Jump to content
The Education Forum

David Von Pein

Members
  • Content Count

    5,216
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by David Von Pein

  1. David Von Pein

    In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

    I never said you were lying when you quoted Hurt, Jim. I merely said for you to get away from Hurt because he hurts. (Just like you told me to get away from VB & RH.) The AMOUNT TO BE PAID line I think refers to the amount to be remitted to SEAPORT TRADERS. And Seaport was only due $19.95, not the full $21.22. Now, yes, I'll admit it's possible that the post office might remit the whole $21.22 to Seaport, and then Seaport gives REA its $1.27 service charge. I really don't know with 100% certainty how that would work. But we can know for certain that Oswald did pay somebody the $21.22 to get his gun. Otherwise, as I said, the post office would not let him have the gun, because it had a COD balance due on the package. Do you think they'd just say--"Here you go, Mr. Hidell. Just pay the $21.22 whenever you can, but you can have the gun now anyway"?? I kinda doubt it. There's no "signed receipt" for Oswald picking up his C2766 rifle at the very same post office either. Big deal. Happens every day. People pick up packages at their local post offices and don't have to sign anything to get them. On several occasions, I have found one of those yellow slips of paper in my mailbox telling me I have an oversized package to pick up at the post office. I then take the slip to the counter, the clerk gets the package from a back room, and the clerk hands me the package. No signature. No receipt. Nothing. And I would guess that the yellow piece of paper that I gave them gets tossed in the trash right away too, because it serves no purpose after I've already picked up the package. And the CTers who love to talk about how Oswald could have walked into a gun shop and bought an untraceable gun are apparently the same people who have a big problem with Oswald doing the same basic thing at the post office when he picked up his mail-order rifle. In other words, why weren't the very same "firearms forms" required at a brick-and-mortar gun shop? Were such firearms forms only required during a MAIL-ORDER transaction? That's silly. But whatever you do, Jim, please remember to never use any common sense when assessing the totality of the evidence in the JFK & Tippit murder cases. Otherwise you'll run the risk of having your ABO [Anybody But Oswald] membership revoked.
  2. David Von Pein

    In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

    Jim DiEugenio's last batch of answers are just as hilarious and goofy as his others. First off, Belin didn't examine Michaelis--Joe Ball did. (Ball's a rotten evil cover-up agent too, no doubt; right Jim?) The $19.95 in the "Amount" box on Michaelis No. 5 is correct -- because it's only reflecting the amount to be remitted by the post office to SEAPORT TRADERS, not the REA fee. Oswald was given exactly what he ordered--a $29.95 .38 Smith & Wesson Commando, and Michaelis #2 proves the COMMANDO was a gun that was being sold by Seaport for $29.95, not $39.95. Why DiEugenio thinks otherwise is a mystery. REA didn't just merely "hope" that the customer (Oswald) would pay them, for Pete sake. They shipped the gun to the address provided by Oswald (PO Box 2915), and then the post office undoubtedly made sure that the COD charges were paid by the customer (Oswald) before the post office employee handed over the gun to LHO. The post office then must have remitted the $1.27 service charge to REA, plus they remitted the $19.95 that was owed to Seaport Traders. If Oswald didn't fork over the cash, he doesn't get the gun. (Duh.) Gerald Hill never said that the SHELLS themselves were examined before a radio report was made regarding the "automatic". Get away from Hurt, Jim. He hurts. Why would anyone believe there was more than one gunman at the Tippit murder? Not even Acquilla Clemons said that. She never said TWO GUNS were involved. And every single witness other than Acquilla said ONE PERSON and only one person was involved in the shooting. Hence, ONE GUN was used. And the LONE GUNMAN was seen physically dumping shells out of that ONE gun at the corner of 10th & Patton. Hence, no automatic could have possibly been involved in the Tippit murder. Jim, you're really looking desperate by pretending Oswald was innocent of shooting Tippit too. Only a CTer in the farthest-out regions of Conspiracy Land could possibly begin to think Oswald didn't kill Tippit after evaluating the wealth of evidence in the case that proves he was guilty. I'll repeat my "bottom line" that I posted earlier, because it applies in this post too: "The key bottom-line fact: The Tippit murder weapon was in the possession of Oswald on 11/22/63, and he was caught red-handed with it in the Texas Theater just half-an-hour after that same gun was used to murder J.D. Tippit."
  3. David Von Pein

    In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

    Good job, Jim DiEugenio. Keep focusing on the unimportant chaff, while the wheat just sails right by your nose. You're doing an excellent job at pretending a double-murderer didn't murder anybody in November 1963. Your posts on this revolver matter are truly pathetic. (Not to mention laughable. My weak bladder will attest to that fact.) P.S. --- If DiEugenio tries hard enough, I'll bet he'll find a way for Jack Ruby to be completely innocent of shooting Oswald too. How 'bout it, Jim?
  4. David Von Pein

    In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

    Wrong. Lee Harvey Oswald (aka A.J. Hidell) ordered a .38 revolver for $29.95. And Seaport Traders mailed him a .38 Smith & Wesson revolver worth that exact amount -- $29.95. Michaelis Exhibit No. 2 proves this fact: Jim DiEugenio apparently thinks that because there's a ".38 S&W Special" listed for $39.95 on this order form that Oswald used to purchase his .38 revolver, this must mean (per Jim D.) that Seaport shipped the wrong gun to Oswald/Hidell. Jim, as usual, is wrong. Quite obviously, BOTH the $29.95 gun that Oswald ordered and the $39.95 gun marked as a "Special" in the above-linked advertisement were BOTH considered to be Smith & Wesson "Specials". Jim D., as always, is focusing on the wrong information, as well as twisting other information into his liking, to serve his pathetic "Anybody But Oswald" purposes. There was very likely no need for Oswald to go to the Railway Express office to pick up the revolver. The gun itself was physically shipped by REA to Oswald's Dallas P.O. Box. We know that via Michaelis Exhibit No. 4 and the testimony of Heinz W. Michaelis [at 7 H 378]: JOSEPH BALL -- "I will show you another document here which is a slip of red paper marked "Railway Express Agency" which has been heretofore identified with an FBI Exhibit No. DL-29 [which was marked by the Warren Commission as "Michaelis Exhibit No. 4"]. What is that document?" .... HEINZ MICHAELIS -- "That is a copy of the receipt which we got from the Railway Express Agency showing that on March 20, 1963, one carton with a pistol was shipped to A. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915, Dallas, Texas. It shows, furthermore, that Railway Express is instructed to collect a c.o.d. fee of $19.95. And it shows furthermore the number of the original receipt, which is 70638." So the merchandise itself (the revolver) was shipped by REA to Oswald's Dallas post office box. And if REA's procedure was to collect the C.O.D. and service fee directly from the purchaser (in this case, Oswald/Hidell), then why would they ever actually physically ship the merchandise to a POST OFFICE BOX in the first place? They would obviously realize that the purchaser would likely not be standing beside his P.O. Box waiting for the REA truck to come by. There are, btw, special instructions for "Agent At Destination" and "Agent At Shipping Point" on the REA C.O.D. shipping document (Michaelis Exhibit No. 5, shown HERE). The "Agent At Shipping Point" instructions would obviously apply to the post office workers who would ultimately be handling the gun package that was shipped to P.O. Box 2915 by REA. And the post office workers would place in Oswald's P.O. Box a slip of paper telling him he has a C.O.D. package at the front desk. The post office would then collect the proper C.O.D. charges from Oswald/Hidell. I suppose it's possible that I'm wrong about how these types of "COD" transactions worked when companies shipped merchandise to P.O. Boxes, but if the PHYSICAL ITEM itself was actually shipped to P.O. Box 2915 (and Heinz Michaelis said it was in his WC testimony), then it means that the post office employees would be initially handling the money from Oswald (since, quite obviously, Oswald didn't set up camp and live right there inside his post office box as he waited for the delivery truck to show up with his pistol). But, then too, only conspiracy theorists actually believe that all of this chaff about the REA paperwork is the slightest bit important. Reasonable people, however, can easily determine that Lee Harvey Oswald received revolver #V510210 from Seaport Traders in March 1963 and he killed Officer J.D. Tippit with that gun on 11/22/63 (regardless of any paperwork and red tape that might be missing from the official records of the Railway Express Agency). And that's very likely due to the fact that Oswald didn't need to go to the Railway Express office to pick up the revolver. He picked it up right there at the post office. Plus: Even if Oswald was required to go to the REA office to get the gun, why on Earth would the slip of paper telling him to do so need to be retained by anybody? That type of paperwork would very likely get thrown away after Oswald picked up his merchandise. And that's because Oswald didn't need to sign anything, as explained by Heinz W. Michaelis [at 7 H 377]: HEINZ MICHAELIS -- "The order received by mail is written up and invoiced in quadruplicate on a snap-out form. .... The fourth copy is the acknowledgment of the order copy and lists on the back side a statement which has to be signed by the respective customer." JOE BALL -- "What statement? MR MICHAELIS -- "A statement to the effect, I believe that it said that the buyer states that he is a citizen of the United States, and that he has never been convicted in any court of the United States, territories, possessions, et cetera." MR. BALL -- "Well, now, this fourth copy that has on the back this statement by the customer, is that mailed to the customer?" MR. MICHAELIS -- "It is mailed to the customer, but not in this particular case. Indicated on the invoice are three X's, which indicates that we have already a statement to this effect on file because this particular mail order coupon has already the statement, and the name of the witness." Here again, to a conspiracy theorist like Jim DiEugenio, the stuff that ISN'T in evidence (which the CTer thinks should be in evidence) is always much more important than what IS in evidence. In this instance, Jim is much more concerned about a "5024 form" not being in evidence than he is about the fact that Oswald had on him the EXACT GUN that Seaport Traders mailed to "A.J. Hidell" at Oswald's P.O. Box. In other words, chaff always trumps wheat if you're a conspiracy theorist the likes of James DiEugenio. Oh, good heavens! Tell me it ain't so, Jim! I guess this must mean we should let Oswald off the hook for shooting Tippit then. And, btw, if you're referring to Michaelis Exhibit 5, the amount written in the "Amount To Be Paid" box ($19.95) is not incorrect at all. That is the correct amount to be remitted to Seaport Traders. The other amount (the $1.27 C.O.D. service charge) goes to Railway Express, not Seaport Traders. No certificate was required in this case, because Oswald had already provided that information via his fake "D.F. Drittal" endorsement on the mail-order coupon that he sent to Seaport Traders. (Also see my response to your #4 item above.) You're wrong. And Heinz Michaelis provided that information in his Warren Commission testimony [at 7 H 378-379]: JOE BALL -- "Is there anything in your files which shows that the Railway Express did remit to you the $19.95?" HEINZ MICHAELIS -- "The fact that the exhibit number...was attached to the red copy of the invoice...indicates that the money was received." Plus: The word "Paid" is written right on the invoice too. (Michaelis No. 2) I guess Jim DiEugenio thinks that Oswald should have kept every receipt he ever had in his possession for everything he ever purchased throughout his life. LOL. And as indicated earlier, it's very likely that no "receipt" was ever given to Oswald (by anybody) regarding his purchase of the revolver. Therefore, of course, no receipt is going to be found among Oswald's possessions after the assassination. JIM DiEUGENIO SAID: >>> "10. There is no evidence the ammo was ever purchased." <<< This is just too silly to talk about. Oswald quite obviously DID purchase some bullets to go into his Smith & Wesson revolver. We know he acquired several bullets to go into that gun, because he fired at least four (and maybe five) of those bullets at Officer Tippit on Tenth Street. Plus, LHO had five bullets in his pants pocket and six additional bullets inside the chamber of the gun when he was arrested in the theater just thirty-five minutes after Tippit was slain. The math's pretty easy to figure out here (except if you're in the "Anybody But Oswald" club, of course). JIM DiEUGENIO SAID: >>> "The first reports were of automatic shells found at the scene." <<< But those early (and inaccurate) reports weren't as a result of a cop actually examining the shells themselves. The initial confusion about the shells possibly being from an automatic came mainly from eyewitness Ted Callaway, who told the police that the gunman he saw leaving the Tippit crime scene was carrying the gun in such a manner that he thought the gun was an automatic (which could be loaded through the handle of the weapon). Hence, the incorrect information was broadcast about the killer being armed with an "automatic". Plus, this whole "automatic" argument is really, really stupid in the first place (even if you're a conspiracy believer). Why? Because if an automatic gun had really been used to kill Officer Tippit, then the bullet shells that were recovered at the crime scene would have been found right next to Tippit's patrol car, instead of where we know they all were found--in the Davises' yard at the corner of 10th & Patton. Does Jim DiEugenio really believe that the real killer of Tippit picked up his four spent "automatic" cartridges and then tossed them into the bushes at the corner of Tenth and Patton? There's not a single witness who ever said anything like that occurred. The gunman was physically dumping shells out of his gun at the corner, which MUST mean that the killer shot Tippit with a revolver and not an automatic. JIM DiEUGENIO SAID: >>> "What happened to Poe's initials?" <<< Let's have a look at what Dallas Police Officer J.M. Poe told the Warren Commission on April 7, 1964 [at 7 H 68]: JOE BALL -- "Did you put any markings on the hulls?" J.M. POE -- "I couldn't swear to it; no, sir." So, as we can see via the above testimony, Officer Poe told the Warren Commission that he wasn't sure whether or not he marked the two bullet shells that Domingo Benavides handed him. But, naturally, anything that anybody told the evil, rotten Warren boys is supposed to flushed down the toilet. Right, Jim D.? DiEugenio pulls this same trick with Darrell Tomlinson too (the man who found Bullet CE399 on Governor Connally's stretcher at Parkland Hospital). Tomlinson told the Warren Commission over and over again that he wasn't sure which of the two stretchers he had taken off of the elevator at Parkland. He said he wasn't sure about TEN different times during his WC session. But, naturally, that testimony means zilch to an "Anybody But Oswald" conspiracy theorist like James DiEugenio. Plus, the two "Poe" bullet shells aren't even needed in order to know with 100% certainty that ALL FOUR shells found at the Tippit murder scene were shells that came out of Oswald's V510210 S&W revolver. Why is this so? Simple: Because we know from the weight of the witness testimony that ONLY ONE GUNMAN was ejecting shells out of ONE SINGLE GUN near the corner of Tenth Street and Patton Avenue just after Officer Tippit was killed. And since we know for a fact that the OTHER TWO SHELLS FROM OSWALD'S GUN that were found by TWO additional witnesses on that same day of November 22 have absolutely no problems or question marks hanging over them regarding the chain of custody....this, therefore, must mean that ALL FOUR of the shells had to have been left at the scene by the one gunman who was dumping shells out of ONLY ONE GUN at the crime scene. Conspiracists never seem to want to perform the above common-sense math. (Gee, I wonder why?) THE MURDER OF J.D. TIPPIT AND THE HILARIOUS DEFENSE OF LEE HARVEY OSWALD
  5. Examples please. (Just a single example showing where I just "make stuff up" will suffice.)
  6. David Von Pein

    In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

    Oh, sure. It's much MUCH more "likely" for the revolver to have been "planted" on Oswald in the theater than it is to believe Johnny Brewer and all of the cops who were there (who all said Oswald pulled the gun out of his waist and tried to shoot some people with it) -- right Jim? LOL. Jim, please stop! You know my bladder is a very weak one!
  7. David Von Pein

    In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

    Because conspiracy theorists have had a willful desire for over 4 decades to mangle and twist the known "Oswald Did It" facts in the case. (Plus there's the fact that very few CTers have any ability at all to evaluate evidence properly and with common sense.) That's why. http://Oswald-Is-Guilty.blogspot.com
  8. David Von Pein

    In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

    Oh, sure. And the police in the Texas Theater just shoved the S&W .38 into Oswald's hands in the theater and whispered to him -- "Hey, Lee, would you be kind enough to go along with this patsy plot we're undertaking today, and take this gun and act like you want to shoot a bunch of us cops with it? How 'bout it, buddy? Will you help us out with this thing? I'll buy you a beer (or a Dr. Pepper) if you do."
  9. David Von Pein

    Texas Gun Laws

    Good info, Bill Kelly. Thanks.
  10. David Von Pein

    In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

    And only in the world of conspiracy-giddy theorists could such things like OSWALD BEING CAUGHT WITH THE MURDER WEAPON ON HIM within 35 minutes of the murder of a policeman be considered "silliness". You're doing great, Jim. Please continue. And I want to hear more about your fantasy about Wes Frazier and Linnie Randle being forced by the rotten & corrupt DPD to make up the "bag" story out of whole cloth. That's a tale Aesop would reject out of hand.
  11. David Von Pein

    In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

    Yep, you sure did. Better watch this video again, James: (I'll now await the addition of Johnny C. Brewer to Jim DiEugenio's ever-growing list of "Liars/Crooks/Cover-Up Operatives". Brewer's going on that list of yours, right Jim? Don't disappoint me now.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrN0VkJUxas
  12. David Von Pein

    In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

    Yeah, Jim, I thought you'd like the Aynesworth quote. Naturally, Jim DiEugenio thinks Aynesworth is (and always was) nothing but a rotten, evil CIA-sponsored xxxx. Good job, Jim. You're doing great in the "Everybody's A xxxx" regard.
  13. David Von Pein

    In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

    James R. Gordon, The photo linked below was (purportedly) taken on the afternoon of the assassination by LIFE Magazine's Allan Grant. There are curtains and curtain rods in place: Oswald's Room; 11-22-63 Also -- Hugh Aynesworth told me last year that he saw the curtains and curtain rods in Oswald's Beckley room on the afternoon of Nov. 22nd: "David: I was in that rooming house -- Oswald's room -- within two hours of him leaving it that day and there were good curtains and rods there. Absolutely no reason to replace them." -- Hugh Aynesworth; September 15, 2009
  14. David Von Pein

    In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

    Jim D., All of those "problems" that you think exist regarding Lee Oswald's revolver evaporate immediately when you take one good look at CE790 [in conjunction with the last paragraph in this post]. CE790 is a Seaport Traders order form that was filled out by Lee Harvey Oswald himself. Hence, he ordered the gun. Was Oswald's handwriting forged onto that Seaport Traders order form too, Jim? And how did the unknown/unseen "they" do that, Jim? "They" were sure good at duplicating Lee Oswald's handwriting and handprinting on a myriad of documents associated with this case, weren't they, Jim? All of this "did he order it or didn't he?" business is just another of the thousands of smokescreens put up by conspiracy theorists who are desperate to exonerate a double-murderer named Oswald. And in the revolver instance, it's especially silly. Why? Because even if we didn't have CE790 to confirm that Oswald himself ordered Smith & Wesson revolver #V510210, so what? We know for a fact that S&W revolver #V510210 was the Tippit murder weapon (and CTers can't use the "Poe didn't mark the shells" excuse; I'll explain to you why if you want me to), and we know for a fact that Oswald was brandishing that same gun in his own hands just 35 minutes after Tippit was slain. So that's the key bottom-line fact: The Tippit murder weapon was in the possession of Oswald on 11/22/63, and he was caught red-handed with it in the Texas Theater just half-an-hour after that same gun was used to murder J.D. Tippit.
  15. David Von Pein

    In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

    Well, Drittal certainly isn't spelled with an "LE" (Drittle) as William Kelly suggested in an earlier post. It looks like DRITTAL to me (via CE790). What's it look like to you, Tom Scully?
  16. David Von Pein

    In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

    Hi Bill, Good to talk with you again. I don't have a definitive answer to your question there, Bill. But I will offer up this possibility (which I think is a reasonable answer to this mystery): I think it's quite possible that Oswald mailed the order forms for both the rifle and the revolver at about the same time--possibly mailing them on the very same day (March 12, 1963). Just because the Seaport Traders order form has a "January 27" date written in by Oswald, that doesn't necessarily have to mean he mailed that order form on that exact day in January. Maybe he waited and mailed it in March. We can never know for sure. Oh, come now, Bill. You're tugging at my lower extremities here, aren't you, you jokester you? You and I both know that "D.F. Drittal" is another invented name that was created out of thin air by Lee H. Oswald. Just as "A.J. Hidell" was created out of thin air. So, Drittal and Hidell were pals with nobody--except their inventor, Lee Harvey. I doubt very much that Oswald could have walked into any store in Texas and bought a gun without any record being left behind. I'm pretty sure that's Conspiracy Myth #884, and is one that Oliver Stone propped up as the truth in his 1991 fantasy film too. Just recently, Jean Davison posted THIS INFORMATION, which deals with this very subject regarding tracing guns that were purchased in brick-and-mortar stores in Texas in 1963. Albert Yeargan's July 1964 affidavit (which is referenced by Davison in the post linked above) certainly indicates that RECORDS WERE KEPT of the sale of firearms at the H.L. Green Sporting Goods store in 1963. This whole topic is something that I very recently started thinking about more and more, and via Jean Davison's post linked above, it certainly looks to me as though Oliver Stone (and other CTers) have been peddling a myth regarding Texas gun shops, circa 1963. I first brought up this topic just last month in fact, in this post (excerpted below): "I'd like to know if conspiracists are right when they say that Oswald could have walked into any gun shop or department store in Texas in 1963 and bought a gun that could never be traced? "No paperwork was required at a gun shop in Texas in '63? No signature from the purchaser? Nothing? Just grab the gun and run? "I'm not saying that perhaps that wasn't how it worked in Texas gun stores, circa 1963, but I'm just wondering if it really was that cut-&-dried--even back in '63? I've never really ever seen that confirmed anywhere (that I can think of). "Could that be just another of the many conspiracy myths that we've been saddled with since the JFK assassination--with Oliver Stone giving it a handy push in his blockbuster movie too? I just wonder. "~~Thinking about the "Benavides' Brother" myth that was destroyed recently, with Domingo's brother really being killed in 1965, not 1964~~" -- DVP; July 21, 2010
  17. David Von Pein

    In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

    Good lord! What a load of crap this is. There are actually conspiracy theorists here at this forum who think Oswald DIDN'T OWN A REVOLVER?? Even with Commission Exhibit No. 790 available for everybody to see (which, of course, has Oswald's writing all over it)? Was his handwriting supposedly "planted" on this order form too?: Plus: To believe that the gun was "planted" on Oswald in the Texas Theater, you've got no choice but to call civilian witness Johnny Brewer a xxxx. Brewer saw Oswald pull out a gun and attempt to shoot policemen with it. Is Brewer lying here?: http://dvp-potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/07/johnny-brewer.html And a whole bunch of different police officers would have to go into the "liars" pool too, who each testified that Oswald pulled out a gun and grappled with the police as he tried to shoot cops with that gun. Are Nick McDonald and Paul Bentley telling one lie after another here too?: http://dvp-potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/06/nick-mcdonald-and-paul-bentley.html Is there any end to the number of people that conspiracists are willing to call liars and cover-up agents? Or is the sky truly the limit?
  18. David Von Pein

    In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

    The answer to that question can never be known. You know that. Everybody knows it's an unanswerable question, and different people will have different opinions about it. My own "opinion" is that he probably made the decision to try to make an attempt on JFK's life sometime on Wednesday evening, November 20th. He then asks Wes Frazier for the unusual ride to Irving on Thursday morning and LHO invents his "curtain rod" lie at that time. So it's pretty clear that by Thursday AM, he had it in his mind to make an attempt on JFK's life. But on Thursday night, per Marina, LHO says that he would get an apartment in Dallas "tomorrow" if she would agree to come back to Dallas with him to live right away. So it's highly unlikely he would have taken that rifle to work with him on Friday if Marina had said "Yes". The rest is history, of course. LHO took his rifle to work on Nov. 22 and got extremely lucky when he found himself completely alone on the sixth floor at exactly 12:30. If Bonnie Ray Williams (or other employees) had been up there on the sixth floor at 12:30, there is no way, IMO, that Oswald would have fired a single shot at JFK. So, yes, Oswald was one LUCKY Presidential assassin on November 22, 1963. No question about that. But he WAS a Presidential assassin that day. There's no question about THAT either.
  19. MY DEBATE PROPOSAL: On May 8, 2010, I sent the following e-mail to James DiEugenio. If he is willing to debate me on these terms, then I'm ready, willing, and very eager (and these terms regarding the format should positively appeal to DiEugenio too; there's every reason in the world for him to love this type of format just as much as I do): ========================================= Subject: Attn.: James DiEugenio (Re: Debate With DVP) Date: 5/8/2010 1:31:55 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: David Von Pein To: James DiEugenio --------------------------- ATTN. JAMES DiEUGENIO: Hi Jim, If you are still willing to debate me about the JFK assassination, I am now ready and eager to participate in such a radio debate with you. The most convenient times in the near future for me to engage in such a debate would be anytime between the dates of June 1 and June 15, 2010. As for the format of any such radio debate (which I assume would take place on the "Black Op Radio" program, with Len Osanic serving as moderator/host), I have an idea that I think should probably appeal to you as well: Instead of taking questions from third parties (such as from "Black Op" listeners who write in questions via e-mail, etc.), I'd prefer a format where each of the two debaters (you and I) present various questions to the other person. That way, you can put together several questions that you would like an LNer like me to answer, and I can ask you various questions that I'd like to hear you answer. Each of us would ask the other party the same number of questions, to keep things fair from a "numerical" standpoint. To give you a heads-up on the number of questions I would like to present at any such debate, I have already put together a total of 23 questions [it's now up to 33] regarding the JFK case (plus a couple of follow-up questions within those 23 [33]) that I would like to ask you. Therefore, for the sake of fairness and "equal time", you would get to ask me the same number of questions. If Len Osanic (or others) wanted to add a few questions too, I think that would be okay as well. But for the bulk of the debate, I would much prefer the format I just outlined--with you and I deciding what questions we want the other person to answer. I don't favor the idea of the parties being shown the questions in advance, however. That would dilute the debate severely, in my opinion. I won't know what questions you'll be asking me; and, conversely, you won't know what questions are going to be coming from my side of the fence either. Sound fair to you? If you have other ideas on the debate format, let me know. We can probably work out something. But I feel that the format I just outlined should appeal to both of us, inasmuch as it would keep the "softball" type questions from being asked in the first place. Let me know if you are agreeable to this proposition. Thank you. Regards, David Von Pein http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-34.html =================================== A FOLLOW-UP POST AFTER JIM DiEUGENIO SCOFFED AT MY PROPOSED DEBATE FORMAT: It's true that I declined to debate Jim D. in 2009 when I most certainly could have done so. But after preparing over 30 questions for Jimbo in the months since the 2009 debate between Jim and John McAdams, I decided to step up and challenge DiEugenio to a different kind of JFK debate--one that would have the debaters asking the questions, instead of relying on other people for the questions. And that type of format regarding the questions, as I've said numerous times since my initial challenge to Jim in early May of 2010, is a format that I simply cannot believe DiEugenio would be AGAINST. Because he could ask me any questions he wanted, and as many as he wanted. And DiEugenio's excuse of not wanting me to ask my own questions because he's concerned that I will simply "make stuff up" is just nuts. Why? Here's why: Because from Jim's utterly crazy "Oswald Didn't Shoot Anybody" point- of-view, it's quite obvious that my own CORE BELIEFS about the whole JFK case (including J.D. Tippit's murder) are beliefs that DiEugenio, in effect, thinks were just "MADE UP" in the first place. The facts about Lee Oswald's guilt weren't "made up" by me personally, of course, but they certainly are core "Oswald Is Guilty" facts that Jimbo believes are dead wrong and were literally MADE UP by somebody along the way. Heck, Jim thinks this whole case is "made up" against poor Patsy Oswald. The entire case, per Jim D., is nothing but one great-big lie and cover-up and "made up" fact after another. Plus: Again from DiEugenio's POV, what difference would it make to him if I did just "make stuff up"? He would simply tell the listening audience during our debate that I was making nonsense up, right? And Jim would go on to explain the reasons he knows that I was making stuff up. Isn't that kinda what a DEBATE is all about--to tell the audience why your opponent is wrong and why you're right (even if it means having to tell the audience why your opponent just MADE SOMETHING UP out of thin air)? Good heavens, if the shoe were on the other foot, and I were to back out of a debate with James DiEugenio (or any of the many "Anybody But Oswald" conspiracy [theorists] who regularly post on the Internet) merely due to the fact that I was of the opinion that my opponent would be inclined to "make stuff up" concerning JFK's assassination during a radio debate with that person -- good gosh, then I'd never be able to debate anyone like DiEugenio....because I KNOW he's going to simply "make stuff up" himself! That's a given. A great example being: Jim's current belief that Lee Oswald carried NO LARGE PACKAGE WHATSOEVER into the Book Depository Building on November 22, 1963. Jimbo, you see, now believes that BOTH Buell Wesley Frazier AND Linnie Mae Randle lied their asses off when they each said they saw LHO carrying a long brown paper parcel on the morning of Nov. 22nd, with Buell and Linnie being strong-armed by the evil Dallas Police Department into making up from whole cloth their individual stories about having seen Sweet Lee with a large package. Now, if that wholly unsupportable and (frankly) pathetic theory about Buell Frazier and Linnie Randle doesn't qualify as "making stuff up", then I don't know what would qualify. In short, James DiEugenio doesn't want to be forced to answer specific questions written by a lone-assassin advocate like myself in a public debate. And that's because those questions about the PHYSICAL EVIDENCE which proves Lee Harvey Oswald to be the murderer of both John F. Kennedy and J.D. Tippit will be far too much to handle from Jim DiEugenio's "Oswald Shot Nobody" viewpoint. Jim would be made to look so silly and foolish when answering my dozens of questions focusing on EVERY LAST PIECE OF EVIDENCE that hangs Oswald, he has decided it would be best to reject my proposed debate format, and stick with the questions coming from other people instead (even though many of those questions aren't very challenging at all, which was precisely one of Jim's complaints about the first half of his Black Op Radio debate against John McAdams from last September 24th). But when given the opportunity to write his own questions (which could potentially make me crawl under my computer desk in fear, from Jim's POV), Mr. DiEugenio says, 'No thanks'. I can't say I blame Jim, though. If I knew I was going to have to admit to the four Black Op listeners that I believed that every single piece of evidence against Lee Oswald was fake, phony, manipulated, planted, or otherwise worthless, I think I might have a few reservations about doing so in a public place too. David Von Pein July 5, 2010 http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-40.html
  20. My list of best JFK assassination books includes: "Reclaiming History" by Vincent T. Bugliosi (2007) "Oswald's Game" by Jean Davison (1983) "With Malice" by Dale K. Myers (1998) "Kennedy And Lincoln" by Dr. John K. Lattimer (1980) "November 22, 1963: You Are The Jury" by David W. Belin (1973) "The JFK Myths" by Larry M. Sturdivan (2005) "Pictures Of The Pain" by Richard B. Trask (1994) "That Day In Dallas" by Richard B. Trask (1998) "The Death Of A President" by William Manchester (1967) "Case Closed" by Gerald Posner (1993) "National Nightmare On Six Feet Of Film" by Richard B. Trask (2005) "The Warren Commission Report" (1964) "The Day Kennedy Was Shot" by Jim Bishop (1968) "Conspiracy Of One" by Jim Moore (1990) "The Memories: JFK: 1961-1963" by Cecil Stoughton, Chester V. Clifton, and Hugh Sidey (1973) -- This book isn't really a book about the assassination, but I put it on my "favorites" list anyway. "The Killing Of A President" by Robert J. Groden (1993) -- This book is recommended only for the great pictures it contains. I certainly wouldn't recommend it for anything else, particularly the outlandish theories presented in the book, which include Mr. Groden's shot-by-shot shooting scenario, where Groden says it's very likely that ZERO shots (out of up to TEN!) came from the "Oswald" window on the sixth floor of the TSBD, even though Groden thinks Oswald was being framed and set up as the proverbial "patsy" from the sixth-floor window that Groden thinks it's likely nobody was firing from. (See Pages 20 through 40 of TKOAP for additional robust laughs.)
×