David Von Pein Hides Behind His Website

[Ben Holmes]

David Von Pein is rightfully terrified of debate with knowledgeable
critics, and has - in recent years, remained far away from real
debate... preferring instead to cite his website.

That his website is filled with lies and unsupportable claims doesn't
bother him... it shields him from looking stupid.

But only to people who are unaware of the other side of the argument.


>> What was the date that the M.O. was deposited?
>>
>> Cite, and use ONLY WC evidence...
>>
>> Puddy, Chuckles, David Von Pein, McAdams, and every other coward &
>> liar will refuse to answer those two questions...
>>
>> Because the *ANSWER* proves fraud.
>>
>> The burden is on them... and they lost.


David attempted to answer with a citation to his website that didn't
address the topic **AT ALL**... and when it was pointed out, he
*STILL* refuses to acknowledge his false citation.

But he finally cited the following webpage... and I'm going to answer
it, statement by statement... then watch David as he sneaks away like
the coward he is.


>GIL JESUS SAID:
>
> The alleged Klein's deposit slip of 3/13/63 (Waldman [Exhibit No.]
> 10) has a date of 2/15/63 and is not stamped by the First National
> Bank of Chicago, which it should have been had it been deposited.
>
>
>DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
> The "WRONG DATE ON THE EXTRA COPY OF THE DEPOSIT SLIP" is just one
> more example (among dozens of others) where the conspiracy theorists
> SHOULD be asking themselves the following logical question:


First thing to note - why did the Warren Commission accept an "extra
copy" of the deposit slip? Why not the original? What *happened* to
the original? Where's the testimony on this topic?

This "extra copy" doesn't demonstrate that anything at all was
deposited...

I can create a "deposit slip" showing that I deposited 15.7 million
dollars to my bank account.

And it would mean just as much as the exhibit that the Warren
Commission accepted as evidence.

Tell us David, if I show you a unstamped deposit slip with a 15.7
million dollar deposit to my account, will you accept a 15 million
dollar check to purchase your home?

David won't answer...


> WHAT THE HELL WERE THE CONSPIRATORS THINKING WHEN THEY DID SOMETHING
> THIS STUPID -- LIKE PUTTING A FEBRUARY 15 DATE ON A DEPOSIT TICKET
> THAT THE PLOTTERS HAD TO HAVE KNOWN FROM THE GET-GO WAS A DEPOSIT
> THAT NEEDED TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH THE MARCH 13 KLEIN'S DEPOSIT ---


David misses the obvious... that the paperwork was *minimally* altered
or forged... they had a real deposit slip, and used that.

But keep in mind, nothing has been offered to link a "21.45" number on
a list of amounts to the Money Order. This is gossamer silk, not hard
evidence.

Question after question has been asked on this issue, and David has no
answers... just speculation and silly theories.

For any lurkers interested, this makes for good reading:
http://harveyandlee.net/Guns/Guns.html


> OR LIKE PLANTING A MAUSER RIFLE IN THE BOOK DEPOSITORY, WHEN THEY
> CERTAINLY MUST HAVE KNOWN THAT THEIR PATSY NAMED OSWALD DIDN'T OWN
> A MAUSER--HE OWNED A MANNLICHER-CARCANO?


David again misses the obvious... that a Mauser **WAS** found, and
then made to disappear in the process of framing Oswald.

Had it turned out that more assassins were needed, the Mauser would
then have been 'attached' to another assassin.

What's more credible? That the conspirators planted the "wrong"
weapon? Or that they were prepared for any eventuality?

See how easily David's speculations are answered? No wonder he's
terrified of actual debate nowadays...


> Errors such as the one with the incorrect date on this deposit
> ticket are errors that are MUCH easier to associate with normal
> fallible human errors than they are associated with any kind of
> perceived "plot" that has been PRE-arranged by a group of conspirators
> for the purpose of faking evidence in the JFK murder case.


Let me get this right... all I need to do in order to not make
mistakes is to conspire.

And as a conspirator, I won't make mistakes... I'll be perfect...

What an AMAZING concept!!


Sadly for David's silly thought... the conspirators *PROVABLY* made
mistakes. The FBI's report on the paper matching or not matching the
TSBD paper is one **INDISPUTABLE** example.

The mailing of a paper sack to Oswald was another. (Anyone care to bet
that David's got no clue to what I'm referring to... and Puddy say
"empty claim" and refuse to deny it?)

Chuckles won't say anything - he doesn't know this bit of evidence.


>Why is this so?


That ordinary mistake prone people are turned perfect by being
conspirators?

It's not so...


So the question doesn't need to be answered... The question answers
itself when you think about it.


> Because if that February 15 date was really written there by a
> person who deliberately was trying to create a fake and false paper
> trail to Rifle C2766 (and, hence, incriminate a "patsy" named Lee
> Harvey Oswald), then the plotters would have KNOWN from the start that
> they would need to be very very careful when placing all of this
> FORGED EVIDENCE into the record, and they would make doubly certain to
> cross every T and dot every I in the proper places.


Or, and far more reasonably, they grabbed as much hard copy paper as
they could, and tried to put it together to make a trail from Kleins
to Oswald.

They failed, and you've failed.

Interestingly, after the FBI grabbed all the originals... the Warren
Commission only got copies, and the originals disappeared. This is one
excellent way to stop anyone from detecting the forgery of paperwork.

You've still been unable to show that the Money Order was ever cashed.
You've failed to show that the handwriting experts weren't looking at
a copy, you've failed to show that the money order can be matched to a
deposit, you've failed to show that the rifle was ever mailed to a
P.O. box, you've failed to show that it was ever received at the P.O.
box. You've failed to show how "Hidell" could have received mail at a
P.O. box he was not authorized to receive mail at.

You've failed in your argument that plotters don't make mistakes.

You're just a failure, David Von Pein... and perhaps that's why you're
afraid to debate in an open forum with critics more knowledgeable than
yourself.


> And they would have also known to have placed the proper bank stamps
> on the documents in question too (or they SHOULD have factored that
> detail into their "Let's Frame Oswald" ruse, unless all of these
> plotters, to a man, were brainless morons).


Oh, I'm sure that given enough time, the FBI could have created more
believable forgeries. It simply wasn't necessary.

Just as I'm sure that with more time ... the Z-film could have been
made so perfectly, it would resist efforts to show the forgery.

But sometimes, you just don't have the luxury of enough time.


Taking all the original paperwork & microfilm... and only giving
*copies* to the Warren Commission - then destroying the originals...
is a foolproof method to avoid proof of alteration.

But David can't publicly admit this.


> The fact that we have discrepancies like the "February 15" deposit
> slip existing in the record at all is, in my opinion, much more
> indicative of NO CONSPIRACY connected with items like that deposit
> slip than it is with the type of vast "Every Document Is Phony" plot
> that a lot of conspiracy theorists believe in today.


March 13 ... February 15...

Yeah, common mistake... anyone could make a mistake like that...


NOT!



You've not been able to refute a single fact. The facts are *STILL*
the same as when I started.



> My last paragraph above is either pretty accurate...or: the alleged
> patsy-framers screwed up YET AGAIN with a piece of evidence in this
> case.


Well, we can dispense quite quickly with your silly idea that when
involved in a conspiracy, ordinary people suddenly acquire the
superhuman ability to not make mistakes.

There were **MANY MANY MANY** mistakes made. I point them out
regularly.

And you run from them regularly...

Take, as merely one example, the mistake of the 6.5mm virtually round
object. No-one saw it on the night of the autopsy. That *ONE* mistake
proves a coverup.

Indeed, why the Warren Commission accepted conflicting dates on
paperwork without eliciting testimony to explain it shows that there
was a coverup.

That the closest police eyewitness to the murder was never asked a
*SINGLE QUESTION* for the Warren Commission demonstrates quite clearly
the coverup in operation.

And all you can do is run away and hide at your website.

(Where you can spin unopposed lies all day long.)


Indeed, the mistake I'm pointing out right now - that the Warren
Commission accepted copies of paperwork instead of originals, and
accepted without question dates that didn't match, failing to elicit
any testimony to explain this - is a mistake that you refuse to
explain.

Run David... RUN!!!


> I wonder how many stupid, reckless, idiotic errors the conspiracy
> theorists are willing to allow their patsy-framers before they put on
> the brakes and realize that such discrepancies WOULD NOT EXIST AT ALL
> if there really had been a concerted effort by a band of plotters to
> doctor and manipulate all of the evidence in the JFK case?


It amuses me that you have to posit such a silly theory to make a
point.

Tell us David, how does this work? Does the Lord reach down from
Heaven and bless the work of conspirators so they make no mistakes?

Or is this the power of Satan doing his evil best?

For surely it must require supernatural help to turn fallible human
beings into machines of perfection.

Tell us David... support your claim... what is it about being involved
in a conspiracy that changes ordinary human fallibility into
perfection?

And can you give any CITABLE and undisputable examples?


> Now seems like a good time to repeat one of my favorite passages
> from Vincent Bugliosi's book "Reclaiming History":
>
> "The conspiracy community regularly seizes on one slip of the
> tongue, misunderstanding, or slight discrepancy to defeat twenty
> pieces of solid evidence; .... treats rumors, even questions, as the
> equivalent of proof; leaps from the most minuscule of discoveries to
> the grandest of conclusions; and insists that the failure to explain
> everything perfectly negates all that is explained." -- Vincent T.
> Bugliosi; Page xliii of "Reclaiming History: The Assassination Of
> President John F. Kennedy" (c.2007)


This is, of course, simply another lie on Bugliosi's part.

Watch, as David ABSOLUTELY REFUSES to name 20 pieces of "solid
evidence."

He can't. And neither could Vincent Bugliosi. He made a fine
prosecutorial effort, but that's all it was.

And David knows it.


>David Von Pein
>March 8, 2011


All those years with an ABSOLUTELY SILLY theory posted.

It doesn't embarrass you to claim that conspiracy turns ordinary
fallible humans into machines of perfection, but it should.

[David Von Pein]

Ben's a liar, lurkers. He knows the above accusation is a lie, because he knows that I've debated various "critics" in "open forums" hundreds of times in the past. He knows this because I've debated HIM in "open forums" dozens of times in the past.

Ben is a chronic liar. (Surprise!)

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/#DVP-Vs-Various-Individual-Conspiracy-Theorists

>
> > And they would have also known to have placed the proper bank stamps
> > on the documents in question too (or they SHOULD have factored that
> > detail into their "Let's Frame Oswald" ruse, unless all of these
> > plotters, to a man, were brainless morons).
>
>
> Oh, I'm sure that given enough time, the FBI could have created more
> believable forgeries. It simply wasn't necessary.
>
> Just as I'm sure that with more time ... the Z-film could have been
> made so perfectly, it would resist efforts to show the forgery.
>
> But sometimes, you just don't have the luxury of enough time.
>
>
> Taking all the original paperwork & microfilm... and only giving
> *copies* to the Warren Commission - then destroying the originals...
> is a foolproof method to avoid proof of alteration.
>
> But David can't publicly admit this.
>
>
> > The fact that we have discrepancies like the "February 15" deposit
> > slip existing in the record at all is, in my opinion, much more
> > indicative of NO CONSPIRACY connected with items like that deposit
> > slip than it is with the type of vast "Every Document Is Phony" plot
> > that a lot of conspiracy theorists believe in today.
>
>
> March 13 ... February 15...
>
> Yeah, common mistake... anyone could make a mistake like that...
>

Ben's either lying (again), or he could just be misinformed about the dates. Ben's date comparison above should read like this....

March 15 ... February 15...

The "March 13" date doesn't apply when talking about the error on the extra copy of the Klein's deposit ticket....as I explain here:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/10/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1058.html#The-Wrong-Date-On-The-Deposit-Ticket

Ben's year-round attempts to exonerate a double-killer named Oswald are always amusing. But, I guess it makes him happy and content to pretend that LHO didn't shoot anybody on November 22, 1963. I guess everybody needs a hobby.

[David Von Pein]

BEN HOLMES SAID:

This "extra copy" doesn't demonstrate that anything at all was deposited...

https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-RdPhjHziHTk/XLZ4yUNFZ0I/AAAAAAABRKs/_hOVZxA1i5UEJVzrW7b6OycBwCr2Lc58ACLcBGAs/s1600/Waldman-10.png

I can create a "deposit slip" showing that I deposited 15.7 million dollars to my bank account.

And it would mean just as much as the exhibit that the Warren Commission accepted as evidence.

Tell us David, if I show you a unstamped deposit slip with a 15.7 million dollar deposit to my account, will you accept a 15 million dollar check to purchase your home?

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

The "extra copy" might not have even been sent to the bank by Klein's.

Alternatively, if the extra copy of the deposit slip did get sent to the bank by Klein's, how do you know there isn't a bank stamp on the back side of that deposit ticket? Can you prove there's *not* a bank stamp there?

[healyd...@gmail.com]

Ya been cut-off at the knees laddie. Your illusionary wish of being the end-all be-all of JFK assassination research asset's. Lies are lies David anyway you cut it. The 1964 Warren Commission Report is bullshit as is your entire defense of same. We know!

[healyd...@gmail.com]

LMFAO! Can you prove LHO was in that window at 1230PM 11/22/63? What a bullshit artist!

[borisba...@gmail.com]

>
> LMFAO! Can you prove LHO was in that window at 1230PM 11/22/63?

Jesse Curry couldn't.

[David Von Pein]

On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 10:51:49 PM UTC-4, borisba...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > LMFAO! Can you prove LHO was in that window at 1230PM 11/22/63?
>
> Jesse Curry couldn't.

https://app.box.com/s/u8hlumq4mya5lylmgqn5

[borisba...@gmail.com]

Keep denying Curry ever said they couldn't place Oswald in that window with the rifle, pond waste.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WT4Gy6_rt_o

[chucksch...@gmail.com]

Ah, the evil cops are in it up to their eyeballs yet slip up at the most opportune time for JFK Truthers to glimpse what really happened.

[Ben Holmes]

Lurkers... notice *ALL* the material above that David was unable to
refute or answer. Clearly, David knows he's lost, and he's trying to
regain his lost self-respect.

But until David starts debating knowledgeable critics in open forums,
he can't.

>Ben's a liar, lurkers.

And yet, it's a simple fact that you ran from EVERYTHING I posted
above. This shows who the true liar is.

> He knows the above accusation is a lie, because he knows that I've
> debated various "critics" in "open forums" hundreds of times in the
> past.

Sorry moron, I wasn't discussing the past. I stated "YOU'RE AFRAID TO
DEBATE IN AN OPEN FORUM WITH CRITICS MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE THAN YOURSELF.

And that's a true statement.

I said nothing about the past. You've been schooled repeatedly in the
past. (Hmm... perhaps I'll start reposting some of those, since you
refuse to debate now.)

You illustrate it again in this post by running from EVERYTHING I
stated.

> He knows this because I've debated HIM in "open forums" dozens of
> times in the past.

Certainly you've been spanked and schooled in the past. But you've
learned your lesson, and are now TERRIFIED of open debate.

You're *PROVING* that statement true RIGHT NOW!

And in addition to proving yourself a coward, you'll show your
dishonesty by failing to post **THIS** post - as is - in your
websites.

You can't... you've been outed as a liar and coward in this post.

>Ben is a chronic liar. (Surprise!)

And yet, the only one lying right now is you. Why is that, David?



>http://jfk- ...


If you're unwilling to defend it in open forum - why do you cite?

You just want to tell lies, and not pay the price?

>> > And they would have also known to have placed the proper bank stamps
>> > on the documents in question too (or they SHOULD have factored that
>> > detail into their "Let's Frame Oswald" ruse, unless all of these
>> > plotters, to a man, were brainless morons).
>>
>>
>> Oh, I'm sure that given enough time, the FBI could have created more
>> believable forgeries. It simply wasn't necessary.
>>
>> Just as I'm sure that with more time ... the Z-film could have been
>> made so perfectly, it would resist efforts to show the forgery.
>>
>> But sometimes, you just don't have the luxury of enough time.
>>
>>
>> Taking all the original paperwork & microfilm... and only giving
>> *copies* to the Warren Commission - then destroying the originals...
>> is a foolproof method to avoid proof of alteration.
>>
>> But David can't publicly admit this.

This **ONE** example proves David a liar and coward...

>> > The fact that we have discrepancies like the "February 15" deposit
>> > slip existing in the record at all is, in my opinion, much more
>> > indicative of NO CONSPIRACY connected with items like that deposit
>> > slip than it is with the type of vast "Every Document Is Phony" plot
>> > that a lot of conspiracy theorists believe in today.
>>
>>
>> March 13 ... February 15...
>>
>> Yeah, common mistake... anyone could make a mistake like that...
>>
>
>Ben's either lying (again), or he could just be misinformed about the dates.

Sadly for David's "honesty" - anyone can see the date here:

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/pdf/WH21_Waldman_Ex_10.pdf

That you need to use ad hominem instead of the EVIDENCE shows lurkers
where the truth lies.

The story has been told...


And you lost.

[Ben Holmes]

On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 18:30:52 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>BEN HOLMES SAID:
>
>This "extra copy" doesn't demonstrate that anything at all was deposited...

Nope.

Answer the ORIGINAL post.

Clearly you're snipping just the material you want to dishonestly post
on your website... without, of course, my response.

You're quite the scumbag, David.

[Ben Holmes]

On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 19:59:19 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 10:51:49 PM UTC-4, borisba...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >
>> > LMFAO! Can you prove LHO was in that window at 1230PM 11/22/63?
>>
>> Jesse Curry couldn't.
>

>https://ap ...

There you go again, providing cites that you won't support.

[chucksch...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 9:51:49 PM UTC-5, borisba...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > LMFAO! Can you prove LHO was in that window at 1230PM 11/22/63?
>
> Jesse Curry couldn't.

Yet Oswald was arrested by the DPD and charged with the murder of JFK.

[Ben Holmes]

On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 20:22:52 -0700 (PDT), borisba...@gmail.com

wrote:

>On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 10:59:20 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
>> On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 10:51:49 PM UTC-4, borisba...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > >
>> > > LMFAO! Can you prove LHO was in that window at 1230PM 11/22/63?
>> >
>> > Jesse Curry couldn't.
>>

>> https://app ...

>
> Keep denying Curry ever said they couldn't place Oswald in that
> window with the rifle, pond waste.
>
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WT4Gy6_rt_o

David thinks he's winning, if you go to his website, he does the same
thing the WC & Bugliosi did... and entirely one sided and slanted
story.

He's too slimy and cowardly to put these posts on his website as is.
They would reveal too much.

[Ben Holmes]

On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 07:28:26 -0700 (PDT), chucksch...@gmail.com

wrote:

>On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 10:22:53 PM UTC-5, borisba...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 10:59:20 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
>> > On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 10:51:49 PM UTC-4, borisba...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > LMFAO! Can you prove LHO was in that window at 1230PM 11/22/63?
>> > >
>> > > Jesse Curry couldn't.
>> >

>> > https://app ...

>>
>> Keep denying Curry ever said they couldn't place Oswald in that window with the rifle, pond waste.
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WT4Gy6_rt_o
>
>
> Ah, the evil cops are in it up to their eyeballs yet slip up at the
> most opportune time for JFK Truthers to glimpse what really happened.

And Chuckles steps in to remind everyone that the evidence doesn't
support his faith, so he's forced to use ad hominem.

*That* fact tells the tale.

[Ben Holmes]

On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 07:33:28 -0700 (PDT), chucksch...@gmail.com
wrote:

Fortunately, we've not got to the point where an arrest means that one
is guilty. Perhaps Chuckles should move to a country where this is
true.

[chucksch...@gmail.com]

> refute or answer. [My insert: Ben means unable to refute or answer to BEN'S satisfaction.] Clearly, David knows he's lost, and he's trying to

You don't even think Oswald owned a rifle or had a MC shipped to him.

You're nuttier than a pet squirrel.

[chucksch...@gmail.com]

Fortunately, we've not gotten to the point where claims that LBJ had JFK murdered and then RFK, with the help of Hoover, the DPD, etc. means that one is guilty.

Since you're making the claim these people were involved, you carry the burden to prove it. Get busy.

And I've always said Oswald is HISTORICALLY guilty, which is true. He never had a trial, which everyone acknowledges.

Sirhan had a trial and you turds still think he was innocent, so I'm not certain a trial convicting Oswald would've quenched your thirst for conspiracy, but maybe there wouldn't have been so many of you nuts running around trying to dig up Oswald's corpse, put Clay Shaw in jail, etc.

[Ben Holmes]

On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 08:58:13 -0700 (PDT), chucksch...@gmail.com
wrote:

You got the task from McAdams to defend David, but completely failed
to refute even a *SINGLE SENTENCE*...

You're going to get a failing grade... this is quite unsatisfactory...

You can't make claims, then refuse to support them... you know what
Puddy says about empty claims, right Chuckles?

Why can't you cite the evidence for your claim?

>You're nuttier than a pet squirrel.

Your cowardice cannot be measured on the Richter scale.

[Ben Holmes]

On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 09:03:23 -0700 (PDT), chucksch...@gmail.com

wrote:

>On Wednesday, April 17, 2019 at 9:48:05 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 07:33:28 -0700 (PDT), chucksch...@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 9:51:49 PM UTC-5, borisba...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > LMFAO! Can you prove LHO was in that window at 1230PM 11/22/63?
>> >>
>> >> Jesse Curry couldn't.
>> >
>> >
>> >Yet Oswald was arrested by the DPD and charged with the murder of JFK.
>>
>>
>> Fortunately, we've not got to the point where an arrest means that one
>> is guilty. Perhaps Chuckles should move to a country where this is
>> true.
>
> Fortunately, we've not gotten to the point where claims that LBJ had
> JFK murdered and then RFK, with the help of Hoover, the DPD, etc.
> means that one is guilty.
>
> Since you're making the claim these people were involved, you carry
> the burden to prove it. Get busy.
>
> And I've always said Oswald is HISTORICALLY guilty, which is true.
> He never had a trial, which everyone acknowledges.

And since you claim that Oswald is guilty, then it's your burden to
present the evidence...

Start citing.

> Sirhan had a trial and you turds still think he was innocent,

Your recent email claiming that you molest children in your school
district has been forwarded to the board. I suggest you start
preparing your defense.

[chucksch...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, April 17, 2019 at 2:49:20 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 09:03:23 -0700 (PDT), chucksch...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>
> >On Wednesday, April 17, 2019 at 9:48:05 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> >> On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 07:33:28 -0700 (PDT), chucksch...@gmail.com
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 9:51:49 PM UTC-5, borisba...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > LMFAO! Can you prove LHO was in that window at 1230PM 11/22/63?
> >> >>
> >> >> Jesse Curry couldn't.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Yet Oswald was arrested by the DPD and charged with the murder of JFK.
> >>
> >>
> >> Fortunately, we've not got to the point where an arrest means that one
> >> is guilty. Perhaps Chuckles should move to a country where this is
> >> true.
> >
> > Fortunately, we've not gotten to the point where claims that LBJ had
> > JFK murdered and then RFK, with the help of Hoover, the DPD, etc.
> > means that one is guilty.
> >
> > Since you're making the claim these people were involved, you carry
> > the burden to prove it. Get busy.
> >
> > And I've always said Oswald is HISTORICALLY guilty, which is true.
> > He never had a trial, which everyone acknowledges.
>
>
> And since you claim that Oswald is guilty, then it's your burden to
> present the evidence...

Presented over 50 years ago.
>
> Start citing.

Read the WCR.

>
>
>
> > Sirhan had a trial and you turds still think he was innocent,
>
>
> Your recent email claiming that you molest children in your school
> district has been forwarded to the board. I suggest you start
> preparing your defense.

Sticks and stones.

[BT George]

I bet beb's scool district would be *very* concerned if they saw that he deals with kids and how often he mentions the subject of molesting children here.

[Ben Holmes]

On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 16:11:59 -0700 (PDT), chucksch...@gmail.com

wrote:

>On Wednesday, April 17, 2019 at 2:49:20 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 09:03:23 -0700 (PDT), chucksch...@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Wednesday, April 17, 2019 at 9:48:05 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 07:33:28 -0700 (PDT), chucksch...@gmail.com
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 9:51:49 PM UTC-5, borisba...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > LMFAO! Can you prove LHO was in that window at 1230PM 11/22/63?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Jesse Curry couldn't.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Yet Oswald was arrested by the DPD and charged with the murder of JFK.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Fortunately, we've not got to the point where an arrest means that one
>> >> is guilty. Perhaps Chuckles should move to a country where this is
>> >> true.
>> >
>> > Fortunately, we've not gotten to the point where claims that LBJ had
>> > JFK murdered and then RFK, with the help of Hoover, the DPD, etc.
>> > means that one is guilty.
>> >
>> > Since you're making the claim these people were involved, you carry
>> > the burden to prove it. Get busy.
>> >
>> > And I've always said Oswald is HISTORICALLY guilty, which is true.
>> > He never had a trial, which everyone acknowledges.
>>
>>
>> And since you claim that Oswald is guilty, then it's your burden to
>> present the evidence...
>
>Presented over 50 years ago.

As was the evidence showing a conspiracy.

You want *ME* to carry a burden, then you do too.

>> Start citing.
>
>Read the WCR.

I have. It lies about it's own underlying evidence... as I've proven
so many times.

How can it be relied on when it tells blatant lies that **YOU** refuse
to acknowledge or explain?

How does Mark Lane's scenario fail? Since you never refute anything he
points out?

>> > Sirhan had a trial and you turds still think he was innocent,
>>
>>
>> Your recent email claiming that you molest children in your school
>> district has been forwarded to the board. I suggest you start
>> preparing your defense.
>
>Sticks and stones.

Yep... I've learned that this doesn't bother you.

I don't understand, but perhaps you're just a kook.

Do you believe you have a burden to support claims that *YOU* make?

[Bud]

He didn`t have one. He couldn`t explain this event any better than you can.

[chucksch...@gmail.com]

Mark Lane never put a case together. He hinted in 'Plausible Denial' that the CIA via E. Howard Hunt had a role. Rush to Judgment was one of the first of hundreds of books that could've been titled, 'Explain this Freaky Looking Sh!t to my Satisfaction.'

>
>
> >> > Sirhan had a trial and you turds still think he was innocent,
> >>
> >>
> >> Your recent email claiming that you molest children in your school
> >> district has been forwarded to the board. I suggest you start
> >> preparing your defense.
> >
> >Sticks and stones.
>
> Yep... I've learned that this doesn't bother you.
>
> I don't understand, but perhaps you're just a kook.
>
> Do you believe you have a burden to support claims that *YOU* make?

As has been explained to you ad nauseam, there is no co-burden, Ben. There just isn't, period.

I make no claims and carry no burden.

There is the historical case against Oswald drawn from the original work of the DPD, the FBI, the experts employed by the WC, the interviews of witnesses, etc. and there is your yet-to-be determined case.

One side has put up a case, warts and all, because no investigation is perfect, and the other side has put up zilch. All "your side" can do is shake your collective fists at the work of the other side, hence this is an exercise in futility for you. You're no closer to "solving" the JFK conspiracy than Boris and his Truther pals are to solving the 911 conspiracy.

So, stop snapping rubber bands at the Warren Commission and put up a case or pack your bags and find something else to do with your time.

[Ben Holmes]

Dead silence.

> > How does Mark Lane's scenario fail? Since you never refute anything he
> > points out?
>
> Mark Lane never put a case together.

And the proof that you're lying is that you can't answer his case.

You refuse to even respond to it, let alone refute it.

> > >> > Sirhan had a trial and you turds still think he was innocent,
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Your recent email claiming that you molest children in your school
> > >> district has been forwarded to the board. I suggest you start
> > >> preparing your defense.
> > >
> > >Sticks and stones.
> >
> > Yep... I've learned that this doesn't bother you.
> >
> > I don't understand, but perhaps you're just a kook.
> >
> > Do you believe you have a burden to support claims that *YOU* make?
>
> As has been explained to you ad nauseam, there is no co-burden, Ben.
> There just isn't, period.

You're not just a liar, you're a COWARDLY liar.

> I make no claims and carry no burden.

You make claims every day.



[unsupported claims snipped]

[chucksch...@gmail.com]

It's a classic Fringe Reset/Holmes Pivot. Ben rolls right back to asking me to explain to his satisfaction the freaky looking sh!t Lane melted down over.

>
> You refuse to even respond to it, let alone refute it.

I don't need to refute it. You need to prove it.

>
>
> > > >> > Sirhan had a trial and you turds still think he was innocent,
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Your recent email claiming that you molest children in your school
> > > >> district has been forwarded to the board. I suggest you start
> > > >> preparing your defense.
> > > >
> > > >Sticks and stones.
> > >
> > > Yep... I've learned that this doesn't bother you.
> > >
> > > I don't understand, but perhaps you're just a kook.
> > >
> > > Do you believe you have a burden to support claims that *YOU* make?
> >
> > As has been explained to you ad nauseam, there is no co-burden, Ben.
> > There just isn't, period.
>
>
> You're not just a liar, you're a COWARDLY liar.
>
>
> > I make no claims and carry no burden.
>
>
> You make claims every day.

The only claim I make is that you can't support yours.
>
>
>
> [unsupported claims snipped]

[David Von Pein]

So, unless I resapond to your cockeyed crap EVERY SINGLE TIME you desire a response, I'm a coward....is that the way it works in your silly little mind, Holmes?

I've "debated" virtually every JFK sub-topic with you (or other CTers) in the past, all of which are archived on my website (Hint: *That's the whole idea of putting them on one website---to "archive" past discussions, so that I don't have to repeat myself over & over again a million times. Why is such a concept so foreign to you, Holmes?)

But Klein's didn't DEPOSIT the March 13th money until MARCH 15th. Hence the reason I posted this information previously (which Holmes will totally ignore, naturally)....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/10/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1058.html#The-Wrong-Date-On-The-Deposit-Ticket

[David Von Pein]

Keep pretending that Curry was relying on ABSOLUTELY NOTHING (evidence-wise) when he said this about Lee Harvey Oswald on November 23, 1963, Mr. Conspiracy Fantasist....

"I THINK THIS IS THE MAN THAT KILLED THE PRESIDENT." -- Jesse E. Curry; 11/23/63

[Ben Holmes]

On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 20:02:36 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein

Anyone notice that David simply ran away?

>> >> Had it turned out that more assassins were needed, the Mauser would
>> >> then have been 'attached' to another assassin.
>> >>
>> >> What's more credible? That the conspirators planted the "wrong"
>> >> weapon? Or that they were prepared for any eventuality?
>> >>
>> >> See how easily David's speculations are answered? No wonder he's
>> >> terrified of actual debate nowadays...
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > Errors such as the one with the incorrect date on this deposit
>> >> > ticket are errors that are MUCH easier to associate with normal
>> >> > fallible human errors than they are associated with any kind of
>> >> > perceived "plot" that has been PRE-arranged by a group of conspirators
>> >> > for the purpose of faking evidence in the JFK murder case.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Let me get this right... all I need to do in order to not make
>> >> mistakes is to conspire.
>> >>
>> >> And as a conspirator, I won't make mistakes... I'll be perfect...
>> >>
>> >> What an AMAZING concept!!

David got spanked on his silly concept that conspirators are perfect,
so he simply ran away crying...

Anyone notice that David couldn't defend himself?

>> > He knows the above accusation is a lie, because he knows that I've
>> > debated various "critics" in "open forums" hundreds of times in the
>> > past.
>>
>>
>> Sorry moron, I wasn't discussing the past. I stated "YOU'RE AFRAID TO
>> DEBATE IN AN OPEN FORUM WITH CRITICS MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE THAN YOURSELF.
>>
>> And that's a true statement.
>>
>> I said nothing about the past. You've been schooled repeatedly in the
>> past. (Hmm... perhaps I'll start reposting some of those, since you
>> refuse to debate now.)
>>
>> You illustrate it again in this post by running from EVERYTHING I
>> stated.

And David runs AGAIN!

>> > He knows this because I've debated HIM in "open forums" dozens of
>> > times in the past.
>>
>>
>> Certainly you've been spanked and schooled in the past. But you've
>> learned your lesson, and are now TERRIFIED of open debate.
>>
>> You're *PROVING* that statement true RIGHT NOW!
>
> So, unless I resapond to your cockeyed crap EVERY SINGLE TIME you
> desire a response, I'm a coward....is that the way it works in your
> silly little mind, Holmes?

That's strange... you do it on your website.

Why is it so impossible to answer what I say here?

You're DESPERATE to be able to say things without a response, aren't
you?


I refute you quite easily in posts like this, and instead of citing a
previous answer you gave, YOU REMAIN ABSOLUTELY SILENT.

Which shows that **YOU** know you lost.

> I've "debated" virtually every JFK sub-topic with you (or other
> CTers) in the past, all of which are archived on my website (Hint:
> *That's the whole idea of putting them on one website---to "archive"
> past discussions, so that I don't have to repeat myself over & over
> again a million times. Why is such a concept so foreign to you,
> Holmes?)

You've run from a great deal of points as well. And you know this.

If you had the evidence, you wouldn't have to repeat yourself... you'd
simply post the evidence, and that would be the end of it.

But you can't.

So I end up posting the same material I posted a decade ago, THAT HAD
NO ANSWER FROM YOU OR ANY OTHER BELIEVER... and you run.

>> And in addition to proving yourself a coward, you'll show your
>> dishonesty by failing to post **THIS** post - as is - in your
>> websites.
>>
>> You can't... you've been outed as a liar and coward in this post.
>>
>>
>> >Ben is a chronic liar. (Surprise!)
>>
>>
>> And yet, the only one lying right now is you. Why is that, David?
>>
>>
>>
>> >http://jfk- ...
>>
>>
>> If you're unwilling to defend it in open forum - why do you cite?
>>
>> You just want to tell lies, and not pay the price?
>>
>>
>> >> > And they would have also known to have placed the proper bank stamps
>> >> > on the documents in question too (or they SHOULD have factored that
>> >> > detail into their "Let's Frame Oswald" ruse, unless all of these
>> >> > plotters, to a man, were brainless morons).
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Oh, I'm sure that given enough time, the FBI could have created more
>> >> believable forgeries. It simply wasn't necessary.
>> >>
>> >> Just as I'm sure that with more time ... the Z-film could have been
>> >> made so perfectly, it would resist efforts to show the forgery.
>> >>
>> >> But sometimes, you just don't have the luxury of enough time.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Taking all the original paperwork & microfilm... and only giving
>> >> *copies* to the Warren Commission - then destroying the originals...
>> >> is a foolproof method to avoid proof of alteration.
>> >>
>> >> But David can't publicly admit this.
>>
>>
>> This **ONE** example proves David a liar and coward...

Anyone notice that David ran from this again?

>> >> > The fact that we have discrepancies like the "February 15" deposit
>> >> > slip existing in the record at all is, in my opinion, much more
>> >> > indicative of NO CONSPIRACY connected with items like that deposit
>> >> > slip than it is with the type of vast "Every Document Is Phony" plot
>> >> > that a lot of conspiracy theorists believe in today.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> March 13 ... February 15...
>> >>
>> >> Yeah, common mistake... anyone could make a mistake like that...
>> >>
>> >
>> >Ben's either lying (again), or he could just be misinformed about the dates.
>>
>>
>> Sadly for David's "honesty" - anyone can see the date here:
>>
>> http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/pdf/WH21_Waldman_Ex_10.pdf
>>
>
> But Klein's didn't DEPOSIT the March 13th money until MARCH 15th.
> Hence the reason I posted this information previously (which Holmes
> will totally ignore, naturally)....

Then all you need to do is cite the deposit slip with a date on it.

Or ANYTHING AT ALL with a date on it.

But when you proclaim to the world that the FBI saw the date, and put
it in a report, but didn't bother to show what **THEY** were allegedly
looking at, then you have nothing at all.

The FBI lied as frequently as the WC in this case, as I've
demonstrated time and time again.

Indeed, you still can't explain why all the originals from Kleins
disappeared while under FBI control... and why the WC only got copies.


I predict that this won't appear on your website either. What a
dishonest slimy coward you are!

[Ben Holmes]

On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 19:48:10 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>Keep pretending that Curry was relying on ABSOLUTELY NOTHING (evidence-wise) when he said this on 11/23/63, Mr. Conspiracy Fantasist....
>
>"I THINK THIS IS THE MAN THAT KILLED THE PRESIDENT." -- Jesse E. Curry; 11/23/63 AD


It's amusing that every single time I've asked believers to post the
evidence against Oswald that existed that first weekend, they run.

EVERY.

SINGLE.

TIME.

Indeed, David absolutely HATES the evidence... he keeps running from
it... and that's all you need to know.

The story is told.

[Ben Holmes]

On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 18:38:51 -0700 (PDT), chucksch...@gmail.com

Chuckles ran again... showing that he knows he lost.

>> > > How does Mark Lane's scenario fail? Since you never refute anything he
>> > > points out?
>> >
>> > Mark Lane never put a case together.
>>
>> And the proof that you're lying is that you can't answer his case.
>
> It's a classic Fringe Reset/Holmes Pivot. Ben rolls right back to
> asking me to explain to his satisfaction the freaky looking sh!t Lane
> melted down over.

A coward's excuse for his cowardice is **ALWAYS** a lie.

>> You refuse to even respond to it, let alone refute it.
>
>I don't need to refute it. You need to prove it.

Good idea. The Warren Commission - I don't need to refute it, you need
to prove it.

You lose!

>> > > >> > Sirhan had a trial and you turds still think he was innocent,
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Your recent email claiming that you molest children in your school
>> > > >> district has been forwarded to the board. I suggest you start
>> > > >> preparing your defense.
>> > > >
>> > > >Sticks and stones.
>> > >
>> > > Yep... I've learned that this doesn't bother you.
>> > >
>> > > I don't understand, but perhaps you're just a kook.
>> > >
>> > > Do you believe you have a burden to support claims that *YOU* make?
>> >
>> > As has been explained to you ad nauseam, there is no co-burden, Ben.
>> > There just isn't, period.
>>
>> You're not just a liar, you're a COWARDLY liar.
>>
>> > I make no claims and carry no burden.
>>
>> You make claims every day.
>
>The only claim I make is that you can't support yours.

You're lying again, Chuckles.

Amusingly, you can't even publicly acknowledge that a person has a
burden to support what they claim.


>> [unsupported claims snipped]

[chucksch...@gmail.com]

Yes. You have a burden to support what you claim.

Start with JFK's corpse being kidnapped. Explain the event in detail.

[Bud]

On Thursday, April 18, 2019 at 10:16:36 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 19:48:10 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
> <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 11:22:53 PM UTC-4, borisba...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 10:59:20 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> >> > On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 10:51:49 PM UTC-4, borisba...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > LMFAO! Can you prove LHO was in that window at 1230PM 11/22/63?
> >> > >
> >> > > Jesse Curry couldn't.
> >> >
> >> > https://app.box.com/s/u8hlumq4mya5lylmgqn5
> >>
> >> Keep denying Curry ever said they couldn't place Oswald in that window with the rifle, pond waste.
> >>
> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WT4Gy6_rt_o
> >
> >Keep pretending that Curry was relying on ABSOLUTELY NOTHING (evidence-wise) when he said this on 11/23/63, Mr. Conspiracy Fantasist....
> >
> >"I THINK THIS IS THE MAN THAT KILLED THE PRESIDENT." -- Jesse E. Curry; 11/23/63 AD
>
>
> It's amusing that every single time I've asked believers to post the
> evidence against Oswald that existed that first weekend, they run.

Why don`t you list it?

> EVERY.
>
> SINGLE.
>
> TIME.

Why are you shifting the burden? Why don`t *YOU* look into what evidence convinced the Dallas Police that Oswald was the man who killed the President, enough so that they charged him with that murder.

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 10:29:47 -0700 (PDT), chucksch...@gmail.com

Amusingly, you're flagrantly lying right now. You're saying what you
think will impress lurkers...

You made a claim in another thread, then RAN when challenged to
support it.

You've refused, time and time again, to support *YOUR* claims.

Why the cowardice, Chuckles?

If the evidence favors your belief, why aren't you citing it?

[donald willis]

On Wednesday, April 17, 2019 at 4:12:00 PM UTC-7, chucksch...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 17, 2019 at 2:49:20 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 09:03:23 -0700 (PDT), chucksch...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
> >
> > >On Wednesday, April 17, 2019 at 9:48:05 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > >> On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 07:33:28 -0700 (PDT), chucksch...@gmail.com
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 9:51:49 PM UTC-5, borisba...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > LMFAO! Can you prove LHO was in that window at 1230PM 11/22/63?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Jesse Curry couldn't.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >Yet Oswald was arrested by the DPD and charged with the murder of JFK.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Fortunately, we've not got to the point where an arrest means that one
> > >> is guilty. Perhaps Chuckles should move to a country where this is
> > >> true.
> > >
> > > Fortunately, we've not gotten to the point where claims that LBJ had
> > > JFK murdered and then RFK, with the help of Hoover, the DPD, etc.
> > > means that one is guilty.
> > >
> > > Since you're making the claim these people were involved, you carry
> > > the burden to prove it. Get busy.
> > >
> > > And I've always said Oswald is HISTORICALLY guilty, which is true.
> > > He never had a trial, which everyone acknowledges.
> >
> >
> > And since you claim that Oswald is guilty, then it's your burden to
> > present the evidence...
>
> Presented over 50 years ago.

Yes, and the WC did a bang-up job re the location of the skull entry wound!

[Ben Holmes]

This was due to their cowardice in examining the autopsy material.

But they had a habit of running from the evidence... anyone who would
upset their applecart was ignored or trashed.

And the believers here in this forum aren't smart enough to defend the
WCR.

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 11:54:11 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:

>On Thursday, April 18, 2019 at 10:16:36 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 19:48:10 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
>> <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 11:22:53 PM UTC-4, borisba...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >> On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 10:59:20 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
>> >> > On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 10:51:49 PM UTC-4, borisba...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > LMFAO! Can you prove LHO was in that window at 1230PM 11/22/63?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Jesse Curry couldn't.
>> >> >
>> >> > https://app.box.com/s/u8hlumq4mya5lylmgqn5
>> >>
>> >> Keep denying Curry ever said they couldn't place Oswald in that window with the rifle, pond waste.
>> >>
>> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WT4Gy6_rt_o
>> >
>> >Keep pretending that Curry was relying on ABSOLUTELY NOTHING (evidence-wise) when he said this on 11/23/63, Mr. Conspiracy Fantasist....
>> >
>> >"I THINK THIS IS THE MAN THAT KILLED THE PRESIDENT." -- Jesse E. Curry; 11/23/63 AD
>>
>>
>> It's amusing that every single time I've asked believers to post the
>> evidence against Oswald that existed that first weekend, they run.
>
> Why don`t you list it?

It's not my burden.

>> EVERY.
>>
>> SINGLE.
>>
>> TIME.
>
> Why are you shifting the burden?

I'm not. It's your burden.

[Ben Holmes]

On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 16:44:51 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

You're lying.

And the PROOF that you're lying is that you've been unable to refute
anything but a single point or two.

You've simply RUN from the vast majority of his scenario.

You ran from my scenario as well.

You run from *ANYTHING* that smacks of evidence in this case.