David Von Pein

Just now, Keven Hofeling said:

Yes, you covert tag teams clean up after yourselves fast, don't you?

Yeah, I would have cleaned up that mess much sooner, but I first had to call my super @ Covert Central in Virginia.

1 minute ago, Keven Hofeling said:

Now I've got you defending the bona fides of a limited hangout?  

You're getting sillier by the day.

25 minutes ago, Keven Hofeling said:

you [Pat Speer] have really got some gig going there when even lone nutters are questioning the lack of honesty and integrity...

Huh? Why would you be surprised in the least when an LNer questions the integrity of a CTer? That happens every day. It's a given. It's virtually automatic.

What should be surprising you is the fact that Pat Speer has been under such vigorous attack by the CTers in this nearly-all-CT forum in recent months. That is a bit surprising.

1 minute ago, Keven Hofeling said:

The HSCA authentication of the autopsy photographs and x-rays is tainted due to the fraudulent conduct of the HSCA with regard to its Forensic Pathology Panel (as well as the American public).

My, how convenient for you.

Naturally, almost all CTers believe in such nonsense.

(There was no "fraudulent conduct", of course. But CTers like to pretend there was.)

1 minute ago, Keven Hofeling said:

@Pat Speer you've really got some gig going there when even lone nutters are questioning the lack of honesty and integrity inherent to your distortions of the witness testimony... 

I've deleted my post aimed at Pat, after I noticed he added the words "at least not in this century" when referring to Clint Hill's statements.

1 minute ago, Denny Zartman said:

Yet we're supposed to believe you instead of them.

No. You should believe the AUTHENTICATED autopsy pictures and X-rays. Which are things that prove the Parkland BOH witnesses were all wrong. That's why we have autopsy photos and X-rays---to document where the wounds REALLY are.

.......

12 hours ago, Denny Zartman said:

Even without zooming in, I could tell #26 was airbrushed to hell and back.

23 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

 I do not think DVP knew he [GHWB] was in Dallas.  David, did you know this?

No, I did not.

There are some CTers who think George H.W. Bush was hanging around the front entrance of the TSBD shortly after JFK was shot, which prompted me to create the webpage below and ask this question:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com / Why Would A Plotter Do This?

24 minutes ago, Michael Crane said:

The angle isn't right from the 6th floor of the TSBD.

You're wrong. The angle seen in CE903 works just fine --- 17.72 degrees (17d43m30s).

But we must always be aware of this fact:

Lyndal Shaneyfelt testified that the angle of the string on the wall behind Specter in CE903 is 17 degrees, 43 minutes, 30 seconds [hereafter 17-43-30]. But that particular measurement, keep in mind, is only an AVERAGE angle from the Depository's sixth floor to the chalk mark on the back of the JFK stand-in. It's the average angle between Zapruder Film frames 210 and 225, as testified to by Shaneyfelt.

If you split the difference between Z210 and Z225, the 17-43-30 angle would actually equate to the SBT shot striking at Z217.5. But it's very unlikely and improbable that the Warren Commission managed to hit the SBT Z-frame squarely on the (half-frame) head at Z217.5. The bullet, in my own opinion, is obviously striking the victims a little later than that--at Z224.

Therefore, what we see in Commission Exhibit 903 really isn't the EXACT angle of the bullet that went through Kennedy and Connally. And I'll admit that.

So a tiny little bit of slack and margin-of-error needs to be given to Mr. Specter and the Warren Commission concerning the angle of trajectory depicted in CE903. Because, let's face it, if Kennedy and Connally weren't hit at exactly Z217.5 (and they very likely were not hit at that precise moment in time), then the angle and other measurements are going to be just slightly off.

Based on the obvious truth about the angles that I just mentioned above, is there any chance that the conspiracy theorists of the world would be willing to cut Arlen Specter and the Warren Commission just a tiny bit of slack when it comes to the Single-Bullet Theory?

Via the CE903 visual demonstration, if a bullet proceeding downward at an angle of 17.72 degrees (aligning perfectly with a "Z210-Z225" angle from the "Oswald window") were to exit JFK's throat at the tie knot, it would then proceed on that same angle directly into the back of Governor Connally in exactly the place where we know a bullet DID enter Connally's upper right back.

That's a pretty impressive demonstration if you ask me. I wonder what the odds are of the Warren Commission being able to re-create such a nearly perfect SBT demonstration and yet NOT have such a demonstration represent the truth of what actually happened---even though the angle from the known sniper's window was right where it should be if the shot occurred at around Z217.5 AND the re-created bullet path travelled exactly where a bullet really did strike President Kennedy and John Connally on 11/22/63?

I wouldn't want to take those odds to Vegas if I was an anti-SBT conspiracy believer.

And yet I'm supposed to believe the CTers who tell me that two (or probably THREE) different bullets lined themselves up beautifully so that Arlen Specter could later present this impressive "one bullet" exhibit to the world. Talk about incredibly good luck for Mr. Specter & Company! ....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/sbt-perfection-of-ce903.html

1 hour ago, Michael Crane said:

David Von Pein could watch ex president Ford say that he moved the back wound up & still disagree with that fact.

Fighting the "Ford Moved The Wound" myth is a 24-hour-a-day battle. It never wants to die the death it so obviously deserves....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/gerald-ford-and-sbt.html

4 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:

So although you acknowledged McClelland's historical consistency with regard to the location of the large avulsive head wound yesterday, just twenty days ago you were spinning the yarn that McClelland was instead demonstrating the wound to be in the "upper-right portion of the back of his head," over his ear, where his fingers are resting in the images, when in fact, Dr. McClelland was referencing the area on the back of his head behind his ear, as we see in the following slow-motion the same footage from where your screenshots....[cut]....

Gee, talk about someone not getting the point. Keven Hofeling has earned that distinction with ease in this discussion.

10 hours ago, Denny Zartman said:

A lot of people bash the Dallas police department, but you have to give them credit on one thing: They were able to figure out who killed Oswald.

Not according to one particular conspiracy fantasist....

-------------------------------

"The biggest development in the history of JFK assassination research has just happened. We have irrefutable proof now that the garage shooter of Lee Harvey Oswald was FBI Agent James Bookhout. It turns out that the Ruby impostor we found, posing with police, is him, Bookhout. We have a front-facing image of him staring right at us, and it fits perfectly with the young James Bookhout. There is no longer a speck of doubt that an agent of the US government, James Bookhout, shot Lee Harvey Oswald--not Jack Ruby. Please read this and share it. Spread the word. JFK truth is rising. JFK truth is here." -- Ralph C. Cinque; October 11, 2016

-------------------------------

Lots more of this hilarity (aka: insanity) is archived at my website, here:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2017/05/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1247.html

I have no idea why Keven Hofeling is blasting me on the McClelland "hands-on demonstrations" topic. McClelland's "demonstrations" have ALWAYS placed the large "blow out" wound at the RIGHT-REAR of JFK's head (with very little variation). So where's the disagreement there, Keven?

The disagreement comes, of course, when I point out the fact that Dr. McClelland was 100% wrong, as proven for all time by the HSCA-authenticated autopsy photos and X-rays, plus the Z-Film, which also proves that ALL of the witnesses who said there was a huge blow-out wound at the rear of Kennedy's head were dead wrong.

But CTers like Keven Hofeling will, evidently, continue to pretend that the autopsy photos AND the X-rays AND the Zapruder Film AND the autopsy report AND the testimony of all 3 autopsy surgeons are ALL (in perfect tandem) fake/phony/altered/manufactured.

DVP's JFK Archives / Dr. Robert N. McClelland's Ridiculous And Crazy Beliefs

10 minutes ago, Steve Roe said:

why did the FBI conclude they could not match that bullet slug to Oswald's Carcano to the exclusion of all other rifles????

"The fact that CE573 cannot be linked to any specific rifle is virtual proof, right there, that it was not "planted" into the evidence pile. Because only a total idiot would want to do something so stupid. Although, yes, CE573 looks exactly like CE399 in many respects. No doubt about it. But if you're going to go to the trouble of PLANTING a bullet to frame a particular person, you're surely going to make sure that that bullet can be tied exclusively to the patsy's gun." -- DVP; March 2016

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/12/edwin-walker-and-lee-harvey-oswald.html

1 hour ago, Pamela Brown said:

With all due respect, David, is it helpful to make a negative comment about someone who is unable to defend themself on this board?

I was just reporting a fact, Pam.

......

1 hour ago, Cory Santos said:

I am surprised you did not know this    

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2023/11/22/since-jfk-assassination-no-us-president-has-visited-dallas-dealey-plaza

https://www.nixonfoundation.org/2013/11/richard-nixon-november-22-1963

You're a little mixed up, Cory. I was talking about George Bush, not Nixon.

And, btw, that first article you linked to above is wrong when it says no President has driven through Dealey Plaza since 1963. Gerald Ford did, in 1976. (See photo below.)

32 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

Your post makes it look like he was never in Dallas.

I didn't think he was.

55 minutes ago, Michael Crane said:

Is the JFK Deep Politics forum still crackin?

Yes, but just barely. The DPF has been pretty much a wasteland of inactivity for the last couple of years now. Why that is so, I have no idea. It's rather strange. But it seems that only one lonely person is posting there (for the most part)---and that's Brian Doyle (who, as usual, is constantly whining about being booted off of this forum years ago).

https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-3.html

Duncan MacRae's forum (below) is still active though. (But it too is not really much more than a wasteland as well.)

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php?board=1.0

It's interesting to note that the late Vincent T. Bugliosi evidently had no idea at all that today's 21st Century Conspiracy Theorists have invented a brand-new theory regarding the "Second-Floor Lunchroom Encounter". With that ridiculous "new" fantasy theory being, of course: The Lunchroom Encounter Never Happened At All.

----------------------------

The Warren Commission, in late 1964, issued its 888-page Final Report on the assassination of President John Kennedy. The Commission concluded that Lee Harvey Oswald had murdered JFK, and in so doing, had acted alone. Also within that report rests one of the most controversial so-called "theories" in history -- the "Single-Bullet Theory".

The "SBT" has been battered from proverbial pillar to post by conspiracy theorists for multiple decades now since JFK's tragic death in 1963. And it's been an undeserved bad rap, too, in my opinion. Because the SBT is almost certainly the only conceivable (accurate) scenario to explain the injuries sustained by victims JFK and John B. Connally in Dallas on 11/22/63.

Lacking the SBT, so many weird and incredible and, frankly, impossible, things would have had to have taken place in Dealey Plaza, it would make a Max Fleischer cartoon seem believable by comparison.

[Continued here....]

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/Where Is The SBT Alternative?

6 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

Then why did you post disinformation?

What disinfo was that?

2 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

David, you know this is horse dooky.  GHWB was in Dallas the night of Thursday 11/21/ 1963 giving a speech to an Oil field equipment producers convention.  He spent the night in Dallas. ....

Doesn't matter to me where he was.

9 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

What are the odds of Four Presidents in Dallas on 11/22/63? .... the George HW Bush speech at the Oil drillers equipment convention (or whatever it was officially called) seem maybe contrived.