Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

JFK Assassination Forum Archives -- Misc. Topics Of Interest (Part 129)

101 views
Skip to first unread message

David Von Pein

unread,
Mar 11, 2010, 9:40:51 PM3/11/10
to
ARCHIVED JFK ASSASSINATION FORUM POSTS OF INTEREST (PART 129):

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

TOM HANKS AND HOME BOX OFFICE:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/bb52ed465970f781


PAUL HARVEY:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/1852c77c037882b7


JOHN McADAMS' "JFK ASSASSINATION LOGIC":
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/9112a3f10492253e


MAE BRUSSELL:
http://www.MaeBrussell.com
http://www.MaeBrussell.com/Audio/Merrill%20College%20Lecture.html


MARK LANE:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/9ee9012072a84320
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/909325c101baa3d5


JIM GARRISON:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/72676e305c58b39d


JUDYTH VARY BAKER:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/4068064fe9a28781
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/3e9c162022a36f8a
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/ce69977130eedb93


PAUL BENTLEY:
http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1908.msg29922.html#msg29922


OSWALD, "HIDELL", AND P.O. BOX 2915:
http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1906.msg29608.html#msg29608


NATIONAL ARCHIVES EVIDENCE PHOTOS:
http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1867.msg28948.html#msg28948


ANOTHER KOOK AT WORK:
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15575&st=0&p=185318&#entry185318


ADDITIONAL POSTS:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/1a1e02cfc478fada
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/eb7c92bab6024f2d
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/01a8f7954b4f83ed
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/264382ddf9578cf0
http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1909.msg29776.html#msg29776


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

David Von Pein

unread,
Mar 12, 2010, 6:24:00 PM3/12/10
to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/47c08540609ced17


http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/01/four-days-in-november.html

>>> "[David L. Wolper's 1964 film "Four Days In November"] has a narrow focus on the assassination. It parrots the WCR. What a surprise. No wonder "DVP" likes it." <<<

Damn right, "Pam". I love it. Have for years.

And that movie is just as fresh (and more importantly, valid) today as
it was when it was first screened in New York City on October 7, 1964.
And that's because David Wolper and Mel Stuart FOLLOWED THE EVIDENCE
WHERE IT LED THEM -- to Lee Harvey Oswald and his guns.

"Four Days" isn't tainted and marred by the conspiracy "crazies" like
Jim Garrison and Mark Lane (etc.), because the movie was completed
well BEFORE the Warren Commission even finished its work. And that
fact has always amazed me somewhat too.

I've often wondered how the film could be based (at least in part) on
the Warren Commission's findings, which it clearly says it is during
the opening credits of "Four Days" (with the Warren Commission being
listed at the very top of the credit marked "Film and Research
Sources"), when those Commission "findings" weren't even known to the
public until a mere 10 days before the movie debuted in NYC on
10/7/64?

Perhaps Mr. Wolper and company were privy to some "inside" info from
the WC before the Commission made its conclusions public on
9/27/64. ????

In any event, Wolper and Director Stuart and writer Strauss probably
also utilized a lot of their own common sense when putting the film
together (plus there's a "United Press International" credit in the
opening titles as well).

So even without the benefit of having some kind of advanced knowledge
of the Warren Commission's findings and conclusions regarding the
assassination, there would still have been a whole lot of accessible
"Oswald Did It Alone" material to work with between November 1963 and
the film's New York City premiere in October 1964.

Not to mention the fact that the film's executives talked to (and
filmed) several of the actual witnesses related to the events of
November 22, 1963 -- such as Buell Wesley Frazier, Linnie Mae Randle,
Johnny Brewer, and William Whaley.

And as we all know, still to this very day, there is absolutely no
hard evidence of a conspiracy in JFK's murder....which makes David L.
Wolper's "Four Days In November" as accurate and praiseworthy in the
21st century as it was in 1964.

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

RELATED JFK DOCUMENTARY:

David L. Wolper's television "companion piece" to "Four Days In
November", entitled "A THOUSAND DAYS: A TRIBUTE TO JOHN FITZGERALD
KENNEDY" (1964):


http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/02/thousand-days-1964-jfk-tv-special.html


http://Amazon.com/dp/B001GPOTYG


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


Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,
Mar 12, 2010, 10:28:38 PM3/12/10
to

The link below illustrates the advantages of an UNMODERATED forum like
acj (even though acj is filled with kooks like Healy, Caprio, and
Holmes, et al). But even a kook should be allowed to express himself,
no matter how silly he sounds while doing so:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15641

aeffects

unread,
Mar 13, 2010, 4:54:11 AM3/13/10
to
On Mar 12, 7:28 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> The link below illustrates the advantages of an UNMODERATED forum like
> acj (even though acj is filled with kooks like Healy, Caprio, and
> Holmes, et al). But even a kook should be allowed to express himself,
> no matter how silly he sounds while doing so:

fucking pussy-hypocrite.... you run to this board (acj) because
there's no place left for your foolishness.... you own and run 39
blogs and you're left with nothing to do but fantasize over .rosemary,
queen of dabug's realm...

David Von Pein --Ya need help, sicko! Tom Lowry (cdddraftsman), Chcuk
Schuyler (reverse mortgage rip-off arteeeeest, Sam(antha) Brown, akka
Diane.... queen of the perv's, look at who you have supporting you,
shithead..... ya belong in a dimestore tabloid.... you and your
brother still sharing a bedroom at mom's?

R-O-T-F-L-M-F-A-O

> http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15641

David Von Pein

unread,
Mar 13, 2010, 10:38:01 PM3/13/10
to

>>> "Do you have any *idea* the sort of nonsense the media first reported? They said JFK was taken to the hospital in an ambulance." <<<

And Eddie Barker of KRLD-TV (who was one of the most accurate
reporters on the air that day) actually said that President Kennedy
had been taken to Parkland "by bus", which is a comment that always
elicits a chuckle from this writer when I cue up that CBS footage.

David Von Pein

unread,
Mar 14, 2010, 11:32:28 PM3/14/10
to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/72453f9fc386494e


http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/e4373caf7aadc408


>>> "You want them [the ARRB] to hide the [Horne] memos and then have us conspiracy kooks accuse them of a cover-up?" <<<

Tony must have missed my post from last month when I said this:

"After finding out that Doug Horne was a conspiracy kook to end
ALL conspiracy kooks, the ARRB probably was dying to fire him (to save
the Review Board any further embarrassment), but they decided it might
not look too good to fire the only conspiracy theorist on the Review
Board staff (it might look like the Board was "covering up"
something), so they let the kook named Horne stay on the staff and
they let him run wild with his own unique speculation by allowing him
lots of space in the Report in the form of "memos"." -- David R. Von
Pein; February 24, 2010


http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/2bdfb1d377432d7e

aeffects

unread,
Mar 14, 2010, 11:59:04 PM3/14/10
to
On Mar 14, 8:32 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/72453f9fc386...
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/e4373caf7aad...

>
> >>> "You want them [the ARRB] to hide the [Horne] memos and then have us conspiracy kooks accuse them of a cover-up?" <<<
>
> Tony must have missed my post from last month when I said this:
>
>       "After finding out that Doug Horne was a conspiracy kook to end
> ALL conspiracy kooks, the ARRB probably was dying to fire him (to save
> the Review Board any further embarrassment), but they decided it might
> not look too good to fire the only conspiracy theorist on the Review
> Board staff (it might look like the Board was "covering up"
> something), so they let the kook named Horne stay on the staff and
> they let him run wild with his own unique speculation by allowing him
> lots of space in the Report in the form of "memos"." -- David R. Von
> Pein; February 24, 2010
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/2bdfb1d377432d7e

Rosemary hasn't sent you any hankies yet? You're a wuss shithead.....
now you carry on your charade ya'll hear, now! ROTFLMFAO!

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,
Mar 15, 2010, 2:02:13 AM3/15/10
to

A FEW RANDOM COMMENTS ABOUT JFK ASSASSINATION "DEBATE #2" BETWEEN JOHN
McADAMS AND TOM ROSSLEY ON MARCH 13, 2010:

http://YouTube.com/watch?v=yjoVcZ9H_PA

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


RE: JOHN CONNALLY'S CHEST:


Tom Rossley is unique (in a way), because there's not another
conspiracy theorist alive (that I'm aware of) who actually believes
Governor Connally was shot in the chest from the FRONT.

And there's also not another conspiracy theorist alive (to my
knowledge) who thinks that Connally's chest wound was a very small
"round" wound.

The following quotes can easily be found in the Warren Commission
testimony of one of Connally's Parkland physicians, Dr. Robert R.
Shaw:

"A large sucking wound in the front of his right chest." -- Dr.
Robert Shaw

"We knew this [an area below the right nipple on the body] was
the wound exit...by the fact of its size, the ragged edges of the
wound." -- Dr. Robert Shaw

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/shaw1.htm


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

RE: ROBERT FRAZIER:


As John McAdams said, Tom Rossley has completely misinterpreted some
of the testimony of FBI firearms expert Robert A. Frazier (with
respect to the topic of "tumbling" bullets).

Rossley wants the unsuspecting listener to believe that when Bob
Frazier of the FBI said that there was "no evidence at all of tumbling
or yaw" [3H438] of the many test bullets fired from Lee Harvey
Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle (CE139), this comment by Frazier is
supposed to prove (per Rossley) that a Carcano bullet could not and
would not tumble or yaw AFTER THE BULLET HAD STRUCK AN INTERVENING
OBJECT IN ITS PATH.

But that, quite obviously, is not at all what Bob Frazier meant when
he said what he said on page 438 of WC volume 3. Frazier was talking
about the stability of a Mannlicher-Carcano bullet in flight BEFORE it
reaches its target.

Frazier certainly wasn't suggesting in his testimony at 3H438 that a
Carcano bullet would NEVER tumble or yaw AFTER it had struck an
object. And Tom Rossley is just silly if he believes that IS what
Frazier meant in that testimony.

3H438:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0223b.htm


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


RE: JOSEPH MILTEER:

Another very good point brought up by Professor McAdams was the point
he made regarding Joseph Milteer.

As McAdams pointed out (which is something I had never really thought
about from this particular POV before), the shooting scenario that
Milteer speculated about to William Somersett in 1963 was certainly a
LONE-ASSASSIN PLOT.

I.E., what Milteer was talking about certainly wasn't a MULTI-GUN
plot, and therefore, according to virtually all conspiracy theorists,
it's the kind of shooting scenario that DID NOT OCCUR in Dallas on
November 22.

Plus, as Mr. McAdams also rightly pointed out to Mr. Rossley, Milteer
was most definitely talking about an assassination attempt that was
supposedly going to be made in FLORIDA, not in TEXAS. That fact is
very clear when listening to Milteer's recorded words.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/milteer.htm

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

FINAL DEBATE RESULTS:

John McAdams, quite naturally, very easily won the 3/13/10 debate. And
that's not too surprising, since Mr. McAdams has ALL of the evidence
on his "Oswald Did It Alone" side, while Mr. Rossley is left looking
mighty desperate by not only having to speculate about things that
nobody else on Planet Earth believes (such as John Connally being shot
in the chest from the FRONT), but by also being forced to misrepresent
testimony to suit his conspiratorial purposes (such as the blatant way
Rossley distorted the "tumbling" testimony of FBI agent Robert
Frazier).

All in all, it was a predictable 90 minutes worth of debating, with
the lone-assassin advocate using the facts and evidence in conjunction
with a whole lot of common sense and logic, while the conspiracy
theorist continues to believe in stupid stuff (including the
intolerable theories of one Douglas P. Horne). A typical day at the
office for a JFK conspiracist.


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

RELATED "DEBATE" LINKS:

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/8576bff5a6682062

http://Box.net//static/flash/box_explorer.swf?widget_hash=88cm88qq0r

http://Battling-A-Conspiracy-Kook.blogspot.com


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

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,
Mar 18, 2010, 10:29:30 AM3/18/10
to

The JFK conspiracy kooks of the world should watch this video. Matt
Harding does a nice job at pretending his 'round-the-world videos are
really a "hoax" (as has been suggested by certain people who probably
would feel right at home here at acj with the "Everything Is Fake" JFK
conspiracy nuts).

As I watched Matt's "hoax" presentation here (especially the "shadow"
segment), I couldn't help but think about our kooky friends named
Fetzer, Horne, and Healy (et al):

http://Fora.tv/2008/12/11/Matt_Harding_Where_The_Hell_Is_Matt_an_Elaborate_Hoax

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Harding

http://WhereTheHellIsMatt.com

aeffects

unread,
Mar 18, 2010, 1:29:09 PM3/18/10
to
On Mar 18, 7:29 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> The JFK conspiracy kooks of the world should watch this video. Matt
> Harding does a nice job at pretending his 'round-the-world videos are
> really a "hoax" (as has been suggested by certain people who probably
> would feel right at home here at acj with the "Everything Is Fake" JFK
> conspiracy nuts).
>
> As I watched Matt's "hoax" presentation here (especially the "shadow"
> segment), I couldn't help but think about our kooky friends named
> Fetzer, Horne, and Healy (et al):

ahhhh you're whining again shithead....... bring on the wimp(s) Dave
Wimp included.... but especially Dale 'wanna see my EMMY' Myers....
That supremo nutter-troll .john-ite! You're worth your lone nut,
shithead, weight in gold, right here in acj, Tubby! Keep coming
back....


> http://Fora.tv/2008/12/11/Matt_Harding_Where_The_Hell_Is_Matt_an_Elab...
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Harding
>
> http://WhereTheHellIsMatt.com

lazu...@webtv.net

unread,
Mar 18, 2010, 4:28:38 PM3/18/10
to
Anybody that would call Horne a kook is pure scum...here's a guy who
left his job in Hawaii to take a 42% pay cut to join the ARRB in
Washington...if it wasn't for him it would have just been the usual
piece of shit bureaucrats supporting the Warren report...Laz

aeffects

unread,
Mar 18, 2010, 4:49:50 PM3/18/10
to
On Mar 13, 8:38 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>> "Do you have any *idea* the sort of nonsense the media first reported? They said JFK was taken to the hospital in an ambulance." <<<
>
> And Eddie Barker of KRLD-TV (who was one of the most accurate
> reporters on the air that day)

you haven't a clue as to who the most accurate reporters were that
day... who are you trying to bullshit, shithead?

actually said that President Kennedy
> had been taken to Parkland "by bus", which is a comment that always
> elicits a chuckle from this writer when I cue up that CBS footage.

yeah, great example of "one of the most accurate reporters on the air
that day".

They actually pay you for this shit? ROTFLMFAO! Our hard earned tax
dollars at work! putueeeeee

Ben Holmes

unread,
Mar 18, 2010, 9:23:53 PM3/18/10
to
In article <27362-4BA...@storefull-3252.bay.webtv.net>,
lazu...@webtv.net says...

>
>Anybody that would call Horne a kook is pure scum...

Nah... they're just afraid.

They can't deal with the evidence itself, as presented by Doug Horne, so they
have to try labeling him as a kook.

But the evidence is still there, unrefuted.


>here's a guy who
>left his job in Hawaii to take a 42% pay cut to join the ARRB in
>Washington...if it wasn't for him it would have just been the usual
>piece of shit bureaucrats supporting the Warren report...Laz


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

Bud

unread,
Mar 18, 2010, 11:01:45 PM3/18/10
to
On Mar 18, 9:23 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <27362-4BA28CF6-2...@storefull-3252.bay.webtv.net>,
> lazuli...@webtv.net says...

>
>
>
> >Anybody that would call Horne a kook is pure scum...
>
> Nah... they're just afraid.

Bored, more like. You retards were claiming victory, that Horne
cracked the case. You`d think such a astounding event would have some
ramifications, but as far as I can see things are exactly as they were
before the release of his book. Gil is still retarded. You are still a
pussy. Healy is still on drugs. Nothing has changed.

> They can't deal with the evidence itself, as presented by Doug Horne, so they
> have to try labeling him as a kook.

I was just reading his history, how he came to be interested in the
assassination. Claims at a young age to have read the WC report, and
found it unsatisfying. Another Kennedy fan who feels there has to be
something more behind his hero`s death. Since the truth could never be
satifsying to him (as it isn`t to many), he set about creating his own
version of reality that he found more to his liking. A lot of people
who think like him will find his book satisfying. What could matter
less.

Horne`s evolution as a conspiracy kook can be found here...

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=1514847

I expect his story is the same as many other die-hard conspiracy
kooks, they just can`t accept what really happened. They will believe
anything, no matter how retarded, to avoid the fact that it was Oswald
alone.

> But the evidence is still there, unrefuted.

The problem is never the evidence, it`s always what kooks do with
information that causes the problems.

And of course Horne had actual evidence, it would be before a court,
not in crackpot conspiracy book form.

And you kooks don`t need more conspiracy books, you need people who
took part in the conspiracy coming forward. And that will never happen
because the conspiracy only exists in the minds of retards.

David Von Pein

unread,
Mar 24, 2010, 6:51:53 AM3/24/10
to

http://www.JFKAssassinationForum.com/index.php/topic,2001.msg32549.html#msg32549

http://www.JFKAssassinationForum.com/index.php/topic,2001.msg32558.html#msg32558


>>> "I do not believe that projectile exited. I believe that projectile went in to a depth of 2" and no more, per the initial findings." <<<

Well, Mike Williams [an LNer], you've just complicated things even
more, and you've got another amazing "SBT"-like occurrence to explain
away -- i.e., the wound in Kennedy's throat, which I can only assume
you must think came from a fragment of the head shot, correct? Because
you're a believer in "3 shots only", right? (You don't think Kennedy
had a hole in his throat BEFORE November 22nd, do you?) :)

I've always wondered just exactly how many "SBT"-like things it takes
to get people to accept the Single-Bullet Theory as valid? 4? 5? 15?

~big shrug~


>>> "What I have issue with is that the projectile exited "speculatively" leaving a neat round hole. This would be very uncharacteristic, even had it not struck bone." <<<

It's not uncharacteristic at all, as Dr. Perry said...right here:

ARLEN SPECTER - Based on your observations of the neck wound alone, do
you have a sufficient basis to form an opinion as to whether it was an
entrance wound or an exit wound.

DR. MALCOLM O. PERRY - No, sir. I was unable to determine that since I
did not ascertain the exact trajectory of the missile. The operative
procedure which I performed was restricted to securing an adequate
airway and insuring there was no injury to the carotid artery or
jugular vein at that level and at that point I made the procedure.

Mr. SPECTER - Based on the appearance of the neck wound alone, could
it have been either an entrance or an exit wound?

Dr. PERRY - It could have been either.


http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/perry_m1.htm


>>> "There are several ballistic inconsistencies in the SBT." <<<

No, there aren't. There are absolutely zero inconsistencies (at all)
with the SBT. The ballistics work just fine and the trajectory works
just fine (as Bob Frazier said in his WC testimony; and he was the man
who was looking through Oswald's rifle scope on 5/24/64 when the WC
did its re-creation of the shooting).*

* = Now, yes, Frazier testified that JFK & JBC were in direct
alignment at frames 207 and 210, which is not when the SBT shot was
actually fired. The SBT occurred at precisely Z224, as I essentially
prove via an analysis of the Zapruder Film in my SBT blog at
http://Single-Bullet-Theory.blogspot.com.

But in those 14 frames between Z210 and Z224, there is no way that the
President and Governor Connally were suddenly thrown severely out of
alignment with each other, and I think animator Dale Myers has
essentially proven that fact in his detailed computer reconstruction,
"Secrets Of A Homicide":

http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/138a.+VIEW+FROM+SNIPER%27S+NEST+(VIA+DALE+MYERS%27+COMPUTER+ANIMATION)?gda=WorAdHwAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQ1ihW4B1weCXlqVTx-VuWwhnOfksGie-DZBLaQMcxwkZbNj1v9PHmWKMO1vcJ_M3-_k0y8BjmXsE77h9PSwH8a9VRELD8iPZUlmLlpjcTTXTEaH4Iz1K9wGnj5zrYz1sf_Vpvmo5s1aABVJRO3P3wLQ

The question of "alignment" was also proven in another way (other than
Bob Frazier's physical "through the rifle scope" observations on
5/24/64) -- and that other way can be seen in Commission Exhibit No.
903 (which is an often-overlooked or ignored Warren Commission
exhibit). The alignment of the single bullet through both limo victims
fits to a tee, as seen in CE903 (the caption is mine):


http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/119.+CE903?gda=_RDLNTwAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQ0w2a6K65-JHUUb9NRLuzmCl61k0AMZJieNRhY9YK56_9Wm-ajmzVoAFUlE7c_fAt

>>> "I have a question for you Sir, as this would be right up your alley so to speak. What do you consider the credible evidence of a miss? I ask this because to ask some of the CT crowd I would have bullets flying like the wild west there, and you and I know that was not the case. So I ask you to give me what you see as credible evidence of a miss." <<<

Well, to tell you the truth, I think probably the BEST evidence for
Oswald's first shot having missed the whole Presidential automobile is
the fact that I KNOW (in my own mind, beyond all reasonable doubt)
that the following two things are true--which can only mean one thing--
one of Oswald's three shots missed:

1.) Only two bullets struck President Kennedy and Governor Connally.

2.) A total of three shots were fired in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63.

Plus, there's a very strong piece of witness testimony which, when
added to #1 and #2 above, indicates that Oswald's first shot was a
complete miss...and that's the testimony of Governor Connally himself,
who always maintained he was not hit by the FIRST shot. And there
really can be no arguing with Connally on this key point.

Connally could not possibly have been hit by the first shot, because
he HEARD that shot distinctly and had time to react and turn in his
seat before he, himself, was struck in the back with a bullet. And, as
mentioned, when we couple that testimony of Connally with #1 and #2
above (which are ironclad facts, as far as I'm concerned, for a
variety of reasons, which are detailed in various places at my main
JFK blog linked below), then only one conclusion about the first two
shots can be reached: The first shot missed everybody in the car and
shot #2 struck both JFK and John Connally.

http://DavidVonPein.blogspot.com

David Von Pein

unread,
Mar 25, 2010, 1:01:15 AM3/25/10
to

http://www.JFKAssassinationForum.com/index.php/topic,2001.msg32751.html#msg32751

Mike Williams,

Since you think John Connally wasn't touched by a bullet until Z237, I
look forward to your explaining away all of the various visual signs
of Connally being hit with a bullet between frames Z224 and Z235
(e.g., right shoulder driven forward & downward between Z223 and
Z224.....JBC's open-mouth grimace (which begins at Z225; his mouth is
closed at Z224).....the "lapel bulge/flip".....the very fast "shoulder
hunching" that Connally engages in just after Z225....and THE BIGGIE:
the "hat flip" of Connally's RIGHT arm beginning at precisely Z226,
i.e., the exact arm that's attached to the wrist that was hit by a
bullet, which is a bullet that Mike Williams says didn't strike JBC
until ELEVEN FRAMES LATER.

A reasonable person who examines frames 223 through 235 of the
Zapruder Film cannot possibly come to any conclusion other than the
following one:

JOHN CONNALLY HAS BEEN STRUCK BY A BULLET PRIOR TO Z-FRAME 235.

Let's look:

http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/137d.+ZAPRUDER+FILM+CLIP?gda=gDUYKkoAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQBYfjlVIXaOfo53bDdk7UhkS1wHhiHnkcaFIJaeht9PbvFNTLAo7wqTgtMhyKBJ7R_e3Wg0GnqfdKOwDqUih1tA&gsc=X5NTVwsAAAAv0eahY3fxGuteET-q4_mr

http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/137a.+ZAPRUDER+FILM+Z223-Z224+CLIP?gda=VHdkTFQAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQBYfjlVIXaOfo53bDdk7UhhcLauhfucTsU3R8-Ayd0yK14EMq9sJvYHkH8fXI6XPrVervUohE3YNENn3wMh1Pnc3OAWZC50hVl-fZ6-QcRqg&gsc=X5NTVwsAAAAv0eahY3fxGuteET-q4_mr

http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/137aa.+ZAPRUDER+FILM+Z224-Z225+CLIP?gda=XLVTllUAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQBYfjlVIXaOfo53bDdk7Uhmr9JKvztQAmJ9RdplBb5KN5JLDB9atL_D7jWWYlEZQFphVaarWrvssFJDywv2INlhrtYix3qocOGWUY90Yyf_g&gsc=X5NTVwsAAAAv0eahY3fxGuteET-q4_mr

http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/137b.+ZAPRUDER+FILM+Z225-Z226+CLIP?gda=z6jwqlQAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQBYfjlVIXaOfo53bDdk7UhsYqFRMANgR8mpE9FpBKoHTzEX-Jns9SneuLdee3gvZMVervUohE3YNENn3wMh1Pnc3OAWZC50hVl-fZ6-QcRqg&gsc=X5NTVwsAAAAv0eahY3fxGuteET-q4_mr

http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/137c.+ZAPRUDER+FILM+CLIP+%28THE+SBT+IN+ACTION%29?gda=grsA4mIAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQBYfjlVIXaOfo53bDdk7Uhir55UYqk8Uk0sLgtZTBy3wg2hWDowXyCzIVoZPznwYi6-214amnEHBixUu5lY_kllXi7dpriIAjJhAipsb2do-CHqjxxwsG8_oKG53kozMh&gsc=X5NTVwsAAAAv0eahY3fxGuteET-q4_mr


Addendum:

Former Los Angeles police detective Mark Fuhrman came out with a book
on the JFK assassination in May 2006 ("A Simple Act Of Murder"), and
he tries to pull off the same kind of thing that Mike Williams is
postulating -- i.e., Lee Harvey Oswald fired all the shots (three)
from the Depository's sixth floor, but the SBT is wrong.

And I used the same reasoning when attacking Mr. Fuhrman's theory
(which is really just pure speculation on Fuhrman's part, and nothing
more; Fuhrman has absolutely no hard evidence to back up any of his
anti-SBT beliefs). And, furthermore, Fuhrman is forced to literally
completely IGNORE a whole bunch of SOLID evidence that works in favor
of the Single-Bullet Theory being true, as I point out in detail in
the book review linked below:

http://Simple-Act-Of-Murder.blogspot.com

In short -- In order to argue against the validity of the Single-
Bullet Theory, a person has no choice but to IGNORE the many, many
things that indicate the SBT is correct.


http://Single-Bullet-Theory.blogspot.com

Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,
Mar 25, 2010, 1:58:37 AM3/25/10
to

http://www.JFKAssassinationForum.com/index.php/topic,2001.msg32768.html#msg32768

>>> "And in order to accept the SBT you have to ignore many reasons why it is incorrect. Hell[,] many members of the WC did not even believe it." <<<

And you can bet your bottom dollar that none of those Warren
Commission members (goofball Richard Russell being one of them)
examined the Zapruder Film frames in a back-and-forth TOGGLING manner
like we can easily do today on our home computers. If they had seen
these toggling images over and over again, there wouldn't have been
any WC members who disbelieved the obviously-true Single-Bullet Theory
(except perhaps Goofball Russell):

http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/137d.+ZAPRUDER+FILM+CLIP?gda=gDUYKkoAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQBYfjlVIXaOfo53bDdk7UhkS1wHhiHnkcaFIJaeht9PbvFNTLAo7wqTgtMhyKBJ7R_e3Wg0GnqfdKOwDqUih1tA&gsc=X5NTVwsAAAAv0eahY3fxGuteET-q4_mr

http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/137aa.+ZAPRUDER+FILM+Z224-Z225+CLIP?gda=XLVTllUAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQBYfjlVIXaOfo53bDdk7Uhmr9JKvztQAmJ9RdplBb5KN5JLDB9atL_D7jWWYlEZQFphVaarWrvssFJDywv2INlhrtYix3qocOGWUY90Yyf_g&gsc=X5NTVwsAAAAv0eahY3fxGuteET-q4_mr


http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/137b.+ZAPRUDER+FILM+Z225-Z226+CLIP?gda=z6jwqlQAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQBYfjlVIXaOfo53bDdk7UhsYqFRMANgR8mpE9FpBKoHTzEX-Jns9SneuLdee3gvZMVervUohE3YNENn3wMh1Pnc3OAWZC50hVl-fZ6-QcRqg&gsc=X5NTVwsAAAAv0eahY3fxGuteET-q4_mr


>>> "You asked me to explain away all the reactions we see from JBC, I ask you to prove those are reactions to a bullet, and not simply being startled." <<<

You're living in an anti-SBT dream world, Mike Williams.

You think ALL of that stuff I just illustrated (which is ALL TOTALLY
CONSISTENT WITH A BULLET HITTING CONNALLY, with Connally reacting in
quick, reflexive, JERKY ways) was caused by JBC merely being
"startled" by a shot that Oswald fired back at Z189 (per your theory
of when the first shot occurred, which is also wrong, as Governor
Connally's "right turn" at approximately Z164 indicates)?

As I said, you're dreaming.

I can't figure out people like Mike Williams and Mark Fuhrman (and, to
a lesser extent, "Conspiracy Of One" author Jim Moore, who believes in
the SBT, but at a much later time--Z235--which means Moore, too, was
willing to totally ignore the early involuntary reactions of
Connally). Those type people (Williams, Fuhrman) will endorse the
"Oswald Alone" scenario, but they apparently want to be "different" in
that they refuse to believe the obviousness of the SBT. A curious
mindset amongst some LNers, to be sure.


>>> "I understand [Dr. John K.] Lattimer tried desperately to duplicate the lapel flip, to no avail. How unfortunate for the SBT supporters because there is evidence in that film of a hit to JBC, and it comes oddly enough almost exactly when he said he was hit." <<<

Good job, Mike. Keep ignoring all of those involuntary Connally
reactions at Z224-Z235. Just pretend he was "startled" by the sound of
Oswald's first shot....right down to his RIGHT WRIST being "startled"
enough to want to rapidly move up then back down in the space of 3 or
4 Z-Film frames beginning at Z226.

Don't you wonder why Governor Connally's RIGHT ARM (the very same arm
attached to the wrist that was fractured during the shooting) is
moving around like it does at Z226, Mike? Just a coincidence?


>>> "Nietzsche tells us "One who quotes himself is weighed down with egotism more than he is enlightened by wisdom"." <<<

Why should I be modest when it comes to this "SBT" issue (and other
issues dealing with garden-variety common sense relating to the
assassination of President Kennedy)? Some of my words on this subject
are worth repeating (IMO). YMMV. So be it.

But, if you want some quotes from somebody else who knows all about
the evidence in the JFK case, I'll give you a couple:

"The single-bullet theory...[is] so obvious that a child could
author it." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Page 302 of endnotes in "Reclaiming
History: The Assassination Of President John F. Kennedy" (c.2007)

"The "single-bullet THEORY" is an obvious misnomer. Though in
its incipient stages it was but a theory, the indisputable evidence is
that it is now a proven FACT, a wholly supported conclusion. .... And
no sensible mind that is also informed can plausibly make the case
that the bullet that struck President Kennedy in the upper right part
of his back did not go on to hit Governor Connally." -- Vincent
Bugliosi; Pages 489-490 of "Reclaiming History"

http://Quoting-Common-Sense.blogspot.com


>>> "When you can prove to me that JBC is moving because of a gunshot, rather than being startled[,] then I will consider it." <<<

Excellent job of continuing to ignore the obvious, Mike [Williams].
Keep it up. You'll soon be in bed with Mr. Fuhrman. Maybe you can
collaborate with Mark on a sequel to his 2006 book. You can call it:
"A Simple Act Of SBT Ignorance".

David Von Pein

unread,
Mar 25, 2010, 4:25:29 AM3/25/10
to

http://www.JFKAssassinationForum.com/index.php/topic,2001.msg32786.html#msg32786


MIKE WILLIAMS SAID:

>>> "I would submit, Sir, the only act of SBT ignorance is on the part of those who buy this moronic lot of crap." <<<


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

LOL. Yeah, it's always much better to ignore the obvious (the SBT) and
latch on to things that are far more murky and unexplainable (i.e.,
anything other than the SBT), isn't it Michael?

As John Kennedy said in November 1961: "Reason does not always appeal
to unreasonable men."

Maybe Mike W. can inform us simple-minded idiots just exactly WHERE
the bullet went after it stopped in JFK's back at a depth of only
about "2 inches"?

If that bullet had worked its way out of the wound during cardiac
massage at Parkland (which I can only assume is a theory that Mike
Williams endorses), then that bullet would most certainly have been
recovered in Trauma Room #1 at Parkland. Right?

Or would Mike like to postulate a theory that has that bullet
vanishing off the planet (even though it was RIGHT THERE to be found
in the ER on 11/22/63)?

Please note the pretzel twists that ANY anti-SBT addict must resort to
in order to avoid the obvious truth that resides within the single-
bullet conclusion. These people are contortion artists. They have to
be in order to support their silliness.

Vince Bugliosi said it very well (yet again) when he said this during
a speaking engagement in Philadelphia in 2007:

"Most of my book ["Reclaiming History"], if you want to say it,
is devoting myself to rebutting silliness." -- Vincent Bugliosi; June
7th, 2007

http://Box.net/shared/scraumujf7


COLIN CROW SAID:

>>> "Hi David, please note that my "really silly post" accounts for the single bullet causing the damage at Z223. It does not rely on their being one, but if there was it came from the DalTex." <<<


DVP SAID:


I deleted the "really silly post" remark I made in my last post
(although your post is, indeed, "really silly"). But I realized after
writing that particular comment that Mike Williams was not necessarily
supporting your remark about a shot (or shots) coming from the Dal-Tex
(which would be in direct opposition to what Mike W. said just
yesterday, when he said that he thought all three shots had come from
the sixth floor of the Book Depository Building).

But, Colin, why on Earth you think the SBT trajectory from the TSBD is
impossible, based on a "gap" that allows us to see Jackie at a
particular time is beyond my capacity to understand.

What you are undoubtedly attempting to do (at least in large measure)
is something that NOBODY CAN DO (as animator Dale Myers has said many
times in the past when arguing with conspiracists about his 3D
animation project) -- you are trying to extract 3D information from a
two-dimensional source. And you just cannot do that. Period.

"In short, you cannot simply draw or overlay lines on a two-
dimensional image and extract three-dimensional information." -- Dale
K. Myers; Via the FAQ linked below (which is something Colin Crow and
other SBT critics should read very closely)

http://jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/faq_01.htm

David Von Pein

unread,
Mar 25, 2010, 7:25:32 AM3/25/10
to

http://www.JFKAssassinationForum.com/index.php/topic,2001.msg32803.html#msg32803


>>> "See LOS to Zapruder.........no visible gap in jumpseats." <<<

LOL. Based on an overhead view of a 2D image of Myers' animation,
you've deduced that there is "no gap", and hence the SBT from the TSBD
is impossible.

Hilariously absurd, Colin.

BTW, how did you arrive at the "LOS to Zapruder" line?

How do you know that your LOS line to Zapruder is 100% accurate?

As stated before, it's very likely you cannot have any such line
accurate, due to the fact you're attempting to arrive at 3D
information based on a 2D image, and you can never do that with 100%
precision.

Most conspiracy theorists, however, seem to think that they have the
amazing ability to circumvent the basic rules of photogrammetry, and
they'll simply start drawing lines on flat two-dimensional photographs
and freeze-frame TV images; and they think they will somehow extract
perfectly accurate three-dimensional data from such jimmy-rigged
experiments. It's silly.

lazu...@webtv.net

unread,
Mar 25, 2010, 4:13:41 PM3/25/10
to
Ten posts in a row of pure bullshit Von Pein-do you ever post anything
but B.S.? Haven't seen it...Laz

bigdog

unread,
Mar 26, 2010, 10:26:54 AM3/26/10
to
On Mar 25, 1:01 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> http://www.JFKAssassinationForum.com/index.php/topic,2001.msg32751.ht...

>
> Mike Williams,
>
> Since you think John Connally wasn't touched by a bullet until Z237, I
> look forward to your explaining away all of the various visual signs
> of Connally being hit with a bullet between frames Z224 and Z235
> (e.g., right shoulder driven forward & downward between Z223 and
> Z224.....JBC's open-mouth grimace (which begins at Z225; his mouth is
> closed at Z224).....the "lapel bulge/flip".....the very fast "shoulder
> hunching" that Connally engages in just after Z225....and THE BIGGIE:
> the "hat flip" of Connally's RIGHT arm beginning at precisely Z226,
> i.e., the exact arm that's attached to the wrist that was hit by a
> bullet, which is a bullet that Mike Williams says didn't strike JBC
> until ELEVEN FRAMES LATER.
>
> A reasonable person who examines frames 223 through 235 of the
> Zapruder Film cannot possibly come to any conclusion other than the
> following one:
>
> JOHN CONNALLY HAS BEEN STRUCK BY A BULLET PRIOR TO Z-FRAME 235.
>
> Let's look:
>
> http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/137d.+ZAPRUDER+FILM+CL...
>
> http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/137a.+ZAPRUDER+FILM+Z2...
>
> http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/137aa.+ZAPRUDER+FILM+Z...
>
> http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/137b.+ZAPRUDER+FILM+Z2...
>
> http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/137c.+ZAPRUDER+FILM+CL...

>
> Addendum:
>
> Former Los Angeles police detective Mark Fuhrman came out with a book
> on the JFK assassination in May 2006 ("A Simple Act Of Murder"), and
> he tries to pull off the same kind of thing that Mike Williams is
> postulating -- i.e., Lee Harvey Oswald fired all the shots (three)
> from the Depository's sixth floor, but the SBT is wrong.
>
> And I used the same reasoning when attacking Mr. Fuhrman's theory
> (which is really just pure speculation on Fuhrman's part, and nothing
> more; Fuhrman has absolutely no hard evidence to back up any of his
> anti-SBT beliefs). And, furthermore, Fuhrman is forced to literally
> completely IGNORE a whole bunch of SOLID evidence that works in favor
> of the Single-Bullet Theory being true, as I point out in detail in
> the book review linked below:
>
> http://Simple-Act-Of-Murder.blogspot.com
>
> In short -- In order to argue against the validity of the Single-
> Bullet Theory, a person has no choice but to IGNORE the many, many
> things that indicate the SBT is correct.
>
> http://Single-Bullet-Theory.blogspot.com

David, I don't know why I never noticed this before in the clear close
up of Z224 but we get a great look at JFK's left hand and arm which
clearly shows his left elbow is still down at this side meaning he
hasn't yet reacted to the bullet which has just hit him. I think I've
always focused on JFK's right hand and JBC in that view and missed
that very obvious clue.

I've commented on this before but the Z224-225 sequence clearly shows
JFK's right hand moving down in those frames, also indicative that he
is still lowering it from the wave he had just finished prior to
disappearing behind the sign. In the Z225-226 sequence we see that
movement suddenly reversed as both of JFK's arms begin raising upward,
pinpointing the instant that he reacted to his wound. Also revealing
is that JBC reacts at exactly the same time has his right hand flips
suddenly into the air. That two frame sequence shows the right arms of
JFK and JBC moving upward as if connected by a string. To me, this is
the absolutely clincher for the SBT. It took the SBT from a 99.9%
certainty to 100%.

I'm sure most people when first seeing the Z-film saw an unharmed JFK
disappear behind the sign and then reappeared seemingly having already
reacted to a shot which struck him and assumed that the bullet struck
him while he was behind the sign. The bullet did indeed strike him
while he was out of view(Z222 is my belief), but his reaction didn't
happen until two frames after reappearing at Z226. Because there are
only two frames before he reacts, just 1/9 of a second, looking at the
unenhanced Z-film at normal speed creates the impression that the
reaction had already occurred before JFK reappeared. The naked eye
just does not pick up on the fact JFK's arms had not yet come up in
those first two frames after he comes back into view.

bigdog

unread,
Mar 26, 2010, 10:30:04 AM3/26/10
to
On Mar 25, 4:13 pm, lazuli...@webtv.net wrote:
> Ten posts in a row of pure bullshit Von Pein-do you ever post anything
> but B.S.? Haven't seen it...Laz

David, as always, is right on the mark with these posts and extremely
thorough. I would gladly wager that if every American looked at this
material David has presented, over 90% would be convinced of the
validity of the Single Bullet Fact. The few holdouts would be the
deniers from the CT camp who are so committed to the idea there was a
conspiracy that no amount of evidence is going to disuade them from
their beliefs. They are the modern day flat earthers.

Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,
Mar 26, 2010, 11:36:31 AM3/26/10
to

>>> "David, I don't know why I never noticed this before in the clear close up of Z224 but we get a great look at JFK's left hand and arm which clearly shows his left elbow is still down at this side meaning he hasn't yet reacted to the bullet which has just hit him." <<<

Yes, indeed, bigdog. JFK's hands (both of them, but especially his
left hand) aren't even near his neck/throat as of Z225. And yet the
HSCA insisted he was struck by the SBT bullet at Z190. Ridiculous.

http://reclaiming-history.googlegroups.com/web/137aa.+ZAPRUDER+FILM+Z224-Z225+CLIP?gda=XLVTllUAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQBYfjlVIXaOfo53bDdk7Uhmr9JKvztQAmJ9RdplBb5KN5JLDB9atL_D7jWWYlEZQFphVaarWrvssFJDywv2INlhrtYix3qocOGWUY90Yyf_g&gsc=X5NTVwsAAAAv0eahY3fxGuteET-q4_mr

And that subject of the VERY LOW position of Kennedy's hands is a
topic that I have raised several times in the past in my SBT articles,
and, in particular, I recall arguing for many weeks about this "hands"
subject with a conspiracy kook named Bill Miller at Debra Conway's JFK-
Lancer forum in 2004, with Miller (incredibly) insisting that both of
JFK's hands are ALREADY AT NECK/THROAT LEVEL at Z225. He claimed that
Zapruder's elevated position on his pedestal was skewing the actual
location of JFK's hands in the Z-Film.

I pointed out to Miller, after laughing for quite a while after
hearing his nonsense about Kennedy's hands, that per his theory about
JFK's hands already being at throat/neck level as of Z225, this would
HAVE to mean that when we see Kennedy (after Z225) quickly raise his
hands to a level ABOVE where they are in Z225, this would mean that by
Z233 or so, JFK's hands must have actually been somewhere OVER HIS
HEAD, per Miller's theory.

Because we can certainly all agree that Kennedy RAISES his hands
HIGHER in the post-Z225 frames. So if they were already at his neck at
Z225, I wondered where Bill Miller thinks those same hands ended up at
Z233 or so? I don't recall Miller ever providing a logical answer to
that question.

http://Single-Bullet-Theory.blogspot.com

aeffects

unread,
Mar 26, 2010, 2:04:25 PM3/26/10
to
On Mar 26, 8:36 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:

moderated

<no advertising shithed>

bigdog

unread,
Mar 27, 2010, 7:55:26 PM3/27/10
to
On Mar 26, 11:36 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>> "David, I don't know why I never noticed this before in the clear close up of Z224 but we get a great look at JFK's left hand and arm which clearly shows his left elbow is still down at this side meaning he hasn't yet reacted to the bullet which has just hit him." <<<
>
> Yes, indeed, bigdog. JFK's hands (both of them, but especially his
> left hand) aren't even near his neck/throat as of Z225. And yet the
> HSCA insisted he was struck by the SBT bullet at Z190. Ridiculous.
>
> http://reclaiming-history.googlegroups.com/web/137aa.+ZAPRUDER+FILM+Z...

>
> And that subject of the VERY LOW position of Kennedy's hands is a
> topic that I have raised several times in the past in my SBT articles,
> and, in particular, I recall arguing for many weeks about this "hands"
> subject with a conspiracy kook named Bill Miller at Debra Conway's JFK-
> Lancer forum in 2004, with Miller (incredibly) insisting that both of
> JFK's hands are ALREADY AT NECK/THROAT LEVEL at Z225. He claimed that
> Zapruder's elevated position on his pedestal was skewing the actual
> location of JFK's hands in the Z-Film.
>
> I pointed out to Miller, after laughing for quite a while after
> hearing his nonsense about Kennedy's hands, that per his theory about
> JFK's hands already being at throat/neck level as of Z225, this would
> HAVE to mean that when we see Kennedy (after Z225) quickly raise his
> hands to a level ABOVE where they are in Z225, this would mean that by
> Z233 or so, JFK's hands must have actually been somewhere OVER HIS
> HEAD, per Miller's theory.
>
> Because we can certainly all agree that Kennedy RAISES his hands
> HIGHER in the post-Z225 frames. So if they were already at his neck at
> Z225, I wondered where Bill Miller thinks those same hands ended up at
> Z233 or so? I don't recall Miller ever providing a logical answer to
> that question.
>
> http://Single-Bullet-Theory.blogspot.com

David, it is really unfortunate but I have no doubt that if we had a
forum in which we could show to the American public the downward
movement of JFK's right hand/arm in the Z224-225 sequence, followed by
the sudden upward movement of both his arms as well as JBC's
simultaneous upward movement of his right arm in Z225-226, there would
be few doubters of the SBT. The bulging of JBC's jacket at Z224 is the
second best piece of evidence to sell the SBT. The best is the
synchronized rising of JFK's and JBC's right arm from Z225-226 which
absolutely locks down the SBT. Only the most fervent deniers would
refuse to accept the SBT as fact.

If the WC had one major failing, it was its failure to pick up on the
two best clues supporting the SBT, JBC's jacket bulge and the flip of
his right arm which was simultaneous with JFK's sudden raising of both
his arms. Perhaps it is a case of hindsight being 20/20. Maybe if the
WC staffers had had more time to examine the SBT, they would have
discovered these clues which later researchers picked up on and
preempted many of the objections to the SBT. The acceptance of the SBT
might just be the single greatest impediment to the acceptance of a
lone assassin. If we could convince the public of the validity of the
SBT, a lot of the belief in multiple gunman would vanish.
Unfortunately, neither acj nor aaj as enough of a readership for this
forum to succeed in that regard.

aeffects

unread,
Mar 28, 2010, 1:12:20 AM3/28/10
to
...

get busy moron.... LMFAO!

lazu...@webtv.net

unread,
Mar 28, 2010, 3:00:06 PM3/28/10
to
Another thing Ben is it is not Horne's evidence- it is the evidence
provided by the Bethesda Medical Staff that rips apart the official
lies...and every single witness involved with the Autopsy, almost
literally obliterates the official story, including the 3 stooges who
did the sham that passes for the autopsy.

Ben Holmes

unread,
Mar 28, 2010, 7:15:01 PM3/28/10
to
In article <27365-4BA...@storefull-3252.bay.webtv.net>,
lazu...@webtv.net says...

>
>Another thing Ben is it is not Horne's evidence-


True... I should be more specific... it's merely evidence in this case that
Horne has documented.

You can't wait for LNT'ers to document the evidence... if they had *their* way,
in their secret heart of hearts, they'd have published *ONLY* the WCR, and
classified the 26 volumes.

The more evidence that is revealed, the more obvious the conspiracy becomes, and
the more silent the LNT'ers & trolls become on the evidence.

And the more ad hominem appears...


>it is the evidence
>provided by the Bethesda Medical Staff that rips apart the official
>lies...and every single witness involved with the Autopsy, almost
>literally obliterates the official story, including the 3 stooges who
>did the sham that passes for the autopsy.

I've repeatedly asked LNT'er to name *ANY* eyewitness that they can accept for
all statements made in 1963-64... and no-one ever replies.

Johm McAdams asserted that he *could* name names... but didn't.

It's not gotten any better after 1964...

Bud

unread,
Mar 28, 2010, 9:08:29 PM3/28/10
to
On Mar 28, 7:15 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <27365-4BAFA736-1...@storefull-3252.bay.webtv.net>,
> lazuli...@webtv.net says...

>
>
>
> >Another thing Ben is it is not Horne's evidence-
>
> True... I should be more specific... it's merely evidence in this case that
> Horne has documented.
>
> You can't wait for LNT'ers to document the evidence... if they had *their* way,
> in their secret heart of hearts, they'd have published *ONLY* the WCR, and
> classified the 26 volumes.
>
> The more evidence that is revealed, the more obvious the conspiracy becomes, and
> the more silent the LNT'ers & trolls become on the evidence.
>
> And the more ad hominem appears...

It`s getting so that you folks aren`t even worthy of that.

> >it is the evidence
> >provided by the Bethesda Medical Staff that rips apart the official
> >lies...and every single witness involved with the Autopsy, almost
> >literally obliterates the official story, including the 3 stooges who
> >did the sham that passes for the autopsy.
>
> I've repeatedly asked LNT'er to name *ANY* eyewitness that they can accept for
> all statements made in 1963-64... and no-one ever replies.
>
> Johm McAdams asserted that he *could* name names... but didn't.
>
> It's not gotten any better after 1964...

But Horne`s book is going to change all that. In fact, since it had
been out, the effect has been... well, nothing.

aeffects

unread,
Mar 28, 2010, 10:05:06 PM3/28/10
to

the troll be fishing? ROTFLMFAO!

Ben Holmes

unread,
Mar 28, 2010, 11:15:25 PM3/28/10
to
In article <bb2a4c38-a895-4e07...@f13g2000pra.googlegroups.com>,
aeffects says...

>
>On Mar 28, 6:08=A0pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>> On Mar 28, 7:15 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > In article <27365-4BAFA736-1...@storefull-3252.bay.webtv.net>,
>> > lazuli...@webtv.net says...
>>
>> > >Another thing Ben is it is not Horne's evidence-
>>
>> > True... I should be more specific... it's merely evidence in this case =
>that
>> > Horne has documented.
>>
>> > You can't wait for LNT'ers to document the evidence... if they had *the=
>ir* way,
>> > in their secret heart of hearts, they'd have published *ONLY* the WCR, =

>and
>> > classified the 26 volumes.
>>
>> > The more evidence that is revealed, the more obvious the conspiracy bec=

>omes, and
>> > the more silent the LNT'ers & trolls become on the evidence.
>>
>> > And the more ad hominem appears...
>>
>> =A0 It`s getting so that you folks aren`t even worthy of that.

>>
>> > >it is the evidence
>> > >provided by the Bethesda Medical Staff that rips apart the official
>> > >lies...and every single witness involved with the Autopsy, almost
>> > >literally obliterates the official story, including the 3 stooges who
>> > >did the sham that passes for the autopsy.
>>
>> > I've repeatedly asked LNT'er to name *ANY* eyewitness that they can acc=

>ept for
>> > all statements made in 1963-64... and no-one ever replies.
>>
>> > Johm McAdams asserted that he *could* name names... but didn't.
>>
>> > It's not gotten any better after 1964...
>>
>> =A0 But Horne`s book is going to change all that. In fact, since it had

>> been out, the effect has been... well, nothing.
>
>the troll be fishing? ROTFLMFAO!

Yeah... he's fishing alright. Problem is, he isn't using any kind of bait that
would get him off my killfile list.

You know, names, evidence, citations... that sort of thing.

Bud

unread,
Mar 29, 2010, 7:48:01 AM3/29/10
to
On Mar 28, 11:15 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <bb2a4c38-a895-4e07-865b-0f23b65aa...@f13g2000pra.googlegroups.com>,

No, you guys don`t touch the truth, which is the bait I`m using.

> You know, names, evidence, citations... that sort of thing.

I suppose Horne used some of this, right? And the effect of his book
has been nothing, right?

Fun to watch the kooks recoil from he truth.

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,
Apr 3, 2010, 2:59:39 PM4/3/10
to

JOHN McADAMS SAID:

>>> "I'm willing to say that Jean [Davison] is simply a better researcher than Vince [Bugliosi]." <<<

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Jean Davison is the God (Goddess) of online researchers, IMO. No
question about it.

I think part of the problem a person has who is stuck in the "19th
century" (like Vince Bugliosi says he is with respect to computers and
computer technology) is the fact that he doesn't have the fabulous
"Information Super Highway" at his instant disposal the way all of us
Internet users do.

Vince, to this day (although I've tried to tell him otherwise via e-
mails to his secretary), doesn't seem to realize that every page of
every volume of the WC and HSCA (and most other JFK-related material)
is available for free online.

Vince gets some Internet stuff sent to him by his secretary, Rosemary
Newton, but that really cannot begin to compare with Vince having 24/7
Internet access himself and being able to utilize the extremely
helpful "Word Find" tools that can be found in any Internet browser.
Without that "Find" tool, it would be hell to try and find a
particular quote that is buried among hundreds of pages of testimony,
etc.

So, Mr. Bugliosi was at a distinct disadvantage right from the get-go
when he wrote his book "Reclaiming History". He had to get copies of
the actual documents at either the National Archives or at various
libraries.

Plus, if he needed to find a particular passage in the WC or HSCA
testimony, he had to actually read through every word of the text in
the physical volumes that he owns, which IMO would be torture in many
instances when searching for something small and/or SPECIFIC.

But, then too (to be fair), when Mark Lane wrote his first book which
came out in 1966 ("Rush To Judgment"), he certainly didn't have the
Internet at his side either. Lane had to research the "old fashioned"
way, like Vince did, without the aid of the great websites we have
today, such as History Matters and Mary Ferrell's site.

In fact, when Jean Davison wrote her excellent book ("Oswald's Game"),
which was first published in 1983, she didn't have the World Wide Web
to help her either. The Internet was still about a decade away from
becoming a reality when Jean researched and wrote her book.

Anyway, I admire BOTH Jean Davison's work and Vincent Bugliosi's "old
school" way of researching. And I owe a great debt of gratitude to
Jean for pointing out the very key significance of one particular
Warren Commission document -- CE903 -- which is an exhibit that almost
all conspiracy theorists hate with a passion (or the CTers try to
dismiss the exhibit as being "misleading" or a crock of Specter-
authored bullshit, etc.).

I've kind of grabbed the CE903 baton from Jean Davison and have run
with it many times in my own Internet articles, in order to illustrate
the key point that Jean was making when she said what she said about
CE903 at John Simkin's Education Forum in late December 2006 and early
January 2007 --- with that key point being:

The Warren Commission (and Arlen Specter) certainly DID NOT require
President Kennedy's upper-back wound to be "moved" up into the "neck"
in order to support the Single-Bullet Theory. And CE903 demonstrably
proves that fact for all time.

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

THE SBT PERFECTION OF CE903:


http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/bf3ae3c6c0993e13

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/c65419db537d4abf

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/753b93209f19ba6e

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

Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,
Apr 3, 2010, 3:52:08 PM4/3/10
to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/51d915d6f6aeffc4


Thank you, David Emerling.

That is absolutely hilarious. I had never seen that before. Allow me
to link to it again (it's great):

http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/04/andy-rooney-on-oliver-stone.html


"Note the similarity of Orson Welles to the man claiming to be
Oliver Stone." -- Andy Rooney

Walt

unread,
Apr 3, 2010, 8:57:14 PM4/3/10
to
On Apr 3, 2:52 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/th...

>
> Thank you, David Emerling.
>
> That is absolutely hilarious. I had never seen that before. Allow me
> to link to it again (it's great):
>
> http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/04/andy-rooney-on-oliver-stone...

>
>       "Note the similarity of Orson Welles to the man claiming to be
> Oliver Stone." -- Andy Rooney

Iwas always a fan of Andy Rooney....Until he said those little kids at
David Koresh's church deserved what they got..... Burned alive by the
FBI.

lazu...@webtv.net

unread,
Apr 3, 2010, 11:37:28 PM4/3/10
to
Rooney was like the 60 minutes show- pretty good once, but now just an
over the hill curmudgeon going through the motions..this is Andy
Rooney... ever wonder why underwear doesn't fit like it used too? Blah
Blah blah...Laz

Sam McClung

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 2:52:59 AM4/4/10
to

the end of that video...
http://web.newsguy.com/mcclung/rooney.html

hilarious!

Chuck Schuyler

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 3:02:55 AM4/4/10
to
On Apr 3, 7:57 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> Iwas always a fan of Andy Rooney....Until he said those little kids at
> David Koresh's church deserved what they got..... Burned alive by the
> FBI.

Did he actually say that?

David Von Pein

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 7:14:55 PM4/4/10
to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/51d915d6f6aeffc4/11e394780e74f9d6?#11e394780e74f9d6


>>> "The thing that Andy and I had in common then is that neither one of us knew anything about the case. Ignorance can indeed be bliss." <<<

Yeah. Karin now has the smoking gun she needs to prove conspiracy.
Right, Karin?

Maybe it's this:

http://www.funnyjunkz.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/terrorist-cat.jpg

Walt

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 9:26:25 PM4/4/10
to


Yes he did!.... Though he never singled out the little kids who were
there....He just lumped all of the people in the sanctuary together as
deserving of their fate.

he said David Koresh and everbody in that sanctuary got what they
deserved. That was the last time I listened to Sixty Minutes......

Chuck Schuyler

unread,
Apr 4, 2010, 11:12:49 PM4/4/10
to
0 new messages