David Von Pein

4 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

A group on facebook talking about conspiracy theories? I see you like to live dangerously. Even the blogspot is pushing it. Hope you have all your stuff backed up.

I have no idea what you mean by this. Care to elaborate?

You seem to be implying that I am a CTer myself. (???)

And why would having a Blogger.com JFK blog be "pushing it"? (Google = CIA? Is that it?)

1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said:

It's interesting to note that out of 331 posts on this thread 117 of them, over one third, are by Dave and Frank. 

Where did you get that info? Does Edu. Forum offer detailed analytics on every thread? (Or ---- Don't tell me you actually went through all 23 pages and counted the posts by hand? You didn't really do that, did you? Surely not.)

5 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

If VB had brought that case up--as he should not have been allowed to do in London-- with all this new info, he would get murdered today.

And then CTers could have blamed the CIA for murdering Vince too!

2 hours ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

Without the batting of an eye you had rejected this new evidence (to you) as quickly as you have rejected the evidence upon which this thread is based. 

That is very closed minded behaviour. You had a conclusion prior to your assessment of the facts. 

I rejected the Campbell "sighting" because....

1. Campbell, on 11/24/63, said to the FBI he had never seen LHO in his entire life, which contradicts Campbell's alleged statement in a newspaper from the previous day. So, which report should we believe? I really don't know, but I'll ultimately choose the "never seen" report. Why, you ask? See #2 below.

2. I'm satisfied beyond all reasonable doubt that Oswald could not possibly have been in a storage room near the front entrance of the TSBD on the first floor at the time Ochus Campbell allegedly said to have seen Oswald in that room, and that's because the evidence (in total) indicates that Oswald was on the sixth floor shooting at JFK at 12:30.

6 hours ago, Tony Krome said:

"You best keep silent, not go around talking, cause I don't want anything to happen to my family .................. I can accept a lot of things happen to me .............. but not my family" - Frazier

Powerful stuff!

After watching the last minute of the previously-mentioned 2013 video featuring Buell Frazier, and after reading Tony Krome's post [seen above] concerning Frazier's remark about "keeping silent", my previous comment — "stuff like this gets taken out of context a lot in this (JFK) case" — rings even truer.

Here's the complete quote by Frazier that can be found in that 2013 video:

"But I knew, if there was people behind this, you best keep silent."

So Buell wasn't saying that somebody had told him to "keep silent". He was saying that IF there was anyone else involved in the President's assassination, he thought it would be better to "keep silent"---even though Mr. Frazier has been far from "silent" in the years since 1963. He's made numerous appearances over the years, even in the year just following the assassination, including an appearance in the Oscar-nominated 1964 feature motion picture produced by David L. Wolper, "Four Days In November".

But the way that Tony Krome has got that quote written out in his post, it makes it look like some third party is telling Frazier: "You best keep silent." But that's not what Frazier said or implied at all.

Now, even when the correct context of Frazier's quote is taken into account, CTers can still believe (if they want to) that Buell Wesley Frazier is "keeping silent" and concealing (to this day) a big secret concerning the identity of "Prayer Man". But, Tony, you should have shown Frazier's whole quote, in order to give the proper context, don't you think?
 

1 hour ago, Derek Thibeault said:

Ok, Maybe I overreacted. I should assume positive intent.

Thank you for saying that, Derek. I appreciate it.

5 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

But she [Acquilla Clemons] said as I recall she was visited and told to keep quiet. 

http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2017/11/Lane, Clemons, And Tippit

2 hours ago, Derek Thibeault said:

I just saw in the Facebook group Fair Play for JFK that DVP copied the link to this particular forum on this topic. Is that appropriate? What's the point of doing that?

I don't understand. What's INappropriate about linking to a JFK discussion at a JFK Facebook group? I do it all the time at Jim Hess' FB group and Ed Cage's group and my own JFK FB group.

FYI / BTW, here's my Facebook group (which has 800+ members) (and I've got it set up as a "Public" group, so anybody [even non-members] can view its contents; it's not a "Closed" group, which many FB groups are):

If you want to join my group, Derek, just come on by. I've never refused membership to anyone who has asked to sign up. (Or maybe you're a member already. I can't recall.)

Quote

That group seems more appropriate for his views on the assassination anyway, so why be here? Just to gunk up further learning and thoughtful discussion?

I really don't understand that mindset, Derek. This is a forum entitled "JFK Assassination Debate". It's not called "JFK Forum For Conspiracy Believers Only".

Good gosh, do you really want a forum on a controversial issue like this one that is totally one-sided? Do you really think that in my 5,000+ posts I have done nothing but "gunk up" the place? Do you really think I've offered up no evidence at all for my stated Lone Assassin position?

Come now. Let's be a little reasonable.

3 hours ago, Tony Krome said:

"You best keep silent, not go around talking, cause I don't want anything to happen to my family .................. I can accept a lot of things happen to me .............. but not my family" - Frazier

Powerful stuff!

But stuff like this gets taken out of context a lot in this (JFK) case. Take Acquilla Clemons, for example....

"CLEMONS: But see, I take care of an ill man here. And she don’t want me in anything because it would upset him. She’s awful fond of me...

[Dale Myers speaking:] This is the first ah-hah moment – one that has been hidden from public scrutiny for better than fifty years. Here, for the first time, we have Mrs. Clemons explaining that it’s not a cadre of faceless, nameless law enforcement officers harassing her to keep quiet (as everyone has been led to believe by Mark Lane and the conspirati), but rather, a strong suggestion by her employers – John and Cornelia Smotherman – who are no doubt sick and tired of the parade of “journalists” (remember, this is the third visit in as many weeks) who keep showing up at her home." -- Dale K. Myers; November 1, 2017

More:

On 2/13/2019 at 4:41 AM, James DiEugenio said:

I should also add. It's about 3:30 in the morning back in Indy. He [DVP] really does not have a life.

Jimmy just now posted at 3:47 AM his time in L.A.

I guess Jimmy, too, "really does not have a life".

And the hypocritical irony exhibited by a certain conspiracy theorist in the state of California continues. (Ya gotta love it.)

5 hours ago, Tony Krome said:

But isn't it on permanent record at the Sixth Floor Museum that he [Buell Frazier] did later see Oswald?

Yes. But that was an AFTER-the-assassination alleged "sighting" of Oswald, and Buell said he saw Oswald walking along the side of the TSBD Building about "5 to 10 minutes" after the shooting.....

2002 Interview With Book Depository Employee Buell Wesley Frazier

So even if Frazier is right about his later (2002) "sighting" of Oswald, that fact wouldn't change a thing with respect to where Oswald was at the time of JFK's murder and with respect to the evidence that will still point directly at Mr. Oswald as the murderer of both President Kennedy and Police Officer J.D. Tippit.

And here's another thought I had regarding Frazier's 2002 "bombshell"....

If Tony Krome is right about the "Psychogenic amnesia" stuff, AND if Oswald was really the "Prayer Man" figure, then we'd have to wonder WHY Frazier still said nothing about seeing Oswald on the steps at the time of the shooting?

Or did Frazier's "Psychogenic amnesia" only wear off PART OF THE WAY in June of 2002 when he said to Gary Mack that he saw Lee Oswald on Houston Street five to ten minutes after the shooting? And will Buell suddenly burst forth with Bombshell #2 in a few more years when his Psychogenic amnesia wears off to an even greater degree so that his memory blockage will be completely removed and he'll suddenly recall that LHO was with him on the steps all along?

And then when that unlikely scenario I just painted re: Frazier does occur, the conspiracy theorists of the world would then only need to reconcile all of these other problems with the "Oswald Is Prayer Man" theory....

....Why didn't Oswald HIMSELF shout from the rooftops (when he was provided with multiple opportunities to do so when the live television cameras were focused on him at Dallas City Hall on both November 22nd and 23rd): "I was outside with Wesley Frazier at the time of the assassination! Just ask Wesley! He'll tell you!" ?

....Why didn't Billy Lovelady, Bill Shelley, or any of the other people who were near the steps at the time when JFK was shot say they saw Oswald on or near the steps at that same critical "12:30" time? Were ALL of those other people suffering from "Psychogenic amnesia" too? And when do you suppose they too (if they are still among the living) will be able to free themselves from that affliction the way Frazier was freed from it?

....Why did Oswald tell Police Captain J. Will Fritz (within earshot of James Hosty and James Bookhout, who wrote the same thing in this FBI report) that he (Oswald) was INSIDE the building and specifically on the "first floor" at the time when JFK was being shot?

....Why didn't Oswald tell his wife or his brother or his mother the truth about how he was located out on the steps at 12:30 when all three of those relatives visited Oswald at City Hall on November 22 or 23? (Or are we dealing with three more cases of "Psychogenic amnesia" here?)

....Why did Lee Harvey Oswald shoot and kill J.D. Tippit if, in fact, he had really been located on the TSBD steps when John Kennedy was killed by some unknown non-Oswald killer(s)?

That should keep the conspiracy theorists busy for a few more years----even if Buell Wesley Frazier were to suddenly appear on CNN or Fox News beneath a Breaking News banner and declare on live television: "I saw Lee Harvey Oswald on the Depository steps at 12:30 P.M. on November 22, 1963; my Psychogenic Amnesia has just now totally worn off!"

20 hours ago, François Carlier said:

I'd be happy if any JFK-assassination researcher who lives in the area of Dallas could try to go and visit Mister Buell Wesley Frazier and ask him a precise question, showing him all the so-called "prayer man" evidence (Wiegman and Darnell films) : "To the best of your knowledge, Mister Frazier, do you recall Lee Oswald being there ? Could it be him ? Was he there ?"

[...]

Can someone do that ?

Let me remind everyone what Frazier told the Warren Commission in 1964 regarding the subject of "The Last Time Buell Wesley Frazier Saw Lee Harvey Oswald On November 22nd, 1963"....

JOSEPH A. BALL - When was the last time you can remember you saw Lee?
BUELL WESLEY FRAZIER - You mean on the 22nd?
Mr. BALL - On the 22nd, that day.
Mr. FRAZIER - Somewhere between---it was after 10 and somewhere before noon, because I remember I was walking down to the first floor that day, that was the only time I went up on the elevator was, like I say, for a few minutes and, I put that box of books up and put it down, and I was on the first floor putting up books all day and I seen him back and forth and he would be walking and getting books and put on the order.
Mr. BALL - That was the last time you saw him all day?
Mr. FRAZIER - Right.
Mr. BALL - You didn't talk to him again?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I didn't.

13 hours ago, B. A. Copeland said:

I somewhat agree with you (we don’t need to ID everyone but....perhaps it would somehow help when connecting dots) though perhaps my wording leads you to respond in such a way as to say that everyone needs to be ID’ in order to know what happened. That could actually be true. I mean think of the film and video footage that had been confiscated never to return and how it would assist us in identifying those in the plaza. Suppose we ID someone who has been ID’ elsewhere, say, Anti-Castro Cuban training camps, etc. It would help.

Yes, that's true. But my main point was that no matter how many "unidentified" people we have in the Dealey Plaza photos and films, the physical evidence that points to Lee Oswald is not going to disappear. It's going to be there until the cows come home (and beyond).

17 hours ago, B. A. Copeland said:

regardless of who you think Prayer Man is, the person must be accounted for for anyone proposing a theory as to what occurred in Dallas that terrible day. You must account for who that individual is and provide arguments and evidence to support your hypothesis.

That's ridiculous. The PM figure doesn't need to be identified in order to provide a reasonable theory of the shooting. You might as well also say that every person in this Z-Film frame below needs to be IDed in order to come to any conclusion about this case. And why would anyone think that?

There were dozens of people who were in Dealey Plaza who very likely will never be officially identified, including the beloved "Prayer Man". But that doesn't suddenly erase the fact that all the physical evidence points to Oswald as the killer.

It's my opinion that you simply cannot have this much evidence pointing directly at one individual (Oswald) and still have that individual being innocent.

7 hours ago, Tony Krome said:

After the assassination, they were trying to piece together for a long time how and when Oswald left the TSBD ... yet Frazier had that information in hand all along.

I doubt that very much. (Check Frazier's first-day affidavit again.)

Just now, Sandy Larsen said:

Sure I did.

Am I allowed to disagree with you on this, Sandy? 

On 2/13/2019 at 9:32 PM, Ron Bulman said:

You (?) you think Fraizer [sic] was adding to...the story he told later on? 

There's no doubt that he "added" the "I saw Oswald on Houston St." stuff to his story many years after 1963. Because he said this on 11/22/63....

"I did not see Lee anymore after about 11:00 AM today, and at that time, we were both working, and we were on the first floor."

http://1.bp.blogspot.com / Buell-Wesley-Frazier-Affidavit

17 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

FC, two hours ago I asked you if you knew what I had written about Wesley Frazier and that weekend.

I have been waiting for you to reply.

Yes or no?

Not everybody's like me and stays up all night. (Geez.)

FC's in France, you know.

9 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I proved two or three years ago that Baker didn't rush into the TSBD like the official story tells it.

You "proved" no such thing....

https://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2016/04/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1123.html

1 hour ago, François Carlier said:

I also like the segment with Marrion Baker on the video "On trial : Lee Harvey Oswald"...

23 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

 I mean you know what they did to Frazier that night don't you?  

All (or most) of which was totally understandable from the point-of-view of the Dallas Police Department on the night of 11/22/63, in my opinion.

The cops have a suspect (Oswald) who they know was driven to work (along with the JFK murder weapon) on the morning of the assassination by this other TSBD worker (Frazier). The cops don't know what (if anything) Buell Frazier knows about the planning of the shooting. Maybe this guy Frazier is an accomplice. The police can't tell at that point.

Frazier's alleged "rough treatment" might be considered too excessive by some people, but IMO, given what the police knew and didn't know at that early hour on 11/22, I think the DPD's behavior with respect to Buell Wesley Frazier was totally within reason. (The part about Fritz "raising a hand" to hit Frazier is something I've got some doubts about, however. I'm wondering if that episode really did occur, or whether Buell was adding in a little extra "drama", shall we say, to the story he told later on. We know that Buell was prone to "add" some things to his story as the years went by. Such as the "added" part about Buell seeing Oswald walking down Houston Street after the assassination, which is something he never told anybody [AFAIK] until 2002.)

https://drive.google.com / Interview With Buell Wesley Frazier (June 21, 2002) (2 Hours)

James DiEugenio said:

So FC, that is why that is it for the misrepresenter. And I will hold you to the same standard.  I do not mind arguing with the Dark Syde but if you do something like that, then that will be it.

Translation....

If Francois ever dares to interpret the evidence in a proper, reasonable, and commonsense fashion (which James DiEugenio rarely does), then he (Francois) will be shunned and banished from Jimmy's Kingdom forever.

Good policy, Jim. 



James DiEugenio said:

But I still think you and he belong at Duncan's [forum].  That is more like WWE.  We are more evidence based here.

  Oh good God! Give everybody a break!

"Evidence based"???? You???

You're the guy who has decided to just THROW OUT all of the following "evidence based" things....

1.) The paper bag that Oswald took to work on 11/22. (Jimmy has declared that that bag NEVER EXISTED AT ALL. Frazier & Randle [and the cops] just INVENTED it.)

2.) The lunchroom encounter. (Jimmy thinks it was COMPLETE FICTION. Just a made-up story by Truly & Baker & the cops).

3.) And Jim doesn't even think Howard Brennan was present at ANY POLICE LINEUP at all on November 22nd, 1963. (Jimmy has decided, on his own, to make Brennan's lineup go POOF! It's gone! It never happened, per this guy named James who claims he is so "evidence based"!)

And I'm sure I could add several more items to the above list of things that really did happen but Jim says never happened at all.

You're too much, Jimmy!

5 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

...it is the answer that Von Pein gets for what he did with Baker's first day affidavit.  He said it's the same thing except he got the floor wrong.

That's correct. And Francois agrees with me on this point without a shred of a doubt, as does every other "LNer" in the world (without a shred of a doubt). How could LNers NOT agree with me on this point about the Baker affidavit? They agree with me that Baker stopped Oswald in the lunchroom on the second floor. Ergo, they agree with me about what I have said about the affidavit of Baker.

And yet DiEugenio, incredibly, seems to want to isolate ONLY DAVID VON PEIN when it comes to this subject of Baker's affidavit (and other sub-topics too). How silly can Jimmy get?! ALL LNers think exactly like me when evaluating Marrion Baker's 11/22 affidavit! How could they think anything else?!

So why don't you start berating all those other LNers too, okay Jimmy? Because I've got news for you ---- there are a LOT more "LNers" out there besides just Francois Carlier and David Von Pein. And every single one of them knows that Marrion Baker, in his November 22 affidavit, was describing the one and only encounter he had with Lee Harvey Oswald (which occurred on Floor #2 and no other floor, as confirmed by Roy S. Truly).

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/07 / The Lunchroom Encounter

http://drive.google.com / Video / CBS-TV Interview With Marrion L. Baker (1964)