A Blast From The Past

[David Von Pein]

Excerpts from a good 2007 acj thread, wherein I rip to shreds many of
the worn-out CT myths still being clung to by some kook named Caprio:

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

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Conspiracy theorists rarely, if ever, acknowledge the fact that the
Warren Commission went to additional lengths (beyond what they
certainly HAD to do, of course) to determine the truth with respect to
the major pieces of physical evidence connected with the assassination
(such as the ballistics/bullet evidence and the fingerprint evidence),
in
that those pieces of evidence were examined by not only people
employed by the FBI....but also by INDEPENDENT experts OUTSIDE THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT in these fields of evidence identification.

Independent experts Joseph Nicol of Illinois (for ballistics) and
Arthur Mandella
of the New York City Police Department (for fingerprint analysis) were
brought in by the WC to examine various pieces of evidence connected
with the case, and both Nicol and Mandella arrived at the exact same
conclusions that the FBI did.

In fact, one of the independent experts (Nicol) even went a step
beyond the FBI when he testified that one of the four bullets removed
from Officer J.D. Tippit's body could positively be linked to Lee
Harvey
Oswald's Smith & Wesson .38 revolver to the exclusion of every other
gun on the planet. Here's what Nicol told the Commission:

JOSEPH NICOL -- "On specimen 602--I'm sorry--603 [one of the four
bullets taken out of Tippit's body], which I have designated as Q-502,
I found sufficient individual characteristics to lead me to the
conclusion that that projectile was fired in the same weapon that
fired the projectiles in 606."

MEL EISENBERG -- "That is to the exclusion of all other weapons?"

MR. NICOL -- "Yes, sir."

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

So, it would appear to me that the Warren Commission did an excellent
job of getting at the truth of the matters concerning these very
important
determinations regarding the PHYSICAL EVIDENCE in the John F. Kennedy
murder case.

The Commission, in fact, utilized (in many instances) TRIPLE
redundancy
when it came to arriving at conclusions about the evidence in the
case;
i.e., the WC had up to three separate people (from both Governmental
and non-Governmental institutions) examine the critical pieces of
physical
evidence in this murder case....and they ALL came to the same basic
conclusions when each of them testified for the Warren Commission in
1964.

The Commission, come to think of it, possibly utilized that type of
redundancy in an effort to ward off the exact kind of allegations that
are still be hurled at the WC to this day -- i.e., allegations that
the
"fox [the Government's own FBI] was investigating the chicken coop".

But what about experts like the previously mentioned Nicol and
Mandella (who worked for non-Federal Government organizations in
Illinois and New York)?

Do conspiracy theorists think that those independent experts in the
fields of ballistics and fingerprint identification told a bunch of
lies to
the Warren Commission, too?

In short, is there anything that conspiracy theorists won't do, say,
twist, or allege in order to try to discredit the work that was done
by the Warren Commission and its legal staff in 1963 and 1964?

I think I know the answer to that last question. Don't you?


ROB CAPRIO SAID:


>>> [Referring to Jim Garrison:] "You don't have to agree with everything someone says or does to still find worth in their effort. You should learn this." <<<


DVP:

Garrison did NOTHING of a redeeming or "worthy" nature. Nothing. Quite
the opposite, in fact. He prosecuted a man he knew to be totally
innocent
(Clay Shaw), and he believed in the craziest of all imaginable JFK
conspiracy theories -- a pre-arranged one-patsy plot involving up to
FIVE shooters blasting away at the President.

And: Garrison went further into nutsville territory by uttering this
brazen
lie in 1967 (just one of the many lies and misrepresentations he
spewed
forth in the late 1960s):

"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 (Via his Playboy Magazine
interview in 1967)


Maybe Mr. Garrison should have taken a good look at these affidavits
before shooting off his mouth to Playboy Magazine:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/vdavis.htm

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/bdavis.htm


CAPRIO:

>>> "My question is simple: if he [LHO] craved world attention, and he accomplished something the best shots in the world couldn't accomplish, why deny it?" <<<


DVP:

Denying it got him the same amount of world attention, idiot. And
that's because Oswald knew he was guilty and he also knew that he left
behind a popcorn trail for the police that convicts him 30 times over.

Perhaps that's a viable explanation for why he left behind those
bullet shells in the window, and the gun on the same 6th Floor, and
his fingerprints all over the place, and the shells on 10th Street,
etc. Maybe, deep down, he WANTED to get caught.

We know that he certainly EXPECTED to get caught, that's for sure.
And we know this via his actions that Friday morning in Irving (e.g.,
leaving behind the $170 and the wedding ring for Marina).

It's hard to get inside the head of a person who actually has it
inside him the capacity to murder the President of the United States.
That's what makes it a bit difficult to know what Oswald's exact
motives were; or why he was so incredibly stupid and inept after
performing the shooting (e.g., leaving behind enough "LHO Was Here"
evidence to make sure he'd be convicted, and then, on top of that,
also killing a policeman while in full flight from the first murder,
and doing the latter in front of many witnesses too).

But to think that ALL of this stuff has been conveniently "planted" by
other people after the fact is just too ridiculous to be considered.
Author and ballistics expert Larry Sturdivan said it very nicely in
his 2005 book when he said:

"While one of the pieces of physical evidence could conceivably have
been faked by an expert, there is no possibility that an expert, or
team of super-experts, could have fabricated the perfectly coordinated
whole. This brings to mind the recurrent theme in most conspiracy
books. All the officials alternate between the role of "Keystone
Kops", with the inability to recognize the implications of the most
elementary evidence, and "Evil Geniuses", with superhuman abilities to
fake physical evidence that is in complete agreement with all the
other faked evidence." -- Larry M. Sturdivan; Page 246 of "The JFK
Myths"


Oh, btw Robby, this statement of yours is dead wrong (as per your
norm) --
"He accomplished something the best shots in the world couldn't
accomplish."

Fact is, of course, that many people have duplicated (and even
bettered)
Oswald's so-called "impossible feat", including some expert riflemen
in
1967 (for this CBS-TV special).

So you can take that CT Myth out back and bury it too. (Along with all
the other outdated and debunked myths you insist upon espousing as
the truth.)




CAPRIO:

>>> "[The three shells in the sniper's nest] were fired at some point [prior] to the time of the assassination and left to frame LHO." <<<


DVP:

And the DPD just happened to have three spent rifle cartridges on them
to "plant" beneath the killer's window, huh?

If that's not what you're suggesting, then what shells were
photographed
by Lt. J.C. Day and Robert Studebaker very shortly after the
assassination
(and BEFORE the Carcano rifle of Oswald's was even removed from the
building)?


CAPRIO:

>>> "CE399 is undoubtedly from the M-C, but it is an obvious plant and was not actually fired at the president or JBC." <<<

DVP:

You're an idiot.

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/04/index.html#CE399


=================================================


More excerpts follow in the next few posts. Full 2007 discussion here:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/10/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-66.html

[David Von Pein]

CAPRIO:

>>> "You think LHO is guilty based on very little evidence..." <<<


DVP:

There's that nutty talk again. (Really nutty.)

You're just plain wrong here, Rob. Simple as that. No matter how many
times you insist that there's "very little evidence" against Lee
Oswald, it still won't be true. The exact opposite is true, in fact.

There is so much evidence against Oswald for the two murders he
carried out on November 22, 1963, it's almost beyond belief.

I suppose that's part of the reason you just simply don't want to
believe in the vast assortment of evidence that exists against Mr.
Oswald; i.e., you probably think it's just "too pat", right? It's too
convenient. Which means, per some CTers, that this huge mountain of
evidence (both physical and circumstantial) must somehow be fake or
manufactured in some way.

But at some point, the person making such bold claims must PROVE HIS
CASE, and prove that all (or ANY) of this evidence against LHO is, in
fact, "faked" or "planted", or whatever. Thus far, such proof has not
arrived.

In fact, CTers are pitiful in this regard. They don't really even TRY
to prove their claims about "phony evidence". They think that by just
SAYING the evidence is "no good", it magically makes it so. But, as
Vincent Bugliosi (a seasoned courtroom lawyer) would say -- "It's not
quite that easy!"

Speaking (again) of Vince, now seems like a pretty good time for
another "Vince Common Sense Break". Let's bask in the following logic
for just a minute or two, shall we? All quotes are directly from the
indicated pages of Bugliosi's 2007 masterwork "Reclaiming History: The
Assassination Of President John F. Kennedy":

"Not only was there PHYSICAL circumstantial evidence against Oswald
[e.g., guns, bullets, and fingerprints traced to the defendant], but
there was an enormous amount of non-physical circumstantial evidence,
including the very most powerful in this category: his flight from the
murder scene, his resisting arrest, and his telling one provable lie
after another upon his apprehension, all showing an unmistakable
consciousness of guilt." -- Page 528 of endnotes

==========

"In a city of more than 700,000 people, what is the probability of one
of them being the owner and possessor of the weapons that murdered
both Kennedy and Tippit, and yet still be innocent of both murders?
Aren't we talking about DNA numbers here, like one out of several
billion or trillion? Is there a mathematician in the house?" -- Page
964

==========

"It is remarkable that conspiracy theorists can believe that groups
like the CIA, military-industrial complex, and FBI would murder the
president, but cannot accept the likelihood, even the possibility,
that a nut like Oswald would flip out and commit the act, despite the
fact that there is a ton of evidence showing that Oswald killed
Kennedy, and not an ounce showing that any of these groups had
anything to do with the assassination. It is further remarkable that
these conspiracy theorists aren't troubled in the least by their
inability to present any evidence that Oswald was set up and framed.
For them, the mere belief or speculation that he was is a more-than-
adequate substitute for evidence." -- Pages 951-952

==========

"The Warren Commission critics and conspiracy theorists display an
astonishing inability to see the vast forest of evidence proving
Oswald's guilt because of their penchant for obsessing over the
branches, even the leaves of individual trees. And, because virtually
all of them have no background in criminal investigation, they look at
each leaf (piece of evidence) by itself, hardly ever in relation to,
and in the context of, all the other evidence." -- Pages 952-953

==========

"I can tell the readers of this book that if anyone in the future
maintains to them that Oswald was just a patsy and did not kill
Kennedy, that person is either unaware of the evidence against Oswald
or simply a very silly person. .... Any denial of Oswald's guilt is
not worthy of serious discussion." -- Page 969

[David Von Pein]

CAPRIO:

>>> "The real point is that LHO could not do what your theory claims by himself (in terms of the SBT [Single-Bullet Theory], only with God's help); therefore, common sense says he had help at the very least. Help = conspiracy. Not real difficult, Dave." <<<

DVP:

And just because ALL of the physical (ballistics) evidence DOES,
indeed, tell the world that you are 100% wrong, with that evidence
showing that one gunman DID, indeed, pull off the assassination of
President Kennedy all by himself (i.e., with Lee Harvey Oswald's very
own C2766 Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, firing three shots from Oswald's
own workplace on the 6th Floor of the Texas School Book Depository
Building in Dealey Plaza)....you, a rabid conspiracist, choose to
believe exactly the OPPOSITE from what this ballistics evidence
indicates.

Is that about the size of the situation as she currently exists there
in Kookville? (Meaning: Things are normal in Kookville....everything
is upside-down and topsy-turvy.)

And maybe you should take a closer look at the Single-Bullet Theory,
Robert. It's the only possible scenario that makes a lick of sense
(when
all of the physical evidence and all variables regarding the victims
are evaluated).

I've taken a pretty close look at the SBT, along with the crazy
solutions
that some CTers have invented to replace the SBT; and if you truly
think
that ANY theory purported by CTers (if you can even get a CTer to talk
about a detailed anti-SBT scenario, which is very rare) is MORE
reasonable
and MORE convincing than the single-bullet scenario, then you are
immersed
deeper in conspiracy quicksand than anyone could possibly imagine.

[David Von Pein]

CAPRIO:

>>> "Why was Ruby allowed to get so close to shoot LHO? Answer that one." <<<


DVP:

An amazing combination of things brought about the murder of JFK's
assassin in the police basement on November 24th, 1963. .....

1.) Jack Ruby and WHO he was; i.e., he was KNOWN by many DPD officers
and Dallas officials; and Ruby was SEEN by some of these people
earlier that weekend at DPD Headquarters. This made it very easy for
Ruby to blend in with the crowd at the bottom of the basement's ramp
just before Oswald was brought out. In effect, it would have been a
"normal" thing to have seen Jack Ruby there.

2.) The fact that the basement had been searched by police BEFORE Ruby
entered the basement at 11:20 AM. If Ruby had managed to sneak into
the basement a half-hour or so earlier, he almost certainly would have
been ejected by police officers. But Jack's timing was impeccable,
entering the basement probably no more than 45 seconds before Oswald
appeared.

3.) The moving of the police car which exited the basement garage just
seconds before the shooting....which allowed Ruby to sneak in
unnoticed by Officer Roy Vaughn, who was guarding the entrance ramp to
the garage, because Vaughn had to step into the street to stop traffic
so that Officer Pierce could drive out of the garage. Again, only the
incredibly fortunate timing by Jack Ruby allowed him to gain entry
into that basement.

4.) Karen Carlin's telephone call to Ruby on Sunday morning. That
call, and its timing, permitted Ruby to be in the right place at just
the right time at 11:20 AM at the top of the Main St. ramp, just one
minute before Oswald was killed.

5.) Ruby's habit of almost always carrying a gun ON HIM wherever he
went. Because if Ruby HADN'T had this habit, he wouldn't have been
able to kill Oswald anyway (unless he had planned to beat Lee Harvey
to death with the brass knuckles that Jack had in his car, also known
as "Ruby's Thrift Shop On Wheels").

6.) Jack Ruby's violent temper and his willingness to take the law
into
his own hands. Without these character traits of Ruby's firmly in
place
on 11/24/63, it's very likely that Mr. Oswald would have lived to see
the sun come up November 25th.

[David Von Pein]

CAPRIO:

>>> "More people who were in the Marines with him have said he was a horrible shot, vs. anyone you can find. It is well documented with his scores as well." <<<


DVP:

Bullshit.

Dr. John Lattimer was able to acquire Oswald's original "Score Book"
from the Marines (or at least one such book that recorded some of
Oswald's rifle-range scores), and that book showed the results of two
of Oswald's near-perfect scores on the range (at a 200-yard distance,
which is more than twice the distance of Oswald's third shot in
Dallas,
which was only 88 yards).

In a documentary a few years ago, Dr. Lattimer showed the two pages of
the Score Book on camera. One of the scores was 48 out of 50; and on
another day, Oswald scored a 49 out of 50 on the 200-yard rifle range.

But it's best for you conspiracy-happy kooks if you keep on believing
that Lee Harvey Oswald couldn't hit the broadest side of the
proverbial barn, despite the fact that you're dead wrong.

[mainframetech]

Amazing how many posts all about himself he can generate in a short
time...:)

Chris

[aeffects]

On May 19, 4:13 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> Excerpts from a good 2007 acj thread, wherein I rip to shreds many of
> the worn-out CT myths still being clung to by some kook named Caprio:
>

"rip to shreds", easy to do when a lone nut fool creates one of his CT
alter ego's.... you need to grow up nadless. 16 months to the
anniversary..... will you be partying that night?

<snip the lone nut lunacy>

[aeffects]

P.U.

[Ben Holmes]

In article <2c5c5596-ec0f-4c16...@kw17g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
aeffects says...

It's easy to "rip to shreds" a kook that was probably either intensely mentally
challenged, or a LNT'er to begin with.

It's just a tad more difficult to do so with the 45 Questions... rip away!


--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Holmes
Learn to Make Money with a Website - http://www.burningknife.com

[timstter]

It's amazing how little the pathetic Caprio knew.

About his only use around here was to berate the pompous Holmes, LOL!

Regards,

Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*

[timstter]

On May 20, 9:25 am, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <2c5c5596-ec0f-4c16-a377-ea0844d3f...@kw17g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,

How do you plan on reading the responses skulking behind your
killfilter, Yellow Pants?

You're nothing but a research FRAUD, Benny!

The idea of you accusing another poster of cowardice is quite
laughable, in my view.

Informative Regards,

[Bill Clarke]

In article <8e98362e-d8f5-4557...@jx17g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
timstter says...
>
>On May 20, 9:25=A0am, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> In article <2c5c5596-ec0f-4c16-a377-ea0844d3f...@kw17g2000pbb.googlegroup=

>s.com>,
>> aeffects says...
>>
>>
>>
>> >On May 19, 4:13=3DA0am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >> Excerpts from a good 2007 acj thread, wherein I rip to shreds many of
>> >> the worn-out CT myths still being clung to by some kook named Caprio:
>>
>> >"rip to shreds", easy to do when a lone nut fool creates one of his CT
>> >alter ego's.... you need to grow up nadless. 16 months to the
>> >anniversary..... will you be partying that night?
>>
>> ><snip the lone nut lunacy>
>>

>> It's easy to "rip to shreds" a kook that was probably either intensely me=

>ntally
>> challenged, or a LNT'er to begin with.
>>

>> It's just a tad more difficult to do so with the 45 Questions... rip away=

>!
>>
>> --
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Ben Holmes
>> Learn to Make Money with a Website -http://www.burningknife.com
>
>How do you plan on reading the responses skulking behind your
>killfilter, Yellow Pants?

Poor Benny missed the many times you pointed out Mark Lane's lies, page number
and all because of his fierce kill filter. Now he wants me to find them for
him. I don't think so.

>You're nothing but a research FRAUD, Benny!
>
>The idea of you accusing another poster of cowardice is quite
>laughable, in my view.

Benny has squealed "coward" and "liar" for so long and so often it really has no
meaning anymore. Meaningless. Just like Benny.

Bill Clarke

[Ben Holmes]

In article <jparl...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...

>
>In article <8e98362e-d8f5-4557...@jx17g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
>timstter says...
>>
>>On May 20, 9:25=A0am, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>>> In article <2c5c5596-ec0f-4c16-a377-ea0844d3f...@kw17g2000pbb.googlegroup=
>>s.com>,
>>> aeffects says...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> >On May 19, 4:13=3DA0am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>>> >> Excerpts from a good 2007 acj thread, wherein I rip to shreds many of
>>> >> the worn-out CT myths still being clung to by some kook named Caprio:
>>>
>>> >"rip to shreds", easy to do when a lone nut fool creates one of his CT
>>> >alter ego's.... you need to grow up nadless. 16 months to the
>>> >anniversary..... will you be partying that night?
>>>
>>> ><snip the lone nut lunacy>
>>>
>>> It's easy to "rip to shreds" a kook that was probably either intensely me=
>>ntally
>>> challenged, or a LNT'er to begin with.
>>>

>>> It's just a tad more difficult to do so with the 45 Questions... rip away!

>>
>>How do you plan on reading the responses skulking behind your
>>killfilter, Yellow Pants?
>
>Poor Benny missed the many times you pointed out Mark Lane's lies, page number
>and all because of his fierce kill filter. Now he wants me to find them for
>him. I don't think so.

You're lying.

It's not *me* you need to convince... but all the lurkers who are looking for
information about the JFK murder.

>>You're nothing but a research FRAUD, Benny!
>>
>>The idea of you accusing another poster of cowardice is quite
>>laughable, in my view.
>
>Benny has squealed "coward" and "liar" for so long and so often it really
>has no meaning anymore. Meaningless. Just like Benny.

You mean you've stopped lying, and I didn't notice???

Tell us Billy - how much longer is your cowardice on the Mark Lane quotes going
to continue?


>Bill Clarke

[tom...@cox.net]

yOU BIG DUMMY;

EVEN A BROKEN CLOCK IS RIGHT TWICE A DAY ! ! !

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB

[tom...@cox.net]

TALK ABOUT "CHERRY-PICKING" ! ! !

YOU NEGLECT TO TELL YOUR READERS THAT VIRGINIA DAVIS'S PHONE NUMBER WAS
FOUND IN JACK RUBY'S NOTE BOOK ! ! !.

David Von Pein <davev...@aol.com> wrote:

[David Von Pein]

>>> "EVEN A BROKEN CLOCK IS RIGHT TWICE A DAY!" <<<

You, however, are never right, Rossley.

[aeffects]

On May 21, 8:10 pm, tom...@cox.net wrote:
> TALK ABOUT "CHERRY-PICKING" ! ! !
>
> YOU NEGLECT TO TELL YOUR READERS THAT VIRGINIA DAVIS'S PHONE NUMBER WAS
> FOUND IN JACK RUBY'S NOTE BOOK ! ! !.

VonPein'ski loves to beat up faux CTer's... something in that indiana
water or the KFC...

> >http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/10/jfk-assassination-arguments-...
> > -66.html
>
> --
> --------------------http://NewsReader.Com/--------------------

[Jason Burke]

Nice crack-addled response. Did you have a little trouble following the
thread, Rosstard? Wipe the drool off your mouth and have your nurse /
mommy explain it to you.

[Sam McClung]

maybe davey has kfc disease, he's gone from original to extra crispy?

[aeffects]

On May 22, 5:37 am, "Sam McClung" <mccl...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> maybe davey has kfc disease, he's gone from original to extra crispy?

a career changing character defect, Sam.... :)

[tom...@cox.net]

im remember you:

You're the guy(?) who is too chickenshit to debate me on the
evidence/testimony.

[Jason Burke]

Is that like 'me love you long time'?

>
> You're the guy(?) who is too chickenshit to debate me on the
> evidence/testimony.
>

GIRAST FAEUWTR!

No one wants to debate a retard, Rosstard. I've seen your debate tactics:

1) Yell as loud as you can when your opponent is speaking.
2) Cover your ears and say 'la, la, la' when your opponent smacks
down your points (come to think of it, that's EVERYTHING out of your
pie-hole.)
3) Finally admit that you have NO evidence that anyone other than Oz
was involved.

Yeah, you're a peach, dipshit.

Now take another few hits off the pipe. You'll probably feel better.
Watch out for those monsters under the bed though. They might have a
wood-chipper!

[tom...@cox.net]

NO WONDER YOU "RAN" FROM RDIO DEBATE.


BADA-BING

(WR 172) States that one bullet taken from officer Tippit match Oswald's
38 "TO THE EXCLUSION OF ALL OTHER WEAPONS"





BADA-BOOM

(WR 559) "The .38 had been RECHAMBERED for a .38 Special cartridge, it had
not been REBARRELED for a .38 Special bullet. The barrel was therefore
slightly oversized for a .38 Special bullet, which has a smaller diameter
than a .38 S&W bullet. This would cause the passage of a .38 Special
bullet through the barrel to be eratic, resulting in
inconsistent microscopic markings."

From WCR page 172 below.



From WCR page 559. Below


SEE> http://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm

David Von Pein <davev...@aol.com> wrote:

[Jason Burke]

WTF, Rossturd?

[jfkassassi...@gmail.com]

Rob Caprio is not a LNer as you are claiming. He posts on our board and his posts are hardly in support of the official conclusion.


Why you would say this is anyone's guess, but it is inaccurate.

JFK Assassination Board

[jfkassassi...@gmail.com]

This is why we probably won't have any LNers on our board as they cannot cite evidence. This post shows someone debationg someone else when that person isn't even around anymore. Totally ridiculous.

JFK Assassination Board

[Ben Holmes]

The last post in *this* thread was 7 years ago.

And a failure to cite evidence hasn't stopped believers from posting
here.