JFK Assassination Forum Archives -- Misc. Topics Of Interest (Part 177)

[David Von Pein]

ARCHIVED JFK ASSASSINATION FORUM POSTS OF INTEREST (PART 177):

======================================================


WITNESS AFFIDAVITS:
http://JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/2011/12/jfk-assassination-affidavits.html


"JFK: THE LOST BULLET":
http://JFKFiles.blogspot.com/2012/01/mr-hollands-opus-max-holland-and.html
http://Amazon.com/review/R2G3V5FDD9ICBI


LEE HARVEY OSWALD AND THE MURDER OF J.D. TIPPIT:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/67c6773e51018d19
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/f80e99f1939f5ed9
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/79d603c2c8fffd27


THE F.B.I.:
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=18453&st=210&p=242105&#entry242105


THE JET EFFECT:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/6d16047646478eaa


THE FIRST THORACIC VERTEBRA [T-1]:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b175b9dd3679f244


THE DENTED SHELL CASING:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/ef3f4a49657ec57b


ROBERT N. McCLELLAND:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/6b5cb21e2be2999f
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/982db07263e36524


LEE HARVEY OSWALD IN IRVING:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/702da86579d6e82e
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b92022e2bef80b1a
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b0d87b090c2dd5a6


DALE MYERS:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/d08d79aa55cb3700


MORE POSTS:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/3366631922bf4052
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/8f7393715011e548
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/6e442a0733b93973
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/78284d01b3b7a582




======================================================

[aeffects]

On Jan 10, 12:41 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:

<snip the nonsense>

where's the beef moron?

-and- no advertising dipso!

[Jason Burke]

Hey fuckface! Seems that 'no advertising' is the best you've got.
Big surprise there!

[David Von Pein]

It doesn't matter what I post, Jason. To Crackpipe Healy, everything
is "advertising", regardless of content.

David G. Healy is a psychiatrist's dream patient come to life.

[aeffects]

well troll, I'm busy can't you see? Busywith your arch-hero, his full
cowardice is on display here, I suspect you noticed that and felt a
sincere desire to save his sorry ass from those 45 questions.....
those very same damn 45 questions you fled from also..... nad up
girlee..... what the lone nutters need these days is integrity.
smooches my-lovely! lmfao!

[aeffects]

next to Gil Jeasus website, the 45 questions, your worst fucking
nightmare! Carry on fraud!

[David Von Pein]

Healy's worst nightmare is staying sober for a whole day.

[David Von Pein]

>>> "nad up girlee. .... smooches my-lovely!" <<<

Allow me to repeat the following quote (it seems quite appropriate in
light of the above creepy commentary from Healy's keyboard):

[aeffects]

got ya by the short ones hon, love seeing you dance, fill out the
dance card hon, all ya need is a real, live job..... LMFAO! ! ! ! !

[aeffects]

On Jan 10, 2:31 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> Healy's worst nightmare is staying sober for a whole day.

do you still hate VET'S, disgusted with the VA? Slander alcoholics,
drug addicts and combat veterans? Are you Chuck Schuyler's brother in
arms (or parisols)?

YOU, need a life, hon....

btw troll, I take an extra serving of gravy with that buttermilk
biscuit, please! ROTFLMFAO!

[Sam McClung]

maybe like all children and young nations, he is rebelling and preparing to
break away from his parent figure, paulie, to make his own runaway
discussion gruppe 2, the sequel, now with lower cholesterol!

[Jason Burke]

Hey dipshit. Let me post in a way your retarded brain can handle.

Bleh, duz, hist wvus duh!

[David Von Pein]

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/inside_my_teen_affair_with_jfk_FGF4aS7OdoQozP4tyySsmK



DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I find a lot of Mimi's story [in the above-linked New York Post
article] just a tad hard to believe (to say the least).

BUD SAID:

>>> "Rings true to me. She [Mimi Alford] gives a lot of information that can be checked. This isn't like that phony Hunt "confession", where nothing is really presented, she gives details." <<<

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

And she is giving some details that just don't ring true, IMO. The
excerpt below is particularly unbelievable (plus the part about Mimi
"servicing" Dave Powers):

"Mimi, why don’t you take care of my baby brother [Teddy]? He
could stand a little relaxation."

JFK supposedly said the above words to Mimi Alford.

Come on. How much of this should we swallow? (Oops...bad choice of
words there.) :-)

Another part of Mimi's story that is not at all believable to me is
when she says that JFK said this to her on November 15, 1963, seven
days before Kennedy was killed:

"I wish you were coming with me to Texas."

That quote above sounds to me like a manufactured quotation, which was
inserted into Mimi's story in order to place a melancholy note of
sadness on the President's fateful trip to Dallas on November 22nd.

Plus, why in the world would JFK have said such a thing to Mimi about
the Texas trip anyway--from the standpoint of the LENGTH of Kennedy's
Texas excursion? The Texas trip was only a two-day trip for the
President. He was scheduled to return to Washington sometime on
Saturday, November 23rd. My gosh, couldn't Kennedy get along without
his 19-year-old sweetheart for just two days? IMO, it's just silly to
think that President Kennedy uttered those above words to Mimi.

Mimi, however, is definitely correct about JFK being in New York City
on the date she mentioned (11/15/63). And she is also correct about
Kennedy being at the Carlyle Hotel on that exact date too (see JFK's
Appointments Calendar for that day, linked below). So that part of her
story checks out. Therefore, I suppose it would have been physically
possible for Mimi to have seen JFK in Manhattan on November 15th:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-P09aQojDXUU/Ty-c2qI3UdI/AAAAAAAAEUg/vE__entZ1cI/s1600/JFK-White-House-Diary-11-15-63.png

Plus:

According to some sources, JFK was also supposedly having extended
flings with several other women/girls during this period when he was
President ('61-'63). We've all heard about his sexual antics with
"Frick & Frack" (a couple of White House secretaries), plus Judith
Exner, plus Marilyn Monroe, plus Angie Dickinson, plus God knows how
many others. And then there's his wife, Jackie. Surely, she wasn't
left out in the cold entirely when it came to Jack's attention in the
bedroom.

So, I'm just asking myself the logical question: How many mistresses
does one President really NEED in order to keep himself satisfied?

Was it just a game to JFK? Was he trying to see how many girls he
could "service" (right in the White House itself) without getting
caught?

And while I was reading Mimi Alford's sordid account of her supposed
sexual affair with President Kennedy, I kept asking myself another
question (which may not be an intelligent question to ask, because I
have not memorized the First Lady's travel schedule for the White
House years), but I kept asking myself: My gosh, is Jackie ALWAYS gone
on a trip? Isn't she ever around at all?

Of course, whenever a member of JFK's innermost "inner circle" has
ever commented on Kennedy's rumored trysts and affairs, they have
always denied them -- from Pierre Salinger on down.

Now I realize that Salinger would have certainly wanted to keep a lid
on any of JFK's sexual freelancing when Pierre talked to the press
during the time when Kennedy was actually the President. But Salinger
has appeared on many TV documentaries since JFK's death, and I don't
seem to recall him ever coming out and admitting that he was aware of
any sexual flings that the President might have been having.

It could be, of course, that Salinger, even if he did know about
Kennedy's affairs, was so close to JFK that he didn't want to tarnish
his reputation--even decades after his assassination.

But if JFK had really engaged in all of the sordid sexual antics that
he was rumored to have engaged in, it's hard for me to believe that
Mr. Salinger wouldn't have been aware of them. (If only to keep the
press at bay and play down the whole thing in front of the reporters,
which he did do at one point when a newsman asked him about the
rumors.)

In my opinion (without having read all of Mimi Alford's explosive new
"tell-all" book), I think John F. Kennedy almost certainly did engage
in some extramarital affairs during his 1,037 days as the 35th U.S.
President. There are many accounts by various people (including Secret
Service agents) which pretty much corroborate each other on that
point. So, JFK was almost certainly a person who didn't give a damn
about remaining faithful to his wife.

But I'm just wondering HOW MUCH of it is true? Some of it is almost
certainly true. But was JFK really such a sex maniac that he was
tossing girls onto Jackie's bed every time the First Lady left the
house? And was he really so starved for sex that he would literally
get headaches if he didn't get some new trim every night (or every
third or fourth night, or whatever), as one person has suggested in
the past?

I'm not saying that Jack wasn't a sex maniac. I'm just dubious about
the frequency of such dalliances. And I'm certainly dubious about some
of the details revealed by Ms. Alford in the New York Post article.

But, then again, maybe she's telling the 100% truth. I have no idea.
But, as most people will acknowledge, the word "Kennedy" has a way of
bringing people out of the woodwork to spin all kinds of tales that
are not the complete truth.

http://JFK-Archives.blogspot.com