David Von Pein

Then why do we have any "handwriting analysts" testifying in court at all? If everybody's signature and handwriting COULD conceivably be easily faked and forged, what good are people like McNally and Alwyn Cole?

Did Milam simulate the skulls being on a pivoting "neck" type of device, as JFK's head was on in Dealey Plaza when he was shot? Or were Milam's skulls nailed squarely (and firmly) to the ladder? If it's the latter option, I think Milam's tests are not valid and do not simulate the proper conditions of a human head on a human (pivoting) neck.

Like I said, Lee...human beings are inherently stupid. Your unbelievably stupid and reckless-beyond-belief "patsy framers" are proof of that, it would appear. And Lee H. Oswald WAS human (well, almost anyway).

I just found the Olivier testimony that Pat was probably referring to--it's in the Rockefeller Commission records. Here's what Olivier said about his '64 skull tests and the direction of the skull movement: Q. Have there been any instances in which you have done firings into the head? A. We have done firings into human skulls filled with gelatin and coated with gelatin, and we have even put goat skin on it to simulate the human scalp. Q. Have you been able to observe the nature of the movement of the skulls? A. The skulls that we shot invariably rolled away from the gun. And this was a reason for this, that you didn't get any jet effect, because the gelatin that we used was 20 percent gelatin, this was our simulant for tissue. We also used it as a simulant for the brain. There is one bad thing about that. If you want to see this movement, the gelatin is too elastic, it recovers, in other words, any gelatin that expands out comes back like a rubber band. So it didn't fly loose from the skull to get a jet effect. Q. You mean such as brain tissue might? A. Right. http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/olivier_a.htm

You've got to be kidding me! Good heavens, Pat...use YOUR head! If the skull is NAILED to the ladder (and not even on a "neck"-like spring to provide some freedom of movement for the skull), OF COURSE the skull has to go forward. How could it possibly go anywhere else? In effect, then (if I'm interpreting your comments about Wallace Milam's experiment correctly), Milam was PROHIBITING any kind of rearward movement at all by nailing down the skulls. You can't see the logic of what I'm getting at here, Patrick? C'mon.

@Pat Speer (re Lattimer's ladder/skull tests): Well, for Pete sake, what direction would you expect a NAILED-DOWN SKULL ON A LADDER to go if shot from behind? How could it go backward if it was NAILED to the ladder? (Did I misinterpret your "nailed" comment above, Pat? Because, if I didn't, this is laughable.) In fact, I've always contended that Lattimer's skull tests are MORE impressive since the skulls were just lying there (untethered) on the ladder. With a "FREE TO MOVE ANYWHERE" situation of a skull that was not tied down in some way...and STILL having the skulls go backward, it seems more impressive to me. And the "ladder recoil" junk is just that....junk (IMO). When I view those films of Lattimer's, I see the skulls flying backward BEFORE the ladder ever tips backward (which I think is the excuse given by some CTers for why Lattimer's skulls went backward). The ladder seems to be going FORWARD, while the skull moves BACKWARD. What is deceiving about that, Pat? I really do not see what the complaint is on this?

Well, I once postulated that very idea--Oswald left his popcorn trail on purpose. But, who knows? But there's one big difference here---ALL of the actual evidence in the case points toward Oswald, while NONE of the evidence points toward any unknown, "mystery" shooters. If we had a mystery shooter in the mix, wouldn't you think his gunshots would have left behind SOME tangible evidence in the limousine that wasn't immediately swept under the carpet by your band of evidence-manipulators? Just ONE hunk of bullet--or SOMETHING? After all, we know (via my previous examples on this subject) that your collection of "Let's Get Oswald" patsy framers was totally retarded from Day 1. I mean, allowing Lee Harvey to walk around on the lower TSBD floors at around 12:30 (or to possibly even waltz outside the building and get himself PHOTOGRAPHED by James Altgens, as Jim Garrison seemed to actually believe in 1967) just reeks of "patsy plotter incompetence" to me. Doesn't it to you?

But Lee [Farley] and David [Josephs]--- You CT guys have got SO MANY people who would need to be involved (and remain dead silent afterward) in order to have the kind of "Let's Frame Oswald" conspiracy exist that you imagine did exist...well, it ain't even funny (or conceivable...or logical)...now, is it? I mean, re the paper trail for Oswald's rifle alone, how many people must be "involved" in faking the evidence that shows Oswald did order and pay for that rifle? If you think it was merely one or two people, I think you should probably think again. There are several FBI agents (and Hoover, of course). And Waldman of Klein's (surely). And other Klein's employees who helped search the Klein's records until 4 AM on 11/23. Or do you even believe that a search WAS made at Klein's in Chicago? Was that all a ruse too? Don't you believe that an order form and envelope (microfilm) with HIDELL'S name on it and OSWALD'S Dallas PO Box on it was found by KLEIN'S EMPLOYEES on the morning of Nov. 23? Or was there really a search, with the Klein's people finding a PHONY/PLANTED microfilm copy of this in the KLEIN'S DOCUMENTS in Chicago? (Boy, those evidence-fakers must have been fast that night!): http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0331a.htm It all snowballs out of control if you're a conspiracy theorist. And that's just ONE piece of the so-called "fake" evidence. That's not even including the money order....or the rifle itself....or Waldman Exhibit #7....or Oswald's revolver....or the bullet shells in the TSBD....or the bullet shells on 10th Street....or the paper bag in the Sniper's Nest....or Oswald's fingerprints and palmprint on the rifle....or the backyard photos....or the Mexico City trip....or CE399....or the Walker shooting....or all of the various witnesses who swore under oath that Oswald was involved in the Tippit murder....and on and on and on. ALL of that's fake? All of it? If you want to believe that, knock yourself silly (if you haven't already). As another LNer once said -- It was either Oswald alone...or a whole bunch of people running around trying to make it LOOK like Oswald alone. Now, I wonder which of the above two options is the most reasonable (and believable)?

Because Oswald's handwriting is on the money order. Why that extremely powerful fact isn't good enough for you is a mystery. But it IS good enough for me (and probably for most other reasonable people). Plus--there's the FACT that Klein's positively had that money order IN ITS POSSESSION in March 1963. We know that to be the case, because if they didn't, they would have never processed the sales order for Rifle C2766 to "A. Hidell", as seen in Waldman #7. (Oh, yes, Waldman 7 is yet another fake document, isn't it, Lee?) And Klein's STAMPED the money order with their own company stamp, for Pete sake. Why do you think EVERYTHING is a fake--even that Klein's stamp on the back of the Oswald money order? Nothing is EVER what it seems to be, is it Lee (and Jimbo)?

That is very likely because that was merely an "extra copy" of the deposit ticket, and my guess would be that that extra copy never made it to First National Bank at all. Or, if it did go the bank, perhaps the bank only stamped the FIRST copy, and not the "extra copy". But if it never went to the bank in the first place, of course it wouldn't have any "First National Bank" markings on it. First off, how does Armstrong know that Klein's provided no "additional help" at all regarding the money order? But even if Armstrong is correct here, it could have merely been an educated, logical guess on the FBI's behalf. By that time on early Saturday morning, the FBI likely knew a whole lot about Oswald's financial state, and they likely knew he had no personal checking account at all. And they certainly knew that the rifle was ordered via MAIL ORDER. That left only CASH and a MONEY ORDER for the most likely methods by which Oswald would have paid for the rifle. (And we know he paid for it, because Klein's wouldn't have had a record of the SALE [Waldman 7] if the rifle had not been paid in full by the purchaser.) So, to the Post Office the FBI went. Pretty simple tracking method, IMO, given what the FBI likely knew about Oswald and his finances as of early on Nov. 23, 1963. But I'd like to also know where Armstrong got the info about Klein's providing the FBI no help at all re the money order on 11/23/63 AM. Can that be documented somewhere in the record?

Sorry I had to use 2010 stuff to illustrate my point, Jimbo (my simple point being: not all PROCESSED checks that are deposited by bank customers have bank markings on them), but all of my 1963 cancelled checks are currently locked up at CIA HQ in Langley until 2039. (Hoover ordered it; I didn't.)

But Lattimer and Zimmerman merely conducted experiments that ANYONE (even a garbage man) could easily have conducted (if they had the proper materials and resources). Lattimer merely set up some shooting experiments using a Carcano rifle, some skulls, some cardboard targets, etc., and started shooting at them. And every single test he conducted is documented in his very good 1980 book "Kennedy And Lincoln", and he even filmed many of his experiments, such as the head shot stuff, which proves for all time that a skull WILL definitely travel TOWARD THE SHOOTER when it is struck from behind. EVERY one of Lattimer's skulls moved toward the gun when shot. And yet, NONE of Lattimer's excellent reconstruction experiments hold any water with the disbelieving conspiracy crowd whatsoever. (Gee, I wonder why? Not.) Do CTers dismiss Lattimer's FILMED head experiments just because he was a "piss doctor"? What DIFFERENCE does it make what Lattimer's occupation was when it comes to THOSE particular hands-on experiments? A two-dollar hooker in high heels could have proved what Lattimer proved (assuming she had a Carcano, a human skull to shoot at, and a camera with film in it). =================== BUGLIOSI ADDENDUM: Just yesterday, I discovered a new Feb. 2011 radio interview featuring Vince Bugliosi. Good stuff here too, including some previews of Vinnie's newest book on religion (coming out in mid-April 2011), entitled "Divinity Of Doubt: The God Question", which Vince says he is "more excited about" than any other book in his whole career. The whole 44-minute interview is below (and Vince weighs in some more on the conspiracy kooks too): http://Box.net/shared/oql264kfze http://Vincent-Bugliosi.blogspot.com

It wasn't "all by design", Lee. It was all by "human nature". (And it was "all by Oswald", too, of course.) I.E., it's human nature to screw things up. Happens constantly, no matter what we do. I can't even toast bread without screwing up and burning it 5 times out of 10. And you must agree with me on this basic "human nature = screw-ups" analogy, Lee, because your perceived Oswald patsy-framers screwed up virtually everything they did (one way or another), as I illustrated in a previous post. -- Such as allowing the patsy to roam free at 12:30 (how stupid can you possibly GET?), and leaving a MAUSER in the TSBD, and on and on. Looks like they were TRYING to get caught, doesn't it?

Then what is this a picture of, Jimbo? A figment of my imagination?.....

DiEugenio doesn't have the PROOF that Oswald's $21.45 money order [CE788] is a fraud. In fact, the BEST EVIDENCE tells us just the opposite -- OSWALD'S WRITING IS ON THE DAMN THING. Naturally, this BEST EVIDENCE means zilch to conspiracy mongers like DiEugenio. He WANTS Oswald to be innocent (for some reason), so he'll jump through every impossible hoop and turn himself (and the evidence) into an unidentifiable pretzel in order to achieve that silly goal. Another great example of DiEugenio's Mister Salty pretzel twists comes in the form of what he's done to totally misrepresent and mangle the "paper bag" evidence. There's way, way more evidence to tell us that Oswald WAS carrying that paper bag on the morning of November 22 than there is to suggest a reasonable doubt that he didn't. But DiEugenio WANTS that paper bag to vanish off the planet--so, by God, he'll do and say anything to make that happen. Even to the point of accusing TWO COMPLETELY INNOCENT PEOPLE (Linnie Mae Randle and 19-year-old kid Buell Wesley Frazier) of just MAKING UP the bag from whole cloth. This, you see, is the fantasy world DiEugenio lives in every day regarding the assassination of President Kennedy. And he relishes it. He basks in it daily. Well, he can have it. I like EVIDENCE instead of silly speculation about people like Buell and Linnie Mae.

Thank you, Bernice. I appreciate the info on that.

Lee, You misunderstood my terms. When I said "cancelled" check, I didn't mean that I had literally CANCELLED it. I meant "processed". It's a check from late last year that I deposited, and it was positively PROCESSED and added to my personal account by a major U.S. bank via a Bank By Mail deposit ticket. And that's not the only example I have either. I can dig up at least one or two more "processed" checks that went into my bank account that don't have a single marking or stamp on them from the bank where it was deposited. But, as I also said, SOME of the checks DO have a stamp on them from my bank, but not all of them. It's possible (I suppose) that the check in question was stamped by my bank only AFTER they had taken a digital image of it to put online for me to see. I'll admit that's possible. But all I can go by is what the digital image shows right now--and there's no bank stamp on it anywhere.

With respect to the BANK STAMPS that conspiracy theorists insist should be on the back of Oswald's money order (CE788), I'll offer up the following thoughts and observations: This question suddenly popped into my head today: I wonder if my bank puts stamps or other markings on the back of every one of my checks that I have deposited into my personal bank account? This question became very easy to answer (at least as far as my last several deposits are concerned), since I can check my recent deposits online and I can even see (and enlarge) the front and back of every cancelled/processed check that has been a part of a recent deposit. I found that only SOME of my cancelled checks have ANY bank markings on them at all, while some others are COMPLETELY VOID of any and all bank stamps. This discovery suggests to me that it's quite possible that this same "hit and miss" type of activity regarding the stamping of cancelled checks (and money orders) could have been the reason we find no official bank markings on the back of CE788. For proof of this, I offer up the following two images of the front and back of one of my own cancelled checks from November 2010. This check was deposited (by mail) into my account at a major U.S. bank. And please note the back side of the check, which doesn't have any bank markings on it whatsoever (nor does the front). It merely has my own signed endorsement (much like what we see in CE788, which has just the Klein's rubber stamp marking and account number on it). And, btw, in case anyone wants to accuse me of "faking" or "whiting out" some of the markings on this cancelled check--I have not altered this image in any way (other than to remove my account number under the words "Deposit Only" on the back side of the check): It's my feeling, too, that in many cases where a large, bulk deposit is made which includes many checks and money orders (which would certainly have been the case with the $13,000+ deposit made by Klein's Sporting Goods on March 13, 1963) that it's quite possible that only the DEPOSIT TICKET for the entire bulk amount gets stamped by the bank after it is received. That last part about "bulk deposits" with a lot of checks and money orders shouldn't be too hard to verify at some point in the future. (Are there any bank employees posting at this forum?)

The whole business about the BANK stamps is actually a situation where CTers are attempting to close the barn door after the horse has already escaped. I.E., Since we know Oswald definitely signed the 3/12/63 money order (verified by multiple handwriting analysts for the WC and the HSCA)....and since we know that that money order was definitely RECEIVED and STAMPED FOR DEPOSIT by Klein's Sporting Goods (verified by the stamp on the money order and by Klein's V.P. William Waldman, who CTers must certainly think is either a huge xxxx or as dumb as a stump about his own company's procedures and operations)....and since we positively know that Klein's DID ship Rifle C2766 to Oswald/Hidell on 3/20/63..... It, therefore, doesn't make any difference what happened to the money order after First National Bank in Chicago received it from Klein's. Whether the bank stamped it or not is immaterial for the purpose of determining whether Klein's handled that money order and whether Klein's shipped the rifle to Oswald. The main point is: We know Klein's received that money order in the mail from Oswald. And as a result of receiving payment (in full) for the ordered rifle, Klein's shipped Rifle C2766 to LHO (as confirmed for all time by Waldman Exhibit #7, which is a document that CTers must ALSO believe is a total forgery). Do you see the sheer outlandish NUMBER of hoops and contortions a CTer must go through in order to take that rifle out of the hands of Lee Harvey Oswald? I sure do, whether any CTer sees them or not.

Another question for David Lifton...... If JFK's body was stolen off of Air Force One and was altered between Dallas and Bethesda, why do you think the conspirators were so unbelievably stupid to have placed the President into a BODY BAG after the covert body alterations were completed, instead of simply wrapping the body back up IN THE SHEET that he was wrapped in when he left Parkland Hospital? Do you have ANY kind of a logical (believable) explanation for why the body-alterers would have done something so amazingly silly and inane? Same goes for the casket ---- Why on Earth would the goofy body-alterers decide to throw JFK's body into a very cheap pink "shipping" casket, when those same plotters HAD TO HAVE KNOWN that they had stolen the body out of a very expensive mahogany ornamental casket? Did they WANT their covert plan to be exposed as quickly as possible by blatantly switching around BOTH the body wrappings AND the casket?

Question for David Lifton...... If your theory is correct and no shots at all came from the rear of President Kennedy's limousine in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963, then how can you possibly reconcile the slight wounding of bystander James T. Tague and the chipped curb on Main Street? Or do you think that Tague is a xxxx when he said he was struck in the face by something DURING the shooting itself? I know there are some people (John McAdams for one) who have serious doubts about a bullet being the cause of this very, very small mark on the Main Street curbing: But even with some doubts about what might have caused the mark on the curb, it's difficult to deny the fact that Tague was hit by something DURING the assassination, and he told Dallas Deputy Sheriff Buddy Walthers that very thing within minutes of the shooting. And it would be nearly impossible to reconcile Tague's wounding with a FRONTAL gunshot, unless the frontal gunman was totally blind, or unless the REAL target of the shooting that day was car salesman James Tague. (And I kind of doubt that even the most off-the-wall conspiracy theorist on the planet believes that Mr. Tague was being shot at on 11/22/63.) As we can see from Commission Exhibit 875 (pictured below), given the location of the President's car throughout the ENTIRE time when gunfire was occurring in Dealey Plaza, the only possible source of any gunfire that would have been responsible for the cheek wound suffered by Mr. Tague would have been gunfire coming from BEHIND President Kennedy's vehicle, and not from in front of the car: MORE TAGUE TALK: http://JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/james-tague-part-1.html 2005 RADIO INTERVIEW WITH JAMES TAGUE: http://www.box.net/shared/3hqzkvub2a http://www.box.net/shared/nhmn4rgf77

Yeah, but your so-called "plotters/planters/cover-uppers" screwed up on virtually EVERYTHING, according to your beliefs. E.G., They planted a Mauser instead of a Carcano. (Dumb.) They shot Tippit with an automatic, when the patsy owned a revolver. (Stupid.) They forgot to stamp the money order properly. (Silly plotters.) They shot JFK from the front. (Really idiotic in a plot with the patsy in the TSBD.) They allowed the patsy to roam around the TSBD, instead of keeping a leash on him, potentially allowing the patsy to gain an alibi (which YOU think he did, of course, in the lunchroom). (Incredibly reckless and stupid.) They plant a bullet shell in the TSBD that CTers say couldn't possibly have been fired that day. (More stupidity from the bumbling plotters.) How many more of these silly goofball errors does it take to qualify the JFK Assassination Team Of Patsy-Framers as retards? 150 more? 200? In reality, of course, none of the above things is true at all. Each item only exists in the fantasy-filled minds of conspiracy theorists. And they fester there until more and more CTers begin to believe in them too. That's why 75%-80% of the American public believes in a conspiracy today. It's not because the EVIDENCE is tainted. It's because of the really silly things that conspiracy theorists like Jim DiEugenio and Jim Garrison and Oliver Stone place their faith in.

I never suggested any such thing. And why you say I am suggesting such a silly thing is beyond me. But in THIS (Kennedy) case, I'm saying that there was positively no "forgery" of the Oswald documents, because of the testimony of the experts in the field of identifying writing on questioned documents (e.g., Alwyn Cole and Joseph McNally). Naturally, though, expert testimony means zilch to people like Lee Farley (esp. if it means having to admit the obvious--i.e., Farley's favorite patsy actually ordered rifle C2766). WHY DIDN'T THE PLOTTERS WHO FAKED THE MONEY ORDER THINK TO PUT THE PROPER STAMPS ON IT? WHY DIDN'T THE PLOTTERS WHO FAKED THE MONEY ORDER THINK TO PUT THE PROPER STAMPS ON IT? WHY WERE YOUR PATSY FRAMERS SO INCREDIBLY SLOPPY AND RETARDED? WHY?

Gil, The writing on ALL of the rifle-purchasing documents (including the money order) was Lee Harvey Oswald's. That's not just MY opinion--that's the OFFICIAL determination made by multiple handwriting analysts for BOTH the Warren Commission and the HSCA. Are they ALL liars or incompetent boobs at their jobs? You and your fellow CTers will NEVER be able to skirt around the FACT that Lee Harvey Oswald's writing is on ALL of the documents that prove he purchased the JFK murder weapon (Rifle C2766). Also -- If "handwriting analysis" is such a flawed science, then why on Earth do such handwriting analysts exist AT ALL? Do you think they testify in court and for organizations like the WC and HSCA merely for the fun of making impossible-to-prove determinations like the ones made by Alwyn Cole below?: MELVIN EISENBERG -- "Mr. Cole, I now hand you an item consisting of a U.S. postal money order in the amount of $21.45, payable to Klein's Sporting Goods, from "A. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915, Dallas, Texas." For the record I will state that this money order was included with the purchase order in Exhibit 773 which has just been identified, and was intended and used as payment for the weapon shipped in response to the purchase order, 773. I ask you, Mr. Cole, whether you have examined this money order for the purpose of determining whether it was prepared by the author of the standards?" ALWYN COLE [Treasury Dept. Document Examiner] -- "Yes, sir." EISENBERG -- "What was your conclusion, Mr. Cole?" COLE -- "It is my conclusion that the handwriting on this money order is in the hand of the person who executed the standard writing [i.e., Lee Harvey Oswald]." 4 H 373: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh4/html/WC_Vol4_0191a.htm ====================== And handwriting expert Joseph McNally (along with others who examined the same documents for the HSCA) came to the same conclusion as Cole did fourteen years earlier--i.e., the money order and all other documents relating to the rifle purchase were written by Lee Harvey Oswald [see McNally testimony at 4 HSCA 355]. http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol4/html/HSCA_Vol4_0180a.htm

So the plotters did everything in their power to complicate the shooting and the plot to the Nth degree to make sure it would be virtually IMPOSSIBLE for the "All Shots Came From The Front" plot to stay a secret. Ya gotta love the backward logic of David S. Lifton. In addition.... The following hunk of logic never occurs to the conspiracy theorists who want to believe that everything connected to Oswald's rifle and revolver purchases is phony and fake: If the whole rifle transaction was phony from the get-go, then why wouldn't the plotters who cooked up the scheme have made sure that the rifle's length MATCHED the ad from the magazine from which it was ordered? In a truly "fake" and made-up-from-whole-cloth scenario regarding the rifle, would the conspirators have wanted to have a mis-match of rifle lengths so that the conspiracy mongers could now say what they are saying today? -- i.e., "Look! The C2766 rifle is the wrong length!" This is just one more example (among dozens) of the built-in idiocy of the so-called "patsy framers" in this case. Everything is supposedly "manufactured" and planted ALL THROUGHOUT THE CASE to make it look as though Oswald did certain things and bought certain things and shot certain people -- but the retard plotters apparently didn't know their asses from the hole in JFK's cranium. E.G., 1.) The brainless plotters couldn't tell "36 inches" from "40 inches". 2.) They plant a "Mauser" in the Depository (even though the patsy owned a Carcano). 3.) They shoot JFK from the front (even though their one and only patsy was located in the rear). 4.) They allow their one and only patsy to wander around on the lower floors of the Book Depository at the precise time they need him upstairs on the sixth floor shooting at the 35th U.S. President. (Brilliant planning and organizing here on the plotters' behalf!) 5.) They plant a bullet shell in the Sniper's Nest that could not possibly (per the conspiracy fantasists) have been fired on the day of the assassination, due to the dented lip. And yet the retard plotters evidently expected this "impossible" shell to go unnoticed by everyone in officialdom. 6.) They shoot J.D. Tippit with an AUTOMATIC gun (again, per the outer-fringe CTers who will do and say anything to try and exonerate cop-killer Oswald)....even though their patsy owns a revolver and not an automatic. 7.) And, according to some CTers, they place into evidence a Smith & Wesson revolver (#V510210) that could not possibly have been fired on 11/22/63, due to a bad/broken firing pin. And yet, at the same time, these same plotters (with a combined I.Q. of a Hostess cupcake) are attempting to make it look like Oswald DID, in fact, use that IMPOSSIBLE-TO-FIRE gun to kill Officer Tippit by placing into evidence four phony bullet shells from Revolver V510210. A brilliant patsy plot all the way around, wasn't it? (Well, maybe if the plotters were Gomer and Goober Pyle.)