JFK ARCHIVES
David Von Pein
NEW BLOG:
http://www.JFK-Archives.blogspot.com
I created that blog mainly for the purpose of eliminating the dead
links that currently reside within my previously-posted articles. (I
hate dead links. Don't you?)
David Von Pein
http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15921&view=findpost&p=195950
http://www.JFKAssassinationForum.com/index.php/topic,2555.msg51039.html#msg51039
ON THE EDUCATION FORUM, JAMES "OSWALD DIDN'T SHOOT ANYBODY" DiEUGENIO
SAID:
>>> "Wow, if I ever had any doubts about what a mouthpiece for DVP you [Mike Williams] and Duncan [MacRae] are, they are now dispelled. He might as well be here. But you forgot to use one of his Von Peinianisms: "CT nuttiness". Mikey boy, you are taking my definition of hearsay from elsewhere and applying it to a non-analogous situation. Unlike with Humes and the FBI report, Tomlinson never denied what Marcus wrote. Even though he knew he was being interviewed for the record. Quite the contrary. (See Mr. Hogan's post above.) And the other source, about Wright somehow forgetting he turned over CE 399, is right in the WC volumes. As per DVP, I challenged him to a debate many months ago. He passed. And passed. And passed. Now, he wants to debate me with his own ground rules. Which would allow him leeway to fabricate things, which as I have shown elsewhere, he [has] a remarkable tendency to do. But you know all this Mikey, since someone named Ken Murray posted my reply to him on the board that you and Duncan so freely associate with DVP on. In the spirit of fairness, why don't you repost my reply to him here then." <<<
I wonder if Mr. DiEugenio can supply even one post of mine which
includes my "remarkable tendency" for "fabricat[ing] things".
Jim can start with this batch of articles, numbering in the dozens.
Good luck finding one single piece of DVP "fabrication" in here:
http://groups.google.com/group/reclaiming-history/browse_thread/thread/863ee417ecb1633f
If anyone has a tendency for fabrication with respect to the JFK case,
it's James DiEugenio. His imagination runs wild regarding anything and
everything to do with President Kennedy's assassination. Here are 13
excellent examples:
"Somebody else might have done it [burned the first draft of the
autopsy report and Humes' blood-stained notes]. .... Today, I think
that's what really happened. I think that that whole thing about
burning the notes...was just a cover story." -- James DiEugenio;
December 11, 2008 (Black Op Radio)
"The anterior neck wound--the measurements on that wound--are
too small for the 6.5-millimeter Mannlicher-Carcano ammunition." --
James DiEugenio; December 11, 2008 (Black Op Radio)
"Tom Purvis has proved there was at least one of those [36-inch
Carcanos] stamped with that serial number [C2766]." -- James
DiEugenio; 2008; http://CTKA.net/2008/von_pein.html
"As I reported, Dr. [John] Lattimer had one [Carcano rifle] of
the 40 inch variety with the C 2766 serial number." -- James
DiEugenio; 2008; http://CTKA.net/2008/von_pein.html
"Specter and Humes understood that the probe was gonna be a big
problem. They thought the photographs would never be declassified. So
Specter made up this B.S. story about the strap muscles, never knowing
that that story was going to be exposed." -- James DiEugenio; July 16,
2009 (Black Op Radio); http://Box.net/shared/79ot23kzbf
"The story of this (these) paper bag(s), Wesley Frazier, his
sister, and the curtain rods can be challenged every single step of
the way. .... By the early evening of [November] 22nd [1963], the DPD
had very little besides the notorious Howard Brennan. Shaky eye
witness Howard Brennan couldn't be relied upon to put Oswald on the
sixth floor. As Police Chief Jesse Curry later admited [sic], they had
no one who put Oswald in the building with a gun in his hand.
Therefore, they needed Frazier and his "Oswald carrying a package"
story." -- James DiEugenio; http://CTKA.net/2008/bugliosi_6_review.html
"I have minimized the testimony of Linnie Mae [Randle]. I do so
because in my view it is highly questionable." -- James DiEugenio;
http://CTKA.net/2008/bugliosi_6_review.html
"Kennedy is murdered at 12:30 PM. Oswald is almost undoubtedly
on the first floor at the time." -- James DiEugenio;
http://CTKA.net/2008/bugliosi_5b_review.html
"At Bethesda, the military severely curtails the autopsy so that
no one will ever know the true circumstances of how Kennedy was
killed. Also, the FBI switches the bullet found at Parkland Hospital
to fit the second rifle found at the TSBD, a Mannlicher Carcano." --
James DiEugenio; http://CTKA.net/2008/bugliosi_5b_review.html
"I don't believe Oswald shot Tippit." -- James DiEugenio;
January 14, 2010 (Black Op Radio); http://Box.net/shared/n89c91dub6
"I'm not even sure they [the real killers of JFK, not Lee Harvey
Oswald, naturally] were on the sixth floor [of the Book Depository]. I
mean, they might have been. But what's the definitive evidence that
the hit team was on the sixth floor? .... If they WERE on the sixth
floor, they could have been at the other [west] end. .... And I've
always suspected there was a sniper in the Dal-Tex Building." -- James
DiEugenio; February 11, 2010 (Black Op Radio); http://Box.net/shared/ll8f5h6vkx
"I don't think [Howard] Brennan was at any lineup. I think that
was all manufactured after the fact. I think Brennan is a completely
created witness." -- James DiEugenio; May 27, 2010 (Black Op Radio);
http://Box.net/shared/rg360ak180
"I just proved that CE 399 was not found at Parkland." -- James
DiEugenio; June 4, 2010; http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15921&st=0&p=194367&#entry194367
--------------------------------
Now, what was that Jim D. was saying about someone's "remarkable
tendency...to fabricate things"?
Can it get any better on a "Pot and Kettle" scale than this, folks? If
it can, please inform CNN right away, because they'll surely want to
know about it.
aeffects
David Von Pein
http://www.JFKAssassinationForum.com/index.php/topic,2555.msg52512.html#msg52512
http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=16150&view=findpost&p=196666
AT "THE EDUCATION FORUM", JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
>>> "DVP is piece of work that not even Central Casting could dream up for a villian in a Cecil B. DeMille extravaganza. .... Last year, at the request of a forum member at Black Op--I extended a debate challenge to Gary Mack, DVP, Reitzes and John McAdams. .... DVP chickened out. .... So now, months after the initial challenge to him was turned down, he began to email me about a debate. Except there was a qualifier. Please sit down before you read this. He wanted to set the ground rules! Yep. It's true. He did not want a scripted debate in which both sides knew the questions in advance. He wanted an off-the-cuff debate, where you could create your own questions willy nilly. .... I told him that the decision is not mine, but Len's [Osanic]. But that I would not agree to an unscripted debate for a simple reason: if McAdams made stuff up for a scripted debate, I can imagine what a fabricator like Von Pein could do when he could create his own questions. .... Bottom Line: When DVP had the opportunity to debate me fair and square, he chickened out. Now he wants to debate me in a format where he can make stuff up." <<<
DVP SAYS:
DiEugenio is full of crap here.
And here's why:
It's true that I declined to debate Jim D. in 2009 when I most
certainly could have done so. But after preparing over 30 questions
for Jimbo in the months since the 2009 debate between Jim and John
McAdams, I decided to step up and challenge DiEugenio to a different
kind of JFK debate--one that would have the debaters asking the
questions, instead of relying on other people for the questions.
And that type of format regarding the questions, as I've said numerous
times since my initial challenge to Jim in early May of 2010, is a
format that I simply cannot believe DiEugenio would be AGAINST.
Because he could ask me any questions he wanted, and as many as he
wanted.
And DiEugenio's excuse of not wanting me to ask my own questions
because he's concerned that I will simply "make stuff up" is just
nuts.
Why?
Here's why:
Because from Jim's utterly crazy "Oswald Didn't Shoot Anybody" point-
of-view, it's quite obvious that my own CORE BELIEFS about the whole
JFK case (including J.D. Tippit's murder) are beliefs that DiEugenio,
in effect, thinks were just "MADE UP" in the first place.
The facts about Lee Oswald's guilt weren't "made up" by me personally,
of course, but they certainly are core "Oswald Is Guilty" facts that
Jimbo believes are dead wrong and were literally MADE UP by somebody
along the way. Heck, Jim thinks this whole case is "made up" against
poor Patsy Oswald. The entire case, per Jim D., is nothing but one
great-big lie and cover-up and "made up" fact after another.
Plus: Again from DiEugenio's POV, what difference would it make to him
if I did just "make stuff up"? He would simply tell the listening
audience during our debate that I was making nonsense up, right? And
Jim would go on to explain the reasons he knows that I was making
stuff up. Isn't that kinda what a DEBATE is all about--to tell the
audience why your opponent is wrong and why you're right (even if it
means having to tell the audience why your opponent just MADE
SOMETHING UP out of thin air)?
Good heavens, if the shoe were on the other foot, and I were to back
out of a debate with James DiEugenio (or any of the many "Anybody But
Oswald" conspiracy kooks who regularly post on the Internet) merely
due to the fact that I was of the opinion that my opponent would be
inclined to "make stuff up" concerning JFK's assassination during a
radio debate with that person -- good gosh, then I'd never be able to
debate anyone like DiEugenio....because I KNOW he's going to simply
"make stuff up" himself! That's a given.
A great example being: Jim's current belief that Lee Oswald carried NO
LARGE PACKAGE WHATSOEVER into the Book Depository Building on November
22, 1963. Jimbo, you see, now believes that BOTH Buell Wesley Frazier
AND Linnie Mae Randle lied their asses off when they each said they
saw LHO carrying a long brown paper parcel on the morning of Nov.
22nd, with Buell and Linnie being strong-armed by the evil Dallas
Police Department into making up from whole cloth their individual
stories about having seen Sweet Lee with a large package.
Now, if that wholly unsupportable and (frankly) pathetic theory about
Buell Frazier and Linnie Randle doesn't qualify as "making stuff up",
then I don't know what would qualify.
In short, James DiEugenio doesn't want to be forced to answer specific
questions written by a lone-assassin advocate like myself in a public
debate. And that's because those questions about the PHYSICAL EVIDENCE
which proves Lee Harvey Oswald to be the murderer of both John F.
Kennedy and J.D. Tippit will be far too much to handle from Jim
DiEugenio's "Oswald Shot Nobody" viewpoint.
Jim would be made to look so silly and foolish when answering my
dozens of questions focusing on EVERY LAST PIECE OF EVIDENCE that
hangs Oswald, he has decided it would be best to reject my proposed
debate format, and stick with the questions coming from other people
instead (even though many of those questions aren't very challenging
at all, which was precisely one of Jim's complaints about the first
half of his Black Op Radio debate against John McAdams from last
September 24th).
But when given the opportunity to write his own questions (which could
potentially make me crawl under my computer desk in fear, from Jim's
POV), Mr. DiEugenio says, 'No thanks'.
I can't say I blame Jim, though. If I knew I was going to have to
admit to the four Black Op listeners that I believed that every single
piece of evidence against Lee Oswald was fake, phony, manipulated,
planted, or otherwise worthless, I think I might have a few
reservations about doing so in a public place too.
David Von Pein
July 5, 2010
================================================
DVP VS. DiEUGENIO--THE COMPLETE SERIES:
http://groups.google.com/group/Reclaiming-History/browse_thread/thread/863ee417ecb1633f
================================================