JFK Assassination Forum Archives -- Misc. Topics Of Interest (Part 122)

And only one of the individuals you cited as not believing the "lone
assassin" scenario was even remotely close to the actual
investigations into the crime--Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry.

At the following link, I've assembled six of Curry's "hallway
interviews" that he gave in front of the live TV cameras at Dallas
City Hall on November 22 and 23, 1963. And these six interviews leave
very little doubt about what Chief Curry's opinion was regarding the
guilt or innocence of Lee Harvey Oswald. Curry, without question,
thought Oswald was guilty:

http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/jesse-curry-interviews.html

aeffects

unread,

Jan 13, 2010, 3:41:43 AM1/13/10

to

bump

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 13, 2010, 3:54:36 AM1/13/10

to

...

robcap...@netscape.com

unread,

Jan 13, 2010, 9:47:54 AM1/13/10

to

On Jan 13, 3:34 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> http://www.JFKAssassinationForum.com/index.php/topic,1638.msg24360.ht...

>
> >>> "INSIDERS...didn't believe it either. SO WHY SHOULD WE????" <<<
>
> Because all the evidence indicates that Lee Harvey Oswald (and nobody
> else) shot and killed two people on 11/22/63:

What evidence would that be again?? We can "run through it" yet
again, and I can SHOW you how it does NOT implicate LHO in the least!
In fact, it SHOWS a conspiracy was afoot.

> http://Oswald-Is-Guilty.blogspot.com

This is just another way this guy is paid for spreading
disinformation. He is a "Liar For Hire"!

> And only one of the individuals you cited as not believing the "lone
> assassin" scenario was even remotely close to the actual
> investigations into the crime--Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry.

NO one who can read and think believes the official theory. That is
why 90% of the country does NOT believe it. The majority of the 10%
who claim to believe it are either paid to do so or fear losing their
cushy government/media/educational job if they support the truth.

> At the following link, I've assembled six of Curry's "hallway
> interviews" that he gave in front of the live TV cameras at Dallas
> City Hall on November 22 and 23, 1963. And these six interviews leave
> very little doubt about what Chief Curry's opinion was regarding the
> guilt or innocence of Lee Harvey Oswald. Curry, without question,
> thought Oswald was guilty:

Chief Curry, like many others, was under OVERWHELMING pressure to name
LHO the guilty man even before the investigation got under way. Any
honest person who recounts those harrowing hours and days knows that.

Murder cases are NOT solved in an hour and a half in the real world.

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 13, 2010, 6:20:02 PM1/13/10

to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/5596b4069e6b83a1/a0f88c5a5c374ad6?#a0f88c5a5c374ad6

>>> "[JOHN] Simkin [THE CHIEF CONSPIRACY-HAPPY KOOK OVER AT "THE EDUCATION FORUM"] is pretty mellow; I would think you would have had to really cross a line to actually get kicked out of there." <<<

LOL. Oh, come now "Pam". Let's be reasonable. No LNer lasts very long
there. Ask Brendan Slattery.

And, AFAIK, there isn't a single LNer posting there as of this date.
At least not any regular posters that I have seen. Not one.

To be perfectly clear (and fair) here:

I was ejected from Simkin's forum in July of 2006 (after posting for
four days), and "officially" the reason I was given for my dismissal
was because I had not added a photograph of myself to my profile.
(John Simkin has a rule where every member who posts at the Edu. Forum
must have a photo of himself/herself; it "personalizes" the experience
for other readers, per Mr. Simkin. And that's fine. I didn't/don't
particularly like that rule; but, after all, it is Simkin's house of
kooks, so he can decide on the rules and regulations.)

However, several other long-time members as of that time (in July
2006) were not complying with the "photo" rule, which I pointed out to
Mr. Simkin, which made John crack down on the rule immediately after I
pointed out to him that other members didn't have personal pics
either. He had evidently been lax in enforcing the rule up to that
time.

I was e-mailing John back and forth a couple of times, trying to work
out a compromise of some kind regarding the "personal photo" rule,
because I did not have a photo of myself that I could use at all. (And
I still don't have one to this day.)

If I recall correctly, John seemed to be willing to compromise on the
picture rule for a certain period of time, allowing me to possibly use
a "filler" picture until I could obtain and upload a decent picture of
myself (which ain't easy with a mug like mine). ;)

So, I continued to post for about two more days or so (posting lots of
actual evidence and citations from the witnesses and common sense,
etc.), when suddenly I was banned from the forum permanently via a
very short and terse e-mail from Mr. Simkin.

So, make of that explanation what you will. But, IMO, the brevity of
my stay at The Education Forum was based more on the "LN" content of
my posts than it was the silly "photo" rule.

YMMV.

>>> "How anyone can objectely examine all the information we have about the Zapruder films and not ask questions is beyond me." <<<

"Films"? As in "more than one"?

~shrug~

Well, "Pamela", you and all other people who even BEGIN to suspect
that Abraham Zapruder's home movie might have been "faked" or
"tampered with" SHOULD be asking yourself the $64,000 question (to
which there is no logical and reasonable and SANE answer whatsoever if
the film was faked to ELIMINATE ALL SIGNS OF A CONSPIRACY; and what
other possible reason could there be for anybody to want to fake the
film other than that?), and that $64K question is this one:

WHY IS THE REAR HEAD SNAP STILL VISIBLE IN EVERY SINGLE COPY OF
THE ZAPRUDER FILM THAT EXISTS TO THIS DAY?

I await a logical, reasonable, and BELIEVABLE answer to the above
inquiry.

To date, I've yet to hear such an answer.

http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/zapruder.html

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 13, 2010, 9:20:02 PM1/13/10

to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/6fea6e46b8c4313f

>>> "Did Oswald have any bullets?" <<<

He obviously had enough to do the job in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63.

I always get a kick out of the conspiracy theorists who seem to think
that finding an answer to this type of question is essential in order
to arrive at the conclusion that Oswald killed Kennedy.

But, quite naturally, it isn't essential at all.

Why?

Because:

1.) We know beyond all doubt that BULLETS FROM THE GUN OSWALD OWNED
were fired at JFK in Dealey Plaza.

2.) And we know beyond all REASONABLE DOUBT that Lee Oswald (the owner
of that gun) was doing the shooting from his workplace.

So the lingering questions of "Where did he buy his bullets?" and
"Exactly how many bullets did Oswald have in his personal inventory of
ammunition as of 12:30 PM CST on November 22, 1963?" are actually
rather meaningless inquiries in the long run.

Would a prosecutor in a bank robbery case have to prove to the jury
WHERE the defendant bought the bullets he used to kill the bank
teller?

Or: Would that same prosecutor be forced to prove WHERE the bank
robber bought the gasoline that was in the tank of the getaway car in
order for the jury to find the defendant guilty?

Food for thought.

(It's silly food for thought. But most things brought up by JFK
conspiracy theorists are silly, of course. So, it's merely par for the
CTer course.)

http://www.DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 13, 2010, 11:17:07 PM1/13/10

to

http://www.JFKAssassinationForum.com/index.php/topic,1635.msg24470.html#msg24470

>>> "History shows that the Warren Commision [sic] ultimately did not convince the majority of the US public (and world) that there was not a conspiracy. This was it's [sic] prime objective..." <<<

Oh, goodie, that old canard again.

Any chance you can prove that the "prime objective" of the WC was to
whitewash things? Any chance of that at all?

A conspiracy theorist believing that somebody (or some group) was up
to no good is meaningless. What the CTers need is some kind of proof
that people were conspiring with each other to do the following:

1.) Kill JFK.

2.) Make Oswald the patsy.

3.) Whitewash ALL of the various post-assassination investigations so
that everybody would think Oswald (and Ruby) did it alone -- including
the DPD's initial investigation on the weekend of November 22-24,
1963, plus the Warren Commission's investigation, plus the HSCA's
probe into the murder.

And to believe that ALL THREE of those individual investigations into
Kennedy's murder were "whitewash" jobs is just too ridiculous a
thought to consider for more than two seconds.

And yet, a goodly number of conspiracy theorists think that ALL THREE
of those investigative agencies were, indeed, part of a "cover-up".
Such thinking is silly beyond all tolerance.

To date, none of the above three things have been proven by the CTers
of the world. And they never will be proven, because none of the
extraordinary things that conspiracy theorists think happened in this
case really happened. Nor could they have happened in the real world
in which we live.

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 14, 2010, 12:45:14 AM1/14/10

to

http://www.JFKAssassinationForum.com/index.php/topic,1636.msg24474.html#msg24474

BTW/FYI -- Jack Dougherty was probably a little bit mentally
handicapped. (I hadn't known that until fairly recently.)

BTW #2 -- Dougherty claimed (in his 11/22/63 affidavit) that after the
assassination (at "12:45 p.m.") he went to the sixth floor, and at
that time (at 12:45) he said he saw all of the various TSBD employees
whom he had also seen on the sixth floor prior to 12:30, which, of
course, we know is impossible, because none of the employees Dougherty
mentions were on the sixth floor at 12:45 PM (or at any time AFTER the
shooting took place).

Of course, Dougherty HIMSELF could not possibly have been on the sixth
floor at 12:45 either. He was obviously all mixed up about the times
when he did certain things that day.

This is from Dougherty's November 22 affidavit:

"I was working on the sixth floor today. There was six of us
working on the floor. The others were Bill Lovelady, William Shelby
[sic; should be Shelley], Danny Arce, Bonnie Williams, and Charles
Givens. I went back to work at 12:45 p.m. I had already gone back to
work and...gone down on the fifth [floor] to get some stock when I
heard a shot. It sounded like it was coming from inside the building,
but I couldn't tell from where. I went down on the first floor, and
asked a man named Eddie Piper if he had heard anything and he said
yes, that he had heard three shots. I then went back on the sixth
floor. I didn't see anyone on the floor except the people I named."

In short, Dougherty doesn't seem to know where he was at various
crucial times on Nov. 22...or when? He was all over the map when he
gave his Warren Commission testimony, too. (I'm sure Joe Ball must've
been ready to tear his hair out while questioning him.)

There's also this little gem from JD:

BALL -- "Wait a minute--did you hear the shots before or after you had
your lunch?"
DOUGHERTY -- "Before--before I ate my lunch."
BALL -- "You heard shots before you ate your lunch?"
DOUGHERTY -- "Let's see--yes, I believe I did."

So, I think it's pretty safe to say that Jack Edwin Dougherty isn't
exactly the greatest or most reliable of witnesses.

Dougherty's testimony is, essentially, worthless.

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b7f9edba0d3a8fbe

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 14, 2010, 1:02:25 AM1/14/10

to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/5596b4069e6b83a1/66d69989af2285c6?#66d69989af2285c6

>>> "David: So you admit that the HEAD SNAP is POWERFUL EVIDENCE OF CONSPIRACY?" <<<

On simply "kneejerk" and "uninformed about the overall facts" levels
-- yes.

That rear head snap as seen in the Zapruder Film is certainly the #1
thing that led to the formation of the HSCA in 1976. Without doubt.

And yet many conspiracists seem to think that the film that Bob Groden
showed to the world in March 1975 on ABC-TV is a FAKED FILM -- i.e.,
it's a film that was manipulated by conspirators long before 1975 in
order to get rid of all notions that people might have that would
suggest that President Kennedy was shot from the front!!

Those film-fakers were idiots, weren't they?

There are only three letters left to write here:

LOL.

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 14, 2010, 1:25:31 AM1/14/10

to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/fd348424f0c55387/fce2108e9564198b?#fce2108e9564198b

TONY MARSH SAID:

>>> "How can it be common knowledge if it never happened?" <<<

JEAN DAVISON THEN SAID:

>>> "Same way it could be "common knowledge" that a Mauser was found or other misinformation that appeared in the media." <<<

DVP NOW SAYS:

True, Jean.

But, as usual, Tony has misrepresented what I said when I said this:

"By the time that document was written (09/23/64), it was surely
common knowledge at the Dallas FBI offices that Lee Oswald was
carrying a Coke bottle in the TSBD at some point just after President
Kennedy's assassination."

In the "Coke" incident I referenced in the quote above, I wasn't
talking about the mythical "Marrion Baker Saw A Coke In Oswald's
Hands" tale. I was talking about the FACTUAL "Coke" story told by Mrs.
Robert A. Reid.

Mrs. Reid certainly DID see Oswald with a Coke shortly after the
assassination. (Or does Tony Marsh think Reid was a liar or mistaken
in this regard?)

So, when I said "it was common knowledge", I was talking about the
"common knowledge" of the Reid/Oswald Coke incident--not the Baker/
Oswald mythical Coke incident.

I sometimes think Tony just likes to see if people will go to the
trouble of unraveling his misrepresentations. It's an enjoyable game
to him. But to everyone else, it's mighty annoying and tiresome.

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 14, 2010, 3:41:16 AM1/14/10

to

http://www.JFKAssassinationForum.com/index.php/topic,1636.msg24496.html#msg24496

>>> "Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I thought the 3 boys [Norman, Jarman, and Williams] moved to the western windows and observed the people running to the grassy knoll area." <<<

Yes, they did. But they were still on the complete OPPOSITE SIDE of
the building from where the elevators were located (south vs. north,
that is).

And since the attention of the boys on the fifth floor was pretty much
fixated on the activity OUTSIDE the building after they moved to the
west side of the building, they wouldn't necessarily have had to see
(or hear) Oswald go down the stairs on the OPPOSITE side of the
building.

Why do you think the "boys" would have had no choice but to see
somebody on the other side of the building?

Plus -- Since we know that SOMEBODY was up on the sixth floor firing a
gun at JFK, then why don't CTers wonder why the fifth-floor witnesses
didn't see or hear "the real killer" as he went down the stairs? Was
the "real killer" being cloaked by a Star Trek-like device that day?

>>> "Also, I believe one of them saw Baker's helmet as he and Truly moved to the Eastern lift on the 5th floor. You know, the one that was left after someone took the other down, after Truly and Baker took to the stairs." <<<

Yes, that's in Bonnie Ray's WC testimony:

JOSEPH A. BALL -- "Now, when you were questioned by the FBI agents,
talking to Mr. Odum and Mr. Griffin, they reported in writing here
that while you were standing at the west end of the building on the
fifth floor, a police officer came up on the elevator and looked all
around the fifth floor and left the floor. Did you see anything like
that?"

BONNIE RAY WILLIAMS -- "Well, at the time I was up there I saw a
motorcycle policeman. He came up. And the only thing I saw of him was
his white helmet."

>>> "You're not playing coy with me, are you David?" <<<

Who? Me? Nah.

aeffects

unread,

Jan 14, 2010, 4:40:55 AM1/14/10

to

On Jan 12, 10:52 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:

you be a busy beaver shithead.....

no advertising moron!

robcap...@netscape.com

unread,

Jan 14, 2010, 10:10:18 AM1/14/10

to

On Jan 13, 9:20 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/th...

>
> >>> "Did Oswald have any bullets?" <<<
>
> He obviously had enough to do the job in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63.
>
> I always get a kick out of the conspiracy theorists who seem to think
> that finding an answer to this type of question is essential in order
> to arrive at the conclusion that Oswald killed Kennedy.
>
> But, quite naturally, it isn't essential at all.

Really??? IF you are going to show someone killed someone else you
need to show this! IF not, why bother to try and show LHO owned the
murder weapon then?

Why can't YOU show us where LHO allegedly purchased his ammo from??
Why can't YOU explain why he did NOT just get some from Klein's???

The other two options (someone gave it to him and he never had any)
aren't to your liking so you need to show us YOUR thinking is correct
here by providing evidence.

> Why?

Oh goodie, more kooky LNer claims!

> Because:
>
> 1.) We know beyond all doubt that BULLETS FROM THE GUN OSWALD OWNED
> were fired at JFK in Dealey Plaza.

We do??? When did you prove LHO owned the alleged murder weapon
again?? When did YOU prove the bullet and fragments presented were
EVER INSIDE either victim?

> 2.) And we know beyond all REASONABLE DOUBT that Lee Oswald (the owner
> of that gun) was doing the shooting from his workplace.

We do?? Who can place LHO in the window at 12:30 P.M. firing CE-139
again?

> So the lingering questions of "Where did he buy his bullets?" and
> "Exactly how many bullets did Oswald have in his personal inventory of
> ammunition as of 12:30 PM CST on November 22, 1963?" are actually
> rather meaningless inquiries in the long run.

ONLY to folks who are NOT seeking the truth Dave Von Con. For the
vast majority of us (90% at last count) it is very important.

Why is this soooo hard to produce (the ammo evidence) if he did do the
shooting as you and the WC claim?

> Would a prosecutor in a bank robbery case have to prove to the jury
> WHERE the defendant bought the bullets he used to kill the bank
> teller?

It depends on how they were charging this. IF they claimed the guy was
ACTING ALONE then it would be very important, but if he was a member
of a group it would be less so as the prosecutor could say he got ammo
from his co-conspirators.

When you paint some as a "loner" and a sole killer you have to connect
the dots Dave Von Con as you have ruled out any help from anyone else.

Why is it sooo hard for you to show us where he got this ammo from IF
he did the shooting as you and the WC claim? I don't get this at all.

> Or: Would that same prosecutor be forced to prove WHERE the bank
> robber bought the gasoline that was in the tank of the getaway car in
> order for the jury to find the defendant guilty?

Bullets and gasoline are two different things. UNLESS the robber set
the guard on fire to kill him it is irrelevant where he purchased his
gas from.

> Food for thought.

YOU must go hungry a lot!!!

> (It's silly food for thought. But most things brought up by JFK
> conspiracy theorists are silly, of course. So, it's merely par for the
> CTer course.)

What is silly is you claim LHO shot the President but you can't show
us any evidence for where he purchased the ammo to do so!

Ben Holmes

unread,

Jan 14, 2010, 10:14:30 AM1/14/10

to

In article <6096cc43-c005-4ce1...@r24g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
robcap...@netscape.com says...

Does my heart good to see a self-proclaimed CT'er actually attacking a LNT'er
for once...

But my heart is really warmed because I know that you'll still reserve your very
best efforts to trying to refute what I state.

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

robcap...@netscape.com

unread,

Jan 14, 2010, 10:31:09 AM1/14/10

to

On Jan 14, 10:14 am, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <6096cc43-c005-4ce1-bd2d-85b94fa80...@r24g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,

Ben, I respond to the LNers all the time (mostly YOU and Walt), so
what is our point??

All I do is show your words Ben, you are the one that argued the LNer
position with me for the last two years. YOU can't blame me for what
you say.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Jan 14, 2010, 11:56:36 AM1/14/10

to

In article <037d0231-6237-477b...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On Jan 14, 10:14=A0am, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> In article <6096cc43-c005-4ce1-bd2d-85b94fa80...@r24g2000yqd.googlegroups=
>.com>,
>> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>>
>> >On Jan 13, 9:20=3DA0pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/th..=

>.
>>
>> >> >>> "Did Oswald have any bullets?" <<<
>>
>> >> He obviously had enough to do the job in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63.
>>
>> >> I always get a kick out of the conspiracy theorists who seem to think
>> >> that finding an answer to this type of question is essential in order
>> >> to arrive at the conclusion that Oswald killed Kennedy.
>>
>> >> But, quite naturally, it isn't essential at all.
>>
>> >Really??? IF you are going to show someone killed someone else you

>> >need to show this! =A0IF not, why bother to try and show LHO owned the

>> >murder weapon then?
>>
>> >Why can't YOU show us where LHO allegedly purchased his ammo from??
>> >Why can't YOU explain why he did NOT just get some from Klein's???
>>
>> >The other two options (someone gave it to him and he never had any)
>> >aren't to your liking so you need to show us YOUR thinking is correct
>> >here by providing evidence.
>>
>> >> Why?
>>
>> >Oh goodie, more kooky LNer claims!
>>
>> >> Because:
>>
>> >> 1.) We know beyond all doubt that BULLETS FROM THE GUN OSWALD OWNED
>> >> were fired at JFK in Dealey Plaza.
>>
>> >We do??? When did you prove LHO owned the alleged murder weapon
>> >again?? When did YOU prove the bullet and fragments presented were
>> >EVER INSIDE either victim?
>>
>> >> 2.) And we know beyond all REASONABLE DOUBT that Lee Oswald (the owner
>> >> of that gun) was doing the shooting from his workplace.
>>
>> >We do?? Who can place LHO in the window at 12:30 P.M. firing CE-139
>> >again?
>>
>> >> So the lingering questions of "Where did he buy his bullets?" and
>> >> "Exactly how many bullets did Oswald have in his personal inventory of
>> >> ammunition as of 12:30 PM CST on November 22, 1963?" are actually
>> >> rather meaningless inquiries in the long run.
>>

>> >ONLY to folks who are NOT seeking the truth Dave Von Con. =A0For the

>> >vast majority of us (90% at last count) it is very important.
>>
>> >Why is this soooo hard to produce (the ammo evidence) if he did do the
>> >shooting as you and the WC claim?
>>
>> >> Would a prosecutor in a bank robbery case have to prove to the jury
>> >> WHERE the defendant bought the bullets he used to kill the bank
>> >> teller?
>>
>> >It depends on how they were charging this. IF they claimed the guy was
>> >ACTING ALONE then it would be very important, but if he was a member
>> >of a group it would be less so as the prosecutor could say he got ammo
>> >from his co-conspirators.
>>
>> >When you paint some as a "loner" and a sole killer you have to connect
>> >the dots Dave Von Con as you have ruled out any help from anyone else.
>>
>> >Why is it sooo hard for you to show us where he got this ammo from IF

>> >he did the shooting as you and the WC claim? =A0I don't get this at all.

>>
>> >> Or: Would that same prosecutor be forced to prove WHERE the bank
>> >> robber bought the gasoline that was in the tank of the getaway car in
>> >> order for the jury to find the defendant guilty?
>>

>> >Bullets and gasoline are two different things. =A0UNLESS the robber set

>> >the guard on fire to kill him it is irrelevant where he purchased his
>> >gas from.
>>
>> >> Food for thought.
>>
>> >YOU must go hungry a lot!!!
>>
>> >> (It's silly food for thought. But most things brought up by JFK
>> >> conspiracy theorists are silly, of course. So, it's merely par for the
>> >> CTer course.)
>>
>> >What is silly is you claim LHO shot the President but you can't show
>> >us any evidence for where he purchased the ammo to do so!
>>

>> Does my heart good to see a self-proclaimed CT'er actually attacking a LN=
>T'er
>> for once...
>>
>> But my heart is really warmed because I know that you'll still reserve yo=

>ur very
>> best efforts to trying to refute what I state.
>
>Ben, I respond to the LNers all the time (mostly YOU and Walt), so
>what is our point??

Sorry stupid... you respond to CT'ers. The self-admitted LNT'ers you generally
stay away from.

\

>All I do is show your words Ben, you are the one that argued the LNer
>position with me for the last two years. YOU can't blame me for what
>you say.

I can, and do, blame you for an inability to understand the rather clear English
language that I use.

You consistently lie about what I've said.

robcap...@netscape.com

unread,

Jan 14, 2010, 12:22:29 PM1/14/10

to

On Jan 14, 11:56 am, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <037d0231-6237-477b-9ce9-6eb2cd814...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,

YOUR words show you to be a LNer. Why else do YOU run from them all
the time?

Just because you are "not self-admitted" does NOT mean you are NOT a
LNer Ben.

> >All I do is show your words Ben, you are the one that argued the LNer
> >position with me for the last two years. YOU can't blame me for what
> >you say.
>
> I can, and do, blame you for an inability to understand the rather clear English
> language that I use.

Blaming others for your own words is very childish Ben. If I
misrepresented them, or edited them as you do to othes, why would I
show them to everyone to see?

This tactic has gotten old and it has turned off the lurkers. They
give you "two thumbs down" for this lame attempt to justify your lying
words.

> You consistently lie about what I've said.

IF I did, why would I QUOTE THEM FOR EVERYONE TO SEE THEN???

Ben Holmes

unread,

Jan 14, 2010, 9:28:19 PM1/14/10

to

In article <8567f7aa-af39-4be0...@22g2000yqr.googlegroups.com>,
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On Jan 14, 11:56=A0am, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> In article <037d0231-6237-477b-9ce9-6eb2cd814...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups=
>.com>,
>> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Jan 14, 10:14=3DA0am, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> >> In article <6096cc43-c005-4ce1-bd2d-85b94fa80...@r24g2000yqd.googlegro=
>ups=3D
>> >.com>,
>> >> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>>
>> >> >On Jan 13, 9:20=3D3DA0pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >> >>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/t=
>h..=3D

>> >.
>>
>> >> >> >>> "Did Oswald have any bullets?" <<<
>>
>> >> >> He obviously had enough to do the job in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63.
>>

>> >> >> I always get a kick out of the conspiracy theorists who seem to thi=
>nk
>> >> >> that finding an answer to this type of question is essential in ord=

>er
>> >> >> to arrive at the conclusion that Oswald killed Kennedy.
>>
>> >> >> But, quite naturally, it isn't essential at all.
>>
>> >> >Really??? IF you are going to show someone killed someone else you

>> >> >need to show this! =3DA0IF not, why bother to try and show LHO owned =

>the
>> >> >murder weapon then?
>>
>> >> >Why can't YOU show us where LHO allegedly purchased his ammo from??
>> >> >Why can't YOU explain why he did NOT just get some from Klein's???
>>
>> >> >The other two options (someone gave it to him and he never had any)
>> >> >aren't to your liking so you need to show us YOUR thinking is correct
>> >> >here by providing evidence.
>>
>> >> >> Why?
>>
>> >> >Oh goodie, more kooky LNer claims!
>>
>> >> >> Because:
>>
>> >> >> 1.) We know beyond all doubt that BULLETS FROM THE GUN OSWALD OWNED
>> >> >> were fired at JFK in Dealey Plaza.
>>
>> >> >We do??? When did you prove LHO owned the alleged murder weapon
>> >> >again?? When did YOU prove the bullet and fragments presented were
>> >> >EVER INSIDE either victim?
>>

>> >> >> 2.) And we know beyond all REASONABLE DOUBT that Lee Oswald (the ow=

>ner
>> >> >> of that gun) was doing the shooting from his workplace.
>>
>> >> >We do?? Who can place LHO in the window at 12:30 P.M. firing CE-139
>> >> >again?
>>
>> >> >> So the lingering questions of "Where did he buy his bullets?" and

>> >> >> "Exactly how many bullets did Oswald have in his personal inventory=

> of
>> >> >> ammunition as of 12:30 PM CST on November 22, 1963?" are actually
>> >> >> rather meaningless inquiries in the long run.
>>

>> >> >ONLY to folks who are NOT seeking the truth Dave Von Con. =3DA0For th=

>e
>> >> >vast majority of us (90% at last count) it is very important.
>>

>> >> >Why is this soooo hard to produce (the ammo evidence) if he did do th=

>e
>> >> >shooting as you and the WC claim?
>>
>> >> >> Would a prosecutor in a bank robbery case have to prove to the jury
>> >> >> WHERE the defendant bought the bullets he used to kill the bank
>> >> >> teller?
>>

>> >> >It depends on how they were charging this. IF they claimed the guy wa=

>s
>> >> >ACTING ALONE then it would be very important, but if he was a member

>> >> >of a group it would be less so as the prosecutor could say he got amm=
>o
>> >> >from his co-conspirators.
>>
>> >> >When you paint some as a "loner" and a sole killer you have to connec=
>t
>> >> >the dots Dave Von Con as you have ruled out any help from anyone else=

>.
>>
>> >> >Why is it sooo hard for you to show us where he got this ammo from IF

>> >> >he did the shooting as you and the WC claim? =3DA0I don't get this at=

> all.
>>
>> >> >> Or: Would that same prosecutor be forced to prove WHERE the bank

>> >> >> robber bought the gasoline that was in the tank of the getaway car =

>in
>> >> >> order for the jury to find the defendant guilty?
>>

>> >> >Bullets and gasoline are two different things. =3DA0UNLESS the robber=

> set
>> >> >the guard on fire to kill him it is irrelevant where he purchased his
>> >> >gas from.
>>
>> >> >> Food for thought.
>>
>> >> >YOU must go hungry a lot!!!
>>
>> >> >> (It's silly food for thought. But most things brought up by JFK

>> >> >> conspiracy theorists are silly, of course. So, it's merely par for =

>the
>> >> >> CTer course.)
>>
>> >> >What is silly is you claim LHO shot the President but you can't show
>> >> >us any evidence for where he purchased the ammo to do so!
>>

>> >> Does my heart good to see a self-proclaimed CT'er actually attacking a=
> LN=3D
>> >T'er
>> >> for once...
>>
>> >> But my heart is really warmed because I know that you'll still reserve=
> yo=3D

>> >ur very
>> >> best efforts to trying to refute what I state.
>>
>> >Ben, I respond to the LNers all the time (mostly YOU and Walt), so
>> >what is our point??
>>

>> Sorry stupid... you respond to CT'ers. The self-admitted LNT'ers you gene=

>rally
>> stay away from.
>
>YOUR words show you to be a LNer. Why else do YOU run from them all
>the time?

I don't. Indeed, I agree with them all the time. When they are QUOTED.

>Just because you are "not self-admitted" does NOT mean you are NOT a
>LNer Ben.

Only a kook would think so...

>> >All I do is show your words Ben, you are the one that argued the LNer

>> >position with me for the last two years. =A0YOU can't blame me for what
>> >you say.
>>
>> I can, and do, blame you for an inability to understand the rather clear =

>English
>> language that I use.
>
>Blaming others for your own words is very childish Ben. If I
>misrepresented them, or edited them as you do to othes, why would I
>show them to everyone to see?
>
>This tactic has gotten old and it has turned off the lurkers. They
>give you "two thumbs down" for this lame attempt to justify your lying
>words.
>
>
>> You consistently lie about what I've said.
>
>IF I did, why would I QUOTE THEM FOR EVERYONE TO SEE THEN???

Your lack of intelligence is at play here...

Message has been deleted

aeffects

unread,

Jan 15, 2010, 3:30:47 AM1/15/10

to

On Jan 15, 12:24 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/th...
>
> >>> "[Conspiracy kook Doug] Horne suggests JFK's body was moved from one casket to another on Air Force One. My goodness! .... What if they were caught? Ooops, just taking JFK for a stroll? .... Humes thinks to himself, as he lifts JFK's brain from the skull. He is so surprised he blurts out to the gathered throng something about prior surgery to the head! Impossible! Parkland doctors did no such thing!" <<<
>
> You're a little confused, Peter. Horne thinks it was HUMES HIMSELF who
> performed the body-altering surgery on JFK (at Bethesda, prior to the
> autopsy)!

now Von Pein is giving us his best Steve "your-a-hoot Keating
impersonation... What an imbecile this Von Pein is! Now the puke is
stealing my thread.... oh-my goodness... nad up hon, nad up!

> Of course, such "surgery" must have been accomplished in record-
> breaking time. But, kooks like Douglas P. Horne don't seem to care
> about the fact that none of this crap could have possibly occurred in
> a thing called "the real world" in the first place. But, as we all
> know, trivial things like reality and common sense have never stopped
> a good conspiracy-happy kook from placing on the table the utter
> silliness they continue to advocate, year after year.
>
> Also:
>
> Horne's "Humes Altered The Body At Bethesda" nonsense also makes me
> wonder why on Earth Horne ALSO advocates the notion of multiple
> caskets, various body wrappings, and faked autopsy photos/X-rays??
>
> ~~big ol' shrug~~
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/0e2e36113ce98e6b
>
> http://ReclaimingHistory.blogspot.com

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 15, 2010, 3:41:22 AM1/15/10

to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/23eafd653585e699

>>> "[Conspiracy kook Doug] Horne suggests JFK's body was moved from one casket to another on Air Force One. My goodness! .... What if they were caught? Ooops, just taking JFK for a stroll? .... Humes...is so surprised he blurts out to the gathered throng something about prior surgery to the head! Impossible! Parkland doctors did no such thing!" <<<

You're a little confused, Peter. Horne thinks it was HUMES HIMSELF who
performed the body-altering surgery on JFK (at Bethesda, prior to the

autopsy)! ....

"Mr. VonPein, Dr. Humes performed the post-mortem surgery on
JFK's head wounds before the autopsy." -- Doug Horne; December 19,
2009 [source link below]

http://www.Amazon.com/review/R23U3HRSNOQ2X3/ref=cm_cr_rev_detmd_pl?ie=UTF8&cdMsgNo=5&cdPage=1&cdSort=oldest&cdMsgID=Mx2RVKNXI6HGY2D#Mx2RVKNXI6HGY2D

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 15, 2010, 3:48:51 AM1/15/10

to

>>> "Now the puke is stealing my thread." <<<

Of course, this is my thread. I started it, as any half-wit can easily
see.

You should have waited another half-hour before taking that last toke,
Mr. Crackpipe. You inhaled too much all at once, it would appear.

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 15, 2010, 5:18:57 PM1/15/10

to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/23eafd653585e699

>>> "Have you read the book [i.e., Doug Horne's book of fantasy]?" <<<

Oh, heavens no.

I've read several pages for free at Amazon, however:

http://www.Amazon.com/Inside-The-ARRB/dp/0984314407/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1263593242&sr=1-5#reader_0984314407

I know basically what's in it from the free Amazon trials (and via
Horne's similar batch of silliness that reside in his ARRB memos from
1996 and 1998). It's all a bunch of nonsensical stuff that could not
possibly have happened in a million lifetimes.

In your first post, Peter, I thought you were talking about when Dr.
Humes FIRST opened the casket, BEFORE Humes supposedly performed the
head-altering surgery. My apologies. I'd forgotten for a moment that
Horne has dreamed up TWO separate casket-openings.

It's probably a little difficult, though, for even YOU, Peter Fokes,
to keep "Fantasy A" separated from "Fantasies B, C, & D [etc.]" when
it comes to the dream world of one Douglas P. Horne.

Isn't it, Pete?

BTW, Peter Fokes, it seems to me as though you were thoroughly MAKING
FUN OF Doug Horne's craziness in the early portion of your thread-
starting post in this thread. Were you? Or is some of Mr. Horne
rubbing off on me--and I just imagined something that never really
happened?

http://The-JFK-Assassination.blogspot.com

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 18, 2010, 9:45:50 AM1/18/10

to

http://www.JFKAssassinationForum.com/index.php/topic,1665.0.html

>>> "I have always felt that Oswald's claim of ignorance that JFK was to pass the TSBD on the 22nd was a strong indicator that he was involved in something that day. For someone so political, it seemed incongruous that he would simply sit in the lunchroom as the motorcade passed by. Others in the building would have similar actions? Would indifference to the event imply their stories to be similarly questioned. .... Jack Dougherty -- claims to have eaten his lunch and gone back to work on the 5th and 6th floors. The "big, husky fellow" who found the crowd outside on the steps intimidating enough to ignore the parade. .... Eddie Piper -- claims to have taken up a position inside the building that would give at best limited view of anything. Realizes this and fails to find a better spot. When the shooting starts, he rushes to the clock to determine the time! .... Troy West -- simply moves to the coffee pot area on the first floor and doesn't even hear the shots. He remembers nothing until 10 minutes or so after the shooting. .... Do any of these accounts ring true?" <<<

Oh, for Pete sake, what in the world are you trying to say? Are you
implying that all of those TSBD employees were part of some plot to
murder the President and/or frame Oswald?

And if you're not implying that, what's the point of this thread at
all?

If you scour the testimony of the other TSBD workers, I'm sure you'll
soon have Elsie Dorman, Billy Lovelady, Vickie Adams, Danny Arce, and
Charlie Givens all acting in suspicious ways on November 22nd, too.

I'm glad I wasn't working in the Depository that day. You'd have me
involved in the plot as well.

I just wonder why conspiracy theorists are always so anxious to
involve innocent bystanders in a scheme to murder the President (or
cover up the facts afterward)?

Jim DiEugenio, for example, has got Wesley Frazier, Linnie Randle,
Marrion Baker, Roy Truly, Ruth Paine, Michael Paine, and a good-sized
chunk of the Dallas Police Department involved in evil shenanigans.
And all without a lick of proof...merely his silly suspicions.

And that's only a small portion of Jim's list of suspects. There are
dozens of others. The nonsense about Randle and Frazier being liars is
particularly ridiculous.

And you ought to hear a kook named John Judge go on and on about the
corrupt Dallas cops. It's enough to make you want to vomit and laugh
hysterically at the same time, it's so stupid-sounding--such as
Judge's accusation about the DPD cops taking the Tippit murder weapon
into the Texas Theater themselves, and evidently planting it on
Oswald!

The main rule that many conspiracy promoters seem to abide by is this
one --- "Blame Everybody Except The Real Culprit".

aeffects

unread,

Jan 18, 2010, 1:59:06 PM1/18/10

to

On Jan 15, 12:41 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:

here you go again shithead.... no place to run, no place to hide....
the troll shithead can't debate the 45 questions... composite Von Pein
needs to run to .bugliosi ... LMFAO!

mucher1

unread,

Jan 18, 2010, 2:20:52 PM1/18/10

to

Why not take a stab at the 45 questions yourself, hotshot? You're
always hiding behind Ben's skirt. Are you unable to think for yourself?

aeffects

unread,

Jan 18, 2010, 6:36:35 PM1/18/10

to

my goodness, the fudge-packin' mucher rises from the garbage heap....
lost toots?

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 23, 2010, 5:20:56 AM1/23/10

to

http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/01/frank-mcgee-and-walter-cronkite.html

http://www.YouTube.com/watch?v=E_WG6ujotxA

"GREAT2C" SAID (AT YOUTUBE.COM):

>>> "Yet another great (and impressive) [video] find. [Linked above.] I have watched so many JFK clips of yours so far -- now I finally want to say a huge "Thank you" for the immense contribution you make to YouTube and for the remembrance of that terrible day in Dallas. Please keep up that great work -- even if it's not always acknowledged explicitly by us, your viewers." <<<

DVP REPLIED:

Thank you, "Great2C". I very much appreciate your nice comment about
my Frank McGee video.

For more videos (sorted the way I want them sorted, which is better
than the way YouTube randomly arranges a channel's playlists), check
out the link below:

http://www.YouTube-Playlists.blogspot.com

Best regards to you,
David Von Pein

Message has been deleted