David Von Pein

Another Wade conference (featuring the voice of Jack Ruby in the background too): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JptiW_sk0aM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzG4BT1RW08

Thanks. That's the best compliment I could ever receive from an Internet CTer. I wouldn't expect anything less from anyone who belongs to the strange CT circus that has been assembled here at this and other Internet forums. But at least I'm not "stoopid" enough to believe that ALL of the evidence collected by the DPD, the SS, and the FBI has been (or even could have been) faked to frame an innocent patsy named Oswald.

And you say that because you (being an Internet conspiracy theorist) fail to ever examine the sheer implausibility of your own theories and "research". To an Internet CTer, every inconsistency or unanswered question is a sign of conspiracy or cover-up. Always. But just answer the following question truthfully for me, Ed LeDoux: Do you really believe that Seaport Traders, Inc. of Los Angeles, California, was part of some kind of plot or cover-up operation connected with Lee Harvey Oswald's 1963 revolver purchase? If your answer is "No" (as it surely must be, if you're a reasonable man), then why even post the "humor" in Post #272 above?

A conspiracy theorist who thinks it was "THE WORLD AGAINST OSWALD" is preaching to me about God-given "sense". It's a new zenith in irony. And Pot/Kettle-ism. I'm lovin' it.

So now Seaport is part of the ever-growing plot to frame that innocent schmuck named Oswald, eh? I love it. Please continue. Because I'm sure you can find a way to get Railway Express "in" on the plot too. Right, Ed?

BOTH the Warren Commission AND the HSCA were satisfied that Oswald ordered, paid for, and took possession of Revolver V510210 and Rifle C2766. Do you really want to think that BOTH the WC and the HSCA (14 years apart, with a different group of investigators and committee members and lawyers) didn't know what the hell they were talking about when they concluded that Lee Oswald bought and possessed both of those weapons? Do conspiracy theorists REALLY believe that? Amazing if they do.

But, as everybody knows, the evidence in the JFK, Tippit, and Walker cases against Oswald could never be strong enough or withstand the scrutiny of Internet conspiracy theorists. Never. No way. Regardless of its strength. And that's because Internet conspiracy theorists have set the bar so high for "Beyond A Reasonable Doubt", that no amount of evidence could ever hurdle it. And a great example of this "infinitely high bar" is the Tippit murder. Here's a case with a dozen witnesses who positively IDed Oswald as either the one and only killer of Officer Tippit or the one man fleeing the scene of the murder with a gun in his hands (many of those witnesses saw the gun at any rate), plus the ballistics evidence (the shells) dumped at the murder scene by the killer himself (Oswald), plus the fact that Oswald is arrested nearby with the Tippit murder weapon in his own hands -- and yet that aggregation of evidence is still not even NEARLY enough to convince many CTers that Oswald could have been guilty. And I'd still like to know how the CTers deal with Ted Callaway's IDing of Oswald (plus other after-the-shooting witnesses too)? If Oswald couldn't have gotten to 10th & Patton in time to kill Tippit, how then DID he manage to be on Patton Avenue (with a gun) just SECONDS after Tippit was shot? Did Callaway see an "imposter" Oswald? Is that what CTers truly believe? It was an imposter who was such a dead ringer for Lee Harvey Oswald that Ted Callaway said he could have identified Oswald even if all the men in the lineup had been "nekkid" (when asked a question about the clothing of the men in the police lineup). And Sam Guinyard was fooled by the Oswald impersonator too, eh? And Markham? And Scoggins? And B. Davis? And V. Davis? And Patterson? And Russell? And Lewis? And Brock? Et al. Yeah, right.

7) The FBI, being able to utilize something that many JFK conspiracy theorists are apparently inherently incapable of utilizing--COMMON SENSE, realized that Oswald had obviously ordered, paid for, and took possession of Smith & Wesson revolver #V510210 in March of 1963, mainly due to the fact that the SAME person who ordered that weapon had that weapon in his hands on Friday afternoon, November the 22nd, 1963 AD @ 1:50 PM Central Standard Time. 8) (Does this "Oswald Is Innocent" madness ever end?)

Common-Sense Reprise--- "The evidence convicts Oswald of Tippit's murder (and JFK's murder too, but the body of evidence especially convicts him of Tippit's murder). Why pretend that it doesn't?" -- DVP; 12/15/11; 4:11 PM EST

I want to also thank Josiah Thompson for his quick reply to Robert Harris' question, which Robert only asked in the first place because he had seen where I had already asked the very same question of Josiah in this post on December 9, 2011: "Question for Josiah Thompson or Jim DiEugenio (or anyone else who has knowledge of this): When Josiah Thompson interviewed O.P. Wright for the book "Six Seconds In Dallas", did Mr. Wright deny ever being shown a bullet at Parkland Hospital by an FBI agent on June 12, 1964 (or at any other time)? Putting it another way: Did Josiah Thompson ask Wright if he was ever shown a bullet by the FBI after the assassination? And if so, what was Mr. Wright's answer? I can't find an answer to that precise question in the CTKA.net articles that I have looked at recently. Some of the articles talk about Wright and the "pointed tip" on the bullet, but there's nothing there that would indicate whether Wright specifically said, No, I was never shown a bullet by the FBI. If Mr. Thompson (or anyone else) could point me to a passage in the book SSID that would answer my question regarding this matter, I'd appreciate it." -- DVP; 12/9/11 --------------- Mr. Thompson undoubtedly wasn't reading the thread that contained my above inquiry (or he missed seeing my post). But, anyway, I'm just glad the message got through to Josiah now. I probably should have done what Robert Harris did today--start a new thread with Josiah's name right in the thread title (so he'd be sure to see it). So, thank you, Bob, for doing that very thing.

Step down off your high horse, Duke. You know full well that the evidence convicts Oswald of Tippit's murder (and JFK's murder too, but the body of evidence especially convicts him of Tippit's murder). Why pretend that it doesn't?

What makes you think there would necessarily have to be a "trail" of a person who merely picks up his mail at the post office? Now, since Oswald owed $19.95 + $1.27 COD on the revolver, then obviously (if the gun went to the P.O.) the post office would have then forwarded the money to REA. But whether THAT type of routine transaction would have left a paper trail behind at the post office, I really don't know. But since Oswald didn't owe any money on the rifle when it was delivered by Klein's, then no such "COD" transaction was required at any location. So when Oswald went to get his Carcano rifle, all he was really doing was picking up his mail. It just so happens that in the "rifle" instance, he had to get the package at the front desk, because the bulky object couldn't fit inside his small P.O. Box. I've picked up packages at the post office before. You take the little yellow slip of paper to the post office and the clerk gives you the package. End of transaction. You actually think the post office retains those yellow slips (or whatever color they are in other cities) that people bring to the front desk? I kinda doubt those are saved, Jimmy? I'm guessing those slips end up in File 13 by the end of the day. Yes, I know I wandered away from the "revolver" transaction and went over to the rifle -- but I wanted to add that part about Oswald getting his rifle too, because you (of course) think there should have also been some kind of a "trail" left behind when Oswald picked up the Carcano too. But you (of course) are wrong.

Oh, for Pete sake, Jim -- you know what I meant. Either the gun itself or a notification card went to the PO Box. Point being: Seaport (via REA) shipped the gun to Oswald/Hidell. Care to answer this question now?: Why did Seaport send the revolver to PO Box 2915 Oswald/Hidell if they were never paid that $10?

James, Seaport shipped Revolver V510210 to Oswald's PO Box. I assume we can both agree on the above fact, can't we Jim? You surely don't think that Seaport lied about having the "Hidell" invoice in its records on Nov. 30th, do you Jim? You surely aren't silly enough to think that the whole paper trail from Seaport, through REA, to PO Box 2915 was "faked", are you? So, if we can agree that Seaport shipped #V510210 to "Hidell"/(Oswald), then if you have ANY ability to think logically at all, you MUST therefore admit that Seaport received the $10 deposit in the mail from SOMEBODY. Correct or not, Jim? And if you still have doubts about whether Seaport received the $10 deposit, then answer this question for me: Why did Seaport send the revolver to PO Box 2915 if they were never paid that $10? Did they just feel generous that day in March '63--and they said to themselves: Well, guys, we didn't receive a cent of money as a deposit from this dude Hidell in Dallas. But, what the xxxx, we'll just mail him this gun anyway.

Sure. And Seaport undoubtedly deposited the $10 that Oswald mailed them into their bank account. But please tell the world HOW the FBI is going to track or trace a specific $10 bill IN CASH that was deposited by Seaport? How is that done, Jimmy? And, more to the point, WHY would the FBI need to do that? They already knew LHO ordered the gun (the mail-order coupon and the Seaport order form prove that fact for all time)....and the FBI knew that Seaport had received the $10 cash deposit (the fact that Seaport mailed the merchandise to PO Box 2915 is proof of that). So why is there any need whatsoever to track down a particular $10 bill, which the FBI knew was paid IN CASH by Oswald (vs. a traceable check or money order)? Your goofiness is reaching a new zenith, Jimmy. I can think of two good reasons: #1.) Because the Klein's rifle order was paid for via a money order (which was traceable through the U.S. Post Office). #2.) Because Oswald was not caught red-handed with the Mannlicher-Carcano in his hands on 11/22/63. Therefore, additional means of linking the murder weapon to its owner (Oswald) were needed. And that was accomplished without a shred of a doubt. But the #2 item above did not apply to the revolver, because Oswald was nice enough to keep that murder weapon on his person at the time he was fighting with the police in the theater. Instead of focusing almost solely on Oswald's $10 cash deposit for Revolver V510210, you should be much more concerned about the $19.95 + $1.27 S&H that Oswald had to pay on the COD payment after the revolver was shipped. Yes, it's true that apparently there is no official "tracing" of that COD payment made by Oswald. (But LHO probably paid cash for that part of the payment, too. In fact, the Seaport invoice does have the "Cash" box checked for a payment; whether that refers to the $10 deposit or the COD payment, or possibly both, I am not certain.) But even without tracing the $19.95+, the FBI knew the revolver was Oswald's, and since he was caught with the gun on him on 11/22, the FBI actually was able to figure something out that Jimbo DiEugenio hasn't figured out to this day --- Lee Oswald, in March of 1963, picked up the gun that he himself ordered. (Gee, imagine somebody actually doing something like that, huh?) This is very simple stuff to figure out, Jim. Why over-complicate it with your silly "REA" requirements?

How would you suggest the FBI "trace" a particular ten-dollar bill that was mailed IN CASH by a particular person? Was the FBI supposed to collect every $10 bill in existence in 1963 and check each bill for Oswald's fingerprints or something? You're again asking WAY too much of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Why would that be considered odd, Jimbo? Nobody at the Dallas Post Office could remember Oswald picking up the rifle either. But he certainly DID pick it up. Marina took multiple pictures of LHO holding the gun just a few days later in the Neely backyard. (Oh, yes, those are fake too, aren't they Jimmy?) Plus, as noted a dozen times already, the FBI had already established the critical things that needed to be established -- 1.) Oswald having the Tippit murder weapon in his hands when he was arrested (which you will deny until the cows come home). 2.) Oswald ordered a revolver from Seaport, and Seaport shipped him what turned out to be the Tippit murder weapon. Can you get any goofier, Jimbo? Is it possible? WHY do you want to believe in the silly idea that the cops planted Revolver V510210 on Oswald? Plus: If the gun Oswald had in his pants on November 22 wasn't Revolver V510210, then what gun do you think that was that LHO had on him in the theater? There's no evidence that indicates Lee Oswald owned or possessed more than just one single revolver in 1963. And that one revolver that he owned was positively Smith & Wesson revolver #V510210. An unborn child still in the womb could figure this stuff out. But, miraculously, school teacher Jim DiEugenio can't. Bizarre.

Greg, All of that stuff you just mentioned is merely the normal (and expected) smoke and mirrors that a defense lawyer would naturally try to use at a trial in which they absolutely have to know the defendant is guilty. (Just like at the O.J. Simpson trial.) http://OJ--Simpson.blogspot.com The defense team would have to convince a jury that this portion of your above scenario actually happened: "The only pistol at the TT was one that the police were trying to force upon him." Tell me, Greg, just exactly WHY would a reasonable jury even BEGIN to believe such a thing occurred? Also: Would a reasonable jury truly believe that the Dallas Police (within MINUTES of Tippit's murder) would have had a desire to "force" a pistol into the hands of a man who was in no way involved in J.D. Tippit's murder? Which would mean, of course, if the jury did buy into the above preposterous notion, that the jury would also have to believe that the DPD would have deliberately allowed the killer of their fellow officer to just get off scot-free, while they framed the innocent man who was arrested in the Texas Theater. Hogwash. All of it.

Oh, good Lord. What a load of baloney. So, via the above CT rules of "proof", nobody could EVER be convicted of a murder involving a handgun or rifle -- because there's always the possibility that the cops were evil and sinister and wanted to switch around the evidence in the case. That is essentially what you've just said above. Okay, Duke, you're up to bat now: Please tell me just exactly how it could ever be "proven" to your satisfaction (under any hypothetical circumstances) that the gun taken off Oswald in the Texas Theater on 11/22/63 was the very same gun that Seaport Traders shipped to Oswald/"Hidell", which we know was Revolver V510210.* * = Or do you now want to claim that there's some doubt about the serial number of the gun Seaport sent to Oswald? And if so, then how could THAT be proven to your satisfaction; i.e., how could anyone "prove" to you that Revolver V510210 was really the exact gun shipped to Oswald? And how can ANY answer you are going to provide possibly eliminate the ever-present possibility of the authorities pulling a switcheroo on the guns at some later point in time? I await your logical and forthright answers to these inquiries, Mr. Lane.

The Tippit murder weapon was ALREADY in Oswald's hands at the time of his arrest, for Pete's sake. Why do you think it is absolutely essential and mandatory to find out exactly where and when Oswald INITIALLY gained possession of that revolver? And it's a particularly moot point in THIS (Oswald) case, because the FBI DID know that it was a revolver that WAS ordered by Oswald in March '63. The documentation on that fact is clear and distinct and was in the Seaport Traders files as of 11/30/63 when the FBI checked on it. Therefore, the FBI knew that the Tippit murder weapon belonged to Lee H. Oswald. I suppose that additional details about how and where LHO came into possession of the Tippit murder weapon in March might be kind of nice to know, from the standpoint of: We can now eliminate the idea of an accomplice possibly picking up the gun for Oswald at REA -- or something along those lines. But that type of information certainly is not required to establish the key things that need to be established in this case. These things: 1.) Did Lee Oswald kill Officer Tippit with Revolver V510210? 2.) Did the Tippit murder weapon belong to Lee Oswald? The answers to those two inquiries are, unquestionably, Yes and Yes. And those two answers were easily arrived at by the authorities, even without the help of the Railway Express Agency. No. Not really.

Greg, Your example is not analogous with the REA/Pistol example, and for the reasons I outlined, which are reasons that make perfect sense to me.

Bad comparison, Greg. The September 25/Winn-Dixie example is not at all the same as the REA/pistol thing. Because the question of Oswald taking possession of the Tippit murder weapon has NEVER been in doubt (except when you talk to off-the-wall CTers who apparently think, incredibly, that Oswald NEVER had Revolver V510210 in his hands at ANY time--not even in the Texas Theater at 1:50 PM CST on 11/22/63). But in the September example, the FBI was trying to find out if, indeed, Oswald could have actually been at Sylvia Odio's door at some point in late September 1963. And part of that particular investigation involved tracing Oswald's check. So, of course, they would naturally want to trace that check all the way through the system, to see if that tracing might turn up some additional lead of some kind that might take the FBI in a different direction re the check. But in November, there was no real need to know exactly where and when Oswald picked up Revolver V510210. Because even without that knowledge, Oswald would still be guilty as ever in the Tippit murder, and he still would have had the Tippit murder weapon in his hand in the theater thirty-five minutes after Tippit was slain.

They DID prove that the revolver was delivered to P.O. Box 2915 in Dallas. Why in the world do you think THAT fact is in doubt? Re: REA and the "unknown" about exactly where and when Oswald picked up his revolver: My guess on that is (as also stated in prior posts): The reason they did not pursue the REA matter was because they DIDN'T NEED TO. They already knew that Oswald was caught red-handed with the Tippit murder weapon in his hands within 35 minutes of Tippit being killed. And the FBI certainly also knew that Oswald had positively ordered the revolver by mail-order via Seaport Traders. And the FBI also knew from the Seaport/REA paperwork that the Tippit murder weapon had been shipped to OSWALD'S post office box. Good gravy, who COULDN'T connect those dots? You don't need to be in the FBI to do that connecting. A third-grader with a learning disability could connect those dots without a lick of trouble. Why can't you, Duke?

Go to 8:35: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzw3RlNgR1s

Billy Lovelady HIMSELF said he was the man in the doorway. Shouldn't Lovelady know where he was located when the motorcade passed? It's incredible that in the year 2011 there would STILL be people contending that Oswald was Doorway Man.