"CAN IT GET ANY BETTER THAN THAT?!"
David Von Pein
>>> "Presently the Bugliosi/HBO team is sending up flags (on this board in particular) looking for program material that resonates and addresses CT concerns re the case...and more importantly, what they, the Bugliosi-HBO prodcuers [sic] frankly need to address if they ever have hopes for a successful JFK/Bug/Hanks program. Frankly, they've noplace else to test their *dumb* theories. This is their incubator." <<<
<large-sized barrel laugh here>
Healy thinks that VB & HBO actually give a rat's ass about the stupid
things that are being uttered by a bunch of evidence-mangling Super-
Kooks at a nearly-deserted JFK forum that doubles as a padded cell for
conspiracy-thirsty idiots who think they've somehow "cracked the case
wide open!" as they race to their keyboards whenever they discover
"bold, new evidence of conspiracy!" in JFK's murder.
The only POSSIBLE reason for Mr. Hanks or Mr. Paxton or Mr. Bugliosi
to ever want to check out the goings-on in this CT evidence-skewing
factory (which probably never happens at all) would be to laugh
themselves silly. (That's certainly the main attraction for me
anyway.)
>>> "They need to float specific LHO topics, questions and areas of concern re JFK's assassination and following cover-up--as witnessed by the current Ruth Paine threads. Von Pein is drowning this board. And Ruth Paine is a problem, a REAL problem for Lone Nut's [sic]." <<<
As if VB or anybody else has the slightest control over the things I
choose to write about on the Internet. Healy's back in his imagined
little dream world again I see -- a world that comes complete with a
handy crystal ball, with which the kook knows exactly what's going on
in everybody's head, including Tom Hanks' and Vince Bugliosi's. (I
love it! I ask you--who WOULDN'T love the hobby of making fun of a
kook like Mr. Healy on a regular basis?)
<Damn, that weak bladder's acting up again....bad!>
INSTANT REPLAY (just for the inevitable huge laughs that will follow):
>>> "They [meaning: the evil and dastardly VB, T. Hanks, and HBO] need to float specific LHO topics...as witnessed by the current Ruth Paine threads. Von Pein is drowning this board. And Ruth Paine is a problem, a REAL problem for Lone Nut's [sic]." <<<
As if VB said the following to me the other day----
"You know, Dave, I think we're going to have a really big
problem getting the HBO viewers to believe anything that that lying
vixen named Ruth Paine said. Her story, as you know Dave, just reeks
with lies and phoniness and underhanded conspiracy-flavored plots
underneath the surface. So Tommy Hanks and I want you to write up a
series of articles on Ruth Paine and her WC testimony at the Google
place where you post all the time....and let's see what kind of
reaction you get from those ever-so-smart and all-knowing CTers in
there.
"Remember, Dave, don't tip your hand or anything....let 'em
think you really believe Mrs. Paine's hogwash that she testified to in
'64. Prop up Ruth as a really good LN witness and all that kind of LN
bullshit that you're so good at doing....just like you did with your
William Whaley essay a while back. And then we'll be able to get the
REAL scoop about Mrs. Paine from the likes of Benji Holmes, Walter
Cakebread, Lazuli what's-his-name, Robby "LHO Shot No One" Cap-
something (he's one of the TOP brains of that CT outfit for sure!),
Donny Willis, and Gilberto Jesus.
"And if we get really lucky, we'll get a lot of great anti-Ruth
stuff out of Davey G. Healy and (let's hope and pray) Tony Marsh! If
that happens, we've got it made, DVP my boy! Because those guys know
it ALL when it comes to Ruth "Vixen" Paine...and any other sub-topic
we choose to throw at them!
"So get to work on that right away Dave. And then after the
CTers/mega-brains at the asylum give us the whole true story about
Paine, we'll sound 'em out on all of those other rotten liars
connected with the case -- like that little tramp Marina, and that
"so-
called" Oswald eyewitness Roy S. Truly [spit!], and his partner in
lies Marrion L. Baker.
"And then, Dave, we'll get the real story on Will Fritz [no tape
recorder available, my ass!]. And Buell Frazier [no lunch bag, my rear
end!]. And Howard Brennan [positive ID on LHO, my spleen!]. Remember
to seek out "Walt Duncan-Hines" on the Brennan thing, Dave. That guy's
got the REAL story on Howard for sure. I've already seen some of the
excellent, EXCELLENT stuff Walter's written on Brennan...and it looks
great. I mean, who'd have thunk?--Howard REALLY was "DESCRIBING" the
WEST end of the Depository all that time he was testifying! I'd never
thought of that before. [slaps forehead.] But, thank God there are
alert students of the case like Mr. Duncan-Hines around.
"And just think, Dave, we don't even have to PAY a single
freakin' cent to get the real story of the assassination! All we have
to do is "plant" a schnook like you--DVP--into the asylum (which is
disguised as a forum) and we can pick the brains of geniuses like
Walter and Robby and David "Zapruder Wasn't Even There" Healy FOR
FREE! Can it GET any better than that?!"
>>> "Dave persists, perhaps in the hope of clarifying the very weak WCR evidence and witness points concerning LHO/SBT." <<<
If you've got ANY pity in you at all, Mr. Kook, you'll stop before my
bladder bursts (again). Ten-Four?
>>> "David [V.P.], of course, has his own agenda." <<<
Yes, I do. And I thought I made that agenda clear long ago. My
"asylum" agenda is (as is quite evident by way of my fictitious VB
conversation shown above) --- To ridicule the likes of CT-Kooks like
Mr. Healy as much as possible.
>>> "So David Von Pein, accept the failure...the longer you deny it, the less likely you'll get that on-camera role you desire in the next Bugliosi soap opera installment." <<<
There is nothing I desire less than that.
But one of the things I enjoy MOST is watching David G. Healy make his
weekly fool of himself (as he just did with his incredibly-silly
thread-starting post above).
>>> "Bug doesn't need you Dave, he needs Dale Myer's [sic]." <<<
And the one person that the CT brigade certainly does NOT need is:
David G. Healy. His foolishness has done more for the "LN" cause than
it's done for the "CT" one.
CTers, if they have even a single brain cell left working in their
craniums, desperately should want to put as much distance between
themselves and this mega-kook named Healy as is humanly possible.
David Von Pein
April 2008
Gil Jesus
WC refusing to ANSWER FOR THEIR LIES---LIKE THIS ONE:
ON LIMB AND PUBIC HAIRS FOUND ON THE BLANKET COMING FROM LEE HARVEY
OSWALD:
the testimony said:
Mr. STOMBAUGH. I could not say that these hairs came from Oswald. I
could not say they definitely came from him to the exclusion of all
other Caucasian persons in the world.
( 4 H 69 )
But the WC Report said:
"Several of the limb and pubic hairs matched samples of Oswald's limb
and pubic hairs obtained by the Dallas Police...."
( Report, Appendix X, "Hairs and Fibers", pg 590 )
ANSWER FOR THEIR LIES
David Von Pein
That "pubic hair" statement by the WC isn't a lie, Gil. The
characteristics of the hairs in the blanket were consistent with
Oswald's. I.E., they "matched" Oswald's hairs.
The WC didn't say they were positively Oswald's hairs -- they merely
said the hairs "matched"....and they did.
But the word "matched" doesn't have to mean "to the exclusion".
"Matched" is a softer term. And that's why the WC didn't use any kind
of "to the exclusion" term regarding the hairs....or regarding the
Walker bullet (which is another item on your silly "lies" list
recently).
The Walker bullet generally "matches" bullets from Rifle C2766, but
it's not a "to the exclusion" match.
But anyone with one decent eyeball can easily see the similarities
between CE399 and CE573:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0142b.htm
Gil Jesus
others", bonehead.
There's no degree of "matching".
There's no interpretation of the word "match".
The hair on the blanket "matched" all other caucasion people also.
That's not a positive ID it was Oswald's..
GO PEDAL YOUR BS SOMEPLACE ELSE.
David Von Pein
>>> "There's no degree of "matching"." <<<
Bullshit.
See the Webster's definitions below.
>>> "That's not a positive ID it was Oswald's." <<<
And the WC never said the hairs were positively Oswald's, idiot. They
said the blanket hairs "matched" Oswald's. And they did.
Better look up the word "match", retard. It doesn't have to mean "to
the exclusion":
MATCH -- :to put in a set possessing equal or harmonizing
attributes (2): to cause to correspond : to compare favorably with
(2): to harmonize with <the jacket matched the pants> c: to provide
with a counterpart 4: to fit together or make suitable for fitting
together.
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/match%5B2%5D
I'll repeat this definition of "match" in big letters for the retard
named Jesus:
"TO COMPARE FAVORABLY WITH."