David Von Pein

Nonsense. You're living in Conspiracy Fantasy World [CFW]. You can't have that much evidence against you and still be Not Guilty (unless you reside in CFW, of course).

I guess it comes down to each person's own definition of "proof". As we all know, the definition and scope of that particular word varies (greatly) from one person to the next. And when you say that "various assertions" that have been made by certain Lone Assassin believers have not been "backed up", can you provide a specific example or two? Frankly, I just don't see how a person (namely Mr. Oswald) can have this much evidence pointing toward his guilt (in two separate murders that occurred within 45 minutes of each other on 11-22-63) and yet still be innocent.... http://Oswald-Is-Guilty.blogspot.com http://drive.google.com / Summary Of Oswald's Guilt (By Vincent Bugliosi) (All 53 Items) http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com

http://educationforum/topic=Paul-Landis-Revelation / What About The 1983 & 1988 Landis Statements?

From September 11, 2023:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/12-9-63-fbi-report.html

But given the situation Marina Oswald was confronted with after the assassination ---- her husband is dead, she has no money, very few friends, speaks very little English, and she's now on her own and living in a country that's foreign to her ---- can you think of one good reason under the sun WHY she would be afraid (or unwilling) to go back to her native Russia? In other words, why on Earth would she have been afraid of being "deported"? The "Marina Was Afraid Of Being Deported" line of reasoning has never made any sense to me at all. But apparently it does make sense to most conspiracy theorists. But I would think that Marina would have been anxious and eager to get back to her USSR homeland, which is where her family and friends were located. Marina did later say that she did want to remain in the United States. But the notion that has been advanced over the years by various conspiracy theorists that she was deathly afraid of being "deported" back to the Soviet Union (and therefore she lied her ass off on numerous occasions in her Warren Commission testimony in order to avoid deportation) is, in my opinion, a totally ridiculous and illogical notion.

Marcus, Lee's wife, Marina, testified that she personally saw the rifle inside the blanket in Ruth Paine's garage. So it wasn't merely a wild GUESS on the part of Marina that a rifle was in the blanket. Many conspiracy theorists, naturally, think Marina Oswald was telling a bunch of lies when she testified in the following manner in early 1964: MARINA OSWALD -- After we arrived, I tried to put the bed, the child's crib together, the metallic parts, and I looked for a certain part, and I came upon something wrapped in a blanket. I thought that was part of the bed, but it turned out to be the rifle. [Later....] Mr. RANKIN. After your husband returned from Mexico, did you examine the rifle in the garage at any time? Mrs. OSWALD. I had never examined the rifle in the garage. It was wrapped in a blanket and was lying on the floor. Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever check to see whether the rifle was in the blanket? Mrs. OSWALD. I never checked to see that. There was only once that I was interested in finding out what was in that blanket, and I saw that it was a rifle. Mr. RANKIN. When was that? Mrs. OSWALD. About a week after I came from New Orleans. Mr. RANKIN. And then you found that the rifle was in the blanket, did you? Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, I saw the wooden part of it, the wooden stock.

.....

Greg D., Can you confirm for a fact that the Irving Sports Shop was even open for business on Monday, November 11, 1963? It was, after all, a federal holiday (Veterans Day).

If Lee Oswald was an accomplice, then you're right. Oswald, under those make-believe conditions, certainly wouldn't have wanted to tell the cops that he had handed off the murder weapon to somebody else within the context of Oswald himself KNOWING that the "other person" was going to kill the President with it. But my last post was based on an assumption that you, Gregory Doudna, were very likely of the opinion that Lee Oswald was completely blameless for the assassination (i.e., he wasn't a shooter and he was also not an "accomplice"). Maybe my assumption was inaccurate? ~shrug~ In any event, your entire "November 11" theory is nothing but 100% guesswork and speculation on your part, and you've got a HUGE hurdle to climb if you really expect anyone here to believe that Lee Oswald REALLY had his "lunch" in that large-ish paper sack on 11/22. Because if that was the case, then we've got no choice but to paint Buell Frazier as a major story-teller (l-i-a-r) with regard to TWO key aspects of his post-assassination story and testimony --- 1. The part about Lee telling Buell that the package contained curtain rods (a very silly thing for Oswald to say, of course, if the bag really had a sandwich and an apple in it). 2. And the part of Buell's story where he says he specifically ASKED Oswald about his lunch that morning (Nov. 22), with Oswald telling Frazier that he was going to buy his lunch that day. And I think any explanation that you (or anyone else) comes up with to try and logically explain away BOTH the "curtain rods" lie that Oswald quite clearly did tell Buell Wesley Frazier on BOTH Nov. 21 and 22....plus the "No Lunch / LHO Said He Was Going To Buy His Lunch" testimony provided by Frazier....is destined to be a very weak (and desperate!) explanation indeed. Plus, if Oswald's paper bag contained merely his lunch, then why didn't Lee fold down the bag after he put his lunch inside of it? Don't tell me a cheese sandwich and an apple took up 27 inches of space? Remember, the amount of the bag that was visible on the back seat of Frazier's 1954 Chevy, according to Frazier's own observations, was measured and was found to be about 27 inches (per Frazier's own estimate). In addition, there's Frazier's "Tucked under his armpit" story too, which would mean that this long bag that you (Greg) think held merely a person's "lunch", was being carried by Oswald into the Book Depository in a very strange manner---with Frazier claiming Oswald had one end "cupped" in his right hand, with the other end stuck up under his armpit. Who on Earth would carry their lunch bag in such a strange non-folded-up manner? It makes no logical sense whatsoever. You'd be better off going back to saying the package contained curtain rods. And.... No, I do not think that Lee Harvey Oswald removed his rifle from Ruth Paine's garage on November 11th, 1963, and I most certainly do not believe that Oswald (with Marina and his 2 daughters in tow)....quoting Greg Doudna.... "borrowed Michael Paine's blue-and-white Olds parked in front of Ruth's house, and Lee drove himself and Marina with their two children to a gunsmith to have the scope, which had come with the rifle and then had been removed by Oswald, reinstalled on it." That latter part about Oswald using Michael Paine's car is, in my opinion, a preposterous story. (For one thing, why would Lee want to drag his wife and two tiny children with him to the Irving Sports Shop? For what purpose would they be needed on such a journey?)

On October 13, 2023, I was able to read the key "bullet" portions of Paul Landis' newly-released book "The Final Witness" (via the book excerpts that have been made available on this webpage), and some additional problems and questions arise, with one of these problems being a massively important one regarding the precise location of where Landis says he left the whole bullet that he says he found on the top of the back seat in the Presidential limo. All of the available testimony from the Parkland Hospital personnel makes it clear that President Kennedy was never moved from his stretcher (gurney) during the entire time the President was being treated in Trauma Room No. 1. This fact is confirmed in the Warren Commission testimony of Parkland's Dr. Robert McClelland: ARLEN SPECTER -- Was he [President Kennedy] on the stretcher at all times? DR. ROBERT N. McCLELLAND -- Yes. MR. SPECTER -- In the trauma room No. 1 you described, is there any table onto which he could be placed from the stretcher? DR. McCLELLAND -- No; generally we do not move patients from the stretcher until they are ready to go into the operating room and then they are moved onto the operating table. MR. SPECTER -- Well, in fact, was he left on the stretcher all during the course of these procedures until he was pronounced dead? DR. McCLELLAND -- That's right. --------------------------------------- Plus: ----------------------- Former Secret Service agent Paul Landis, however, says something completely different in his book. He says this (quoting from the book itself): "As I entered—or, more to the point, was pushed into—the trauma room, the president’s lifeless body was already being lifted off the gurney and placed onto a white cotton blanket that covered the surface of a stainless-steel examination table in the middle of the room." [End Quote.] Landis then goes on to say this in his book: "I removed the bullet from my pocket, and reaching out over the examination table, I carefully placed it on the white cotton blanket next to the president’s left shoe." [End Quote.] But let's now compare the above book excerpt with the following statement made by the same Mr. Landis just one month ago: "I put the bullet on the gurney right by his [JFK's] feet" -- Paul Landis; September 12, 2023 (NBC Interview) So the question of great importance now becomes: Did Landis drop the bullet onto JFK's stretcher/"gurney"? Or did he leave it on an "examination table"? That's an exceedingly important question to answer, because if we're to believe he left it on an exam table instead of the stretcher (with a stretcher, of course, having wheels on it, which means it could easily be moved from one part of the hospital to another), we've then got to ask: How, then, did that bullet (if it was really CE399, which Mr. Landis does seem to think it was) manage to get from the exam table to a stretcher in the corridor of Parkland Hospital, where it was then found by hospital employee Darrell C. Tomlinson a short time later? Another possible problem with Landis' story crops up in the book excerpts linked above, although this "problem" isn't nearly as important or imperative as the "gurney vs. exam table" head-scratcher. This additional problem concerns the timing of Vice President Johnson's arrival at Parkland Hospital on 11/22/63. Landis says in his book that LBJ and the Vice President's Secret Service car had not yet arrived at Parkland Hospital by the time JFK's body was being lifted out of the back seat and onto a stretcher. Quoting again from Mr. Landis' book: "The vice president’s limo had yet to arrive, so there were no agents from his detail in sight. In fact, there were no other agents in sight anywhere to the rear, to my right, or to the front. Where are they? Where the hell is SA Greer? He was driving the president’s limo. He should be here. The follow-up car was empty too. Where the hell is Special Agent Sam Kinney? He was driving it. Jeez, oh man! Where the hell is everyone? Where did all the agents go? Who is going to secure the car AND THE CRIME SCENE? Everyone seemed to be crowded around the president’s body. No one was paying attention to anything else. My immediate concern was the bullet. It would be visible to anyone happening to walk by. What about photographers? Or worse yet, What about a souvenir hunter? Thoughts continued to race through my mind." [End Quote.] But with regard to Vice President Lyndon Johnson and his exact whereabouts at the time when President Kennedy was being wheeled into the hospital, there is evidence (via the observations of ambulance driver Aubrey Rike) which would indicate that Johnson actually entered Parkland Hospital prior to the time when either JFK or wounded Governor John Connally entered the emergency room entrance. Listen to the chronology of events provided by Aubrey Rike, in two separate interviews he did on November 22, 1963, HERE. If Rike's chronology of the timing for when each man entered the hospital is correct --- i.e., Johnson, then Connally, then Kennedy --- that would, in my opinion, place a serious cloud of doubt over Mr. Landis' account (and his mindset) concerning those same events. Because if LBJ's car and his Secret Service follow-up car were actually there at the hospital prior to Landis and JFK and Mrs. Kennedy exiting the limo and going into the emergency room, it would also mean that Mr. Landis would very likely have had no reason to say this to himself --- "Where did all the agents go? Who is going to secure the car AND THE CRIME SCENE?" --- because there would have still been plenty of SS agents there at Parkland to look after the limousine/"crime scene". And here's yet another interesting twist to the Paul Landis bullet story: In this video (which was uploaded to YouTube on September 11, 2023), Clint Hill says that Landis told him in 2014 that he (Landis) put the whole bullet on a stretcher "in the hallway" of Parkland Hospital, vs. putting it on Kennedy's gurney (or exam table), which is what Landis is now saying in 2023. So with each passing glance at Paul Landis' new 2023 story regarding the events of November 22nd, more and more questions (and doubts) seem to surface. ------------------------- My main "Paul Landis" page: http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2023/06/paul-landis.html

No.

Greg, If Oswald had actually given his rifle to somebody else between Nov. 11 and 22, then Oswald would have certainly told the police that very important fact after he was arrested and charged with committing a murder that he (under those conditions) very likely never committed. Would Oswald have had every reason under the sun to admit to the cops that he had given his rifle to another person prior to Nov. 22 if such a rifle transaction was actually the truth? Yes, of course he would. (Especially after being shown the backyard photo on Nov. 23.) But did Oswald say anything to the authorities about some other person coming into possession of his Carcano rifle? No, he didn't.

Notice how The Enquirer has the wrong SS agent circled. They've got William McIntyre circled, not Paul Landis. Oh brother. LOL. It's also good to know that a few of Donald Trump's long-lost relatives have finally been found.... "Alien Mummies Found In Mine!"

Seems like a mighty weak theory to me. And many (most) of the things on your 10-item list that you've labelled as "facts" are, of course, not really "facts" at all. They are merely your own opinions and suspicions. Like nearly all JFK conspiracy theories, Greg Doudna's latest effort is full of guesswork and speculation, and is merely another attempt by a conspiracist to avoid the obvious. With that "obvious" being (IMO): Oswald brought his own rifle to work with him on Nov. 22 (after an unusual Thursday-night trip to Irving), with Oswald himself then using that rifle to shoot JFK from the sixth floor of the Depository.* * With Oswald unquestionably lying to Wesley Frazier about his real reason for going out to Irving on Thursday night. (The curtain rod story being the provable lie that he told to Frazier.) But at least you (Greg Doudna) have found a way to get that rifle out of Ruth Paine's garage without anyone needing to break into the garage in order to steal it (as some CTers have theorized). You certainly deserve a point for that. But via your theory, if Oswald himself didn't bring the rifle into the TSBD, who do you think did? Do you think it might have been one of Oswald's fellow TSBD employees? Or was it a stranger? Any idea at all? Related thoughts: http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/two-things-that-prove-oswald's-guilt

Sandy, Who is this person wearing the plaid shirt as Oswald passes by him at City Hall on 11/22/63? Is it Billy Lovelady? Or somebody else?

Wesley Frazier and Linnie Mae Randle were obviously mistaken as to the precise length of Oswald's paper bag. To believe otherwise is to believe that the brown paper bag Frazier and Randle saw Oswald carrying on 11/22/63 was a different brown paper bag from the EMPTY brown paper bag that was found in the TSBD which had OSWALD'S PRINTS ON IT. Is a reasonable and sensible person supposed to actually believe that Oswald took a large-ish bag with him into work on November 22 that was 27 inches long, with that bag then disappearing without a trace between 8:00 AM and early- to mid-afternoon on the same day (November 22)? And then are we supposed to believe that a similar-looking BROWN PAPER BAG (EMPTY!) turned up in the exact place from which a gunman fired shots at JFK, with this coincidence occurring (incredibly) on the very same day that Oswald carried a 27-inch BROWN PAPER BAG into the very same building where a 38-inch BROWN PAPER BAG was discovered WITH OSWALD'S PALMPRINT AND FINGERPRINT on it? A reasonable person can arrive at only one reasonable conclusion here: The bag that Buell Wesley Frazier and Linnie Mae Randle saw Lee Harvey Oswald carrying on the morning of the assassination was the very same paper bag that was seen lying (empty!) in the Sniper's Nest by Lt. Carl Day and Robert Studebaker of the DPD on November 22, 1963. Accepting any other scenario other than the scenario I just mentioned in the above paragraph is to accept a scenario that lacks all fundamental logic and common sense.

Conspiracy theorists need to somehow explain away the devastatingly incriminating evidence against Lee Oswald known as CE142 (the EMPTY paper bag that was found in the Sniper's Nest with two of Oswald's prints on it). Most conspiracists like to cry foul when discussing that brown paper sack, claiming that the police were up to no good and created a fake bag in order to frame Oswald with it. But such arguments fall short in the "proof it happened" department. Way short. But it's obvious why CTers feel the need to distance themselves from the reality of that paper bag. Because if those conspiracy believers were to actually face the stubborn reality concerning the bag (with that reality being: It was Oswald's homemade bag and Oswald took his rifle to work in that bag), then those CTers would be forced to admit that their precious "patsy" had probably taken that gun to work in order to shoot somebody with it on the day when JFK came to town. What other reasonable and logical conclusion could anyone (CTer or otherwise) come to after they've admitted to themselves the obvious truth: That Lee Oswald did, in fact, walk into the Book Depository on November 22, 1963, with a rifle wrapped in brown paper? Another pesky item that conspiracists need to "explain away" is the "curtain rod" lie that was told by Lee Harvey Oswald. And it couldn't be more obvious (to a reasonable and rational person, that is) that Oswald DID, indeed, lie to Wesley Frazier (and later to the police after he was arrested) concerning the curtain rods. Oswald never had any curtain rods, of course. And why on Earth would Oswald want to lie about the contents of that brown paper package? Again, the answer couldn't be more obvious: He wanted to DISTANCE HIMSELF FROM THE MURDER WEAPON.

I wonder what the odds are of Lee Oswald having carried a DIFFERENT brown bag into work from the one WITH HIS TWO IDENTIFIABLE PRINTS ON IT that was found by the cops in the Sniper's Nest on the 6th Floor? Care to guess at what those odds might be? They must be close to "O.J. DNA" type numbers (in favor of the empty brown bag that was found by the police on the 6th Floor of the Book Depository being the very same bag that Buell Wesley Frazier and Linnie Mae Randle saw in Lee Harvey Oswald's hands on the morning of November 22, 1963). I'm eagerly awaiting the logical and believable conspiracy-slanted explanation that will answer the question of why a 38-inch empty paper bag (which could house Oswald's 34.8-inch disassembled rifle), which was an empty bag with Oswald's fingerprints on it, was in the place where it was found after the assassination (the sixth-floor Sniper's Nest) and yet still NOT have Lee Oswald present at that sniper's window on 11/22/63. I, for one, cannot think of a single "Oswald Is Innocent" explanation for that empty paper sack being where it was found after the assassination of John Kennedy....AND with Oswald's fingerprints on it.

JOSEPH BALL -- "Did you notice whether or not Lee had a package that looked like a lunch package that morning?" BUELL WESLEY FRAZIER -- "You know like I told you earlier...he didn't take his lunch because I remember right when I got in the car I asked him where was his lunch and he said he was going to buy his lunch that day." MR. BALL -- "He told you that that day, did he?" MR. FRAZIER -- "Right. That is right. So I assumed he was going to buy it, you know, from that catering service man like a lot of the boys do. They don't bring their lunch, but they go out and buy their lunch there." http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com / index.html#The-Paper-Bag