Jump to content
The Education Forum

David Von Pein

Members
  • Content count

    5,009
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by David Von Pein


  1. Chris,

    It's just a general comparison of the so-called "impossible" Oswald stance. I'm not saying the angles are identical. They obviously aren't EXACTLY the same angle. But just look at his general "stance" in both pictures. They're the same basic posture. It's just how Oswald stood. Leaning back somewhat on his right foot, with his left foot in front of his right. It's a very similar stance in both photos. (Do some CTers claim the photo on the left is an "Imposter Oswald" too?)

    LHO.png


  2. You actually want to pretend that Garrison DIDN'T "knowingly" prosecute a man he had to know was innocent?

    Come now. Let's be realistic. There was as much evidence against Elvis Presley in March 1967 as there was against Clay Shaw.


  3. 40 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

    ...Except DVP, who with, such things as honesty do not matter.  

    Which is why he is what he is. 

    Seeing as how the above claptrap is coming from someone (DiEugenio) who considers the late Jim Garrison to be an honest man of the highest possible integrity (even though Garrison knowingly prosecuted an innocent man on a charge of conspiracy to murder the POTUS), I can only request that some EF member lend me their "POT/KETTLE" icon asap! I need it badly here (in addition to multiple "ROFLs").

    But, that's why Jim D. is what he is --- a walking Pot Meets Kettle emoji.


  4. 13 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

    You know what would be better than a FAQ on his blog trying to explain what could already be explained by releasing his computer data? Releasing his computer data.

    Dale seems to guard his copyrighted material very closely. (You can't even right-click or copy-and-paste any text off of his main website.)

    But he has every right to be protective of the material that rightfully belongs to him.

    Heck, I'm still awaiting that DVD release of "Secrets Of A Homicide" that Dale's video trailer said was supposed to be coming out in 2003. :)

     


  5. 1 minute ago, James DiEugenio said:

    Should not have done that Davey. ....snip....

    ~yawn~

    Reprise.....

    All of DiEugenio's never-ending complaints about Dale K. Myers' computer animation project are tackled by Dale himself in this FAQ....

    http://jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/faq_01.htm

    Addendum / Basic Observation....

    "As I've said a thousand times before -- the luck of those multiple shooters in Dealey Plaza apparently never ran out. Did it? Those assassins were even able to fool Dale Myers' computer overlays and key framing....with those crackerjack killers pummelling JBC & JFK with several bullets (all of the vanishing variety, naturally) in just such a pattern (and with ideal SBT-like timing to boot, per the Z-Film) so that decades later a man at his computer could come up with an animation -- BASED ON AN ACTUAL FILMED RECORD OF THE EVENT! -- that would make this MULTI-shot event look exactly the same as the SBT purported by the WC in 1964. Where's the champagne?! Those ever-efficient, magical assassins deserve an endless supply of it for that magnificent hunk of "public duping". Wouldn't you agree?" -- DVP; May 19, 2007


  6. 46 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

    I had no idea that CBS was fighting off the fact of photo fakery with regard to the BYP’s as far back as 1967.

    Yes. And PROVING that the different shadow angles are NORMAL for a photo taken in the backyard of 214 Neely Street in Dallas, Texas, on March 31st at noontime.

    And yet there are still CTers arguing that the shadows "prove fakery", even with that huge blow-up of the CBS News 3/31/67 photo staring them in the face via the above-linked video. (I guess they must ALSO think the 3/31/67 CBS picture is fake too.)

     

    46 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

    Thanks David Von Pein.

    S'alright.


  7. 35 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

    If anyone wants to see what a shameless water carrier DVP is for Dale Myers... [snip] ...

    ~yawn~

    All of DiEugenio's never-ending complaints about Dale K. Myers' computer animation project are tackled by Dale himself in this FAQ....

    http://jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/faq_01.htm

    If Jim wants to think Dale is merely lying through his teeth in that extensive FAQ session, go ahead Jimmy. We can just add Dale to Jim's mile-long list of liars associated with the JFK murder case (if he's not already on the list, which he no doubt is).


  8. 2 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

    When confronted with the clothing evidence Dale K. Myers created animation depicting JFK's jacket collar elevated an inch up into the hairline -- an obvious fiction!

    The clothing seen in Dale Myers' computer animation is MEANINGLESS. The clothes have NOTHING to do with where the bullet hole is located IN KENNEDY'S UPPER BACK in Myers' computer model. Myers added the clothing for cosmetic purposes only. So the amount of "bunching" that Myers places on JFK's jacket does not mean a thing. It's merely to make the animated figures look more realistic.

    (See the last paragraph in the image below, which is from this FAQ page on Myers' website.) ....

    Dale-Myers-FAQ.png


  9. 1 hour ago, François Carlier said:

    Whenever someone goes so far as to include Ruth Paine in their conspiracy theory, I know that they are well beyond the point where you could have a healthy debate with them.

    Then you can forget about having a healthy debate with Jim DiEugenio, because James has been accusing Ruth of being an evil conspirator for years now---as evidenced by Jim's outrageous allegations aimed at Mrs. Paine at the webpage below (allegations that don't have a stitch of evidence to back them up, except in Jim's imagination)....

    http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/04/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-87.html

    A sample....

    JIM DiEUGENIO SAID [IN 2013]:

    I am really proud of the section on the Paines in my book.

    DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

    That figures. Defamation of character is always something to be proud of, isn't it Jimbo?

    None of that crap DiEugenio wrote in his last post [HERE] comes even close to showing Ruth Paine (or Michael Paine) had anything to do with a conspiracy to murder John Kennedy and/or frame Lee Oswald for that murder.

    DiEugenio's pathetic attempts to trash Mrs. Paine are sickening.

    I only wish I could persuade Ruth to start a slander lawsuit. She'd win, hands down. Does anybody have Ruth's phone number? Maybe I'll give her a call.

    [End 2013 Quotes.]

    In addition to Jim D., I've noticed a trend over the last several years of CTers slinging their arrows at Ruth Paine (with no actual evidence at all to support their allegations, naturally). You should see some of the hostile and downright vile comments aimed at Ruth that I get on some of my Paine-related videos on my YouTube channel. Some of the comments contain such vulgar language that I feel compelled to delete them due to their disgusting and hateful content. It's pathetic.


  10. Joseph,

    You're entitled to your opinion about the JFK assassination....and so am I. If you want to think the Warren Commission's 10-month probe was nothing but a "transparently phony" investigation, you're free to believe that if you want to. But that doesn't mean I have to swallow such a notion too----and I certainly don't. Believing that the Commission had a hidden agenda to frame Oswald as the lone killer and to cover-up any and all evidence of a conspiracy is a belief that, in my opinion, is a patently silly one.

    When you've got to accuse so many people in Officialdom of lying and covering up and hiding the truth, etc., I think it's time to re-think your position. But it seems that most of the CTers I've talked to over the years don't think it's unreasonable at all to believe that a whole bunch of people connected with so many different organizations (such as the Warren Commission, the HSCA, the Clark Panel, the DPD, the FBI, and the Secret Service, among others) all decided to jump on board the "Let's Frame An Innocent Lee Harvey Oswald As The Sole Assassin" train. But, to me, that scenario is simply ridiculous (not to mention virtually impossible to pull off, especially considering all the evidence that exists against Oswald in this double-murder case). I'm supposed to actually believe that ALL of the evidence in both the JFK and Tippit murder cases is fake, phony, and manufactured? (Come now, my good man. Let's be sensible here.)

    And, Joseph, do you truly think that a person who has been interested in President Kennedy's murder for over 35 years (like myself) couldn't possibly believe in Oswald's lone guilt without also being on the payroll of one of the alphabet agencies (or any agency)? Is that why I was treated to your closing "Who is paying you?" salvo in your last post? Even though I don't agree with any of your theories in the Kennedy/Tippit case, your Internet posts normally rise above the level of such juvenile inquiries.

     


  11. 18 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

    the "hard evidence" in those two massive works of fiction that you describe is, certainly, an illusion--

    You think ALL of the physical ("hard") evidence----guns, bullets, shells, prints, paper bag----is "an illusion"?

    Are Oswald's actions also an "illusion" created by the WC and/or Bugliosi?

    Get real.


  12. I couldn't disagree more strongly, W. Niederhut.

    The Warren Commission (and Vince Bugliosi) actually had something that conspiracy theorists can only dream about having ---- that is: HARD EVIDENCE to work with—e.g., Oswald's guns, bullets and fragments and shell casings from Oswald's guns, Oswald's lies, the Tippit murder witnesses, Oswald's unusual actions on both Nov. 21 and Nov. 22, etc.

    Whereas CTers have nothing that even comes close to matching the Lone Assassin/Oswald evidence. And the likely reason for that is --- No such hard "conspiracy" evidence exists. And never did.

     


  13. 47 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

    ...the JFK assassination was not actually investigated in 1963 or 1964.

    I hope you don't mind if I fervently disagree with you on this point, Jim.

    In fact, I think your above quote is one of the silliest things you've ever uttered. And that's really a major accomplishment, considering the items that are contained within "The DiEugenio 22", which I never get tired of highlighting.

    I know this will come as a massive shock to you, James, but I actually agree with Vincent T. Bugliosi on this (please don't faint)....

    • "In my opinion, the Warren Commission's investigation has to be considered the most comprehensive investigation of a crime in history. Even leading Warren Commission critic Harold Weisberg acknowledges that the Commission "checked into almost every breath [Oswald] drew"." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Page xxxii of "Reclaiming History: The Assassination Of President John F. Kennedy" (W.W. Norton & Co.) (AD 2007)

  14. 4 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

    Apparently FC is not aware that the above essay he suggested to me as being definitive was pretty much harpooned by Mike.  This is the kind of work FC does. This is the kind of researcher he is.

    And if a fellow conspiracy theorist "harpoons" anything, then the CTer has GOTTA be the one who is 100% correct....right?

    IOW, no LNer could POSSIBLY hope to fight the all-knowing Michael Griffith. Right, Jim?

×