David Von Pein

And you NEVER get "the last word" in any of your CTKA articles, do you Jimmy?

Oh, brother. Talk about "Cuckoo's Nest".

Gee, what a lovely thing to say, Scott. Thanks so much for caring about me. Great film. I've got a page for it on my Movies site. .... classic--movies.blogspot.com/2011/03/cuckoo-nest.html Of course I have. Why do you ask? (What a strange post you just wrote, Scott.) ~shrug~

Oh, stop the feigned "shock", Jimmy. Your phony dramatics are quite transparent. The stuff I save on my site is mainly (as I said in my 2014 post above) for the purpose of archiving MY OWN words and MY OWN Kennedy arguments at my own site. And what better place to archive one's own material than at their own site (or blog)? Why on Earth would people want to use up hundreds of hours of their time to write up posts for an Internet forum, only to run the high risk that those posts will vanish into nothingness in just a short time? One year? Two years? Who knows? All Lancer Forum posts are now gone forever, except for perhaps a few that are recoverable via the Wayback Machine at Archive.org. IMO, it's just dumb to take that risk. So, I archive my own material at my site. And if "my material" is in the form of a REPLY to a CTer on a JFK forum, then (of course) it makes sense to bring the CTer's words that I'm replying to along for the ride too. And, naturally, since I'm an "LNer", I naturally am going to think I have outlasted or defeated the CTer I'm battling. Just as you, Jimmy, undoubtedly think YOU have won *every* single war you've ever waged online. Right? (Have you ever admitted that you've been "defeated" by a lowly LNer like me? Of course you haven't.) So why not stop the preaching, Jim? You're looking silly (yet again).

FYI / FWIW.... If anybody cares about the reason WHY I archive so many forum discussions on my own site, I explained it in this exchange at Duncan MacRae's forum in 2014.... MARTIN WEIDMANN SAID: Do you really copy/paste every discussion about JFK? DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Most of the ones that I am personally involved in, yes. (So I can archive them at my websites.) Sorry if it bothers you. MARTIN WEIDMANN SAID: Please tell me you have a life beyond this case..... if you can, that is. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: I can't tell you that, because I don't have a life. Haven't for years. Sorry if it bothers you. MARTIN WEIDMANN SAID: It doesn't bother me at all. I just think it is very very sad, that's all. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Yes, it is. But we puppets who work at Langley have no choice. Once CIA---always CIA. ~sigh~ MARTIN WEIDMANN SAID: That's an extremely paranoid reply, David. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Hint: It was a joke, Martin. MARTIN WEIDMANN SAID: I was only amazed that anybody would go through such length to archive and index most of his conversations about a 50 year old murder. What would the purpose for that even be? DAVID VON PEIN SAID: I like to archive my writings in a place where I know they'll be safe. Plus, I don't like the idea of taking hours (sometimes) to write an article or an Internet post and then having it virtually vanish from sight overnight (as almost all Internet forum posts do). That is to say, they get buried under a sea of other things in a very short period of time. And who is going to take the time to dig deep into the bowels of a forum's archives for 5-year-old posts or 10-year-old discussions? I sure don't. What a huge waste of time and energy it would be to continually post in such a fashion, particularly in an Internet world where forums can come and go about as fast as a start-up airline. Take Bob Harris' now-defunct forum, for example, with all of those posts now gone into the dustbin of cyberspace. (And I thought Bob had a pretty good forum, too. Too bad all that work was wiped out when he decided it wasn't worth the effort.) Ergo, I archive my material on my own site, where I have many articles indexed on the main page for easy access. Simple as that. MARTIN WEIDMANN SAID: Btw, I don't recall saying anything about the CIA at all. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: You didn't. I brought up my dastardly "CIA" connections. Another hint: It was a joke. (As if you didn't know that.) CARMINE SAVASTANO SAID: Hello DVP, I have a question and comment. Do you consider debating someone who is unaware of a post or unable to respond challenging? DAVID VON PEIN SAID: I think you'll find, Carmine, that most of my online "debates" are against CTers who are, indeed, "aware" of what is being posted for the most part. (I show what the CTer said and then I post what my response was.) There are times, however, when I see something really stupid being written by a CTer at a website where no personal give-and-take is possible (a non-forum site), and I want to archive the stupid CT comments and then post my response. I did that for years with Jim DiEugenio's delusional statements that I could only see at his CTKA site (which isn't a forum situation, of course). That was prior to his joining Simkin's forum in 2010. So, if I wanted to respond to the pre-2010 dumb things spouted by Jimbo, I had to copy his quotes into my site and then post my reply after his. But that's just the way it was if I wanted to get in my 2-cents worth. Not every site is a "forum" site where personal and immediate exchanges of thoughts are possible. DVP September 2014 http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/09/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-791.html

It's rather hilarious to think that Jimmy D. thinks the plotters were SO STUPID that they decided to put a FAKE "March 12" date on the FAKE money order and then put a FAKE "March 13" date on the FAKE Waldman No. 7 invoice. IOW---apparently the braindead plotters framing Oswald WANTED people to think the letter could get from Dallas to Chicago in one day's time --- even though crackerjack experts like Jimbo DiEugenio assure the world that such a journey was impossible. Jim, please have those patsy framers fired---asap! They're all idiots. And yet--incredibly--Jimbo buys into this "Everything's Fake" crap. Hysterical. jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-postmark-on-commission-exhibit-773.html

CTers refuse to ever drop a silly, unsubstantiated argument. Just look at the "Hidell Money Order" topic for proof of that. The bleed-thru has been explained in a non-sinister way. And there's a FRB stamp on the M.O. Do these things sway any CTer? Nah. Not a chance. The M.O. is just as "suspicious" now to Jimbo & Company as it ever was. Same with the "Zone 12" on the envelope. Jimbo will just ignore the facts regarding that "12" too. But....that's Jimmy.

Mister Irony strikes again. Hilarious. jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/01/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-81.html#The-Stupid-Things-James-DiEugenio-Believes

My blog's not a forum either, Jimbo. But you know that, don't you? (And, no, I don't allow comments, even though I could allow them. Should I be sued for that too?) Scott is right --- this thread is a joke. And the two Jims are competing as the top act in the big tent. And CTKA just started yesterday, right Jimmy? I see. What a joke.

Are those replies hosted on YOUR site?

You think I "embroider" the direct quotes I get from here? Your imagination is a remarkable thing to behold, Jimmy. And you think you DON'T get the "last word" when you write an article for your website? So tell me....what's the major difference (in a "last word" fashion) between the way I cull a conversation for my blog and the way you structure an article for your website, such as your 2-part smear piece on DVP? Answer----there is no difference at all, and you know it. jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-1.html http://www.ctka.net/2010/dvp.html

I didn't say that my quotes you used (without my permission) in your 2-part smear piece against me in 2010 came from THIS site, Jimmy. I think most of the quotes you used came from Debra Conway's old Lancer forum. But, so what? The point is still the same. Lancer undoubtedly had about the same "Terms of Use" rules in place as Edu. Forum does, right? So, did you get Lancer's express permission to use my quotes in your DVP smear piece? Of course you didn't. Nobody ever does. Who would? They're posts on a public forum. And I'm pretty certain Jon Tidd's first post is accurate. It's not illegal to copy quotes from any public forum or website and use them elsewhere on the Internet. Can you just imagine the massive number of lawsuits that there would be if "copying & pasting" Internet quotes to other sites suddenly became a major violation? There wouldn't be enough lawyers in the world to handle all the cases. It's absurd. Jim Hargrove started this ridiculous thread merely because of my status as a Lone Nutter -- and for NO other possible reason. To prove I'm right, just ask yourself this question---- Do you think Hargrove would have even considered (for even a brief instant) starting up a thread like this one if it was Jim DiEugenio or John Armstrong or Mark Lane or Greg Parker or Jon Tidd who had copied posts written by other people to their websites? (And, of course, DiEugenio and Parker HAVE done just that--many times--in the past. What person who owns a "JFK" website HASN'T?) I rest my case.

And Jon went home with a sore head.

Yeah, sure, Jimmy. And you've NEVER copied anyone's posts from JFK forums to use in your CTKA articles, have you? Like, say, this little smear piece against "Disinformation Dave", as you called him.... http://www.ctka.net/2010/dvp.html Pot meets Kettle (again). And I sure hope to God that Jimbo got bank supervisor "Craig's" express written approval before quoting him in this thread above. If not, a lawsuit will surely be pending!

"Imaginary conversations"? Maybe you'd better choose some other words to describe my verbatim quoting of CTers on my website, Jim. Because those two words you just utilized are just plain ridiculous. You're going to have a tough time finding anything "imaginary" about the conversations on my site. (I always provide a link to the source conversation, if available, as well. So if somebody wants to check out the original thread, they can do so.) And you'll have an even tougher chore trying to find where I have misquoted someone on my site--ever. And if you're also implying that I don't permit CTers to have their say or get in their licks against me when I transfer written material to my site---think again. Because you'd be dead wrong if you were to think anything like that.

The "order letter" that Chief Jesse Curry refers to in his hallway press conference on the night of Nov. 23 is CE773, which is the microfilm of the order form clipped by Oswald out of the Feb. '63 American Rifleman magazine. That's the microfilmed document that was the basis for the FBI's findings that the "order letter" had Oswald's writing on it. That order form, of course, doesn't have the $21.45 figure on it either. Nor does it have $12.78 on it. It has $19.95 on it. (Shall we dance some more over those three figures?) 1. The FBI did, indeed, have the serial number. (They had the rifle in their possession at 11:45 PM CST on Friday, you know. So why would you be surprised they knew the serial number? And even if they didn't have the rifle themselves, the FBI could have simply telephoned the DPD and gotten the number from them at any time on Nov. 22....couldn't they?) 2. The FBI discovers from a gun dealer in Dallas that Italian surplus WW2 rifles were being distributed by Crescent Firearms in New York City. This leads the FBI to Klein's in Chicago after finding out that Crescent had sold the "C2766" rifle to Klein's. 3. The Klein's records are searched and the "C2766" invoice is found (via what would soon become "Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7"), which provides all the pertinent information about the sale of Italian rifle No. C2766 for $21.45 to one A. Hidell of Dallas, Texas (via "M.O." [Money Order]) on March 20, 1963 (which is the date the FBI goes with, instead of the date stamped at the very top of Waldman No. 7--March 13, 1963--which was the date Klein's put the Hidell order through their cash register, as William Waldman explained in his Warren Commission testimony; the March 20 date was, of course, the date the rifle was shipped to Hidell/Oswald). 4. Somebody connected with the discovery of the "Waldman No. 7" invoice must have transmitted the wrong purchase price to other FBI personnel ($21.95 instead of $21.45), which led to confusion when the FBI and Secret Service began searching for the money order that was used to pay for the rifle. 5. In addition to the internal Klein's invoice (Waldman No. 7), the FBI also found the "order letter" (as Curry called it), which is CE773. They quickly determined that the writing on the order form was that of Lee Harvey Oswald. In short, there was no "wrong order". Somebody just wrote down or transmitted to somebody the wrong purchase price after the discovery of Waldman No. 7. But even though some officials had the wrong price, there were others who knew the correct price of $21.45 for the Hidell rifle order, because we find the correct figure being written in two separate reports (connected with the discovery of the money order) authored by both the FBI and the Secret Service on November 23 -- CD75 and CD87. Also see: jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-postmark-on-commission-exhibit-773.html

The only thing it really reveals is how eager CTers like James DiEugenio are to take that gun out of Lee Oswald's hands. You know, just as I do, that there was no Klein's order found in the amount of $21.95. Somebody relayed the wrong price after the FBI and Klein's discovered Waldman No. 7 in the Klein's files at 4:30 AM on Nov. 23rd. One slipped digit--that's all. Nothing more. And you still don't understand that.

Jimmy, When it came time to look for the money order, they were most certainly looking for the AMOUNT, not the serial number. (The serial number wasn't on the M.O.) And this sentence written by John Armstrong.... "They did, however, find documentation that showed Klein's sold a $21.95 rifle that was paid for with a postal money order issued on March 20, 1963." ....is just a flat-out distortion of the facts, because the FBI most certainly did NOT find any $21.95 Klein's order form for the C2766 rifle. They found the Waldman Exhibit No. 7 document, which is the ONLY document that has BOTH a price and the C2766 serial number on it--and Armstrong knows it. He's merely trying to turn an innocent error regarding the exact amount of the purchase ($21.95 vs. $21.45) into a mountain of conspiracy and cover-up. Silly beyond belief.

Yeah, Healy, the recent verification that Oswald's money order is legit and genuine (via the File Locator Number) was a real bummer for the LN side, wasn't it? jfk-archives.blogspot.com/The-File-Locator-Number-On-The-Hidell-Money-Order BTW: When Healy makes his first post here that has any "JFK" substance to it, please call ABC and FOX News immediately! That will be major Breaking News. I'll bet the moderators just love comments like this.

Sandy, The FBI didn't get the "wrong order" from the microfilm. There WAS NO ORDER FOR $21.95 for the C2766 rifle. That was merely a slipped digit. And Harry Holmes talks about that mistake in his testimony too. That was one of the reasons it took a little longer to find the $21.45 Hidell money order --- because they were searching (in vain) for the wrong amount ($21.95). Once they realized what the correct figure was--$21.45--they found it very quickly. Do you think Waldman No. 7 is a fake document, Sandy? It clearly says $21.45 on it. And it also says C2766. And it says A. Hidell. And Italian Carbine. And William Waldman testified in detail about that order form. Was he a plotter too? jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/12/oswald-ordered-rifle.html

I feel kind of sorry for people who insist on making conspiratorial mountains out of ordinary run-of-the-mill molehills. jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/04/Ruth Paine's Calendar jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/12/Oswald Ordered The Rifle jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/10/The Hidell Money Order

OK, I see what you mean now. But keep in mind that when Curry told the press about the $12.78 price for the rifle, the complete information concerning the $21.45 money order had not been revealed to Chief Curry yet. I believe Curry provided the $12.78 info at about 7 PM Dallas time on 11/23, while the money order was recovered at 9:35 PM EST (8:35 PM Dallas time) on 11/23. The SS and FBI knew a little earlier than that, of course, that they were looking for a MO in the amount of $21.45 (see CD87), but the DPD wouldn't necessarily have been privy to the $21.45 price until much later (assuming they were ever provided that figure by the SS or FBI, which perhaps they weren't, I don't really know). So the press people went with the info they had available as of Curry's makeshift conference at DPD at 7:00 on Nov. 23 --- i.e., Oswald's writing was traced to the Klein's "order letter" (not the money order), with Curry telling the reporters this.... "I believe the gun was supposed to cost twelve dollars and seventy-eight cents, I believe. I believe it was advertised in some magazine for that." http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10490#relPageId=119

I have no idea what you mean here.