Part 1398 of my "JFK Assassination Arguments" series includes a variety of my posts and comments covering the period of March 1—31, 2026. To read the entire forum discussion from which my own comments have been extracted, click on the "Full Discussion" logo at the bottom of each individual segment.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Can any conspiracy theorist tell the rest of the world that they themselves would have "set up" Lee Harvey Oswald the way many, many CTers think he was set up on 11/22/63? I.E., by using multiple gunmen to shoot at President Kennedy from various front and rear locations?
ANTHONY MARSH SAID:
Yes, you need to have an insurance shot in case something goes wrong in the TSBD, as actually happened.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
In this case, then, you can't frame a lone patsy in the Depository too. No way. No how. (Unless you're the goofiest "Patsy plotters" known to man.)
You can either have multiple shooters, firing away a mile a minute at the one and only target -- or: you can (maybe) have a chance at framing the one and only patsy by using just ONE single shooter in the TSBD.
And even a one-shooter, one-patsy plot automatically fails if Oswald's own gun isn't being used (but yet is the rifle "planted" to frame Oswald with).
CTers want the cake, all the icing, and the baking pan too. But, realistically, they simply cannot have all of the above and have a chance of success.
But, in a CT Dream World, I guess it would be possible.
Sweet Patsy dreams.
"CURT JESTER" SAID:
I am not in the assassination business.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Once more, the very simple question at hand is totally ignored and unanswered. Which tells me that even most hardline CTers aren't insane enough to say the following out loud to anyone....
"Yes, I myself would have pre-arranged the JFK killing in exactly the same manner most CTers believe it was pre-planned -- by letting Oswald wander free anywhere he wanted to wander at 12:30 and by using a whole bunch of shooters, front and rear, to knock off the one target; even though one good marksman with LHO's rifle could have done the job easily from the place where Oswald was supposed to be. Yes, yes, indeed, that multi-shooter, single-dupe plan is exactly the way I would have arranged it myself."
-------
Only a moron would utter those above words. (And, per CTers, there must have been quite a few "morons" pre-planning JFK's hit....because a whole boatload of CTers actually think it was carried out in such a nutty fashion.)
Still waiting for a single CTer to be willing to look foolish enough to speak those words I bracketed above. But the mere fact that NOBODY, in hindsight, would even begin to arrange the Patsy Plot in such a stupid fashion should be a good indication that nobody would have considered it in 1963 either.
I just want to hear one conspiracy believer state that they actually think the "Multi-Gun, Single-Patsy, More-Than-Three-Shots-Fired" assassination plan was a whale of a pre-arranged plot that just couldn't help but succeed.
WILL SAID:
Standard procedure is not to furtively burn any document, especially one of monumental importance, in your fireplace over the weekend, unless you have a secret to protect.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Well, let me ask this of CTers then....
If Dr. James Humes' mission from the get-go on November 22nd was to "conspire" with others to hide the evidence of conspiracy via the final autopsy report (as many CTers believe), then WHY would Humes have ever written up that first draft of the autopsy report in the first place?
And WHY would he have ADMITTED that he burned some of his original autopsy materials at all? He certainly didn't have to admit to there even BEING an original draft of the autopsy report at all. So why did he even say there were two versions if his mission was to hide the truth?
And he most certainly didn't have to admit to burning some of his autopsy notes in his own fireplace! Why on this Earth would a "conspirator" have admitted to doing such a silly thing?
If Dr. Humes' motives were to "hide" something via burning stuff in his fireplace, don't you think that he would also know that ADMITTING to this burning of notes and changing around the official report would look just a tad suspicious in the minds of others?
There is no way in hell that Humes would have said in front of the Warren Commission that he burned his notes and changed the autopsy report if he was actually part of some elaborate conspiracy to hide the truth concerning the President's death.
His saying anything about the "burning" of his notes indicates that he had NOTHING AT ALL TO HIDE with respect to said "burning".
In reality, CTers have no reason, other than their own built-in paranoia, to think that Humes' motives were conspiratorial in nature when he burned his notes and revised the autopsy report.
WILL SAID:
Dr. Humes' admission that he burned some of the most vital evidence in the assassination of the President does not exonerate him from a cover-up, be it benign or perfidious.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Therefore, all CTers will choose to believe the "conspiratorial" line of thought regarding Humes' note-burning (quite obviously). Even though the innocent explanation always given by Humes should hold the same weight as the CT version. But it never will, because CTers are paranoids and MUST believe the "shady" option even if they have to put the "shady" intent in the theory themselves....and they have, of course.
So, to do a little table-turning regarding "things people say" --- Oswald's saying "I'm just a patsy" does not make him a patsy automatically and does not erase the mile-high stack of physical evidence supporting his lone guilt in two murders on 11/22/63.
I cannot wait to see Vince Bugliosi rip to shreds the weak-ass CT argument of Oswald being a mere unwitting "Patsy" (with many CTers ACTUALLY taking the word of the accused double-murderer, at face value).
Vince will demolish the notion that Oswald was (or even could have been, or WOULD have been) an innocent "Patsy", set up by a group of always-unknown plotters, using XX number of guns to pelt the target with obvious non-Oswald evidence.
VB will have no trouble destroying that CT myth. Heck, I can even do that...and I'm not even close to being in Vincent's league on this subject.
WILL SAID:
An easy, but exotic, way to have as many shooters as the conspirators want, and no pesky, errant fragments found:
1) Blend the bullet material with a radioisotope label, or irradiate the material as done in NAA.
2) Fire those labelled missiles at the limo.
3) Post-shooting, retrieve the missiles and frags with a Geiger counter, leaving only the evidence that fits LN scenario.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
And Elvis is picking peaches and singing "My Way" in my backyard right now too. (Can't get rid of him. He's always there.)
Your nifty "As Many Shooters As They Want" scenario is laughable at best. You've totally ignored the very high likelihood that many Parkland Hospital witnesses will blow the plot to Kingdom Come (regardless of your fancy-schmancy "radioisotope" thingies. Because if you truly think that "All The Shooters They Want" are ALL going to somehow miss the one target of JFK's body, then those many shooters have no business firing a gun at all, because they must all be the worst gunmen ever...or completely blind.
But possibly the better question to ask when discussing these silly multi-shooter "One-Patsy" scenarios is not whether any of these theories COULD have actually been pulled off (in some miraculous fashion) after the fact -- the bigger question to ask, in my opinion, is:
"WOULD ANY PROFESSIONAL PLOTTERS, WANTING TO FRAME JUST ONE GUY, ACTUALLY UTILIZE ALL THESE SHOOTERS" (with these plotters, as a result, having to know that a whole bunch of "covering up" would be needed afterward)?
And how could any plotters be so stupid to think that many people at a local hospital (where the victim is bound to be taken--surely they KNEW this ahead of time, right?) would either just not notice the wounds caused by the non-Oswald shooters or would be willing to just shut up about the conspiracy they've just seen proven via their own eyes at the hospital?
In short -- It's a dumb plot. Plain and simple. And no amount of Monday-morning assassination quarterbacking will change the fact that a pre-planned, multi-shooter, Single-Patsy plot is just....dumb!
WILL SAID:
If you are willing to believe LHO got lucky twice, is it any more unrealistic to consider the CT line, given that the conspirators had unlimited access to evidence, witness intimidation, and control of the crime scene?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
You jest (surely).
Yes...that "CT" scenario is FAR more "unrealistic", and everybody knows (or should know) why.
You actually think that that CT scenario is as realistic (or more so) than a simple Oswald-Did-It-Alone conclusion? With the CT scenario featuring a band of conspirators (who MUST have been in cahoots with the after-the-shooting Government cover-uppers as well, correct?) arranging to shoot just one almost-stationary target in the OPEN, in front of hundreds of WITNESSES, while using SEVERAL GUNS, while at the same time trying to frame just ONE PATSY -- and then the plotters managed to coerce many doctors and other witnesses to just go with the LN flow, even though these people knew it was a lie?
Get real.
WILL SAID:
Hell, if anything got seriously out of control, they could just arrange a gas-line leak at Parkland and blow everyone up.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Sure. Great plan. That'll never trigger the "It Was A Conspiracy" portion of anyone's thought process, will it?
Better still -- Why didn't the plotters just arrange for the limousine to blow up (or enter Rod Serling's "Zone") BEFORE it got to Parkland, thereby destroying any and all evidence inside the car immediately?
~smirk~
WILL SAID:
People get lucky, but what I am saying is that your scenario requires as many, or more, presuppositions as most CTs.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
It requires NO "presuppositions" in point of fact.
Why?
Because the physical evidence left behind by the murder weapon TELLS US that Oswald's rifle (crappy as it may have been) was the ONLY weapon that fired any bullets that hit anyone in JFK's car on 11/22.
Similar to the useless CT argument concerning the Tippit murder (that argument being: Oswald couldn't have gotten to 10th Street in time to shoot Tippit) .... a similar type of CT argument proves to be totally useless and moot with respect to the JFK murder weapon as well (with that invalid CT argument being: Oswald's rifle could not possibly have been the gun used to kill JFK because it was a rusty, defective, mis-aligned POS that only cost $21.45).
Neither of the above arguments is worth a hill of beans ... because of OTHER HARD EVIDENCE that trumps both CT arguments 100%.
There is still, to this day, ZERO pieces of physical ballistics evidence that indicate any weapon other than Oswald's Carcano rifle hit anyone on Nov. 22nd.
Which, therefore, still indicates to this day that if a multi-gun conspiracy existed in Dealey Plaza (as virtually all CTers believe), there was a wide-sweeping, comprehensive, grab-every-non-LHO-bullet cover-up job performed by XX number of conspirators after the fact -- including the EXTRA, unexpected task of getting rid of XX number of bullets that hit a person (John Connally) other than the intended target.
And these plotters did it all just perfectly, per most CT accounts, even though Connally and Kennedy could very well have had XX number of missiles stuck inside them when they arrived at Parkland.
And they DID have multiple NON-OSWALD bullets inside them too, per CT accounts of events --- e.g., JFK's neck bullet, caused by some oddball low-powered weapon....plus JFK's back-wound bullet, again caused by a low-powered weapon evidently, since it only goes into him a couple of inches; these wounds make NO sense from the assassins' POV, because why on Earth would any pro assassins shoot TWO dum-dum type of non-fatal bullets at the target; that's pure stupidity....plus the XX number of bullets that CTers say pelted Gov. Connally, which were all never seen by any non-plotters either.
The "hide-the-bullets-before-somebody-gets-wise" plot only gets sillier and sillier the more any logical person thinks about it.
But the LHO/Lone Assassin/3-Shot scenario fits perfectly, to a tee, right down the line -- from the TSBD evidence (rifle/shells), to the fragments inside the limo, to the witness testimony, to the SBT alignment, to CE399, to the autopsy report, and to the fact that NO OTHER BULLETS were found anyplace that could be connected with the victims' wounds.
And to think that this amount of LHO-hanging stuff could have possibly ALL been "faked" and/or "arranged" by evil plotters after the fact in such a short time period is to believe in magic (literally).
To repeat a quote I've mentioned before from Larry Sturdivan's well-done book "The JFK Myths" (and it's a quote every CTer should jot down and stick to their refrigerator for future reference, because it makes so much logical sense):
"While one of the pieces of physical evidence could conceivably have been faked by an expert, there is no possibility that an expert, or team of super-experts, could have fabricated the perfectly coordinated whole, with superhuman abilities to fake physical evidence that is in complete agreement with all the other faked evidence." --- "The JFK Myths"; Page 246
WILL SAID:
And in the Tippit scene, LHO was armed and suspicious. .... I wonder how many other Texans were armed and suspicious in those hours after the assassination.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Possibly quite a few, with the big glaringly obvious difference being --- Only one man in the state of Texas (or on planet Earth) had the Tippit murder weapon ON HIS PERSON (while trying to kill somebody else with it) when he was arrested just blocks from where the officer was killed. And only one person in Texas was seen murdering the policeman and seen dumping shells from his gun while fleeing.
And guess who that one person might have been?
Each post that attempts to cast doubt on Oswald's obvious guilt in the Tippit murder is one more reason to vomit....and is also one more very good reason for disregarding everything else a paranoid conspiracy fantasist has to say about anything related to the JFK or J.D. Tippit murder cases.
WILL SAID:
Okay, David. Your post has piqued my interest. People saw LHO empty shells from a revolver. Who? I'm not being combative at the moment. This is a question for which I have wanted an answer for some time. Any elucidation is welcome.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
I'm sure you know the answer to your own question already (or should know), but I'll play....
Barbara J. Davis saw Lee Harvey Oswald "unloading a gun" as he cut across
her yard. [Affidavit]
Virginia Davis saw Oswald "unloading his gun", too. [Affidavit]
As for Oswald's motive for shooting Tippit -- IMO, it's as obvious as a CTers' paranoia. Oswald feared being apprehended for the murder he had just committed in Dealey Plaza 45 minutes earlier.
But, in the final analysis, it doesn't make a damn bit of difference WHAT Oswald's motive was -- because he DID KILL TIPPIT, period.
Motive notwithstanding, Lee Harvey Oswald killed Officer J.D. Tippit. And no CTer can undo this murder that Oswald committed, whether everybody's watches were perfectly "synchronized" or not. (And why anyone would think every witness on Tenth Street had all their timepieces set to perfect "Coordinated Universal Time" is just silly on its face. Ask five people on the street "What time is it?" and you're likely to get at least three or four different answers.)
DAVID VON PEIN LATER SAID:
The "CT mindset" is an alien one to me. It's "out there" in a Twilight Zone-like world all its own.
A great example of this really weird and skewed CT mindset, of course, is that many conspiracy theorists believe (on nothing more than outright blind faith, with ZERO hunks of evidence at all to prove that it occurred) that a band of President-murdering conspirators actually arranged a plot -- ahead of time (with ample time, no doubt, to THINK about the idiocy and implausibilities of their proposed actions) -- that called for the framing of one patsy named Oswald, while at the same time deliberately shooting JFK from every angle imaginable.
And then, after pelting the lone target with up to a dozen rounds of hot lead from XX number of directions, these boobs who pre-planned it that way somehow expected everything to neatly fall into a nice "Oswald Did All Of This" pile at LHO's feet (either via their own miraculous brand of "evidence altering" procedures ... OR, in lovely "Hail-Mary, I Sure Hope Everything Works Out Okay" fashion, these moronic Patsy Framers just hoped and prayed that the Dallas Police and the U.S. Government would ALSO be wanting to frame the very same "Patsy" that the pre-11/22 patsy arrangers were wanting to frame.
And then the large number of Police and Government cover-uppers would obediently perform all of the necessary altering of evidence in order to eliminate the tons and tons of evidence that undoubtedly will be revealing the conspiracy, since these brain-dead assassins decided to use three or four gunmen, instead of the required maximum of one.
Many CTers actually believe that a "Patsy Plot" was pre-planned in the above manner. How could they NOT believe something along the lines I've just laid out and still believe that JFK received any gunshot wounds from the FRONT?
Can there be any "reasoning" with people who believe something that wouldn't even have been considered by any assassins in the first place, much less having a plot like that actually implemented and carried out on November 22nd, 1963?
The biggest and boldest reason to know that Lee Harvey Oswald was not being set up as a lone patsy in the manner theorized by many/most CTers is:
BECAUSE NOBODY WITH A BRAIN WOULD HAVE FRAMED HIM THE WAY CONSPIRACY THEORISTS THINK HE WAS FRAMED....BY USING MORE THAN ONE SHOOTER, FIRING AT THE PRESIDENT FROM MULTIPLE DIRECTIONS.
Once conspiracy believers learn this, and accept it, then the Multi-Gun Patsy Plot that CTers have fallen in love with over the decades crumbles into a pile of dust.
I'd also love to know what that band of "Patsy Plotters" (who worked so hard to set up dumb-as-a-box-of-rocks Lee Harvey) would have done if Lee just decided to take Friday off. He decides he's not gonna go to work on the 22nd. He'll stay at the Paines with Marina and his two little girls.
What happens then?
It's yet another possible "unknown" factor that the plotters need to have go off like clockwork on 11/22 in order for their "Miracle Patsy Plan" to succeed.
And the fact that, per many CTers, Oswald isn't even WATCHED at 12:30 by the plotters is another laughable part of this so-called "plot". Lee, per most CT accounts, is on the lower Depository floors when he's needed UPSTAIRS firing at JFK. Yet another impossible-to-control 12:30 PM variable in this grand Master Plan Of Patsydom.
And what if Harold Norman, Bonnie Ray Williams, and Junior Jarman had decided to go to the SIXTH floor to watch the motorcade, instead of the fifth? What would the Patsy Plotters have done then? Eliminate every one of those three witnesses in a blaze of gunfire?
The Patsy Plot is so amazingly and incredibly IMPOSSIBLE for so many different reasons. But CTers can only see the plot through POST-assassination eyeballs, never having once (evidently) looked at the complexities of such a complex plot through PRE-11/22 orbs.
BUD SAID:
Excellent points, and an excellent way to view the conspiracy angle. For starters, the kooks frivolously assign anything troublesome or unknown as evidence of conspiracy. What they don't seem to realize (well, they don't seem to realize quite a bit) is that every added thing you attribute to the conspiracy makes the concept of conspiracy more far-fetched. It collapses under the weight of the stuff the kooks pile onto it.
But that isn't what I want to comment on. That point itself could be elaborated into several thousand words. The germ of an idea which you have awoken, David, has been gnawing at me for quite some time. I'm glad you have been focusing recently on the "prior planning" aspect of any conspiracy, as it is as important as it is neglected. I'll speak generally about conspiracy as I know it, mostly because the kooks are loathe to go into details and specifics about how they think such a thing could be arranged and carried out (much easier to attack the WC than put a reasonable alternative on the table).
In any case, in any kook-considered scenario, they always have the luxury of hindsight, they know where Oz [Lee Oswald] was at fairly precise times. They can weave a tale about Oz being at the Texas Theater at a certain time for instance, whereas the conspirators would have to anticipate this, or influence it, a much harder task.
I'm sure you are familiar with the ease the kooks say "They lured Oz to the Texas Theater", but the truth is there are hundreds of variables between the 15 minutes prior to the assassination and Oz's arrest in the [theater]. In fact, every person in Dealey Plaza was a variable that couldn't be completely accounted for (especially those with cameras).
If I was told that some shooter was going to shoot from a building, and I was filled in with all the particulars, and you were to ask me what would happen next, I couldn't begin to tell you. Would one person see the shooter, or 3 dozen? Would the building be rushed or neglected? Easy to build scenarios after the fact, but difficult to anticipate events beforehand. Take the Tippit shooting. What if a bystander took Tippit's pistol and shot this double the kooks imagine? Or tackled him while he reloaded? Who knows [how] these average citizens would react to this event?
I remember when an unbalanced person was running amuck through a mall shooting people, and someone just stepped forward and disarmed her (Sylvia Seagrist, I think was the name). What if [Johnny] Brewer associates the sirens to the suspicious fellow who entered his store, and steps outside and flags down a cop? Anyway, this is one huge problem for conspirators, anticipation of events is impossible, only possible to plug things in in hindsight.
The other thing that occurs to me is that most, if not all of the indications [that] conspiracy kooks point to occur the day of the assassination and after. Yet, conspiracy as written by the kooks is a complex operation requiring all kinds of preparation. P.O. boxes to be secured, rifles to be sent, constant surveillance of [Ruth] Paine's house and Oz's boardinghouse, to learn the movements of Oz and the other, Oz's possessions need to be infiltrated, likely a few times, the need to know the TSBD inside-out, scouting shooting locations, and just hundreds of other tasks big and small.
Yet, what do the kooks have to show as indicating the laying of groundwork for this endeavour? I asked Ben [Holmes] what pre-assassination evidence the kooks had, and he offered [Joseph] Milteer. Now, two things about him. One, if a blowhard like Milteer, who would blab to anyone who would listen, could get inside information, how secure could the operation be? Secondly, it's obvious that Milteer was talking out of his ass, making up shit as he talked.
Anyway, that's all I have on my mind at the moment. Thanks for the thought-prevoking response, David.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Thank you, Bud.
You are the very first person, LNer or CTer, who has ever responded in such a well-thought-out and logical manner to any of the many posts I've made over the last several years (at multiple similar forums) concerning the "Pre-Assassination Illogic" of the so-called 11/22/63 "Patsy Framers".
Quite naturally, I can never get any CTer to actually look at the ridiculously reckless "Patsy Frame-Up" plot from the PRE-11/22 point-of-view....because if they do, they've got to realize what I've been saying for years -- It's a totally unworkable and untenable plot! Period.
And, even if (somehow) this stupid multi-shooter, One-Patsy plot was to miraculously succeed, it still would not make that silly scheme any MORE secure and non-reckless from a pre-11/22 standpoint. (If it succeeded, it would only mean that the Lord Jesus Christ intervened for some reason and helped out these inane people who wanted to frame just one guy but used a plethora of guns all over Dealey Plaza to kill the one almost stationary target.)
CTers refuse to discuss any of the pre-planning aspects from the "Why on Earth would they have planned it THIS silly way?" POV.
Because to do that would mean for CTers to readily admit what has been obvious to me for many years -- i.e. ....
You don't try to frame a lone Patsy by shooting up the joint with 2 to 5 gunmen! And, moreover, you don't attempt to frame a guy with his own gun and then NOT USE SAID GUN AT ALL IN THE MURDER ATTEMPT! That's yet another layer of stupidity exhibited by these so-called plotters (a layer of the PRE-PLANNED PATSY PLOT that is widely believed to be "FACT" by many a-CTer, when, in reality, it's just plain dumb).
And furthermore, you don't NEED to frame a lone gunman by using multiple shooters. A "professional" hit man is just that -- a PRO -- he doesn't need back-ups all over the place.
CTers, in short, don't seem to want to realize that if a multi-gun patsy plot did occur on November 22nd, then some group of conspirators (who are never named by CTers of course; their identities are as murky as Badge Man) had to have sat themselves down prior to November 22 and mapped out the best way to frame Lee H. Oswald. And, incredibly, CTers think that these pre-planners came up with this brainstorm of a plan....
"Hey, guys....why don't we put three or maybe even FOUR riflemen in Dealey Plaza, in the front and the rear of JFK's vehicle, and then start popping away at the exact same time at the one target....all the while we'll just let our one Patsy run around loose on the first or second floor of the TSBD (even though he's supposed to be upstairs with a gun)....or, maybe, we'll even let him GO OUTSIDE THE BUILDING WHERE HE'S SURE TO BE PHOTOGRAPHED BY CAMERAMEN! Yeah....that's what we'll do on 11/22. Anybody object to this plan??"
And, per CTers, evidently there wasn't a single person in this "Mystery Group Of 11/22 Pre-Planners" who thought that that Patsy frame-up idea was not an excellent one.
I only hope that Vincent Bugliosi has a lot to say about the silliness of any Multi-Gun One-Patsy Plot in "Final Verdict" [later re-titled "Reclaiming History"]. I'm confident he will speak of this almost totally ignored aspect of the "planning" of any such crackpot plot in his book next year. And Vince's unique brand of common sense is not likely to be ignored in this important regard.
More on "The Patsy Plot Silliness" HERE.
DAVID VON PEIN ALSO SAID:
Re: "Oswald, The Liar"....
It's oh so obvious that Lee Oswald started lying to the police almost immediately after his arrest, and he never stopped lying when it came to anything that had to do with the JFK and Tippit murders. Offhand, I cannot think of a single hunk of "truth" he uttered during his 46-hour detention at DPD (to the police or to the live TV cameras and press in the hallways) when it came to pertinent info concerning the murders themselves. Every single thing Oswald said was a lie, including this LHO falsehood that was mentioned by Bud in one of his forum posts:
"The whole "patsy" thing is a myth. Oz claimed the Dallas police picked him up because he had lived in the Soviet Union, and no one has shown that claim to have a shred of merit."
I've spoken at various other times about this exact lie of Oswald's. And it really places the "Patsy" remark in a whole new and differing light, because his "Patsy" whitewash comes right on the heels of a PROVABLE LIE regarding the "Soviet Union". One lie is feeding the next.
Also: Oswald doesn't say anything about some outside entity (i.e., Clay Shaw, David Ferrie, the Mob, the Boogie Man, et al) making him the "Patsy" during his famous "I'm Just A Patsy" statement. He, in essence, since the remark tailgates the lie about the "Soviet Union", is pointing the finger of "Patsy blame" at the Dallas Police Department, and not at anyone else who might have "set him up" beforehand. And, IMO, that's an important distinction to remember when assessing the infamous "Patsy" remark made by Oswald.
Why on Earth so many CTers want to take the word of the accused double-murderer as Gospel is a mystery indeed. It's similar to blindly accepting the protestations of Charlie Manson or O.J. Simpson, when they insisted "I killed no one".
Here are some links that discuss many of "Oswald's Lies". (Does a truly "innocent Patsy" need to lie this much?)....
David Von Pein
February 10-19, 2006
Re-posted March 1, 2026
================================
BUD SAID:
Look at what the effort put forth by OJ's lawyers did in producing enough muddle for OJ to escape through the fog. OJ had the money to buy the experts to make the smoke. [JFK Conspiracy] kooks have been doing it pro bono on Oswald's behalf.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Bingo, Bud.
But even the pro bono "lawyers" the world over, who are hellbent on allowing Lee Oswald (like O.J. Simpson) to escape through that CTer-created fog, cannot escape the inescapable PHYSICAL EVIDENCE that screams "Oswald Did It". (Plus the almost-equally-invincible circumstantial evidence that tells the world that LHO killed 2 men in 1963.)
Even with all that pro bono effort on Oswald's behalf, the best that conspiracy theorists can do is to question the validity of the physical evidence (which all leads to the beloved "patsy" and everybody knows it).
The CTers don't like the way Commission Exhibit 399 was handled...so that evidence is thrown out and deemed unfit for use by the CTers (despite the fact that NO proof can be established to show that 399 is any kind of a "plant" in the JFK case).
And if 399 is a legit bullet in the case (which of course it is), then even CTers know that that very fact means something they never want to admit to themselves -- i.e., it means that Oswald's rusty old Carcano rifle definitely DID do what many conspiracists think was virtually impossible for it to do -- it fired a bullet that hit one or more victims in the President's limousine on 11/22/63.
And I still want to know who is more likely to have used Oswald's own rifle at any point in time besides the gun's owner, Lee Harvey Oswald himself?
Is it MORE likely for a band of patsy-framing plotters to have stolen Oswald's rifle and used it to frame him? Or for those same plotters to have duped the dumber-than-dumb Oswald into bringing his rifle to work for somebody ELSE to use on November 22?
Or is it more likely that Oswald HIMSELF used it on Friday, 11/22/63?
I ask....which of the above is the most likely scenario?
David Von Pein
April 21, 2007
Re-posted March 1, 2026
================================
ANTHONY MARSH SAID:
Bugliosi places the Single Bullet Theory at frame 210 [of the Zapruder Film]. And as you know, Bugliosi says that anyone who doesn't agree with him is a kook. Unfortunately for the Warren Commission defenders here, most of them say the frame was Z-224.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Yes, an Internet friend told me this the other day by private e-mail (after that friend asked Vince directly at a book signing in NYC about his odd SBT timing). Vince told my friend that he places the SBT "just after Z210".
This is, indeed, odd and is something I completely disagree with Vince about, and I will say so in my tome of a review coming in a few weeks. But at least Vince realizes that an SBT frame IS on that film somewhere. There has to be. The Warren Commission knew that and so did the HSCA (even though they, too, came to different conclusions about the timing).
Odder still, IMO, is Vincent's picking Zapruder frame "210", which is, number 1, a frame that does not even exist on the copies of the Zapruder Film we see today. Z210 is one of the damaged and removed frames that were damaged by Time-Life in '63-'64.
And, number two, Z210 (if it WERE a part of the extant film) can't possibly lead Vince to a conclusive "SBT" conclusion, because we can't even SEE Kennedy's body at that point on the film. All but the top of his head is behind the Stemmons Freeway sign.
I see, though, that Vince has gotten closer to the true SBT frame (which is Z224, without a speck of a doubt, in my opinion)....because VB had endorsed the HSCA's ridiculously early Z190 timeline back in 1986 at the Mock Trial of LHO in London.
Very strange. But I'll wait and see what Mr. Bugliosi's full explanation is for this odd 210 timeline when I read (fully) his book very soon. (My copy is coming in a day or so.)
Perhaps Vince is doing a little "extrapolating" backward from Z224-225 (via some "expert" in the field of "reaction times" or something) to arrive at his 210 SBT time. I don't know. But I'll know for certain soon.
MARTIN SHACKELFORD SAID:
David doesn't seem to realize that the "missing frames" have been mostly available since the publication of Josiah Thompson's book in 1967, and ALL available with the publication of Robert Groden's booklet in the late 1990s. They are also available on Groden's DVD "The Assassination Films."
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
But not available on the best digital version of the Z-Film (to date)....the 1998 MPI DVD version.
Yes, I have the Groden DVD, which (as you said) does include the unspliced film....but it's a really crappy-looking version, and is hardly in good enough shape to make any definite "JFK WAS SHOT HERE" determinations. (IMO anyway.)
ANTHONY MARSH SAID:
Can you explain why he [Bugliosi] would depict a SBT trajectory at Z-210 if he thought it happened at Z-224?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
When did I ever say VB thought it happened at Z224? I didn't say that. It DID happen at Z224, of course. But I never said Vince said that.
Vince is wrong regarding the exact SBT timing...but he's just playing it safe...like the Warren Commission with its 210-225 "range".
But you, Tony Marsh, are even MORE wrong with your anti-SBT stance. Obviously, Vince isn't silly enough to abandon the Single-Bullet Theory. Why would anyone who's looked at the evidence in this case be that silly, I ask you?
DAVID VON PEIN LATER SAID:
In his book "Reclaiming History", Vincent Bugliosi has a variation in SBT timelines it would appear. Which makes me suspect (although I certainly cannot prove it) that Vince possibly wrote some of this material years (even decades) apart, and some of these precise timelines aren't meshing over time.
Perhaps he's had differing "SBT Timeline" theories over the years, has revised them, and some old material didn't get revised in certain places in the book. Hard to believe, though, since Vince is meticulous and wants things to "align" and be correct for any finished product. But, anyway, that's just a guess.
BARB JUNKKARINEN SAID:
How come Bugliosi says that the [SBT shot] happened between 210 and 222? He doesn't say 224.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
But, then too, on Page 40 -- "3.5 seconds" after a Z160 shot HAS to be Z224. So, yes, Vince is inconsistent throughout the manuscript concerning the exact SBT timeline. (I say this without having gotten to the SBT chapter yet. I'm still on Chapter 1. This is gonna take weeks...or months...to read...but worthwhile IMO.)
But, based on these piecemeal posts regarding Mr. Bugliosi's SBT timing, it appears he's got at least 2 variations. Because Z210 is certainly not 3.5 seconds from Z160 (VB's first-shot time). Nor is Z222 3.5 secs. from 160.
Anyway, VB knows an SBT is on that Z-Film someplace. To believe otherwise is simply "crazy on its face" (in VB parlance). So, whether it's 222 or 210 or 224, the SBT lives BASED ON ALL THE OTHER EVIDENCE THAT MAKES IT A FACT.
Live with that...or live with a bulletless CT alternative (if CE399 was "planted", as nearly all CTers advocate). Simple as that.
(Addendum -- Z224 is the correct SBT frame, IMO. That's obvious...to me anyway.)
ANTHONY MARSH SAID:
The alignment of those men [Kennedy & Connally] does not work for your SBT.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Sure it does. So why not stop saying it doesn't. You know damn well you can't measure the victims' positions TO THE INCH inside the limo at the time they're hit. Such exactitude is impossible and everybody knows it.
But within a reasonable degree of certainty/probability, the men were lined up to receive a single bullet from Z-Film frames 210 to 225. The Warren Commission TESTED this theory, and came up with that "range".
Thus far, no conspiracy theorist has come up with anything better (certainly nothing with the word "reasonable" attached to it, at any rate). Nor has any conspiracist come up with anything to disprove the Warren Commission's "210-225" SBT timeframe.
And, most importantly, no CTer has produced a single BULLET that debunks the SBT's likelihood...and, of course, they never will produce one...because no such non-Carcano anti-SBT bullet exists.
So, what CTers are left with is this -- Seven wounds in two victims...caused by ZERO BULLETS in evidence. (Automatically discounting CE399, naturally, since all CTers think that bullet is a fake of some kind and never touched a victim on Elm Street.)
CTers have multiple magic bullets in this case. LNers have zero such missiles of the "magical" variety.
Which is, indeed, irony at its finest.
ANTHONY MARSH SAID:
What's wrong with CE 399 doing some of the work?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Nah. That sucker HAD to be planted.
What kind of CTer are you anyway...believing in a legit 399 to do "some of the work"?
That kind of talk will positively get you crossed off the invitation list for Oliver Stone's next BBQ. 😁
David Von Pein
May 18-28, 2007
Re-posted March 1, 2026
================================
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
I recently upgraded and expanded my WFAA-Radio (Dallas) 11/22/63 assassination coverage. This new version (linked below) is 36 minutes longer than my previous version and the audio quality is much better:
David Von Pein
March 2, 2026
