Jump to content
The Education Forum

David Von Pein

Members
  • Content Count

    5,203
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by David Von Pein


  1. 12 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

    The BOH photo and skull x-ray have obviously been faked or altered...

    Which means you have to think that the Z-Film has been "faked or altered" as well, right? Because Mr. Zapruder's motion picture most certainly does NOT show any of the BACK of JFK's head being blown out by the force of the head-shot bullet....

    http://drive.google.com / video / The Zapruder Film / Version Created By DVP Utilizing Each Of The Film's 486 Individual Frames

    You can surely see how silly the "faked or altered" policy becomes when more and more items keep having to be added to a CTer's list of faked things. (And we've discussed this very thing before at this forum, of course. See link below. The merry-go-round never stops.)

    http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/12/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1072.html#There Is No Large Wound In The Back Of JFK's Head


  2. 4 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

    BTW, the second link above shows Boswell's (inadvertent) HSCA testimony that a back-of-head skull fragment was brought to the autopsy room AFTER the body had arrived. Which, of course, corroborates all the other rear blowout evidence -- both the Harper Fragment evidence and the back-of-head blowout testim

    There's no possible way that could have happened, and this X-ray below (which the HSCA said "had not been altered in any manner" [7 HSCA 41]) proves it. There's not even the tiniest piece of the BACK of President Kennedy's head missing....

    JFK-Head-Xray.jpg

     


  3. From a 2014 discussion....

    DVP SAID:

    President Kennedy's suit coat is unquestionably hiked up on his back in the Croft picture at circa Z161. That's not even debatable.

    Now, given that undeniable FACT (unless someone wants to pretend that Robert Croft's picture has been faked too), it means the suit coat is going to have a hole in it that is lower than the wound in JFK's skin. Correct?

    And since there's only one bullet hole in the back of JFK's shirt and only one bullet hole in the upper back (skin) of John F. Kennedy's body too---well, it's pretty obvious to see where I'm going with this, right?

    And, to reiterate -- Why on Earth do CTers think it would be an impossible feat to have somebody's shirt and jacket bunched up IN UNISON on a person's back?

    But to hear CTers like Cliff Varnell tell it, that "double bunching" thing is more improbable than flying to the moon in a Cessna. ~big shrug~

    It only goes to show--once again--the lengths that some conspiracy hounds will go to in order to inject suspicion and doubt and alleged "conspiracy" into every nook and cranny of the JFK murder case---even though there's no need to inject such things into this particular sub-topic regarding the President's clothing whatsoever.

    And btw, a picture was produced by Jean Davison a few years ago (the one below) showing JFK wearing a shirt that is "bunched up" near his neck. But according to some CTers, I guess maybe this is merely an illusion I'm seeing here....

    JFK-Shirt-Bunched.jpg

    And Cliff Varnell and other Education Forum members know about the above picture, too. It was discussed right here in this thread.

    Naturally, Cliff doesn't think it has any relevance at all. But I think Cliff is all wet, and I set him straight here [excerpted below].

    "Of course, your argument about Kennedy's shirt is (and always has been) an unprovable one since we can't see the back of JFK's shirt in any of the motorcade photos. Therefore, you cannot possibly prove that it's "impossible" for his shirt to have been bunched-up in unison with his suit coat." -- DVP; June 22, 2011

     


  4. 7 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

    There are no unknown variables.

    That's an incredibly brazen statement for anyone to make. And an incredibly silly one, to boot.

    You, Cliff, should face the FACT that you don't really have any idea how much "bunching" was occurring with JFK's COAT or SHIRT when Kennedy was being shot in Dealey Plaza. You keep PRETENDING you do have all this knowledge....but you don't. And you KNOW you don't. You're just blowing more smoke. As usual.


  5. 11 hours ago, Lance Payette said:

    Two assassins' bullets, one from the front and one from the back, that didn't exit the body?  Pure happenstance that those two shots lined up in a way that brought the SBT at least within the realm of possibility? 

    From a June 2018 discussion here at this forum....

    "Isn't it amazing that there just happened to be another bullet hole on the opposite side of JFK's body to meet the "SBT" needs of Mr. Specter, et al?

    Has any conspiracy theorist in history ever made this basic observation?....

    Boy, those assassins were sure a bunch of lucky sons of bitches when the guy who shot JFK in the throat from the front managed to hit Kennedy in exactly the right spot on his body so that (later on) the official investigators could utilize that entry wound in the throat as the point of exit for the SBT bullet. And then the multiple assassins got even luckier when the upper-back bullet and the bullet that entered the throat both decided not to exit the body and then both of those bullets vanished into puffs of smoke before either of those bullets (which obviously were still inside JFK's body when he was inside Trauma Room No. 1 at Parkland Hospital) could be seen by any non-conspirator.

    Can anyone truly believe that such incredible good fortune could possibly have existed amongst the (alleged) multiple shooters who were (allegedly) firing bullets at President Kennedy on 11/22/63?

    (And yet CTers have the gall to tell me that I am the one who believes in "Magic Bullets". Oy vey!)" --DVP; June 2018

    More....

    http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/sbt-perfection-of-ce903.html#The-Incredibly-Lucky-Plotters

     


  6. 10 hours ago, Ray Mitcham said:

    I'd like [DVP] to confirm your [Francois Carlier's] comment that he agreed that the shot hit JFK in the back rather than the neck. It'll be a hell of a shock to him.

    No shock at all. Of course the bullet entered JFK's BACK (not his NECK). I've NEVER argued anything else. And you won't find any post of mine saying otherwise. I've always said "Upper Back", not "Neck" for the bullet's entry point. For example, in this post here (which I previously linked to in this thread), I said....

    "Why are you [Anthony Marsh] stating that LNers "keep saying neck"? They do no such thing. LNers know the wound was in JFK's upper "back" (14 centimeters below the mastoid process), not in the "neck". Can you, Tony, post some messages of LNers saying "neck" repeatedly, in order to back up your statement that LNers "keep saying neck"? (I doubt you can.)" -- DVP; January 2018

    And I've also said (many times) that the problem, IMO, is mainly just semantics---and nothing more.

    Also See:

    https://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/12/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-860.html


  7. 13 minutes ago, Ray Mitcham said:

    Now explain how S.A. Bennett happened to see a bullet hole in the President's jacket, four inches down from his right shoulder.

    I don't think he did. That type of vision is reserved for a guy named Superman.

    Anyway, do you think Bennett had a tape measure with him when he estimated where the bullet entered the President's back?

    Bennett was guessing. Simple as that.


  8. Thanks, Micah.

    But the document you linked to (MD 26) is certainly not clear at all as to which writing instrument Boswell used---a pen or a pencil. The document says Boswell said BOTH, indicating either Boswell's fuzzy memory on that point or the fact that he really did write with both types of writing instruments.

    Some great case you've got there. But CTers are experts at the Mountains From Molehills game. And this "Pen vs. Pencil" topic certainly qualifies as that.


  9. 1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said:

    Those measurements were written in pen -- a blatant violation of autopsy protocol, which requires a pencil.

    Oh noooooooooooooooooo!! Tell me it ain't so!! A pen was used instead of a pencil??!!!!!

    That must mean the entire case against Oswald is now totally destroyed!!

    All because somebody used a Bic instead of a #2!!

    Well, back to the ol' drawing board.

    Obligatory --------> Eyeroll-Icon-Blogspot.gif


  10. Addendum re: the location of JFK's back wound....

    There is also CE903, which will forever prove that the Warren Commission did NOT require a wound to be located in the NECK of John F. Kennedy in order to support the notion of the "Single-Bullet Theory". (Pat Speer's constant protests notwithstanding, of course.)

    http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/04/index.html#Commission-Exhibit-903


  11. 8 hours ago, Ray Mitcham said:

    Give me your refutations if you have any, of the evidence of the back shot was in the President's shoulder rather than his neck.

    The autopsy report and the Boswell Face Sheet provide the exact place where the bullet entered --- "14 cm. below the tip of the right mastoid process" --- which is in the UPPER BACK, not the NECK.

    More wrangling about this topic here:

    http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2018/01/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1270.html


  12. 2 hours ago, Denny Zartman said:

    I don't get what you're trying to say.

    I'm saying it's my belief that the shot that hit Tague COULD have been EITHER the first (missed) shot OR a fragment from the THIRD (head) shot. There's no possible way to determine with 100% certainty which of those two shots struck the curb and Tague. It's always been a guessing game. And always will be.


  13. 16 minutes ago, Denny Zartman said:

    It seems like you're saying that the shot that hit also produced a fragment that made a mark on the curb near Tague and then bounced and hit Tague on the face, but that shot was the shot that the WC called a missed shot, wasn't it?

    Read Page 117 of the WCR again. The WC did not specifically say which shot missed.

    WCR-Page-117.gif


  14. 1 hour ago, Cory Santos said:

    No David, we need more than that.

    Oh heck, you CTers wouldn't be satisfied if you were hung with a brand-new rope, would ya?

    But anyhow, Cory, I can tell that you've had your tongue firmly rooted in your right cheek during your recent "Hard & Stiff" posts in the last couple of days, so I'll just assume you're giving Lance, Cliff, and me "the business" in this thread. (And there's probably some kind of "homo-erotic" crossover humor being aimed at Varnell here too, via the Hard/Stiff/Soft references. Please try and tone it down, though. My delicate sister might be looking in.) 😈

×