JIM MOORE AND DAVID VP
tomnln
I DO have the time to look it up;
David quotes Jim Moore's Lies;
Page 52 of Moore's book quotes ONE (1) of Bakers accounts.
Moore OMITS Baker's other THREE (3) accounts offered by Baker.
NOT wanting to point out that Baker gave FOUR (4) Different accounts of his
encounter with Oswald.
Proving that Baker LIED a minimum of 3 out of four times.>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
NOT to mention Many other Lies/Ommissions in Moore's book.
On page 53 of Moore's book "Conspiracy of One", Moore states that " AFTER
the encounter with Baker and Truly
Oswald bought a coke."... "Oswald habitually drank Dr. Perrpr(58)"
Page 55 shows citations of footnotes (58) (page 157 of WCR. Page 157 of
WCR says NOTHING of Oswald's choice of soft drink. Page alludes to Oswald's
Bus ride with McWatters.
IN EFFECT;
Moore Lies & David Swears to it.
"Peter Fokes" <jp...@toronto.hm> wrote in message
news:cb6h335oec28b5l09...@4ax.com...
> On 2 May 2007 09:58:19 -0400, Anthony Marsh
> <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>David Von Pein wrote:
>>> QUESTION FOR THE WHOLE SITE.......
>>>
>>> Was anyone here aware of the existence of a Dr. Pepper soda machine in
>>> the Depository's first-floor lunch ("Domino") room on 11/22/63?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>I have asked questions like that and never gotten a good answer. We know
>>about the Coke machine and some people say it was stocked with Dr.
>>Pepper as if Dr. Pepper is a Coke owned brand. I don't know if that is
>>true. I have never seen a Dr. Pepper machine in the TSBD. One wacky WC
>>defender had a theory that the reason why Oswald decided to shoot the
>>President was that he had gone to the machine to purchase his usual Dr.
>>Pepper and it was out of Dr. Pepper so he had to buy a Coke. This so
>>incensed him that he decided to shoot the President. It's known as the
>>Cola defense.
>
>
> LN author Jim Moore discusses this matter. I think Moore believed
> Oswald had a Dr. Pepper. Don't have time to look it up in his book
> now.
>
>
> PF
>
David Von Pein
Yeah, that must be why I gave Jim Moore's book a wishy-washy (i.e.,
somewhat negative) rating when I reviewed it in December 2006...right
kook? ....
BTW, I never once mentioned Moore's "Dr. Pepper vs. Coke" theory in my
review of his book. (And that's because I think that theory is kinda
silly; so I simply ignored Moore's guesswork regarding that particular
soft-drink point.)
And I also never once mentioned the name "Marrion Baker" in my review
either. So, the two things that Tom The Kook specifically mentions
above in his post are two things that I NEVER even bring up in my
review. And yet The Sack berates me for something I never said.
~shrugs~
Oh well, I guess that kind of CTer idiocy is something for the
psychiatrists at Tom's hospital to sort out.
BTW #2, Jim Moore (although he definitely has the bottom-line
conclusion of "Oswald Did It Alone" correct in his 1990 book
"Conspiracy Of One") is going to look all the sillier regarding his
claim that LHO's nervousness made him purchase a Coke by mistake
(instead of a Dr. Pepper) once Mr. Bugliosi's book streets.
This due to the revelation that the Dr. Pepper machine wasn't even ON
the second floor--it was on the first floor. (Unless Moore, or
somebody, can prove that Dr. Pepper was available in BOTH soft-drink
machines on 11/22/63.)
tomnln
You endorse someone even You know is a LIAR.
That make both of you AFRAID to address Bakers Lies.
(yer EASY)
NOBODY can be Right when their Opinions are based on LIES.
Here it is AGAIN.
You Gonna DODGE it AGAIN?
http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1178141132.0...@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
YoHarvey
> POINT;
>
> You endorse someone even You know is a LIAR.
>
> That make both of you AFRAID to address Bakers Lies.
>
> (yer EASY)
>
> NOBODY can be Right when their Opinions are based on LIES.
>
> Here it is AGAIN.
> You Gonna DODGE it AGAIN?
>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
>
>
>
>
> >>>> "IN EFFECT; Moore Lies & David Swears to it." <<<
>
> > Yeah, that must be why I gave Jim Moore's book a wishy-washy (i.e.,
> > somewhat negative) rating when I reviewed it in December 2006...right
> > kook? ....
>
>
> > BTW, I never once mentioned Moore's "Dr. Pepper vs. Coke" theory in my
> > review of his book. (And that's because I think that theory is kinda
> > silly; so I simply ignored Moore's guesswork regarding that particular
> > soft-drink point.)
>
> > And I also never once mentioned the name "Marrion Baker" in my review
> > either. So, the two things that Tom The Kook specifically mentions
> > above in his post are two things that I NEVER even bring up in my
> > review. And yet The Sack berates me for something I never said.
>
> > ~shrugs~
>
> > Oh well, I guess that kind of CTer idiocy is something for the
> > psychiatrists at Tom's hospital to sort out.
>
> > BTW #2, Jim Moore (although he definitely has the bottom-line
> > conclusion of "Oswald Did It Alone" correct in his 1990 book
> > "Conspiracy Of One") is going to look all the sillier regarding his
> > claim that LHO's nervousness made him purchase a Coke by mistake
> > (instead of a Dr. Pepper) once Mr. Bugliosi's book streets.
>
> > This due to the revelation that the Dr. Pepper machine wasn't even ON
> > the second floor--it was on the first floor. (Unless Moore, or
> > somebody, can prove that Dr. Pepper was available in BOTH soft-drink
>
> - Show quoted text -
David, by now you must realize Rossley has the
IQ of a tree trunk. Just ignore him as everybody
else does.
David Von Pein
Jim Moore didn't lie, you wretched sack of conspiracy-thirsty gutter
slime.
Moore gave his OWN interpretation of the "soft drink" matter. I don't
agree with it. But Moore's entitled to believe what he wants. (Just as
gutter slime like The Nutsack is entitled to believe in the stupid
kookshit he ejaculates here regularly.)
And Officer Baker didn't lie either. Any slight discrepancies in his
account can be resolved with three simple words: He Was Human.
And the 9/23/64 document (signed by M.L. Baker) was obviously not
WRITTEN by Baker himself. It was written by the FBI agent, with Baker
CORRECTING the document and initialling it. ....
http://whokilledjfk.net/images/altgen9.jpg
The question I have now is -- Is Tom-Sack "human"? Or does he look
something like this?....
http://www.cmu.edu/PR/releases06/images/060419_gort_lg.jpg
"Klaatu-Barada-Nutsack."
"The choice is yours -- join us (the LNers) and live in peace....or
follow your present course and face (VB) obliteration. The choice
rests with you. We will be waiting for your answer." -- Klaatu
David Von Pein
Oh, it's gone up, huh??
>>> "Just ignore him as everybody else does." <<<
Oh, I usually do. But every now & again I feel like nailing his sorry
ass to the wall....just for fun.
tomnln
"David, by now you must realize Rossley has the
IQ of a tree trunk. Just ignore him as everybody
else does."
TRANSLATION;
Yo(Momma)Harvey DODGES evidence/testimny.
WHO is Yo(Momma)Harvey?>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/baileynme.htm
Hey Criminal;
START HERE>>>
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/spy.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/danrather.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/horne__report.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/RACE%20TO%20TSBD.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Rifle.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/single_bullet.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/media_page.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Lattimer.htm
Because I know you're TOO Cowardly to address all of them,
Why don't you pick one of them to address?
(we both know you don't have the guts/intelligence to address ANY of them.
"YoHarvey" <bail...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178159554....@u30g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
Start HERE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1178160531.4...@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
That FBI Agent was sitting WITH the witness.
WHO told the FBI Agent Oswald had a coke in his hand?
Remember now Rinky-Dink, The FBI Agent was NOT a witness.
1 Baker Lied
2 Moore Lied
3 You Lied
It's ALL HERE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
David Von Pein
Prove that please.
tomnln
Are you Stupid?
You said it was written by an FBI agent.
You said Baker corrected it.
If they were NOT sitting together, WHERE did the FBI Agent get "drinking a
coke"???
Even Fritz's notes state that Oswald was "drinking a coke when the officer
came into the lunchroom.
btw;
WHEN are you gonna address the OTHER Lies from Baker?
http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1178166823.4...@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
Murders are NOt solved with Probables.
No wonder you support the WCR.
Page 541 of WCR...Discussing back/throat wounds they said,
"presumably of entrance...presumably of exit".
The "Coke" Account is only one of FOUR Accounts.
http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1178170356....@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>>>> "You said it was written by an FBI agent." <<<
>
> Which it so obviously was (the handwriting indicates that, without
> doubt).
>
>>>> "You said Baker corrected it." <<<
>
> Which he obviously did; the "MLB" initials indicate that...with those
> initials matching the signature too.
>
>>>> "If they were NOT sitting together, WHERE did the FBI Agent get
>>>> "drinking a coke"?" <<<
>
> Oh for Pete sake, you idiot. The damn thing was written until the day
> before the WCR was given to LBJ (Sept. 1964)! By that time, don't you
> think it's probable that Agent Burnett of the FBI could have learned
> some of the basics about the case?
>
> Burnett could very well have heard about Oswald being in the
> possession of a "Coke" just after the assassination....and so he
> (incorrectly) wrote "drinking a Coke" in the 9/23/64 document. (And
> WHY that document was even needed, I haven't the foggiest; the WC
> investigation was completely over by that time; so, that beats me; but
> the FBI wanted another statement from Baker in Sept. for some reason.)
>
> But the main point is: An FBI agent could very well have had some kind
> of "Oswald had a Coke" info before that FBI report was written on
> Sept. 23rd.
>
> Another thing that indicates the Sept. FBI Baker document was written
> outside the presence of Baker is the other scratch-out on that
> report....the scratch-out re. the floor number. If Baker was sitting
> right beside Burnett, why are there TWO separate scratch-outs? Doesn't
> make sense. But if the FBI agent was relying on just his memory of
> some of these things, it does make sense.
>
> Burnett wrote it, Baker later looked it over, Baker corrected a couple
> of minor errors (and initialled the errors), and Baker signed it.
>
> MARK VII.
>
> Of course, we've been through all of this EXACT stuff before not too
> long ago....but in another three weeks, Tom-Kook will pretend it's ALL
> NEW once more.
>
> Go figure kooks.
>
David Von Pein
Which it so obviously was (the handwriting indicates that, without
doubt).
>>> "You said Baker corrected it." <<<
Which he obviously did; the "MLB" initials indicate that...with those
initials matching the signature too.
>>> "If they were NOT sitting together, WHERE did the FBI Agent get "drinking a coke"?" <<<
Oh for Pete sake, you idiot. The damn thing wasn't written until the
day before the WCR was given to LBJ (Sept. 1964). By that time, don't
you think it's probable that Agent Burnett of the FBI could have
learned some of the basics about the case?
Burnett could very well have heard about Oswald being in possession of
a "Coke" just after the assassination....and so he (incorrectly) wrote
"drinking a Coke" in the 9/23/64 document. (And WHY that document was
even needed in the first place, I haven't the foggiest; the WC
investigation was completely over by that time; but the FBI wanted
another statement from Baker in Sept. for some reason.) ~shrug~
But the main point is: The FBI agent could very well have had some
kind of "Oswald had a Coke" info before that FBI report was written on
Sept. 23rd.
Another thing that indicates the document was written outside the
presence of Baker is the other scratch-out on that report....the
scratch-out re. the floor number. If Baker was sitting right beside
Burnett, why are there TWO separate scratch-outs? Plus, why didn't
Baker just write it all out himself IF HE WAS SITTING RIGHT THERE at
the time? Doesn't make sense. But if the FBI agent wrote the whole
thing himself and was relying on just his memory re. some of these
things, it does make sense.
Burnett wrote it...Baker later looked it over...Baker corrected a
couple of minor mistakes (and initialled the errors)...and then Baker
David Von Pein
Keep on concentrating on that chaff, Tom....and watch, unconcerned, as
all that wheat rolls right by you.
David Von Pein
Tom,
I've just checked on this...and (as usual) you are incorrect. Moore's
footnote ("58") is an "Ibid", which means it refers to the footnote
immediately preceding it...which refers to Jim Bishop's book "THE DAY
KENNEDY WAS SHOT" (which Moore loves tremendously and endorses many
times is his book).
So the "58" footnote indicates that Moore is referencing "Page 157" of
Bishop's book...not the WCR.
Moore refers to a different edition of Bishop's book than the
hardcover version I have, however. Because Page 183 (not 157) contains
the "invariably drank Dr. Pepper" remark by Bishop (although how Mr.
Bishop knows that Oswald "invariably" drank Dr. Pepper is anyone's
guess really).
Anyway, that's where you're mixed up, Tom. Start learning how to read
"Ibid" footnotes.
I'm not sure whether to call you a "Nutsack" again...or just feel
sorry for you this time. ;)
Walt
> David;
> Are you Stupid?
> You said it was written by an FBI agent.
> You said Baker corrected it.
>
> If they were NOT sitting together, WHERE did the FBI Agent get "drinking a
> coke"???
If they were NOT sitting together, WHERE did the FBI Agent get
"drinking a coke"???
Proof that this " Baker affidavit" is nothing but a fraudulent attempt
to wipe out Baker's seemingly innoucous statement, of "He (LHO) was
drinking a coke", is the fact that the "affidavit" was not written by
Baker. Since a FBI agent was writing the affidavit and he made an
error all he had to do was re-write the affidavit and then have Baker
sign the clean copy. The crossing out the words... "drinking a
coke"... is an obvious attempt to expunge the fact that Baker said
Oswald was calmly drinking a coke when he saw him in the lunch room
just seconds after the shooting.
The Warren Commission knew that the timing of their proposed THEORY
about Lee running down the stairs from the SE corner of the sixth
floor to the lunch room was crurial.... because in their attempt to re-
enact the proposed theory they found that every second was precious,
and if Oswald had just bought a coke, as Baker had said, then their
entire theory was null and void. They had to expunge that "drinking a
coke" statement from the record.
When a person claims he can't see the obvious reason for the rewriting
of Baker's affidavit he is either a moron or a liar.
Walt
>
> Even Fritz's notes state that Oswald was "drinking a coke when the officer
> came into the lunchroom.
>
> btw;
> WHEN are you gonna address the OTHER Lies from Baker?
>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
>
> "David Von Pein" <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote in messagenews:1178166823.4...@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> >>>> "That FBI Agent {Burnett} was sitting WITH the witness {Baker}." <<<
>
> > Prove that please.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
tomnln
I said Baker gave 4 different accounts and you refuse to address them.
ONE "mistake" may be acceptable....Never FOUR.
Baker is a LIAR
http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
You are a LIAR
Baker has 2 positions for himself
Baker has 3 positions for Oswald
Care to address them?
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1178172567.7...@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1178174117.7...@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
Now, to subject at hand;
Is there any difference between quotes from the WCr and a book written by a
WCR Supporter?
Bishop also neglects to offer any ciutation for hisd claim;
All he offers is Speculation of Oswald's Nervousness.
You people THRIVE on Speculation.
Ya better hope that the level of Justice you advocate for others don't come
back & bite you in the ass.
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1178186526.1...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
David Von Pein
Just as I thought. The Tom-Sack doesn't have a shred of moral fiber or
ordinary decency and/or integrity to admit he made a simple mistake
re. the footnote in Moore's book.
Instead of saying, "You know, you're right Dave, I was in error
there".....here's what I get in return from a kook with seemingly no
redeeming qualities whatsoever:
"Is there any difference between quotes from the WCR and a book
written by a WCR supporter?" -- Tom "No Decency" Nutsack
tomnln
Are you denying that Jim Bishop is a WC Suporter?
WHY do you DODGE all 4 of Bakers different accounts?
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/spy.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/danrather.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/horne__report.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/RACE%20TO%20TSBD.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Rifle.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/single_bullet.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/media_page.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Lattimer.htm
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1178233110.3...@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...