(PART 925)


Seems you got pegged Dave. Live with it. .... Jimmy [DiEugenio] nailed your ass.


DiEugenio nailed nobody in his "Comedy Central" piece, as I amply demonstrate in my rebuttal argument HERE.

But in Jimmy's obnoxious tirade aimed at John McAdams, I had to wipe the foam that was coming from DiEugenio's mouth off of my computer screen in order to continue on to the rest of the things DiEugenio embarrassed himself with, like these classic moments of unintentional hilarity:

"Von Pein's "mountain of evidence" consisted of the mildewed litany of discredited Warren Commission data. Which, of course, is not a mountain. It's more like the San Andreas Fault. He began with the...specious notion that Oswald owned the rifle; and he ended with the equally specious notion that Oswald could have run down from the sixth floor to the second in time to be seen by Marrion Baker and Roy Truly right after the assassination. Some of the gems in between were that Oswald definitely killed Officer Tippit and that he also attempted to kill General Edwin Walker. My favorite point was this: "the Single Bullet Theory has still not been proven to be an impossibility." I guess he thinks that if it's not impossible, that means it happened. .... Von Pein even wrote that at Z frame 224, both Kennedy and John Connally were reacting to the same bullet. Which Milicent Cranor, in her previously posted article "Lies for the Eyes", showed to be a howler. In reality Kennedy is reacting and Connally is not. With a straight face, at the end of this "mountainous" listing, Von Pein wrote, "For aren't hard facts and evidence always more believable than wild speculation and conjecture?" (Posted 7/17/03)" -- J. DiEugenio


"After this second ejection, Von Pein came to his senses. He realized he could not comport normally with the great mass of the public who didn't buy the fantasy of the Single Bullet Theory. He now made his way to the place where he belonged all along: the John McAdams dominated Google group, alt.conspiracy.jfk. Why is this important? Because historically speaking, McAdams was the first person on the Internet to exhibit critical thinking skills so stilted, comprehension skills so unbalanced, cognitive skills so impaired, all combined with a basic dishonesty about these failings, to the degree that he almost seemed the victim of a neurological disease. Any strong indication of conspiracy in the JFK case, no matter how compelling, could not permeate his brain waves or synapses. McAdams hates being an outcast or labeled as a propagandist – even though he is. So he constructed a sort of hospice for people like himself who normal thinking people could not tolerate. Actually two of them. One is on his own site and one is a Google Group.

The important thing for Von Pein is that since McAdams controls the halfway houses, almost anything goes as long as it supports the Warren Commission. Here, Von Pein could now use his previously noted wild man tactics with impunity. Another place that Von Pein frequents is the IMDB forum on Oliver Stone's film 'JFK'. There, to those not familiar with the facts of the case, he tried to discredit the film as a work of "fiction"."
-- J. DiEugenio


Well, at least it's nice to be recognized (I guess) -- even by an Anybody-But-Oswald kook like James DiEugenio.

BTW, what do all of you kooks here at acj (which is a forum that DiEugenio thinks is run exclusively by John McAdams) think about DiEugenio's new theory about Lee Oswald having NO BAG AT ALL when he went to work on 11/22/63?

Is there anybody here willing to buy into Jimbo's "No Bag" theory, even though nearly every kook here has spoken out about how the bag that Oswald DID have with him was, itself, proof that Oswald was innocent, since you kooks think that that bag was too short to house Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano?

Just curious to know how far the kooks here are willing to carry DiEugenio's jock strap.


I'd prop up that ridiculous DiEugenio article about me any day of the week. It's absolutely hilarious (but the laugh is only on Mr. DiEugenio, of course). It does me no harm whatsoever. It only shows DiEugenio to be a really big "Anybody But Oswald" nutcase.

Let's take a quick inventory of the stupid things that DiEugenio revealed about his beliefs regarding the JFK case in that article, which is being billed on Jim's website as "an incisive overview of the Internet career of the man many call Disinformation Dave". (That's hilarious part #1 right there.)

In the article, DiEugenio thinks I am crazy for believing that each and every one of the following KNOWN FACTS is true (this is almost too funny for words):

1.) Oswald shot John F. Kennedy.

2.) Oswald shot J.D. Tippit.

3.) Oswald shot at General Edwin A. Walker in April 1963.

4.) The Single-Bullet Theory is true.

5.) Connally is reacting to a bullet wound at circa Z224. (Actually, Z224 is the precise moment I believe the bullet struck both victims, with Z225 being the first frame where a definite "reaction" on the part of Governor Connally can be seen--which are observations that any first-grader could easily see HERE--but DiEugenio cannot. Go figure.)

6.) Oswald could make it down from the 6th to the 2nd floor of the TSBD in less than 90 seconds.

7.) Oswald owned Carcano rifle C2766.

8.) If a gunshot fired from the Grassy Knoll had struck JFK in the head, that bullet would have had no choice but to result in damage to the LEFT side of Kennedy's cranium. (This is an inferred truth, based on comments I made about the 2008 Discovery Channel documentary, "JFK: Inside The Target Car", which DiEugenio mentions in his 4/13/10 CTKA article. And, quite obviously, this is another blatantly obvious and common-sense truth that another first-grader could easily figure out with no trouble at all. But, amazingly, Jim DiEugenio cannot. Go figure.)

And yet I am the one who is supposedly "auditioning for Comedy Central" here?

James DiEugenio has blown a "common sense" gasket. Perhaps several of them.


Is any of this your own work[?]


Any of what?

[Then, a little later in another post, I said:]

Oh -- [slaps forehead] -- I get it now! Ian Kingsbury thinks I should INVENT SOME NEW EVIDENCE in the John F. Kennedy murder case (kinda like all conspiracy theorists do 24/7). The "same old stuff" (Ian's words) just isn't good enough.

IOW--The ACTUAL EVIDENCE in the case (e.g., the actual bullets from Oswald's gun, the actual shells from Oswald's gun, Oswald's gun itself, Oswald's prints being all over the place where the ACTUAL KILLER of Kennedy was located, and Oswald's known and provable lies) just isn't nearly enough stuff with which to solve the case.

We need new and fresh stuff every so many years--in order to MAKE BELIEVE that Oswald didn't do it.

David Von Pein
April 13, 2010
April 14, 2010