Part 1363 of my "JFK Assassination Arguments" series includes a variety of my posts and comments covering the period of April 1—30, 2023. 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.
CHARLES BLACKMON SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
FYI / BTW / FWIW....
Take note of the "Oswald lean" in the photo of LHO on the left below. It's remarkably similar to the "leaning" posture that many conspiracy theorists
think was physically impossible for Lee Harvey Oswald to achieve in the backyard photos. I wonder if there are now CTers who think the picture
on the left is a fake too? ....
CHRIS BRISTOW SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
More CTer excuses in order to deny the obvious, I see.
Main Point:
Oswald's general posture is virtually identical in both of these photographs. And that's telling me that Lee Oswald stood in this manner routinely (i.e., placing more weight on his right foot than his left)....
CHRIS BRISTOW SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
It's incredible how the JFK case makes the most obvious things the subject of controversy and debate. (The obviousness of the SBT being yet another example of this tendency.)
It couldn't be more obvious that Oswald's basic posture is virtually the same in both of these pictures....and yet there are people (such as Chris B.) who are actually willing to argue the exact opposite.
Fascinatingly bizarre behavior indeed.
David Von Pein
April 3-4, 2023
================================
PAT SPEER SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
On the contrary, Robert Stone's "Oswald's Ghost" is a very good film.
DVP Review:
David Von Pein
April 3, 2023
================================
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Newspaper articles concerning author Jean Davison and her 1983 book "Oswald's Game" (click to enlarge):
Excerpts from my review of "Oswald's Game":
"In a (lone) nutshell:
1.) This book shows (beyond a reasonable doubt, in my opinion) that Lee Harvey Oswald had it WITHIN HIMSELF the desire to shoot President Kennedy.
2.) The physical evidence positively indicates that Oswald's very own Mannlicher-Carcano rifle WAS the one and ONLY weapon used to kill JFK.
Those two things go together like bread and butter. When adding #1 to #2 above, it's pretty clear that Lee Oswald was not the "innocent patsy" that so many conspiracy theorists seem to want to believe he was. Instead, numbers 1 and 2 above, when merged, are telling the world that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone assassin of President John F. Kennedy.
Thank you, Jean Davison, for your excellent book "Oswald's Game", and for the high road that you have taken since writing it when dealing with critics of your work regarding Oswald. I've yet to read an article or a newsgroup posting by Jean that didn't brim over with common sense and reasoned thinking with respect to John Kennedy's assassination." -- DVP; Feb. 2006 and Jan. 2007
David Von Pein
April 8, 2023
================================
"SKY THRONE" SAID:
There certainly is reasonable doubt about what Oswald carried into the TSBD on Friday morning.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
But it's pretty clear that Oswald most certainly LIED to Buell Frazier about the contents of his package. (And why would I think for even a moment that the real liar in the "curtain rods" story is Buell Frazier? That is not a reasonable conclusion at all.)
We know Oswald lied to Frazier about the "curtain rods" package. Because if that wasn't a lie, Oswald would have certainly told the police that he had, indeed, carried some curtain rods into the TSBD building on Nov. 22---and Oswald would have then told the cops where they could find the rods within the TSBD.
What possible reason would Oswald have had for saying he had no rods if he really did take some rods into the building? That lie is one of the biggest (and most telling) of the lies Oswald told after his arrest, to be sure. Because if LHO had anything in that bag other than a rifle, he would have been shouting that fact from the roof of City Hall after he was arrested. Instead, he tells the police he took no large-ish package to work at all that day. But we know he did. That "large package" fact is confirmed by not only Buell Frazier; it's also verified by Linnie Mae Randle as well.
David Von Pein
April 8, 2023
================================
JOHN CORBETT SAID:
Still waiting for someone to explain why Oswald needed to make a special trip to Irving on Thursday night to get curtain rods when he could just as easily have picked them up on his regular weekend visit to the Paine's house. Why the urgency? Hmmm! That's a head scratcher.
Unless someone can come up with a plausible answer for that, the whole question about whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods is moot.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Yes. And there's also this angle that nobody ever talks about....
Lee Oswald told Buell Frazier on Thursday morning (Nov. 21) that the curtain rods he wanted to get at Ruth Paine's house were rods that were going to support some curtains that Marina had apparently made for Lee.
So, with the above information in mind, I now ask:
Why on Earth would LHO have any desire to put up new curtains (and rods) in a room that we know he had every intention of vacating very soon thereafter? Makes no sense.
Plus: What happened to those curtains that Lee said Marina made for him? Where did those go?
More on Lee Oswald's "curtain rods" lie HERE.
Also see the following excerpt from Vincent Bugliosi's book, "Reclaiming History" (click to enlarge):
David Von Pein
April 15, 2023
================================
BEN HOLMES SAID THIS.
JOHN CORBETT SAID:
This is what conspiracy hobbyists always do. They take a piece of evidence in isolation and because that stand-alone piece doesn't prove Oswald's guilt by itself, they think that is grounds for dismissing it. This is, of course, an illogical way to examine evidence. The evidence has to be looked at as a whole to make sense of it.
The Thursday night visit to Irving doesn't establish by itself that Oswald was the assassin and no one argues that it does. When we combine that with the fact that [Buell Wesley] Frazier testified Oswald carried a long narrow brown paper package into the TSBD, that an open brown paper package was found near the sniper's nest that had Oswald's prints on it and fibers that matched the blanket the rifle was stored in, that Oswald's rifle was found on the same floor as the paper bag, that shells that could only have been fired from Oswald's rifle were found at the location where several witnesses saw a gunman, that Oswald's prints were found at that same location, that fibers matching Oswald's shirt were found on the butt plate of the rifle, and that the only two bullets recovered had been fired by Oswald's rifle, there is only one sensible conclusion and that is that Oswald made the unusual Thursday night visit to Irving to fetch his rifle and smuggle it into the TSBD in a brown paper package.
You can look at any one piece of evidence [and] can come up with a number of explanations for it, but if you take the body of evidence as a whole, there is only one explanation that makes sense. Oswald went to Irving on a Thursday night to fetch his rifle because he intended to use it to assassinate JFK.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
From a similar 2017 discussion:
BEN HOLMES SAID:
Why are you desperately trying to imply that this [Charles Givens' testimony] supports Bugliosi's claim that Oswald said he was on the 6th floor at the time of the assassination???
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
As I said before, you have to ADD THINGS UP, Holmes. You never ever do any "adding up". You like to isolate and keep things separate. The "isolation" trick, of course, is the only conceivable way that you (or any rabid conspiracy theorist) can possibly even begin to justify your claim that LHO is innocent.
And because of this penchant for separating and isolating everything related to Lee Harvey Oswald, you are therefore not qualified to evaluate any of the evidence associated with JFK's murder. You are a total disgrace, in fact, when it comes to piecing together relevant evidence and testimony.
Such as....
You know perfectly well what I was talking about in my previous posts regarding Bugliosi PUTTING TOGETHER Harry Holmes' statements and Charles Givens' testimony, but you're too deeply invested in your silly "Oswald Is Innocent" policy to reasonably evaluate the sum total of all the evidence.
But as I also said, I'm not entirely convinced by Bugliosi's 13th item on his
"53 Items" list. I think Vince might be inferring too much when he said Oswald "slipped up". But I do think it's quite POSSIBLE that Mr. Bugliosi was, indeed, correct too. I'm perched on the fence about that particular item.
However, I do know that Ben Holmes is wrong when he said that there's no evidence AT ALL to support Bugliosi's Item #13, as I clearly have demonstrated in my previous posts in this discussion.
But no matter how many times Ben Holmes is reminded that he needs to ADD THINGS TOGETHER, he'll continue to keep every piece of evidence isolated from all the other things that ADD UP to Oswald's blatantly obvious guilt.
As they say, you can lead a horse to water, but....well, you know....
Lots more HERE and HERE.
David Von Pein
April 11-13, 2023
================================
PAMELA BROWN SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Marina Oswald didn't "recant" her Warren Commission testimony. She just changed her opinion about whether LHO killed JFK (after she had been inundated, no doubt, with various crackpot [and unsupported] conspiracy theories over the years).
But Marina never "recanted" any substantive facts relating to Lee Oswald -- such as the two major facts that many conspiracy theorists, still to this day, think Marina was lying about:
1. Lee admitting to Marina that he had taken a shot at General Walker.
and
2. Marina confirming that she took the backyard photos of LHO.
PAMELA BROWN SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
What a silly statement that is.
You [Pamela Brown] think Marina's testimony was the sole basis for the Warren Commission finding LHO guilty of two murders? Come now. Let's not forget about the dozens of other things pointing to Lee Oswald's guilt, outlined here.
PAT SPEER SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
The item below should not be on the list that appears in Pat Speer's post above, since it never happened:
"The CIA had asked DeMohrenschildt to keep tabs on [Lee Oswald]." -- P. Speer
PAT SPEER SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Click to enlarge:
PAT SPEER SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Your point isn't confirmed at all via the book excerpt I provided. In fact, just the opposite. Because (via Bugliosi's research) the only "Moore/DeMohrenschildt" timeframe involved was from 1957 to 1961, which was BEFORE DeMohrenschildt ever even met Lee Oswald. So what makes you think there was any discussion about Lee Oswald between Moore and DeM. during that 1957-1961 time period mentioned by Bugliosi (which was a period when Oswald was either in the Marine Corps or in Russia)?
LAWRENCE SCHNAPF SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
FYI / FWIW....
Here's another excerpt from Vince Bugliosi's book regarding George DeMohrenschildt, the CIA, and J. Walton Moore (who, btw, is also referred to by Bugliosi as Walter Moore; and both DeMohrenschildt and Albert Jenner refer to him as Walter Moore during DeMohrenschildt's WC session [at 9 H 235])....
Click to enlarge:
Related Link:
http://jfk-archives/George DeMohrenschildt's Suicide
PAT SPEER SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Thanks, Pat. Point taken.
PAMELA BROWN SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
That's absolute nonsense, Pam.
If we were to completely eliminate and disregard all of Marina's testimony, Lee Oswald's guilt would still be ironclad in both the JFK and Tippit murder cases (based on the available evidence).
CHARLES BLACKMON SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
If you can't figure that one out, Charles, I feel sorry for you. That's an easy one.
SEAN COLEMAN SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
The more accurate equation is this one:
Oswald + Revolver that killed Tippit being in Oswald's own hands 35 minutes after Tippit was killed with that same revolver = No way for Oswald to be innocent of shooting Tippit ..... UNLESS.
CHARLES BLACKMON SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
~obligatory sigh~
But the shells dumped at the Tippit murder scene are a different story, as you no doubt know.
And how many gunmen were seen dumping shells at 10th & Patton?
And who did the witnesses say that ONE gunman was?
And what gun did Oswald have on his person when arrested? (Answer: Smith & Wesson Revolver No. V510210 --- aka: The gun that killed J.D. Tippit.)
But conspiracists always want to fixate on the bullets themselves, never the shells. And I can see why, of course. Because those shells convict Lee Harvey Oswald and no other person on the planet.
David Von Pein
April 16-21, 2023
================================
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Below is a link to Pages 955—966 of Vincent Bugliosi's 2007 book, "Reclaiming History". It's a PDF file which contains all 53 items of evidence which are included in the "Summary Of Oswald's Guilt" chapter of Mr. Bugliosi's book:
AN ANONYMOUS CONSPIRACY THEORIST SAID:
Number 9 [on Bugliosi's 53-item list] — HERE — Bugliosi tells us that contrary to routine, Oswald did not read yesterday's newspaper in the Domino Room. I've never heard this before. There's a footnote, but the DVP PDF doesn't have the footnotes. It's the change of routine thing, and there seem to be many of those on Oswald's Friday. That might imply guilt, but it does not imply lone nuttedness.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
FYI / FWIW:
The PDF file that I provided does, indeed, contain all the FOOTnotes that exist on pages 955 thru 966 of Bugliosi's book (4 footnotes in total).
There is no FOOTnote attached to the #9 item on Bugliosi's list (concerning Oswald's habit of reading newspapers at the Depository every morning). There is a SOURCE note (#27) listed, however. And that Source Note takes us to Charles Givens' Warren Commission testimony, at 6 H 352.
[A related "Oswald Reading The Newspaper" discussion can be found here.]
David Von Pein
April 22-25, 2023
