David Von Pein

The question doesn't really require an answer --- because what you think is the "wrong rifle" is, of course, not anything of the kind. The C2766 rifle IS the rifle that Klein's positively mailed to Oswald. And David W. Belin of the Warren Commission was obviously smart enough to know that any slight 36-inch vs. 40-inch discrepancy in the Klein's advertisements does not indicate massive fraud when it comes to the rifle. It's a discrepancy that is very easily explained by just looking at the remainder of the Klein's ads for the rest of 1963. Plus, yet again, I ask --- Why did your plotters supposedly do something they could have avoided if the whole rifle transaction was simply INVENTED from whole cloth? I.E., Why did the plotters want to make it look as though the patsy was ordering a 36-inch weapon....but then "they" arranged to frame him with the C2766 40-inch Carcano? If your patsy framers get any sloppier, Jim, you should have them all fired.

What a pathetic broken record you are, Jimbo. This "wrong rifle" schtick of yours has been reasonably explained a million times. (Dozens of times by me.) But you just keep on playing your ridiculous "Wrong Rifle" refrain, never once acknowledging the obvious non-sinister explanation. Geesh. How embarrassing for you. jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/12/oswald-ordered-rifle.html

Ah, yes. Of course! We all must bow down to Armstrong the God of CTers! The same Armstrong who thinks there were two Marguerite Oswalds. (Oh, brother.) Now it's really time for an LOL break.

I utilized the Groucho Marx audio clip merely to prove that an air mail letter could easily travel 3,000 miles across the country--overnight. Or is this guy from the L.A. helicopter service part of a plot to frame Oswald too--in 1952?! And, btw, Jim, can you PLEASE tell us WHY your patsy framers were all so incredibly inept? According to you, they manufactured the ENTIRE paper trail for the rifle from the GROUND UP. And that includes Waldman #7 and the money order. And yet they decided to make it look as if the rifle order was processed by Klein's the next day (March 13)---which you say is impossible. Why did "they" do that, Jim, when they could have very easily stamped ANY date at the top of Waldman #7? Why did they choose "MARCH 13TH"? Were your plotters all retarded or what?

Harry Holmes himself, a postal inspector for the U.S. Post Office Department --- i.e., a person who would certainly know how long it takes for mail to travel from one city to another --- verified that Oswald's rifle order could have gone from Dallas to Chicago in LESS than one day.... "He could have bought it that morning and that he could have gotten it by airmail that afternoon." -- Harry D. Holmes (WC Testimony) Naturally, DiEugenio thinks Holmes lied in his testimony cited above too. Right, Jimmy?

Re: Jim DiEugenio's latest round of things he thinks are worthy of numerous LOLs and ROTFs, I'll repeat some things that I know DiEugenio has seen multiple times before, but he'll pretend I've never addressed them before..... BOB PRUDHOMME SAID: You've almost given in to the possibility of a conspiracy, Dave, and it is obvious you are now grappling with your inner demons. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Not even close, Bob. The lack of a bank stamp (or even two) doesn't prove that money order is fake. It's got OSWALD'S writing on it and it's got KLEIN'S stamp on it. And it's a document that perfectly aligns with everything found in Waldman Exhibit #7 -- >> The "Hidell" name to whom Klein's mailed the rifle. >> The PO Box number to which Klein's sent the rifle. >> The exact dollar amount ($21.45), which is precisely the amount found in Waldman 7 as well. (And the "M.O." notation written by Klein's right underneath the "Amount Enclosed" line on Waldman 7.) >> And the dates line up nicely too (March 12 for the M.O. purchase; and March 13 on Waldman #7) --- although CTers think it was impossible for the letter/money order to get to Chicago in just one day; but a 29-year veteran of the U.S. Post Office [Jimmy Orr] thinks otherwise.... DAVID VON PEIN SAID [iN THIS DISCUSSION]: Jimmy, in your experience, in general, how long does it take an air mail letter to go from Dallas, Texas, to Chicago, Illinois (provided the letter was mailed no later than 10:30 AM local Dallas time)? JIMMY ORR SAID: David, Cancelled in Dallas by 10:30 AM and flown to Chicago that afternoon. Arrival for mail processing at a Chicago General Mail Facility during the early morning hours of the 13th and on the street for delivery to Klein's that same day. Makes perfect sense considering the volumes handled in 1963. [End Quote.] ~~~~~~~~~~~~ So everything about the money order aligns with the Klein's internal paperwork. So that means KLEIN'S was a major part of the plot to frame Oswald too, if the CTers are right about this thing. And that's not a reasonable thing to think, IMO. I just answered this a few days ago (and aimed the answer at DiEugenio in another thread). Jim's memory must be nonexistent, I guess. ~shrug~ Reprise..... DAVID VON PEIN SAID: I think it's quite possible that Oswald went to the post office and purchased his money order BEFORE he went to work on March 12th. But other possibilities certainly exist as well, as Gary Mack speculated about in this e-mail to me in 2011: "True, there's no evidence showing Oswald to have been anywhere but J-C-S that day, but do his time sheets list his working hours AND breaks - including lunch - NO. Of course not, they just show that he was paid to be at J-C-S for a full day.....and he was. As for Oswald's J-C-S times sheet, researcher Mary Ferrell, whom I had great respect for, wrote, "OSWALD'S time sheet for March 12 is evidence that he probably lied sometimes about his hours. On the day he ordered the rifle, he signed in from 8:15 a.m. to 5:15 p.m., (Exhibit no. 1855, Vol. 23, p. 605)." She then wrote that the post office opened at 8am, after noting Harry Holmes' testimony that the envelope was mailed in the early morning. The simple fact that Marina and Marguerite both admitted back then and for years later — I've heard the story directly from both women — that he posed for pictures with the guns he ordered trumps everything else." -- Gary Mack; March 25, 2011 And regarding "Air Mail".... A letter that was mailed in January 1952 could go all the way across the country overnight--from California to New York. (Audio below.) https://app.box.com/s/efa74dw67xv2t372npky

If you don't mind my interjection here.... Given all the things that ARE present and accounted for on the Hidell PMO (including Oswald's own handwriting, the Klein's stamp, and the File Locator Number), I think the most reasonable conclusion to reach is that it must NOT have been a mandatory requirement for the Hidell Postal Money Order to be stamped by the First National Bank of Chicago (regardless of the "documentary proof" previously supplied by Mr. Sandy Larsen). There are just too many things about the Hidell PMO that are proving beyond all reasonable doubt, in my opinion, that it is a legitimate document that was handled by every person or company or bank that should have handled it if it had been properly handled and processed in 1963 -- from Oswald himself, to Klein's, to the Federal Reserve Bank in Chicago, and then to the FRB storage facility in Alexandria/Washington. So I guess a good question to ask conspiracy theorists at this point might be this question: How many things that appear to be legitimate about the Hidell money order does it take for a stubborn CTer to admit that the money order is, in fact, very likely a legitimate document? I also have little doubt that even if a few First National Bank markings had been stamped on the Hidell PMO, there would still be a dedicated group of conspiracists who would continue to claim that the PMO is a fake, with those CTers merely adding any and all FNB endorsements to their list of things that were forged by the unnamed plotters who were allegedly framing Lee Harvey Oswald.

More HSCA audio.... jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/02/hsca-testimony-miscellaneous-audio.html

Testimony of John Connally and Nellie Connally (HSCA audio; September 6, 1978; Running time: 2 hours, 39 minutes).... CLICK HERE Source: http://BlackOpRadio.com Thank you, Len Osanic.

Why on Earth would they have felt any NEED to investigate such a stupid claim regarding alleged fakery of the Hidell/Oswald money order? As far back as 1964, everybody in officialdom already knew the money order was totally legitimate. And that's because they knew it had Lee Harvey Oswald's very own handwriting all over the front of it, plus the Klein's stamp which proves that Klein's handled it, plus the fact it was found in the exact spot where it should have been found on 11/23/63. What more did they need? It's only the obsessive conspiracy theorists of the world who have the slightest desire to pursue this subject to the ends of the Earth. And that's because they'll do anything they can--no matter how far-fetched--in order to take that rifle out of the hands of the man who obviously purchased it, Lee H. Oswald. And the ARRB's job certainly wasn't to "investigate" anything anyway. (Doug Horne's crazy notions notwithstanding.) Why in the world they took ANY testimony from any witnesses is still a mystery to me. There was no need for it whatsoever. But this fascination that many CTers continue to have with "Money Order Fakery" isn't surprising to me in the least. I pretty much could have predicted months ago that most of the hardcore Internet conspiracy theorists would never actually have the balls to come out and admit they were wrong about the money order being fraudulent. Because if they were to do that, it would force them to re-examine a few other things relating to Oswald's rifle purchase, such as the order form (CE773) that Oswald sent to Klein's to buy the rifle, plus Waldman Exhibit No. 7, which proves that Klein's did ship the C2766 rifle to Oswald's very own post office box in Dallas and also proves that Klein's did receive payment from a certain "A. Hidell" in the amount of $21.45 via a money order on March 13, 1963. And if U.S. Postal Money Order #2,202,130,462 is a real and legitimate document that was handled by Lee Harvey Oswald and was mailed to Klein's Sporting Goods by Lee Harvey Oswald, then where can the conspiracy theorists go with the idea that all of that other stuff relating to the same rifle purchase is somehow fake and fraudulent? In short, if that money order is the real deal, then Lee Harvey Oswald did order a rifle from Klein's Sporting Goods in 1963. And many conspiracists just don't like that idea at all. Right, Mr. DiEugenio?

A "Money Order Timeline" summary.... There is solid evidence to support every step of the Hidell money order's journey --- from the post office in Dallas all the way to the document's final resting place at the Federal Records Center in Alexandria, Virginia (just outside Washington, D.C.).... 1.) The Dallas "G.P.O." Post Office handled the CE788 "Hidell" money order --- via the two stamps applied to the M.O. at the post office (i.e., the "Dallas, Tex.; G.P.O.; Mar. 12, 1963" stamp and the "$21.45" stamp that appear on the money order). 2.) The purchaser, Lee Harvey Oswald, handled the money order --- via the fact that Oswald's handwriting is on the document. 3.) Klein's Sporting Goods Company handled the money order --- via the Klein's "Pay To The Order Of The First National Bank Of Chicago" stamp on the back of the M.O. 4.) The First National Bank of Chicago handled the money order in question --- via the FBI interview with First National Bank Vice President Robert Wilmouth on November 23, 1963 [see CD75]. In that interview, Wilmouth verified that his bank received a $13,827.98 deposit from Klein's on 3/15/63, which contained a U.S. Postal Money Order in the amount of 21 dollars and 45 cents. Wilmouth also verified that the subject money order was sent to the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago on March 16, 1963. 5.) The Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago handled the Hidell money order --- via the presence on the document of the ten-digit "File Locator Number" in the upper left corner, which is a number that is stamped on a money order (or check) only after it has reached a Federal Reserve Bank for processing. 6.) And the CE788 money order was recovered on November 23, 1963, by employees of the Federal Records Center in Alexandria, Virginia, which is precisely where approximately 75% of the U.S. Postal Money Orders were being sent for storage by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago in March of 1963 [see CD75, Page 669]. Now, if ALL of the above things are fake, fraudulent, or just a bunch of lies, then I think we can all agree that miracles are, indeed, possible. But even with a "File Locator Number" now identified on the Hidell money order, PLUS Lee Harvey Oswald's handwriting (per many handwriting analysts) being on the same money order, PLUS the Klein's stamp being on that same money order, PLUS the "Mar. 12, 1963" and "$21.45" post office stamps being exactly where they should be on that same money order....the conspiracy crowd still wants more proof to show that the M.O. is a legitimate document. As far as most conspiracy theorists are concerned, it always seems to be the things that AREN'T there that become more important and valuable than the things that ARE present and accounted for. The bullets in the JFK case are another good example of this mindset possessed by many CTers. Per those conspiracists, it's the bullets that were never found or recovered that somehow become much more important when it comes to solving JFK's murder than the bullets that are in evidence. Go figure. http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/10/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1058.html

Here's a plain text copyable version of the autopsy report (via JFK Lancer).... http://www.jfklancer.com/autopsyrpt.html

As I said, it's a matter of interpretation. There's not just one way to interpret what Katzenbach meant in his memo. Play the video I posted above. Listen to Katzenbach explain it himself. Plus, why on Earth would Katz write such a memo if his objective was a secretive one involving a cover-up and a bunch of lies? In such a situation, you think Katzenbach would commit it to WRITING? That's absurd.

And the Katzenbach memo is yet another thing that conspiracy theorists have been misrepresenting and misinterpreting for decades now. There is certainly more than one way to interpret the words that Nicholas Katzenbach wrote in his memo to Bill Moyers on 11/25/63, as I discuss HERE and as Mr. Katzenbach himself explains in the HSCA audio excerpt below: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Another interesting non-conspiratorial portion of the Katzenbach memo is this part: "I think this objective may be satisfied by making public as soon as possible a complete and thorough FBI report on Oswald and the assassination." Do conspiracy theorists think that Katzenbach was really talking in some kind of secret code or something when he said that a "complete and thorough FBI report on Oswald and the assassination" should be made public "as soon as possible"? I.E., was Katzenbach REALLY saying that only a "phony" or a "fake" FBI report about Oswald and the assassination should be made public? Because if Katzenbach really knew about Oswald's rumored involvement with the FBI (and CIA), and Katzenbach was "in" on some cover-up operation from the get-go, he certainly wouldn't REALLY want the FBI to release a "complete and thorough" report concerning Oswald, now would he?" -- DVP; Oct. 27, 2007

Your statement above, of course, assumes that the WC had any "aims" to begin with (such as nailing Oswald to the wall at all costs). I don't think they had any such "aim".

I don't think ANY official testimony should be changed--ever--regardless of whether it's Warren Commission testimony, HSCA testimony, or some other case not related in any way to the JFK assassination. If Paul Stombaugh said something on the record, it should stay on the record forever--and in print. As I just demonstrated in the above examples of WC testimony from witnesses who said things that certainly didn't lead down a path of Oswald's sole involvement in the assassination, the Warren Commission obviously had no qualms about eliciting testimony from witnesses whom they had to know before they ever called them to the witness stand were going to testify, on the record, in a manner that would seem to point in the direction of conspiracy. But they didn't shy away from taking testimony from people like S.M. Holland and Jean Hill and Billy Lovelady and a host of others as well. Regarding Paul Stombaugh.... My guess is that these words attributed to Stombaugh, which appear in WC Volume 4 and are after the so-called "change" was made to his testimony, very likely were actually uttered by Mr. Stombaugh himself at some point in time.... "There is no doubt in my mind that these fibers could have come from this shirt. There is no way, however, to eliminate the possibility of the fibers having come from another identical shirt." So the end result was probably looked upon by the Warren Commission as a necessary "revision", as opposed to the wicked and underhanded "change" or "alteration" that conspiracy theorists seem to want to label it as being. However, I do agree with Sandy Larsen on this issue. I think ALL of Stombaugh's testimony ("revised" and otherwise) should be available to read in the WC volumes. Any omission or deletion of testimony from the official record only makes the Warren Commission more of a "suspect" in the eyes of many people who are already not exactly big fans of Earl Warren's investigation. But let me again repeat this main point I made earlier, which I think is important (especially if you believe the WC was as crooked as they come right from Day #1 of its existence).... "The final result of what we now see on Page 88 of Warren Commission Volume #4 are altered words that nobody would have wanted to alter if their desire was to make people think that the fibers found on the butt plate of Mannlicher-Carcano Rifle #C2766 had come from the shirt worn by Lee Harvey Oswald on November 22, 1963."

Then you should be wondering how testimony like this ended up in the 26 volumes.... S.M. HOLLAND -- I counted four shots. .... There were definitely four reports. Mr. STERN -- You have no doubt about that? Mr. HOLLAND -- I have no doubt about it. I have no doubt about seeing that puff of smoke come out from under those trees either. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ JEAN HILL --- I have always said there were some four to six shots. There were three shots---one right after the other, and a distinct pause, or just a moment's pause, and then I heard more. .... At that time I didn't realize that the shots were coming from the building. I frankly thought they were coming from the knoll. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Mr. SPECTER -- What is your opinion as to whether bullet 399 could have inflicted all of the wounds on the Governor, then, without respect at this point to the wound of the President's neck? DR. ROBERT SHAW -- I feel that there would be some difficulty in explaining all of the wounds as being inflicted by bullet Exhibit 399 without causing more in the way of loss of substance to the bullet or deformation of the bullet. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Mr. BALL -- Where was the direction of the sound? BILLY LOVELADY -- Right there around that concrete little deal on that knoll. Mr. BALL -- That's where it sounded to you? Mr. LOVELADY -- Yes, sir; to my right. I was standing as you are going down the steps, I was standing on the right, sounded like it was in that area. Mr. BALL -- From the underpass area? Mr. LOVELADY -- Between the underpass and the building right on that knoll. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Mr. BALL -- You say you heard these three sounds which you later thought were probably shots, you thought it came from a certain direction. Can you tell us from what direction as illustrated on the map? .... BUELL WESLEY FRAZIER -- It is my true opinion, that is what I thought, it sounded like it came from over there, in the railroad tracks.

So, Sandy, you think these two comments (which I did not mention in my Post #6 above, because they weren't necessary to make the point I was making about the WC) are miles apart in meaning? ..... "...but I know of no scientific method to prove this, so therefore I am unable to say this." Vs.: "...There is no way, however, to eliminate the possibility of the fibers having come from another identical shirt." The two remarks above are virtually identical in meaning. In each statement, Stombaugh is saying he cannot say for certain that the butt-plate fibers positively came from Oswald's shirt. So, once more, we have CTers making enormous mountains out of things that aren't really even bumps in the road.

But my point is still entirely valid. I.E., If the Warren Commission was truly the corrupt and evil Oswald-framing entity that many (most) Internet conspiracy advocates think it was, then Stombaugh's original remark --- "In my mind I feel that these fibers came from this shirt" --- would most certainly have been left intact in WC Volume #4. Such a change in the wording of expert testimony to a conclusion that makes it LESS likely that Oswald was the guilty party, albeit marginally so, only tends to indicate that the Warren Commission was most certainly not railroading Oswald at all costs--even when, in this instance, they could have made it look as if Oswald was just a tad bit more guilty by merely leaving Stombaugh's original testimony alone. Is that the way Earl Warren's Commission would have behaved if they were on a dedicated mission to convince the American public of Lee Oswald's guilt?

Thanks, Pat. I find it interesting, however, to note that the "change" in Paul Stombaugh's Warren Commission testimony only SOFTENS the testimony and makes Stombaugh look a little LESS certain in his opinion that the fibers came from Oswald's shirt. If the Warren Commission had been on a dastardly mission to paint Lee Oswald as the lone gunman at all costs, there's no way on this Earth that we would have had this comment.... "In my mind I feel that these fibers came from this shirt..." ....changed to this.... "There is no doubt in my mind that these fibers could have come from this shirt..." If there was, in fact, any "change" made to Paul Stombaugh's above testimony, the final result of what we now see on Page 88 of Warren Commission Volume #4 are altered words that nobody would have wanted to alter if their desire was to make people think that the fibers found on the butt plate of Mannlicher-Carcano Rifle #C2766 had come from the shirt worn by Lee Harvey Oswald on 11/22/63. Some cover-up there. ~Yawn~

Whose testimony was changed? Can you cite it please?

Maybe this wider look of the TSBD will help....

Nolan, Bell, Wade, Connally, and the imaginary bullet.... http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/07/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-737.html