David Von Pein

And I suppose this means you also think the FBI lied through their collective anal cracks when they said that Linnie Mae Randle said the exact same thing that Buell Frazier said about the bag (with respect to the bag's color). Right? From a discussion here at the EF in March of 2018: DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Reprise [the "she" in this report (CD7) refers to Linnie Randle].... JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID: Notice in the last sentence, the two dependent clauses begun with the words "if" and "could". Thanks for posting that David. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Thanks for totally missing the point, Jim. That point being: If the bag that Linnie Mae Randle saw Lee Oswald carrying had REALLY been quite a bit shorter than the "original" bag she was later shown, then there should have been no "ifs" and "coulds" about it in Randle's mind—i.e., the "original" bag (via those conditions) could not possibly have been the bag Linnie Mae saw on Nov. 22, regardless of the bag's COLOR. But instead of saying to the FBI agents something like this.... Regardless of the color issue, there's no way in the world this "original" bag you are showing me now could be the same one I saw Oswald carrying on Nov. 22nd, because this "original" bag is way too long. ....she, instead, tells the FBI agents that the "original" bag she was being shown is still in the mix of possible bags that Lee Oswald "could have been" carrying on November 22nd. Do conspiracy theorists think that Mrs. Randle just TOTALLY IGNORED the LENGTH of the "original" bag when she said that the original sack was still a candidate for the one she saw Oswald toting on 11/22? Was she ONLY concerned with the COLOR of the bags at that point in time in her FBI interview? In other words, she knew the original bag was much too long, but she was unable to concentrate on two separate aspects of the bag at the same time (color and length), so she said "could have been" with respect to the color only, all the while totally forgetting that this "original" bag in front of her was entirely too big. Is that what some conspiracists want to contend? [2023 Edit --- Or, more likely, the CTers of the world probably think that it was the FBI that was playing fast & loose with the evidence. In other words, the FBI's only concern in the CD7 interviews with both Frazier & Randle was the COLOR of the bag. They didn't give a damn that both Frazier and Randle were (probably) screaming these words at their FBI interviewers: "That CE142 bag is way too big!! So why are you only interested in the COLOR of the bag?!"] In addition.... There's also the fact that the amount of Oswald's bag that was available to view from Randle's perspective on Nov. 22 was very likely a few inches less than the bag's overall length of 38 inches. It was "folded" in some manner, as Wesley Frazier said in his 11/22/63 affidavit: "The top of the sack was sort of folded up, and the rest of the sack had been kind of folded under." -- Buell Wesley Frazier RAY MITCHAM SAID: Frazier actual quote [Mitcham's emphasis]... "It must have been about 2 feet long, and the top of the sack was sort of folded up, and the rest of the sack had been kind of folded under." Slightly changes the debate when all the info is given. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Well, then, Ray, don't forget to mention the fact that Wesley Frazier said a total of TEN TIMES during his Warren Commission testimony that he wasn't paying much attention to Oswald's paper sack. [Click Here to see all ten "I didn't pay much attention" references.] But keep pretending that Frazier's "two feet" estimate is a rock-solid fact as far as the actual length of Oswald's bag is concerned. Did Frazier whip out a tape measure the instant he saw the brown bag resting on his back seat? More: http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2018/03/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1275.html

The Non-Existent Bullet That Buddy Walthers Supposedly "Found".... http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/04/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-927.html

It's definitely worthy of a second (and third) look, that's for sure.

The JFK-related video below was made public on YouTube on July 24, 2023. It's called "The Kennedy Assassination: Inside The Book Depository" and was created by a "30-something Swedish guy" who runs the YouTube channel known as "LEMMiNO". And this talented fellow from Sweden evidently has quite a large following there at YouTube, because his Kennedy video embedded below has amassed more than 3-million views in just its three days of existence. It's a darn good video too—very (very!) good, in fact—featuring stellar graphics, music, and narration. I was quite impressed by just about everything in this video, including the common sense and logic that exists within the video's narration and (most importantly) the accuracy of the evidence and testimony that was presented throughout the 98-minute program. That last comment I just made should have given away the following fact --- the video definitely was not made by a conspiracy theorist. Given the tremendous amount of detail that had to have gone into the graphics work, research, sourcing, and voiceover narration for this video, this impressive project must have taken a very long time to complete. I applaud "Lemmino" for his diligent efforts. I, for one, think those efforts were worth it. Here's the video: To see the complete (and huge) list of sources utilized for the video, GO HERE.

FWIW, here's a short passage from Vince Bugliosi's tome relating to the Oswalds' voyage on the Maasdam: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To see the two sets of answers that Lee Oswald wrote in preparation for the press interviews that never materialized upon his return to America, CLICK HERE.

Someone on Facebook today re-posted a 2019 Facebook post which includes the following photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald, which purports to be a picture taken aboard the ship S.S. Maasdam in 1962 when Lee was on his way back to the USA from Russia (click to enlarge): Maybe the above photo is old news to many people at this forum, but I had never seen it before today. One skeptical person at Facebook asked: If that's really LHO in that photograph, then where's Marina? I suppose that's a fair question to ask, since we know that Marina (plus her baby daughter, June) was, indeed, also aboard the Maasdam for that long journey across the Atlantic in June of '62. But perhaps Marina and the baby were there with Lee, but at the time when the picture was being taken, maybe Marina had to get up from the table and tend to the baby. (Diaper change perhaps?) Or: Perhaps Marina and the baby never went to the dining room with Lee for this particular meal at all. However, it does, indeed, look like some food and drink is present on the table (opposite from Lee), suggesting that Lee was not sitting alone at his table. But was it Marina's food and drink, or perhaps someone else's? We can never know, of course. Isn't it fun when a "new" picture pops up out of nowhere occasionally? Here's the full Facebook post from which I culled the LHO photo.

http://kennedy-photos.blogspot.com/2012/06/kennedy-gallery-154.html

Here's a video I edited and put together on July 10th, 2023. It's part of my "Highlights Series" of JFK-related programs and TV/radio broadcasts:

The latest addition to my November 1963 Newspaper Archive.... Click to enlarge....

I was recently made aware of the following television newscast, which was broadcast on the evening of November 22, 1963, by the United Kingdom's ITV (Independent Television) Network. My thanks go out to Stephen May for providing me with the information about the existence of this rare British coverage of JFK's assassination:

They're relevant with respect to Buell Frazier's current mindset about whether or not Oswald was guilty or innocent. And, as I said above... "I truly wonder if Mr. Frazier has ever once examined the evidence against Oswald in an objective way in which his friendship with the accused assassin was set aside in order to let the evidence speak for itself." Do you think Buell has ever performed such an examination of the evidence, Cory?

Thanks for your expert (and pointless) response.

POSTSCRIPT.... I thought of another question that I would like to ask Buell Wesley Frazier (which I don't think any interviewer has ever asked him before). It's this question: During the mid-morning hours on November 22, 1963, when you realized that President Kennedy's motorcade was going to pass right in front of the Book Depository that day, and after you had confirmed through your boss that the TSBD employees would be allowed to take a break and watch the Presidential parade pass by the building, did it ever cross your mind to approach Lee Harvey Oswald and ask him this?: "Hey, Lee, I just found out that the President is coming right past this building at noontime today and we're going to be allowed to watch the parade. I'm going to watch it from the front steps of the Depository. Do you want to join me out there? What do you say?" If such a question had been put to Lee Oswald on the morning of 11/22/63, I can't help but wonder what Lee's answer to Buell would have been. I wonder if Oswald, wheels turning in his head as he made his assassination plans throughout that morning, would have accepted Frazier's invitation, but then just not show up on the front steps to join Frazier? But, from Oswald's point-of-view that morning (given his murderous intentions), such an agreement to meet Mr. Frazier out on the steps (or anyplace else inside or outside the TSBD Building) might have been a risky thing for Lee to do, because Oswald might then have thought that Frazier just might come looking for him in the building during the minutes prior to JFK's motorcade arriving in Dealey Plaza. Would Lee want to take such a risk? Nobody now, of course, can ever answer such a question. Or, perhaps, Oswald's answer to Frazier's invitation to watch the motorcade together might have been: No thanks, Wesley. I'm not the slightest bit interested in seeing the President. Or, LHO could have brushed Frazier off with this reply: Thanks, Wes, but I'm just too busy filling my book orders to stop and watch a Presidential parade. Or Lee could have used this wishy-washy response: Well, Wesley, I might join you to watch the parade---but only if I get the time. I'm not making any promises. So maybe you should go on outside by yourself, and perhaps a little later I'll get out there too. But regardless of what Oswald's answer might have been if such an "invitation" had been put in front of Lee Harvey Oswald for his consideration on 11/22/63 by Buell Wesley Frazier (or by anyone else, for that matter), it would have added yet another "Food For Thought" topic to the large mountain of such subjects relating to President John F. Kennedy's assassination. It's kind of fun, though, to think about such "What If?" questions, isn't it?

The above one-hour interview with JFK assassination witness Buell Wesley Frazier took place on November 22, 2021, at the Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza. It is one of several interviews and public appearances that Mr. Frazier has done in the last few years. (Others can be found at my Buell Frazier webpage here.) I've always been very fond of Buell Wesley Frazier. I've enjoyed listening to him tell his story over the years about how he and his 1963 co-worker, Lee Harvey Oswald, would ride to work together to the Texas School Book Depository in Dallas. And despite the fact that Buell has added a few hard-to-believe chapters to his assassination story in the last 20 years or so (such as the episodes talked about here and here and here), I must admit, I am still quite fond of Mr. Buell Wesley Frazier. That doesn't mean that I accept as fact all of the things that Buell has tacked on to his story since about 2002. Not at all. In fact, I think he's done a bit of—shall we say—"embellishing" (or "enhancing") of his story during these last twenty years. Frazier's latest embellishment/enhancement, which was added for the first time to his account of the events of 11/22/63 in the pages of Buell's new 2021 book, "Steering Truth: My Eternal Connection To JFK And Lee Harvey Oswald", is a tale about how Buell allegedly encountered a man with a rifle on the Elm Street extension road just outside the Book Depository Building within minutes of the shooting of President Kennedy. This impeccably-dressed rifleman, wearing clothes and shoes that apparently (per Frazier) only a "professional" could afford, threw his weapon into the trunk of his car and then drove off, never to be seen or heard from again. I could be wrong, but Buell's new late-arriving tale about a dapper gun-toting assassin (?), who was evidently displaying his rifle out in the open in front of the Depository for everybody to potentially see, is very likely an addendum to Mr. Frazier's story that even most hardened conspiracy theorists will have a hard time swallowing. The above 2021 interview with Mr. Frazier prompted me to create this post, but not mainly for the purpose of scoffing at the latest addition to his November 22nd story (although scoff I must), but instead I wanted to take the opportunity to ask Buell Wesley Frazier a few questions (on paper only) that I do not think have ever been asked of him during any of the several interviews he has participated in since the assassination occurred in 1963. I'm very curious as to what Buell's reactions and responses might be if he were to ever be confronted with questions put to him in the following manner.... #1. Buell, you do realize, don't you, that the rifle that was found on the sixth floor of the Depository on 11/22/63 was a rifle that was proven by the totality of the evidence in this case to have been owned and possessed by Lee Harvey Oswald? #1a. And you also realize that that exact rifle was proven to have been the weapon that murdered President Kennedy, don't you? #2. And you also realize, don't you, that the empty brown paper bag that was found near the Sniper's Nest on the sixth floor had the fingerprints of Lee Oswald on it? #2a. Plus, that same paper bag had fibers inside of it that generally matched fibers from the blanket in Ruth Paine's garage, which is a blanket that was known to have been the place where Oswald's rifle was kept in storage in the weeks just before the assassination. You know that fact too, don't you Buell? #3. Don't you ever wonder, Buell, why Lee Oswald told you that big fat lie about the "curtain rods"? And he twice told that lie to you—once on Thursday morning (November 21st) and then again on the morning of November 22nd when you and he got into your car at your sister's house. We know now that Lee's "curtain rods" story was definitely a lie. We know this because.... ....No curtain rods were ever found inside the Book Depository after the assassination. ....No curtain rods were found among Oswald's possessions at his roominghouse at 1026 North Beckley Avenue in Oak Cliff. ....No curtain rods were found on the bus or in the taxicab that Oswald rode in on 11/22/63. ....And no curtain rods were found on Oswald himself after the assassination. #3a. So, why do you think Lee would feel the need to tell such a lie about "curtain rods"? And if the item that was inside Oswald's package on 11/22/63 had really been curtain rods, then where did those rods disappear to? Did Lee ditch them in a trash dumpster on Elm Street after he left the Depository? Those questions about the "rods" are very important ones, wouldn't you agree Buell? #4. And what about the murder of policeman J.D. Tippit? Do you think Lee was innocent of killing Officer Tippit too? I don't think any interviewer has ever asked you that question, have they? The evidence against Oswald in the Tippit shooting couldn't be any more powerful and concrete (as my next question clearly illustrates). #5. If you are of the opinion that Lee Oswald did not kill J.D. Tippit, then how can you explain the fact that Lee was arrested in the Texas Theater with the Tippit murder weapon in his very own hands just 35 minutes after Officer Tippit was gunned down nearby? Given this fact concerning the Tippit murder weapon, about the only way for Lee Harvey Oswald to be innocent is to believe silliness like this. #6. And if Lee Oswald was innocent of shooting both John Kennedy and J.D. Tippit, then why did Lee pull a gun on a police officer in the Texas Theater on 11/22/63? And why did Lee fight like a wild man with Dallas Patrolman M.N. McDonald in the theater? Are those the actions of a person who had done nothing wrong on November 22, 1963? #7. And then there's the attempted murder of General Edwin Walker on April 10, 1963. Do you think Lee Oswald took that shot at General Walker, Buell? If not, then how do you explain what Lee wrote to his wife, Marina, in Warren Commission Exhibit No. 1 (which is in Oswald's own handwriting)? #7a. And if you do accept the fact that Lee took that shot at Walker (and the evidence clearly indicates that he did), then wouldn't you agree with me that Lee Harvey Oswald definitely had murder running through his veins just seven months before President Kennedy went to Dallas? And wouldn't you agree with me that if a person is willing to take a gun and shoot at another human being in April, then it's quite possible that that same person (namely Lee Oswald) might have a similar desire to aim that same gun at another political figure in November? #8. With all of the above individual facts piled up against the door (plus these additional pieces of evidence), which are facts that are just dying to be strung together to form a cohesive whole known as "The Totality Of Evidence In The JFK Murder Case", can you, Buell Wesley Frazier, possibly still cling to the notion that Lee Harvey Oswald, merely because he was kind to you and the children who lived near you in Irving, was innocent of killing President John F. Kennedy? I truly wonder if Mr. Frazier has ever once examined the evidence against Oswald in an objective way in which his friendship with the accused assassin was set aside in order to let the evidence speak for itself. I doubt that he has. David Von Pein January 12, 2022 http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2022/01/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1349.html

I really enjoyed watching and listening to the Sixth Floor Museum's 2016 Oral History interview with Dr. Cyril Wecht (linked below). As you might have guessed, I totally disagree with Cyril's pro-conspiracy slant on the JFK assassination, but even so, it's nearly impossible not to personally like Dr. Wecht. His enthusiasm and passion when he discusses the John Kennedy murder case, even after all these years of talking about it over and over again, are things I can't help but admire. And keep in mind, Cyril was 85 years old at the time of this interview! And his mind is still as sharp as they come. (He's 92 as of the date of this post [June 22, 2023], and still going strong.) This interview is 82 minutes long....of which Dr. Wecht is speaking for about 80 of those minutes (maybe even more). No kidding. But that's not too surprising to me, because I know Cyril loves to talk. And, boy, he sure does a lot of that here. But even a dedicated "LNer" like myself (of all people) thoroughly enjoyed this interview.... Custom logo by DVP; the "bursting" passion courtesy of Dr. Cyril Harrison Wecht of Pittsburgh:

It doesn't matter one bit whether he ate lunch or not. Oswald's still guilty (the overall evidence proves that fact many times over)---with or without a lunch in his stomach. As I said earlier.... "Now, I suppose we can speculate that Oswald DID, indeed, buy his lunch from the catering truck that morning and then ate it sometime before 12:30. But even if that did occur, it certainly would not exonerate Oswald for the President's murder in any way at all."

I base my opinion on the fact Buell Frazier said that Oswald did not have any lunch with him on the drive to work on 11/22. Plus the fact that LHO told BWF that he (LHO) was going to buy his lunch that day. Now, I suppose we can speculate that Oswald DID, indeed, buy his lunch from the catering truck that morning and then ate it sometime before 12:30. But even if that did occur, it certainly would not exonerate Oswald for the President's murder in any way at all. And now I'll repeat my question to you that you haven't yet answered.... Other than Carolyn Arnold, what other witness (or witnesses) said they saw Oswald eating lunch on 11/22? I don't think any other such witness exists. Click to make bigger:

I spend so much time on it because I like to add little bits and pieces to my own JFK Archives website, in order to keep increasing the number of assassination sub-topics covered. (But, to be clear, and in keeping with the new rule that Mr. Gordon forced upon us in August of 2019, I haven't copied the text of anyone's EF posts to my site since I rejoined this forum in late June of 2022.) As far as "defending America's honor" ..... I have never thought about my "LNer" status in quite those terms before. I'm not sure it really applies anyway. But I support the Lone Gunman scenario mainly because virtually all the evidence supports such a scenario. Certainly ALL of the PHYSICAL evidence does at any rate. And I get annoyed at CTers who keep insisting that there's not a shred of evidence supporting Oswald's guilt. Incredibly, I've actually had discussions with CTers who have said that very thing to me. Vince hit the nail squarely on the head when he said.... "The conspiracy community regularly seizes on one slip of the tongue, misunderstanding, or slight discrepancy to defeat twenty pieces of solid evidence; accepts one witness of theirs, even if he or she is a provable nut, as being far more credible than ten normal witnesses on the other side; treats rumors, even questions, as the equivalent of proof; leaps from the most minuscule of discoveries to the grandest of conclusions; and insists that the failure to explain everything perfectly negates all that is explained." -- Vincent Bugliosi

Not if it was packed in some kind of external container (e.g., bag, blanket, box, etc.). Bottom Line: Nobody knows just how the rifle was packed for transit.

I don't see any reason to assume the rifle was "in pieces" when it was transported to and from New Orleans in the spring and summer of 1963. Why would anyone assume such a thing? I don't know how the rifle was specifically packed for transit. Nobody does. But I can reasonably infer that Oswald's C2766 Carcano rifle WAS transported (in some manner) to and from New Orleans in 1963.

You're kidding, right? You're just playing around with me now, aren't you?

Which is the typical silly approach that many (or most) conspiracy theorists have adopted over the years. And it's the thing that enables many CTers to just make up any assassination scenario they want to -- despite their complete lack of actual evidence to support any of their beliefs.