DVP vs. DiEUGENIO
http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/DVP Vs. DiEugenio
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID [WHILE ADDRESSING A MEMBER OF THE EDUCATION FORUM NAMED MIKE WILLIAMS]:
>>> "Mr. Williams, your argument about the weight of CE 399 is a
cheap diversion. I just proved that CE 399 was not found at Parkland. Understand?" <<<
DiEugenio actually thinks he has "proved that CE 399 was not found at
Parkland". Jim is showing all the traits of an arrogant, pompous
conspiracy theorist (and a really, really silly one at that, given the
fact he thinks that JFK's and J.D. Tippit's killer was completely
innocent of shooting anyone on November 22nd).
DiEugenio hasn't come close to proving that CE399 wasn't found at
Parkland. And Jim will forever ignore the following testimony provided
by the man who found the bullet at Parkland Hospital, Darrell C.
Tomlinson [at 6 H 132]. Jim D. naturally believes that Arlen Specter
was intimidating or coercing Mr. Tomlinson into saying OVER AND OVER
AGAIN that he WAS NOT SURE which stretcher he took off of the Parkland
elevator on 11/22/63:
ARLEN SPECTER -- "What did you tell the Secret Service man about which
stretcher you took off of the elevator?"
DARRELL TOMLINSON -- "I told him that I was not sure, and I am not--
I'm not sure of it, but as I said, I would be going against the oath
which I took a while ago, because I am definitely not sure."
MR. SPECTER -- "Do you remember if you told the Secret Service man
which stretcher you thought you took off of the elevator?"
MR. TOMLINSON -- "Well, we talked about taking a stretcher off of the
elevator, but then when it comes down on an oath, I wouldn't say for
sure, I really don't remember." ....
MR. SPECTER -- "You say you can't really take an oath today to be sure
whether it was stretcher A or stretcher B that you took off the
MR. TOMLINSON -- "Well, today or any other day, I'm just not sure of
it, whether it was A or B that I took off."
And DiEugenio naturally believes that the following two paragraphs
from CE2011 and CD1258 are nothing but a pack of lies forced on the
American public by the evil FBI. DiEugenio will rely on Bardwell
Odum's memory of this 37-year-old event, rather than rely on this FBI
report that was written on July 7, 1964, just 25 days after Odum
showed Bullet CE399 to both Darrell Tomlinson and O.P. Wright at
Parkland Memorial Hospital:
"On June 12, 1964, Darrell C . Tomlinson...was shown Exhibit C1
[CE399], a rifle slug, by Special Agent Bardwell D. Odum, Federal
Bureau of Investigation. Tomlinson stated it appears to be the same
one he found on a hospital carriage at Parkland Hospital on November
22, 1963, but he cannot positively identify the bullet as the one he
found and showed to Mr. O.P. Wright."
"On June 12, 1964, O. P. Wright...advised Special Agent Bardwell
D . Odum that Exhibit C1 [CE399], a rifle slug, shown to him at the
time of the interview, looks like the slug found at Parkland Hospital
on November 22, 1963, which he gave to Richard Johnsen, Special Agent
of the Secret Service. .... He advised he could not positively
identify C1 as being the same bullet which was found as November 22,
>>> "I personally have no respect for anyone who channels Von Pein for any reason on any issue." <<<
I think I'm pretty safe in saying that Mike Williams isn't looking for
(nor does he require) the "respect" of someone like James "OSWALD SHOT
Conversely, anyone who has studied the JFK assassination for as many
consecutive years as DiEugenio obviously has who can seriously believe
that Lee Harvey Oswald did not fire a single shot at either John
Kennedy or J.D. Tippit certainly doesn't deserve a single granule of
"respect" from anyone--either an LNer or a reasonable-minded
conspiracy theorist (assuming that isn't a contradiction in terms
DiEugenio's hilarious delusions regarding the JFK case continue to be
unveiled on almost a weekly basis. The latest example coming during
the Black Op Radio broadcast of June 3, 2010, when Jimmy D. revealed
one of his newest silly theories and delusions -- he thinks that
author Edward Jay Epstein was a Warren Commission shill right from the
very beginning--apparently dating all the way back to Epstein's first
book, "Inquest", which was published in 1966.
Of course, Epstein was very critical of the Warren Commission's work
and its lone-assassin conclusions in his 1966 book, but DiEugenio
evidently thinks that Epstein was just pretending to be a critic of
the Commission. Jim D., you see, can now read people's minds, and he
can tell us all kinds of intricate and detailed things about various
people, dating all the way back to the mid-1960s.
I wonder whose mind DiEugenio will read next? John McCloy's? Gerald
Ford's? Or maybe the mind of Allen Dulles?
Oh, wait. I forgot. Jim has already told us exactly what was going on
in the heads of those three men. They are the rotten and evil "Troika"
that Jim loves to ramble on about so much in his articles. And Jim
tells us that we're not to believe a single thing any of those three
Warren Commissioners said.
In other words, trust Jim DiEugenio to tell you the truth. Don't trust
the Triplets Of Deception named McCloy, Ford, and Dulles. After all,
they merely represent 43% of Earl Warren's top-level Commissioners.
And Jim has no problem at all tossing almost half of the WC under the
front wheels of his delusional bus on a whim. Jim thinks they were
evil, rotten-to-the-core men when it came to their investigation into
JFK's death, so we must believe what Jim D. says. Right?
In a word -- Bullshit!
I think I might even trust Roger Craig more than I do Jim DiEugenio at
this point in time here in mid-2010. And, as we all know, Deputy Sheriff
Craig was the biggest liar in the whole assassination investigation,
without a shred of a doubt.
>>> "And using DVP to point out an error by Harris, while ignoring everything else he mentions in his video--which I then detailed--is
typical cheap DVP trolling." <<<
Robert Harris is nearly as delusional as James DiEugenio when it comes
to his pet theories about this case. But if Jim wants to place a lot
of faith in someone who is still trying to peddle the notion that
somebody planted the initials of J. Will Fritz onto Commission Exhibit
No. 842 (which are initials that Harris last month was so sure were
the forged initials of Audrey Bell), then I say -- Harris is all yours, Jim.
Have a ball with him.
You two do have a lot in common--you guys gleefully misrepresent and
misinterpret more evidence in this case than a whole stadium full of
your fellow conspiracy kooks. And the odd part is--you seem proud of
the fact you're doing it. A strange hobby indeed.
>>> "You [Mike Williams] are the guy who says there is no evidence
for a front shot also. Hmm. How about the altered testimony of Sam Holland...[?]" <<<
LOL. Ya gotta love Kook DiEugenio here! Here's a witness (S.M.
Holland) who testified as follows in front of the Warren Commission:
S.M. HOLLAND -- "There were definitely four reports [gunshots]. .... I
have no doubt about it. I have no doubt about seeing that puff of
smoke come out from under those trees either."
And yet DiEugenio is saying that something has been "altered" in Mr.
Holland's testimony. But what would be the point of "altering" some of
Holland's statements after Sam let the above words slip from his lips?
You'd think if the Warren Commission was going to alter some of
Holland's words in order to make him conform more closely to the "Lone
Nut" scenario, they would have done something about that quote I just
cited above, which made it into the Warren Commission's volumes, on
Page 244 of Volume 6.
DiEugenio, as we can easily see, doesn't care if his theories make any
sense or not. He'll promote them as the gospel truth nonetheless, even
WITH Holland's words on page 244 of Volume 6 staring him in the face.
>>> "...The avulsed hole in the back of JFK's skull...[?]" <<<
Jim D. doesn't care that ALL of the most-reliable evidence (like X-
rays, autopsy photos, the autopsy report, the autopsy doctors, and the
Zapruder Film) proves that Jim is 100% wrong about there being a huge
"avulsed hole in the back of JFK's skull".
In other words, Jim is saying FUCK THE BEST EVIDENCE, which is
evidence that proves that the various "BOH" witnesses were wrong. Jim
is ready and willing to cast doubt over every single item I just
listed -- from the X-rays to the Z-Film to the autopsy report. All of
it is wrong, according to James.
And Jim's even a guy who doesn't place a lot of stock in the crazy
Zapruder Film Alteration theory either. So how Jim manages to get an
"avulsed hole" in the rear of President Kennedy's head when he stares
at this frame of Mr. Zapruder's home movie is a real mystery to me.
But no worries--Jim is always ready to see things that never existed
when it comes to this case.
>>> "...the witnesses Doug Horne names in Vol. 2 who saw a hole in JFK's temple...[?]" <<<
ZERO witnesses saw an ENTRY hole in JFK's temple. Horne's obviously
nuts. He's probably more nuts than Jim DiEugenio (as amazing as that
is to believe).
And the reason no witness could have possibly seen any entrance wound
in the temporal area of John F. Kennedy's head is because no such
entry hole existed in his temple. And the autopsy photos and X-rays
verify that obvious fact.
>>> "...Jackie Kennedy jumping on the back of the car to retrieve her husband's skull bones...[?]" <<<
Jim D. is more than happy to jump on any conspiracy bandwagon he can
climb aboard, even this silly one about Jackie Kennedy.
Of course, as any sensible person knows, even if Jackie DID climb onto
the trunk of the limousine to retrieve a portion of her husband's skull
(and I don't for a minute think she actually did climb out there for that
singular purpose), so what? What does it prove?
Answer: It proves nothing. And that's because we can all see JFK's head
being thrown violently to THE REAR right after the fatal head shot. And
since we also know that JFK was shot in the head ONLY ONCE and FROM
BEHIND, even if a part of his skull was thrown onto the trunk of the car,
it could have easily gotten there as a result of the President's rearward
head movement (vs. getting there directly as a result of a shot from the
Grassy Knoll or some other frontal location).
I've often wondered why more conspiracy theorists haven't figured out
the logic of the above scenario.
>>> "...Hargis' testimony (pre Gary mack MK Ultra) about getting hit with blood and tissue so hard it felt like a bullet...[?]" <<<
DiEugenio is reaching for more chaff here...even when the lone-
assassin wheat field is right beside him. Once again, Jim D. is ready
to pretend that all of the autopsy pictures are fakes. He must be
willing to do that very thing....otherwise he has to admit that any
theory about JFK being hit in the head from the front is pure bunk.
>>> "...and--oh yes--the Zapruder film's violent rearward action of JFK's body?" <<<
Jim, naturally, will totally overlook the fact that JFK's head moves
FORWARD at the critical moment of impact (between Z312 and Z313).
For conspiracy nuts like Jim D., the forward movement of Kennedy's
head AT IMPACT must either be completely ignored or misrepresented in
order to promote the theory of a frontal head shot.
Maybe Jim would like to now pretend that JFK was shot TWICE in the
head, a la Cyril Wecht. That's always a good fallback position for a
kook to take (despite the fact that there's ZERO evidence to support
such a theory).
>>> "In light of that "non-evidence" you [Mike Williams] are a natural soul-brother of Davey Boy." <<<
The mound of mush you just presented above is the same pile of crap
that you kooks have been trying to peddle for decades. Unfortunately,
a bunch of people have, indeed, swallowed that stuff -- hook, line,
And those people who buy into such garbage are also saying, by default,
that BOTH Government committees (the WC and the HSCA) were totally
inept or corrupt when BOTH of those investigatory entities came to the
same conclusion about Lee Harvey Oswald being the only gunman in
Dealey Plaza who hit anybody with any rifle bullets on November 22nd.
You'd think that maybe ONE of those two Government panels would have
gotten something right when they were tasked with investigating the
murder of the President, wouldn't you?
But no. According to people like James DiEugenio, BOTH of those
investigations produced nothing but lies. Even the HSCA, which was
hungry for a conspiracy from its inception!
>>> "Time wasters like you are one reason I lurk. /s/ Jim D" <<<
And yet you'll waste time responding to "time wasters" like Mike
Williams and David Von Pein.
Jim's not only an Anybody-But-Oswald nutjob, it would appear he's a
hypocrite, to boot.
David Von Pein
LINK TO ORIGINAL POST (JUNE 4, 2010)
Posted By: David Von Pein