JFK Assassination Forum Archives -- Misc. Topics Of Interest (Part 93)
David Von Pein
=====================================================
JOHN CANAL'S STRANGE THEORIES:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/ccc185e2cdb425e2
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/21cc71b474cf8645
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/53bb726b2197a2ff
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/e4dc00cf72fbad52
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/4cf4a1bcdbb8e744
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/e2b44d823fb3b919
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/657d2b906ecd114f
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/7865bbc24190989c
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b3e67acb274c7580
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/0a5757d0a4e48013
COWLICK TALK:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/953141c22adfa241
"I'VE GOT HIS BRAINS IN MY HANDS":
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/57016b3122fd029f
I'VE GOT MY HANDS FULL (ACCORDING TO A RETARD):
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/9484cd92763d4ed5
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/ff29d5fc5ea309d7
MORE ASSASSINATION TALK:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/228b4df64feea99c
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/cc67d5dce07c4d23
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/428ffb5d00b0fd8f
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/5605c5b5e4886ce9
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/48fe4c9250f8fb79
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/59542e4c0b8a84ef
=====================================================
David Von Pein
A "YOU TUBER" SAID:
>>> "You seem like a person who has looked into JFK's assassination and as you are a human being with some common sense, I do not see how you can still support the theory that Oswald did it. I don't see any sense in your conclusion, I'm sorry. If you can explain, I'd be more than happy to listen, but I don't get what you could possibly be thinking." <<<
DVP SAID:
Thank you for your message.
In short, in order to believe that Lee Harvey Oswald DIDN'T kill
President Kennedy (and a policeman named J.D. Tippit just 45 minutes
after JFK was shot), you have no choice but to totally IGNORE
virtually all of the evidence...because that evidence leads only to
one man--Lee Oswald. And there's nothing anyone can say to change that
irrevocable fact.
I think when reasonable people examine this whole case logically, they
must come to the conclusion that people like Jim Garrison and Oliver
Stone and Jim Fetzer and Bob Groden (and many other conspiracy
theorists) are just flat-out wrong about their theories.
I mean, FIVE gunmen involved in shooting Kennedy when Garrison says
the plotters were attempting to frame JUST ONE GUY (Oswald)?! Come on!
Let's be sensible here.
If you're interested in a whole lot more common sense regarding the
case, I invite you to take a look at just a few of my articles on my
JFK Blog, here:
You sound to me like a person who is willing to listen to reason (and
to accept the hard facts of the case).
Regards,
DVP
aeffects
David Von Pein
ROBERT WEINGARTNER SAID (AT THE AMAZON.COM LINK BELOW):
"David, Well said. I agree with you 100%. For over forty years
we have heard nothing but how the assassination of JFK was a
conspiracy involving God knows how many people. The Warren Commission,
Dallas Police, CIA, FBI, etc, etc, but no one can explain how so many
people can keep it a secret for so long when you can't even keep
something a secret between two people. One of the problems is this:
very few people who write books on the JFK assassination know how to
conduct a murder investigation. They work backwards. They come up with
a theory first and then try to connect a theory to the murder, rather
then let the evidence from the crime scene bring them to the murderer
(s). Like you wrote in your review [linked below] -- the evidence just
doesn't point to a conspiracy - it points to one person, Lee Harvey
Oswald. And you are right, Vincent Bugliosi's book is a masterpiece."
www.amazon.com/review/RZJX0UX72K2BU
DVP SAID:
Thank you, Robert. It's so nice to hear from a person who hasn't
ignored the evidence in the JFK murder case. You're a breath of (very)
fresh air.
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/f80a78504ceddd18
>>> "There is no hard evidence against LHO that would stand up in a court of law." <<<
Oh, come now my good woman! You cannot possibly believe what you just
said. If you truly do believe what you just stated, I feel sorry for
you--because your many years (?) of JFK research was all for naught,
because it obviously did you no good at all.
REPLAY:
>>> "There is no hard evidence against LHO that would stand up in a court of law." <<<
It already has (sort of):
www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6FiTHZutGw
www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=1993B641DFC1CB06
>>> "Why do you think he [St. Oswald The Great] was not allowed to live to stand trial?" <<<
Because a guy named Ruby had impeccable timing on 11/24/63 and managed
to get into that basement and put a bullet in Lee's belly.
That's why. No other reason whatsoever.
~Mark VII~
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/53e141c5af3c3a7f
>>> "So how do you explain your fellow WC defenders claiming that Oswald never actually said, "I'm just a patsy"?" <<<
When has any LNer ever claimed that Oswald never said "I'm just a
patsy"?
How could anybody make such a goofy claim when this audio exists of
Oswald saying his 4-word lie:
Tony's messages get weirder with each passing day.
tomnln
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:39408be4-9646-4b31...@e20g2000vbc.googlegroups.com...
Gerald Posner made that claim.
David Von Pein
Posner supposedly made the claim that Oswald NEVER SAID "I'm just a
patsy", even though LHO said those four words on live TV in front of
millions of people?:
Please provide a citation for Gerald Posner believing something so
stupid. There's no possible way that any "non-kook" would ever make
such a nutty claim.
aeffects
your ego knows no bounds: to continue quoting yourself that'll stunt
your growth, troll!
<snip ther nutter's nonsense>
David Von Pein
A CONSPIRACY-LOVING KOOK AT THE IMDB JFK FORUM SAID:
You [Nick Kendrick] state that only two people in deely [sic]
plaza said they heard gunshots from the grassy knoll.
DVP SAID:
You'd better learn to read better, because there's no possible
chance that Nick ever said that.
ANOTHER MOSTLY-ILLITERATE CONSPIRACY KOOK THEN SAID:
Why is dvp defending nick [sic]? How could he intimately know
exactly what Nick wrote or didnt [sic] wrote [sic]? Oh thats [sic]
right. They are the same person. [LOL.] David Von PEON indeed.
THEN ANOTHER RETARD CHIMED IN WITH:
[It] couldn't be more obvious that the two frauds [Nick & DVP]
are one and the same. Scum bags. Remember, according to Von Pein
himself, he never takes his travelling circus show into the public
domain because he has "a terrible case of stage fright." LOL!!!
Chicken-hearted lying cowards.
THEN ANOTHER KOOK SAID:
Dave Von Pein - or whatever the hell his name really is - was
actually kicked out of the room [i.e., "The Education Forum"] because
he was not able to provide a picture of himself. LOL!!! Of course not
- that's because he's probably Mack or McAdams posting under a phoney
alias.
FOLLOWED BY THIS QUOTE FROM A CTer WHO APPARENTLY HAS EVERYTHING
FIGURED OUT:
Von Pein and this Slick Nick character were kicked off the JFK
Lancer forum a few years ago for posting lies and playing little troll
games with other posters.
DVP THEN SAID:
In reality, we were both kicked out of Debra Conway's "JFK
Lancer" nuthouse in late July of 2005 due to the fact that Nick had
just joined the forum eleven days earlier, and the combination of
common-sense-based and evidence-based posts from both Nick and myself
became too much for the conspiracy-happy clowns at Lancer to bear.
Therefore, we both had to go. And, therefore, on July 28, 2005, we
were both banned from posting the actual evidence (and common sense)
at the Lancer forum from that point forward.
And since our departure, I don't think there's been one single
"LNer" to post on a regular basis at JFK-Lancer.com. Offhand, I can't
even think of a single LNer that has posted even ONE post there in the
last few years. There probably have been a few lone-assassin believers
to post there once in a while; but I can't think of any right now. The
place is saturated with nothing but conspiracy-seekers.
AND ONE OF THE CONSPIRACY IDIOTS CONTINUED MAKING A FOOL OUT OF
HIMSELF (WITHOUT EVEN SO MUCH AS BLUSHING) BY OFFERING UP THE
FOLLOWING COMMENTS:
There is really no moderation on this forum [at
www.imdb.com/title/tt0102138/board/threads], so they can pretty much
post all the lies they want freely. Put them on a serious discussion
forum, and they fold quickly. Their "job" is to create so much
distraction with bogus arguments that newbies to this subject will
either be discouraged from studying further, or will be duped into
adopting the official story as their belief. I put the word "job" in
quotation marks, as that is what Slick Nick described it as the other
day. He said the CTers on this forum make his "job" easy. An admission
that he is being paid to do this.
DVP THEN SAID:
I see the conspiracy-happy kooks are out in force today. It's
just a shame that none of these kooks has any bullets from any non-
Oswald gun(s) to show anybody. If a 3-gun, 6-shot assassination took
place (as Oliver Stone insists was the case on 11/22/63), you'd think
that there would be at least ONE non-Oswald bullet in the evidence
pile someplace.
And to think that all of these bullets from non-LHO weapons that
were supposedly GOING INTO THE VICTIMS could have been miraculously
hidden from everyone's view at Parkland and Bethesda right after the
shooting is a belief that only David Copperfield might try to embrace.
Because to any non-magician, such sleight-of-hand with the bullets
(and the WOUNDS IN THE VICTIMS too!) is just pure fantasy...and always
has been.
The CT-Kooks think they can realistically prop up the kind of "3-
shooter" fantasy promoted by Stone and Garrison even though they have
ZERO bullets or bullet fragments that can be said to have come from a
gun other than Lee Oswald's.
And Garrison went on the Johnny Carson show in 1968 and actually
hinted that there might have been as many as FIVE different guns being
aimed at JFK in Dealey Plaza (even though, per Mega-Kook Garrison, Lee
Harvey Oswald was being "sheepdipped" and framed as the LONE PATSY).
And yet when the dust settled, we have ONLY bullets and
fragments that lead to Oswald's gun. But the conspiracy kooks aren't
the least bit concerned about little details like that. They
apparently think that it's to be EXPECTED to have found definitive
proof of ONLY OSWALD'S gun after a shooting which nuts like Garrison
and Stone say occurred as a result of multiple gunmen pumping the
President full of bullets.
I honestly ask every CTer -- Can it GET much sillier than that
kind of "3-gun, 1-patsy" scenario that is laid out in Oliver Stone's
ridiculous movie?
If anyone answers "Yes" to my last question above, they should
seek mental help asap. Because the only reasonable answer to my last
question is a resounding "No, it cannot".
Footnote -- The above website is not a "Government-sponsored
Disinformation" site. It's simply a blog that was started by a nobody
in Indiana (me) in August of 2007. Simple as that. If the kooks want
to think otherwise, so be it.
In fact, I actually love it when these retarded goofballs known
as "CTers" try to paint me as a "WC shill" or a "paid disinfo agent",
or something equally as insane. Nothing makes me smile more than when
I read such silliness. So, please, keep it up. I like to smile.
:)
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/1ea22068511c9510
>>> "You have to ignore a LOT of evidence to believe that Ruby just happened to have lucky timing, and shot Oswald on impulse." <<<
And conspiracy theorists have no (reasonable) choice but to call Karen
Carlin one of the prime conspirators in a plot to murder Lee Harvey
Oswald.
Because without Carlin being nearly penniless and having her rent due
very soon (as of 11/23/63), then she's not going to make that call to
Jack Ruby on Sunday morning, which is a call that enabled Ruby to be
at the right place at the perfect time to slay LHO.
And the fact that Ruby closed his clubs on 11/22 and 11/23 is a key
factor in Ruby being where he was on 11/24/63 too.
I.E.,
If Ruby hadn't closed his nightclubs on those two nights, then Karen
Carlin could have (and undoubtedly would have) gotten her $25 advance
AT ONE OF THE NIGHTCLUBS THEMSELVES, instead of having to bother Jack
at home for the money.
Any way a CTer slices it, they need Karen Carlin to be a key "plotter"
in November 1963 if the CTers want to actually believe that Ruby
killed Oswald due to anything except an "impulse" (and being in the
right place at just the right time to pull off the murder).
Or do CTers want to believe that the "Carlin Asks For Money" part of
the scenario was merely PURE LUCK for plotter Jack Ruby?
IOW -- Carlin just HAPPENS to need some cash (and can't get into
Ruby's clubs to get the money because they're closed for the
weekend)....and she just HAPPENS to call Ruby prior to 11:00 AM on
Sunday morning....and Jack then suddenly realizes he has the perfect
"non-conspiratorial" reason for going downtown to the Western Union
office (even though, per this silly scenario, Jack knows in advance
he's going to pop Oswald on Sunday, but he decides to wait until about
11:00 to go downtown, even though the transfer of Oswald was supposed
to have occurred at 10:00 AM)?
In the final (and most reasonable) analysis.....
Every last thing connected to Jack Ruby and his killing of Lee Harvey
Oswald spells -- SPUR OF THE MOMENT. Right down to "Sheba" going
downtown with Jack.
~Mark VII~
David Von Pein
AN LNer AT IMDB.COM SAID:
>>> "Of course, you [a conspiracy-happy idiot] can just MAKE UP all kinds of crap in no time at all, which is the typical approach used by conspiracy buffs." <<<
DVP SAID:
And they get people to actually BELIEVE their retarded made-up-from-
whole-cloth nonsense, too.
That's one of the saddest parts of all.
Quoting Warren Commission counsel member Wesley Liebeler ---- "If Mark
Lane talks for five minutes, it takes an hour to straighten out the
record."
David Von Pein
A REALLY STUPID CTer NAMED "JOHN" AT IMDB.COM UTTERED:
>>> "Dear David; It's simply impossible for that (3 shots) "one rifle/one shooter" to be what occured [sic] there[,] Sir. Totally impossible!!" <<<
DVP THEN UTTERED BACK:
Oh, okay. Thanks for that info.
I'll be sure to return the $1.5-million that I've received from the
U.S. Government (the "Shill" Department, based out of Arlington) since
1999. It apparently did no good. I didn't convince "videojohn"; so I
don't deserve the 1.5-mil.
What should I do with my time now? Volleyball?
P.S. -- I would have responded to the rest of "videojohn's" absurdity,
but I have a basic rule that I go by -- Never respond to anyone whose
post requires more than 8 [sic] notations.
Sorry, Johnny. But your last error-riddled message requires nine such
[sic] notations.
THE KOOK THEN CAME BACK WITH:
>>> "Guy's [sic #1] like you are why our taxes are so high and nothing ever gets done right. If that 'price tag' is true." <<<
I THEN SAID:
It doesn't take much to get you to take something literally, does it
Johnny?
No wonder kooks like "videojohn" believe almost any JFK conspiracy
theory that's placed in front of their nose. Gullibility seems to be
their common bond.
THE KOOK:
>>> "Vollyball [sic #2] might be a good idea?? [sic #3; the question marks here obviously are incorrect]" <<<
DAVID V.P.:
I'm buying you a dictionary for your birthday, Johnny. You need one--
badly.
You were born on June 6th, right? I'm pretty sure, based on your
posts, that your date of birth is 6/6/66. Correct?
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/05114911d8570b12
>>> "Publicity hound [Lee Oswald] who went around telling everyone that he shot at Walker?" <<<
No, of course Oswald wouldn't want to do that, Tony.
But you can bet that LHO was enjoying every news tidbit he could find
in the papers regarding the Walker shooting (a shooting that he
himself was responsible for). He probably savored every word that was
written about it, even though his own name wasn't in print, of course.
And as an addendum to this topic:
I believe there was something written by Priscilla McMillan (probably
in her 1977 book "Marina And Lee") with respect to this subject -- to
the effect that Oswald was enjoying watching the cops spinning their
collective wheels in the aftermath of the Walker shooting.
And according to an on-camera interview with Priscilla McMillan for
one of the many JFK documentaries she has appeared on, Oswald
particularly enjoyed the fact that he was able to get away from the
scene of the Walker shooting on his own two feet, vs. needing a car to
escape the scene of the crime, with McMillan paraphrasing a comment
that Lee Oswald supposedly made to Marina, with LHO saying something
like this in the wake of the Walker assassination attempt:
"Those silly cops. They think you always need a car to escape.
But I escaped using my own two feet."