David Von Pein

It's fairly obvious that Oswald did, indeed, hang on to his Seaport coupon for about seven weeks before he mailed it....and the virtual proof is the Michaelis exhibit which shows an invoice date of "3/13/63". Does Jimbo DiEugenio think that Oswald would have mailed the coupon in late January, but then have Seaport Traders not write up the invoice until March 13th? That's nutty.* Gary Mack inserted another very good theory in an e-mail he sent me this morning (March 24): Dave, The simple answer to why Oswald delayed mailing his order for the revolver could be he didn't have the extra money at the time. So he kept the coupon until he did. Gary Gary's point is a good one. Oswald, of course, wasn't exactly rolling in dough at any time in his life. It's quite possible that the reason he waited to send in the revolver coupon is simply because he didn't have the ready cash until mid-March to pay for the weapons (both the revolver and the rifle). Naturally, though, Mr. Anybody But Oswald (DiEugenio) will throw some more mud on the perfectly-reasonable comment about Oswald's finances that was offered up by Gary Mack this morning. But, such is the way with conspiracists like Jim -- they WANT Oswald to remain innocent. So, therefore, they'll try everything in the book to take BOTH guns out of Lee Harvey Oswald's hands. * = Of course, what DiEugenio really believes (incredibly) is that ALL of the paperwork connected with BOTH the revolver sale and the rifle sale is fake, phony, and worthless. Which means, of course, that we're dealing with yet another one of the dozens of examples of DiEugenio's patsy-framers running around acting like morons and retards. In this latest instance, if we're to believe that Oswald really DIDN'T wait approx. 7 weeks to mail in his revolver order form, we'd have to believe that the silly plotters who were wanting to frame Oswald decided to fake Oswald's handprinting by putting a JANUARY 27 date on the order form for the revolver--but then the same conspirators or cover-up agents decided to date the invoice for that gun purchase with a MARCH 13 date. Which will it be, Jimbo? Were your plotters totally retarded? Or is there another (less extraordinary) explanation--like, say, the one provided by me yesterday about Oswald waiting for several weeks to mail his order form and the additional reason provided by Gary Mack this morning about Oswald possibly waiting until he had the needed funds to pay for the guns he was ordering via mail-order? OFF-TOPIC ADDENDUM: I was re-watching the outstanding 1967 CBS special "A CBS NEWS INQUIRY: THE WARREN REPORT" this morning (you can watch all 4 hours of the program at the link I just provided), and while watching Part 2 of the program, I realized that Parkland employee Darrell C. Tomlinson did a really interesting flip-flop in his story between the years 1964 and 1988. In 1967, on CBS-TV, Tomlinson was absolutely positive that the bullet he found on 11/22/63 had come from a stretcher that he had taken off of the elevator. But in 1988, during the PBS-TV program "Who Shot President Kennedy?", Tomlinson said that the bullet was positively found on a stretcher that he had NOT taken off of the elevator. In his '67 CBS interview, when asked if he was certain that the bullet had come from a stretcher that had come off the elevator, Tomlinson said "well, I know that; I just don't know who was on that stretcher". During his Warren Commission session in 1964, Tomlinson seemed to be stuck somewhere in-between his 1967 posture and his 1988 stance, with Tomlinson stating numerous times in '64 that he just was "not sure" which of the two stretchers in question he had taken off of the elevator. DVP VS. DiEUGENIO (PART 64)

Well, to be honest with you, I'm not sure WHERE exactly Oswald picked up the physical revolver. Jim DiEugenio is the one who has made a huge issue out of this "Post Office vs. REA" subject. But after reading Dale Myers' essay on this matter (wherein he refers to a quote by the REA Vice President himself regarding the way COD packages are normally handled), I tend to believe Oswald probably went to REA to get his revolver. I kind of doubt that REA would have just placed the gun in his PO Box, because almost $20 was due on it. I suppose it's POSSIBLE that the gun itself was put in the box, and along with it was a bill to "Hidell" for the remaining $19.95, which Oswald could have mailed to them. But there's no record of REA getting any money order in the mail from Oswald. But I suppose it is possible, since the FBI (as DiEugenio loves to point out) didn't seem to follow through with the REA investigation in any depth at all. There is also Michaelis' testimony, which is testimony that does seem to suggest that the GUN ITSELF was shipped to the post office, which is part of the reason I suggested that Oswald picked up the gun at the post office, and not at REA. The record isn't clear at all as to where Oswald did obtain the revolver. But one thing is crystal clear (even with confusion about REA) --- When he was arrested on 11/22/63, Lee Harvey Oswald definitely WAS IN POSSESSION of the EXACT revolver that Seaport Traders shipped to A. Hidell (Smith & Wesson #V510210). There can be no reasonable doubt about that fact. And we also know from the Seaport paperwork that Seaport Traders definitely DID receive the COD payment of $19.95 from the Railway Express Agency. There's no doubt about that fact either. So, either somebody ELSE paid REA the $19.95 that was due on the revolver....or LHO paid that money to REA (with REA then reimbursing Seaport Traders in Los Angeles)....or REA, out of the goodness of their hearts (and in order to frame LHO apparently) decided to remit the $19.95 to Seaport on their own, without ANYBODY giving the money to them in Dallas. Now, which of the above three options is most likely to be true? As for the reason why the rifle and revolver were shipped on the same day (March 20, 1963) -- my guess is that Oswald just didn't mail in his Seaport coupon for two months. He made it out in January and mailed it in March. Simple as that. Just because he filled out an order blank in January, does that mean he HAD to mail it in January? He very likely mailed both mail-order coupons (to Klein's and Seaport) on the same day (March 12). That's my opinion anyway. And, btw, Michaelis Exhibit No. 2 goes a long way toward corroborating my theory about Oswald mailing BOTH the rifle coupon and the revolver coupon on the very same day, because the "Invoice Date" on Michaelis #2 says 3/13/63 (shown below). And March 13th is the exact same date that Klein's received Oswald's money order for the rifle (per the "Mar 13, 63" stamp that can be found at the top of Waldman Exhibit No. 7, also depicted below). For more on this subject, go to my 42nd battle with James DiEugenio, here: LEE HARVEY OSWALD'S REVOLVER

Yeah, I could follow your hilarious lead-in act, entitled: "I Think Everything's Fake In The JFK Murder Case". I doubt that the crowd could laugh any more after listening to your hysterical act, however.

GIL JESUS SAID: Waldman 7 is not a REAL DOCUMENT, it is a COPY from a microfilm copy. DAVID VON PEIN SAYS: It's a PHOTOGRAPH of a REAL DOCUMENT, Gil. It's as good as having the original document in our hands. Or would you like to now pretend that the copy of Waldman 7 is a fake and that it does not represent a REAL DOCUMENT at all? And would you also like to show us proof that Bill Waldman of Klein's is a xxxx when he testified to all kinds of important stuff relating to Exhibit No. 7, including the very important "M.O." marking on that document--which can only indicate one thing: Klein's received a money order for the full amount of $21.45 from "A. Hidell" for the purchase on one Italian carbine. If you can't do either of the above things, then you've got a problem -- because, as I mentioned previously, Waldman Exhibit 7 is a great document for shooting down all kinds of crazy theories that have been spouted by conspiracy theorists regarding Oswald's 1963 rifle purchase. GIL JESUS SAID: And of course it's a fake [Waldman Exhibit No. 7]. And it's a fake for the same reason the order blank is a fake: It's got the wrong catalog number for the 40" rifle. The idiots who faked them obviously didn't know there was a difference in catalog numbers between the 36" rifle and the 40" rifle. DVP SAYS: More nonsense from Gilbert. You have no proof whatsoever that Waldman 7 is a fake. Nor do you have a speck of proof that the order form that Oswald used to order the weapon is a fake either. To the contrary, the order form has Oswald's own handwriting on it. (Naturally, you think his writing is phony too. Well, go tell that to the handwriting experts who testified for the WC and HSCA.) The catalog number shown on Waldman #7 is exactly the correct catalog number relating to Oswald's/(Hidell's) March '63 rifle order....so, naturally, that's the exact number that Klein's stamped on the order (probably on March 13, since it was not written in by hand). When it came time to ship Oswald's 36-inch rifle order seven days after the order form was received by Klein's in Chicago, Klein's undoubtedly realized they were out of stock of the 36-inch rifles, so they shipped him the 40-inch model, which is a model that Klein's had TOTALLY SWITCHED TO by the time of the VERY NEXT Klein's magazine ad. Gary Mack did some great research on this matter last year (see the direct quote from Gary below), as he dug up copies of all the 1963 Klein's ads that appeared in American Rifleman magazine throughout that calendar year....with Gary discovering that the February ad (which Oswald used to place his order for a 36-inch rifle) was the last ad during the entire year for the 36-inch model carbine. All other ads after February advertised the 40-inch model. It couldn't be more obvious what happened here: Klein's simply ran out of the 36-inch rifles, so they shipped Oswald the longer 40-inch rifle. I'm guessing that Oswald never even knew the difference. "I looked up the Klein's ads for 1963 and found that the next issue after February 1963 and all the issues afterward showed the 40" rifle. I don't have my notes here at the house, so the April 1963 issue, which would have mailed in mid-March so the ad had to have been changed prior to that, may be the first with the 40" weapon. So that is exactly what must have happened. Klein's ran out of 36" rifles very quickly and substituted the longer weapon. They may have notified customers ahead of time, but there's no record of that happening." -- Gary Mack; August 17, 2010 ------------------- Gary then wrote me this follow-up e-mail on 8/18/2010: Date: 8/18/2010 3:28:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: Gary Mack To: David Von Pein Dave, Thanks to The Sixth Floor Museum’s collection, today I examined all 1963 issues of the American Rifleman and here is what I found: Jan 63 -- p. 61 -- 36” “6.5 Italian Carbine” -- $12.88 -- $19.95 (with scope) Feb 63 -- p. 65 -- Same ad as above Mar 63 -- No ad Apr 63 -- p. 55 -- 40” “6.5 Italian Carbine” -- $12.88 -- $19.95 (with scope) May 63 -- Missing pp. 63-66 Jun 63 -- p. 59 -- 40” “6.5 Italian Carbine” -- $12.88 -- $19.95 (with scope) Jul 63 -- p. 67 -- 40” “6.5 Italian Carbine” -- $12.78 -- $19.95 (with scope) Aug 63 -- p. 79 -- Same ad as above Sep 63 -- p. 89 -- Same ad as above Oct 63 -- p. 85 -- Same ad as above Nov 63 -- No ad Dec 63 -- No ad So as I suggested earlier, Oswald ordered the 36” rifle but, probably due to Klein’s running out of stock, he received the 40” model instead. The price remained the same, so Klein’s may have just sent him the newly available model instead. They would certainly accept a return if he didn’t want it. The Museum’s copy of the May 1963 issue is missing four pages and, since Klein’s ads normally ran in the back half of the magazine, it was likely on one of those pages. But as you can see, the ad for the months before and after May showed the exact same 40” rifle. I don’t know when the American Rifleman normally went to press, but I would think they’d want the new issue to appear on the newsstands and in subscriber’s mailboxes at or shortly before the beginning of each month. That would mean all ad copy must be ready and in the hands of the publisher at least 30 days ahead of time, maybe more. If Klein’s ran out of 36” rifles in January, they might not even have enough time to get a corrected ad in by the March deadline. Maybe that’s why there was no ad in the March issue? Perhaps Klein’s sold out of the Carcano and other weapons and just couldn’t update their new ad before the deadline? Gary Mack -------------------------------------------- POST-SCRIPT: BTW, speaking of e-mails from Gary Mack and the subject of Oswald's rifle purchase, I received the following two e-mails from Gary within the last few days: Subject: RE: Buying the Money Order Date: 3/12/2011 11:01:42 AM Eastern Standard Time From: Gary Mack To: David Von Pein Dave, Oswald could have left JCS at any time between 8am and 10:30 IF there was no work for him to do. Oswald was given simple tasks as they came in, so if no orders were waiting, all he could do was sit and wait.....and get paid for doing so. I assume he'd have to check with his supervisor about taking a few minutes to go to the post office, but his time card certainly does not confirm that he was on the job every single minute. It merely shows that he was at the office and "on the clock" all day. And maybe, just maybe, he went over there on JCS business? Or perhaps a co-worker - his supervisor? - also needed something from the PO so Oswald went and took advantage of the opportunity? In short, there are many reasons Oswald's PO visit was entirely legitimate. It would not surprise me to learn that the Main Post Office opened at 7am, but I don't know that to be the case. I'd have to check the 1963 directories, but I sort of remember doing that years ago. Anyway, I can take a look when I get back to the office on Monday. Gary -------------------------------------------------- Subject: Main Post Office hours Date: 3/17/2011 5:28:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: Gary Mack To: David Von Pein Hi Dave, None of the directories at the Museum show the hours at the main post office in Dallas in 1963. However, the USPS online search service shows the main distribution center today opens at 7am (it’s location #4): http://usps.whitepages.com/post_office/75202 But that building wasn’t there in 1963. The main post office, and presumably the distribution center, was at 400 N. Ervay (location #1) in 1963 and it would likely have had the early business hours. The Ervay PO is the one that was just a few blocks from J-C-S which was located at 522 Browder. According to Google maps, the two are only 8 blocks, or ½ mile, apart [Gary linked to a map here]. Oswald could have walked or run, or probably ridden the bus, since Ervay was a main north-south street. For that matter, he could have bummed a ride from a co-worker. In short, I don’t see anything that prevents Oswald from getting to the post office, then buying and sending his money order to Klein’s. As to why the envelope is postmarked in a different zone, I have no clue, but there’s no evidence such a practice was out of the ordinary. Gary

My guess is that Oswald just didn't mail the order form to Seaport until March. Just because he filled out the order form in late January, that doesn't mean he HAD to drop it in the mail at that time. He likely mailed both of the order forms (for the revolver and the rifle) on the same day (March 12th).

Another day at the office for the Anybody But Oswald conspiracy theorists, I see. To a CTer, the things we DON'T have in evidence are always much, much more important than the things we DO have in evidence. And, of course, it's always been that way for the ABO conspiracy crowd. And the things we do have in evidence indicate--beyond all possible doubt--that Lee Oswald ordered, paid for, and was shipped the C2766 rifle from Klein's and the revolver from Seaport Traders. And it wouldn't make a bit of difference if Forms 2162 & 1508 were in evidence concerning Oswald's gun purchases. Because even if those forms existed, people like Gil Jesus and James DiEugenio would merely be inventing new excuses to consider them ALL FAKE and planted. (Is there ANY doubt at all that this would be the attitude adopted by people like Gilbert and Jim?) Conspiracists like Gilbert and James do it with EVERY piece of incriminating evidence against Oswald. EVERY piece, without exception. Why do they do that? Simple. Because if they don't, they have to admit that their precious patsy was guilty of the two murders he so obviously committed in Dallas. A great example of this is Waldman Exhibit No. 7. That exhibit--all by itself--shatters the illusions of Gil and Jimbo, because it provides all the information anyone needs to KNOW FOR CERTAIN that Klein's DID receive an order form and a money order in the amount of $21.45 from the purchaser ("A. Hidell", who we all know is really Lee Oswald). And Waldman 7 also tells us (for all time) that the rifle that Klein's mailed to the customer named Hidell was shipped to a P.O. Box in Dallas that we know was rented by Gil's favorite patsy--L.H. Oswald. And Waldman 7 also tells us that the rifle Klein's shipped to Hidell/Oswald wasn't just any old rifle -- no, it was Rifle #C2766, which just happens to be the exact rifle that was used to murder President Kennedy. (And if someone wants to resurrect the myth about there being a whole bunch of additional Carcano rifles with the number C2766 on them, they'll get a nice-sized argument from me -- because the fact is: there hasn't been a single additional "C2766" Carcano rifle ever seen by anyone on this planet that we know of. And not only that--I have never even heard of anyone coming forward to say that they have seen ANY TWO Carcanos with the same serial number--regardless of whether it's the number C2766 or ANY OTHER NUMBER they'd care to pick out of a hat. It just hasn't happened. And it never will--because Oswald's C2766 rifle is the only Carcano ever made with that unique number on it. Which is, btw, the whole point of stamping a serial number on an item in the first place--to make it unique.) So, unless the CTers can prove Waldman #7 is really a phony baloney document, then where does that leave the CTers who continue to want to pretend that Klein's never received payment from Oswald and that Klein's never shipped Rifle C2766 to LHO? And, of course, nobody has ever come close to proving that Waldman #7 is a fake, and they never will be able to prove such a silly allegation--because Waldman 7 is a real document, with a real "Klein's" logo in the corner, and was verified as such by Klein's Vice President William J. Waldman in his 1964 WC testimony.

IMO, the first shot missed. So, yes, the FBI was flat-out wrong in its "3 Shots & 3 Hits" conclusion. Plus, the obvious fact that the Single-Bullet Theory is true is another factor that makes it pretty certain that the original 12/9/63 FBI report is incorrect regarding the number of bullets that hit the limo victims in Dealey Plaza. More: THE SHOT THAT MISSED

Maybe you'd better brush up on the Warren Report some more. The Warren Commission didn't definitively say that the first shot missed, and they never said they knew for certain which shot caused the Main St. curb damage and the slight injury to bystander James T. Tague. The Commission, instead, laid out several possibilities. The best guess is that the first shot missed, yes (largely via Governor Connally's testimony), but the WC lays out all possible scenarios--including a missed SECOND shot and missed THIRD shot. The Warren Commission and its staff has been unfairly criticized for decades as pigeon-holing themselves into believing certain things--and it's totally unwarranted criticism. The SBT is another such example, with most conspiracists believing that the WC was FORCED into accepting the SBT at all costs--which is just plain wrong. Read Page 117 of the Warren Report to see how wrong those conspiracy theorists are:

I still want to know how David Lifton manages to get James Tague wounded by a FRONTAL gunshot? David never did answer that question (which is a question I directly asked him on this forum a week or two ago). Let's take a gander at a photo from Commission Exhibit No. 875 (while keeping in mind where on Elm Street JFK's vehicle was located during the entire time when bullets were being fired at him on 11/22/63) and then ask that question again: How could James Tague have possibly been peppered in the face by a gunshot that came from anywhere in FRONT of Kennedy's limousine? ....

Even though he had a pistol in his hands when he was arrested in the Texas Theater. And yet conspiracy theorists talk about LNers being in "denial" about the evidence. E-gads, how ridiculous can you get? You're actually going to try and take that gun out of Oswald's hands in the theater too? The current state of affairs on several of the JFK discussion boards has reached almost epic proportions in the category of "Let's deny the legitimacy of all of the evidence and just say it's ALL fake, including the pistol Lee Harvey Oswald had in his hands when he was apprehended, which is a gun that was seen by civilian witness Johnny Brewer". Unbelievable.

To David Lifton, Your CPA misread the back of the money order. And it's a rather interesting misreading of the stamp, because it does kind of appear that the word "Paid" shows up on the back. But that is merely the "Mar. 12" stamp that is bleeding through to the other side of the money order. The "Mar." in reverse looks sort of like the word "paid".

Go, Jimbo, go!

Mighty weak retort by Jimbo The Great. He must be tired from looking for his daily quota of 33 additional people to call liars and cover-up operatives in the JFK case. You're sickening. Let's see what Jimbo DiEugenio's very favorite of all authors and lawyers (Vincent T. Bugliosi) has to say. (I always enjoy quoting Vince, so that Jimbo The Great can make another post about how Vince ignored all the evidence of the vast "Let's Frame Oswald" conspiracy that DiEugenio thinks people like Hoover, McCloy, Warren, Dulles, and Ford were an integral part of.) .... "What is elliptical in Katzenbach's and Warren's reference to "rumors" is they obviously were referring to rumors "which had no evidence to support them." The conspiracy theorists have converted Katzenbach's and Warren's desire to squelch rumors that had no basis in fact into Katzenbach's and Warren's desire to suppress the FACTS of the assassination. But how could Katzenbach and Warren have known way back then that they had to spell out that ONLY false rumors, rumors without a stitch of evidence to support them, had to be squelched for the benefit of the American public? "How could they have known back then that there would actually be people like Mark Lane who would accuse men like Warren, Congressman Gerald Ford, Senator John Cooper, and so on, men of unimpeachable stature, honor, and probity, of getting in a room and all deciding to deliberately suppress, or not even look for, evidence of a conspiracy to murder the president (thereby jeopardizing their reputation and legacy and making them criminal accessories after the fact), or that there would be intelligent, rational, and sensible people of the considerable stature of Michael Beschloss and Evan Thomas who would decide to give their good minds a rest and actually buy into this nonsense?" -- Pages 367-368 of "Reclaiming History" ========================= "Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that [J. Edgar] Hoover could not be trusted in the Kennedy assassination case and investigation, and tried to emasculate the Warren Commission by convincing everyone early on that Oswald, despite his innocence, killed Kennedy and acted alone, and hence there was no need for a thorough investigation by the Warren Commission. "That argument, like virtually all conspiracy arguments, doesn't go anywhere since we know Hoover did not succeed. As indicated, the HSCA concluded that the Warren Commission and FBI did, in fact, conduct a massive investigation. Warren Commission assistant counsel Norman Redlich...says that he "did not come to Washington with the view that the Federal Bureau of Investigation was a model that I should choose to follow." "But he said that "notwithstanding my predisposition" against them, "I left Washington...with a feeling of respect for the FBI," finding it to be "a very cooperative agency. ... There is nothing that we asked them to do that they didn't do and do promptly." "Perhaps most importantly, he found "they were fair, cautious, and did not try to overstate their case. They were not trying to convict Lee Harvey Oswald. ... They were a very professional organization." "Finally, some conspiracy theorists have made the argument that Hoover couldn't be trusted and was out to sabotage the investigation because he was behind the assassination and was out to cover up his complicity. But no serious and responsible conspiracy theorist believes this. Only those on the far-out fringes do. "So where does the argument that Hoover cannot be trusted go? Nowhere. With conspiracy theorists, however, none of their arguments have to go anywhere. The argument (based on a contradiction, anomaly, rumor, etc.) is the end in itself. "The bottom line is that even if the Warren Commission did rely exclusively on the FBI for its investigation (which clearly wasn't the case), it would only compromise the Commission's conclusions if the FBI itself was involved in Kennedy's murder or in trying to cover up for those who did. "In other words, when the critics say the Warren Commission was crippled by the reliance on the FBI as its chief investigative arm, they are for the most part presupposing that the FBI was involved in Kennedy's murder or cover up. But as you'll see later in this book, there is not a scintilla of evidence to support that proposition." -- Page 340 of "Reclaiming History"

My goodness, what a nice little diatribe by Jimbo above. What did I ever do to deserve such a devoted puppy-dog pal like DiEugenio? The fact is, Jimbo, that I do indeed value the evidence in the JFK murder case (your last ranting-and-raving session notwithstanding). I value the ACTUAL hard, physical evidence that proves (for all eternity) that Lee Harvey Oswald was guilty of TWO murders, even though Oswald is a person whom you think was TOTALLY INNOCENT of committing EITHER of those murders. (Talk about laughable. To deny Oswald's involvement in President Kennedy's murder is ridiculous enough, but for conspiracy theorists to extend that denial to Officer Tippit's slaying is beyond ridiculous--it's pathetic.) So, yes, I value the REAL evidence in the case (things like the palmprints and the fingerprints and the bullet shells and the guns and the bullets and the fibers and the paper bag with Oswald's prints on it and the many eyewitnesses who fingered your prized patsy, plus Oswald's own highly-incriminating actions on both Nov. 21 and Nov. 22). And if you think that by taking a trip to Dallas or New Orleans or Clinton/Jackson (to discuss Jim Garrison's sham of a case against Clay Shaw) is going to suddenly make me see "the light of conspiracy", I beg to differ. Thanks to the Internet, I can evaluate just about every piece of evidence in the whole case by staring at this computer screen.* * = Unfortunately, Vince Bugliosi doesn't even realize that fact to this day, although I tried to get word to him on this subject of "massive Internet content being available on the JFK case" in the past. But my messages apparently never got through to him. In short -- I disregard "evidence" conjured up by conspiracists that has no basis in fact -- e.g., your contention that Lee Oswald had NO LARGE BAG at all with him on the morning of 11/22/63. (Don't you ever even have the decency to blush when you spout such silly theories? Even if you're only on Black Op Radio saying the silly things about Randle and Frazier and Paine and Ford and Dulles, et al, I'd think you'd turn beet-red with embarrassment when such unsupportable hunks of junk escape your lips, like the stuff about Frazier and Randle just MAKING UP the paper bag.) But, alas, you think you're doing a great SERVICE to the heroic "JFK research community" by saying the vile things you have said (in print and on Internet radio) about such people as future President Ford and Ruth Paine and Wes Frazier and Linnie Randle (and so many others whom you have dragged through the mud without a SPECK of evidence to support your imaginary theories about any of these individuals whom you have verbally abused). Gil Jesus wants some CTer to sue me because I merely called them a "kook" at one time or another. But what I'd really like to see is a headline in the Dallas Morning News next month saying that Buell Wesley Frazier and Ruth Paine have joined forces in a defamation lawsuit against a big-mouth high-school teacher named James DiEugenio of Los Angeles, California. A headline like that would be worth more than three of my large "CIA Disinfo Agent" checks that I'm currently receiving each month from Langley. What was I just saying about DiEugenio's defaming remarks about certain people? Well, I see Jimbo just can't contain himself. And, btw, what do your last sickening remarks have to do with MY OWN political beliefs? Answer: Nothing. The fact that the Warren Commission was composed of mainly politicians doesn't mean a thing to me. The EVIDENCE speaks for itself in the case that those politicians were assigned to investigate -- the JFK assassination. Are you implying that because you believe that some of the WC members were, to repeat your vile phrase, "four of the most arch conservative thugs in 20th century American history", this therefore means that anyone who agrees with their "Oswald Did It Alone" conclusions about JFK's murder also falls into that same category ("arch conservative thugs")? If that's not what you're implying, then please spell it out for me. After all, I'm just a dumb-as-a-stump lil' ol' Hoosier boy here (who has never known a "nice girl" in his life). DVP v. DiEUGENIO (PART 63)

Tom Scully, Sorry to disappoint you and your CT cronies, but I have no "politics" at all. None. Zilch. I'm not a Republican. I'm not a Democrat. I have no political leanings (or agenda) whatsoever. I couldn't possibly care less about politics. I can tell you who the current President is, but that's about it. My interest in the JFK assassination is all about EVIDENCE (and where that evidence leads). Not politics.

DiEugenio's long list of liars just got longer. We can now add New Orleans Police Lieutenant Francis L. Martello to Jimbo's list of rotten liars who was trying to frame poor Oswald. (Apparently there wasn't a single person alive in the states of Louisiana or Texas who DIDN'T want to frame Oswald for two murders in 1963.) Martello confirms that Oswald spoke with an FBI agent in Aug. '63 in New Orleans, and Martello also said he saw an I.D. card with the name HIDELL on it, which had been in Oswald's possession at the time of his Aug. '63 arrest. I'm glad Jim D. chimed in (yet again) here, because every time he opens his conspiracy-hungry yap, I get to add another "xxxx" to Jimbo's silly list of 10,499 liars (and growing by the day). And it never matters how utterly improbable (or even impossible) DiEugenio's theories are--he'll keep truckin' out the liars, just to keep from admitting the obvious truth -- with that truth being: DiEugenio's favorite patsy named Lee Harvey Oswald was a double-murderer. http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/martell1.htm

That's easy -- Quigley was merely incorrect in assuming the cards were "evidence" that were confiscated by the New Orleans Police Department. And why should Quigley lie about seeing those cards? Just...why? Go ahead and make something up that has no basis in fact, Greg. I'm accustomed to that behavior from CTers. You seem to think Quigley was dying to see an innocent man [Oswald] hang for JFK's murder. But CTers never ask the logical question of -- WHY? Did all of the Feds and local DPD authorities enjoy allowing the real killer(s) of both JFK and Tippit run free....and in the case of the DPD, the CT version of events is even more ludicrous and unrealistic -- i.e., the cops just stood by and did nothing to capture Officer Tippit's "real" killer, and instead tried to pin the murder of their friend and fellow officer on somebody they must have known didn't commit the crime (Lee Oswald). Does anyone else besides me at this forum realize just how utterly preposterous the above paragraph sounds?

The FBI only sent an agent because Oswald, HIMSELF, asked to see one. They didn't do it on their own: JOHN QUIGLEY -- "Lt. Francis L. Martello, platoon commander at the first district, New Orleans Police Station, called our office and advised that he wished an agent to stop by there since there was a prisoner who desired to speak with an agent." And I suppose Quigley's lying (some more) when he said this to the WC (re: Hidell): JOHN L. QUIGLEY -- "I asked him about A. J. Hidell, obviously you can see why I would have been interested in this. [Quigley quoting Oswald:] "Well, Mr. Hidell had a telephone." "What was Mr. Hidell's telephone number?" "Mr. Hidell's telephone has been disconnected." "What was the number?" "I can't remember." This was the end of it, so this is the basis for my thinking."

RE: OSWALD & HIDELL..... Of course every card and document that says "Hidell" was determined by both the WC and HSCA to have been in Lee Oswald's own handwriting. Naturally, though, that fact means zilch to conspiracy mongers who are bent on clearing Oswald of 2 murders (for some silly reasons of their own). Therefore, per the CTers, ALL of the "Hidell" documents are fakes. Just like ALL of the bullet/ballistic evidence is supposedly fake. And just like ALL of the many witnesses at the Tippit murder scene were either wrong or liars (yes, my mind wandered over to 10th Street for a minute, but this is related, because it goes to the heart of the main contention made by conspiracy theorists like Jim DiEugenio and others--i.e., their belief that virtually EVERYTHING connected with the evidence against Oswald is tainted, fake, and generally worthless). Do you guys REALLY think Marina lied when she said she had known about Oswald using the name Hidell in New Orleans during the summer of '63? Why would she just make that up? Why?

Great, Greg. You've got yet another xxxx (FBI agent John L. Quigley) to add to the mile-high list of liars that you CTers think were trying to frame poor Oswald. Didn't ANYBODY in Texas or Washington give a damn about finding Kennedy's "real killers" in 1963....or ever? Marina Oswald herself, of course, knew all about Lee Harvey's using the fake name "Hidell". But, naturally, Marina was lying when she said this to the Warren Commission, right?..... J. LEE RANKIN. Have you ever heard that he [LHO] used the fictitious name Hidell? MARINA OSWALD. Yes. Mr. RANKIN. When did you first learn that he used such a name? Mrs. OSWALD. In New Orleans. Mr. RANKIN. How did you learn that? Mrs. OSWALD. When he was interviewed by some anti-Cubans, he used this name and spoke of an organization. I knew there was no such organization. And I know that Hidell is merely an altered Fidel, and I laughed at such foolishness. My imagination didn't work that way. Mr. RANKIN. Did you say anything to him about it at that time? Mrs. OSWALD. I said that it wasn't a nice thing to do and some day it would be discovered anyhow. You're hilarious, Gregory. And don't forget this ultra-important JFK "connection" --- Ruth Paine visited my hometown in September 1963 on her way back home from visiting her sister in the northeast (and they were undoubtedly plotting Kennedy's murder at Langley, as we all know). Now, don't tell me that little fact of Ruth coming to my hometown in Indiana in '63 was just a co-inky. No way, Jose. This means, of course, that my family and myself are up to our necks in the plot too. http://Ruth-Paine.blogspot.com You guys and your "6 degrees of separation" nonsense are a riot. My favorite is the Bertha Cheek/Earlene Roberts/Jack Ruby "connection", plus ANY silly "connection" that the conspiracy mongers want to invent that involves J.D. Tippit as an accomplice in the assassination. (Marie Tippit must just love the conspiracy clowns who pretend that her slain husband actually was "Badge Man" on the Grassy Knoll.)

What difference does it make how many times Oswald utilized the "Hidell" alias? What's the minimum supposed to be anyway? 10 times? 20? Why does it matter? We know he used the alias "Hidell" at least three times in 1963: 1.) To order his revolver from Seaport Traders. 2.) To order his rifle from Klein's. 3.) He tried to pass off "Hidell" as a member of the FPCC. And Oswald's conversation with FBI Agent John Quigley regarding Hidell in Aug. '63 is a howler. Here's an excerpt from a post I wrote last June concerning Oswald and CE826: "Among the falsehoods that Oswald told Special Agent John Quigley of the FBI on 8/10/63 was this one (with LHO obviously not wanting to reveal the fact that he had met and married his wife in Russia): "About four months ago he and his wife, MARINA OSWALD nee Prossa [sic], whom he met and married in Fort Worth, moved to New Orleans." And then there are the multiple lies that Oswald told Agent Quigley concerning the fictitious "A.J. Hidell". Knowing, of course, that A.J. Hidell only existed in Lee Oswald's imagination, the following portions of Agent Quigley's August 1963 FBI report are really quite humorous to read now. I can envision Oswald talking to himself on the telephone, or sending himself a letter to ask himself if he would go down to Canal Street to pass out some FPCC literature: [Quoting Quigley:] "Since receiving his membership card in the New Orleans chapter of the [Fair Play For Cuba] committee he said that he had spoken with [A.J.] HIDELL on the telephone on several occasions. On these occasions, HIDELL would discuss general matters of mutual interest in connection with committee business, and on other occasions he would inform him of a scheduled meeting. He said he has never personally met HIDELL, and he knows HIDELL did have a telephone, but it has now been discontinued. He claimed that he could not recall what the number was. "OSWALD said that the committee did not have any offices in New Orleans, and whenever meetings were held they were held in residences of various members. He maintained that he had attended only two meetings of this committee, and at each of the meetings there were about five different individuals. "At each of these meetings the persons present were different. He did not know the last names of any of these individuals and claimed he was only introduced to them by first names. He maintained that he could not recall any of the first names. "From what he understands there are no regularly scheduled times for meetings, and the only way he knows about them is when somebody gives him a call and tells him there will be a meeting. At these meetings he said the general conversation deals with Cuba and the latest news on the internal affairs of Cuba. "OSWALD admitted that on one occasion he held a committee meeting at his home, but he declined to elaborate on how he got word to the various members that it would be held. "Last Wednesday, August 7, 1963, OSWALD said he received a note through the mail from HIDELL. The note asked him if he had time would he mind distributing some Fair Play literature in the downtown area of New Orleans. "He said HIDELL knew that he was not working and probably had time. HIDELL also knew that he had considerable literature on the committee which had been furnished to him by the national committee in New York. "Since he did not have anything to do, OSWALD said he decided he would go down to Canal Street and distribute some literature. He denied that he was being paid for his services, but that he was doing it as a patriotic duty." [End Quigley quotes.] It's also rather interesting to take note of the fact that FBI agent Quigley says in his August 1963 report that Oswald himself "exhibited" to Quigley a Fair Play For Cuba Committee membership card that was signed by "A.J. Hidell". And this is in addition to Oswald telling Quigley that he (LHO) had actually talked with Hidell on the phone several times. The only reason I mention the above facts is because I believe that I'm correct in saying that a few conspiracy theorists have speculated that just perhaps Lee Harvey Oswald didn't really use the alias "A.J. Hidell" at all in 1963. But if Oswald HIMSELF was bringing up the name Hidell while talking to an FBI agent in August of '63, and if Oswald HIMSELF had shown Agent Quigley a card with the name Hidell on it, then such a theory about Oswald having no idea who A.J. Hidell was would go up in smoke for all time. Or maybe some conspiracy theorists want to believe that John Quigley's report that we find in CE826 is nothing but a great-big lie regarding the name "Hidell"." http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/08/warren-commission-exhibit-826.html

Stupid plotters -- doing things that Oswald couldn't possibly have done within a plot that has JUST THE OPPOSITE GOAL -- they want to make it look like Oswald definitely DID do these things. I guess the retarded plotters didn't count on sleuths like Gil Jesus and Jimbo "Oswald Never Shot A Soul" DiEugenio investigating the case, did they? Retarded plotters all around.

And DiEugenio ALWAYS will believe the "extraordinary", even when the "ordinary" is most often the truth. And it is, indeed, "extraordinary" to believe what DiEugenio The Great is trying to pass off as the truth here -- i.e., that the FBI, Klein's, the post office, Harry Holmes, and probably the Dallas police too were attempting to only make it LOOK like Oswald had purchased a gun from Klein's. In fact, such a "false" paper trail isn't even required. (Just as the supposedly phony paper bag isn't required either, even from DiEugenio The Great's POV.) Why? Because the C2766 rifle in the TSBD had the patsy's palmprint and fingerprints on it -- and we know that the patsy was in the building when the assassination occurred, and that he did not have a believable or supportable alibi for the exact time of the shooting. Surely, Oswald's own prints on the JFK murder weapon (which, of course, were ALSO faked/planted by the Dream Team Of Patsy-Framers, per the likes of conspiracy mongers like DiEugenio), plus LHO's lack of any type of supportable alibi for exactly 12:30 PM, would easily be enough to convince the stupid and gullible masses of US citizens (like DVP) that Oswald was guilty. Right? Not to mention the fact that Oswald killed a policeman less than an hour after JFK was murdered WITH OSWALD'S RIFLE. In short -- Many of the things that DiEugenio thinks were ALL FAKE are things that no conspirators in a million years would have gone out of their way to even WANT to fake (or risk faking) -- such as that paper bag (CE142). There is simply not a good-enough reason for the police to even WANT to start down that road of faking a paper bag (or a money order either, for that matter)--especially when it involves the kind of ludicrous crap that DiEugenio thinks was done to the witnesses (Frazier & Randle) as a result of such fakery, with both witnesses being forced to lie about seeing LHO with a bag. Face facts, Jim, your theory about both Linnie Mae and Buell telling a lie about seeing Oswald with a bag is just plain nuts. And all reasonable people know it's nuts. And keep in mind that Frazier and Randle then went on television in the months and years that followed and decided to tell their lies about the bag, again and again--voluntarily! That's nuts too. Why hasn't either witness ever come clean about their "lies", Jim? And why hasn't Marina Oswald-Porter ever "come clean" either? For that matter, why haven't ANY of the many, many liars ever come clean about the many lies they told about the JFK assassination in the intervening years? I have never heard of one witness EVER coming forth to admit that he or she lied about any of the "Oswald Did It" evidence associated with the John F. Kennedy murder case. Why is that, Jim? Surely, SOME of these people that are part of your very long list of liars would have had a pang of conscience strike them at some point since 1963. Wouldn't they? Or do you actually believe that they would ALL carry their evil secrets to their graves?

Conspiracy theorists always look at things from the standpoint of "THIS ERROR OR INCONSISTENCY MUST MEAN CONSPIRACY OR A PLOT". But even TODAY, in the 21st century, I hear people saying that Oswald owned a "$12 rifle". But, so what? The RIFLE ITSELF (sans scope) DID cost just $12. When the scope was included, it was $19.95 + S&H. Also..... There was definitely a (slight) mix-up in the "RIFLE ONLY" pricing at first when the authorities were talking about the price of the gun. The FBI was looking at a Nov. '63 Klein's ad, in which the price of the rifle had decreased by a dime to $12.78. That's the price repeated by Jesse Curry to the press on 11/23: http://dvp-potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/jesse-curry-interviews.html But the price Oswald would have paid for just the rifle in March '63 (had he chosen to not get the scope) was $12.88, as we can see from the Feb. '63 magazine ad: NOVEMBER 1963 AD:

Gil, can you confirm that the U.S. Post Office buildings in Dallas, Texas, did not open for business prior to 8:00 AM CST on Tuesday morning, March 12, 1963 (which was exactly 48 years ago today, btw)? I'm not saying that the post office WAS open that early (before 8:00 AM), but I'm just wondering if anyone has any personal (provable) knowledge of what the post office hours were in Dallas in March '63. FWIW -- I looked online and found at least one Dallas post office that currently opens for regular business at 7:30 AM. Of course, this doesn't prove that any post office would have opened that early in 1963. But at least I found a Dallas P.O. that is open prior to 8:00 AM. Linked here: http://www.hoursmap.com/b/post-office---robert-e-price-hours-dallas-tx-75230-b10011645 According to John Armstrong, the post office in Dallas where Oswald purchased his money order opened at 8:00 AM on 3/12/63. If somebody has Armstrong's book handy, could they please look up the source note for this "8:00 AM" information regarding the post office? Thank you. Quoting Armstrong (via a post made online by Jack White on August 26, 2005): "On March 12, at 10:30 am, Oswald was working at Jaggers-Chiles-Stoval [sic]. According to JCS records, he began work on his first camera job at 8:00 am (the same time the post office opened) which lasted 20 minutes."