JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS
(PART 1240)


BEN HOLMES SAID:

David [Von Pein] makes the claim [here] that the "best medical evidence" was that a "thru-and-thru transiting bullet went through JFK's neck."

But this is a lie on his part - as THERE WAS NO MEDICAL EVIDENCE **WHATSOEVER** for this claim. (Nor will David cite any...)

Indeed, the prosectors claim not to have EVEN KNOWN about the throat wound, and were forbidden from dissecting the track of the wounds... so there's ZERO medical evidence for transit.

David cannot cite any evidence for transit. It doesn't exist.

IT DOESN'T EXIST!!!

What he's able to cite IS OPINION BASED ON SPECULATION MADE AFTER THE AUTOPSY WAS OVER.

Nor can David make a bullet striking T3/T4 come out the neck... it *IS* impossible given what we know about where David alleges the bullet came from, and the position of JFK at the time.

This is why the Warren Commission artificially RAISED the wound... with their God-like powers... "Let the wound be raised... and it was raised..."

David is a coward, and will NOT respond to this post, point by point, as I frequently do with his posts.

He can't.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

The mere FACT that there WAS NO BULLET FOUND IN JFK'S WHOLE BODY is a solid indication the bullet transited his body. Ben will deny that obvious assertion forever, I guess. But it's still true.

There's also the OUTWARD-POINTING fibers in JFK's shirt which certainly are indicative of the bullet EXITING the throat, not ENTERING it.

As for the Warren Commission "moving" the wound up to the neck....Click Here.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

My crystal ball was, yep, you guessed it, right AGAIN!

David was completely unable to cite any medical evidence WHATSOEVER for transit.

Nor was he honest enough to publicly admit that he cannot...


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

It would help, Ben, if you possessed just a TINY bit of ability to properly and reasonably evaluate the evidence in this case. You have not exhibited any ability to perform such an important task. So until you do garner such ability, you are destined to forever remain lost in a sea of piecemeal and isolated evidence and theories.

Quick Summary....

1. Bullet hits JFK in upper back.

2. No bullet found in JFK's body at autopsy.

3. There's a bullet hole in the front of JFK's throat.

4. The fibers in JFK's shirt are pointing OUTWARD.

5. The bruising pattern in JFK's upper body suggests the PASSAGE of a high-speed missile caused those bruises.

6. The autopsy report, signed by 3 doctors, says this:

"The missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the neck, damaged the trachea and made its exit through the anterior surface of the neck. As far as can be ascertained this missile struck no bony structures in its path through the body."

7. Governor Connally's injuries also suggest the high likelihood that the bullet that exited JFK's neck went on to pierce Connally's upper back as well.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

It would help, David, if you possessed just a TINY bit of courage to address and explain the evidence in this case.

But you don't.

TIME AND TIME AGAIN I demonstrate your cowardice and lying.

OVER AND OVER you refuse to defend yourself - you can't!

[...]

The Warren Commission quite dishonestly moved it [the bullet wound in JFK's back] semantically to the lower neck.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Bullshit. They did no such thing, and CE903 proves they didn't. Specter places the wound in the upper BACK here, not the NECK. This one exhibit (CE903), more than anything else, proves the CTers are dead wrong when they insist the Warren Commission needed the wound in the NECK....




BEN HOLMES SAID:

"No bullet found in JFK's body at autopsy." [DVP]

At the official autopsy starting at 8 pm, no.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Which was the ONLY autopsy, of course. Ben is imagining additional autopsies. (What a silly hobby.)


BEN HOLMES SAID:

Indeed there is [a bullet hole in the front of JFK's throat] - one that wasn't known about by the prosectors, and never examined at the autopsy.

And you know quite well that the Warren Commission lied about this wound, as well as Vincent Bugliosi. Believers are just SCARED TO DEATH about the throat wound - since it proves that there was a conspiracy.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Even though the OFFICIAL AUTOPSY REPORT plainly indicates the throat wound was an EXIT wound.

Just continue to ignore that fact, Ben. Your hobby requires that you ignore it.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

I've already pointed out that you're lying. You CONTINUE to refuse to cite the underlying evidence for this claim....

"The fibers in JFK's shirt are pointing OUTWARD."

....because you *KNOW* that you're lying.

Nor will you dare mention the examination made to find copper - which *WAS* found in the clothing from the back wound... and not found at all in the slit made by a scalpel when removing the tie.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Ben is imagining "lies" being told (by me and the Warren Commission). Lies that never existed, of course.

The FACT is that the front of JFK's shirt had fibers POINTING OUTWARD, indicating the bullet exited the throat:

ROBERT A. FRAZIER (FBI) -- "...the fibers of the cloth are protruding outward, that is, have been pushed from the inside out. I could not actually determine from the characteristics of the hole whether or not it was caused by a bullet. However, I can say that it was caused by a projectile of some type which exited from the shirt at that point and that is again assuming that when I first examined the shirt it was--it had not been altered from the condition it was in at the time the hole was made."


BEN HOLMES SAID:

"The bruising pattern in JFK's upper body suggests the PASSAGE of a high-speed missile caused those bruises." [DVP]

Nope. Simply untrue.

Nor can you cite the photo showing this bruising - it's one of the bits of evidence that simply disappeared while under government control.

Most likely because it would have PROVEN that there wasn't any transit.

If the photo supported transit, there'd have been no reason to make it disappear.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

The autopsy report and the testimony of the autopsy doctors is enough PROOF for me. But you think everybody connected with JFK's autopsy was a liar, so naturally you aren't able to reasonably evaluate the bruises. Such is the life of a rabid conspiracist.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

But you don't *BELIEVE* the autopsy report, do you David?

I've repeatedly pointed this out - AND YOU ABSOLUTELY **REFUSE** TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU ACCEPT THE AUTOPSY REPORT.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

It's my opinion that just ONE WORD is likely inaccurate in the whole report -- the word "occipital" in the "Missile Wounds" section on Page 3 of the autopsy report.

More on that topic here.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

This [quote from JFK's autopsy report] isn't based on any examination of the body....

"The missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the neck, damaged the trachea and made its exit through the anterior surface of the neck. As far as can be ascertained this missile struck no bony structures in its path through the body."

....this is opinion based on speculation formed after the autopsy.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

It's a conclusion based on EVERYTHING the autopsy doctors saw on 11/22/63 PLUS the new information obtained by Dr. Humes from Dr. Perry on Saturday morning. The ONLY logical conclusion to reach after assessing EVERYTHING was to conclude exactly what Humes & Company did conclude --- the bullet went clear through Kennedy's body.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

Until the prosectors 'learned' of the throat wound the following day, the autopsy report would have stated that the bullet striking the back only went in a short distance, then worked its way back out.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

So what? More information was obtained on Saturday, which made the answer quite obvious to Humes and his associates.

Why do you think ALL THREE doctors signed off on the transiting bullet? Were they ALL liars (or idiots)? Nonsense.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

The evidence simply doesn't support your claim [re: the Single-Bullet Theory and Governor Connally's injuries], and you know it.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Bull. The SBT works perfectly from every angle, as I demonstrate here:




BEN HOLMES SAID:

Believers don't believe in utilizing the most plausible explanation... the evidence *CLEARLY* conflicts, and the simple explanation is there ready for them to accept... but they don't.


BUD SAID:

You [Ben Holmes] slide down a slippery slope, grasping at one fantastic concept after another until your ideas are crushed by the weight of the fantastic. Which is why you will never put your ideas on the table for examination, the absurdity of them would become instantly apparent.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

Said the coward who refuses to post his scenario...

And refuses to answer simple questions...


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

You don't think Bud has ever posted his "scenario" of the JFK assassination? You must be nuts.

Bud's scenario has been on the table for decades. And it's the same as mine....

Oswald fired three shots with his Carcano from the 6th floor of the TSBD, striking the President twice, with one of those "strikes" also hitting Governor Connally. No conspiracy. Just Oswald. Period.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

GOOD!!!

It's always amusing when I can get a believer to answer a simple question.

And since you've provided your scenario, I'll do EXACTLY WHAT I'VE REPEATEDLY STATED I WILL DO - which is to provide a scenario EXACTLY as detailed, and with JUST AS MUCH EVIDENCE cited as you do.

At least three shooters fired multiple weapons from at least three different directions, striking the President three times, and striking Connally at least twice, and probably three times. Clearly a conspiracy. Oswald was not a shooter. Period.

Now, the next time you or "Bud" or any other believer tries to claim that I've not provided a scenario - *YOU* will know that you or they are lying, won't you?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

No wonder you didn't want to post your scenario earlier. It's embarrassingly silly.

Poor Ben.

Just imagine the "at least three shooters" all taking aim at JOHN KENNEDY'S body (with none of them aiming at JOHN CONNALLY, of course; only an idiot would think that any shots were aimed at Connally) --- and the end result of all this AIMING AT KENNEDY is that CONNALLY is hit AS MANY TIMES WITH BULLETS as JFK was (per Holmes' insane scenario).

Hi-lar-ious!


DAVID VON PEIN ALSO SAID:

Do you, Ben, think the "at least three shooters" in Dealey Plaza were PROFESSIONAL ASSASSINS? Or were they merely three guys with guns who were chosen at random off the street to do the job by the Grand Poobah Of Assassinations?


BEN HOLMES SAID:

Tut tut tut, David...

I gave you a RECENT example where a shooter, FAR CLOSER TO HIS INTENDED VICTIM THAN OCCURRED IN DEALEY PLAZA, still ended up shooting two unintended victims.

You should publicly acknowledge that you've been schooled.

*THEN*... and only then, can you ask more questions.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Once more I want lurkers to just envision the kind of "professional assassination" plot that most CTers believe in --- THREE shooters all taking aim at JFK. (And why there was even a NEED for "at least three shooters" is yet another discussion; it's ridiculous overkill, of course, and would only serve to TRIPLE the chances that the shooters would be caught and/or exposed.)

And yet, per Ben, these THREE shooters ("at least"; maybe even four, five, or sixty gunmen, per Kook Ben), all presumably PRO killers, pelt an unintended victim (Connally) with just as many bullets as the intended victim (3 apiece).

Remind me to never again hire any of those "at least three shooters" for my next Presidential hit in the future. Their performance could hardly have been worse (as far as hitting ONLY the target, that is).

It's remarkable that Skinny Holland, Jean Hill, Ike Altgens, and Jesse Curry got out of Dealey Plaza alive, what with the "three blind mice" wielding the guns that day.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

Why did Z-133 not have the INVARIABLE 'first frame flash' that science says *must* have been there?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Can you explain to me WHY THIS EVEN MATTERS?

Are you really suggesting that there is ANYTHING shown on the film PRIOR to Z133 that would have any value at all as far as SHOTS BEING FIRED or VICTIMS BEING HIT BY BULLETS?

Are you suggesting that conspirators felt the need to excise some frames out of the Zapruder Film between Z132 and Z133? For what possible reason would "they" have needed to do that? Any idea, Ben? Nobody had been shot that early in the film.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

It's SCIENTIFIC PROOF that the extant Zapruder film has been altered from the original.

THIS IS OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

Simple.

If we cannot even trust the most basic of evidence in this case, how can you be sure of your conclusions?

[...]

THE FILM WAS ALTERED FOR A REASON.

Unless you can refute the scientific evidence of film alteration, then you need to give a *credible* reason for altering the film that doesn't include conspiracy.

But you can't.

I'll also point out your implied theory that the only missing evidence is from *before* Z-133 - that's simply a theory on your part, and one that DOES NOT ACCORD with the actual evidence in this case.

For example... the original recreations of the event placed the final shot some 30 or 40 feet further down the street from where Z-313 is. You can't explain that... (nor will you). Then there's the HUGE number of witnesses for a limo slowdown/stop. Once again, you won't explain it. Let's not forget the missing Chaney/Curry conversation - YOU HAVEN'T EXPLAINED IT.

You want to do a 'limited hangout' - and imply that you'll accept a very small "alteration" - but you simply cannot do that.

Once you allow for *ANY* alteration, you're in a world of trouble.

[...]

THE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE OF A LACK OF 'FIRST FRAME FLASH' **PROVES** THAT THE CAMERA WAS NOT MERELY STOPPED BETWEEN Z-132 AND Z-133.

It **PROVES** that the film was cut at that point.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Hogwash. It proves no such thing. You're placing way too much emphasis on this so-called "first frame flash". The lack of such a "flash" doesn't HAVE to mean the film was cut or altered. That's a ridiculous leap of faith.

We KNOW the original in-camera Z-Film could not possibly have been altered, unless Abe Zapruder himself was part of the conspiracy to alter his own film. (And who believes such silliness?)

Abraham was with that film every step of the way (at Kodak & Jamieson's) on 11/22/63. There was no opportunity for any goon squad to alter the film. And you know it. But you (and other CTers) won't allow any common sense to get in the way of your silly "Alteration" beliefs.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

No David, you're lying again. You're making claims for Zapruder that he cannot support.

Indeed, IT'S A PROVABLE FACT - and one that even *YOU* will admit, that the "original" Zapruder film has been altered... IT'S MISSING FRAMES... and you know this.

Merely accidents on the part of Time-Life - but this is ABSOLUTELY UNREFUTABLE... (Watch as you refuse to deny this...)


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

But the "accident" at LIFE Magazine (where somebody stepped on 4 frames and crushed them) isn't the type of deliberate conspiratorial "alterations" that you think happened with the Zapruder Film, so why pretend they're the same thing at all? Those situations aren't close to being synonymous and you know it.

You don't really think LIFE Magazine "altered" the film on purpose. So why did you even BRING UP the "accidents" at LIFE Magazine?


BEN HOLMES SAID:

The only issue is not whether the Zapruder film is altered - IT PROVABLY IS - but whether or not it was *INTENTIONAL* - and the extent of the alteration.

You're pretending that unless it was altered before it was developed, it couldn't have been altered.

You know that's sheer nonsense... I know it's sheer nonsense... and you CANNOT IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM defend such a silly claim.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Huh?? What the heck are you talking about here? When did I ever suggest such a thing? Did you mean to say "before it was copied at Jamieson's", instead of saying "before it was developed"? Because you surely aren't suggesting that it's even POSSIBLE to have altered Mr. Zapruder's film BEFORE it was DEVELOPED (i.e., processed at Kodak), are you?


BEN HOLMES SAID:

Hanging your hat on the copies, are you?

That's not evidence either... indeed, the copies form some of the strongest evidence AGAINST the authenticity of the film.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

So you ACTUALLY believe that some band of film fakers went about the task of altering FOUR SEPARATE COPIES of the Zapruder Film (the original and the three copies that were made on the day of the assassination), and that this band of film alterers was able to alter each of those four copies in EXACTLY the same manner each time, so that no differences could be spotted by anyone watching any of those four copies of the film?

Is that what you're suggesting? If not, please elaborate on what you DO think happened regarding your "Film Alteration" theory, Ben. (I love fiction. So go ahead and spill it.)


BEN HOLMES SAID:

Go ahead, David... tell us what stopped the U.S. Government from altering the film after 11/22/63.

I DARE YOU!!!


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Well, for one thing, the Zapruder Film appears to be in perfect harmony (and "in sync") with the Orville Nix film of the assassination (see the comparison video below). So this "in harmony" fact would certainly suggest that the Z-Film was NOT altered. Or would you like to now suggest that the Nix Film was altered as well? Because at least as far as the "Limo Slowdown" is concerned, this comparison of the two films is providing solid evidence that both films match each other perfectly. In other words, nobody "faked" the "Limo Slowdown" in the Zapruder Film....



Another thing that tells any sensible person that the Z-Film has not been tampered with by evil conspirators is the fact that if anybody had wanted to alter the film in order to REMOVE ALL SIGNS OF PERCEIVED CONSPIRACY, they would have certainly removed from the film the ONE THING that almost all conspiracy theorists love to harp on as the #1 thing in the film that (for the CTers) proves that the President was struck in the head from the FRONT --- with that thing being, of course, JFK's head snap to the rear. But that head snap still exists in all copies of Mr. Zapruder's 26-second home movie.

How can you, Ben, as a believer in Z-Film Alteration, possibly explain why the film forgers chose not to remove the single biggest thing in the film that spells out "Conspiracy" to millions of Americans?

Please try to explain that, Ben. (As I said, I love fiction.)


BEN HOLMES SAID:

And while you're at it, ADMIT THAT THE EXTANT ZAPRUDER FILM ***IS*** ALTERED, even if only by accident.

And produce the evidence you claim to have showing that it's not been altered...

PRODUCE IT, DAVID!!!

CITE IT!!!


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Yes, the film is "altered" to THAT limited extent. The film was accidentally damaged by LIFE Magazine and some frames had to be removed. I already acknowledged that (obvious) fact in a previous post. (How could anyone--including me--possibly DENY that fact? They can't.)

But the "accident" at LIFE has NOTHING to do with the kind of alleged sinister and conspiratorial alterations that you believe in, Ben. So, again, why do you even bring up the LIFE "accident" in the first place? It's apples and oranges. It's not the same thing in the slightest---and you know it.

Now, why don't YOU, Mr. Ben Holmes, produce the evidence you claim to have showing that the Zapruder Film HAS been altered by a band of conspirators---not by LIFE Magazine, mind you, but by some person or group that you think changed the film in order to HIDE A CONSPIRACY IN THE KENNEDY ASSASSINATION. (And the "first frame flash" argument won't cut it. You need way more than that. So get cracking.)


BEN HOLMES SAID:

POST RIGHT HERE WHAT WOULD STOP YOU FROM ALTERING THE ORIGINAL FILM, THEN MAKING THREE NEW COPIES.

I don't want speculation, I want CITABLE FACT.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Now you're just making up crazy conspiratorial scenarios that cannot possibly apply to the situation regarding the Zapruder Film on November 22, 1963.

We know that the U.S. Government didn't whip up three copies of an altered film on Nov. 22nd.

How can we know that for a fact?

Because either Abraham Zapruder or his business partner, Erwin Schwartz, retained physical possession of the original film throughout the day on 11/22/63. (Schwartz held onto Mr. Zapruder's camera, with the undeveloped film inside of it, while Zapruder was being interviewed on WFAA-TV between 2:31 PM and about 2:40 PM CST.) And Mr. Zapruder was also present when the film was processed at Kodak and he was also present when the three copies of the film were made at Jamieson's Film Lab, with one of those three copies being retained by Abe Zapruder himself on Nov. 22.

Therefore, no alterations could possibly have been performed on the original film or the three copies during this brief period when Abraham Zapruder himself was in possession of his original in-camera film and one of the three copies.

If Mr. Zapruder had not escorted his film on every step of its journey from Dealey Plaza to Kodak and then to the Jamieson lab, then conspiracy clowns like Ben Holmes would have a better argument. The silly "alteration" argument would still fall flat for many other reasons, but at least Holmes could pretend the "U.S. Government" went about the cumbersome task of "ALTERING THE ORIGINAL FILM, THEN MAKING THREE NEW COPIES".

But with Mr. Zapruder retaining possession of his own film every step of the way on 11/22, well, as we can see, Holmes can't possibly even get to first base in his "alteration" argument---let alone trot around the bases with a round-tripper. There was simply NO TIME or OPPORTUNITY for the evil "U.S. Government" to have accomplished the kind of Z-Film alterations that CTers think occurred in this case. Similar to David Lifton's "Body Alteration" theory, it just simply could not have happened.

~Mark VII~


BEN HOLMES SAID:

No. It's not in perfect sync.

Nor does the Nix film prevent anyone from altering the Zapruder film. The Nix film was also under control of the Government.

Indeed, you can't even produce the *original* Nix film anymore, can you?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Great! So now we've got still MORE film fakery in the JFK case, eh Ben?

You're funny.

And if you don't think the limo slowdown is "in sync" when comparing the Nix and Zapruder films in this video, then you're either blind as a bat or you're in total denial.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

The Nix film demonstrates as the Zapruder film couldn't that Chaney never went forward to speak with Curry.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Just like your fellow conspiracy kook Jim Fetzer, you expect way too much to be seen in the Zapruder and Nix films. For some idiotic reason, you actually seem to think that motorcycle policeman James Chaney should be seen moving forward to talk with Police Chief Jesse Curry in the Nix film. But, quite obviously, Orville Nix had stopped filming prior to the time when Chaney moved further down Elm Street to catch up with Curry's car.

As far as James Fetzer's incredibly ridiculous notions concerning the plethora of things he thinks should be revealed within Abraham Zapruder's motion picture film, go here for today's laugh.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

First you'd have to admit that the head snap *DOES* prove conspiracy.

Ready to do that, David?

Because unless you do, your point is sheerest nonsense and meaningless.

And speculation isn't evidence.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I was very careful in my wording, Ben. I said:

"Another thing that tells any sensible person that the Z-Film has not been tampered with by evil conspirators is the fact that if anybody had wanted to alter the film in order to REMOVE ALL SIGNS OF PERCEIVED CONSPIRACY, they would have certainly removed from the film the ONE THING that almost all conspiracy theorists love to harp on as the #1 thing in the film that (for the CTers) proves that the President was struck in the head from the FRONT --- with that thing being, of course, JFK's head snap to the rear. But that head snap still exists in all copies of Mr. Zapruder's 26-second home movie."

Key word there --- "Perceived". Not REAL, but PERCEIVED.

To anyone who has studied the evidence relating to JFK's autopsy, of course, the realization must sink in that JFK was struck in the head only from BEHIND. That fact is indisputable and irrevocable, regardless of what any CTer says the "head snap" proves.

Quoting JFK's chief autopsy physician....

"In 1963, we proved at the autopsy table that President Kennedy was struck from above and behind by the fatal shot. The pattern of the entrance and exit wounds in the skull proves it, and if we stayed here until hell freezes over, nothing will change this proof. It happens 100 times out of 100, and I will defend it until I die. This is the essence of our autopsy, and it is supreme ignorance to argue any other scenario. This is a law of physics and it is foolproof--absolutely, unequivocally, and without question. The conspiracy buffs have totally ignored this central scientific fact, and everything else is hogwash. There was no interference with our autopsy, and there was no conspiracy to suppress the findings." -- Dr. James Humes; October 1991


BEN HOLMES SAID:

WHERE'S YOUR EXPLANATION FOR THE LACK OF 'FIRST FRAME FLASH' IN Z-133???

WHY CAN'T YOU ANSWER THIS???

The 'first frame flash'...is scientific, it's supported by experts, it's supported by science... and you can't answer it.

So it's really all I need.

There's plenty of other corroborating evidence for the extant film having been altered, but this one unanswerable hard evidence is all I need.

RUN DAVID... RUN LIKE THE COWARD YOU ARE!!!


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

This "first frame flash" crap is one of the silliest conspiracy arguments I think I've ever encountered. It's something that is occurring (or, I should say, NOT occurring) at Z-frame 133, which is the very first frame showing Kennedy's car on the film. The rest of the film is continuous and uncut (except for the frames that were accidentally damaged by LIFE Magazine, as discussed earlier). And yet I'm supposed to believe that instead of Mr. Zapruder merely stopping and starting his camera again between Z132 and Z133, the film was (per CTers) "cut" or "altered" at Z133 by some unnamed group of film manipulators for some nefarious purpose. And all because there's no "flash" at Z133.

Pardon me, Ben, if I don't bow down to your "first frame flash" theory. But, as I said before, you're going to need a lot more than that flimsy reason for me to even begin to believe the Zapruder Film is a forgery.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

John Howlett calmly *WALKED* the distance [from the Sniper's Nest to the second-floor lunchroom], but we KNOW FOR A FACT (because we have video of the event) that Baker RAN THAT DISTANCE.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Right. Which means that the Warren Commission (and John Howlett) were bending over backwards to give Oswald the benefit of every doubt --- i.e., they only had Howlett WALKING the distance between the 6th and 2nd floors, even though the WC likely knew that Oswald was actually moving MUCH FASTER than just a "walking" or a "fast walking" speed.

Therefore, Oswald was given a BREAK as far as those re-enactments by Howlett were concerned. And yet Howlett STILL managed to get to the second floor in less than 80 seconds each time [see Warren Report, Page 152] --- even though I still hear CTers to this day telling me that Oswald didn't have a prayer of making it down to the lunchroom in even NINETY seconds.

But, quite obviously, given the results of Agent Howlett's tests, even if Lee Oswald was WALKING the whole distance, he still could easily have gotten to the 2nd floor in well under 90 seconds, thereby beating police officer Marrion L. Baker to the lunchroom.

BTW, there's no video of Baker's re-enactment (that I'm aware of). Provide a link to it---if there is one (which I'm pretty sure there isn't).


BEN HOLMES SAID:

...Baker would have **RUN** as he was videotaped doing on 11/22. (Not slower, as he did in the recreation.)


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Yeah, I knew Holmes was lying his ass off when he said this earlier....

"...but we KNOW FOR A FACT (because we have video of the event) that Baker RAN THAT DISTANCE."

Holmes thinks the Darnell video footage showing Marrion Baker running toward the TSBD is the same as having a video of the "event" showing Baker running all the way up to the second-floor lunchroom---even though Darnell's (and/or Couch's) videos only show Officer Baker for a couple of seconds (and BEFORE Baker even reached the entrance of the Book Depository Building).

Ergo, Ben just flat-out lied. (What a surprise.)


BEN HOLMES SAID:

Instead, everything was precisely the opposite... Howlett moved quickly, and BAKER SIMPLY WALKED. (Or "trotted" ... which is not a run...)

SO YOU'RE EITHER INCREDIBLY *STUPID* AND UNABLE TO FOLLOW SIMPLE LOGIC, OR YOU'RE A DESPICABLE LIAR...

Which is it David?

You can't follow that "giving Oswald the benefit" would be PRECISELY OPPOSITE TO WHAT WAS DONE IN THE RECREATION - or you *do* understand it and simply lied?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

You're nuts. The Warren Commission definitely gave Oswald (Howlett) MORE time than was needed. And in my book, I'd call that giving someone the "benefit of the doubt". And your extra "15 seconds" isn't a time that has been verified (nor could it be). Howard Brennan did say that Oswald stood and admired his feat for a few seconds, but that's hardly "15 seconds". And it sure as heck doesn't take any time at all to drop a gun into a stack of book cartons. CTers like Walt Cakebread want to make this task sound arduous and time-consuming, and it just is not at all.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

Which is it, David? Liar or Stupid?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Which is it, Ben -- are you goofy or retarded? I can't figure out which anymore.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

"Therefore, Oswald was given a BREAK as far as those re-enactments by Howlett were concerned." [-- DVP]

I DARE YOU to defend this ridiculous claim. I DEFY YOU TO MAKE A LOGICAL ARGUMENT THAT IT WAS TO OSWALD'S BENEFIT TO HAVE HOWLETT MOVE FAST AND BAKER TO MOVE SLOW.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

The kook named Holmes has lost me completely here. He now seems to be implying something that I never said or implied at all. If Howlett moves FASTER (which he should have done, IMO, to simulate a reasonable speed of Oswald on Nov. 22), then of course that's NOT giving LHO any "benefit of the doubt".

It's only a "benefit" for LHO if Howlett moves SLOWER---which he did in his March 20, 1964, re-enactments. He was only utilizing two WALKING speeds -- a "normal walking pace" and a "fast walk". Oswald was undoubtedly moving faster than either of those two speeds. And yet Howlett still beat Baker's time to the lunchroom. And also keep in mind that Officer Baker specifically said his 3/20/64 times were "minimum" times. I.E., he probably took LONGER than 90 seconds to get to the lunchroom on Nov. 22.

Any way you slice it (with or without any "benefit of the doubt" being given to Lee Oswald), the re-enactments show that Oswald (Howlett) beats Baker to the second floor, which is exactly what really did happen, of course, on 11/22/63.


BUD SAID:

Where does this "15 seconds" come from? Brennan said Oswald paused at the window "a moment".


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Yes, Bud, in the 1964 CBS interview below, Howard Brennan did say that Oswald paused for only "a moment". In his Warren Commission testimony, Brennan said this [at 3 H 144]:

DAVID BELIN -- "Would you describe just exactly what you saw when you saw him this last time?"

HOWARD BRENNAN -- "Well, as it appeared to me he was standing up and resting against the left window sill, with gun shouldered to his right shoulder, holding the gun with his left hand and taking positive aim and fired his last shot. As I calculate a couple of seconds. He drew the gun back from the window as though he was drawing it back to his side and maybe paused for another second as though to assure hisself that he hit his mark, and then he disappeared."



As we can see, there's not much difference between Brennan's WC testimony and the CBS video. In neither instance does it add up to any "15 seconds". So I guess Ben Holmes must have another witness (or witnesses) in mind when he says the assassin remained at the sixth-floor window for "15 seconds". Because Howard Brennan certainly didn't state any such thing.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

WHY DID YOU BLATANTLY LIE AND CLAIM THAT THE WARREN COMMISSION DID THE RECREATION IN A WAY THAT WOULD "BENEFIT" OSWALD - WHEN PRECISELY THE OPPOSITE IS THE TRUTH?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Because they did. They had Howlett moving at a snail's ("walking") pace, when they should have had him run as fast as he could. Doing it the way they did it was to the "benefit" of Oswald possibly NOT being able to make it to the lunchroom ahead of Baker.

But as it turned out, it didn't matter. Because even if Oswald had WALKED all the way (as Howlett did), he (Oswald) still would have beaten Baker to the second floor---as the reconstructions firmly prove for all time, even though nearly all CTers on the planet totally IGNORE Howlett's timed re-enactments and ignore WCR Page 152.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

He [Marrion Baker] was FILMED running to the TSBD, yet in the recreation he merely "walked" or "trotted."

So who's the liar here?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

You are (of course). Just as I said.

Let me walk Holmes through it very gingerly....

When you, Kook Holmes, said this....

"we KNOW FOR A FACT (because we have video of the event) that Baker RAN THAT DISTANCE."

....you were implying (i.e., lying) that a VIDEO existed of Baker having travelled "THAT DISTANCE", with "that distance", of course, being the distance from Baker's motorcycle to the second-floor lunchroom. (What other "distance" could Holmes possibly be referring to?)

There is no such video, of course, despite Holmes saying "WE HAVE VIDEO OF THE EVENT".

The fuller quote (i.e., lie) by Holmes makes it quite clear that Holmes was trying to imply that a VIDEO existed of Marrion L. Baker performing one or both of his re-creations for the WC on 3/20/64, which I knew immediately was an outright lie:

"John Howlett calmly *WALKED* the distance [from the Sniper's Nest to the second-floor lunchroom], but we KNOW FOR A FACT (because we have video of the event) that Baker RAN THAT DISTANCE." -- B. Holmes

Holmes was clearly implying that VIDEO existed of Baker RUNNING ALL THE WAY UP TO THE LUNCHROOM.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

They DID NOT have Howlett accurately recreate the alleged Oswald movements.

I've already pointed to the recycling of the rifle, the necessity to squeeze between boxes that were no longer there, and the fact that the assassin did *NOT* merely 'toss' the rifle.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

What makes you think Howlett just "tossed" the rifle into the book stack? Where did you get that from?

In the 1963 "Secret Service Film" version of John Howlett's re-creation (in the video below), we can see Howlett (moving at a snail's pace, as I said) hide a simulated rifle (stick) behind some book cartons just before he descends the stairs. He doesn't TOSS the rifle. He neatly places it down on the floor.

And I have no reason to think that Howlett did it differently when he re-created LHO's movements a few months later for the WC in March '64. The video below, however, does NOT show the same "re-enactment" that Howlett did for the WC in March. This video was shot by the Secret Service in late November of '63. Howlett's hilarious "Michael Myers"-like slow re-enactment begins at about the 22-minute mark...




BEN HOLMES SAID:

Nor did they account for the fact that [Roy] Truly was ahead of Baker... Oswald MUST HAVE BEATEN TRULY as well - which would add another 5 or 10 seconds to the mix.

It's even *MORE* obvious in Baker's movements... where he ADMITS to "walking" - when walking should never have even been considered.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

But you're totally ignoring these comments made by Baker (and this is REGARDLESS of how fast or slow he performed his re-creations for the Warren Commission)....

MARRION L. BAKER -- "We simulated the shots and by the time we got there, we did everything that I did that day, and this would be the minimum, because I am sure that I, you know, it took me a little longer."

Therefore, the WC should have SLOWED DOWN BAKER EVEN MORE (not speed him up in any way) in order to simulate more accurately the things Baker did on 11/22/63.

You're cooked, Ben. Admit it. Because any way you cut it, Oswald is going to beat Baker to that lunchroom, especially when we consider the fact that Howlett was certainly moving TOO SLOW and, per the above testimony, Baker was moving TOO FAST during his two re-enactments.

Adjusting for those two things, Oswald has plenty of time to beat Baker to the lunchroom.


"CONAN" SAID:

If Harry Holmes was part of the H/T Lingual program (and that is certainly a real possibility), he still would not have jurisdiction to interrogate a subject about a murder. It would be nice to know what compelled Harry Holmes to rush on Sunday morning to interrogate Oswald shortly before he was murdered. Could it be a separate investigation from the assassination?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Harry Holmes (partially) answers that question in his Warren Commission testimony (shown below). I think Harry felt "connected" to the case (and to Oswald) because of the fact that the murder weapon was sent THROUGH THE U.S. MAIL via Harry's Postal Department. So the "connection" is readily apparent.

DAVID BELIN -- "Let me ask you this. Just what was the occasion of your joining this interrogation? How did you happen to be there?"

HARRY D. HOLMES -- "I had been in and out of Captain Fritz' office on numerous occasions during this 2 1/2-day period. On this morning I had no appointment. I actually started to church with my wife. I got to church and I said, "You get out, I am going down and see if I can do something for Captain Fritz. I imagine he is as sleepy as I am." So I drove directly on down to the police station and walked in, and as I did, Captain Fritz motioned to me and said, "We are getting ready to have a last interrogation with Oswald before we transfer him to the county jail. Would you like to join us?" I said, "I would"."


BEN HOLMES SAID:

Of course, David has no answer for why HT/Lingual never spotted something as large as a rifle coming through his mail.

This **WAS** a mail intercept program... how did they miss a rifle?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

As usual, the CTer has decided to focus his attention on all the wrong information. Regardless of "why HT/Lingual never spotted something as large as a rifle coming through his [Harry Holmes'] mail", the fact remains (without question for sensible people) that the C2766 Carcano rifle WAS mailed to P.O. Box 2915 in Dallas by Klein's Sporting Goods of Chicago, which was a shipment that was generated after Klein's received an order in the mail from "A. Hidell" of "P.O. Box 2915 in Dallas".

And there is no evidence that the C2766 rifle was ever returned to Klein's by the post office.

Therefore, the rifle was definitely shipped to Oswald's P.O. Box by Klein's. And it MUST have been picked up by somebody at the Dallas Post Office.

Now, who do you suppose that person was who picked up that gun?

CTers have trouble with that last question....because CTers refuse to accept reality --- i.e., that Lee Harvey Oswald ordered a rifle from Klein's in March of '63 and, quite naturally, that same person who ordered that gun (Oswald) picked it up at the P.O. Box to which he had it sent. It's kindergarten math. But for CTers, it's an enduring mystery. Go figure.

"Common Sense Quote Of The Day".....

"Who in the heck orders something by mail-order,
and has it sent to his post office box, but then doesn't
even bother to pick it up?"
-- David Von Pein; December 1, 2011

David Von Pein
April 3, 2017
April 12, 2017
April 13, 2017
April 13, 2017
May 1, 2017
May 8, 2017
May 8, 2017