David Von Pein

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?

Nov. 2018 television interview with Fred Litwin:

Canadian TV interview with Fred Litwin (Nov. 22, 2018):

1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said:

I've wondered before if they were coming back from or going to some specific function.

After performing an intense and exhaustive investigation (with the aid of J. Edgar's top men at The Bureau  ), I'm pretty sure those family pictures were taken on November 13th, not the 14th. Mrs. Kennedy was wearing the exact same coat and what appears to be the same piece of jewelry (a brooch attached to a neck scarf) during a White House event on 11/13/63 which was attended by all four people pictured in the image (the President, Jackie, John-John, and Caroline). [See video below.]

One aspect of this mystery that might seem puzzling to some people is the fact that the November 13th event in question took place on the White House South Lawn between 4:10 PM and 5:00 PM (Washington time), according to the JFK Library's White House Diary, but the two photographs above seem to show the First Family being photographed after dark. However, the apparent darkness in the pictures is probably due to the bright flashbulbs being used by the cameraman, giving the appearance of nighttime in the images even though it is daytime. Plus, logic would dictate that the President and his family probably wouldn't be walking around on the South Lawn in pitch darkness to pose for a photo-op.

Here's another very similar photo taken the same day at about the same time. I like this one even better....

20 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

I really wish there was a larger version available to share.

I found this larger version.....

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

 

16 hours ago, Ray Mitcham said:

How do Francois and DVP explain the butchery of the President's tracheotomy?

Let me remind you, Ray, what one of the conspiracy theorists' all-time favorite Parkland witnesses, Dr. Robert McClelland, had to say in both 1988 and again in 2009 about the size of the tracheotomy wound in JFK's throat....

~~~~~~~~~

"The next time some conspiracy buff brings up the "gaping" nature of JFK's trach wound, show them the video on this webpage of Dr. Robert McClelland saying on PBS-TV in 1988 that the trach incision in the autopsy pictures looks "exactly the same size and the same configuration" as it was when he saw it at Parkland. .... And even though I think Dr. McClelland is as kooky as a 9-dollar bill with regard to his comments concerning the location of JFK's large head wound, I certainly don't have any reason to think he's kooky about his comments regarding the trach wound -- and that's because I don't believe for a single second that anybody "altered" any of JFK's wounds between Parkland and Bethesda." -- David Von Pein; November 2013

~~~~~~~~~

"Some people have even said 'Oh, that tracheostomy has been altered; it's too big a wound'. Well, I can speak for that -- no, it had not been altered. That's exactly the way it was made at Parkland. It's just that people expected it to be smaller." -- Dr. Robert McClelland; 2009

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/Dr. Malcolm Perry, David Lifton, And The Trach Wound

Francois Carlier said:

In a nutshell, could there have been just a simple (if one could use that term in such a situation) attempt by the Secret Service to temporarily "hide" the body from the Dallas police (after they had fled at gun point), with absolutely no desire to take part in any conspiracy or cover-up, no foul play...no malicious intent whatsoever? It was indeed a bad decision in retrospect, but only that.
That might reconcile some of your [David Lifton's] findings (that can sometimes be hard to explain away) with the arguments of the defenders of the official version (who, you have to admit it, have good reason to doubt your--may I say--farfetched conclusions about pre-autopsy surgery and a we-shall-fire-from-the-front-with-a-patsy-being-behind-and-take-the-body-unnoticed-and-change-the-wounds conspiracy (which even other conspiracists don't believe in).
What do you think?

Hi Francois,

While I don't think the scenario you laid out above actually happened on 11/22/63, I will say that your scenario is definitely more believable (and doable) than the outlandish "pre-autopsy autopsy" conspiracy theory put forth by David Lifton.

For the sake of argument, however, I'm wondering something....

If your "The Secret Service Took JFK's Body Out Of The Casket" scenario were true, then why did every single person who would have witnessed such an event decide to lie about it and say that the President's body was never removed from the casket at all? (That would include all of the Secret Service agents who would have been involved in such an action, plus many Kennedy aides, such as Ken O'Donnell and David Powers, plus Mrs. Jacqueline Kennedy (who never said anything about such an extremely odd---albeit non-conspiratorial---event occurring aboard Air Force One on November 22nd.)

I would think if the situation were the benign and innocent event that you propose, then the truth of that event would likely have surfaced (at least many years later, if not sooner) via at least one or two of the people aboard the plane that day.

But I like the general idea that Francois has brought forth here --- that is, the idea that even some of the wildest and outrageous conspiracy theories could conceivably have a non-sinister and non-conspiratorial explanation after all.

11 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

You seem a little out of sorts, David.

Don't tell me you were rooting for the Dodgers...

I'm not "out of sorts" at all, Cliff. I'm just having a little fun.

And, no, I wasn't really rooting for the Dodgers in Game 5 last night --- although it would have been nice to see the Series go longer than five games. I always want the World Series to go to Game 7. Who doesn't?

(BTW/OT, to anyone who is a "Big Red Machine" fan like me, you'll like this very good interview I found last night. Good stuff....)

1 minute ago, Micah Mileto said:

"I was a mummy who followed the money"

My title for Fred's third book is much better. (And I revised it after you quoted it above too. It's even better now. I'm just worried that the title might be a little too long once we add the subtitle.)

6 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

I'm waiting for his sequel --"I Was A Middle Aged Nutter Propagandist."

And the third installment of Fred Litwin's trilogy of truth will very likely be entitled "I Was A Crusty Old Fart Who Was Sick To Death Of Arguing Incessantly With JFK Conspiracy Theorists Whose Theories Have Never Once Come Together In A Cohesive And/Or Believable Manner And Have Never Made A Lick Of (Common) Sense" (©2027 Three Cheers For Common Sense In The JFK Case! Publishing Co., Inc.).

On 10/24/2018 at 7:12 PM, Lance Payette said:

I found the recreation pretty astonishing [in the 2004 program "JFK: Beyond The Magic Bullet"].

I agree....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/jfk-beyond-magic-bullet.html

"All-in-all, the Discovery Channel broadcast did an amazing job at
replicating the damage path and general characteristics of CE399. The
test bullet exited the JFK mock body much lower than the real 399 did
in '63, true. I certainly cannot deny this obvious difference. But we
must keep in mind that a PERFECT re-creation can never be fully
achieved, with every single "human" nuance accounted for (since only
mock torsos were utilized in the re-creation).
With some unavoidable limitations in mind, the SBT re-creation done by
the Australian team of JFK researchers in early October of 2004 is as
close to the real event that I believe we're likely to ever see. And
the results most certainly do not debunk the likelihood of the Single-
Bullet Conclusion. To the contrary -- the results of that re-creation
enhance the viability of the Warren Commission's one-bullet conclusion
greatly." -- DVP; December 2004

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

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

Excerpt from the marathon "Money Order" discussion (2015—2018)....

SANDY LARSEN SAID:

I just go where the evidence leads me, David. The money order wasn't processed, and probably wasn't even deposited in the bank.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Okay, Sandy. Believe what you want. But I disagree.

But can you give me your opinion as to why the alleged plotters were so incompetent when it came to pretty much everything relating to the alleged "phony" rifle purchase?

E.G.,

1.) Wrong paper stock used for the money order.

2.) No bank stamps.

3.) The rifle order and money order go from Dallas to Chicago in 24 hours, which is an impossibility if we're to believe the conspiracy theorists.*

4.) They "shipped" the WRONG RIFLE, per DiEugenio and other CTers (sending "Hidell" a 40-inch Carcano instead of the 36-incher that "Hidell" ordered via the American Rifleman magazine ad). Why did they manufacture that little piece of confusion if the ENTIRE rifle transaction is nothing but a fantasy from the ground up---including ALL of the paperwork?

5.) They forgot the proper legal forms for the rifle (which CTers insist should have been included with the rifle shipment; although Jean Davison in the past has made it quite clear, via documentation, that such a legal requirement only applied to HANDGUNS in 1963, not rifles).

* Incredibly, however, a letter that was mailed in January 1952 could go all the way across the country overnight--from California to New York. (Audio below.)

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

 

1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said:

What about the evidence the money order was not processed by the Post Office but produced afterwards courtesy of Holmes...

Are you referring to the "Out of Sequence" theory, in which CTers imply that the Oswald/Hidell money order couldn't have been purchased in March of '63 because the serial number on it is way too high?

Well, that's always been a very silly and easy-to-debunk theory that CTers like John Armstrong just haven't thought through logically....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/10/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1058.html#The-Serial-Number-On-The-Money-Order

4 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

(The GIGO part of what I said is predicated on my recollection that the hole was more like 5" below the collar, not 4". If I'm remembering wrong, then my GIGO claim doesn't apply.)

ROBERT FRAZIER -- "There was located on the rear of the coat 5 3/8 inches below the top of the collar, a hole, further located as 1 3/4 inches to the right of the midline or the seam down the center of the coat; all of these being as you look at the back of the coat."

ROBERT FRAZIER -- "I found on the back of the shirt a hole, 5 3/4 inches below the top of the collar, and as you look at the back of the shirt 1 1/8 inch to the right of the midline of the shirt, which is this hole I am indicating."

FBI shows KLEINS never got C2766

~ big sigh ~

Once again, we have to endure a conspiracy theorist looking for reasons to justify what they want to believe --- in this instance (yet again) a CTer who wants to believe that Oswald never once touched Rifle No. C2766, even though there's a vast amount of evidence to prove that LHO owned and possessed that exact weapon.

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/12/Oswald Ordered The Rifle

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/10/The Hidell Money Order

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/04/Guns And Other Evidence

1 hour ago, Ray Mitcham said:

I think Ron included you in the threesome, Dave.

Yeah, you're probably right. But the way it's phrased, it looks like Mr. Bulman is asking me to pick between two "Old JFK assassination freaks". 😜

8 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

The closer we get to Halloween[,] the freakier this thread gets. I think I may go this year as [an] Old JFK assassination freak. What does one look like? Frank or Fred, DVP?  

Aren't I even in the running? (I'm crushed.)

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

.....

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....