Jump to content
The Education Forum

David Von Pein

Members
  • Content count

    4,655
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by David Von Pein

  1. David Von Pein

    What's the point ?

    Lifton's embarrassing debacle on Anybody-But-Oswald Radio with Osanic occurred on 5/24/07. Myers wrote his article on 7/5/07, more than a full month after Lifton's ABO Radio appearance. Tell me how I'm mixed up on the chronology, Jimbo?
  2. David Von Pein

    In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

    Date: 8/17/2010 3:18:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: David Von Pein To: Gary Mack ---------------------- Hi again Gary, Earlier today, you said this: "Ray's Hardware in Dallas still has their January 19, 1960 log showing the revolver bought by Jack Ruby (but paid for by police detective Joe Cody, one of Ruby's friends). One of the folks at Ray's told me long ago that they must keep such records." Question: Can you tell me if Ray's records from that 1/19/60 revolver purchase positively show the name of "Joe Cody" as the purchaser of the revolver that ended up in the hands of Jack Ruby on 11/24/63? Thank you. David V.P. ========================================================= Date: 8/17/2010 4:42:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: Gary Mack To: David Von Pein --------------------- They do not, they show only Ruby's name. I have seen a scan of the record which was sent to me by Ray's Hardware. Cody has spoken about it many times over the years including, as I recall, in the Museum's oral history. It was quite legal and, since Joe was a cop, he could purchase the gun without having to pay sales tax, thus saving Ruby a few dollars. But Ruby was listed as the purchaser, and Federal law, from what Ray's told me, requires gun dealers to keep that record. Gary =========================================================
  3. David Von Pein

    In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

    Yes, That's exactly right. How can anyone deny that fact? (Duh.) So, we're faced with another of the hundreds of "Big deal" situations raised by the conspiracy mongers. So they left the bullets in his pocket. Who cares? Do you think Lee's bullets (without the gun to put them in) WERE, in fact, a danger to anyone? Was he going to throw the bullets at the cops and kill them? (And how could he even do that? He was in handcuffs.) You Anybody-But-Ozzie CT mongers are pitiful. Oswald is caught red-handed with the Tippit murder weapon on him (while attempting to murder still more Dallas police officers with that same gun), and you conspiracy nuts are more concerned with why the cops left the five bullets in Ozzie's pocket...or where Oswald purchased his cop-killing bullets. You make me want to vomit. (And I'm pretty sure Francois Carlier has his puke bucket by his side after reading the CT tripe on this forum too.)
  4. David Von Pein

    What's the point ?

    July 2007 article by Dale Myers: Lifton's Ghost
  5. David Von Pein

    What's the point ?

    Jim D., I've never denied that VB's books was written by three people -- Bugliosi, Haines, and Myers. That's obviously true, just as Vince tells the world in his Acknowledgments section of RH, right there in B&W. But how anyone can place an ounce of faith in anything David S. Lifton has to say about Vince's book being "ghostwritten" after Lifton was totally destroyed by Patricia Lambert and VB's secretary, Rosemary Newton, in July 2007 is beyond my understanding. Lifton actually had the 'nads to say that Lambert wrote THE ENTIRE 90-PAGE CHAPTER in VB's book dealing with Garrison and Oliver Stone's movie. After Lambert responded with the truth (which is: she never wrote so much as a comma in RH; see more HERE), Lifton continued to insist that large chunks of RH were ghostwritten by unnamed authors. If endorsing a person who spouts provable falsehoods (like Lifton's embarrassing "Lambert wrote a whole chapter" lie) floats your boat, Jim -- then by all means, knock yourself out.
  6. David Von Pein

    What's the point ?

    Subject: Link To My Review Of "Reclaiming History" Date: 8/16/2007 From: David Von Pein To: Starling Lawrence (W.W. Norton & Co., Inc.) ------------------------ Hello Mr. Lawrence, Vincent Bugliosi's secretary (Rosemary Newton) wrote to me today and said that you wanted me to e-mail you regarding my extensive review that I've placed on the Internet for Mr. Bugliosi's book "Reclaiming History". I've revised and updated the lengthy review a few times since originally posting it on June 20, 2007, adding more photos, which help to explain some of the text passages that I have used from the book. I think the photos (and links to other articles) in the review add an extra layer of important information for people to evaluate, because they can see a particular picture or an animated Zapruder Film clip right next to a quote from the book itself that I have provided. Here's the link to my book review [newer 2009 blog link provided below]: http://ReclaimingHistory.blogspot.com =================================================== Subject: Re: Link To My Review Of "Reclaiming History" Date: 8/16/2007 12:01:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: Starling Lawrence To: David Von Pein ------------------------ Dear Mr. Von Pein: Well, I don’t think I have ever seen anything like this in my 38 years sitting in this chair, most of those years, of course, before such a “review” would be technically possible. I’m certainly glad that you agree with Vince, for the most part, otherwise we’d be facing the situation of an huge excerpt (in effect) being used to beat up on the book. Still, this “review” in three parts could be construed as a serialization of the book, however informal, and I’ll have to take my colleagues’ temperature on it. Can you tell me how many words you quote? In the meantime, let’s please hold off on any further use of quoted material from the book. I’ll get back to you soon. Yours, Starling Lawrence =================================================== Subject: RE.: "Reclaiming History" Book Review Date: 8/16/2007 From: David Von Pein To: Starling Lawrence ------------------------ Hi Mr. Lawrence, Thanks for the quick reply. As I told Rosemary Newton by e-mail the other day, I have no intention of adding any MORE quotes from the book to my review. Absolutely not. If I edit anything else, it won't be to add any more quoted passages. I'm not sure as to the exact number of words I've quoted from the book. But if you need a word count, I can start counting them. [Quoting Mr. Lawrence from a previous e-mail:] P.S...by the way, I am not at all sure what the rights situation on all those photos is. I know that we paid pretty good money to get volume rights, but we certainly did not clear any electronic permissions, and I simply wouldn’t know if posting them on the internet constitutes some sort of infringement of the copyright on those photos. [End Quote.] The photographs were taken off of the Internet, from various sites which offer photos on their webpages. But none of the photos in my review were scanned directly from the pages of "Reclaiming History". Zero. (I wouldn't know how to do that anyway.) A few of the photos in the review do match some of the photos used in the book's two photo sections. But I didn't scan them from the book itself. The photos came directly from JFK websites, and they are pictures that can be viewed by anyone around the globe with Internet access. I worked for quite a while on the review for Mr. Bugliosi's "Book for the Ages", and I'd like to think of the review as an appropriately-large review for such a grandiose "book for the ages". Also, I will add, it's a book I have been anxiously awaiting for many years now....and Vince doesn't disappoint, in my opinion. And to hear Vince tell it on his radio interviews, I guess I should thank YOU, Star, personally for some of the large "scope" of "Reclaiming History"; because Vince relayed the story about you telling him to "not cut out anything" from the manuscript. In effect, leave it alone, regardless of its massive size. A good decision, too, in my opinion. And, quite obviously, given the huge scope of Vince's tome (1.5-million words), the quotes from the book used in my review still only amount to a drop in the bucket when compared to the whole book's text (percentage-wise). But, yes, I was a little concerned about getting some type of written permission for this particular review, due to its size...and due to the unusual situation that exists with "Reclaiming History", wherein that book does not provide the normal type of disclaimer at the front of the book, a disclaimer which usually says (in effect): "You Can Quote Excerpts For A Review". I'm very proud of the review, and as I told Rosemary Newton (and Mr. Bugliosi, through Rosemary), it's my hope that such an in-depth review would make a few more people want to read the WHOLE book from start to finish. I certainly hope that would be the case for many readers anyway. [...] Thank you very much for your time. And thanks, most of all, for publishing "Reclaiming History". I've enjoyed it immensely (as you can probably already tell). Best Regards, David R. Von Pein davevonpein@aol.com =================================================== Subject: FW: Link To My Review Of "Reclaiming History" Date: 10/16/2007 11:04:17 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: Jessie Hughes To: David Von Pein ------------------------ Mr. Von Pein, Further to your correspondence with Starling Lawrence, while we would normally consider such use of the text to be permissive, in this case we are willing to waive any rights we have in the text for such use and can confirm that we have no objection to your continued use [of] the text on your website within your review. That said, we do not control the rights in any of the photos and therefore cannot speak to their use. You may wish to contact the rights holders of the photos to verify they have no objection to their use or seek licenses from said rights holders. Regards - Jessie Hughes Jessie Hughes Contracts Manager W.W. Norton & Company, Inc. 500 Fifth Avenue New York, New York 10110 ===================================================
  7. David Von Pein

    What's the point ?

    I never said you did, lizard lips. More conspiracy myths coming from the CT brigade, I see. There's no proof that Bugliosi got a "million bucks" for writing his book. That's Lifton talking. And, naturally, you lap up every anti-VB word uttered by Lifton, despite the proof that he was a fool when he said what he said about RH on 5/24/07 on Anybody-But-Oswald Radio. Lifton's Load Of B.S. Yeah, prob'ly so. Bugliosi and Lawrence certainly realized that they'd have to put up with a bunch of conspiracy kooks when they published the book for the ages on the JFK case. You're living proof of that. Yeah, prob'ly so. But I'm certainly not going to lose any sleep over re-posting the incoherent ramblings of Robert "LHO Shot No One" Caprio at another forum. Exposing that kook's nuttiness is practically a year-round task. BTW #4: If you want to play "insult tag" some more, I'm game. See ya, numb-nuts!
  8. David Von Pein

    In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

    JEAN DAVISON SAID: Once again I ask, what's the evidence that a rifle could've been bought in Dallas "with no records"? And again, here's an affidavit from a gun dealer in Dallas that I posted in another thread, with my emphasis this time: QUOTE PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY STATE OF TEXAS, County of Dallas, ss: I, Albert C. Yeargan. Jr. 1922 Mayflower Drive, Dallas, Texas, being duly sworn say: 1. I was the Sporting Goods Department Manager at the H. L. Green Company, 1623 Main Street, Dallas. Texas. from the Summer of 1963 until March 13, 1964. I am now employed by Smitty's Sporting Goods, 111 West Jefferson Avenue, Dallas, Texas. 2. When I worked for the H. L. Green Company, it had in stock and was offering for sale, a large number of Italian 6.5 mm rifles that were surpluses from World War II. 3. On November 22, 1963, FBI Agents, Secret Service Agents, and I examined all ***sales records and receipt records*** concerning Italian 6.5 mm rifles. 4. The records showed that the H. L. Green Company obtained its supply of these Italian 6.5 mm rifles from the Crescent Firearms Company in New York City. 5. A review of all of the ***records*** failed to reflect any ***record of sale*** of a 6.5 mm rifle with the Serial Number C2766. 6. ****As far as I know, the H. L. Green Company was at that time the only Company in Dallas that handled any quantity of these Italian 6.5 mm rifles.**** Signed the 21st day of July 1964. (S) Albert C. Yeargan, Jr., ALBERT C. YEARGAN. Jr. ------------------------------------ BILL KELLY SAID: I thought the question was why Oswald would purchase a handgun and rifle from a mail order coupon in a magazine and with a money order when he could have gone in any sporting goods, department store or pawn shop and obtained one immediately with cash and no identification? ---------------------------------- JEAN DAVISON THEN SAID: Hi Bill, I don't know that he could've bought a gun in all those places with no ID. I'm trying to establish whether there's any *evidence* for this old claim. Can you help me out there? I also don't know why Oswald decided to use mail order. Maybe he didn't want to show his face and risk a later identification. A Dallas gunshop owner named Alfred Hodge made this offhand comment in WC testimony: QUOTE: When it came in over the radio that [JFK] had been killed with a 7-millimeter [sic] rifle, my wife and myself--we got our book and started checking to see **who we had sold a 7-millimeter rifle to**. UNQUOTE He also said... QUOTE: Well, Captain Fritz' men came by with a shell, a Peters Wad Cutter, and that's this man and woman that got killed a few days ago out here and it has no concern with this case, but anyway, I checked my book and I found where I sold that man a gun and a box of ammunition.... UNQUOTE http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/hodge.htm This man was arrested based on Hodges' lead, according to the Dallas Morning News, and convicted. Evidently Hodge, at least, took names. [...] Everybody but Oswald is a suspect, it seems, but where's the evidence that Oswald had anything to do with Dodd? Calling two anonymous, unavailable sources "unimpeachable" means... bupkis, right? Jean
  9. David Von Pein

    Embarrassing questions

    Apparently there's an invisible motorcycle on Houston Street here (which is approx. 2 to 3 seconds before Oswald fired his first shot): http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/TDO4NFFBZAI/AAAAAAAAEwM/NHW6JMtBHqA/s400/Hughes+Film.bmp And, incredibly, there are CTers who apparently still think that it's H.B. McLain's cycle that had the stuck-open microphone. And yet it's the LNers who the conspiracy mongers accuse of being guilty of outmoded thinking? What a joke.
  10. David Von Pein

    In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

    Relating to my comments above, I received the following e-mail from Gary Mack: Date: 8/17/2010 1:57:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: Gary Mack To: David Von Pein -------------------- Dave, Regarding the purchase of weapons in Texas in the early 60s, Federal regulations required retailers to keep a log of all such sales. For example, Ray's Hardware in Dallas still has their January 19, 1960 log showing the revolver bought by Jack Ruby (but paid for by police detective Joe Cody, one of Ruby's friends). One of the folks at Ray's told me long ago that they must keep such records. Gary
  11. David Von Pein

    What's the point ?

    Relating to my comments above, I received the following e-mail from Gary Mack: Date: 8/17/2010 1:57:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: Gary Mack To: David Von Pein -------------------- Dave, Regarding the purchase of weapons in Texas in the early 60s, Federal regulations required retailers to keep a log of all such sales. For example, Ray's Hardware in Dallas still has their January 19, 1960 log showing the revolver bought by Jack Ruby (but paid for by police detective Joe Cody, one of Ruby's friends). One of the folks at Ray's told me long ago that they must keep such records. Gary
  12. David Von Pein

    What's the point ?

    That previously-mentioned "topsy-turvy" world that conspiracy theorists call home once again rises to the surface via Michael Hogan's last idiotic Education Forum post above.
  13. David Von Pein

    What's the point ?

    LOL. Exactly, Dean. But before citing VB, please make sure that you hide all the bootleg whiskey that you, Sparky, and Lee Harvey are consuming prior to the SWAT team's arrival. Ten-Four? BTW, your humorous post above is kind of proving my point from my previous post about quoting people from other websites -- IOW, who cares? Obviously, nobody cares about actually breaking a copyright law by citing thousands of words from a book like "RH" on their websites (or hundreds of other books that have strict rules on not reprinting material). And yet Lee Farley expects me to garner specific permission from someone on another PUBLIC FORUM before I can post that person's ALREADY PUBLIC words on another website. Meh.
  14. David Von Pein

    Embarrassing questions

    Dr. Thomas must have moved the goal posts again, eh Martin? Suddenly, a motorcycle DOESN'T need to be at the corner of Elm & Houston anymore in order for the acoustics/Dictabelt evidence to be valid. Is that correct? It was absolutely MANDATORY for a DPD cycle to be located at that corner at the time of the first gunshot when the HSCA's acoustics people investigated the case in 1978. But now that rule is null & void?
  15. David Von Pein

    What's the point ?

    I don't need your permission to copy something you've written on a public forum, Lee. And I don't ever intend to ask permission to cross-post from forum to forum. If it's on the Internet, it's fair game. BTW, before you ask me about posting Gary Mack's e-mails sans permission: Gary expects that to happen. I've done it for years. And so have many other people who think Gary's e-mails contain an abundance of good info (and common sense, to boot). I know Gary doesn't mind his mails getting posted at forums. In fact, he encourages it most of the time. BTW #2, Please explain to me the difference between cross-posting something written at another forum and the CTers who enjoy trashing Vincent Bugliosi's book at a public forum like this one? Is there a big difference between the two? Bugliosi certainly isn't a member of The Education Forum (or any other forum); therefore, he can't "defend" himself from the onslaught of sewage that is slung at his exemplary book every single day on the Internet. In fact, anyone who uses quotes from Bugliosi's book on the Internet is technically breaking the law, because I've noticed that VB's "Reclaiming History" is one of the very few books that I own that doesn't allow ANYTHING (not even a single sentence) to be copied and reprinted without the express permission of the publisher, W.W. Norton. So, in a way, it's much worse (legally-speaking) to trash Bugliosi's book (via specific quoted passages) on a public Internet website like The Education Forum or James DiEugenio's CTKA.net site, because it's illegal to do so without express permission (which I'm pretty sure DiEugenio never obtained from Starling Lawrence or W.W. Norton & Company). F.Y.I. Footnote -- I, however, did obtain express permission (in 2007) from Vincent Bugliosi's publisher/editor, Starling Lawrence, to use extensive quotes from Bugliosi's book in my lengthy book review. (It took me months to get that permission from W.W. Norton, too.)
  16. David Von Pein

    What's the point ?

    LOL. Hilarity at its best here. Bugliosi writes a book with 4,000 more citations than the Warren Report and yet it's a "crappy" book filled with nothing but "must haves" and "may haves". (Oh, my bladder!) I was expecting a higher-class batch of conspiracy mongers at this forum. Obviously, I was expecting way, way too much. Incredibly, per CTers, John Armstrong's "may have" book of tripe is supposed to be considered a great masterpiece of JFK literature, but Vince Bugliosi's book of solid facts and evidence is supposed to be "ignored". What a topsy-turvy world CTers live in.
  17. David Von Pein

    Embarrassing questions

    Martin Hay is a magician (not to mention the fact he's seeing things). He sees a motorcycle near the Elm & Houston corner in the picture below. Amazing: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/TDO4NFFBZAI/AAAAAAAAEwM/NHW6JMtBHqA/s400/Hughes+Film.bmp
  18. David Von Pein

    Embarrassing questions

    Bollocks back @ Hay. http://jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/acoustics.htm
  19. David Von Pein

    What's the point ?

    ROB CAPRIO SAID: DVP SAID: More [nonsense] from Caprio. Oswald would have paid exactly the same amount for the RIFLE WITH SCOPE in November as he did in March -- $19.95 plus S&H. The Nov. '63 ad shows the EXACT SAME PRICE for that item--$19.95. Plus, if the ads between Feb. and Nov. were the same as the Nov. ad, then the price of the rifle ONLY would actually have been 10 cents LESS than what Oswald's rifle (alone) cost in the Feb. ad. It was advertised for $12.88 in Feb.; and $12.78 in Nov. And yet Robert Caprio thinks Oswald would have owed KLEIN'S money, even though Klein's was selling the 40-inch rifle for a dime LESS in the Nov. ad. ROB CAPRIO SAID: DVP SAID: Maybe because NOVEMBER was the CURRENT MONTH and was the CURRENT ISSUE of a magazine that the FBI checked for Klein's ads. BTW, I'm pretty sure that today isn't the first time that Gary Mack's research regarding the 40-inch rifles has been mentioned here at the acj/aaj newsgroups. I recall this exact same thing coming up in the past, with Gary Mack (yet again) supplying the exact same useful information concerning the post-February Klein's advertisements. Naturally, most/all CTers ignored Gary Mack back then....and they'll ignore him today too. ORIGINAL POSTS
  20. David Von Pein

    What's the point ?

    What I want to see is the proof that shows that the conspiracy theorists are correct when they continually say that Oswald could have walked into any gun store in Texas in '63 and bought a gun without any paperwork being involved at all. I don't think that has been proven. And the statements from various gun shop owners who provided information to the Warren Commission (or the FBI) would certainly indicate that at least SOME gun shop owners DID keep records of the people to whom they sold firearms in 1963. I'm guessing that (in large part) this whole business about buying a gun in a gun shop without leaving a trace, which is promoted in Oliver Stone's fantasy movie as well, is probably nothing more than yet another in a long line of conspiracy myths foisted on the public since JFK's assassination. NOTE -- To protect myself from future abuse by the Anybody-But-Oswald conspiracy theorists on the Internet, I will conclude this message with this addendum: I could be wrong about the last paragraph I just wrote above concerning the topic of buying guns in gun stores in 1963.
  21. David Von Pein

    What's the point ?

    Yeah, that's about the response I expected.
  22. David Von Pein

    What's the point ?

    Gary Mack didn't ask me to post his e-mail, Dean. I did it on my own. And, of course, whatever you do, Dean, make sure you COMPLETELY IGNORE Gary's valuable input on the "40-inch vs. 36-inch" Carcano topic. It's always best if CTers ignore this evidence about the Klein's ads, so that they can continue to pretend that Oswald couldn't possibly in a million years have been sent a 40-inch Carcano from Klein's in late March of 1963: "I looked up the Klein's ads for 1963 and found that the next issue after February 1963 and all the issues afterward showed the 40" rifle. I don't have my notes here at the house, so the April 1963 issue, which would have mailed in mid-March so the ad had to have been changed prior to that, may be the first with the 40" weapon. "So that is exactly what must have happened. Klein's ran out of 36" rifles very quickly and substituted the longer weapon. They may have notified customers ahead of time, but there's no record of that happening." -- Gary Mack; 8/17/10
  23. David Von Pein

    Embarrassing questions

    And, as usual, whenever CTers point out this flawed HSCA conclusion, those CTers always fail to note that the Dictabelt evidence from which the HSCA's "4th shot" sprung is evidence that has been totally discredited--to the point that it's simply astounding to find ANY person in the world (who knows anything about the JFK case) who is still propping up the Dictabelt "4th shot" garbage here in 2010. Debunking The HSCA's Acoustics Evidence
  24. David Von Pein

    What's the point ?

    E-MAIL FROM GARY MACK OF THE SIXTH FLOOR MUSEUM AT DEALEY PLAZA: Date: 8/17/2010 9:56:49 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: Gary Mack To: David Von Pein -------------------------- Dave, I looked up the Klein's ads for 1963 and found that the next issue after February 1963 and all the issues afterward showed the 40" rifle. I don't have my notes here at the house, so the April 1963 issue, which would have mailed in mid-March so the ad had to have been changed prior to that, may be the first with the 40" weapon. So that is exactly what must have happened. Klein's ran out of 36" rifles very quickly and substituted the longer weapon. They may have notified customers ahead of time, but there's no record of that happening. Gary
  25. David Von Pein

    What's the point ?

    It doesn't matter that an order for a "40-inch" rifle wasn't sent in by Oswald to Klein's. The key fact is that Oswald's/(Hidell's) order for a 36-inch rifle was filled with a FORTY-INCH gun (#C2766). Regardless of what Oswald ordered, Klein's sent him C2766. We know that beyond all doubt (thanks to Waldman Exhibit No. 7 below, which many CTers have no choice but to think is a phony document). But, then too, if Waldman #7 is phony/fake, then why in the world didn't the people faking all of this stuff (such as Waldman #7 and Oswald's order form, etc.) see to it that the LENGTHS OF THE RIFLES matched up? Looks like, once again, we're confronted with a group of totally inept goofballs who were serving as the patsy-framers. But what really happened is much less sinister, of course -- i.e., Klein's was very likely out of stock of the 36-inch Carcano rifles, and they shipped Oswald/Hidell a 40-inch model instead. And I'd be willing to bet the farm that Oswald never even noticed the difference. BTW, even if I could provide you with a 40-inch rifle order from Oswald, it wouldn't make the CTers give up on this issue. Not by a longshot. Because a bunch of them also think ALL of the other documents that prove Oswald ordered his Mannlicher-Carcano from Klein's Sporting Goods have been faked and manufactured too (e.g., the Klein's order form and the money order for $21.45). Of course, as mentioned before, this type of thinking begs the question: Why didn't the brain-dead plotters make sure they "sent" the patsy the same rifle that they wanted everybody in the world to think he ordered--a 36-incher? I guess maybe the dumber-than-dirt plotters ran out of 36-inch rifles too, huh? Otherwise, they'd have "sent" their patsy a 36-inch Carcano instead of the 40-inch gun they framed him with. Right? Waldman No. 7:
×