to change your mind about the killers being in the "professional"
ranks? Or do you think they were all blindfolded on November 22, just
to make the assassination a little more challenging?

In any event, your extra one or two missed shots are nothing but pure
CT wishful-thinking, of course. There was only one "missed" shot (the
Tague shot; which was shot #1 from Oswald's MC rifle). There certainly
weren't an additional TWO missed shots, plus the Tague bullet.

>>> "That is 8 or 9 shots in my book." <<<

Gee, get with the program, Rob-Kook! Even Bob Groden's got TEN shots
being fired. Surely you can go one or two better than him, can't you?

(And you call yourself a decent CTer. Meh.)

>>> "Try reading some up-to-date research that isn't based on
1964 data." <<<

Oh, you mean I should place my trust and faith in people like John
Armstrong (the "Double Oswald" crackpot) and Joan Mellen (who decided,
in 2005, it was time to resurrect the already-moribund silliness
spouted by Jim Garrison) and maybe Robert Groden (who believes that
it's likely that ZERO gunshots came from Oswald's SN window)?

Or did you have some other CT-Kook authors in mind besides the trio
listed above?

Anyway, I'm sure you find comfort in reading pretty much anything that
attempts to bash the still-erect WC, correct?

In other words, CTer guesswork is always much better than the hard
evidence dealt with by the DPD, FBI, and WC. Right?

Well, no thanks. I'll stay in 1964. And you can have the conspiracy
authors and all of the unsupportable nonsense that goes with them.

>>> "Do you know anything about Lovelady?" <<<

I know he died more than 21 years ago. And I know he worked in the
TSBD with double-murderer Lee Oswald for about five weeks in late
1963. And I know he resembled LHO. And I know I have no reason under
the sun to suspect Billy Nolan Lovelady of being involved in some kind
of plot to kill JFK.

Now....what do you know about Mr. Lovelady?

>>> "The CTers are the ones that have had to spend their own money and time to investigate on their own." <<<

And how many killers and non-Oswald bullets have been uncovered as a
result of all that "investigating" that's been performed by those many
conspiracy theorists over the last 40+ years?

You'd think that some CTer would have found proof by now of at least
ONE non-C2766 bullet being involved in this supposedly-MULTI-GUN

And you'd think that after all that time SOME theorist (somewhere on
Earth) would have come up with just ONE non-Oswald killer being
provably involved in the assassination too.

But every "confession" by a so-called JFK assassin turns into a
situation comedy. Like the "Three Tramps". Or Jimmy Files. .....

"Perhaps the most famous of the "other" assassins are the "three tramps". The fact that there never was any evidence at all of their guilt is irrelevant to the conspiracy theorists. To the buffs, there was one big piece of incriminating evidence against the tramps: THEY WEREN'T LEE HARVEY OSWALD! And in the balmy and unhinged conspiracy universe, no evidence of guilt is stronger against someone than that he isn't Lee Harvey Oswald." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Page 929 of "Reclaiming History" (c.2007)


"Another alleged assassin is James E. Files, the Rodney Dangerfield of Kennedy assassins. .... Files has fallen on such hard times that few buffs will even talk to him. However, a few promoters and publicity seekers have tried to exploit Files's pathetic story." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Page 917 of "Reclaiming History" (c.2007)

>>> "I don't think LHO ever said he was in the door. He may have not thought of it or maybe he wasn't." <<<

He may have "NOT THOUGHT OF IT"??

Via the viewpoint of Oswald possibly actually BEING "Mr. Doorway Man"
(which you seem to have implied in your previous posts), that's a very
strange thing to say. That is: Oswald wouldn't have THOUGHT to give the
cops his provable, ironclad alibi for the time when JFK was being shot?

Oswald was quick enough, however, to make up a lie re his "alibi" (his
lie about having lunch with "Junior")....but he wouldn't actually say where
he REALLY WAS at 12:30??? How nutty is that??

Back here in reality, however -- If Lee Harvey Oswald had been in that
Depository doorway at 12:30, he would certainly have SAID SO after his
arrest. But he said NOT A WORD to the police about being outside on
the TSBD steps when JFK was in the process of being murdered on Elm

Nor did Oswald say a word about being in the Book Depository
entranceway to the LIVE TELEVISION AUDIENCE EITHER, which he had ample
opportunities to do, what with the cameras and microphones being
shoved in his face several times as LHO was being paraded through the
DPD corridors on both November 22 and November 23.

In point of fact, Oswald actually admitted to the reporters (and thusly
to the live TV audience) that he was INSIDE THE BUILDING at the time
Kennedy was being shot.

A reporter asked him:

"Were you in the building?"

Oswald answered (somewhat sarcastically, after having just told the
same reporters, "I work in that building"):

"Naturally, if I work in that building, yes sir."

>>> "Can't we use facial recognition software to determine this [the identity of "Doorway Man"]?" <<<

Mr. Lovelady's admission that it was him in the doorway isn't NEARLY
good enough for a skeptic like you....is it, Robert?

And what about the testimony of Buell Wesley Frazier and William
Shelley (both of whom said they saw Lovelady outside the building,
near the front entrance, at the time of the shooting)?

Lovelady, Frazier, and Shelley are ALL to be disbelieved, is that

It's going to take "facial recognition" computer software to convince
Robert C. of the truth about Doorway Man, right?

>>> "I stick to all the facts of this case and that includes all the new ones found since 1964, that is the year you are stuck in." <<<

Yeah, you stick to such "facts" as: 4 assassins/spotters on the sixth
floor of the TSBD at 12:30 on November 22. (A "fact" with ZERO pieces
of credible/provable evidence to support it.)

And "facts" like "LHO shot no one" (not even Officer Tippit, a murder
which has a DOZEN witnesses fingering Oswald as the killer or the ONE
AND ONLY man who ran from the scene with a gun in his hands).

It's crazy "facts" like yours that make me so glad to be residing on
the side of (LN) truth in this case. Because you and your "CT Facts"
are merely imaginary (and pathetic) ones.

As my very able LN cohort, Bud, has said so many times in the past
(and now is a good time to repeat it) -- You conspiracy-loving kooks
are the very LAST people on the face of this globe who should be
looking into the assassination of the 35th U.S. President.

David Von Pein
October 2007


(PART 25)


>>> "I think there were probably two teams of two men in the west and east windows. One spotter and one shooter per team." <<<


There's nothing better than making stuff up incessantly, with zero shreds of evidence to support your wishful-thinking, is there Robby [Caprio The Kook]?

FOUR assassins (strangers to all TSBD employees, I would assume) all manage to sneak IN and OUT of the Depository without being seen going IN or coming OUT.

Not a single employee of the TSBD saw any strangers on the upper floors on 11/22/63. And I think only one "stranger" was seen on the first floor all day by any employees, and he was seen leaving the building well before the assassination.

I guess that quartet of killers either ALL looked exactly like Lee Oswald (and MERGED into one "Oswald Entity" on 11/22), or those 4 guys just lucked out when they cloaked themselves and escaped a semi-busy building on a workday (Friday) sight unseen.

>>> "This is how professionals do it and everything about that killing was professional. No amateur like LHO could do it." <<<

It's interesting to me that many of you kooks think that JFK's murder could have ONLY been pulled off by "professionals", and yet WHO IS IT THAT THESE "PROS" ARE ATTEMPTING TO FRAME? Yes, a NON-professional named Lee Harvey Oswald....the same Lee Harvey Oswald who was (per you kooks) a piss-poor shooter and who was unable to hit the broad side of the broadest barn in Texas.

So, I guess the "pro" plotters/assassins must not have counted on sleuths like you CT-Kooks who keep spouting "Oswald Couldn't Have Done It On His Own", huh?

Otherwise, those real killers would have a bit of a problem, don't you think? That is, trying to frame this Barney Fife-like boob named Oswald as a lone shooter, while doing so in a way that couldn't possibly (per you kooks) have been pulled off by just that solo patsy.

But, when we return to a thing called "Reality" and "The Evidence In The Case", a reasonable person doesn't have the slightest bit of trouble believing that Lee Oswald could have pulled off the non-difficult shooting that LHO did, in fact, pull off in Dallas (per ALL of the physical/ballistics evidence in the case).

Oswald only hit the target (JFK's head) with 33% of his shots that day; and he totally missed the target (and the whole car) with another 33% of his shots.

Some "professional" hit there.

>>> "Thanks for the info [re: Billy Lovelady's Dec. 1961 date of hire at the TSBD]. That means we have a look-alike already there." <<<

No prob. Like I told you previously, I occasionally specialize in making stuff easier to find for super-lazy and clueless nuts like yourself.

But, of course, if you suspect Billy N. Lovelady of being part of the "Let's Frame Oswald" plot, then you should be asking yourself this: Should I believe Lovelady's December 1961 hiring date that he gave the Warren Commission?

If he lied about being in the doorway...don't you think he'd be willing to lie about other stuff too?

Rob, you are so "all over the map" in almost every post you make, it's pathetic. No wonder it's hard to follow your fairy tales from one day to the next.

Was Orson Welles up on the 6th Floor too? How about Frank Sinatra? Remember, Sinatra shot at a President in the 1954 movie "Suddenly", a film Lee Oswald watched shortly before November 22nd.

Rob's daily Fable Sessions are rather entertaining, though. I just wonder how many more days will pass until he has J.D. Tippit firing a rifle at President Kennedy from the Grassy Knoll. (I'll give him another week....tops.)

David Von Pein
October 2007


(PART 24)



>>> "OK, let's go real SLOW. Find a picture showing the back of the President's head. Show me a hole in the scalp on the back of his head. You never have and you never will, because there was none." <<<


>>> "Too wacky a theory for me to dignify by arguing any more with you about it. Bye." <<<


Like many CTers, Mr. Marsh refuses to believe what the photo below is
telling everyone who gazes an eye upon it (i.e., there's an obvious
bullet entry hole in the upper portion of JFK's head, near the cowlick
area, plus NO DAMAGE WHATSOEVER to any other REAR/OCCIPITAL portion of
JFK's cranium; not even a hint of scalp damage, other than that small
bullet hole of entrance near the cowlick):

Tony, therefore, must think that JFK was hit in the head from the
front....and yet there's not a hint of damage to the back of Kennedy's
head in any of the photos or X-rays. (Except that small bullet hole of

Therefore, per CTers like Anthony Marsh, the bullet that was used by the
imaginary frontal gunman to kill John Kennedy somehow managed to NOT
rip a hole through the REAR or LEFT-REAR scalp of JFK's head...and
also (somehow, some incredible zig-zagging way) managed to NOT rip a
hole in ANY PART of the left side of JFK's head either:

Incredibly and unbelievably (per many conspiracy theorists), that
bullet from the alleged frontal (Knoll?) shooter didn't cause any
damage of any kind to the left side of Kennedy's head.

Nor did that bullet leave a single solitary metal fragment in the left
hemisphere of John Kennedy's head, even though (per most CTers) the
bullet was fired from the Grassy Knoll and was on a definite "RIGHT
when it hit President Kennedy's cranium at or very near Zapruder
Frame #313.

Talk about a Magic Bullet. It seems to me that Tony (and many, many
other CTers who believe such conspiracy-flavored tripe) have had the
real "Magic" bullet all along.

Funny that nobody seems to have noticed. Or maybe the CTers just don't
care about that seemingly-very-odd lack of damage to both the left
side of Kennedy's head AND the back of Kennedy's head in the autopsy
photographs and X-rays.

Or: maybe all of the photos and X-rays are total frauds/fakes (despite
what those dozen or so HSCA "experts" said about the pictures and
X-rays being unaltered in any manner whatsoever).

But that's what is so terribly nice about being a conspiracy theorist,
isn't it? You can just start spitting out theories and fall back on
CTer Rule #4A: "If All Else Fails, Just Say That Something Is Fake".

LNers, thankfully, don't have such freedom with the evidence.

And therein lies one of the major differences between a "CT" mindset
and the "LN" mindset -- not every single thing has to be "suspicious"
or "phony" to a lone-assassin believer in order to arrive at the truth.

David Von Pein
October 2007