David Von Pein

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/03/sylvia-odio-part-2.html

You should watch the 9/11 TV coverage in real time during the afternoon hours, Robert. Several of the reporters commented on how they anticipated that Building 7 was the "next to go down". And there's interviews with police and fire officials on the street a few hours before Building 7 collapsed, with those officials stating that everyone was being kept AWAY from the area of Building #7 because they feared (and predicted) it would be collapsing soon----which, of course, it did. Were those police & fire officials "in" on the plot to bring down Building 7 with explosives? Come now, you can't possibly believe such a thing, can you? But, I guess Robert Card knows more than the New York City police officer who was being interviewed on MSNBC just minutes before Building #7 fell (fast forward to 2:05:20).... https://drive.google.com / video file / DVP's 9/11 Recordings (Part 3) I haven't the slightest idea. But at least the fact it didn't fall gives you a reason for believing in stupid stuff regarding the multiple collapses of the WTC buildings.

You're quite obviously dead wrong, since at least four tall buildings in Manhattan did just that after being consumed by raging fires on Sept. 11, 2001.

Only because it had been on fire and burning out of control for 7 straight hours. (Duh!) But, according to the conspiracy fantasists, a blazing seven-hour inferno wouldn't tend to weaken a structure at all. https://drive.google.com / video file / DVP's 9/11 Recordings (Part 4)

That's not Oswald's visa application. It's his work application when he applied for a job at the TSBD on 10/15/63. (Seen in CE496....) https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0118b.htm BTW.... This topic of the duplicate LHO TSBD application came up four years ago at Jeff Morley's site. I archived much of that discussion here.... http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/04/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-920.html ---------------------- Related Link (re: all the lies Oswald told on his work application): http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/lho-tsbd-work-application.html

Well, Francois, my #1 Rule of Thumb is to always go to "Reclaiming History" first whenever I want to look up any information relating to the JFK case. And about 95% of the time, I'll find something in that book on the sub-topic I'm searching for.

Oh, brother. What an imagination. Just like with the JFK case, CTers always go "over the top" with their fantastic "multi-gunmen" conspiracy theories in the RFK assassination as well. It never ends. Just incredible. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lee Harvey Oswald's WDSU-TV interview in New Orleans definitely occurred just after his radio debate with Bringuier and Butler on Wednesday, August 21, 1963. (Confirmed via the documents shown below.) WC Vol. 11, Page 175.... https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh11/html/WC_Vol11_0093a.htm

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/09/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-793.html#Vincent-Bugliosi-And-Mexico-City

Thanks, Andrej. I don't buy his scenario for a single solitary second (of course), but at least author Paul Smith has put something on the table to try and answer the "Where Was Oswald?" question.

Sure, it's easy to just pretend all the various documents are fake and phony. And it's easy to label someone a l-i-a-r. But the fact is: No Warren Commission critic has ever come close to actually PROVING that those two important documents (CE15 and CE2564) are fake documents (with Oswald's own signature forged on BOTH of them). To me, such a notion of wholesale fakery is just not reasonable (or realistic). But I've come to realize that JFK conspiracy theorists possess a unique mindset when it comes to the topic of "evidence". Many CTers seem to have no problem at all believing that dozens and dozens of pieces of physical evidence in this case were fabricated, fraudulent, forged, planted, tainted, etc.---including those two important "Mexico City" documents (CE15 & CE2564). And if you want to believe that all of this "Mexico City" testimony provided by Marina Oswald on February 3, 1964, is nothing but a big fat lie being told by Marina, well, you go right ahead and believe that. But don't expect me to follow you down that rocky road either (despite the information that appears on page 20 of Harold Weisberg's "Whitewash 2").

Marina interviews, testimony, photos, and discussion.... http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/09/marina-oswald.html

I don't consider it a strawman when the CTers are alleging that LHO was positively NOT in Mexico City, when the hard evidence (i.e., CE2564 and CE15) is indicating just the opposite. I think the "Where Was Oswald If He Wasn't In Mexico?" question is a perfectly valid inquiry in light of the continual "LHO Was Not In MC" refrain we are always getting from the conspiracy theorists, especially since we're talking about an EIGHT- or NINE-day period. It's not just a few hours or just one single day. It's eight or nine days. And nobody sees him (except in Mexico, of course).

No, I'm not. You're wrong about Marina. But that's what makes Jimmy Jimmy. He gets everything wrong.

I can't answer all those questions, Jim. And neither can you (or any other CTer). Part of the answer is almost certainly bungling and probably some carelessness (and, no doubt, mistakes) on the part of the people at the embassies who should have been recording and/or photographing Oswald. And part of the answer could be faulty equipment at the time Oswald visited the embassies/consulates. Plus, some incorrect assumptions were also made regarding the topics of the photographs and the tape recordings. I don't know all the answers to these discrepancies. I don't think anybody knows everything about it. But, IMO, Commission Exhibit No. 15 (Oswald's 12/9/63 letter that he typed on Ruth Paine's typewriter), which has Lee Oswald's own signature on it (another "fake" signature, Jim?), trumps any and all theories about Oswald not travelling to Mexico City in September '63.... https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0029a.htm And CTers have to claim that Ruth Paine lied about the above CE15 letter of Oswald's too....because Ruth said she read the "draft" of that letter that Oswald (for some reason) left behind on Ruth's desk. So, was Ruth lying about the "draft" of the letter, Jim? (I'm pretty sure you'll have no trouble labelling Ruth a l-i-a-r once again, right?) But don't expect me to follow you down that path of fantasy. Because I won't do it. Therefore, in addition to all of the other things I've mentioned (and Francois has repeated as well) that prove LHO went to MC in '63, there's also that testimony of Ruth Paine concerning the "draft" of the letter (CE15), in which Ruth said that Lee lied about the FBI "no longer having any interest in me", etc. How many liars were there in JUST this "Mexico City" area of the case, Jim? Give me a number. I want to know just HOW MANY people I'm expected to call "LIARS" regarding this Mexico topic. Just "for the record". Thanks in advance for providing me with those numbers. Mr. Pot/Kettle strikes again! A man who believes in all 22 of these fantasies is preaching to me about "ignoring real evidence". Ya gotta love the thick irony of it all! (I sure do.)

So why did "they" use some blond guy in the first place? You, Jim, are just inventing excuses so you can ignore the best evidence --- which is: CE2564, CE15, and Marina's testimony about Lee going to MC. And I'd still like to see a good answer from a CTer to my prior question.... If Lee Harvey Oswald wasn't in Mexico City from Sept. 25 to Oct. 2 of 1963, then where the heck was he?

Regardless of any goofy description Silvia Duran came up with after the fact, we know she processed a visa application for the one and only LEE HARVEY OSWALD (see CE2564). That application has Oswald's own signature on it.... https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm Let me guess----BOTH the picture and the signature are forgeries on the above document, right?

All the more reason to know your make-believe Oswald Patsy Framers must have all been total morons! Because only a complete idiot would want to have a blond guy who was 5-feet-5 try to impersonate a guy who had dark hair and was 5-9. Just how stupid were your Mexico City plotters in 1963, Jim?

And yet you CTers think that this "blonde" person was supposedly IMPERSONATING the dark-haired Lee Oswald?? Only three words are needed now.... WTF???

No LNer has ever used her (AFAIK). Why would they?

Also See:

Oh, OK. Thanks, Rich. (I think it might be time for an "LOL" icon now.) I guess I must've forgotten that particular aspect of Judyth's fantasy tale. I don't pay much attention to anything going on in Camp Judyth. (I do have a 2-part series on Judyth at my website though. So I haven't ignored her altogether. But she does deserve to be ignored.)

Good one, Francois. In Judyth's fantasy world, I wonder which of the two camps she's in ---- "Lee Went To Mexico" or "Lee Didn't Go To Mexico"? I'm not sure which camp she resides in. (Not that it matters, because no reasonable person could even begin to take anything she says seriously.)

A worthy reprise..... Question for conspiracy theorists: If Lee Harvey Oswald was not in Mexico between the dates of September 25 and October 3, 1963, then where was Lee Harvey Oswald during that time period? Nobody that I am aware of places Oswald anywhere EXCEPT in Mexico (or on the busses going to and from Mexico) during that eight- to nine-day period in question. Marina Oswald certainly didn't say that her husband was with her during that period of time. In fact, quite the opposite. Marina knew darn well that Oswald was going to Mexico City at that time. And Ruth Paine has never said she saw Oswald during that period just prior to his returning to the Dallas/Irving area on October 3rd. This might seem like a minor point to some people, but I think it deserves some attention and is a valid and reasonable question that I just asked. I mean, everybody's got to be SOMEWHERE. So, if Lee Oswald didn't travel to Mexico from Sep. 25 to Oct. 3, 1963, then where the heck was he concealing himself for those eight or nine days after he was last seen in New Orleans? David Von Pein September 18, 2010

When I first saw this thread title today, my first thought was that Jim was trying to say.... Oswald was not in the Marine Corps. I was all ready to get out this icon ---- ---- when I then realized that "MC" was short for "Mexico City". Maybe Jim should change the title so that others like me won't be confused and want to pull out the eyeroll emoji.  Although, the eyeroll icon can most certainly still be used even though the MC = Mexico City. Because it couldn't be clearer from the bulk of the evidence that Lee Harvey Oswald definitely DID travel to Mexico City in September of 1963. (More facts below.) http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/09/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-793.html