Jump to content
The Education Forum

David Von Pein

Members
  • Content Count

    5,200
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by David Von Pein

  1. David Von Pein

    More from the past on BYP

    Given the manner in which Lee Harvey was dressed (including the two guns he was outfitted with that day in their backyard), I would say that Marina remembering the CONTENT of the pictures more so than the number of pics, the date, and the exact details of how the camera worked, was perfectly reasonable and understandable. Naturally, though, the conspiracy theorists have to add in a dash of "conspiracy" and "cover-up" where none has ever existed. That's to be expected, of course. Also.... If Marina never took any backyard pictures at all in late March of 1963, then where do you suppose she got ahold of the photo that she and Marguerite Oswald destroyed in their hotel room on 11/23/63? Do you think Marguerite was lying in her testimony too [at 1 H 152]? .... MARGUERITE OSWALD -- "And this is the picture of the gun that Marina tore up into bits of paper, and struck a match to it. Now, that didn't burn completely, because it was heavy--not cardboard--what is the name for it--a photographic picture. So the match didn't take it completely." J. LEE RANKIN -- "Had you said anything to her about burning it before that?" MARGUERITE OSWALD -- "No, sir. The last time I had seen the picture was in Marina's shoe when she was trying to tell me that the picture was in her shoe. I state here now that Marina meant for me to have that picture, from the very beginning, in Mrs. Paine's home. She said--I testified before "Mamma, you keep picture." And then she showed it to me in the courthouse. And when I refused it, then she decided to get rid of the picture. She tore up the picture and struck a match to it. Then I took it and flushed it down the toilet." ---------------------------------------------------- 2015 E-MAIL FROM GARY MACK: Date: 6/5/2015 (3:57:47 P.M. EDT) From: Gary Mack To: David Von Pein ------------------- Hey Dave, Well, the CTs are all wound up again over the BY photos but I'm continually puzzled as to why they claim things don't make sense? [...] What the CTs never talk about is Marguerite and Marina both admitting to destroying a fourth pose in which Oswald held the rifle over his head. They did that the next day BEFORE Dallas Police found the other pictures. I knew Marguerite and I know Marina (although we haven't spoken in years) and not only did both women readily admit to having testified to the WC about destroying the photo, both were aware of the picture controversy and both said the destroyed picture was, in fact, just like the other three - taken in the Neely Street back yard. What this means is that IF the BY photos are fake (but they aren't), Oswald is the one who faked them! Phew! It's hard to keep all this straight. Gary Marina's memory has always been fuzzy when it comes to the precise number of backyard pictures she took of her husband. She just simply could not remember how many she took, and she couldn't remember the exact date she took them. Big freaking deal! Of course, had she stopped to think really hard about this subject just a little bit more, she would have realized that she had to have taken a minimum of two photos, because she and Marguerite destroyed one of the pictures on 11/23/63. So she could have easily figured out that she took at least two. Related discussion: http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/06/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-949.html#The-Backyard-Photographs
  2. David Von Pein

    More from the past on BYP

    Okay, she might have tilted the camera 90 degrees. Again---no big deal. (It's only a "big deal" to conspiracy theorists who are bent on finding "conspiracy" around every corner and in every Neely Street backyard.) The long and short of it is ---- Seeing as how Marina didn't know the first thing about how to take a picture with Lee's Imperial Reflex camera, she did whatever Lee told her to do in order to get the pictures to come out correctly. And when she was asked to recall the specific details of how she held the camera and how many photos she took, she just flat-out forgot. Yes, she did remember some of the details about the Backyard Photos session---such as the detail about how silly and "crazy" she thought Lee looked that day in his all-black outfit with his guns.... "I asked him then why he had dressed himself up like that, with the rifle and the pistol, and I thought that he had gone crazy, and he said he wanted to send that to a newspaper." ....But the details of how the camera worked and the exact number of pictures she took were things that obviously were not important enough to her at the time for her to make a mental note of such trivial things. And so, almost a year later when she was asked to recall such things, she was not able to do so. That's certainly not an unheard-of situation at all, IMO.
  3. David Von Pein

    More from the past on BYP

    I don't know. I've never looked into it that deeply.
  4. David Von Pein

    More from the past on BYP

    Waist level (of course). She just didn't remember that detail about the camera when she was asked about it later on.
  5. David Von Pein

    More from the past on BYP

    Marina's HSCA testimony (re: the backyard photos)(audio).... https://app.box.com/s/hf7yp5ctenxvgjttuq7jwtuuv57eagb7
  6. David Von Pein

    More from the past on BYP

    Good job, Michael. Just keep ignoring what Marina herself said.... "...I took the pictures..."
  7. David Von Pein

    More from the past on BYP

    So what? Lee told her what to do and what button to press, and she did it. No big deal.
  8. David Von Pein

    More from the past on BYP

    "I was very nervous that day when I took the [backyard] pictures. I can't remember how many I took, but I know I took them and that is what is important. It would be easier if I said I never took them, but that is not the truth." -- Marina Oswald; Early 1990s (Via Gerald Posner's book, "Case Closed", Page 106 [footnote])
  9. David Von Pein

    Which is the best available image of the headshot?

    http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/04/index.html#JFK-Head-Wounds
  10. David Von Pein

    Kennedy Videos

    "THE FOUR DARK DAYS" (CBS-TV SPECIAL, AIRED ON NOVEMBER 25, 1963): http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2016/11/the-four-dark-days-cbs-special.html
  11. David Von Pein

    Kennedy Videos

    "PRESIDENTS AND ASSASSINS" (CBS NEWS SPECIAL REPORT, AIRED ON NOVEMBER 25, 1963): http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2016/05/presidents-and-assassins.html
  12. David Von Pein

    Where is the exit?

    Yes, they can. And these 3 images prove that they can---because there is no "BOH" wound anywhere to be found in these THREE different examples of photographic evidence. (Were ALL of these pictures faked?)....
  13. David Von Pein

    Where is the exit?

    ARLEN SPECTER -- "Based on the appearance of the neck wound alone, could it have been either an entrance or an exit wound?" DR. MALCOLM PERRY -- "It could have been either." [At 3 H 373.] ------------------------------- ARLEN SPECTER -- "Was the wound in the neck consistent with being either an entry or exit wound, in your opinion?" DR. CHARLES CARRICO -- "Yes." MR. SPECTER -- "Or, did it look to be more one than the other?" DR. CARRICO -- "No; it could have been either, depending on the size of the missile, the velocity of the missile, the tissues that it struck." [At 6 H 5.] ------------------------------- ARLEN SPECTER -- "What did you mean when you just made your reference to the academic aspect with the wound, Dr. Akin?" DR. GENE AKIN -- "Well, naturally, the thought flashed through my mind that this might have been an entrance wound. I immediately thought it could also have been an exit wound, depending upon the nature of the missile that made the wound." [At 6 H 65.] ------------------------------- Related Links: http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/06/jfk-wounds-and-more-sbt-talk.html http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2018/02/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1273.html
  14. David Von Pein

    Where is the exit?

    I supplied a perfectly credible (and evidence-based) answer to your question some fourteen days ago, on July 26th.... http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/25088-where-is-the-exit/?page=5&tab=comments#comment-383269
  15. David Von Pein

    Who changed the motorcade route?

    REPRISE.... JOSEPH McBRIDE SAID: No Dan Rather in the [McIntire] photo. I noticed that immediately when this was first printed by the Dallas Morning News in 1988 when I was in town for the twenty-fifth anniversary. A colleague has said Rather was at the Trade Mart. Rather has given various claims for his whereabouts at the time of the shooting, including his frequent claim he was on the other side of the overpass from the shooting area waiting for a film drop. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: But that doesn't mean Rather wasn't there in the area nearby. Not every last square inch of the area is covered in the McIntire photo. Maybe Rather was standing just outside McIntire's camera range. For that matter, how do you know that the man on the far right of the picture isn't Dan Rather?
  16. David Von Pein

    David Von Pein

    Have you been getting your info from Dave Healy again?
  17. David Von Pein

    David Von Pein

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/#DVP-Vs-Various-Individual-Conspiracy-Theorists http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/09/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-430.html
  18. David Von Pein

    Was Dubya in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63?

    http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/07/why-would-they-do-this.html
  19. David Von Pein

    VOICING FOR BANNED MEMBERS

    Professor James H. Fetzer was definitely an active member of this forum in circa 2009—2010, as the three threads linked below (all started by Fetzer) would indicate. And he almost certainly was "banned" at some point after 2010, otherwise his name in these posts would still be presented as a clickable link that leads to a profile page. But he's now listed as only a "Guest" in these threads and his name can't be clicked on.... http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/14121-did-zapruder-take-the-zapruder-film/ http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/15173-six-seconds-in-dallas-truth-or-obfuscation/ http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/15218-did-josiah-thompson-rip-off-david-lifton/ Side note.... Even though Jim Fetzer can no longer post anything here at EF, I'm glad to see that his old posts are still visible here at this forum, instead of having them totally wiped out for all time (like John Simkin did with banned members' posts a few years ago, such as with my own EF posts from 2006 and James DiEugenio's contributions from 2010—2013, all of which were wiped out with the click of a button by Simkin). It's good to have the ability to search for even a banned person's posts and have the material still available for viewing, like those threads linked above that were started by Prof. Fetzer.
  20. David Von Pein

    VOICING FOR BANNED MEMBERS

    Good questions, Sandy. As a general rule, I think James Gordon's newest forum rule is a good one. But I also think that in order for someone to be penalized, the person posting the banned person's material must have knowledge of the "banned" status of the quoted person. That's only fair, right? And why in the world would every member here be aware of the "banned or not banned" status of all other members? It's not reasonable to think that such information is known by everybody here---or that everybody would even care about knowing such info. I certainly don't care about such things. For example, I was not aware of the banned status of the fellow named Doyle until today. So that seems like it'd be a problem for the EF staff --- how can the moderators prove that a member knows that another person has been officially banned from posting at EF? Seems to me like the best policy would be to warn the offender first (to allow for the very real possibility that the offender had no idea that he/she was posting stuff from a "banned" member), and if a second occurrence of the violation takes place, then penalize the offender.
  21. David Von Pein

    VOICING FOR BANNED MEMBERS

    Because the forum member in question (Jim H.) was posting verbatim quotes written by a person who was (evidently) banned from this forum. Such activity should be considered unacceptable, IMO. I agree with James Gordon's new rule.
  22. David Von Pein

    Plaza Man: Bob Groden vs the City of Dallas

    Oh, OK. I didn't see the link. Thanks, Jim. Here's the direct link to the whole film: https://www.npostart.nl/2doc/11-11-2015/VPWON_1250532
  23. David Von Pein

    Plaza Man: Bob Groden vs the City of Dallas

    FYI.... Here's the "Plaza Man" trailer: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1d9MooGuoEcxP9-eIePvbwTiQ3KPyexki/view
  24. David Von Pein

    Where is the exit?

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The complete 1992 JAMA interview with Dr. James Humes can be found HERE. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  25. David Von Pein

    Where is the exit?

    But what about Dr. McClelland's observations concerning the throat wound?.... "Some people have even said 'Oh, that tracheostomy has been altered; it's too big a wound'. Well, I can speak for that -- no, it had not been altered. That's exactly the way it was made at Parkland. It's just that people expected it to be smaller." -- Dr. Robert McClelland; 2009 https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0KFei3W7bGOODhkYTRkOFdNUlU/view
×