JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS
(PART 430)


ON JANUARY 22, 2009, JOHN SIMKIN SAID:

A researcher has asked for information on David Von Pein.


PAM BROWN SAID:

Why doesn't the researcher go to alt.assassination.jfk and ask him directly?


DAVID HEALY SAID:

Every chance Lone Nut-Wing Nut Von Pein gets to promote Vinnie Bugliosi's tome Reclaiming History, Von Pein blathers on.

His foolishness, and his minions, can be found on alt.conspiracy.jfk too! DVP never announced at any public function that he is indeed David Von Pein. Never participated in a public JFK assassination forum, seminar, symposium, anniversary and/or function as David Von Pein.

Some speculate David Von Pein and David Reitzes are one in the same, as was recently discussed on Black Op Radio with Jim DeEugenio [sic].

Frankly I'm surprised anyone cares who the hell he is, or what he does.

[...]

Von Pein is nothing more than a glorified copy & paste artist with zilch to offer.

[...]

No one that I know of has met or even seen a David Von Pein at any public JFK assassination function, with ANY of the big names within the research community.


BILL MILLER SAID:

I am not a fan of Von Pein at all. I believe him to be a troll. But in his defense, a big name to you (David [Healy]) is one that has more than three letters in it, so what was your point?


PAM BROWN SAID:

Has anyone met DVP? Has anyone met Reitzes? Is the question of whether he is an actual person or a persona the reason the question is being asked here?


MARK KNIGHT SAID:

I'm curious to find out who Von Pein actually is [I'm assuming it's a nom de plume], and I don't need another thread to ignore because of the juvenile squabbling.


WILLIAM KELLY SAID:

Yea, even though he's a nitwit, there's no need to be insulting him by implying he's one and the same as David Reitzes, as I can attest they are two different nitwits who don't have the gonads to sign on here and talk honestly about the assassination of President Kennedy.

And indeed, instead of rising above mere debunkers and generating new and useful knowledge and research, they decided they liked being nitwit schmucks and distractions. They could have been contenders though...if they only had the gonads.


CLIFF VARNELL SAID:

Indeed. In my experience, the Peinster [that'd be me--DVP ] always puts up a fight no matter how lame and fact-free it is. [Varnell is nuts, of course.]

Dave Reitzes always curls into a ball and never engages the discussion. "That's my opinion, Cliff" -- is as far as he ever got in rebuttal with me.

Two different clowns. Same circus.


PAT SPEER SAID:

I am also curious about Von Pein's identity, and suspect he's somebody else. Most LN's are more than happy to tell you their qualifications. Not so Von Pein, who won't even post a picture of himself.

That said, I don't consider him a total troll. He's posted a lot of early news footage on his Youtube channel; these are definitely worth looking at. He's also posted links to interviews with his hero, Bugliosi, which prove that Bugliosi was working pretty much from a script, repeating the same lines from city to city, much as a stand-up comedian. Call VB the anti-Bill Hicks.


BILL MILLER SAID:

I would also like to know who the guy is because he is one of the most biased people I have ever seen post and no one, not even Oswald, was always right or wrong. Pein [sic] seemed bent on propaganda.


KATHY BECKET SAID:

I do not know David von Pein [sic], but I have emailed Dave Reitzes a few times, and always found him to be a very polite and sincere person. While I do not agree with alot of what he says, the level of discussion is always done with great respect.

I have read that he is not interested in joining this forum, because he believes all that will occur from his posting will be alot of namecalling, and to tell you the truth, he is probably right.

Shame.


WILLIAM KELLY SAID:

There is a point when David von Pein [sic] and Dave Reitzes reached where they could have become legitimate independent researchers and knowing the basic background of the case, forged new information, unearthed new documents, find a fresh witness, and expanded our knowledge of the assassination. Instead they decided to become debunkers and one of Prof. Rahn's coincidentalists.


J. WILLIAM KING SAID:

The one place I've found Mr. von Pein [sic] 24/7 is the Internet Movie Database (IMDB) on the Oliver Stone movie "JFK". He and his cronies are on there all day, all night blasting anyone who even asks the most innocent question.

Some on there say he and about 6 others are all the same person. The all agree with each other that anyone who questions the official version is obviously nuts. He posts there under "DVP-1" and probably other names as well, such as "NickSlickReturns".

I know the JFK movie discussion board on the IMDB isn't for serious researchers, but I worry about younger people who's [sic] first exposure to the assassination discussion is that board, and they end up falling right into his (and others) lone nutter grasp.

[DVP INTERJECTION --- Oh, those poor, poor youngsters who are unfortunate enough to fall into my evil "lone nutter grasp". ]


PAM BROWN SAID:

"DVP" is just chock full of excuses for not providing any information that can be verified. There seems to be an agenda. Unfortunate, as he appears to have a bit of a following who might appreciate more concrete interactions with him, such as talking by phone or even actually meeting in person. However, this is not likely to happen as he is too busy trying to stay on the tightrope he has created.


GIL JESUS SAID:

This guy is never seen publicly.

He won't post a picture of himself or any bio info.

Sounds like an alias for someone we would all recognize.


ANTTI HYNONEN SAID:

David R. Vonpein [sic]

Mooresville, IN


PETER FOKES SAID:

Hi Antti,

Yes. It was a simple matter to find this name on the White Pages. I asked DVP last night on alt.assassination.jfk (before your post) whether he had ever been to Mooresville. :-)

But DVP hasn't been hiding that location. It is included in many of his Amazon reviews. Just do a search.


DAVE REITZES SAID:

Pam [Brown] & friends gossip about me & DVP:

http://EducationForum.com


J.G. LEYDEN SAID:

Well, they spelled your name right, Dave. What more can you ask for? Of course, they also suggest you're David Von Pein, which can't be good news because it would double your work load. Gotta love these people. I'll bet they check under their beds every night and are disappointed when they don't find a CIA or FBI agent there.


JOHN McADAMS SAID:

What a bunch of wackos!


PAM BROWN SAID:

Typical McAdams. Ignore the context and make a blanket accusation.

The question about whether DVP was Reitzes was raised because it was discussed on Black Op Radio. It was asked as a question. Nobody has met DVP. So far, his identity is unverified.

Since McAdams is so big on documentation lately, why not provide some documentation for who this person actually is, and give us info on what contact McAdams has had with him? Where does DVP live? Who has actually met him? That would have some value; knee-jerk sputterings do not.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

You stole my whole response, John ["What a bunch of wackos!"]. Now I don't need to post it. :)

BTW, I'm also supposed to be an LNer named Steve Keating (per one of those "wackos").

Three...three...three mints (er...LNers) in one! (Remember that commercial?)


WHISKY JOE SAID:

There are three levels of Conspiracy Theory researchers.

The highest level tries to tie the assassination to the CIA or Mafia or the KGB.

The second level tries to tie in the Judyth Baker story.

And the third level tries to prove that Dave Reitzes and David Von Pein are really the same person with ties to the CIA.

To be fair, Von Pein does sound like the name of someone who used to work for the East German Security and Intelligence Service.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Well, it's the name I was born with on Wednesday, 12/27/61 (while JFK was serving as President, btw). So, I guess I'm stuck with it--German Intel Service jokes and all. ;)

I considered changing my name to "Vincent Moore Posnerelli", but I figured that such a moniker would be too "obvious".


PETER FOKES SAID:

So Dick Van Dyke was already on TV when you were born?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Yep. That CBS-TV program was, indeed, on the air at that time. It debuted 2+ months before I was hatched. :)

BTW -- For trivia buffs, the premiere episode of "The Dick Van Dyke Show" was filmed on the same day JFK was inaugurated (1/20/61).

http://Dick-Van-Dyke-Show.blogspot.com


WHISKY JOE SAID:

I predict that in the coming year some good progress will be made in the "Grand Unification Theory" that proves that Reitzes, Von Pein, Myers and McAdams are really the same person.

Note, to be fair, Pam [Brown] does not seem to buy into the theory that Reitzes and Von Pein are the same person.


ANTHONY MARSH SAID:

The fourth level [of Conspiracy Theory researchers] tries to prove that Whisky Joe is the new alias of Brandy Alexander. Notice how the WC defenders love to use aliases? They are to embarrassed to use their real names.


DAVE REITZES SAID:

Bob Harris thinks I'm at least two people. Someone at the Nuthouse [aka alt.conspiracy.jfk] once asked him if I and a certain LNer who used to post here were the same person. He responded, "I don't know if [name deleted] is posting through that account or not, but I have no doubt whatsoever that people of widely varying writing skills are. The long-winded stuff is definitely coming from a pro. If that is the David Reitzes we all know and love, then I would expect that he is published somewhere. But the guy who writes most of the day-to-day stuff is nowhere near that level."

He's accused me of some other interesting things (including a novel claim about how three well known JFK researchers and I spend the holiday season), but I don't want to tax the moderators' patience too much. \:^)


PAM BROWN AND DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

JFK Assassination Arguments (Part 429)


PAM BROWN SAID:

Are you refusing to acknowledge that there are some people who are wondering if you are an actual person or a persona?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Huh?

Of COURSE I "acknowledge" the fact that some people (all CTers, naturally) think that I'm posing as several different individuals on the Internet. It's fairly obvious that some CTers have jumped to that wholly unwarranted conclusion.

But do I need to officially "acknowledge" those suspicions from atop an orange crate in the middle of Town Square or something?


PAM BROWN SAID:

Don't you want to clear that up fast?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Actually, no. I love watching conspiracy theorists make fools out of themselves on a daily basis. And this issue of "DVP aliases" has been extremely entertaining from my end of the computer. I hope it continues. I enjoy it immensely. It's especially enjoyable since I know every one of those conspiracy theorists is 100% wrong.

So, no, I have no real desire to "clear that up" anytime soon. If the silly CTers who think I'm really several other people want to think that....let them. Heck, a CTer or two in the past actually alleged that I was Vincent Bugliosi in disguise. And what's not to like about that?!

There's probably nothing I could do to make those people stop believing that fantasy anyway. After all, most of those same CTers actually think that a THREE-BULLET substitute for the Single-Bullet Theory is a MORE REASONABLE and accurate explanation for the wounding of JFK and John Connally than is the SBT.

So, as you can see, that's the type of conspiratorial mentality I'm up against here. And who can fight imagination? It almost always trumps reality in a conspiracist's world.


PAM BROWN SAID:

You have managed to continue to be evasive.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:



Yeah, I've been "evasive" by forthrightly answering every single question that was asked of me.

See what I mean? I can't win even when I answer everything that's put to me. I love it!


PAM BROWN SAID:

So far, you have not presented any documentation to the fact that you are not an alias.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Another one of these needs to go here (for sure) --->

And just exactly what kind of "documentation" do you (or anyone) possess to show that the "He's Using Multiple Aliases" and "DVP Is Reitzes" rumors are correct? Anything at all?

IOW -- Is the burden of proof on ME here? Or should it be on the ill-informed people who make the accusations?

I guess nothing short of a birth certificate will suffice here, huh?

Oops. No, that won't be good enough either. Because somebody could say that all I did was swipe this guy's birth certificate.




DAVE REITZES SAID:

There are now TWO threads about DVP at the Simkin forum [The Education Forum].

Not bad for someone who doesn't even exist.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

That other Education Forum thread was started by Tom "I Can't Say It Here At AAJ Because The Post Will Certainly Be Rejected If I Call Him This Name" Purvis back in September '08.


BRENDAN SLATTERY SAID:

Crackpot Simkin and his flying monkeys really do give Nixon a run for his money in the paranoia department. During my brief stay there, the locals were *obsessed* with my listed occupation, demanding to know more about my work. More than a few suggested that I might be a government "plant."

Thank God I didn't submit my real photo (they had no right to that anyway; that goes double for my real name). The vast majority of them are unhinged, Bush-hating leftists who bewailed things like FISA and the Patriot Act to no end, yet didn't think twice about compromising MY privacy. A pox on all of them.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Here's a little something that indicates that certain people at The Education Forum can't even follow the progression of a simple forum thread, and are unable to identify the people who are making the posts. (It's either that explanation, or Bill Kelly just simply cannot read....or he thinks that Mr. Slattery [aka "slats"] is another one of the many fake names I'm supposed to be using on the Internet, per the conspiracists.)

William Kelly of The Education Forum said this in the post linked below:

"Apparently Von Pein is not his real name and he's so afraid of the truth he won't post a picture of himself, so he's disqualified on two points. He's concerned about his "privacy"? He calls Simkin a crackpot and me a flying monkey but doesn't have the balls to join the debate?" -- William Kelly; February 1, 2009

Kelly (as well as Pat Speer) seem to think that I wrote this post.

Somebody should teach William Kelly how to read forum posts. Because it's quite obvious that the post which Kelly/Speer credit as being mine was written by "slats", who used to post common-sense stuff at The Edu. Forum, which is why the kooks hated his guts there too.

Another interesting (and deceptive) thing that Kelly did in the above Education Forum post was to add in the web address to my JFK Blog at the bottom of that message. Kelly added that weblink HIMSELF. Because that link does not appear in either my original post to which "slats" was responding or in the post "slats" made.

Seems to me as though Mr. Kelly is trying to pull the wool over somebody's eyes there at the Edu. Forum by ADDING IN something that never appeared in the aaj posts he was quoting from, making it look as if I (DVP), myself, had "signed" that post with my blog address. That's pretty darn deceptive, IMO.

Anyway, maybe I should thank Mr. Kelly for the free advertising, since I have no way of posting a link to my JFK Blog on that Edu. Forum myself. [As of early 2009, that is. But since that time, I have rejoined The Education Forum as an active member.]

BTW/FYI:

I did not refuse to post a picture of myself during my short-lived stay at The Education Forum in July of 2006. I told Mr. Simkin that I did not have any picture to post (which was the absolute truth; I had none at all available). [I did, however, find a very tiny picture to use as my Profile photo when I rejoined that forum in August of 2010.]

I was in the process of trying to work out some kind of a compromise regarding my adhering to the Forum rule about all members putting a picture in their profiles (even though, as I pointed out to Mr. Simkin at that time in 2006, there were several long-time members in mid-'06 who were not fulfilling that requirement as well), when Mr. Simkin decided to cut off my membership after only four days of posting. Therefore, no such "photo compromise" could be worked out.


PAM BROWN SAID:

More excuses from "DVP" to attempt to justify his not posting on the Ed Forum and instead complaining about it here. Guess this is the kind of mishmash one can expect from a died-in-the-wool WC apologist.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Or -- it's the kind of raw truth you can expect from a person who posted for four days at a forum that detests the likes of lone-assassin believers.

Your choice.


ANTHONY MARSH SAID:

If I remember correctly, the Education Forum requires registration and that you use your REAL name.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Yes. Correct. Which I did.

So what's your point?


PAM BROWN SAID:

I feel sure John Simkin would find a way for "DVP" to post if he were to pony up bio info and photo; especially since it was John who initiated this thread.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I have no problem with revealing "bio" type info (e.g., location, age, e-mail address). In fact, I almost always "pony up" such info on websites where a "Profile" is made available to the world [such as HERE].

And I don't really have a problem with providing a photo either. It's just that (in 2006) I did not have a photo available.

I have discovered, however, a very small picture that I could use as a profile image (although it will probably show up way too blurry and indistinct if it's blown up much at all).

But I'm certainly willing to sign up again as an active member at The Education Forum (if John Simkin hasn't banned me completely after my dismissal three years ago). Does he allow people to re-join after they've been previously kicked off? I have no idea about that. ~shrug~

Anyway, I'm game.....if John S. is.


BUD SAID:

It's always interesting to read Pam's interpretation of what someone says. The way she reads what is written explains the conclusions she draws. How could she not be a CT?


PAM BROWN SAID:

You have to use your real name "DVP"...


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I did. (Your disbelief notwithstanding, of course.)


PAM BROWN SAID:

...and you have to provide bio information connected to it.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Does such mandatory info stop at "locale, age, race, sex, favorite cereal, and shoe size"? Or do I have to provide my blood type and last 12 employers as well in order to satisfy Mr. Simkin's hunger for useless data?


PAM BROWN SAID:

Plus, you have to post a photo, which you refused to do.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Incorrect. (As usual.)


PAM BROWN SAID:

Get real.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I have.

Maybe you, though, should learn to read (and comprehend correctly), Pam. That'd help greatly.

Plus, it would probably help if you would refrain from hanging a label of suspicion on people when you have so little reason to do so.

But, hey, maybe I'm just being totally unreasonable to expect such restraint from a conspiracy believer.


BUD SAID:

If you [Pam] really wanted to "get real" you'd acknowledge that the only reason they started enforcing the photograph requirement was to contrive a reason to kick DVP out. If it wasn`t for him posting there, it would have never been an issue, as it wasn`t strictly enforced prior to his participation in that forum (and as far as I can tell, there are still members who haven't provided a photo, but these mostly lurk without posting).

The "real" reason they wanted him gone is that he keeps bringing up that pesky evidence that gets in the way of the silly things they want to believe.


PAM BROWN SAID:

You also have to have a photo as your avatar [at The Education Forum] and a bio that provides some information about you. Hard for a persona to do that.


BARB JUNKKARINEN SAID:

Why? Anyone who can create a "persona" can come up with a pic and create a bio to go with it.

You seem obsessed with ragging on DVP as being a "persona" ... yet you created several fake ID [e-mail] addreses a few months ago to attack me and a couple others. Not knowing what an IP address is, you got outed immediately.

But isn't it more than a tad hypocritical for you to make it such a pursuit to rag on someone else who you accuse of creating a persona ... when you don't have any proof it's true in the first place ... and when you have done the same thing yourself?


PAM BROWN SAID:

Simkin started the thread to find out if "DVP" is an actual person. You figure it out.


BARB JUNKKARINEN SAID:

When you get right down to it, what difference does it make? What any of us have to deal with are the words others put out....regardless of who, or what, they are.

[...]

You, Pam, do little else but distract from discussion of actual research on evidence and issues with nonsense like this on DVP and others ... particularly those who don't buy Judyth [Baker's] story.

Is that your goal?


DAVE REITZES SAID:

Three Von Pein threads at the Simkin forum . . . and counting.


BARB JUNKKARINEN SAID:

He must be seen as an effective threat on something to garner so much interest and attention??


DAVE REITZES SAID:

One Nuthouse psycho [at the alt.conspiracy.jfk newsgroup] is even calling upon people to bomb DVP's home residence.

It's a swell class of people over there.