David Von Pein

7 minutes ago, Alan Ford said:

And so a fiendish little plan is hatched to disappear the curtain rods found at the Depository into two curtain rods taken on-the-record from the Paine garage by the WC. Central to this little scam is the use of the digits 2-7-5 and 2-7-6. What better way to discredit in advance the mouthy TSBD discoverer of the rods than to neutralize the danger posed by the digits 2-7-5- by turning them into a Ruth Paine Exhibit No.

As I said in my last post. CTers almost always exhibit....

"...utter desperation, wishful thinking, and outright speculation..."

Alan Ford just demonstrated all three of those traits in his last post.

6 hours ago, Alan Ford said:

It's nice to think that this little exchange of ours will be archived. It effectively showcases your chronically silly, shamelessly bad-faith approach to the evidence! 👍

I think it merely showcases the utter desperation, wishful thinking, and outright speculation that we (of course) have all been accustomed to seeing in virtually every argument put forth by JFK conspiracy theorists since the crime was committed in November of 1963.

So, thank you, Alan Ford, for being willing to showcase your massive amounts of speculation and your willingness (and eagerness) to call multiple people outright l-i-a-r-s, all based on the words "March 15" on one document (plus a copy of said document).

Another fine (and extraordinarily fun and funny) example of CTer desperation and wishful thinking and speculation in action (re: the SBT) can be found HERE.

1 hour ago, Joe Bauer said:

The guy says JFK wasn't shot. It was a special effects gimmick trick and Jackie pulled the string to activate it!   I kid you not.

Sounds a lot like the Brian David Andersen theory. He's the kook who wrote a book in 2007 called "My God, I'm Hit!", theorizing that JFK faked his own death by exploding a pyrotechnics device on his head. A "fake JFK" then popped up out of a secret compartment in the back of the limo.

If you've got $125 to waste, you can still get a copy of this Pulitzer Prize winner at Amazon!! Hurry though....only one copy left!

32 minutes ago, Alan Ford said:

This from the guy who invented time travel to explain away the document.

Untrue. I have said multiple times that I think the March 15th date on the DPD form is simply an error. Which it so obviously is, when taking into account the totality of the facts surrounding the two curtain rods that were recovered from Ruth Paine's garage on 3/23/64.

Reclaiming History Book Excerpt.....

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

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

11 minutes ago, Alan Ford said:

Keep serving the l-i-e, Mr. Von Pein! 👍

And please, Alan, please keep fantasizing that the March 15 document SOMEHOW means that rods were found IN THE TSBD.....even though it proves no such thing (nor does it even go in that direction, except in the fanciful mind of an ABO CTer).

Carry on with your next fantasy please....

A simple slipped digit in the March 15 date just isn't nearly good enough for a CTer, is it? Something MORE *must* enter into it, right?

And tell me again what was the reason for why the WC didn't merely deep-six the curtain rods that you (I guess) think were taken into the TSBD by LHO on 11/22 (even though Oswald himself decided to lie about this and say he took no rods into work; that's something you certainly need to work on, and without using the "All Cops Lied About What LHO Said" cop-out please), instead of transporting the rods back into Ruth's garage at some point prior to March 23rd?

Wouldn't just getting rid of the rods be a better solution, vs. the proverbial curtain rod/garage "charade"?

Please enlighten me (again) with your wisdom as to why the WC cover-uppers didn't just simply eliminate said rods?

And remember, I'm just a dumb-as-a-rock hick from the Hoosier State, so please explain it (again) very slowly. Thanks.

1 minute ago, Alan Ford said:

Great Scott, Mr. Von Pein! How do you do it?

I'm very talented, that's all.

Try March 25.

Or maybe August 31.

Or Dec. 27 (that's my birthday).

3 minutes ago, Alan Ford said:

And you can't offer a single date that would not be a mistake.

ANY date after March 23.

1 minute ago, Alan Ford said:

Warren Gullibility has Mr. Von Pein's brain melting down over his humiliating inability to explain away inconvenient evidence about the curtain rods.

The March 15 date was wrong. Simple as that.

No l-i-a-r-s required. Just a mistake on a paper.

CTer Version = L-i-a-r-s / schemers / evidence manipulators everywhere!

Which version is more likely to be the truth---mine or yours?

17 minutes ago, Alan Ford said:

next time you trot out your provably wrong claim that There is no evidence any curtain rods were found in the Depository after the assassination, WITHOUT mentioning your utter inability to explain away evidence pointing precisely that way....

Now you're just making stuff up. There is NO EVIDENCE which points "precisely" to any curtain rods being recovered from the TSBD. None. And your fantasy and cloak-and-dagger crap regarding Paine Exhibits No. 275 & 276 doesn't come CLOSE to showing that any rods were found IN THE DEPOSITORY.

Why you think otherwise is yet another mystery.

The JFK Conspiracy Fantasists have people scheming and plotting and planting and lying and conniving and altering and framing patsies all over the place in this case.

You think all of those never-ending accusations can be wiped out by replacing all of those terms I just used with the simple word "WRONG"?

Get real.

27 minutes ago, John Iacoletti said:

P.S. I'm glad you accept the witnesses (like Rowland) who saw two people on the sixth floor, and that people like Hoffman and Gordon Arnold saw or heard gunmen behind the picket fence, and that people like Adams and Carolyn Arnold had their testimonies altered.

I don't accept any of the claims by any of those people, Mr. Conspiracy.

They were all "wrong", but not necessarily L-words.

Just like the many Parkland witnesses who said they saw a huge hole in the back of JFK's head. I have never called any of those witnesses the L-word. But they were all "wrong". And they were provably wrong too, with the autopsy X-rays and photos providing the proof (for all time) that they were wrong.

18 minutes ago, John Iacoletti said:

So much for "zero l-i-a-r-s".  That was fast.

Better read my quote again, Mr. Conspiracy. I never said there were "Zero L-i-a-r-s" in the whole case. What I said was this....

"I require a total of 0 (Zero) l-i-a-r-s (not counting Lee Oswald) in order for my Lone Assassin position to be supported and maintained."

The above statement is certainly still 100% true even with L-i-a-r-s like Russo, Hill, and Craig in the mix. I can easily maintain and support my LN position even without those 3 people ever surfacing in any discussion.

Can CTers maintain and support THEIR position with only THREE measly l-i-a-r-s in the mix? Not a chance. You need at least ten times that many (if not more).

P.S. -- People that I think were just simply "wrong" about something don't go into my "L-i-a-r-s" list. Maybe that's something that CTers like you, John, should learn.

I added Russo too.

8 minutes ago, John Iacoletti said:

What utter BS.

Just a sample of the "lying" witnesses according to DVP and his fellow ideologues:

Arnold Rowland
Roger Craig
Carolyn Walther
Jean Hill
Vickie Adams
Ed Hoffman
Julia Ann Mercer
Gordon Arnold
Ricky White
Rose Cheramie
Acquilla Clemons
Bernard Haire
Sylvia Odio
O.P. Wright
Bardwell Odum
Seth Kantor
Butch Burroughs
W.R. (Dub) Stark
Louis Cortinas
Tom Mullins, Emmett Hollingshead, and J.B. "Shorty" Lewis
James A. Andrews
T. F. White
Fred Moore
John Elrod
Jack Davis
Paul O Connor
Floyd Riebe
Jerrol Custer
James Curtis Jenkins
Dennis David
Saundra Spencer
Dean Andrews
Carolyn Arnold
Janet Conforto
Charles Crenshaw
Cyril Wecht
Marita Lorenz
Nelson Delgado
Fletcher Prouty
Edwin Walker
Nancy Lee Fenner
Madeleine Brown
Albert Bogard
Richard Randolph Carr
Saint John Hunt
Waggoner Carr
Kenneth Croy
John Manchester
Perry Russo
Edith Whitworth
Esther Mash
Delphine Roberts
Roy Eugene Vaughn
Thayer Waldo
William Walter

You're out of your mind if you truly think that I (or ANY other LNer) thinks ALL of those people on your silly list are to be labelled as "l-i-a-r-s".

The only people who I would label as l-i-a-r-s on that list would be Roger Craig, Perry Russo, and Jean Hill. (And all 3 of them are, of course, told PROVABLE lies.)

11 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

So, no, David, "officialdom" is not comprised of church mice. It is comprised of flawed humans, many of whom fib or cover-up as a matter of routine. 

But in the "EXHIBIT NO. 275 / CURTAIN ROD" instance, which some CTers are now insisting was all just a "charade", if those CTers are correct, we'd actually have to believe that not only did people in "officialdom" fib/lie out their respective ass cracks, but we'd ALSO have to believe that Ruth Paine (and probably Michael Paine too) were lying about the curtain rods that Ruth said were stored in her garage both BEFORE and AFTER the assassination. And neither Ruth nor Michael are part of the police, the FBI, or "officialdom" in general.

And regarding the "SECOND-FLOOR LUNCHROOM ENCOUNTER", which many many CTers on the Internet now firmly believe NEVER HAPPENED AT ALL .... the l-i-a-r-s in that instance would have, just like the "Exhibit 275 Charade", also consisted of a COMBINATION of "officialdom" people telling one lie after another (Marrion Baker) and regular ol' citizens (TSBD Superintendent Roy Truly).

And then there's the Tippit murder (which many conspiracy theorists believe was committed by someone they are sure was NOT Lee Harvey Oswald) .... with witnesses like Johnny Brewer and Ted Callaway and the Davis girls and William Scoggins all being thrown under the bus and treated like l-i-a-r-s and crooks by various CTers over the years. And none of those people I just mentioned can be labelled as being part of "officialdom" at all. They were all just ordinary Dallas citizens in 1963.

So, again, in the Tippit case, if the CTers are right, it would have been a combination of ordinary people PLUS various police officials who must have lied through their individual and collective teeth and then they all gathered together in Chief Curry's office at City Hall and decided to join forces to frame an innocent Oswald. It's just flat-out absurd.

And there are, of course, many additional examples that I could easily cite in order to support my previous (admittedly) tongue-in-cheek comment about "The More L-i-a-r-s, The Better" motto/mantra that seems to have been embraced in recent years by many Internet conspiracists. But if I were to cite all of those examples in just this one post, I wouldn't get any sleep for the next five days.

3 minutes ago, Alan Ford said:

'I am an extremely gullible person.'

Yes, Alan, you are.

The BIG / HUGE / TREMENDOUS / IMPORTANT difference between JFK conspiracy fantasists and myself is:

I require a total of 0 (Zero) l-i-a-r-s (not counting Lee Oswald) in order for my Lone Assassin position to be supported and maintained.

CTers like Alan Ford, however, require a very large number of people to be telling many lies about various aspects of the evidence connected to the 11/22/63 events in Dealey Plaza and on Tenth Street.

In just this "Exhibit 275 / Curtain rod" instance alone, the CTers who think it was nothing more than a staged "charade" require several different people to be telling blatant falsehoods about the curtain rod evidence, including Ruth Paine, John Joe Howlett, Albert Jenner, J.C. Day, and (probably) Michael Paine. And it's very likely that CTers would place many other people at the Depository on this particular L-i-a-r-s List too.

But, as I've said many times in the past, there are a lot of conspiracy theorists who couldn't care less how many people they have to call rotten evil l-i-a-r-s in order to try and support their silly theories. It would seem the CTer policy has been (and still remains today): The More L-i-a-r-s, The Better.

6 hours ago, Alan Ford said:

The only obvious mistake here, of course, is Mr. Von Pein's oft-repeated Warren Gullible claim that (repeat after me, boys and girls) No! Curtain! Rods! Were! Ever! Found! In! The Depository!

Once Mr. Von Pein drops that evidence-denying claim, the headache brought on by cognitive dissonance will lift.

Talk about leaping to an unfounded and wholly unsupportable claim! Mr. Ford has sure done that here.

Via a series of cloak-and-dagger conspiratorial contortions and outright speculation, Mr. Ford has decided that there WERE, in fact, some curtain rods found in the TSBD after the assassination of JFK, even though the only actual evidence (and testimony) indicates the exact opposite -- i.e., no curtain rods were found in the TSBD (via CE2640, plus the fact that the police never found a single curtain rod anywhere in the Book Depository Building during their extensive searches of that building for evidence on the weekend of the assassination).

So what we end up with is more of the usual coming from a conspiracy theorist -- with that "usual" being nothing more that a bunch of wishful thinking.

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

As the 60th anniversary of President Kennedy's death quickly approaches here in November of 2023, I wanted to renew a little bit of interest in what is, in my opinion, the very best motion picture film or documentary ever produced about JFK's 1963 assassination....with that film being David L. Wolper's 1964 masterpiece, "Four Days In November".

Here's a review for the film that I wrote at Amazon.com in July 2001:

“Four Days In November is my all-time favorite program dealing with the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. You really get a sense of re-living the events of November 22-25, 1963, when America's all-too-young, 46-year-old leader was gunned down on the sunny streets of Dallas, Texas.

This 1964 black-and-white documentary, skillfully narrated by actor Richard Basehart, was filmed only months after the events, making the re-creations that were filmed for this movie all the more effective, since the people involved, the locations, the landmarks, and even the automobiles had not changed to a great degree (if at all) since the tragedy occurred. I truly had the sense of being there BEFORE it happened because of the very good re-created scenes.

This wonderfully-edited chronological documentary guides the viewer through all four of those dark November days that shocked the nation in late 1963. An integral part of this program lies in its outstanding musical score, by Elmer Bernstein. Mr. Bernstein's stirring score fits just perfectly here, adding emotional impact to each portion of the film.

In addition to many re-created scenes, there is a hefty amount of stock news footage presented throughout this 122-minute film, some of which you probably have seen before, and some you probably haven't. The Joan Crawford/Richard Nixon clip was one I'd never seen in the past, as well as the footage of Lee Harvey Oswald's funeral, which nearly no one attended.

One particular re-created scene in the film that has an especially eerie feeling to it is the scene where we see Wesley Frazier driving his 1954 Chevrolet sedan toward the "drab bulk" of the Texas School Book Depository Building, which looms ahead in the foreground. Frazier was the 19-year-old Depository co-worker of Lee Harvey Oswald's who gave Oswald a ride to work on the morning of the President's assassination.

The Zapruder Film is not represented in this documentary. It was to be yet another 11 years before the public at large was to see Mr. Zapruder's infamous film. Four Days does include a sequence from the Nix Film, however.

Wolper Productions sidestepped all the conspiracy theories [thank goodness] and stuck by the Warren Commission Report for this documentary.

Many of the facts surrounding JFK's assassination have been disputed and debated by researchers for decades. And this tragic crime will likely remain a topic that shall cause heated discussion for many more years to come.

But what the film Four Days In November does accomplish is to allow the viewer to re-live those sorrowful November days, in the order in which the events transpired, based on the evidence available. This is definitely one program that deserves to be in anyone's JFK collection.”

David Von Pein
July 2001

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

Related "Four Days" Links:

42 minutes ago, Alan Ford said:

Can Mr. David Von Pein suggest a single alternative date to 3-15-64------any date that he thinks would work-------for the submission of the two curtain rods to the Crime Lab?

Are we to take your repeated evasions of the question [above] as a tacit admission on your part that you simply cannot answer it?

Regarding your non-stop inquiry re: the 3/15/1964 AD date on the CSSS document(s)....

Yes, Mr. A. Ford, you now have my official permission to designate my "repeated evasions" regarding that topic as a "tacit admission" on my part that I have no answer for it --- other than to keep repeating my own opinion that it is an (obvious) mistake, since the curtain rods weren't even retrieved by the Warren Commission from Ruth Paine's garage until the night of March 23rd, 1964.

But, by the same token, you cannot explain the March 15th date either (with any explanation that approaches anything of a PROVABLE nature, that is).

Now, would you care to admit to this forum, Mr. Ford, the obvious truth that is contained within my last sentence?

42 minutes ago, Alan Ford said:

With just a LITTLE intellectual honesty on your part, this moment could be a BIG learning for you!

Mr. Ford is growing more obnoxious by the minute.

Congrats!!

32 minutes ago, Alan Ford said:

3001 is not a random out-of-nowhere number with which to start counting at.

Yes, it is.

Why didn't the Commission utilize more 5000+ numbers instead of STARTING at 3001 for the Semingsen Exhibit?

1 hour ago, Alan Ford said:

there really is no instance anywhere in the WC's assignment of a number to an exhibit that is remotely comparable in its sheer out-of-nowhereness to the assignment of the number '270' for the first Ruth Paine Exhibit.

Yes there is. And I already provided that comparable item --- it's Semingsen Exhibit No. 3001.

~Grin~

~Smirk~

1 hour ago, Alan Ford said:

"and both witnesses worked for Western Union"------------------that's the 3000 club then, Mr. Von Pein. Duh.

Whoopeee! A two-member "club" (per Mr. Ford's choice of verbiage).

How silly.