DEREK THIBEAULT SAID:
I don't buy the curtain rods story. I do think [Buell Wesley] Frazier is untrustworthy in a lot of his story along with his sister.
FRANCOIS CARLIER SAID:
Are there really people here [who] believe that Buell Frazier was a liar? I mean, really? That can't be true!
I have heard a lot of ludicrous claims over the years, but come on, calling Buell Frazier a liar is definitely going way over the top!!!
TONY KROME SAID:
Certainly inconsistencies:
Mr. BALL - When was the last time you can remember you saw Lee?
Mr. FRAZIER - You mean on the 22nd?
Mr. BALL - On the 22nd, that day.
Mr. FRAZIER - Somewhere between--it was after 10 and somewhere before noon.
---------
Gary [Mack]: How long after the assassination do you think this was?
Buell: Oh, probably five to ten minutes probably.
Gary: So, you remember seeing him briefly coming down Houston Street along the side of the building?
Buell: (nodding) Yes.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Yes, you're right, Tony. There are some inconsistencies in Buell Frazier's statements over the years. Another one is: the location where Frazier said the shots came from. More about that here.
But one thing about which Buell Wesley Frazier has always been very consistent over the last 50+ years is when he talks about the paper bag (and the item that Lee Oswald told Frazier was contained within that paper bag—the "curtain rods").
So when many Internet CTers nowadays claim that Frazier just MADE UP the story about Oswald carrying a long-ish bag on the morning of 11/22/63, those CTers aren't just highlighting an "inconsistency" in Frazier's testimony or statements. They are, instead, taking an element of Buell Frazier's account that has always remained constant and the CTers are just totally throwing it away—just as if the paper bag never existed at all. Poof! It's gone!
And when the CTers perform that "Poof" magic act of theirs with that brown paper bag, they are also (by necessity) accusing another person—Linnie Mae Randle—of lying through her teeth as well. So it's not just Buell Frazier who gets treated like a bald-faced liar with respect to the "paper bag" topic—it's Linnie Mae too. And, in my opinion, that "double whammy" accusation against both Frazier and Randle is not only ridiculous, but it's totally unfair as well. Because every CTer on Earth who has made such a silly accusation has to know—deep down—that they can never prove such an accusation——even if their life depended on it.
IN THE 1964 FILM "FOUR DAYS IN NOVEMBER":
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
It's ok when DVP calls someone a liar, right? e.g., Shields and Dougherty.
He then tries to cover up that fact by saying, well, I just think Frazier's testimony supersedes them, which is baloney. Either Frazier is lying or Shields is about whether or not LHO was with Frazier parking the car. Either Dougherty is lying or Frazier is about Oswald's package.
The reason he does this is that he does not want us to use his tactics on him. That motive is pretty transparent.
Shields and Dougherty had no reason to lie. Frazier did.
I once put together a list of 57 people who had to be lying for DVP to be right. He did the same salsa dance.
Talk about a double standard.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
DiEugenio, once more, doesn't evaluate things properly. (No surprise there, of course.)
I have never once said Shields or Dougherty were liars. And I certainly do not think either man was lying about anything.
Shields merely didn't notice Oswald walking some 50 feet ahead of Frazier. So, yes, he might have seen Frazier walking to the building alone (i.e., without Oswald being right there next to him), or Shields could even have seen Frazier IN HIS CAR ALL ALONE (without Oswald), because Oswald got out of the car ahead of Frazier and started walking toward the Depository with his package. So there was a period of time when Edward Shields could have seen Buell Frazier ALONE in his car in the TSBD parking lot and/or ALONE while walking toward the building.
And Jack Dougherty, as discussed before, wasn't even looking at Oswald at all when LHO came in the door. He admitted that fact. So that should be the end of that topic.
Memo to James DiEugenio....
A person can be WRONG without being a LIAR.
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
Davey and FC [Francois Carlier] like to cover up the problems with the witnesses they like. And they then say that everyone who contradicts them is a liar.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
That's a bald-faced lie right there. I've called very few people liars in this case. DiEugenio, however, has called more people liars than you can shake a stick at.
Anyone can go back through Jim's posts in just this thread alone and find where Jimmy accuses many different people of being liars. Let's just take an inventory of some of them....
Marina Oswald ["Marina was so full of crap." -- J. DiEugenio; 1/19/19]
Mary Bledsoe ["who may be worse than Marina." -- JD]
The DPD (via the alleged "planted shirt fibers") [LOL]
Howard Brennan
Buell Frazier
Linnie Mae Randle
Henry Wade
Will Fritz
Bill Shelley
Billy Lovelady
J. Edgar Hoover
Ruth Paine
Harold Norman
Charles Givens ["what a lying cuss this guy was." -- JD]
-------------
As we can see, DiEugenio doesn't give a damn how many people he has to smear and call rotten liars in order to set a double-murderer free. And Jim's proud as a peacock about it too. But in reality, it's simply TOO MUCH. It's actually laughable how many people Jimmy has to pretend were liars in order to make his precious Oswald turn into the "Patsy" Jimmy desires him to be. It's over-the-top nonsense---times ten!
Can anybody imagine that many people actually being rotten evil liars within the confines of one single murder investigation? Couldn't happen in the "real" world in fifty lifetimes.
And, to stress this point again, my list above covers just this discussion thread at The Education Forum, which only was started a mere seven days ago!
DEREK THIBEAULT SAID:
How about answering why Shields stated that Frazier told him he dropped LHO off? Was that a lie?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
The only thing I can think of there is that Shields must have been thinking of some other day when such a thing happened, because we know Frazier did not drop off Oswald at the front door on 11/22. And the testimony of Jack Dougherty would tend to support that conclusion too, with Dougherty seeing Oswald come in the BACK door. Although, of course, Oswald could have easily walked to the back of the building, even if he had been dropped off at the front door. But does anyone know if an employee could enter through the FRONT door as early as 8:00 AM? I have no idea if that could normally happen or not at the TSBD. Was the front door unlocked at 8:00 AM? ~shrug~
Plus....
Why would Buell Frazier feel the need to lie about the precise location where Oswald got out of the car on Nov. 22? The story would be virtually the same either way---i.e., Oswald gets out of the car with package in hand and walks to the building. There's no substantial difference regardless of where Oswald started his journey (whether it be the parking lot or the front door).
DAVID VON PEIN LATER SAID:
I found the following text on a couple of Internet sites concerning Edward Shields' interview with the HSCA in the late 1970s. Here's the exchange between Shields and the HSCA investigator regarding the topic of Buell Frazier and his "rider" (whether this is the complete exchange on this topic, I'm not sure; but this is the only portion of the interview I was able to find online)....
EDWARD SHIELDS -- I think Charles Givens hollered out there and asked Frazier where was his rider and he told him: "I dropped him off at the building." Yeah, that was it...Well, I was down on the floor when they hollered out and said and the answer he gave them, I don't know, I think he said: "I dropped him off at the building." Now, whoever it was hollering asked him, I don't know.
HSCA -- This is the morning of the assassination?
SHIELDS -- Mm-hmm.
HSCA -- Somebody hollered out the window and say: "Where is your rider?" And to your recollection, Frazier says, "I dropped him off at the building."
SHIELDS -- Yes.
HSCA -- Alright. The day of the assassination, did you see Oswald come to work with Frazier?
SHIELDS -- No, I didn’t.
----------
So, we can see that it wasn't really Shields at all who asked Frazier anything that day. Shields thinks it was Charles Givens, who apparently hollered something to Frazier from a window of one of the Depository buildings. Was he hollering from the Houston Street TSBD warehouse building? I guess he must have been, because that's the building Shields worked in (as confirmed by Shields himself in his March 23, 1964, statement to the FBI which can be found in Commission Document No. 706).
But that's a bit confusing to me, because I thought Givens worked in the building at 411 Elm Street. He was certainly working at the Elm St. building on 11/22/63 at any rate. So this "teaming" of Edward Shields and Charlie Givens on November 22nd seems kind of odd and out of sync when it comes to the buildings they worked in. But perhaps Givens was just visiting with Shields in the building at 1917 North Houston Street before Givens started his work day on Nov. 22 at the other TSBD building on Elm Street. ~shrug~
[Here's a map which illustrates the locations of the two different TSBD buildings in relation to each other, and in relation to "Parking Lot No. 1", which is where Buell Frazier parked his car on 11/22/63.]
Plus....
We can see that Shields is far from certain about some of the things he was telling the HSCA investigator. We find all of these wishy-washy phrases in Shields' interview:
"I think Charles Givens hollered out."
"I don't know..."
"I think he said..."
"Whoever it was hollering asked him, I don't know."
And yet it is this witness (Edward Shields), per the conspiracy theorists, who is supposed to totally demolish the unwavering statements and testimony of Buell Wesley Frazier.
Yeah, right.
BTW....
As far as I am aware, Charles Givens never said a word about the above encounter that Shields said he and Givens had with Buell Frazier on the morning of November 22nd. (But, of course, most CTers think that Givens was a big fat liar about many of the things he did say in his testimony and statements, so the fact that Givens himself has never corroborated the things Shields told the HSCA probably doesn't mean much to many CTers.)
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
You are so full of it Davey.
In my book, that is what I said. That Shields heard Frazier's reply to someone else's question.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Yeah, Givens. A guy you've called a liar about other things connected to this case. But you really like the stuff Givens said in THIS one particular instance, huh? So, naturally, you're going to try and use it to your advantage.
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
What does it matter who asked it?
What matters is what Shields heard Frazier say.
This is another example of your diversionary methods, and also your double standard when it comes to evaluation of witnesses.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Pot meets Kettle yet again. You just demonstrated your own "double standard" with regard to Charles Givens.
But, let's face the "real world" here --- almost everybody exhibits a "double standard" (or "cherry picking" of evidence) at one time or another when arguing their points connected with the JFK case. I've yet to meet one single person who hasn't exhibited a double standard at some point in their arguments. It's human nature and it always happens when you dive deep into any controversial issue.
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
He [Shields] said he thought it was Givens, he did not say it was him. Read English much, partner?
But he expressed no doubt about what Frazier said.
But I am glad we smoked you out on this. According to you, Shields is lying. So Shields and Dougherty, liars; but Dougherty twice, right? Because he was in position to see Oswald fly down the stairs at the right time after the shots rang out.
And Adams and Styles? Are they lying or mistaken, Davey? And Stroud? Lying or mistaken?
Therefore, that is three instances of lying and three of either liars or mistakes or whatever you want to call it.
Shameless.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Only a conspiracy fantasist who has called DOZENS of different people liars could possibly think it's "shameless" for me to think some witnesses were "mistaken" (i.e., wrong, but not "lying").
——Shaking My Head——
REPLAY....
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
And Adams and Styles? .... And Stroud?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
http://jfk-archives/Adams, Styles, And Stroud
REPLAY....
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
But he [Edward Shields] expressed no doubt about what Frazier said.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
You must be kidding! Shields expressed nothing BUT doubt about the whole episode. Read English much, partner?
Allow me to highlight Shields' doubts....
"Well, I was down on the floor when they hollered out and said and the answer he gave them, I don't know, I think he said: "I dropped him off at the building." Now, whoever it was hollering asked him, I don't know."
And what the heck does Shields mean when he says "I was down on the floor"? WTF is that all about? ~shrug time~
David Von Pein
January 22-23, 2019
