Re: OSWALD, THE ELEVATORS, THE CLIPBOARD, AND LHO'S GUILT
David Von Pein
http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17547&st=0&p=222616&#entry222616
DAVID G. HEALY SAID:
Do you have "proof" LHO was at the 6th floor, TSBD window, Nov 22nd
1963, 12:30 PM? Let's start there hon.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Of course. The proof has been on the table since 1963-1964. You just
refuse to accept the obvious, honey lamb.
WILLIAM KELLY SAID:
Okay David,
Convince me Oswald was on the Sixth Floor at 12:30 PM 11/22/63.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
If you can't figure out that easy one, Bill, then I feel sorry for
you.
1.) Oswald's prints are on rifle #C2766.
2.) Rifle C2766 killed JFK.
3.) Oswald was in the building at the time when HIS OWN RIFLE (C2766)
was being used by someone to kill JFK from the sixth floor of the Book
Depository.
4.) Oswald's prints were on an EMPTY PAPER BAG found in the same area
where someone was using Rifle C2766 to kill JFK.
5.) Oswald's fresh prints were on two boxes that were located DEEP
WITHIN THE SNIPER'S NEST on the sixth floor.
6.) An eyewitness made a (post-11/22) positive identification of Lee
Harvey Oswald as the assassin in the sixth-floor corner window of the
Depository.
And there is lots of additional circumstantial evidence that indicates
the fact that Lee Oswald killed John Kennedy, including not only the
Tippit murder (which was, of course, committed by the same man whom
you aren't convinced killed JFK).
A piece of circumstantial evidence that is rarely discussed when it
comes to talking about things Oswald did that would certainly lead to
the idea of his guilt and not innocence is the following evidence
(which was corroborated by multiple TSBD employees--and not just
Charles Givens):
Lee Oswald was attempting to get an elevator sent back up to him on
the SIXTH FLOOR of the Book Depository within only about a half-hour
of the President being murdered from that very same SIXTH FLOOR of
that building.
Now, that piece of evidence (if we can call it "evidence") doesn't
prove Oswald to be guilty of shooting the President, no. But it does,
in my opinion, show Oswald's desire to "control" one of those two
freight elevators at about 12:00 on November 22.
He very likely wanted to do two things by having the elevator sent
back up to him (which it never was, per the available testimony from
witnesses): He wanted to lock that elevator on the sixth floor, thus
shutting down one of the elevators during an important time after the
noon hour when he (LHO) was making his plans to shoot Kennedy.
And, number two, he likely wanted to be able to use that same elevator
as a quick means of escape after firing his shots at the President.
Let me ask you this Bill -- Don't you find Oswald's request to have an
elevator sent back up to him on the sixth floor a little bit of an odd
request if Oswald merely was going through an ordinary day at work?
In other words, why didn't he simply go downstairs with the other
employees during the elevator race at about 11:50 AM?
And why did he then not go downstairs with Charlie Givens at
approximately 11:55 AM when Givens came back up to the sixth floor to
retrieve his cigarettes from his jacket?
Oswald had TWO opportunities to go to lunch just before 12:00 noon
that day--but he did not do it. Instead, he STAYED UPSTAIRS ON THE
SIXTH FLOOR.
Why do you think he did that, Bill?
Was he really so anxious to fill those book orders that he had on his
clipboard?
And those were book orders, btw, that HE NEVER DID FILL, which is
another important point in this dicussion, IMO. For, if he merely was
delaying going to lunch with the other boys at 11:50 and 11:55 AM in
order to DO MORE WORK, then the question should be asked: Why didn't
he do that work?
There were multiple unfilled orders attached to his clipboard when
that clipboard was discovered in early December 1963 (and it was found
in a location, btw, that was right next to where the C2766 rifle was
stashed after the shooting).
Now, Bill, just exactly how much MORE stuff would you require in order
for you to be willing to hang a "Guilty" tag around the neck of Lee H.
Oswald?
aeffects
> http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17547&st=0&p=22...
>
> DAVID G. HEALY SAID:
>
> Do you have "proof" LHO was at the 6th floor, TSBD window, Nov 22nd
> 1963, 12:30 PM? Let's start there hon.
>
> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
> Of course. The proof has been on the table since 1963-1964. You just
> refuse to accept the obvious, honey lamb.
wishful thinking, conjecture AND a solo eyewitness account (with
documented eyesight problems no-less) OBVIOUS proof? Since 1964? The
WCR? Grow up hon!
timstter
Why was the sniper's nest smothered with Oswald's fingerprints, hon?
Because he wasn't there? LOL, hon!
KUTGW, Dave *I Can't Work Out The Bleedin' Obvious* Healy.
Cordial Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
Bud
> On Apr 2, 8:22 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17547&st=0&p=22...
>
> > DAVID G. HEALY SAID:
>
> > Do you have "proof" LHO was at the 6th floor, TSBD window, Nov 22nd
> > 1963, 12:30 PM? Let's start there hon.
>
> > DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
> > Of course. The proof has been on the table since 1963-1964. You just
> > refuse to accept the obvious, honey lamb.
>
> wishful thinking, conjecture AND a solo eyewitness account (with
> documented eyesight problems no-less)
Hey look, Healy is vaguely alluding to evidence. Heres your chance
to shine junkie, produce those documents that show Brennan had bad
eyesight on the day of the assassination.
>OBVIOUS proof? Since 1964? The
> WCR? Grow up hon!
Get your head back up Ben`s ass where it belongs, you can`t talk
evidence with the big boys.
Gil Jesus
> http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17547&st=0&p=22...
>
>
> Do you have "proof" LHO was at the 6th floor, TSBD window, Nov 22nd
> 1963, 12:30 PM? Let's start there hon.
>
> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
> Of course. The proof has been on the table since 1963-1964. You just
> refuse to accept the obvious, honey lamb.
>
> WILLIAM KELLY SAID:
>
> Okay David,
> Convince me Oswald was on the Sixth Floor at 12:30 PM 11/22/63.
>
> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
> If you can't figure out that easy one, Bill, then I feel sorry for
> you.
>
> 1.) Oswald's prints are on rifle #C2766.
Not according to the FBI they weren't.
> 2.) Rifle C2766 killed JFK.
Can you show us where the Dallas Police did a swab test to determine
that the rifle had been recently fired ?
> 3.) Oswald was in the building at the time when HIS OWN RIFLE (C2766)
> was being used by someone to kill JFK from the sixth floor of the Book
> Depository.
You're still claiming that rifle was Oswald's ?
> 4.) Oswald's prints were on an EMPTY PAPER BAG found in the same area
> where someone was using Rifle C2766 to kill JFK.
Can we see the picture of that bag in situ ?
> 5.) Oswald's fresh prints were on two boxes that were located DEEP
> WITHIN THE SNIPER'S NEST on the sixth floor.
That's not proof that he put the boxes there. There were other prints
on those boxes too, one which they never identified
> 6.) An eyewitness made a (post-11/22) positive identification of Lee
> Harvey Oswald as the assassin in the sixth-floor corner window of the
> Depository.
Brennan ? And he said he was standing while shooting, a complete
impossibility. Not credible.
You keep rehashing this same crap over and over again and every time
you get your ass kicked with evidence you just come back and keep
repeating it like nothing was ever said to you.
You really are either a cement head or you have some kind of emotional
problem.
Either way, you're definitely not interested in the truth.
David Von Pein
Brennan thought Norman and Williams were standing too. Were they?
CE567/569 weren't photographed "in situ" either. Does that mean we
have to ignore those bullet fragments too (like the paper bag)? And
the four bullet shells on 10th St. weren't photographed on Tenth St.
either. Do we have to ignore those too?
And you're wrong about the FBI and the Oswald palmprint on the rifle.
Every FBI print man who looked at that print IDed it as being LHO's
palmprint.
A "swab test" to see if C2766 had recently been fired? You're nuts.
There were FRAGMENTS FROM THAT GUN IN THE LIMO, Mr. Retard. I think
that indicates that C2766 had, indeed, "recently" been fired.
And you kooks always love to underestimate the importance and
significance of Oswald's fresh prints being on the two boxes deep
inside the Sniper's Nest. Those fresh prints (i.e., less than three
days old, per the print experts), coupled with all that other "Oswald
Was Here" evidence in the SN, tells any reasonable non-kook that Mr.
Oswald was inside that SN at 12:30 on 11/22.
Ben Holmes
Gil Jesus says...
>
>On Apr 2, 11:22=A0am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>> http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=3D17547&st=3D0&p=3D=
It would have been strange indeed should they not have been able to find prints
of a man who worked on that floor.
It seems that if ever a murder is committed where I work, I must be the suspect.
>> 6.) An eyewitness made a (post-11/22) positive identification of Lee
>> Harvey Oswald as the assassin in the sixth-floor corner window of the
>> Depository.
>
>Brennan ? And he said he was standing while shooting, a complete
>impossibility. Not credible.
Particularly the clothing description.
Not credible at all.
What *is* credible is his earliest statements...
>You keep rehashing this same crap over and over again and every time
>you get your ass kicked with evidence you just come back and keep
>repeating it like nothing was ever said to you.
>
>You really are either a cement head or you have some kind of emotional
>problem.
>
>Either way, you're definitely not interested in the truth.
I find it vaguely interesting that although the "clipboard" was mentioned in the
subject... it's not in the post.
The clipboard is one of the strongest bits of evidence for a frame-up that
exists in this case, as I've previously shown. A previous discussion of the case
of the curious clipboard can be found here:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b3737e00fbd6cfa1?hl=en
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Holmes
Learn to Make Money with a Website - http://www.burningknife.com
David Von Pein
>>> "I find it vaguely interesting that although the "clipboard" was mentioned in the subject... it's not in the post." <<<
You didn't look very hard then, retard.
Of course, since you have me killfiled, you can't see the whole post.
And, naturally, the ABO crowd doesn't think it's the slightest bit
strange to have Saint Oswald's FRESH PRINTS on the SN boxes--i.e., a
place where OTHER "Oz Was Here" stuff was located that relates to the
assassination.
Just a co-inky, I guess.
Walt
> http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17547&st=0&p=22...
>
> DAVID G. HEALY SAID:
>
> Do you have "proof" LHO was at the 6th floor, TSBD window, Nov 22nd
> 1963, 12:30 PM? Let's start there hon.
>
> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
> Of course. The proof has been on the table since 1963-1964. You just
> refuse to accept the obvious, honey lamb.
>
> WILLIAM KELLY SAID:
>
> Okay David,
> Convince me Oswald was on the Sixth Floor at 12:30 PM 11/22/63.
>
> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
David Von Pea Brain lied: ( and lying only serves to prove that Von
Pea brain has no case......)
>
> If you can't figure out that easy one, Bill, then I feel sorry for
> you.
>
> 1.) Oswald's prints are on rifle #C2766. Pea Beain lied... NO identifiable prints were ever reported to the Warren Commission. The FBI were unable to find any identifiable prints on the rifle. THIS IS A FACT!!
>
> 2.) Rifle C2766 killed JFK. Pea Brain Lied!!... When the FACTS are examined, there is NO evidence that proves that the Carcano rifle found in the TSBD was the murder weapon. THIS IS A FACT!!
>
> 3.) Oswald was in the building at the time when HIS OWN RIFLE (C2766)
> was being used by someone to kill JFK from the sixth floor of the Book
> Depository. Pea Brain LIED...... There is no proof that the Carcano (C2766) is the exact same rifle the Kleins sent to PO Box 2915 in Dallas.
>
> 4.) Oswald's prints were on an EMPTY PAPER BAG found in the same area
> where someone was using Rifle C2766 to kill JFK. Pea Brain lied:.... There is NO prooof that the bag was found in that area, AND what's more important the FBI said that there was NO indication that the bag had ever contained a rifle of any kind!! THIS IS A FACT!!
>
> 5.) Oswald's fresh prints were on two boxes that were located DEEP
> WITHIN THE SNIPER'S NEST on the sixth floor. Pea Brain lied:.... The prints were found on boxes OUTSIDE of the so called "Sniper's Nest"... And what's more the box that the cops said Oswald sat on while he fired the rifle had a palm print on the edge that would have had Oswald facing the WRONG way!!... Originally Lt Day made a note on top of the box that said the palm print was made by the suspect's LEFT palm L-E-F-T!! If the print was made by Oswald's LEFT palm as he sat there on the box he would have been facing NORTH and away from the window... Later Day scratched out the word "LEFT" and wrote the word "RIGHT" palm. This is no simple matter of a mis identification....because Day wrote that note on the box BEFORE oswald was even arrested in the Texas theater..... How could Day have known Oswald was the suspect before Oswald was arrested??
>
> 6.) An eyewitness made a (post-11/22) positive identification of Lee
> Harvey Oswald as the assassin in the sixth-floor corner window of the
> Depository. Pea Brain lied:.... NOBODY ever identified Oswald as the man with the sniper rifle in the TSBD...THIS IS A FACT!!
>
> And there is lots of additional circumstantial evidence that indicates
> the fact that Lee Oswald killed John Kennedy, including not only the
> Tippit murder (which was, of course, committed by the same man whom
> you aren't convinced killed JFK).
>
> A piece of circumstantial evidence that is rarely discussed when it
> comes to talking about things Oswald did that would certainly lead to
> the idea of his guilt and not innocence is the following evidence
> (which was corroborated by multiple TSBD employees--and not just
> Charles Givens):
>
> Lee Oswald was attempting to get an elevator sent back up to him on
> the SIXTH FLOOR of the Book Depository within only about a half-hour
> of the President being murdered from that very same SIXTH FLOOR of
> that building. B F D!!.... What does this prove?? That Lee wanted to ride the elevator down to lunch!?
Walt
> Brennan thought Norman and Williams were standing too. Were they?
Dear Stupid Bastard..... What Brennan may or may not have assumed
about Williams Jarman, and Norman is irrelevant,they weren't on the
sixth floor. Howard Brennan made it perfectly clear the the man he
saw with a sniper rifle was STANDING ERECT behind a window on the
sixth floor. His exact words were " this man was STANDING"...." I
could see this man from his belt up".... "this man let the gun down
to his side and STEPPED DOWN out of sight"
ARE YOU TOO STUPID TO COMPREHEND THIS SIMPLE DESCRIPTION??
Rob Caprio
> In article <bacf4d3b-a738-4bfa-b980-50e0df883...@ed10g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,> >>http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=3D17547&st=3D0&...
> >22...
>
> >> DAVID G. HEALY SAID:
>
> >> Do you have "proof" LHO was at the 6th floor, TSBD window, Nov 22nd
> >> 1963, 12:30 PM? Let's start there hon.
>
> >> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
> >> Of course. The proof has been on the table since 1963-1964. You just
> >> refuse to accept the obvious, honey lamb.
>
> >> WILLIAM KELLY SAID:
>
> >> Okay David,
> >> Convince me Oswald was on the Sixth Floor at 12:30 PM 11/22/63.
>
> >> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
> >> If you can't figure out that easy one, Bill, then I feel sorry for
> >> you.
>
> >> 1.) Oswald's prints are on rifle #C2766.
>
> >Not according to the FBI they weren't.
>
> >> 2.) Rifle C2766 killed JFK.
>
> >Can you show us where the Dallas Police did a swab test to determine
> >that the rifle had been recently fired ?
>
> >> 3.) Oswald was in the building at the time when HIS OWN RIFLE (C2766)
> >> was being used by someone to kill JFK from the sixth floor of the Book
> >> Depository.
>
> >You're still claiming that rifle was Oswald's ?
It is funny how "Ben" ignored this part when he claimed the SAME THING
as DVP did! LOL!
“Yet you claim there is WC evidence showing LHO ordered a 40" Carcano,
it was stamped with C2766, it was received by LHO, that he owned it,
he posed with it and it was left and found in the TSBD after the
shooting! YOU also claim it was high-velocity!
YOU have lied on ALL COUNTS!” (Robert)
“Sorry stupid, ***none of those items are lies... they are merely the
truth.*** There is indeed evidence for each of those items.” (Ben
Holmes—7/26/10)
"Ben" agrees with DVP!
> of the curious clipboard can be found here:http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b3737e00fbd6cfa...
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ben Holmes
> Learn to Make Money with a Website -http://www.burningknife.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Bud
Where are the prints of the other employees that worked there. It
would be strange if there weren`t prints of the shooter where the
shooter was seen shooting from. And the person seen shooting, the
owner of the rifle that did that shooting and the person who left the
prints were all the same person, the assassin. And that is to be
expected also.
> It seems that if ever a murder is committed where I work, I must be the suspect.
This is why Johnson didn`t tap any dunces to be on the Commission,
they are stumped when it comes to real investigation.
> >> 6.) An eyewitness made a (post-11/22) positive identification of Lee
> >> Harvey Oswald as the assassin in the sixth-floor corner window of the
> >> Depository.
>
> >Brennan ? And he said he was standing while shooting, a complete
> >impossibility. Not credible.
>
> Particularly the clothing description.
>
> Not credible at all.
>
> What *is* credible is his earliest statements...
> >You keep rehashing this same crap over and over again and every time
> >you get your ass kicked with evidence you just come back and keep
> >repeating it like nothing was ever said to you.
>
> >You really are either a cement head or you have some kind of emotional
> >problem.
>
> >Either way, you're definitely not interested in the truth.
>
> I find it vaguely interesting that although the "clipboard" was mentioned in the
> subject... it's not in the post.
>
> The clipboard is one of the strongest bits of evidence for a frame-up that
> exists in this case,
<snicker> Is this the best you got, that Oswald`s clipboard wasn`t
found right away?
> as I've previously shown. A previous discussion of the case
> of the curious clipboard can be found here:http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b3737e00fbd6cfa...
Bud
> On Apr 4, 10:09 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Brennan thought Norman and Williams were standing too. Were they?
>
> Dear Stupid Bastard..... What Brennan may or may not have assumed
> about Williams Jarman, and Norman is irrelevant,they weren't on the
> sixth floor.
No, no, no, that isn`t how it works, retards aren`t allowed to
decide what is relevant. That Brennan thought these guys were standing
shows he though there was more room under the windows that there
really was, and that when he saw Oswald shooting he was only assuming
he was standing, like he assumed the other people he saw in other
windows were doing.
> Howard Brennan made it perfectly clear the the man he
> saw with a sniper rifle was STANDING ERECT behind a window on the
> sixth floor. His exact words were " this man was STANDING"...." I
> could see this man from his belt up".... "this man let the gun down
> to his side and STEPPED DOWN out of sight"
>
> ARE YOU TOO STUPID TO COMPREHEND THIS SIMPLE DESCRIPTION??
He thought were standing who weren`t, retard. This shows that his
"standing" information isn`t trustworthy, retard, because he is
established to be wrong in the other cases, retard. Get it, retard?
Bud
> On Apr 2, 11:22 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17547&st=0&p=22...
>
> > DAVID G. HEALY SAID:
>
> > Do you have "proof" LHO was at the 6th floor, TSBD window, Nov 22nd
> > 1963, 12:30 PM? Let's start there hon.
>
> > DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
> > Of course. The proof has been on the table since 1963-1964. You just
> > refuse to accept the obvious, honey lamb.
>
> > WILLIAM KELLY SAID:
>
> > Okay David,
> > Convince me Oswald was on the Sixth Floor at 12:30 PM 11/22/63.
>
> > DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
> > If you can't figure out that easy one, Bill, then I feel sorry for
> > you.
>
> > 1.) Oswald's prints are on rifle #C2766.
>
> Not according to the FBI they weren't.
Show were the FBI said that there were no prints of Oswald`s taken
off that rifle.
> > 2.) Rifle C2766 killed JFK.
>
> Can you show us where the Dallas Police did a swab test to determine
> that the rifle had been recently fired ?
Whats the name of this "swab test", retard?
> > 3.) Oswald was in the building at the time when HIS OWN RIFLE (C2766)
> > was being used by someone to kill JFK from the sixth floor of the Book
> > Depository.
>
> You're still claiming that rifle was Oswald's ?
Only retards believe otherwise.
> > 4.) Oswald's prints were on an EMPTY PAPER BAG found in the same area
> > where someone was using Rifle C2766 to kill JFK.
>
> Can we see the picture of that bag in situ ?
What good would that do you?
> > 5.) Oswald's fresh prints were on two boxes that were located DEEP
>
> > WITHIN THE SNIPER'S NEST on the sixth floor.
>
> That's not proof that he put the boxes there. There were other prints
> on those boxes too, one which they never identified
Oswald`s prints being found where the shots were fired from is
incriminating evidence. Not to retards maybe, but to people who
understand such things.
> > 6.) An eyewitness made a (post-11/22) positive identification of Lee
> > Harvey Oswald as the assassin in the sixth-floor corner window of the
> > Depository.
>
> Brennan ? And he said he was standing while shooting, a complete
> impossibility. Not credible.
Only a retard would disregard a witness because he got a detail
wrong.
> You keep rehashing this same crap over and over again and every time
> you get your ass kicked with evidence you just come back and keep
> repeating it like nothing was ever said to you.
You haven`t said anything.
> You really are either a cement head or you have some kind of emotional
> problem.
>
> Either way, you're definitely not interested in the truth.
<snicker> You spend all your time running from it.
Ben Holmes
Rob Caprio says...
>
>On Apr 5, 12:18=A0am, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> In article <bacf4d3b-a738-4bfa-b980-50e0df883...@ed10g2000vbb.googlegroup=>> >On Apr 2, 11:22=3DA0am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >>http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=3D3D17547&st=3D3D=
You're lying again...
>=93Yet you claim there is WC evidence showing LHO ordered a 40" Carcano,
>it was stamped with C2766, it was received by LHO, that he owned it,
>he posed with it and it was left and found in the TSBD after the
>shooting! YOU also claim it was high-velocity!
>
>YOU have lied on ALL COUNTS!=94 (Robert)
When you *PROVABLY* cannot quote me saying what you claim I said, then it *YOU*
that's provably lying, isn't it?
>=93Sorry stupid, none of those items are lies they are merely the
>truth. There is indeed evidence for each of those items.=94 (Ben
>Holmes=977/26/10)
>
>"Ben" agrees with DVP!
You're lying again...
Unless you can quote DVP stating that there's *EVIDENCE* for these issues,
you've just been nailed on yet another lie.
Don't you realize just how stupid you're looking to the world?
Why not have some of your friends read these posts, and give you feedback...
>> >> 4.) Oswald's prints were on an EMPTY PAPER BAG found in the same area
>> >> where someone was using Rifle C2766 to kill JFK.
>>
>> >Can we see the picture of that bag in situ ?
>>
>> > > 5.) Oswald's fresh prints were on two boxes that were located DEEP
>> >> WITHIN THE SNIPER'S NEST on the sixth floor.
>>
>> >That's not proof that he put the boxes there. There were other prints
>> >on those boxes too, one which they never identified
>>
>> It would have been strange indeed should they not have been able to find =
>prints
>> of a man who worked on that floor.
>>
>> It seems that if ever a murder is committed where I work, I must be the s=
>uspect.
>>
>> >> 6.) An eyewitness made a (post-11/22) positive identification of Lee
>> >> Harvey Oswald as the assassin in the sixth-floor corner window of the
>> >> Depository.
>>
>> >Brennan ? And he said he was standing while shooting, a complete
>> >impossibility. Not credible.
>>
>> Particularly the clothing description.
>>
>> Not credible at all.
>>
>> What *is* credible is his earliest statements...
>>
>> >You keep rehashing this same crap over and over again and every time
>> >you get your ass kicked with evidence you just come back and keep
>> >repeating it like nothing was ever said to you.
>>
>> >You really are either a cement head or you have some kind of emotional
>> >problem.
>>
>> >Either way, you're definitely not interested in the truth.
>>
>> I find it vaguely interesting that although the "clipboard" was mentioned=
> in the
>> subject... it's not in the post.
>>
>> The clipboard is one of the strongest bits of evidence for a frame-up tha=
>t
>> exists in this case, as I've previously shown. A previous discussion of t=
>he case
>> of the curious clipboard can be found here:http://groups.google.com/group=
>/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b3737e00fbd6cfa...
I find it interesting that Racist Rob isn't interested in debating or presenting
the EVIDENCE in this case.
The clipboard is very strong evidence of a frameup in progress, but Racist Rob
wants to ignore that in order to lie about what I've said again...
Walt
> On Apr 5, 10:29 am, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 4, 10:09 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > Brennan thought Norman and Williams were standing too. Were they?
>
> > Dear Stupid Bastard..... What Brennan may or may not have assumed
> > about Williams Jarman, and Norman is irrelevant,they weren't on the
> > sixth floor.
>
> No, no, no, that isn`t how it works, retards aren`t allowed to
> decide what is relevant. That Brennan thought these guys were standing
> shows he though there was more room under the windows that there
> really was, and that when he saw Oswald shooting he was only assuming
> he was standing, like he assumed the other people he saw in other
> windows were doing.
>
> > Howard Brennan made it perfectly clear the the man he
> > saw with a sniper rifle was STANDING ERECT behind a window on the
> > sixth floor. His exact words were " this man was STANDING"...." I
> > could see this man from his belt up".... "this man let the gun down
> > to his side and STEPPED DOWN out of sight"
>
> > ARE YOU TOO STUPID TO COMPREHEND THIS SIMPLE DESCRIPTION??
>
> He thought were standing who weren`t, retard. This shows that his
> "standing" information isn`t trustworthy, retard, because he is
> established to be wrong in the other cases, retard. Get it, retard?
Well I'll be dipped!... I was responding to Von pea brain but since
you respnded to "Stupid Bastard" that proves that you realize that
you're not the sharpest tack on the bulletin board. But I'll type this
real slow so that even you should be able to understand that Howard
Brennan said that he could see the man was STANDING because he could
see all of the man's upper body from his hips to the top of his
head. Do you think that Brennan could have seen as much of the three
stooges as they knelt behind that fifth floor window?
Please reply ASAP....I need a good laugh.
>
>
>
>
>
> > > CE567/569 weren't photographed "in situ" either. Does that mean we
> > > have to ignore those bullet fragments too (like the paper bag)? And
> > > the four bullet shells on 10th St. weren't photographed on Tenth St.
> > > either. Do we have to ignore those too?
>
> > > And you're wrong about the FBI and the Oswald palmprint on the rifle.
> > > Every FBI print man who looked at that print IDed it as being LHO's
> > > palmprint.
>
> > > A "swab test" to see if C2766 had recently been fired? You're nuts.
> > > There were FRAGMENTS FROM THAT GUN IN THE LIMO, Mr. Retard. I think
> > > that indicates that C2766 had, indeed, "recently" been fired.
>
> > > And you kooks always love to underestimate the importance and
> > > significance of Oswald's fresh prints being on the two boxes deep
> > > inside the Sniper's Nest. Those fresh prints (i.e., less than three
> > > days old, per the print experts), coupled with all that other "Oswald
> > > Was Here" evidence in the SN, tells any reasonable non-kook that Mr.
> > > Oswald was inside that SN at 12:30 on 11/22.- Hide quoted text -
Bud
I responded to what a retard wrote.
> But I'll type this
> real slow so that even you should be able to understand that Howard
> Brennan said that he could see the man was STANDING because he could
> see all of the man's upper body from his hips to the top of his
> head.
What he said was he could see the man from the belt up. Which is
another way of saying he could see his shirt.
> Do you think that Brennan could have seen as much of the three
> stooges as they knelt behind that fifth floor window?
Pretty much. Except they were kneeling, and Oswald was sitting on a
box.
> Please reply ASAP....I need a good laugh.
Walt Cakebread, retard detective.
Walt
Thank you for confirming that you richly deserve the title of "Stupid
Bastard". Your reply was one of the stupidest I've ever read in this
NG..... And there are some really stupid posts in this NG.
>
> > Please reply ASAP....I need a good laugh.
>
> Walt Cakebread, retard detective.
>
>
>
> > > > > CE567/569 weren't photographed "in situ" either. Does that mean we
> > > > > have to ignore those bullet fragments too (like the paper bag)? And
> > > > > the four bullet shells on 10th St. weren't photographed on Tenth St.
> > > > > either. Do we have to ignore those too?
>
> > > > > And you're wrong about the FBI and the Oswald palmprint on the rifle.
> > > > > Every FBI print man who looked at that print IDed it as being LHO's
> > > > > palmprint.
>
> > > > > A "swab test" to see if C2766 had recently been fired? You're nuts.
> > > > > There were FRAGMENTS FROM THAT GUN IN THE LIMO, Mr. Retard. I think
> > > > > that indicates that C2766 had, indeed, "recently" been fired.
>
> > > > > And you kooks always love to underestimate the importance and
> > > > > significance of Oswald's fresh prints being on the two boxes deep
> > > > > inside the Sniper's Nest. Those fresh prints (i.e., less than three
> > > > > days old, per the print experts), coupled with all that other "Oswald
> > > > > Was Here" evidence in the SN, tells any reasonable non-kook that Mr.
> > > > > Oswald was inside that SN at 12:30 on 11/22.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Walt
The Stupid Bastard replied;..... Pretty much. Except they were
kneeling, and Oswald was sitting on a box.
Dear Stupid Bastard.... You're accepting the Warren Commission's
IMAGINARY THEORY is if it a fact. ( Which proves that you lack any
reasoning ability.)
Based on the WC imaginary theory..... Oswald would have been back from
the window about three feet. The angle from Brennan on the street
below to the window was about 30 degrees. Therefore the brick wall
beneath the window would have prevented Brennan from seeing anything
but Oswald's head if he had been there. But Brennan was specific in
his affidavit which he wrote only about an hour after the shooting,
and he clearly said ...." I could see this man from about his belt
up" ..."I saw the man I have described ( early thirties, about 165 to
175 pounds, wearing light colored clothing) in the window and he was
taking aim with a high powered rifle. I could see all of the barrell
of the gun" "Then this man let the gun down to his side and stepped
down out of sight"
Thank you for displaying your stupidity for the whole wide world to
see.
>
> > Please reply ASAP....I need a good laugh.
>
> Walt Cakebread, retard detective.
>
>
>
> > > > > CE567/569 weren't photographed "in situ" either. Does that mean we
> > > > > have to ignore those bullet fragments too (like the paper bag)? And
> > > > > the four bullet shells on 10th St. weren't photographed on Tenth St.
> > > > > either. Do we have to ignore those too?
>
> > > > > And you're wrong about the FBI and the Oswald palmprint on the rifle.
> > > > > Every FBI print man who looked at that print IDed it as being LHO's
> > > > > palmprint.
>
> > > > > A "swab test" to see if C2766 had recently been fired? You're nuts.
> > > > > There were FRAGMENTS FROM THAT GUN IN THE LIMO, Mr. Retard. I think
> > > > > that indicates that C2766 had, indeed, "recently" been fired.
>
> > > > > And you kooks always love to underestimate the importance and
> > > > > significance of Oswald's fresh prints being on the two boxes deep
> > > > > inside the Sniper's Nest. Those fresh prints (i.e., less than three
> > > > > days old, per the print experts), coupled with all that other "Oswald
> > > > > Was Here" evidence in the SN, tells any reasonable non-kook that Mr.
> > > > > Oswald was inside that SN at 12:30 on 11/22.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Rob Caprio
What is real strange is you expect the shooter (i.e. LHO in your mind)
to leave prints on boxes when NONE of his could be found on the
shells, the clip or the rifle (save the alleged palm print). Why is
that?
Rob Caprio
> In article <bf68ab25-9822-4f24-a01c-aa26d7911...@n2g2000prj.googlegroups.com>,
Your words are right below and they show you claiming LHO ordered a
40" Carcano with C2766 on it, received it, owned it, posed with it,
that it was high velocity and that it was the rifle found in the
TSBD! Isn't that what DVP said?
OF course it is LNer!
> >=93Yet you claim there is WC evidence showing LHO ordered a 40" Carcano,
> >it was stamped with C2766, it was received by LHO, that he owned it,
> >he posed with it and it was left and found in the TSBD after the
> >shooting! YOU also claim it was high-velocity!
>
> >YOU have lied on ALL COUNTS!=94 (Robert)
>
> When you *PROVABLY* cannot quote me saying what you claim I said, then it *YOU*
> that's provably lying, isn't it?
More editing, huh? Read your statement right below this!
> >=93Sorry stupid, none of those items are lies they are merely the
> >truth. There is indeed evidence for each of those items.=94 (Ben
> >Holmes=977/26/10)
>
> >"Ben" agrees with DVP!
>
> You're lying again...
YOU are in agreement with DVP! LOL!
> Unless you can quote DVP stating that there's *EVIDENCE* for these issues,
> you've just been nailed on yet another lie.
OF course he would say there is evidence for these statements since he
claims LHO ordered the alleged murder weapon, received it, owned it,
posed with it and that it was left and found in the TSBD!
Your desperation is hilarious.
> Don't you realize just how stupid you're looking to the world?
This means "Ben" knows he is sunk. They always play the "credibility
card" when they are sunk!
> Why not have some of your friends read these posts, and give you feedback...
YOU words are clear as rain!
Here they are again!
“Yet you claim there is WC evidence showing LHO ordered a 40" Carcano,
it was stamped with C2766, it was received by LHO, that he owned it,
he posed with it and it was left and found in the TSBD after the
shooting! YOU also claim it was high-velocity!
YOU have lied on ALL COUNTS!” (Robert)
“Sorry stupid, ***none of those items are lies... they are merely the
truth.*** There is indeed evidence for each of those items.” (Ben
Holmes—7/26/10)
"Ben" thinks there is evidence showing LHO ordered a 40" Carcano with
C2766 on it, that he received it, owned it, posed with it, that it was
high velocity and that it was left and found in the TSBD after the
shooting! Now tell me, how is this different from what DVP said?
Caught again in a huge lie, huh LNer?
How about this one?
“My historically correct statement that there *IS* evidence that
Oswald owned an MC with the serial number of C2766 is
irrefutable.” (Ben Holmes—2/10/10)
LOL!
Ben Holmes
Rob Caprio says...
>
>On Apr 5, 9:28=A0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> In article <bf68ab25-9822-4f24-a01c-aa26d7911...@n2g2000prj.googlegroups.=
>com>,
>> Rob Caprio says...
>>
>> >> In article <bacf4d3b-a738-4bfa-b980-50e0df883...@ed10g2000vbb.googlegr=
>oup=3D>> >> >On Apr 2, 11:22=3D3DA0am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >> >>http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=3D3D3D17547&st=
>=3D3D3D=3D
>> >0&...
>> >> >22...
>>
>> >> >> DAVID G. HEALY SAID:
>>
>> >> >> Do you have "proof" LHO was at the 6th floor, TSBD window, Nov 22nd
>> >> >> 1963, 12:30 PM? Let's start there hon.
>>
>> >> >> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>>
>t
>> >> >> refuse to accept the obvious, honey lamb.
>>
>> >> >> WILLIAM KELLY SAID:
>>
>> >> >> Okay David,
>> >> >> Convince me Oswald was on the Sixth Floor at 12:30 PM 11/22/63.
>>
>> >> >> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>>
>> >> >> If you can't figure out that easy one, Bill, then I feel sorry for
>> >> >> you.
>>
>> >> >> 1.) Oswald's prints are on rifle #C2766.
>>
>> >> >Not according to the FBI they weren't.
>>
>> >> >> 2.) Rifle C2766 killed JFK.
>>
>> >> >Can you show us where the Dallas Police did a swab test to determine
>> >> >that the rifle had been recently fired ?
>>
>6)
>> >> >> was being used by someone to kill JFK from the sixth floor of the B=
>ook
>> >> >> Depository.
>>
>> >> >You're still claiming that rifle was Oswald's ?
>>
>> >It is funny how "Ben" ignored this part when he claimed the SAME THING
>>
>> You're lying again...
>
>Your words are right below and they show you claiming LHO ordered a
>40" Carcano with C2766 on it, received it, owned it, posed with it,
>that it was high velocity and that it was the rifle found in the
>TSBD! Isn't that what DVP said?
You're lying again...
Stating the FACT that certain topics have evidence to support them, and stating
that those topics are historical fact are two separate things.
You're a liar to suggest that they are identical.
Why do you lie?
>> >=3D93Yet you claim there is WC evidence showing LHO ordered a 40" Carcan=
>o,
>> >it was stamped with C2766, it was received by LHO, that he owned it,
>> >he posed with it and it was left and found in the TSBD after the
>> >shooting! =A0YOU also claim it was high-velocity!
>>
>> >YOU have lied on ALL COUNTS!=3D94 (Robert)
>>
>> When you *PROVABLY* cannot quote me saying what you claim I said, then
>> its *YOU* that's provably lying, isn't it?
>
>> >=3D93Sorry stupid, none of those items are lies they are merely the
>> >truth. There is indeed evidence for each of those items.=3D94 (Ben
>> >Holmes=3D977/26/10)
>>
>> >"Ben" agrees with DVP!
>>
>> You're lying again...
>
>YOU are in agreement with DVP! LOL!
Why do you think that lies will convince anyone?
>> Unless you can quote DVP stating that there's *EVIDENCE* for these
>> issues, you've just been nailed on yet another lie.
>
>OF course he would say there is evidence for these statements
There you go.
You ADMIT that he *WOULD* say what I've stated, not that he has.
Yet you assert that I say the same thing as what you now admit that DVP DID NOT
SAY!
So are you ready to retract your lie and offer an apology for lying?
>since he
>claims LHO ordered the alleged murder weapon, received it, owned it,
>posed with it and that it was left and found in the TSBD!
>
>Your desperation is hilarious.
Your lies aren't.
>> Don't you realize just how stupid you're looking to the world?
>
>This means "Ben" knows he is sunk. They always play the "credibility
>card" when they are sunk!
Nope... guess not.
>> Why not have some of your friends read these posts, and give you
>> feedback...
>
>YOU words are clear as rain!
You can lead a horse to water...
>Here they are again!
>
>=93Yet you claim there is WC evidence showing LHO ordered a 40" Carcano,
>it was stamped with C2766, it was received by LHO, that he owned it,
>he posed with it and it was left and found in the TSBD after the
>shooting! YOU also claim it was high-velocity!
>
>YOU have lied on ALL COUNTS!=94 (Robert)
>
>=93Sorry stupid, none of those items are lies... they are merely the
>truth. There is indeed evidence for each of those items.=94 (Ben
>Holmes=977/26/10)
>
>"Ben" thinks there is evidence
Yep... there provably is.
The fact that *YOU* don't know what evidence is doesn't change that fact.
>showing LHO ordered a 40" Carcano with
>C2766 on it, that he received it, owned it, posed with it, that it was
>high velocity and that it was left and found in the TSBD after the
>shooting! Now tell me, how is this different from what DVP said?
You've already admitted what the difference is.
>=93My historically correct statement that there *IS* evidence that
>Oswald owned an MC with the serial number of C2766 is
>irrefutable.=94 (Ben Holmes=972/10/10)
>
>LOL!
And the statement by DVP that says this is...
Hmmm... doesn't exist except in your mind.
>
>> >> >> 4.) Oswald's prints were on an EMPTY PAPER BAG found in the same ar=
>ea
>> >> >> where someone was using Rifle C2766 to kill JFK.
>>
>> >> >Can we see the picture of that bag in situ ?
>>
>> >> > > 5.) Oswald's fresh prints were on two boxes that were located DEEP
>> >> >> WITHIN THE SNIPER'S NEST on the sixth floor.
>>
>> >> >That's not proof that he put the boxes there. There were other prints
>> >> >on those boxes too, one which they never identified
>>
>> >> It would have been strange indeed should they not have been able to fi=
>nd =3D
>> >prints
>> >> of a man who worked on that floor.
>>
>> >> It seems that if ever a murder is committed where I work, I must be th=
>e s=3D
>> >uspect.
>>
>> >> >> 6.) An eyewitness made a (post-11/22) positive identification of Le=
>e
>> >> >> Harvey Oswald as the assassin in the sixth-floor corner window of t=
>he
>> >> >> Depository.
>>
>> >> >Brennan ? And he said he was standing while shooting, a complete
>> >> >impossibility. Not credible.
>>
>> >> Particularly the clothing description.
>>
>> >> Not credible at all.
>>
>> >> What *is* credible is his earliest statements...
>>
>> >> >You keep rehashing this same crap over and over again and every time
>> >> >you get your ass kicked with evidence you just come back and keep
>> >> >repeating it like nothing was ever said to you.
>>
>> >> >You really are either a cement head or you have some kind of emotiona=
>l
>> >> >problem.
>>
>> >> >Either way, you're definitely not interested in the truth.
>>
>> >> I find it vaguely interesting that although the "clipboard" was mentio=
>ned=3D
>> > in the
>> >> subject... it's not in the post.
>>
>> >> The clipboard is one of the strongest bits of evidence for a frame-up =
>tha=3D
>> >t
>> >> exists in this case, as I've previously shown. A previous discussion o=
>f t=3D
>> >he case
>> >> of the curious clipboard can be found here:http://groups.google.com/gr=
>oup=3D
>> >/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b3737e00fbd6cfa...
>>
>> I find it interesting that Racist Rob isn't interested in debating or
>> presenting the EVIDENCE in this case.
>>
>> The clipboard is very strong evidence of a frameup in progress, but
>> Racist Rob wants to ignore that in order to lie about what I've said again...
Dead silence...
Rob Caprio
> In article <e4255f3c-f3d9-476a-9c0c-12b6b7398...@r6g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>,
~Yawn!~
He constantly denies his OWN words!
> Stating the FACT that certain topics have evidence to support them, and stating
> that those topics are historical fact are two separate things.
YOU said there is evidence to support them and DVP says the same
thing. YOU are a lying LNer!
> You're a liar to suggest that they are identical.
YOU are saying the SAME THING as DVP! Everyone can see this.
> Why do you lie?
More deflection from the con man who runs from his OWN words!
> >> >=3D93Yet you claim there is WC evidence showing LHO ordered a 40" Carcan=
> >o,
> >> >it was stamped with C2766, it was received by LHO, that he owned it,
> >> >he posed with it and it was left and found in the TSBD after the
> >> >shooting! =A0YOU also claim it was high-velocity!
>
> >> >YOU have lied on ALL COUNTS!=3D94 (Robert)
>
> >> When you *PROVABLY* cannot quote me saying what you claim I said, then
> >> its *YOU* that's provably lying, isn't it?
>
> >> >=3D93Sorry stupid, none of those items are lies they are merely the
> >> >truth. There is indeed evidence for each of those items.=3D94 (Ben
> >> >Holmes=3D977/26/10)
>
> >> >"Ben" agrees with DVP!
>
> >> You're lying again...
>
> >YOU are in agreement with DVP! LOL!
>
> Why do you think that lies will convince anyone?
"Ben" AGREES with DVP!
> >> Unless you can quote DVP stating that there's *EVIDENCE* for these
> >> issues, you've just been nailed on yet another lie.
>
> >OF course he would say there is evidence for these statements
>
> There you go.
>
> You ADMIT that he *WOULD* say what I've stated, not that he has.
He has told me there is evidence for these things con man. Everyone
who has ever talked with or read DVP knows this! YOU have to lie
about the obvious to hide from YOUR OWN words! LOL!
> Yet you assert that I say the same thing as what you now admit that DVP DID NOT
> SAY!
You have! Anyone who has read DVP knows this. YOU are desperate,
aren't you?
> So are you ready to retract your lie and offer an apology for lying?
Nice try desperate man, but your games won't work.
> >since he
> >claims LHO ordered the alleged murder weapon, received it, owned it,
> >posed with it and that it was left and found in the TSBD!
>
> >Your desperation is hilarious.
>
> Your lies aren't.
You are so desperate, aren't you? Why not just fess up that you are a
LNer? Everyone know that you are by now.
> >> Don't you realize just how stupid you're looking to the world?
>
> >This means "Ben" knows he is sunk. They always play the "credibility
> >card" when they are sunk!
>
> Nope... guess not.
You're sunk LNer.
> >> Why not have some of your friends read these posts, and give you
> >> feedback...
>
> >YOU words are clear as rain!
>
> You can lead a horse to water...
Read on con man.
> >Here they are again!
>
> >=93Yet you claim there is WC evidence showing LHO ordered a 40" Carcano,
> >it was stamped with C2766, it was received by LHO, that he owned it,
> >he posed with it and it was left and found in the TSBD after the
> >shooting! YOU also claim it was high-velocity!
>
> >YOU have lied on ALL COUNTS!=94 (Robert)
>
> >=93Sorry stupid, none of those items are lies... they are merely the
> >truth. There is indeed evidence for each of those items.=94 (Ben
> >Holmes=977/26/10)
>
> >"Ben" thinks there is evidence
>
> Yep... there provably is.
I just noticed how he removed the ***-*** from this statement by him
-- "...none of those items are lies... they are merely the truth."!
You are trying to hide your lie, huh?
> The fact that *YOU* don't know what evidence is doesn't change that fact.
YOU are a liar and you know it that is why you edit all the time.
> >showing LHO ordered a 40" Carcano with
> >C2766 on it, that he received it, owned it, posed with it, that it was
> >high velocity and that it was left and found in the TSBD after the
> >shooting! Now tell me, how is this different from what DVP said?
>
> You've already admitted what the difference is.
NO con man, YOU both say there is evidence showing these things. IF
you think otherwise then show us where DVP says differently from YOU!
I double dare you!
> >=93My historically correct statement that there *IS* evidence that
> >Oswald owned an MC with the serial number of C2766 is
> >irrefutable.=94 (Ben Holmes=972/10/10)
>
> >LOL!
>
> And the statement by DVP that says this is...
>
> Hmmm... doesn't exist except in your mind.
"Ben" is so desperate he thinks DVP says something different from
this! LOL! Sure, a rabid NBO like DVP does not say there is evidence
showing LHO owned the alleged murder weapon! LOL!
Is this guy sunk or what? Look at the desperate lengths he has to go
to!
Ben Holmes
Rob Caprio says...
>
>On Apr 6, 10:01=A0am, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> In article <e4255f3c-f3d9-476a-9c0c-12b6b7398...@r6g2000vbz.googlegroups.=
>com>,
>> Rob Caprio says...
>>
>> >> In article <bf68ab25-9822-4f24-a01c-aa26d7911...@n2g2000prj.googlegrou=
>ps.=3D
>> >com>,
>> >> Rob Caprio says...
>>
>> >> >> In article <bacf4d3b-a738-4bfa-b980-50e0df883...@ed10g2000vbb.googl=
>egr=3D
>> >oup=3D3D>> >> >> >On Apr 2, 11:22=3D3D3DA0am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> w=
>rote:
>> >> >> >>http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=3D3D3D3D175=
>47&st=3D
>> >=3D3D3D3D=3D3D
>> >> >0&...
>> >> >> >22...
>>
>> >> >> >> DAVID G. HEALY SAID:
>>
>2nd
>> >> >> >> 1963, 12:30 PM? Let's start there hon.
>>
>> >> >> >> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>>
>jus=3D
>> >t
>> >> >> >> refuse to accept the obvious, honey lamb.
>>
>> >> >> >> WILLIAM KELLY SAID:
>>
>> >> >> >> Okay David,
>> >> >> >> Convince me Oswald was on the Sixth Floor at 12:30 PM 11/22/63.
>>
>> >> >> >> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>>
>or
>> >> >> >> you.
>>
>> >> >> >> 1.) Oswald's prints are on rifle #C2766.
>>
>> >> >> >Not according to the FBI they weren't.
>>
>> >> >> >> 2.) Rifle C2766 killed JFK.
>>
>ne
>> >> >> >that the rifle had been recently fired ?
>>
>276=3D
>> >6)
>> >> >> >> was being used by someone to kill JFK from the sixth floor of th=
>e B=3D
>> >ook
>> >> >> >> Depository.
>>
>> >> >> >You're still claiming that rifle was Oswald's ?
>>
>G
>> >> >as DVP did! =3DA0LOL!
>>
>> >> You're lying again...
>>
>> >Your words are right below and they show you claiming LHO ordered a
>> >40" Carcano with C2766 on it, received it, owned it, posed with it,
>> >that it was high velocity and that it was the rifle found in the
>>
>> You're lying again...
>
>~Yawn!~
>
>He constantly denies his OWN words!
And yet, strangely enough, when you quote them accurately, I *NEVER* "deny"
them, rather, I assert that they are still correct.
It's only *YOUR WACKY INTERPRETATION* that I deny.
You can *expect* me to "deny" your lies...
>> Stating the FACT that certain topics have evidence to support them,
>> and stating that those topics are historical fact are two separate things.
>
>YOU said there is evidence to support them
There is.
>and DVP says the same
>thing.
You've already admitted that he "would" say this... so you *KNOW* that he
didn't.
You're lying...
Why would you lie so blatantly?
>> You're a liar to suggest that they are identical.
>
>YOU are saying the SAME THING as DVP! Everyone can see this.
And yet, you admit that DVP hasn't said what I said.
Why not simply QUOTE DVP asserting that there's evidence for these topics?
>> Why do you lie?
>
>> >> >=3D3D93Yet you claim there is WC evidence showing LHO ordered a 40" C=
>arcan=3D
>> >o,
>> >> >it was stamped with C2766, it was received by LHO, that he owned it,
>> >> >he posed with it and it was left and found in the TSBD after the
>> >> >shooting! =3DA0YOU also claim it was high-velocity!
>>
>> >> >YOU have lied on ALL COUNTS!=3D3D94 (Robert)
>>
>> >> When you *PROVABLY* cannot quote me saying what you claim I said, then
>> >> its *YOU* that's provably lying, isn't it?
>>
>> >> >=3D3D93Sorry stupid, none of those items are lies they are merely the
>> >> >truth. There is indeed evidence for each of those items.=3D3D94 (Ben
>> >> >Holmes=3D3D977/26/10)
>>
>> >> >"Ben" agrees with DVP!
>>
>> >> You're lying again...
>>
>> >YOU are in agreement with DVP! LOL!
>>
>> Why do you think that lies will convince anyone?
>
>"Ben" AGREES with DVP!
So do you.
>> >> Unless you can quote DVP stating that there's *EVIDENCE* for these
>> >> issues, you've just been nailed on yet another lie.
>>
>> >OF course he would say there is evidence for these statements
>>
>> There you go.
>>
>> You ADMIT that he *WOULD* say what I've stated, not that he has.
>
>He has told me there is evidence for these things con man.
So you lied when you said "OF course he would say there is evidence for these
statements"?
Then simply admit your lie and move on...
>Everyone
>who has ever talked with or read DVP knows this! YOU have to lie
>about the obvious to hide from YOUR OWN words! LOL!
Which statement is correct?
That he *would* say it, or that he "has" said it?
One or the other *must* be a lie, since they contradict each other...
>> Yet you assert that I say the same thing as what you now admit that
>> DVP DID NOT SAY!
>
>You have! Anyone who has read DVP knows this. YOU are desperate,
>aren't you?
"would", or "has"?
Do try to get your lies together before you document them for all to see.
>> So are you ready to retract your lie and offer an apology for lying?
Guess not...
>> >since he
>> >claims LHO ordered the alleged murder weapon, received it, owned it,
>> >posed with it and that it was left and found in the TSBD!
>>
>> >Your desperation is hilarious.
>>
>> Your lies aren't.
>
>> >> Don't you realize just how stupid you're looking to the world?
>>
>> >This means "Ben" knows he is sunk. They always play the "credibility
>> >card" when they are sunk!
>>
>> Nope... guess not.
>
>> >> Why not have some of your friends read these posts, and give you
>> >> feedback...
>>
>> >YOU words are clear as rain!
>>
>> You can lead a horse to water...
>
>> >Here they are again!
>>
>> >=3D93Yet you claim there is WC evidence showing LHO ordered a 40" Carcan=
>o,
>> >it was stamped with C2766, it was received by LHO, that he owned it,
>> >he posed with it and it was left and found in the TSBD after the
>> >shooting! =A0YOU also claim it was high-velocity!
>>
>> >YOU have lied on ALL COUNTS!=3D94 (Robert)
>>
>> >=3D93Sorry stupid, none of those items are lies... they are merely the
>> >truth. There is indeed evidence for each of those items.=3D94 (Ben
>> >Holmes=3D977/26/10)
>>
>> >"Ben" thinks there is evidence
>>
>> Yep... there provably is.
>
>I just noticed how he removed the ***-*** from this statement by him
If you *quote*, you should quote EXACTLY what I said.
>-- "...none of those items are lies... they are merely the truth."!
>You are trying to hide your lie, huh?
Your lies are clearly evident... "would" or "has"?
Your editing of my quotes has merely been removed.
>> The fact that *YOU* don't know what evidence is doesn't change that fact.
>
>> >showing LHO ordered a 40" Carcano with
>> >C2766 on it, that he received it, owned it, posed with it, that it was
>> >high velocity and that it was left and found in the TSBD after the
>> >shooting! =A0Now tell me, how is this different from what DVP said?
>>
>> You've already admitted what the difference is.
>
>NO con man, YOU both say there is evidence showing these things.
So you lied when you said that DVP "would" say it?
>IF you think otherwise then show us where DVP says differently from YOU!
>I double dare you!
This is *YOUR* claim, thus it's *YOUR* responsibility to support it.
>> >=3D93My historically correct statement that there *IS* evidence that
>> >Oswald owned an MC with the serial number of C2766 is
>> >irrefutable.=3D94 (Ben Holmes=3D972/10/10)
>>
>> >LOL!
>>
>> And the statement by DVP that says this is...
>>
>> Hmmm... doesn't exist except in your mind.
>
>"Ben" is so desperate he thinks DVP says something different from
>this! LOL! Sure, a rabid NBO like DVP does not say there is evidence
>showing LHO owned the alleged murder weapon! LOL!
>
>Is this guy sunk or what? Look at the desperate lengths he has to go
>to!
Desperate is when you must imagine a statement, then compare it to mine.
Then after you've admitted that you imagined it, proclaim that it really *does*
exist.
"would" or "has", Racist Rob?
>> >> >> >> 4.) Oswald's prints were on an EMPTY PAPER BAG found in the same=
> ar=3D
>> >ea
>> >> >> >> where someone was using Rifle C2766 to kill JFK.
>>
>> >> >> >Can we see the picture of that bag in situ ?
>>
>> >> >> > > 5.) Oswald's fresh prints were on two boxes that were located D=
>EEP
>> >> >> >> WITHIN THE SNIPER'S NEST on the sixth floor.
>>
>> >> >> >That's not proof that he put the boxes there. There were other pri=
>nts
>> >> >> >on those boxes too, one which they never identified
>>
>> >> >> It would have been strange indeed should they not have been able to=
> fi=3D
>> >nd =3D3D
>> >> >prints
>> >> >> of a man who worked on that floor.
>>
>> >> >> It seems that if ever a murder is committed where I work, I must be=
> th=3D
>> >e s=3D3D
>> >> >uspect.
>>
>> >> >> >> 6.) An eyewitness made a (post-11/22) positive identification of=
> Le=3D
>> >e
>> >> >> >> Harvey Oswald as the assassin in the sixth-floor corner window o=
>f t=3D
>> >he
>> >> >> >> Depository.
>>
>> >> >> >Brennan ? And he said he was standing while shooting, a complete
>> >> >> >impossibility. Not credible.
>>
>> >> >> Particularly the clothing description.
>>
>> >> >> Not credible at all.
>>
>> >> >> What *is* credible is his earliest statements...
>>
>> >> >> >You keep rehashing this same crap over and over again and every ti=
>me
>> >> >> >you get your ass kicked with evidence you just come back and keep
>> >> >> >repeating it like nothing was ever said to you.
>>
>> >> >> >You really are either a cement head or you have some kind of emoti=
>ona=3D
>> >l
>> >> >> >problem.
>>
>> >> >> >Either way, you're definitely not interested in the truth.
>>
>> >> >> I find it vaguely interesting that although the "clipboard" was men=
>tio=3D
>> >ned=3D3D
>> >> > in the
>> >> >> subject... it's not in the post.
>>
>> >> >> The clipboard is one of the strongest bits of evidence for a frame-=
>up =3D
>> >tha=3D3D
>> >> >t
>> >> >> exists in this case, as I've previously shown. A previous discussio=
>n o=3D
>> >f t=3D3D
>> >> >he case
>> >> >> of the curious clipboard can be found here:http://groups.google.com=
>/gr=3D
>> >oup=3D3D
>> >> >/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b3737e00fbd6cfa...
>>
>> >> I find it interesting that Racist Rob isn't interested in debating or
>> >> presenting the EVIDENCE in this case.
>>
>> >> The clipboard is very strong evidence of a frameup in progress, but
>> >> Racist Rob wants to ignore that in order to lie about what I've said
>> >> again...
>>
>> Dead silence...
When it comes to actual evidence, it appears that Racist Rob simply isn't
interested...
Walt
You still haven't gotten it through your thick skull that there was no
identifiable "palm print" found on that rifle, have you? The story
about Oswald's palm print being found on that rifle is nothing but BS
invented by the DPD. ( under orders from LBJ)
>
>
>
> > > It seems that if ever a murder is committed where I work, I must be the suspect.
>
> > This is why Johnson didn`t tap any dunces to be on the Commission,
> > they are stumped when it comes to real investigation.
>
> > > >> 6.) An eyewitness made a (post-11/22) positive identification of Lee
> > > >> Harvey Oswald as the assassin in the sixth-floor corner window of the
> > > >> Depository.
>
> > > >Brennan ? And he said he was standing while shooting, a complete
> > > >impossibility. Not credible.
>
> > > Particularly the clothing description.
>
> > > Not credible at all.
>
> > > What *is* credible is his earliest statements...
> > > >You keep rehashing this same crap over and over again and every time
> > > >you get your ass kicked with evidence you just come back and keep
> > > >repeating it like nothing was ever said to you.
>
> > > >You really are either a cement head or you have some kind of emotional
> > > >problem.
>
> > > >Either way, you're definitely not interested in the truth.
>
> > > I find it vaguely interesting that although the "clipboard" was mentioned in the
> > > subject... it's not in the post.
>
> > > The clipboard is one of the strongest bits of evidence for a frame-up that
> > > exists in this case,
>
> > <snicker> Is this the best you got, that Oswald`s clipboard wasn`t
> > found right away?
>
> > > as I've previously shown. A previous discussion of the case
> > > of the curious clipboard can be found here:http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b3737e00fbd6cfa...- Hide quoted text -
bigdog
One point often overlooked regarding the prints on the boxes is the
fact that they are on top of the boxes. CTs like to argue that it is
understandable for his prints to be on the boxes since his job was
handle those boxes. When somebody is going to move a heavy box, they
are almost certainly going to place their hands on the sides and
bottom of the box, not on the top of the box.
bigdog
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
All of the evidence, the prints, the rifle, the shells, the paper bag,
the eyewitness, Oswald's fleeing the TDBD, his subsequent murdering of
Tippit, and his attempt to kill the arresting officers is exactly what
we would expect it to be if Oswald were the shooter. No reasonable
alternative explaination for all that evidence is available that does
not have Oswald as the shooter.
bigdog
>
> Thank you for confirming that you richly deserve the title of "Stupid
> Bastard". Your reply was one of the stupidest I've ever read in this
> NG..... And there are some really stupid posts in this NG.
>
Dumber than a Box of Rocks Shit for Brains Retarded Motherfucking
Asshole Son of a Bitch.
Have a nice day.
Bud
Read up on fingerprints and cure your own ignorance, retard.
Bud
I know, I replied to one.
Bud
He explained to the WC that he observed Oswald prior to the
assassination. So he has some impressions, made both prior and during
shooting which he relates to the authorities. But Walt Cakebread,
Retard Detective goes "A-HA, a precisely literal interpretation of
what he related isn`t possible, so that means to me, Walt Cakebread
retard detective, that he mist have lied. He must have went to the
police and said he saw someone shoot from that window and gave a bunch
of bogus information. So now the only thing left for me, Walt
Cakebread Retard Detective is figure out why. So let me get my
defective brain on the case and work out some fanciful, elaborate and
retarded explanation".
Walt
Wow!!.... When a stupid bastard is completely devoid of an honest
factual rebuttal he can only resort to ad hominem attacks .....and the
more vile and vicious the attack the more obvious the point that the
stupid bastard is bankrupt.
So thank you little cur......It's abundantly clear that you have
nothing left to fire, so you a forced to try the useless ad hominem
attacks.
Walt
LIAR!!... Brennan said he saw the man with the sniper rifle before the
motorcade arived he did NOT say it was Oswald. And what's more Arnold
rowland also saw the man with the sniper rifle and assumed that he was
a securirty guard, which is exactly what Brennan thought....They
weren't alarmed by the "security guard" keeping a watch over the
motorcade.
So he has some impressions, made both prior and during
> shooting which he relates to the authorities.
That's correct.....And he swore to his observations in a signed
affidavit about an hour after the shooting. In that affidavit he gave
a description of a man who obviously was NOT lee Oswald. He described
a gun that was NOT a Mannlicher Carcano, and he said the man was
STANDING erect.
But continue to lie, and deny, the honest folks know the truth and
you're only proving that you a cowardly liar.
bigdog
If you can't take it, don't dish it out, asswipe.
Bud
RETARD!!
> Brennan said he saw the man with the sniper rifle
He didn`t say it was a sniper rifle, retard, he said it was a hi-
powered rifle. He said the man holding it was Oswald.
>before the
> motorcade arived he did NOT say it was Oswald.
He did say it was Oswald he saw.
> And what's more Arnold
> rowland also saw the man with the sniper rifle and assumed that he was
> a securirty guard, which is exactly what Brennan thought....
Where does Brennan ever say he thought the man he saw (Oswald) was a
security guard?
>They
> weren't alarmed by the "security guard" keeping a watch over the
> motorcade.
Brennan didn`t even know Oswald was armed until he started
shooting, retard.
> So he has some impressions, made both prior and during
>
> > shooting which he relates to the authorities.
>
> That's correct.....And he swore to his observations in a signed
> affidavit about an hour after the shooting. In that affidavit he gave
> a description of a man who obviously was NOT lee Oswald. He described
> a gun that was NOT a Mannlicher Carcano, and he said the man was
> STANDING erect.
You`re a dunce. Brennan observed Oswald casually from a distance as
he sat there waiting for the limo. He probably looked at a lot of
people. Then, under he excited conditions he saw Oswald for a few
seconds while he was shooting. From this you want to make absolute
statements. Guess what retard, just because Brennan said he saw him
from the belt up doesn`t mean that he didn`t see him 6 inches above
the beltline up. The few fleeting seconds he saw Oswald shooting he
wasn`t attempting to capture details. But he did get a good enough
look that he was sure it was Oswald he had seen.
> But continue to lie, and deny, the honest folks know the truth and
> you're only proving that you a cowardly liar.
<snicker> Honest folks? You lie every post you make, like you did
here with "sniper rifle", trying to make it seem like this came from
Brennan when it really is the creation of your dysfunctional brain.
David Von Pein
>>> "One point often overlooked regarding the prints on the boxes is the fact that they are on top of the boxes. CTs like to argue that it is understandable for his prints to be on the boxes since his job was handle those boxes. When somebody is going to move a heavy box, they are almost certainly going to place their hands on the sides and bottom of the box, not on the top of the box." <<<
Yes, BigDog. But, then too, we'd have to ask ourselves: How did Oswald
manage to lift the Sniper's-Nest box that contained two of his prints
on the TOP of that box WITHOUT getting prints on the BOTTOM of that
same box?
I guess it's a fair question too, although it's been documented (as
Bud has pointed out to the CT Retards many times here at The Asylum)
that even when someone touches an object, they do not always have to
leave visible prints behind on that object. And I think that is
especially true with paper or corrugated objects, such as LHO's rifle-
toting paper bag and the boxes that we see here in Commission Exhibit
1301:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0255a.htm
Walt
> >>> "One point often overlooked regarding the prints on the boxes is the fact that they are on top of the boxes. CTs like to argue that it is understandable for his prints to be on the boxes since his job was handle those boxes. When somebody is going to move a heavy box, they are almost certainly going to place their hands on the sides and bottom of the box, not on the top of the box." <<<
>
> Yes, BigDog. But, then too, we'd have to ask ourselves: How did Oswald
> manage to lift the Sniper's-Nest box that contained two of his prints
> on the TOP of that box WITHOUT getting prints on the BOTTOM of that
> same box?
Hey Von Pea Brain......do you have information that the cops dusted
the BOTTOM of the boxes for prints?? Ya dumb bastard, do you really
believe that the cops would have wasted their time by dusting the
bottom of the boxes?? Do you think that any prints that might have
been on the bottom of the boxes would have survived the dust and dirt
on the floor? Ha,ha,ha,ha,hee,hee,hee...Watta dumbass!!
>
> I guess it's a fair question too, although it's been documented (as
> Bud has pointed out to the CT Retards many times here at The Asylum)
> that even when someone touches an object, they do not always have to
> leave visible prints behind on that object. And I think that is
> especially true with paper or corrugated objects, such as LHO's rifle-
> toting paper bag and the boxes that we see here in Commission Exhibit
> 1301:
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0...
David Von Pein
Gee, I gave Walt a good reason to say that I actually AGREED with the
CTers about something, and he blasts me for it.
Go figure kooks.
aeffects
where ya been? grease pit duty at the old KFC... perhaps that explains
your 5 year trip down insanity lane eh, dude? smelling way to much
chickee-poo lard?
Walt
Hey Von Pea Brain, your embarrassment is hanging out a country
mile.........
Rob Caprio
Here is another lying con man (maybe the same one that uses the name
"Ben Holmes" too). I am on record saying NO palm print was found on
11/22/63 so your comment is nothing but a lie.
> The story
> about Oswald's palm print being found on that rifle is nothing but BS
> invented by the DPD. ( under orders from LBJ)
Duh, and I have said this for years. Go play with your fellow LNers
as you have a better chance of looking good that way.
> > > > It seems that if ever a murder is committed where I work, I must be the suspect.
>
> > > This is why Johnson didn`t tap any dunces to be on the Commission,
> > > they are stumped when it comes to real investigation.
>
> > > > >> 6.) An eyewitness made a (post-11/22) positive identification of Lee
> > > > >> Harvey Oswald as the assassin in the sixth-floor corner window of the
> > > > >> Depository.
>
> > > > >Brennan ? And he said he was standing while shooting, a complete
> > > > >impossibility. Not credible.
>
> > > > Particularly the clothing description.
>
> > > > Not credible at all.
>
> > > > What *is* credible is his earliest statements...
> > > > >You keep rehashing this same crap over and over again and every time
> > > > >you get your ass kicked with evidence you just come back and keep
> > > > >repeating it like nothing was ever said to you.
>
> > > > >You really are either a cement head or you have some kind of emotional
> > > > >problem.
>
> > > > >Either way, you're definitely not interested in the truth.
>
> > > > I find it vaguely interesting that although the "clipboard" was mentioned in the
> > > > subject... it's not in the post.
>
> > > > The clipboard is one of the strongest bits of evidence for a frame-up that
> > > > exists in this case,
>
> > > <snicker> Is this the best you got, that Oswald`s clipboard wasn`t
> > > found right away?
>
> > > > as I've previously shown. A previous discussion of the case
> > > > of the curious clipboard can be found here:http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b3737e00fbd6cfa...Hide quoted text -