Another Conspiracy Kook Attempts To Revise The Facts In The JFK Case
David Von Pein
http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17058&st=45&p=214062&#entry214062
http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17058&st=45&p=214116&#entry214116
CONSPIRACY KOOK LEE FARLEY SAID:
>>> "The FBI and the DPD had to get him [Lee Oswald] out of that Rambler and onto McWatter's [sic] bus." <<<
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
TIME OUT FOR A REALITY BREAK HERE!!
Surely Lee Farley MUST realize how totally silly he sounds when he
purports such total nonsense.
Because why on Earth would the FBI and/or the DPD feel the need to
jump through so many hoops regarding Lee Harvey Oswald--even if we
make the kooky assumption that they WERE wanting to frame him for
JFK's murder?
IOW, why not just say that Oswald took the cab to his roominghouse,
and skip the unnecessary bus "story"?
By adding a story about a bus, the "plotters" (FBI/DPD/Mother Teresa,
et al) now only add more complications and hazards to the "Let's Frame
Oswald" plot that so many of you conspiracy-happy folks like to think
really took place on November 22nd.
Via a phony bus story, the authorities now have to have more and more
people in their hip pockets to tell lies for them (mainly Mary E.
Bledsoe in this bus instance), PLUS they've got to plant a phony bus
transfer in Oswald's pocket after he's arrested.
And please note that bus driver Cecil McWatters apparently resisted
the FBI's and Mother Teresa's attempts to place Oswald on his bus,
because McWatters refused to make a positive identification of Oswald.
>>> "The evidence we have tells us he [LHO] wasn't on the bus. The evidence tells us he wasn't in the cab." <<<
Good God, what crap you're spewing here, Lee.
Of course, the exact OPPOSITE is the truth regarding Lee Harvey
Oswald's bus and cab rides on November 22nd, 1963 -- i.e., the
evidence that exists demonstrates beyond ALL reasonable doubt that
Oswald was, in fact, a passenger on Cecil McWatters' bus AND a
passenger in William Whaley's taxicab on 11/22/63.
But it's always nice to know that conspiracy theorists like Lee Farley
are still hard at work at revising the true facts surrounding JFK's
tragic murder.
Well, maybe "nice" is the wrong word to use there -- "pathetic" is a
more appropriate term for what kooks like Farley are doing to the
evidence in the JFK and Tippit cases. (And "sickening", too.)
http://JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/william-whaley.html
aeffects
<snip the Von Pein lunacy>
c'mon little guy, get it outta' your system.....
David Von Pein
http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17058&st=45&p=214123&#entry214123
LEE FARLEY SAID:
>>> "You are a Goddamn fool." <<<
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
I knew I would very likely hit a nerve with Farley by pointing out his
last post regarding the bus and cab (wherein Farley totally changes
all the evidence to his liking so that he can pretend his favorite
patsy Lee Oswald was totally innocent).
BTW, the above quote from Lee Farley is way out of bounds, per this
forum's rules, and should definitely be deleted (with a proverbial
"warning" mail coming from Evan Burton as well).
>>> "Let's not get into your inability to see through the bucket of **** you have your head in." <<<<
Yeah, it's always best to pretend that the Dallas Police Department
and the FBI wanted to jump through numerous ridiculous and complicated
hoops regarding the "bus" and the "cab" rides to frame a guy named
Oswald -- even though those same authorities had plenty of evidence to
prove Oswald's guilt ALREADY.
Great plan. Looks like they probably put Farley in charge of that
scheme. Sounds like he'd be just the person to orchestrate such
totally unnecessary nonsense.
>>> "And do me a favour? Shove your "sickening" comments where the sun don't shine because, let's face it, what I really think about you, I'm unfortunately not allowed to say." <<<
You already did when you broke forum rules by calling me a "Goddamn
fool" just a minute ago. Why stop there, Farley? I can take it. My
skin's thick enough. (After all, it's "extra crispy". Right?)
And the day I'll do an evidence-mangling conspiracy theorist like Lee
Farley any favors (or even any British favours) is the day when Lee
Harvey Oswald's innocence in the JFK and Tippit murders is proved. In
other words, it's never going to happen.
>>> "Oh and yeah, before I forget, in addition to McWatters not IDing Oswald, you do know that Whaley didn't either[?] Or is that information not in your stinking bucket?" <<<
You just don't give a damn how much revising of history and the facts
you have to do in order to clean the skirts of your lover boy, Lee
Oswald, do you?
Truly pa-thet-ic. (As usual.)
>>> "There's one born every day." <<<
And Lee Farley is living proof [that a conspiracy kook and clown is
born every minute].
Have a great day.
(And tomorrow will be even better! Because I think Farley plans on
resurrecting the false story about how Oswald was such a lousy
rifleman, he couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. And the day after
that, Farley will be spreading the additional hunk of misinformation
about how the Warren Commission was boxing itself in to a 5.6-second
timeline for the shooting of President Kennedy. I can't wait.)
David Von Pein
http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17058&st=60&p=214126&#entry214126
http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17058&st=60&p=214129&#entry214129
LEE FARLEY BELLOWED:
>>> "You are now more of a Goddamn fool than you were 10 minutes ago. <snipping most of tirade>" <<<
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
You forgot to wipe off some of the foam from your mouth after your
latest silly tantrum, Farley.
See if Dave "Zapruder Never Filmed A Thing" Healy has a napkin. He'll
probably help you out.
>>> "The simple fact of the matter is your bucket that your head is stuck inside [of] is stinking this ken up." <<<
With conspiracy theorists [i.e., retards] like Lee Farley mangling the
evidence (and mangling regular ol' common sense, to boot) on a daily
basis here in the Conspiracy Heaven known as "The Education Forum",
this "ken" can hardly get any stinkier.
BTW, since you mentioned non sequiturs, did you hear Groden on a
recent radio interview say that he thinks SIX shots totally MISSED the
President's limousine during the assassination in Dallas? And Bob also
said that Connally was hit "FOUR TIMES" and Kennedy was hit "FOUR
TIMES" by bullets.
Sounds like Robert G. is now up to FOURTEEN SHOTS in Dealey Plaza.
Sorry, Don Adams, your 11-shot scenario has now been officially
surpassed.
David Von Pein
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/493b172cf8164995
>>> "A little editing never hurt any writer though. A strong argument doesn't need ad hominem." <<<
Yes, that's true. But it's so much fun to make fun of these crazy
people, Peter [Fokes]. Surely you can appreciate my zeal in doing so.
After all, Pete, we're talking about people who think the DPD would
have wanted to pretend that LHO was on a bus after the assassination--
even though there was absolutely no reason to fake that kind of thing
whatsoever. And, for that matter, there was no need for the cops to
want to fake Oswald's cab ride either (even if the DPD did want to
frame Oswald).
Because even if we had no knowledge at all of Oswald's mode of
transportation from the TSBD to his roominghouse, we can be sure he
DID make that journey to Oak Cliff, because Earlene Roberts witnessed
him coming home at about 1:00.
And Lee Farley's argument about how the cops desperately needed the
bus ride to establish Oswald's "fleeing" the scene of the crime is
enough to make anybody's bladder bust wide open. Because even without
the bus ride, isn't it kind of obvious that Oswald DID FLEE THE MURDER
SCENE just after 12:30?
Earlene Roberts, alone, establishes that fact via her testimony about
Oswald rushing into and out of his room on 11/22. Plus, the mere fact
that Oswald wasn't anywhere to be found in the TSBD shortly after the
assassination tells us that he left the scene of the crime.
And yet people like Farley and DiEugenio think their paper-thin
arguments regarding a "phony" bus trip AND a "phony" cab ride DON'T
deserve to be ridiculed.
Jesus, Joseph, and Mary!
Gil Jesus
> the
> evidence that exists demonstrates beyond ALL reasonable doubt that
> Oswald was, in fact, a passenger on Cecil McWatters' bus AND a
> passenger in William Whaley's taxicab on 11/22/63.
Beyond ALL reasonable doubt ?
Whaley testified that he selected # 2 in the lineup ( Knapp ) as the
one he gave a ride to, yet his affidavit said he selected # 3
( Oswald ). The Commission asked him why the discrepancy:
Mr. BELIN. All right. Now in here it says, "The No. 3 man who I now
know is Lee Harvey Oswald was the man who I carried from the Greyhound
Bus Station " Was this the No. 3 or the No. 2 man?
Mr. WHALEY. I signed that statement before they carried me down to
see the lineup. I signed this statement, and then they carried me
down to the lineup at 2:30 in the afternoon.
( 6 H 430 )
So Whaley signed the affidavit identifying Oswald BEFORE he ever saw
the lineup.
mucher1
How can YOU be so sure when Whaley himself admitted that his
recollection was fuzzy?
Mr. WHALEY. Let me tell you how they fixed this up. They had me in the
office saying that. They were writing it out on paper, and they wrote
it out on paper, and this officer, Leavelle, I think that is his name,
before he finished and before I signed he wanted me to go with him to
the lineup, so I went to the lineup, and I come back and he asked me
which one it was, which number it was, and I identified the man, and
we went back up in the office again, and then they had me sign this.
That is as near as I can remember.
My recollection for that afternoon in that office was very disturbed
because everytime they would open the door, some flash camera would
flash in your face and everybody coming in and out and asking you
questions. (6 H 430)
Weren't you corrected on this a few days ago?
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/6962d6641bdc1989
mucher1
>
> > the
> > evidence that exists demonstrates beyond ALL reasonable doubt that
> > Oswald was, in fact, a passenger on Cecil McWatters' bus AND a
> > passenger in William Whaley's taxicab on 11/22/63.
>
> Beyond ALL reasonable doubt ?
>
> Whaley testified that he selected # 2 in the lineup ( Knapp ) as the
> one he gave a ride to, yet his affidavit said he selected # 3
> ( Oswald ). The Commission asked him why the discrepancy:
Read his testimony in toto. He may have mixed up the numbers assigned
to the lineup, but it's pretty obvious that the man he identified was
Oswald (ie not Knapp). It's typically dishonest of you to pretend
otherwise.
> Mr. BELIN. All right. Now in here it says, "The No. 3 man who I now
> know is Lee Harvey Oswald was the man who I carried from the Greyhound
> Bus Station " Was this the No. 3 or the No. 2 man?
>
> Mr. WHALEY. I signed that statement before they carried me down to
> see the lineup. I signed this statement, and then they carried me
> down to the lineup at 2:30 in the afternoon.
>
> ( 6 H 430 )
>
> So Whaley signed the affidavit identifying Oswald BEFORE he ever saw
> the lineup.
Why on Earth would the evil conspirators tell a witness to help them
railroad a suspect in such an obvious fashion? Why would the witness
later admit it to the WC? Why blow the whistle on the frame-up and
continue to lie about Oswald being the man he identified? Doesn't it
seem more likely that Whaley was confused about the exact sequence of
events? See my previous post.
robcap...@netscape.com
>
> http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17058&st=45&p=2...
Dave is talking to himself again! LOL!! YOU know where Lee is Dave,
why not go there and talk to him? What is with all the lurking and no
posting over there?
lazu...@webtv.net
this creep Von Pein call anyone kook...and there's no consequences....
that's why other than Blubaugh, CJ and a couple others there's nothing
left but Bugliosi Butt Buddies, and token johnny one note conspiracists
over there..laz
David Von Pein
>>> "That's why McAdams is such an asshole and a very dangerous man...he lets this creep Von Pein call anyone kook...and there's no consequences." <<<
Ol' Laz is wrong again (what a shocker).
McAdams won't let me call anybody a kook who is a current member at
aaj.
I can call Kook DiEugenio and Kook Fetzer the kooks that they are ONLY
because they are not regular posting members at aaj.
Got that, Kook Laz?
David Von Pein
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
The evidence that exists demonstrates beyond ALL reasonable doubt that
Oswald was, in fact, a passenger on Cecil McWatters' bus AND a
passenger in William Whaley's taxicab on 11/22/63.
GIL JESUS SAID:
Beyond ALL reasonable doubt? .... Whaley signed the affidavit
identifying Oswald BEFORE he ever saw the lineup.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Even if that's true, so what?
We know William Whaley had actually identified Oswald as his passenger
BEFORE he signed any affidavit and BEFORE he had ever seen Oswald in
any lineup.
How do we know this?
Because Whaley told us so, via his Warren Commission testimony:
Mr. BALL. Later that day did you--were you called down to the police
department?
Mr. WHALEY. No, sir.
Mr. BALL. Were you the next day?
Mr. WHALEY. No, sir; they came and got me, sir, the next day after I
told my superior when I saw in the paper his picture, I told my
superiors that that had been my passenger that day at noon. They
called up the police and they came up and got me.
Mr. BALL. When you saw in the newspaper the picture of the man?
Mr. WHALEY. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. You went to your superior and told him you thought he was
your passenger?
Mr. WHALEY. Yes, sir.
------------------
So, Whaley already KNEW that Oswald had been in his cab before he ever
went down to City Hall to identify LHO or to fill out any statements
or affidavits. That's the whole reason for Whaley making himself known
to the police in the first place. The police didn't seek out Whaley;
Whaley, in effect, went to the police on his own to tell them he knew
Oswald had been a passenger in his taxicab.
BTW, Whaley was also very confused as to the chronology of the events
concerning his signed "statement". He said he actually signed the
statement AFTER he saw the lineup (6 H 431).
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh6/html/WC_Vol6_0221a.htm
http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/08/william-whaley.html
Ben Holmes
lazu...@webtv.net says...
>
>That's why McAdams is such an asshole and a very dangerous man...he lets
>this creep Von Pein call anyone kook...and there's no consequences....
Nah... any intelligent researcher will quickly come to the conclusion that if a
forum must be censored, then it must have problems with the truth.
Why can't McAdams, and other LNT'ers - face the evidence in an UNCENSORED forum?
Simple - the evidence doesn't favor their faith.
>that's why other than Blubaugh, CJ and a couple others there's nothing
>left but Bugliosi Butt Buddies, and token johnny one note conspiracists
>over there..laz
It's a waste of time posting on a censored forum. It can only help them.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Holmes
Learn to Make Money with a Website - http://www.burningknife.com
robcap...@netscape.com
Actually there is another board where Lee Farley posts and Dave used
to post a lot there too, but now he just comes and "watches".
He won't respond to this question either (Why does he do this?).
timstter
But Laz, you ARE a kook!
Informative Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*