Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Real Ruth and Michael Paine

Recommended Posts

Ever read Doug Weldon[?]

The late Doug Weldon was the "Windshield Expert" of the JFK case. In 2010, Doug actually (incredibly) said this to me in an Edu. Forum post....

“The third person was removed from the front seat [of JFK's limousine in Dallas on 11/22/63]. .... I believe this created the opportunity for a shot to be fired through the front of the windshield from the south knoll area to hit Kennedy in the front.” -- Doug Weldon; November 15, 2010

In other words, according to Weldon, the conspirators who were planning the assassination of President Kennedy actually WANTED to fire a shot through the windshield of the car, and they PLANNED IN ADVANCE for that to happen by eliminating the military aide who sometimes sat between the two Secret Service agents in the front seat of the limo during JFK's motorcades.* (LOL.)

The above cockeyed theory that was embraced by Douglas Weldon just might be #1 on both the “hilarious” and “ridiculous” scales.

* BTW, there was most certainly NOT always a third person sitting in the front seat of the car during all of Kennedy's motorcades. A good example of a fairly lengthy motorcade drive with President Kennedy riding in that very same car (SS-100-X), with the top down, in which no third person was riding in the front seat can be found in the videotape footage of JFK's trip to San Diego in June of 1963, which can be seen HERE.

In addition -- The limousine wasn’t whisked off to Dearborn in late November. And the windshield wasn’t replaced. And the windshield never had a hole in it. Those are myths. Nothing more.

Robert Frazier’s testimony and the photos of the windshield [CE350 and CE351] verify there was only a crack in the glass (striking it from the INSIDE, where the lead smear was located).

Let me guess—Bob Frazier was lying.

The “Dearborn” witnesses are similar to the “Second Casket Arrival” witnesses at Bethesda. Just as the Bethesda witnesses could not possibly have seen a “JFK casket” enter the morgue TWICE on 11/22/63 (so any “shipping casket” that was observed that night by anyone at Bethesda Naval Hospital obviously had to have contained a body OTHER than John F. Kennedy’s)….the Dearborn witnesses might have seen some vehicle resembling JFK’s limo, but it was certainly NOT SS-100-X.

[Also see: "Reclaiming History" by Vincent Bugliosi; Pages 300-301 of the endnotes.]

David Von Pein
May 2014

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 651
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Davey kept on saying he was going to NARA to prove John [Hunt] was wrong.

I never said anything of the kind. I have never once EVER said I was planning to make a trip to the National Archives and Records Administration.

DiEugenio is making up crap from whole cloth.

In fact, in the discussion below, I even made fun of Jim for suggesting that I could have just walked right into NARA and demanded to see CE399. (Hilarious notion there.) ....


Davey Boy, everyone here is still waiting for you to put your money where your mouth is. Something you never ever do. In other words...go to Travelocity, book a flight and a hotel room, and go ahead and do what you have been saying you would do for ages: Prove John Hunt is a xxxx [L-word].


Yeah, right, Jimbo. Like the NARA is going to allow me to just waltz right in and examine CE399.

Get real.

Fact is: John Hunt DID NOT examine the bullet itself. He examined the same photos that have been posted in this very thread. And those photos (as good as they might be) are not definitive proof that Todd did not mark CE399.


Edited by David Von Pein
Link to post
Share on other sites

What a bunch of Von Peinian baloney.

1. Weldon has a very good chronology of what happened to the limousine after the assassination. That is what I meant. For long passages of time it was simply alone and unguarded. I mean for God's sakes, outside the hospital some guy--maybe Kinney--actually started to wipe out the back seat. That is what I meant. DVP tried to confuse matters, in his usual obfuscatory way, by saying I buy everything Weldon writes. Complete crapola.

2. Davey once said he was going to NARA. And he was going to prove John Hunt was wrong by finding Elmer Lee Todd's initials on CE 399.

He understands what a problem this is, as is the fact that Frazier already had the stretcher bullet, way before Todd ever got it from Rowley.

So I teased him intermittently at stages later to see if he had ever been at NARA.

The whole issue of what John Hunt actually had is simply a sideshow. In his original essay it is not clear what he had, he is not specific about it. But large blow up photos would be even better to prove him wrong since they would be easier to see traces.

This whole issue became such a liability for DVP and his gang--cyber-ISIS McAdams, Jean (worst book on Oswald ever) Davison, Photon/Paul May--that you know what they came up with? Todd's initials disappeared through an "oxidization" process.


Yep. This is how desperate these fruity people get. And that is the kind of stuff that those factoid oriented bufs post at what is erroneously called JFK Facts.

Next time you post a phony, smelly, list like that, please be more careful. So you don't end up with coconut cream pie on your face again. Like I said before I returned here, I was a going to protect the newbies from falling victim to your bullying techniques.

They don't know what a paper tiger you really are.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to post
Share on other sites

What a bunch of Von Peinian baloney.



Yep. This is how desperate these fruity people get. And that is the kind of stuff that those factoid oriented bufs post at what is erroneously called JFK Facts.

Next time you post a phony, smelly, list like that, please be more careful. So you don't end up with coconut cream pie on your face again. Like I said before I returned here, I was a going to protect the newbies from falling victim to your bullying techniques.

They don't know what a paper tiger you really are.

Old Davey is running out of places to partake in .johnism...

Ben Holmes, Gary Puffer, DEX et al (especially BHolmes) have shut him down at AMAZON! Now you, Jim here.

Guess that leaves just Dunc's to ply his trade.... Of course he's got his 23 websites, 16 blogs 18 YouTube channels, 3,465 video clips, 464,000 USENET posts and of course a 3 piece crispy order of chicken w/mashed no gravy and hold the butter... to keep him happy. LMAO!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't hate Jim Garrison, Healy. I love the guy! He's a great advertisement for the "Lone Assassin" side. Just check out his ludicrous claims in the quotes I cited above, including the evidence-mangling one about the Tippit bullet shells being strewn all over Tenth Street "by the real killers" (plural). LOL.gif

Garrison wanted his gullible "Playboy Magazine" audience to just trust his idiotic claims about the shells and the "real killers" (plural!), without bothering to even mention the fact that multiple witnesses actually saw Oswald (and ONLY Oswald) dumping shells on the ground right after he murdered Officer Tippit.

So, Healy, do you think Mr. Garrison was being totally fair and forthright in this quote below? Or did Big Jim leave out just a tad bit of the facts here? And after looking at this completely distorted version of the story surrounding the Tippit bullet shells, do you think anyone should place ANY faith whatsoever in anything else Jim Garrison said about the JFK and Tippit evidence? If so, why?....

"The clincher, as far as I'm concerned, is that four cartridges were found at the scene of the [Tippit] slaying. Now, revolvers do not eject cartridges, so when someone is shot, you don't later find gratuitous cartridges strewn over the sidewalk -- unless the murderer deliberately takes the trouble to eject them. We suspect that cartridges had been previously obtained from Oswald's .38 revolver and left at the murder site by the real killers as part of the setup to incriminate Oswald." -- Jim Garrison; 1967


David, I'm a CTer, but like you I find a great deal to fault the CIA-did-it CTers (and the LBJ, Mafia, FBI CTers).

Jim Garrison is very much a mixed bag for me -- he found some great data -- and he accepted some truly bogus data.

Jim Garrison proved, IMHO, that LHO was working at 544 Camp Street with Radical Right led by Guy Banister. If Garrison had pursued that thread, he would have solved the case by 1968. That thread led to General Walker of Dallas -- but instead, Garrison created his own, bogus story.

Jim Garrison discovered in NOLA a plot all right -- a plot to kill Fidel Castro. That's exactly what all those mercenaries were doing around Guy Banister, including Clay Shaw, David Ferrie, Jack S. Martin, Fred Crisman, Tommy Beckham, Ed Butler and Carlos Bringuier -- AND LEE HARVEY OSWALD, from April 1963 through September 1963.

The Lopez-Hardway Report (2003) virtually proves this verbatim. LHO pretended to be a Fake FPCC Officer in NOLA in August, and in September he took a Fake Resume of his Fake FPCC credentials to the Mexico City Cuban Consulate and USSR Embassy.

It was all for Guy Banister, and it was all for the Radical Right. David Atlee Philiips of the CIA in his manuscript, THE AMLASH LEGACY (1988) said he was grooming LHO to kill Fidel Castro in New Orleans, even up to the Mexico City episode -- until somebody hijacked LHO for the JFK murder.

I take that as historical fact.

But Jim Garrison left his fruitful thread of the Radical Right in NOLA and began to blame the CIA for EVERYTHING. This was the Fall of Jim Garrison -- and the rise of the most influential CT of all: the CIA-did-it CT.

Even Mark Lane -- perhaps the very first CTer -- got on board with the CIA-did-it CT. He again uncovered more junk about the Kill-Fidel Team there in NOLA and Florida -- but he twisted it into a CIA-did-it CT. For 45 years that's become the old, tired song of the CT community.

So, DVP, I agree with you on the many faults you find with the CIA-did-it CT. Yet there are still to many open issues -- for example, David Lifton's Best Evidence (1980) is still standing after 30 decades. Douglas Horne has basically confirmed it for history through the ARRB.

In the Walker-did-it CT, the Radical Right in Dallas included many elements from the DPD, as well as the local offices of the FBI and Secret Service. These local offices had to be involved in order to hide important facts from the Washington boys.


--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Facts are paramount.

To all here: What are the verifiable facts?

Here are some verifiable facts that have been overlooked in the past 50 years, IMHO, Jon.

1. The Secret Service has an internal organization called the Protection Research Service (PRS), which liaisons with the FBI intensively before any Presidential road trip, to isolate the problem characters in that part of the country.

2. For JFK's Dallas tip, according to SAC Roy Kellerman, the PRS reported that the Dallas FBI had *nothing* to share about any problem characters in Dallas. NOTHING.

3. Yet as I showed last week, with two articles from the Dallas Morning News, it was well-known in Dallas that the physical attacks on Adlai Stevenson in Dallas only 30 days prior to that trip were orchestrated by Radical Right activist, the Resigned General Edwin Walker. The national news was aware that Adlai was spat on and hit by a placard -- but only the Dallas news reported that General Walker was at the center of that cyclone.

4. There was a mild sentence that the FBI shared, saying that some picketers might carry placards and try to hit people with them, or throw them from the crowd -- so be on the alert for THAT!

Those are important facts, IMHO. The local Dallas FBI Agent -- James Hosty -- who was also the Bridge partner of Walker's publisher, Robert Allen Surrey, who had his office in Walker's own home -- was also the Dallas FBI Agent who kept tabs on LHO. Yet Hosty's main job in Dallas was to keep an eye on the Radical Right in Dallas (as he himself says in his 1980 book, Assignment Oswald).


So, it should be evident from the facts that on the week of 11/22/1963, Hosty chose to side with Walker's team, and to withhold vital data from the Secret Service PRS.

So, I think these are some verifiable facts on the topic of the JFK assassination that have eluded attention for five decades.


--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to post
Share on other sites


Here's the point of my question:

When was JFK first struck? From where? By what?

I'll leave it at that.

The debate here is based mostly on opinions, not facts. Let's have verifiable facts.

Well, Jon, I think I presented some interesting and verifiable facts about the JFK assassination.

Yet you're asking about facts WHICH HAVE NEVER BEEN VERIFIED.

We even have a MOVIE of the JFK murder -- and yet we still can't answer in any VERIFIABLE way: "When was JFK first struck; From where? By what?"

We have a thousand guesses. The umbrella of "Umbrella man" was a dart-thrower! Yes, even that is one of the guesses.

But we have a major obstacle -- the decision by Hoover and LBJ on 11/22/1963 to insist upon a Single Lone Nut who killed JFK, and their willingness to use the entire US Government to twist all evidence -- eye-witnesses, photographs, film, ballistics, medical, X-ray, crime scene, fingerprints, palm prints -- to make an Unbelievable Case that a single madman killed JFK with the precision of a coordinated Military Ambush.

Because of the twisting of Evidence -- ostensibly for National Security during the Cold War (e.g. the USSR must not be allowed to crow about our shame) -- how in the world can we VERIFY today -- a half-century later -- that which those closest to the events had failed to verify back then?


--Paul Trejo

Link to post
Share on other sites

DH: Guess that leaves just Dunc's to ply his trade.... Of course he's got his 23 websites, 16 blogs 18 YouTube channels, 3,465 video clips, 464,000 USENET posts and of course a 3 piece crispy order of chicken w/mashed no gravy and hold the butter... to keep him happy. LMAO!

I didn't know he was that expansive.
He is like the CNN of the Krazy Kid Oswald crowd.
Actually more like the Wizard of Oz.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Davey once said he was going to NARA. And he was going to prove John Hunt was wrong by finding Elmer Lee Todd's initials on CE 399.

Bull. Such a thing never happened. I never ever made any such statement or comment about planning to go to NARA. DiEugenio, as I said, is just inventing crap out of thin air. Please stop doing that, Jim. Okay?

Link to post
Share on other sites


You asked for verifiable facts -- and I think it's one of the best questions out there. I'd like to get your feedback on this March 9, 1964 WC testimony about the PRS (Protective Reseach Section) of the US Secret Service.


Rep. FORD. Now, according to the various reports we have, when you know you are going to a particular city, or several cities, you have a method or a procedure to check to see if there are any individuals or organizations that present a serious threat to the President.

Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes, sir. We have what we call a Protective Research Section. This has been in existence for many years, through Roosevelt's days -- I will go back that far. Through the combined efforts of various sources, through other agencies, they have a file on all the, let's say dangerous, for a better word, people that could be suspected in the city the President arrives in. They will furnish the agents on those three shifts, if there are a number of them, or even one -- it doesn't make any difference -- all the data possible on that person -- it will be given to each shift. It is a report form; can be read by all. And, if possible, there is a photograph included. That will be circulated around.

Rep. FORD. Now, when you got your assignment on or about November 17, what did you do in this regard?

Mr. KELLERMAN. ...One of the first things we do, when a trip is planned, is make a call on that PRS Section and tell them, "On November 21 we are going to be in San Antonio, Houston, and Fort Worth. On the 22d we will be in Dallas, Austin, and at the ranch." And they take it from there.

Rep. FORD. So, on or about November 22d, you made this inquiry.

Mr. KELLERMAN. This inquiry, sir, would be made a week ahead of time...

Rep. FORD. Who would make that inquiry?

Mr. KELLERMAN. That would be made by any one of the three people -- SAIC Behn, SAIC Boring, or myself...A departure is given to one man from one of the shifts who would set up a departure from the White House to Andrews. He, too, in turn notifies our Protective Research Section of this thing.

Rep. FORD. Well, do you know who in this case for this trip made that inquiry of the Protective Research Section?

Mr. KELLERMAN. I don't have the name right now...

Rep. FORD. I think we ought to have that for the record -- the time it was made. You don't recall making it yourself, however.


The CHAIRMAN. Do you know if it was actually done?

Mr. KELLERMAN. It is always done, sir...

Rep. FORD. Were you given the information from this inquiry, even though you didn't make it yourself...about those people who are considered dangerous or a problem in any one of these four or five cities where the President was going on this trip.

Mr. KELLERMAN. I will have to check this, but there was no record...

Rep. FORD. In other words, PRS never turned over to you any information about any dangerous individuals in any one of these communities on this trip.

Mr. KELLERMAN. That's right.

Rep. FORD. Is this unusual?


Rep. FORD. In the report from the Secret Service it says, and I quote, "Because of the incidents on the occasion of the visit of Ambassador Stevenson to Dallas earlier in the fall, special attention was given to extremist groups known to be active in Dallas. Appendix A describes the action taken in Dallas in more detail." Were you familiar with that part of the Secret Service activity prior to your departure for Texas?

Mr. KELLERMAN. I have knowledge of that; yes, sir.

Rep. FORD. How much knowledge?

Mr. KELLERMAN. But not enough to be written up, that I recall, sir.

Rep. FORD. Well, could you describe for the Commission what knowledge you did have in this regard?

Mr. KELLERMAN. The only knowledge I can describe to you, sir, is the fact that we were aware of what this Ambassador went through down there. However, we had no information that such an incident would happen to President Kennedy on his trip into that State.

Rep. FORD. But I gather from this report, which is the official report of the Treasury Department, that somebody knew of these previous incidents, and was thereby alerted to the possibility of--the potential of one, because the report says, "Special attention is given to extremist groups known to be in Dallas." Now, could you tell us what special attention was given?

Mr. KELLERMAN. No. Outside of the fact that everybody was alerted to this previous incident.

Rep. FORD. PRS, Protective Research Section, didn't tell you, as the person in charge, of any individuals or of any groups that wanted special attention? I am using "special attention" as in the report.

Mr. KELLERMAN. Right as of this minute, the only knowledge that I have of any incident that could happen was in San Antonio, when I believe we had information of some pickets. Now, those pickets showed up outside of--he made a speech at that space hospital. Well, anyway, in view of that, I cannot reach the name right now--these pickets were out at, let's say, the main gate to the grounds, and just stayed right there with their placards.

Rep. FORD. Also on the report it says, "In accordance with the usual practice, the local FBI office informed the local Secret Service office of any information which affected the President's visit,"

Mr. KELLERMAN. They did...It is always the normal procedure; yes, sir.

Rep. FORD. Now, whom would they have informed in this case in Dallas?

Mr. KELLERMAN. Their report would have come to Washington, and relayed to our Protective Research Section.

Rep. FORD. And the FBI in this instance gave you what information, if any, that you should relay back to the people--

Mr. KELLERMAN. The only thing I can recall right now, sir, are those pickets in San Antonio.

Rep. FORD. Well, may I say if on your return to your office you find any information on this particular point, I think it would be very helpful for the record, and it should be included in the record.

Mr. KELLERMAN. All right. I surely will.

Rep. FORD. The report also says, "On October 30, 1963, the local FBI office gave the local Secret Service officer the name of a rightwing individual in the Dallas area. An investigation was made. On November 21 and 22 the local FBI office referred two pieces of information to the local Dallas office of the Secret Service." Were you familiar with that?


Rep. FORD. Who would, under your normal procedures, have been familiar with that?

Mr. KELLERMAN. It would be the same organization, Protective Research Section.

Rep. FORD. But they did not give you any information of this.


Rep. FORD. Is this unusual or different?

Mr. KELLERMAN. If they evaluated this information, there would have to be a degree of seriousness.

Rep. FORD. But, as far as you can best recollect at this point, you were never so informed.

Mr. KELLERMAN. No, indeed.

Rep. FORD. The report does go on to say, and I quote, "One involved scurrilous literature already in the hands of the Secret Service, Exhibit 4. The second involved possible picket trouble which the local police were aware of." That is the picket trouble you were talking about?

Mr. KELLERMAN. Apparently so.

Rep. FORD. The report also says on page 8, "SA Lawson, SAIC Sorrel, and SA Howlett met with Dallas law-enforcement officials. SA Howlett also met with an informant. They followed up all leads and tips and checked scurrilous literature, Exhibit 4." Did you have any information personally about this activity by Lawson, Sorrel, and Howlett?

Mr. KELLERMAN. No, sir.

Rep. FORD. Was it their responsibility to do it, to undertake that kind of an operation?

Mr. KELLERMAN. Everybody but Lawson. These other two gentlemen you are speaking of are field agents out of Dallas. Yes; they would investigate the seriousness of this thing, through the information furnished by the FBI. And, depending on the degree now, this would be furnished our Protective Research Section here in Washington.

Rep. FORD. Now, did Lawson or anybody else communicate to you what was going on in this regard?

Mr. KELLERMAN. No, no. I do not think Mr. Lawson got in this investigative part at all. It would not be any part of his duties.

Rep. FORD. I am only reading from the report...And the report goes on to say, "Their investigations did not bring to light the name or the individual Lee H. Oswald, and he or his name was not known to them or any other Secret Service agent in Dallas or elsewhere prior to this shooting of the President." Would that be the same as far as you are concerned?

Mr. KELLERMAN. That is very true.

Rep. FORD. You did not know of Lee H. Oswald?

Mr. KELLERMAN. None whatsoever.

Rep. FORD. Was it surprising to you that when the President was going to a city as large as Dallas, that there were no names turned over to you, either by your Protective Research Section or by any other Federal agents--individuals or an individual dangerous to the President?

Mr. KELLERMAN. I recall, to give you an answer, Congressman, that it did seem strange that here we are hitting five cities in one State and from the apparent trouble Ambassador Stevenson had down there one evening, we certainly should have had some information on somebody.

Rep. FORD. Hypothetically, if you go to other large metropolitan areas, do you normally get names from various agencies, including PRS, warning you of an individual or groups that might cause trouble?

Mr. KELLERMAN. Again I say that our PRS would recheck their files, from all the cities--from all the cases that they have in that city, and furnished us information, whether a report or photographwise. They in turn would -- and I believe I am correct on this -- they in turn notify the Bureau of this visit, or may have people check through their files. They can doublecheck this stuff. I don't recall any information whatsoever, except that picket thing.

Rep. FORD. It is surprising to me, as well, and I gather it was certainly, on reflection, surprising to you--

Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes; it is.

Rep. FORD. Was this in itself any warning to you that there might be some breakdown in the system?

Mr. KELLERMAN. Gee -- no; I never cherished that thought, sir.

Rep. FORD. You assumed that the proper liaison between various agencies was taking place, and your PRS was operating effectively?

Mr. KELLERMAN. Oh, yes; very much; yes indeed. Now, if I am wrong, when I check these two questions back here, I will let you know.

------------- END EXTRACT OF WC TESTIMONY OF ROY KELLERMAN -------------------------

Now, Jon, remember these two newspaper clippings I showed you regarding the Dallas attacks on Adlai Stevenson just 30 days before the JFK assassination. (I'll add three more for emphasis):






Do you agree with me that it is highly suspicious -- and a verifiable fact -- that the Dallas field office FBI staff failed to report to the SS PRS that the attacks on Adlai Stevenson were orchestrated by the resigned General Edwin Walker -- who was a known member of the Radical Right in the South?

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in

Sign In Now
  • Create New...