Message From David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

Quote

DVP said:

Oswald admits to the press he was INSIDE the building when JFK was being shot.

 

Quote

Sandy said:

No, that didn't happen.

Why are you saying this, Sandy? Of course it happened. Oswald's on video saying it on live TV:

 

Edited July 2, 2022 by David Von Pein

[Sandy Larsen]

15 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

44 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Third, the evidence indicates that Oswald didn't shoot a gun that day.

Actually, the evidence strongly indicates exactly the opposite.

 

Nope.

Even the Warren Report says that the gunshot residue tests were inconclusive.

But he had no residues on his cheek, which is where he should have had, firing a rifle.

 

[David Von Pein]

5 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

That's just another BS story [re: the Walker shooting] that's been discredited.

So, you think that Oswald's note to Marina (Commission Exhibit No. 1) is a fake and a fraud, Sandy? Even though it was determined by both the WC and HSCA to have been written by LHO himself?

[W. Tracy Parnell]

18 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

What possible motives are there? He wanted to be famous? Then why did say he didn't do it?

The Assassination and Mrs. Paine-LHO Would Have Admitted Guilt? ~ W. Tracy Parnell (wtracyparnell.blogspot.com)

[Sandy Larsen]

19 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

I believe Oswald was in Mexico City in Sept/Oct '63. But I don't think he was involved in any "plot" with Russia/Cuba.

 

What about his and his friend's attendance at the Durans' twist party? What about his meeting with KGB assassinations chief Valeriy Kostikov? The $6500 up-front money he received from the red-haired black guy?

What about his phone calls that were really made by imposters?

You just ignore all this "inconvenient" evidence. Just like I said you would.

 

19 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

There were no such "imposters" in Mexico ....

 

So J. Edgar Hoover was wrong about that? The Cuban consulate employees were wrong about that? Cuban intelligence was wrong about that?

 

[David Von Pein]

36 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

The SBT is weak and a bit loony, IMHO. 

IMO, the SBT is a virtual certainty. No other anti-SBT alternative comes within fifty miles of matching the single-bullet conclusion.

Do CTers really think that all of this shrugging and flinching and mouth-opening and grimacing and hat-flipping and lapel-flipping on the part of John Connally is being caused by something OTHER than a bullet? Really?....

 

Edited July 2, 2022 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

7 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

What about his and his friend's attendance at the Durans' twist party? What about his meeting with KGB assassinations chief Valeriy Kostikov? The $6500 up-front money he received from the red-haired black guy?

What about his phone calls that were really made by imposters?

You just ignore all this "inconvenient" evidence. Just like I said you would.

So J. Edgar Hoover was wrong about that? The Cuban consulate employees were wrong about that? Cuban intelligence was wrong about that?

You need to read (or re-read) "Reclaiming History". All of that stuff is covered in supreme detail by Vince B. in that book.

Sandy, it seems to me that you have fallen for lots of conspiracy-tinged junk that even many CTers have abandoned. (The silly "$6500 up-front money" nonsense being a prime example.)

Edited July 2, 2022 by David Von Pein

[Sandy Larsen]

23 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

 

Why are you saying this, Sandy? Of course it happened. Oswald's on video saying it on live TV:

 

 

He just says that naturally he's gonna be in the building given that he works there. He doesn't say he was inside the building right when the motorcade past.

And now we know that in his interrogation, he said he was outside watching the presidential parade. His alibi was covered up, but discovered a few years ago.

Why did they cover up his alibi?

 

[Tom Gram]

13 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

DVP:

It is difficult to believe JBC could have turned around to look for JFK after being struck in the back by a large slug which tore through five inches of a rib, and exited his chest.

Then...he turns around? 

(BTW, JBC's shirt, on display in Texas, reveals a small bullet hole in its back---thus was struck by a non-tumbling bullet). 

So, if we watch the Z film, we see is JFK struck--that is, JFK's balled fists near his throat, and his wife looks concerned. 

Then...we see JBC begin to look his own right shoulder, and indeed make a near 180-degree turn in his seat.  You can see the left profile of JBC face on the Z film. 

I strongly suspect a man does not turn around and make a 180-degree turn in his seat after being shot through the chest. 

Then as JBC begins to turn to again face the front of the vehicle,   he is violently pushed or thrust forward. 

As you know, the bullet that coursed through JBC took out four to five inches of rib. It makes sense that a bullet entering JBC and hitting solid mass would push him forward.  That happens about Z-295. 

JBC's memory of being pushed forward concurrent to being struck in the back by a bullet makes sense, and is not the sort of memory that is easily confused, and also is verified by the visual record, that is, the Z film. 

The SBT is weak and a bit loony, IMHO. 

Why the giant reservations about a second gunman? The weight of evidence is nearly conclusive, if we assume LHO had a single-shot, bolt-action rifle. 

Over the years, almost like political partisans, people develop fanatical beliefs about the JFKA.

Such as, Allen Dulles must have hand-directed the JFKA, or there absolutely could not be a second gunman.

LHO obviously acted alone, or he was not involved at all. 

The evidence for such stretches is weak, and fit biases. 

The fact that there was a second gunman 11/22 does not mean the CIA did it, or the communists. It just means there was a second gunman. 

It does probably mean the WC was more interested in a public and mollifying resolution of the JFKA, and not a determination of facts. 

 

 

 

Hi Ben. You addressed this comment to DVP, but quoted me, so here's my reply. I agree with literally everything you wrote here. It does indeed seem like a hell of a stretch to think that JBC would make a 180 degree turn after getting shot in the chest, not to mention still hang onto his hat with a shattered wrist. I was just stating why many CTs believe that JBC was hit at the same time or in rapid succession with JFK around Z-224. I've always thought that JBC's reaction at Z-224 could just as (if not more) plausibly be interpreted as a startle reaction though.

Shots at Z-295 and Z-313 could reflect the rapid succession of the last two shots heard by the vast majority of the earwitnesses - but there is also considerable evidence for a shot after the head shot. Hell it could be both. The overall shooting sequence isn't exactly child's play to try and work out. 

I also think it intuitively makes more sense that JBC would be confused about what he said and when vs. how he moved, but I haven't read any memory studies or anything to corroborate that.

By the way, your article on the tumbling bullet theory is one of the best things to come out on the JFK case in recent memory IMO. 

 

[Sandy Larsen]

10 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

Sandy, it seems to me that you have fallen for lots of conspiracy-tinged junk that even many CTers have abandoned. (The silly "$6500 up-front money" nonsense being a prime example.)

 

That stuff I listed is what the CIA said happened in Mexico City. It was covered up by the FBI for the Warren Commission. It was later declassified.

If it was thrown out by CTers, it's only because they thought that Oswald was actually there in  Mexico City and hadn't figured out that the charade was all part of a false flag operation. Either that or because they are Mob-did-it CTers rather than CIA-did-it.

 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

25 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

The $6500 up-front money he received from the red-haired black guy?

What happened to the money?

26 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

What about his phone calls that were really made by imposters?

If a phone call was made it was by the CIA to gather information. This was a technique they had used.

Was Oswald a Tool of the CIA (dperry1943.com)

[David Von Pein]

29 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

And now we know that in his interrogation, he said he was outside watching the presidential parade. His alibi was covered up, but discovered a few years ago.

Why did they cover up his alibi?

A better question that you should be asking (given your belief of LHO actually being on the steps at 12:30) is:

Why did Lee Harvey Oswald HIMSELF cover up his own perfect alibi?

He never said a word to anybody during his interrogation about being on the steps during the shooting. Why not, Sandy?

(And, no, I don't think Fritz & Co. lied about the things LHO said while in custody.)

[Ron Bulman]

On 6/29/2022 at 3:10 PM, David Von Pein said:

FYI ---

On the morning of June 28, 2022, I sent the following request to the Education Forum administrators via e-mail. The following day at 3:00 PM EDT (today, June 29th), I received a reply saying that I would be allowed to re-join the EF forum. For that, I am very grateful.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What does "Two Posts Per Day" below your picture mean David?  That you were initially limited to two posts per day on a trial basis by the administrators?  And none of them are paying attention.  Or, is that part of your new profile, a personal commitment to only two posts per day?  Either way you've blown that with multiple long diatribes, just like in the past.  Wasting space, time.

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Tom Gram said:

 

Hi Ben. You addressed this comment to DVP, but quoted me, so here's my reply. I agree with literally everything you wrote here. It does indeed seem like a hell of a stretch to think that JBC would make a 180 degree turn after getting shot in the chest, not to mention still hang onto his hat with a shattered wrist. I was just stating why many CTs believe that JBC was hit at the same time or in rapid succession with JFK around Z-224. I've always thought that JBC's reaction at Z-224 could just as (if not more) plausibly be interpreted as a startle reaction though.

Shots at Z-295 and Z-313 could reflect the rapid succession of the last two shots heard by the vast majority of the earwitnesses - but there is also considerable evidence for a shot after the head shot. Hell it could be both. The overall shooting sequence isn't exactly child's play to try and work out. 

I also think it intuitively makes more sense that JBC would be confused about what he said and when vs. how he moved, but I haven't read any memory studies or anything to corroborate that.

By the way, your article on the tumbling bullet theory is one of the best things to come out on the JFK case in recent memory IMO. 

 

Tom Gram:

First of all, delighted to "meet" you, and thank you for your comments. Thanks for your reply, and I am sorry I confused DVP and you. 

Yes, I think the simple "timing of the shots" take on the Z film, based upon JBC's corroborating testimony (and that of his wife) is the way to go. 

I understand JBC said a few comments not entirely consistent with my take over the decades, though we do not know the accuracy of those quotes, or if he simply misspoke.  

Certainly, and on film, JBC has stated clearly many times he heard the first shot, he turned around to look, began to turn forward, and then he felt the second shot but did not hear it, and then was aware of the third shot. 

In addition, he testified he was pushed forward by the shot that struck him. 

All in all, with the visual evidence of the Z film, and the small bullet hole in the back of JBC's shirt, I think this is the story.

Thanks again for your (perhaps overly) generous comments. There are many people who preceded me in the JFKA, and through much tougher trials.

I am just an old guy who pecks at a keyboard. 

 

 

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, David Von Pein said:

IMO, the SBT is a virtual certainty. No other anti-SBT alternative comes within fifty miles of matching the single-bullet conclusion.

Do CTers really think that all of this shrugging and flinching and mouth-opening and grimacing and hat-flipping and lapel-flipping on the part of John Connally is being caused by something OTHER than a bullet? Really?....

 

Yes, you do not flinch when a bullet strikes nearby? The crack of gunfire? You are a cool cookie.  

Why not show the succeeding Z frames: Where JBC turns around, does a 180 in his chair, to look for JFK...after JBC is shot? 

JBC was unaware he had been shot through the chest with a very large slug? Is that a viable explanation? 

This is the weakest reed in the SBT, itself a very uncertain explanation. 

JBC was obviously struck by a separate shot from JFK.  

In addition, there is a small bullet hole in JBC's shirt, just large to accommodate a straight shot from the large Western ammo slug, but obviously not a tumbling bullet. Diagrams showing JBC being struck sideways by a tumbling bullet are wrong--we know that, beyond dispute,  from the small bullet hole. 

Why the problem with acknowledging a second gunman in the JFKA? Why such tension there? Are you trapped by previous commentary? 

In fact, the JFKA could still be a small squalid conspiracy, involving low-level CIA assets and mob gunsels.

Eladio Del Valle and Hermininio Diaz are dead within three years.  LHO within days. 

It was the cover-up that was the obvious crime.