Jump to content
The Education Forum

David Von Pein

Members
  • Content Count

    5,245
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by David Von Pein


  1. Hi Vince,

    I disagree with nearly everything you say, but I certainly admire your spirit, energy, and "vigah" whenever you talk about the JFK case. 😄

    (And there's one thing for sure --- nobody is ever going to accuse Vincent Michael Palamara of talking too slowly. :))

    http://box.com/mp3 audio/Interview With Vince Palamara (Dec. 6, 2018)

    http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/A Discussion About JFK's Trip To San Diego In June 1963

    http://www.amazon.com/Vincent Michael Palamara


  2. 1 hour ago, Roy Wieselquist said:

    A great weight of evil has been lifted off this nation.

    GHWB was one of the big paymasters of the Coup.  That was him in Dealey 12:30.  How hard was it for him to get to Tyler using Zeppa's plane?  Less than 90 miles as the bird flies.  Then he's at Kiwanis giving the "sad, sad news."  you bet he knew it well.

    Lately, I have thought that when GHWB goes, it will be "all clear" for MSM and the general public to admit the Coup.  Now that the last of Caesar's slayers is finally dead.  We don't have to worry anymore about hurting any of the Murderers' feelings.

    That's a disgusting and sickening thing to say. You should hide your head in shame after making such a series of vile, inappropriate, totally unprovable, and incredibly stupid comments concerning former President George H.W. Bush.

    Rest in peace, Mr. President. You no longer have to endure the nonsensical rantings of the JFK conspiracy theorists who have desperately tried (sans a single speck of evidence!) to involve you in the murder of the 35th U.S. President.

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/01/politics/george-h-w-bush-dead/index.html

     


  3. 10 hours ago, John Butler said:

    Go back and read the post on Altgens 6 titled Altgens 6- A different view.

    Does that post/(thread) talk about why any assassin would be aiming at the 2nd or 3rd floor of the Dal-Tex when his target was situated in a car in the middle of Elm Street? *

    * And the alleged "bullet holes" are seen in the Dal-Tex facade several seconds before the head shot even occurs, so the CTers can't possibly utilize any kind of "The bullets deflected wildly after striking JFK's skull" excuse either. So, good luck.


  4. Somebody actually thinks there could have been bullet holes in the front of the Dal-Tex Building between the 2nd and 3rd floors??

    Boy, those assassins must have been really lousy gunmen. Or maybe they were blindfolded and firing indiscriminately all over Dealey Plaza, not caring what they were aiming at. Or did the real killers, just like Lee Oswald, have an oak tree and a traffic light pole situated between their rifles and the President's body, which could possibly have deflected some of their shots, even though those shooter(s) would have been firing from west to east? And where in the world could any such assassin(s) have been located in order to possibly cause two bullet holes to pepper the front of the Dal-Tex?

    This reminds me of the insane theory proposed by some conspiracy theorists (including Internet conspiracy fantasist Robert Caprio in this 2007 discussion) concerning two different bullets that allegedly were found in 1966 and 1967 on the roofs of various buildings located many blocks from Dealey Plaza. Now, I ask: if those two bullets on top of those buildings had been fired by assassins in Dealey Plaza, then what exactly were those killers aiming at---a bird up in the sky? Or did the assassins think President Kennedy was really located on the roof of a nearby building? ~a shrug and a chuckle~

    James-Altgens-Photograph-Dealey-Plaza-No

     


  5. 12 hours ago, Micah Mileto said:

    "...a second high velocity bullet had entered the rear of the skull and had fragmentized prior to exit through the top of the skull" -sibert and o'neill report

    Just to be clear.....

    You aren't suggesting in that truncated portion of THIS PAGE of the Sibert/O'Neill Report that Humes was saying that TWO separate bullets entered JFK's HEAD....are you? Because the S&O Report is quite clear in that page I just linked that only TWO bullets total hit Kennedy---one entering the upper back and one entering the back of the head. The reference to "a second high velocity bullet" in that S&O Report was clearly referring to a second TOTAL bullet to hit the President. It wasn't referring to two head shot bullets.


  6. 1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

    They realized the evidence suggested more than one head shot,

    Wrong. The medical evidence doesn't suggest any such thing, and the HSCA and Clark panels knew this. There was only ONE entry hole in JFK's head. All the autopsy doctors substantiate this, as does the autopsy report itself. If the HSCA and Clark panels saw any proof of the "EOP" entry in any of the photos or X-rays, of course they would have said so. There was no logical reason under the sun for those men to start lying about where that entry wound was.

    Conspiracists have invented various reasons for the HSCA and Clark people to want to raise the wound up into the cowlick, but that's the fertile imaginings of the CTers at work and nothing more than that. The fact is: those men studied the photos and X-rays and saw the wound high on the head....so that's what they reported. Simple as that. (The unproven theories of CTers notwithstanding.)


  7. 34 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

    You raise the entry to straighten the trajectory, you then get rid of the lower particles, and the coup de grace, you place a 6.5 mm fragment  where it needs to be.

    And they went through all that fakery and legerdemain just so they could say basically the EXACT SAME THING ---- that being: the bullet entered JFK's head from behind. Right?

    And, Jimmy, you're not going to sit there and tell me that Dr. Russell Fisher, the Chief Medical Examiner for the state of Maryland since 1949, would have held the opinion in 1968 when he was a part of the Clark Panel that a bullet which has just hit a very hard object like the skull of President John F. Kennedy could not possibly have changed its trajectory after striking that object? You don't really think that Fisher held such a belief, do you James? Anyone who thinks Dr. Fisher held such a crazy belief in the year 1968 must, themselves, be a little crazy.

    Ergo, there was no good reason whatsoever for Russell S. Fisher to want to engage in the type of "Let's Raise The Entry Wound By Four Inches" scheme that James DiEugenio thinks he did engage in.


  8. 1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

    Mr. Von Pein,

         I am a physician, (Harvard Medical School '83) and I have studied the original medical reports from the Parkland ER.  JFK, clearly, had a right frontal entry wound that blew a fragment of his right occipital skull backward, behind the limo-- consistent with the Zapruder film.

       My understanding is that the physician who conducted the Bethesda autopsy was not even a forensic pathologist, and was quite reluctant to sign off on the substandard "autopsy" that may well have been conducted on a surgically altered cranium.

      As for Fred Litwin, I will stand by my original comments about his utterly appalling interview on CBC television.  He made several blatantly false statements.  I would give him the benefit of the doubt and attribute his errors to ignorance, but I don't believe that he is ignorant. 

    Well, since you believe that President Kennedy sustained a "right frontal entry wound that blew a fragment of his right occipital skull backward", then you really have no choice but to also believe that ALL THREE of the photographic pieces of evidence depicted below (the autopsy photos, the autopsy X-rays, and Abraham Zapruder's home movie) must have been faked and manipulated by someone so as to completely eliminate the right-rear blowout of the President's skull. If you choose to believe in such wholesale fakery of the evidence, be my guest. But you'll pardon me if I excuse myself from sitting at your table.

    JFK-Head-Wound-Photographic-Comparison.png

     

    1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

    P.S.  This is my last comment to you.  I do not wish to converse with you, going forward.

    Jack-Benny.jpg


  9. Jim,

    Thanks for posting the ARRB testimony by Dr. Humes concerning the X-ray.

    Yes, there are some problems and some discrepancies concerning the autopsy of President Kennedy. I cannot deny that fact. Nor have I ever tried to deny that these discrepancies and oddities exist in the record of this case. But I certainly don't believe that Dr. Russell Fisher of the Clark Panel (and his 3 colleagues on that 1968 panel) decided to falsely "move" the entry wound in JFK's head northward by a total of four inches as part of some sinister and covert cover-up operation.

    That theory, in my opinion, is ridiculous (and, frankly, laughable), mainly due to the fact that the total amount of "net gain" that would have been attained via such an underhanded piece of on-paper surgery to the President's skull would have been extremely minimal to the people who were orchestrating such a fraud so as to fool the public at large.

    Because whether the wound was right at the level of the EOP on JFK's head or 100 millimeters above that location (as determined by Dr. Fisher's Clark Panel in '68), the end result (either way) would have been a conclusion that has one single bullet striking the President's head--with that one bullet entering JFK's head from behind.

    And both of those possible entry points---whether it be a high point or a low point---are both perfectly consistent and compatible with the conclusion that has Lee Harvey Oswald being the lone assassin firing his rifle from the sixth floor of the Book Depository Building (especially when factoring in the likelihood that the bullet that crashed into JFK's head probably changed directions somewhat after striking the hard skull, thereby eliminating any definitive conclusion that any investigative body would hope to reach about the precise angle of trajectory of the bullet as it travelled through the President's cranium).

    For more about that pesky "6.5mm. Object" seen in one of JFK's X-rays .... Click-Here-Logo.png


  10. 27 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

    Davey Boy:

    In how many murder cases does the fatal wound change location, does the fatal bullet miraculously show up on the x rays five years later, and particle trails disappear?

    Jimmy Boy,

    Not a one of those things happened, of course.

    ...The fatal entrance wound never "changed" locations. It was always in the same place on the BACK of Kennedy's head. And the "red spot" photo proves it was high on the head, not low. Mistakes have been made by some people (including the Bethesda doctors) over the years as to the precise place on JFK's head where that wound was located, but the biggest mistake was made by Humes & Boswell on the night of the autopsy by not measuring the vertical distance of the wound from ANY body landmark. Incredibly, it appears they didn't measure the "north/south" distance from any landmark at all! But the photographs confirm it was 100mm. above the EOP. Why not go with the BEST evidence (in this case, those photos)? Or am I supposed to believe the Red Spot pic is a phony?

    ....Nobody KNOWS what the "6.5mm opacity" is on the A-P X-ray. Nobody can say for CERTAIN. Maybe it's a metal (bullet) fragment, but maybe it's not. We'll likely never know for sure.

    ....And your constant refrain of "The particle trail disappeared" has me shrugging too. What are you talking about? The "particle trail" is easily visible in the lateral X-ray of Kennedy's skull. Why would anyone insist it has "disappeared"? It hasn't disappeared at all. ~shrug time~

    JFK-Head-Xray.jpg


  11. 2 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

    The CBC interview of Fred Litwin (posted by David Von Pein) is utterly appalling.

    How did this dishonest, erroneous nonsense get televised in Canada?

    Did the CBC interviewer really not know that Richard Helms admitted under oath that Clay Shaw was, in fact, a CIA asset?  That Shaw was, in fact, guilty of perjury?

    And what is Litwin's nonsense about two pathologists employed by the Kennedy family claiming that autopsy findings supported the Lone Nut in the TSBD narrative of the Warren Commission?

    Someone needs to contact the Chairperson at CBC, Michael Goldbloom, and let him know that Fred Litwin is a bald-faced xxxx.

    What kind of junk/crap are you trying to peddle here, W. Niederhut? You surely know that there were seventeen (17!) different pathologists over the years who have ALL maintained that President Kennedy was shot only TWICE, with both shots coming from BEHIND.

    Even mega-CTer Dr. Cyril Wecht (one of those 17 pathologists) agrees that the autopsy photos and X-rays show only wounds that were caused by bullets that entered JFK from the rear.

    You owe Fred Litwin an apology for calling him a "bald-faced l-i-a-r". But maybe you think those seventeen pathologists (from Bethesda to the Clark Panel to the HSCA) who agree that Kennedy was shot only from behind are the real "bald-faced liars", eh?

×