JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS (PART 1218)

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Anyone who can't figure out that Lee Harvey Oswald shot J.D. Tippit should probably not even be walking around.

But, somehow, the Tippit murder is a big mystery to many conspiracy theorists -- despite a dozen witnesses, from various walks of life (all non-Governmental), who all place Oswald at or near 10th & Patton after 1:00 PM CST on November 22, 1963.

That's called ignoring the best evidence completely.


WILLIAM KELLY SAID:

DVP,

Among your dozen witnesses who saw Oswald in Oak Cliff, do you include Oswald buying the ticket to [the] Dick Clark show at Top Ten? Oswald showing a driver's license with his name on it to buy a beer? Oswald sitting in Mather's car at the Mexican restaurant? The Oswald look-alike - Cuban at the Alpha 66 house who was mistaken for Oswald in Oklahoma? And which one was it who killed Tippit?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Bill,

I'm talking, of course, about the dozen witnesses who were in the immediate vicinity of Tenth & Patton at approximately 1:15 PM on November 22 and saw Oswald firing bullets into the body of a policeman and/or saw Oswald leaving that murder scene with gun in hand, dumping shells out of that gun.

I'm not talking about people who think they saw Oswald elsewhere in Dallas, doing things that we know he could not have been doing at about that same time.

Tell me, Bill, do you really and truly think that all (or any) of those other "I Saw Oswald" witnesses saw the real LHO or an "imposter" on November 22?

And if it's the latter, then what kind of goofballs were those patsy-framers anyway? They've got Oswald driving a car (when they should know the real LHO couldn't do that--at least not very well anyway), and they've even got him in other CITIES, like Oklahoma City, when he's being framed for two murders in DALLAS??

The various "mistaken identity" witnesses are fun to play around with, but they obviously were all truly mistaken. Because the real Oswald's whereabouts are accounted for. And you know that--don't you Bill?


WILLIAM KELLY SAID:

How do you know they were "mistaken identity" witnesses, and if they were, how come the ones who saw "Oswald" shoot Tippit at 10th & Patton didn't make the same "mistaken identity," especially if there was someone or more than one person who either looked like Oswald or was intentionally impersonating him?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Come on, Bill. You're kidding with this question, right?

The answer is, if course -- Because Oswald had the Tippit murder weapon
ON HIM when he was arrested, Bill.

Do you want to theorize that an Oswald "look-alike" shot Tippit with Smith & Wesson Revolver #V510210, and then handed off that gun to the real Oswald less than 35 minutes later in the theater?

That's just crazy talk, Bill.


WILLIAM KELLY SAID:

How come all the Tippit murder witnesses, at least in your mind, say they saw the historic LHO, when the others were mistaken, even though Oswald was certainly in the hood at the time?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Again, the gun.

There was only ONE Tippit murder weapon (despite Don Thomas' recent goofy claims). And that ONE gun was in the real Oswald's hands 35 minutes after Tippit was shot.

This one's a no-brainer, William. Why in the world CTers even consider this topic to be "in doubt" is the bigger mystery.


WILLIAM KELLY SAID:

And who was that guy who said he was Oswald buying jeeps in Louisiana, when Oswald was in USSR?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Beats me. But I know it wasn't the same guy who shot J.D. Tippit in Oak Cliff on November 22nd.

And why on Earth would any plotters who were attempting to frame Oswald for some later crime even WANT to do something so silly by having a person pretend to be a guy who they surely knew was thousands of miles away (in Russia) at the time he was being impersonated in the state of Louisiana?

Did these so-called plotters have any brains at all?


WILLIAM KELLY SAID:

And who was that guy who shot at the targets they say was Oswald when Oswald was at the Paines?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I think one of those LHO sightings at the rifle range might have really been Oswald. Although the part about Oswald possibly driving away in a car is a bit hard to buy. That's the part of the story that makes me think it wasn't Oswald. But Malcolm Price and Garland Slack are pretty convincing.

And, I'll be honest, I kinda want that guy to be the Real McCoy (i.e., the real Oswald).

Why do I say that?

Because if the real Lee Harvey Oswald was target-shooting at the Sports Drome Rifle Range in September of 1963, it means that the conspiracy theorists are dead wrong about yet another one of their many theories associated with the JFK murder case -- and that's the theory about how Oswald never practiced with a rifle in the months leading up to President Kennedy's assassination.

Frankly, I'd love it if it could be proven that the person who was firing bullets into Garland Slack's paper target was, in fact, Lee H. Oswald. I know that that can never be "proven". But I wish it could be (for the reason I just stated).


WILLIAM KELLY SAID:

And who was that guy who called the embassy in Mexico City and claimed to be Oswald?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

That was the real Lee Harvey Oswald, of course.

Given the wealth of documentary evidence that indicates that the real LHO was, in fact, in Mexico City in September and October of 1963, the idea that he called up the embassy in that city during the time he was down there isn't really the mystery of the ages.

Since the topic of Mexico City has arisen in this discussion, let me ask you this question Bill (which is a question that I don't recall anybody ever asking--or reasonably answering--in the past):

If the real Lee Harvey Oswald was NOT in Mexico City in late September and early October 1963, then can you tell me WHERE THE REAL LEE HARVEY OSWALD WAS LOCATED during that time period in question?

As far as I am aware, there is not a single person who has ever stated that they saw Lee Oswald in New Orleans or in Fort Worth or in Dallas or in Muncie, Indiana, or anywhere else on the planet other than Mexico City during that time period when the Warren Commission said he was in Mexico City, Mexico.

How come Marina didn't see her husband during that time period if he really WASN'T in Mexico?

Did he make himself invisible for eight days and nights? Was he hiding somewhere else OTHER than Mexico City during those eight days? Where was Lee Oswald during that time if not in Mexico City?


WILLIAM KELLY SAID:

And who was that guy who tried to get the job at the radio stations in Alice, Texas?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I haven't the foggiest. (And neither do you, Bill.)


WILLIAM KELLY SAID:

And who was that guy who drove the Ford down Stemmons?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I think that could have been the real Oswald too. But, just like all of your other "Oswald Double" examples, it doesn't really matter in the long run. Because the ONE AND ONLY Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK and J.D. Tippit. And his own actions (both before and after the shooting of the President), coupled with the physical evidence of his double-guilt, make that fact abundantly clear.


WILLIAM KELLY SAID:

And who was that guy who hitchhiked a ride in the pickup to the TSBD with a rifle?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

That's almost certainly a bogus "sighting", Bill. The fellow who made that claim could have had knowledge of all of those details prior to telling his tale. And the kicker there, IMO, could very well be the words "window shades" (the exact words in Mr. Yates' and Mr. Jones' story), which were also the exact same words spoken by District Attorney Henry Wade during his 11/24/63 press conference after Oswald was shot and killed:




WILLIAM KELLY SAID:

And who was that guy with the foreign wife, little girl and baby who went to the furniture store looking for a gun shop?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I have no idea. (And neither do you, Bill.)

But even if it was the real Lee Oswald in that furniture store, please tell me how that fact means diddly when it comes to the evidence in the JFK/Tippit cases?

And if the family was an "Imposter Oswald Family", please tell me why any conspirators setting up Oswald for the President's murder would have wanted to go through some silly charade at a furniture store prior to the assassination? Were the plotters bored that day? And they employed a WHOLE FAMILY to impersonate the Oswald family? It's silly beyond belief.


WILLIAM KELLY SAID:

And who was that guy named Oswald who had his gun sight adjusted?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Dial Ryder's story is almost certainly bogus. Bugliosi has a nice section in "Reclaiming History" which destroys Mr. Ryder.


WILLIAM KELLY SAID:

And who was that guy who signed his name Lee H. Oswald; Dallas at the Nuclear Energy Museum in Tennessee?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

LOL.

When you get to the Oswald sighting in my hometown of Richmond, Indiana, let me know. Because I want to know if Lee was hiding in my basement on Pearl Street while I was upstairs in my crib. (Don't forget about Ruth Paine's visit to Richmond in September of '63. There's probably a "connection" there for an industrious conspiracy theorist, don't you think?)


WILLIAM KELLY SAID:

How can you be so convinced that Oswald shot Tippit and then went to the movie theater when others at the theater say Oswald showed up earlier and bought popcorn? Who was that guy?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

So, let me get this straight, Bill -- you're saying that an "Oswald" person went into the theater prior to the time when Johnny Brewer saw Oswald go into the theater?

Which would mean one of two things (both equally silly):

1.) It was the same "Oswald" who entered the theater on both of those occasions on November 22, 1963. Which would also mean that Oswald decided to GO BACK OUTSIDE after going into the theater and buying some popcorn, so that he could be seen acting "funny" and "scared" by Johnny Brewer in the lobby area of Brewer's shoe store.

or:

2.) There were two different "Oswalds" who entered the theater that day, which means that the goofy plotters were pulling another scenario like Edwin Lopez has suggested occurred in Mexico and just like John Armstrong has said occurred in the TSBD on November 22 -- with BOTH an "imposter" and the Real McCoy showing up at the same place at the very same time (or pert-near the same time anyway).

If #2 is correct, wouldn't the plotters be a little hesitant to allow an imposter to be seen in the very same place as the guy he was impersonating?

Or didn't the brain-dead conspirators give a damn about potentially blowing their "patsy" plot to bits by risking having an unknown number of possible witnesses seeing TWO Oswalds walking around in the same building at the same time?


WILLIAM KELLY SAID:

How do you differentiate between the positive identifications of Oswald and the bogus ones?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Well, in the case of any sightings of Oswald being somewhere other than near Tenth & Patton at about 1:15 PM CST on 11/22/63, it's very easy to differentiate between a "bogus" sighting and a real sighting. All sightings of an "Oswald" being someplace other than near Tenth Street and Patton Avenue at that time are definitely "bogus" (for the reasons stated previously).

Common sense and geography debunk several of the other bogus sightings -- such as the ones about seeing "Oswald" in cities that we pretty much know he was not in at the time in question.


WILLIAM KELLY SAID:

And if the bogus ones aren't a case of mistaken identity but intentional impersonation, what was that all about?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Well, IMO, that would be a case of the plotters who were supposedly setting up the real Oswald being mighty, mighty stupid. Because they're having him do things and be in places that only tend to advertise the fact that it's a fake Oswald.

Plus there's the fact, of course, that on Game Day (Nov. 22) all of their detailed "imposter" preparations would be sliding right down the toilet because these incredibly dumb conspirators then decided to shoot JFK with multiple guns in Dealey Plaza (according to 99% of all conspiracy theorists on the planet), thereby assuring that their lone "patsy" could never be proven to be the SOLE ASSASSIN of President Kennedy.

Apparently gray matter was in short supply in the "Let's Frame Lee Harvey Oswald As Our Lone Patsy" Department at Langley in 1963. Wouldn't you agree, William Kelly?

David Von Pein
December 6-7, 2010


RELATED ARTICLES:

JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS (PART 1217)

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

The bald-faced lie told by Roger Craig, when he said he saw the words "7.65 Mauser" stamped, plain as day, on Oswald's Carcano rifle as it was discovered on the TSBD's sixth floor on 11/22/63, was certainly THE biggest and most blatant lie told by anyone connected in any way with the JFK murder case.

But try and get any conspiracist to say a single bad word about Big Fat Liar Roger Craig. Since Craig was on the "conspiracy" side of the equation, naturally all of his many lies are supposed to be ignored altogether--like his doozy about seeing "7.65 Mauser" on Oswald's Carcano (which was proven to be a Carcano via the Alyea film, which is another thing that all CTers will ignore until the cows come home).




WILLIAM KELLY SAID:

David,

Will you please explain then, why officers Weitzman and Boone, who found the rife and stated in their reports later that day that the rifle was a Mauser, aren't Big Fat Liars too?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Boone and Weitzman never claimed to see the words 7.65 MAUSER on any rifle in the Depository. Therefore, they didn't LIE.

They were merely mistaken about the type of rifle that was being hoisted in the air by J.C. Day.

And when we look at the similarities, it's easy to see how such a mistake could easily be made:




DAVID VON PEIN LATER SAID:

Take note of Roger Craig's comments in this article:



Craig claims he had no idea what type of gun was recovered from the boxes on the sixth floor, even though he said he HANDLED the rifle himself (another big fat lie from Craig).

Craig also talks about a Mauser being found on "the roof" of the TSBD (another ridiculous statement).

I guess Craig later decided to add his tall tale about actually seeing the words "7.65 Mauser" stamped on a rifle that was supposedly (per the above article) found ON THE ROOF, and not on the sixth floor at all.

That's the trouble with evolving lies like Roger Craig told. It's hard for the liar to keep all of his lies straight....as we can easily see via that interview with Craig.


JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:

Typical Von Peinian BS, all assumption, presumption and no research except what he wants to say to smear someone. This is nothing but a brief extract of an interview. Very little follow-up, if any. So one cannot ask the subject: did they eventually bring down the Mauser from the roof? When exactly did you get there? How long after the original rifle discovery?

DVP does not like it since Bernice just blew up the developing story to discredit Craig, namely that the inscription "7.65 Mauser" did not appear on the Mauser at all. She proves that on the Argentine model it did.

Oh yeah Davy, Bernice photoshopped the interview out of her imagination.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

More B.S. from Jimmy D., of course.

After Roger Craig invented his bald-faced lie about seeing "7.65 Mauser" stamped on the rifle, he always maintained that it was stamped on the rifle that Lt. J.C. Day had just lifted out of the boxes on the northwest corner of the sixth floor.

Craig never claimed to see the stamp on a rifle that had later been carried down from the roof.

Craig's 7.65 Mauser lie is exposed in this [1968] article that Bernice Moore linked to earlier [in a post at The Education Forum] (even though Bernice undoubtedly thinks that that article she posted is further proof that Roger D. Craig is the Saint to end all Saints.)

But the clincher is contained in the video below, which proves for all time that Craig's lies evolved over a period of time. In the 1968 article, Roger Craig said this:

QUESTION: "Did you handle that rifle [that was pulled from the boxes on the sixth floor of the TSBD]?"

ROGER CRAIG: "Yes, I did. I couldn't give its name because I don't know foreign rifles."

But in Mark Lane's video from the 1970s, "Two Men In Dallas", Roger Craig specifically says that he saw "7.65 Mauser" stamped on the rifle that had just been lifted from the box stacks on the sixth floor. [See video below.]



The combination of the 1968 Craig interview and the above video clip exposes Roger Craig's "7.65 Mauser" lie like never before.

But I'm sure conspiracy mongers like James DiEugenio and Lee Farley will continue to pat Roger Craig on the back and treat him as a perfectly truthful and upstanding witness when it comes to this 7.65 Mauser B.S. and his tale about the bullet shells being only about three-fourths of an inch to one inch apart and all facing the exact same direction (and who would even want to PLANT shells in such a silly manner anyway?), etc.

Plus, there's also the fact that Roger Craig never said a single word about seeing any rifle with "7.65 Mauser" stamped on it during his testimony in front of the Warren Commission either. Which is, of course, yet another indication that Deputy Sheriff Craig invented his "Mauser" story only after appearing before the Warren Commission.

The word "Mauser" is not mentioned once during Craig's 1964 Warren Commission session, even after David Belin said this to Craig right after Craig told the WC about the discovery of the rifle on the sixth floor:

"Anything else happen up to that time that you haven't related here that you feel might be important?"

Roger Craig's answer to Belin's above question:

"No."

In addition, Craig never said a word about seeing the Mauser stamp on the sixth-floor rifle during his 1969 Clay Shaw Trial testimony either. And also contradicting his 1968 interview, Craig never mentions handling the rifle during his testimony at Shaw's New Orleans trial either.

In short -- Anyone who supports Roger Dean Craig is supporting a known liar.

David Von Pein
October 10, 2010

JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS (PART 1216)

DAVID ANDREWS SAID:

It was planned to remove all bullets and identifiable fragments from the wounds before the official autopsy.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

But what about the potential bullets and fragments in John Connally's body?

Connally didn't die, and therefore could not be subjected to any kind of "rigged" or phony autopsy (which is what many conspiracy theorists think happened with JFK's autopsy).

So did the plotters of this grandiose "REMOVE ALL BULLETS AND IDENTIFIABLE FRAGMENTS FROM THE WOUNDS BEFORE THE OFFICIAL AUTOPSY" scheme just get lucky when no bullets or large, identifiable fragments were recovered from the wounds of Governor Connally at Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas?

Conspiracy theorists sound so silly when they start talking about the physical evidence in the JFK case. And what makes it so incredibly silly, of course, is the fact that none of this stupid crap they think happened with the bullet evidence ever really happened at all. Nor COULD it possibly have happened--unless all of the plotters and conspirators had the same talents and abilities as magician David Copperfield.


DAVID JOSEPHS SAID:

Regarding the shells, DVP, there is also testimony in evidence that the shells were bunched together when first discovered.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Oh, I see that the chronic liar named Roger Craig has you hypnotized, eh?

Can't you see the idiocy of Craig's statement about the shells being only about an inch apart and all pointing the same direction?

Who would even WANT to plant shells in such an obvious "THESE SHELLS WERE PLACED HERE, THEY DIDN'T FALL THIS WAY ON THEIR OWN AFTER BEING FIRED FROM RIFLE C2766" fashion?

Just how stupid were those patsy-framers anyway? I'd really like to know.

Let's take a quick "How Stupid Were These Plotters?" inventory:

They supposedly planted a bullet on the WRONG stretcher at Parkland (per some CTers).

They planted shells in the Sniper's Nest in such a manner to make it look like they were placed there by hand (per some CTers).

They wait until Sunday, November 24th to shoot Lee Oswald, so that their "hit man" named Ruby could perform the murder on live television in front of millions of people.

They allow their one and only patsy to wander around on the lower floors of the Book Depository at the exact time they desperately need him upstairs on the sixth floor firing a gun at the President. (This one is momumentally stupid on the part of the unknown and unseen "they".)

They go to the immense trouble of impersonating LHO all over God's Creation PRIOR to November 22, and they take the time to "fake" the backyard photos (and then they get Marina to lie about them by getting her to say for the rest of her life that she, herself, took those pictures of her late husband) -- and yet when Game Day (11/22) rolls around, what do "they" do? --- They start popping away at JFK from several different directions in Dealey Plaza, even though they are supposed to be framing just ONE guy in the TSBD.

These bumbling patsy-framers must have all attended Idiots 'R Us University before commencing their "Let's Frame Oswald" project.


DAVID JOSEPHS SAID:

If we are to accept CE399 on face value, then we must also accept other testimony that appears as evidence in the WCR, right?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

If it's the testimony of a known liar such as Roger Dean Craig, then no.

As far as the JFK murder case goes, there was no bigger and more blatant PROVABLE liar than Roger D. Craig. No question about that fact. And anyone who places a single ounce of faith in anything that liar says in connection with the JFK assassination is nothing but a fool.

David Von Pein
September 21, 2010

EULOGIES TO PRESIDENT KENNEDY (DELIVERED IN THE CAPITOL ROTUNDA ON NOVEMBER 24, 1963)

AN ALTERNATE VERSION:



TRANSCRIPTS:



ALSO SEE:

MISC. JFK POSTS OF INTEREST (PART 124)

OSWALD ON WDSU-TV:
http://educationforum.com/topic=25450/comment=391747


JAMES P. HOSTY VS. THOMAS J. KELLEY:
http://educationforum.com/topic=25532/comment=395575


WAS THE ZAPRUDER FILM ALTERED?:
http://educationforum.com/topic=25562/comment=395329


JIM MOORE:
http://jfkassassinationforum.com/topic=1743/message=45136


BEING OSWALD:
http://jfkassassinationforum.com/topic=1789/message=47359


A "BUMP FOR THE AGES":
https://alt.assassination.jfk/tDw1ESGChGQ/QBvL8TAaBQAJ


THE “WELL-OILED” RIFLE:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/Firearms Factoids


SENATOR JOHN F. KENNEDY IN 1957 (AUDIO):
http://jfklibrary.org/archives/JFK/Audio/July 4, 1957


JFK RIDING IN LIMOUSINE (JULY 1962 PHOTO):
http://educationforum.com/topic=24892/comment=395942


DEALEY PLAZA ON 11/23/63 (PHOTO):
http://facebook.com/groups/permalink/1190622071098275


RARE DALLAS MOTORCADE PHOTOS:
http://kennedy-photos.blogspot.com/JFK Motorcade (11/22/63)


DR. PEPPER:
http://educationforum.com/topic=24489/comment=392393


NON-CONSPIRATORIAL EXPLANATIONS:
http://educationforum.com/topic=25472/comment=392751


COMMISSION EXHIBIT 903:
http://educationforum.com/topic=25404/comment=392421
http://educationforum.com/topic=25404/comment=392466


OSWALD'S OUT-OF-THE-ORDINARY BEHAVIOR:
http://educationforum.com/topic=25472/comment=392543


OSWALD'S WISHFUL THINKING:
http://educationforum.com/topic=25472/comment=392735


MARINA AND THE RIFLE:
http://educationforum.com/topic=25472/comment=392591
http://educationforum.com/topic=25472/comment=392596
http://educationforum.com/topic=25472/comment=392611


================================

JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS (PART 1215)

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Penn & Teller weigh in on JFK conspiracy kooks:




"NICKNAME" SAID:

If ever there was an encyclopedic knowledge of the case evidence, it would be Penn and Teller. DVP needs help. He's citing non-experts again! LOL!!!!


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Penn & Teller prove the "jet effect" theory is valid in that video. I don't care if it was Jack Benny and Mel Blanc doing the shooting of that melon, the point is still a valid one.

What difference does it make WHO pulls the trigger?


"NICKNAME" SAID:

As always, murder apologists like Von Pein like to have it both ways. Namely, they point to JFK's head going forward to prove a shot from behind. Then point to the "jet effect" to explain why it went backwards.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

JFK's head DOES go both directions, "Nick". Who can possibly deny that fact? And we know beyond doubt that BOTH of those actions were caused after just ONE bullet struck his head from behind. (The autopsy proves that fact.)

Ergo, there must be some explanation to reasonably explain both movements. And the jet effect can, indeed, explain the backward movement.


R. ANDERSON SAID:

I have to say though: I've never bought the jet effect (by itself) explaining the movement. I've always thought we are talking some sort of (muscle) reaction as well.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

That's quite possible, RA. I, too, have endorsed a COMBINATION of the two theories in conjunction with one another. We'll never know for sure, of course.

But a "jet effect" HAS been proven with melons AND with human skulls (via Dr. Lattimer's tests). So we know the jet effect is valid. There's no doubt about it.


"NICKNAME" SAID:

Unfortunately, you're at an impasse, Von Trapped. You just admitted the head goes both ways. The "jet effect" only allows for it to go one way. Now tell me, do believers or do believers NOT point to a "forward motion" on JFK as proof that the shot came from behind? One is a contradiction of the other. It takes a LNer to believe both.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

The forward motion is caused by the bullet's initial contact with the skull. The jet effect occurs after the bullet passes through the skull, propelling the head in the opposite direction. So, of course, the LNers CAN "have it both ways". And they should. Because ONE bullet DID cause the head to move in different directions at different points in time.


WILLY WHITTEN SAID:

Pen and Teller [sic] didn't prove squat, Von Pien [sic]. They use a honey dew melon wrapped in tape, just like "Nobel Prize winning physicist, and personal buddy of JFK, Dr. Luis W. Alvarez" used for his bogus experiments.

These melons are NOT an adequate analog of a human head. Especially one attached to the body - as Kennedy's obviously was.

You are a crank, Penn and Teller are cranks, and Dr. Luis W. Alvarez is a crank. It is a BS experiment.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Go watch Lattimer's skull tests then, Whitten. The skulls always flew backward. Every time. [See video below.]




WILLY WHITTEN SAID:

Utter nonsense. A skull sitting atop a ladder, attached to nothing, is simply not an acceptable analog to a human body. Totally bogus pseudoscience.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

The fact that Dr. Lattimer's test skulls were UNTETHERED skulls on a ladder makes the backward movement of those skulls even more impressive, given the fact the bullet COULD have blown the skulls dozens of feet FORWARD off the ladder....but that didn't happen. The skulls still went backward, even though they weren't attached to anybody's "neck". (Think about it from that standpoint for a minute.)


"NICKNAME" SAID:

You guys need a new official story. For God's sake, even Specter's SBT was supposed to be a temporary placeholder until they "figured out" what happened.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

WTF?? "Placeholder"? Where did you get that from?


"NICKNAME" SAID:

Specter dreamed up some nonsense as a hypothetical theory, which was adopted at once as fact. The "proving it" came later. As you well know. Not that I hear Henry, Anderson or any other troll demanding to see Specter's "credentials" and "expertise" in ballistics, forensics, geometry, physics and so on. He just stated it; it became truth.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Given ALL the facts and factors of the shooting, the Single-Bullet Theory is the ONLY reasonable conclusion that can be reached. Any other non-SBT scenario falls way short, as conspiracy theorists surely have to know (but refuse to admit it).

Two bullets going into Kennedy and never exiting? (Ridiculous.)

Or:

A bullet passing through JFK and barely missing Connally, with Connally then being struck by a SECOND bullet IN THE UPPER BACK at virtually the exact same instant as Kennedy? (Ridiculous.)

The SBT defeats all other comers....if only via common sense alone.

David Von Pein
December 13, 2016


================================

ADDENDUM....


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

The video below contains a rarely-seen film which depicts some of the experiments that were conducted in May of 1970 by physicist Luis W. Alvarez. The film was taken by Don Olson and made available to me in September 2023 by long-time JFK assassination researcher Paul Hoch.

Note: The unseen gunman in each of these filmed tests, from the point-of-view of the camera, is located to the RIGHT of the target....


1970 MELON EXPERIMENTS BY LUIS ALVAREZ:


================================

JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS (PART 1214)

PATRICK COLLINS SAID:

Hi David,

Can you help on this one?....

In the chapter entitled "Summary of Oswald’s Guilt", Vincent Bugliosi writes on page 958 of Reclaiming History:

“If we are to believe Oswald’s story”……“claiming in one version that he was having lunch on the first floor of the Book Depository Building at the time of the shooting, and in another version that he was working on the sixth floor.”

Bugliosi is clearly making reference to a version of events that Oswald was working on the sixth floor at the time of the shooting, he does not however cite for the latter scenario.

It would seem that Bugliosi is saying that somewhere there is a statement from Oswald that he was up on the 6th floor when JFK was shot. This could either be a written statement from a witness such as [an] individual from the DPD or FBI or Secret Service for example, or a recollection in an interview on film or even word of mouth from an individual who heard Oswald make that assertion.

It may be a confused message and Oswald could have simply said he worked on the 6th floor leading up to the assassination. Anyway, I am not aware of any such statement from Oswald. Have you heard any such thing?

Thanks,
Patrick


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Go to page 957 of "Reclaiming History"....

"During Sunday's [11/24/63] interrogation Oswald slipped up and placed himself on the sixth floor at the time of the assassination. .... In his Sunday-morning interrogation he said that at lunchtime, one of the "Negro" employees invited him to eat lunch with him and he declined. .... He said before he could finish whatever he was doing, the commotion surrounding the assassination took place and when he "WENT DOWNSTAIRS," a policeman questioned him as to his identification, and his boss stated that he was one of their employees. .... WHERE WAS OSWALD AT THE TIME THE NEGRO EMPLOYEE INVITED HIM TO LUNCH, AND BEFORE HE DESCENDED TO THE SECOND-FLOOR LUNCHROOM? The sixth floor." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Page 957 of "Reclaiming History" [All emphasis Bugliosi's.]


PATRICK COLLINS SAID:

Have you any idea where Bugliosi gets the info? Is it Chief Curry's notes?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Bugliosi uses Page 636 of the Warren Commission Report and Harry Holmes' testimony at 7 H 302.

But we must take Holmes' notes with a granule of salt, because the word "downstairs" isn't really a direct quote attributed to Oswald. It's a paraphrased report of the things Oswald said during his November 24 final interrogation with Holmes present.

I'm wondering: Did Oswald himself really say that he "went downstairs" just after the shots? Or was that something that was perceived to be the case by Holmes?

LHO did, of course, admit to being on the upper floors of the Depository building shortly before the shooting and he admitted that he asked Charles Givens to send an elevator back UPSTAIRS to him. That information can also be found in Harry Holmes' Warren Commission testimony at 7 H 302.

Plus, of course, Charles Givens himself testified that Oswald had been on the sixth floor at about 11:55 AM and had asked Givens to send an elevator back up to him [6 H 350-351].

So, Oswald obviously HAD to have travelled "downstairs" at some point around lunchtime anyway.

But Vince Bugliosi seemed convinced that Oswald "slipped up" with the "downstairs" reference. But I'm not entirely convinced that LHO did slip up. Perhaps he did; but perhaps not. A tape recording of Oswald's exact remarks sure would be nice to have.

[Also see this related discussion.]

David Von Pein
December 12, 2016

"THE FIRST FAMILY" RECORD ALBUMS (FEATURING VAUGHN MEADER)

VOLUME 1:


VOLUME 2:






CLICK TO ENLARGE:



ALSO SEE VAUGHN MEADER
ON "WHAT'S MY LINE?":