JFK Assassination Forum Archives -- Misc. Topics Of Interest (Part 158)

There's not a thing wrong with David Belin's work. It was excellent.
Very, very thorough. And his 1973 book is an outstanding addendum to
the Warren Commission Report.

http://You-Are-The-Jury.blogspot.com

Even if we were to toss out the two Poe bullet shells, Lee Harvey
Oswald's guilt in J.D. Tippit's murder is firmly established via the
OTHER two shells (not to mention those 13 witnesses whom Jim DiEugenio
wants to think all were wrong--or liars).

Conspiracy theorists like DiEugenio never get tired of calling dozens
of people liars (probably hundreds), and will forever ignore the clear
chain of custody for the two Davis shells.

Try proving that the two Davis shells were "planted", Jimbo. You can't
do it. And you never will be able to prove it--and that's mainly due
to the immutable fact that the silly conspiracy-slanted nonsense that
you imagine took place with respect to the Tippit and JFK murders
never took place. It only exists in your fevered imagination (and in
the fevered imaginations of thousands of other conspiracy promoters
who want a conspiracy to exist in the JFK case).

David Von Pein

unread,

Dec 24, 2010, 11:26:04 PM12/24/10

to

http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17136&st=45&p=215893&#entry215893

DELUSIONAL KOOK JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:

>>> "...It is almost ridiculous to argue with someone like Von Pein. First he says that, "OMG, I would never rely on someone like Belin!"..." <<<

DAVID VON PEIN:

Of course (as usual), DiEugenio misrepresents something. I never once
said that I "would never rely on someone like Belin". Of course I
would rely on David Belin (and his Warren Commission). There's no
reason not to.

What I implied earlier was that I certainly was not relying on David
Belin to establish the fact that approximately one dozen eyewitnesses
positively identified Lee Harvey Oswald as J.D. Tippit's murderer (or
as the one and only man seen fleeing the general area of 10th Street &
Patton Avenue).

Why on Earth anyone would say that the witnesses' IDing of Oswald
depended on DAVID BELIN is a real mystery. That's beyond goofy.

>>> "Then when I show he has, he writes, "Well why not. His work was excellent, and his 1973 book was outstanding." And he is so blind that he does not even notice the dichotomy." <<<

And you're so blind and delusional (etc.) that you don't even realize
that you've said something incredibly stupid when you said this about
the Tippit eyewitnesses: "He takes the IDs right from David Belin."

Belin, as a point of fact, had absolutely NOTHING to do with the
various Tippit witnesses going down to DPD/City Hall and making a
positive identification of Lee Oswald.

Belin wasn't even in the picture when those witnesses positively IDed
LHO at DPD Headquarters. The WC wasn't even created until five days
after Oswald's death, for Pete sake.

So, as usual, DiEugenio doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.

>>> "Sort of like denying he [DVP] plotted with Reitzes on IMDB or anywhere else." <<<

You're delusional (again). I've never "plotted" with anyone, at any
time, about anything concerning the assassination of JFK. You're
picking shit out of thin air (i.e., you're inventing a "plot" out of
sheer nothingness--just like you do 24/7 with the JFK murder case).

But please keep pretending that I'm "plotting" evil LN schemes with
David A. Reitzes and Francois Carlier and John McAdams and Duncan
MacRae (et al). Your brand of kooky comedy is better than any TV
sitcom.

>>> "Then when this was exposed he says, well I [Delusional DiEugenio] erred because I attributed a line of their group dialogue to Reitzes rather than him. Without realizing that by saying that he just admitted my informant was right about how close they were. A fact he tried to conceal." <<<

I haven't the slightest effing idea what you just said. You're going
further off the deep end with each passing 24-hour period. (But please
continue plummeting over that deep end. I'm loving it.)

>>> "What's next Davey? Are you going to say you don't know Duncan either?" <<<

That's correct. I don't know him. I know OF him. But I don't know him.
I've very rarely even spoken to him via Internet posts--let alone
"knowing" him personally (which is what I assume you mean by "knowing"
someone).

When Duncan chimes in and confirms that he doesn't "know" me, will you
call him a liar too? I hope you do. Because your current comedy
routine regarding the people I supposedly "know" and "plot" things
with is reaching hysterical proportions.

>>> "Even though you post regularly at his [Duncan MacRae's] forum[,] along [with] your carbon copy Carl May [sic]." <<<

You meant Paul May. Not Carl. (And, btw, I don't "know" Paul May
either. Now, call me a liar again, Jimbo. Pretty please.)

And FYI, I only post occasionally at Mr. MacRae's very good forum. In
2009, I guess you could have called me a "regular" poster at that
forum. But not now. So, it looks like DiEugenio is dead wrong (again).
What a shocker!

BTW, is a portion of your last silly post supposed to infer that I am
using an alias and posting as "Carl May" [sic; Paul May]?

I sure hope Jimbo thinks I'm Paul May too. Because I enjoy watching a
conspiracy monger put his foot in his mouth six times in a single day.

David Von Pein

unread,

Dec 27, 2010, 5:52:30 PM12/27/10

to

http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17159&st=0&p=216138&#entry216138

http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17159&st=0&p=216164&#entry216164

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Let's take a look at two quotes from the lips of Prof. Fetzer (which
should make any reasonable person doubt the credibility of anyone
making such absurd statements):

"There are several possibilities, including that Zapruder was
made of rubber, that Zapruder was not there at all, and that someone
else stood in for him." -- James H. Fetzer; March 11, 2009

"Zapruder and Sitzman may have been in the area, but I have
always found it a bit odd that she would climb up on the pedestal,
which would have been difficult for anyone but especially a woman in a
dress, who, presumably, would want to preserve her modesty. But the
question is a bit more basic than that, since we know that "the
Zapruder film" is not a film that Zapruder--or anyone else!--could
have taken, since it includes events, like the blow-out to the right-
front, which are complete fabrications." -- James H. Fetzer; March 15,
2009

Nuff said.

JAMES H. FETZER SAID:

Let Von Pein spell out the context, which explains the remark.

DVP SAID:

Who CARES what the "context" is, Jim? What difference does it make? In
2009, you wrote that you actually were entertaining the notion that
the Abe Zapruder that is seen in the various other films and photos
was possibly made out of "rubber".

And ANYONE who could actually entertain such a goofy notion
(regardless of any additional "context" attached to such an idiotic
theory) is a person who is so deeply entrenched in his conspiracy
treasure hunt that nothing more needs to be said to destroy that
person's overall credibility.

FETZER SAID:

If anyone here is completely and utterly untrustworthy, it is this
David Von Pein.

DVP SAID:

Coming as it does from a man who thinks that all kinds of meaningless
things were "wholly fabricated" in the Zapruder Film, the above
comment isn't exactly too shattering.

aeffects

unread,

Dec 27, 2010, 6:29:52 PM12/27/10

to

On Dec 27, 2:52 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:

you're not even worthy to carry his hat dipshit! Jealous your
heroworsahip has had lunch with Jim Fetzer, little guy? ROTFLMFAO! ! !

Bud

unread,

Dec 27, 2010, 6:40:27 PM12/27/10

to

Thats the beauty about being a CTer, no matter how retarded what you
say is you can`t lose credibility.

David Von Pein

unread,

Dec 27, 2010, 6:45:31 PM12/27/10

to

>>> "That's the beauty about being a CTer, no matter how retarded what you say is you can`t lose credibility." <<<

Absolutely, Bud. And Fetzer is living proof of that fact (along with
Healy).

BTW, Happy Holidays to you, Bud.

Are you getting the blizzard there in Philly? (You are near
Philadelphia, aren't you Bud?)

Bud

unread,

Dec 27, 2010, 7:01:48 PM12/27/10

to

On Dec 27, 6:45 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>> "That's the beauty about being a CTer, no matter how retarded what you say is you can`t lose credibility." <<<
>
> Absolutely, Bud. And Fetzer is living proof of that fact (along with
> Healy).

Was the junkie saying in that gibberish that Bugs lunched with
Fetzer? How could he be sure it wasn`t a rubber dummy?

> BTW, Happy Holidays to you, Bud.

Same to you, David.

> Are you getting the blizzard there in Philly? (You are near
> Philadelphia, aren't you Bud?)

Yah, I`m in Philly. We got pounded, but not terribly so. Wish they
would have let the Eagles play, it would have been interesting to
watch Vick scramble in snowshoes.

aeffects

unread,

Dec 27, 2010, 7:10:13 PM12/27/10

to

dudster, you're simplemined, no-nothing -- parroting ,john nonsense
filtered through david von pein and his deep fried KFC chicken legs,
who'll never amount to anything concerning this investigation.... 75%
of America doesn't buy WCR bullsit.... whats-a-matta wit'ch you, moron?

aeffects

unread,

Dec 27, 2010, 7:11:09 PM12/27/10

to

lunch with bugliosi moron -- think about it! lmfao!

Bud

unread,

Dec 27, 2010, 7:23:05 PM12/27/10

to

Yah, happy holidays to you too.

mucher1

unread,

Dec 27, 2010, 7:23:11 PM12/27/10

to

Your man crushes on big-talking mega kooks like Jim Fetzer and Ben
"Yellow Pants" Holmes are duly noted. We had a certain amount of
respect for you when you retired from the JFK case and went back to
chasing juicy she-males at the tranny hotspots of your home town, but
this...

Bud

unread,

Dec 27, 2010, 7:40:02 PM12/27/10

to

If Ben would only get a boob job Healy would have the best of both
worlds, crackpot claims and firm luscious breasts. He might be tempted
to give up crack for that.

aeffects

unread,

Dec 27, 2010, 7:56:31 PM12/27/10

to

my goodness, look at all the lone nut shitheads I collect. Every time
I post no-less...... oh-wee ROTFLMFAO! ! ! ! Carry on girls!

David Von Pein

unread,

Dec 28, 2010, 12:46:25 AM12/28/10

to

Allowing their prisoner to be murdered in the police department
basement wasn't exactly a high spot of the DPD's weekend. I'll grant
you that. :)

But I doubt that even the best magician in the world could have
conjured up the extraordinary amount of "HAPPENSTANCE" and "PERFECT
TIMING" that Jack Ruby and Lee Oswald and the DPD encountered on Nov.
24. It was truly amazing (not conspiratorial in any way--just
"amazing"):

Carlin's call at just the right time.
Ruby leaves apt. at just the right time.
Ruby leaves Western Union at just the right time.
The armored truck blocks the OUT ramp of the DPD basement.
Pierce drives OUT the IN ramp at just the right time.
Oswald changes clothes at just the right time.
Holmes' questioning of LHO consumes just the right amount of extra
time.
Ruby enters the basement at just the right time (and also AFTER the
basement had TWICE been thoroughly searched).
Ruby has a loaded gun on him (as per usual).
Ruby is known by many cops.
Ruby is dressed in a manner that didn't attract any attention at all
(in fact, he blends in perfectly with the other reporters/newsmen).

Amazing.

But pure happenstance. Without a doubt.

To think all of the above things were somehow coordinated and
orchestrated by evil forces so that Ruby could shoot Oswald is much
more unbelievable than to believe it was all ordinary happenstance.

But, yes, that happenstance was, indeed, incredible.

Gil Jesus

unread,

Dec 28, 2010, 8:50:44 AM12/28/10

to

More fooishness from a fool. The Oswald transfer was supposed to take
place at 10:00 am. ( 7 H 257 )
The problem was that Ruby had not yet gotten into position. So they
"stalled" by continuing the questioning of Oswald
( 7 H 300 ).

The line of questioning ( 7 H 99 ) used was ridiculous in itself.
These were all questions Oswald had been asked prior, indicating that
the line of questioning was meant to stall the process of the
transfer. Once Ruby was in position, the "all clear" signal was given
and the police brought Oswald down for Ruby to murder.

Nutcases like Von Pein want you to look at Ruby's presence in the
basement from the standpoint that his timing was impossible. But they
want you to look at it from that angle, rather than placing the timing
issue in the hands of the Dallas Police. If the timing of the transfer
was dependant on Ruby being in the basement, then there's no
coincidence here. There is only a conspiracy and collusion by the
Dallas Police and Jack Ruby to murder Lee Oswald and prevent the case
from ever going to trial.

Ruby himself said it best:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U77Rj46ncY8

Rob Caprio

unread,

Dec 28, 2010, 9:55:39 AM12/28/10

to

You are an EMBARRASSMENT to the city of Philadelphia! Why don't you
move to Podunk, IN where DVP lives?

Rob Caprio

unread,

Dec 28, 2010, 9:57:08 AM12/28/10

to

On Dec 27, 7:01 pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:

By the way, how much of an Eagles fan are you? Can you tell us who
wore the number 66 during the 1980 season?

Rob Caprio

unread,

Dec 28, 2010, 9:59:13 AM12/28/10

to

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U77Rj46ncY8- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I believe DVP once said the hour and twenty minute delay was due to
"LHO putting on a sweater!"

LOL!!

Gil Jesus

unread,

Dec 28, 2010, 10:23:08 AM12/28/10

to

On Dec 28, 9:59 am, Rob Caprio <robcap...@netscape.com> wrote:

> I believe DVP once said the hour and twenty minute delay was due to
> "LHO putting on a sweater!"
>

> LOL!!-

"IF ONLY .... Lee Harvey Oswald hadn't taken the time to put on that
black sweater before being escorted into the basement." --David Von
Pein 8/9/10

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/8a9fcab83069f956

What a f@#king retard.

mucher1

unread,

Dec 28, 2010, 10:34:46 AM12/28/10

to

> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/8a9fcab83069...
>
> What a f@#king retard.

Wow. Robsie and his soulmate Gilly believe that Ruby was in the
basement 80 minutes(!!!) before Oswald showed up!

Rob Caprio

unread,

Dec 28, 2010, 12:18:39 PM12/28/10

to

On Dec 28, 10:23 am, Gil Jesus <JFK63Conspir...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Dec 28, 9:59 am, Rob Caprio <robcap...@netscape.com> wrote:
>
> > I believe DVP once said the hour and twenty minute delay was due to
> > "LHO putting on a sweater!"
>
> > LOL!!-
>
> "IF ONLY .... Lee Harvey Oswald hadn't taken the time to put on that
> black sweater before being escorted into the basement." --David Von
> Pein 8/9/10
>

> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/8a9fcab83069...
>
> What a f@#king retard.

Thanks for the link Gil!

Rob Caprio

unread,

Dec 28, 2010, 12:20:46 PM12/28/10

to

Where did either of us say this? I have said many times Ruby knew the
time of the transfer (they made it public) and yet he did not show up
then! Instead of LHO being moved and Ruby being out of luck we are
asked to believe that Ruby came into the basement an hour and twenty
minutes late and as luck would have it LHO was still there!

Then they want us to believe this was a "crime of passion" to boot!

bigdog

unread,

Dec 28, 2010, 1:27:21 PM12/28/10

to

> Then they want us to believe this was a "crime of passion" to boot!- Hide quoted text -
>
You assume Ruby went to the DPD station for the purpose of killing
Oswald. In fact Ruby had hung out most of the weekend at the station
even when Oswald was not being paraded in front of the cameras. He was
friends with the cops and hand brought sandwiches for the ones who
worked late on Friday night into Saturday. The reason Ruby went into
downtown was because he got a phone call from one of his dancers who
needed some money wired to her. Since the Western Union office was a
short walk from the DPD station, he headed over there to see what was
going on. By coincidence, he arrived just as Oswald was being led out.
To believe it was anything more than a coincidence, you would need to
believe that Ruby was notified just before Oswald was transfered.
Since cell phones weren't in existence then, that would have been a
neat trick. You would also need to believe that Oswald himself was
complicit since he delayed his own transfer by requesting a sweater.
Had he not doen that, he would have been in the armored car before
Ruby arrived. You also would need to believe that Ruby decided to
bring his dog along for the ride, as if he thought he would be allowed
to drive home after shooting Oswald.

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 3, 2011, 4:57:52 PM1/3/11

to

http://Amazon.com/Expanded-Reclaiming-History-Book-Review/forum/Fx2TVHW5I0UEY9A/Tx6D680Z49Q7UO/2/ref=cm_cd_et_md_pl?_encoding=UTF8&cdMsgNo=39&asin=0393045250&cdSort=oldest&cdMsgID=Mx1UYENH8X6LSEE#Mx1UYENH8X6LSEE

http://Amazon.com/Expanded-Reclaiming-History-Book-Review/forum/Fx2TVHW5I0UEY9A/Tx6D680Z49Q7UO/2/ref=cm_cd_et_md_pl?_encoding=UTF8&cdMsgNo=40&asin=0393045250&cdSort=oldest&cdMsgID=Mx2XLCTZMX208CY#Mx2XLCTZMX208CY

The persistent rantings and ravings of conspiracy theorists couldn't
possibly matter less when it comes to the grand scheme of history. And
that includes the huffing and puffing of Mr. Charles E. Ochelli.

The physical evidence in the JFK murder can only lead in one
(reasonable) direction -- and it's not toward the type of multi-gun
"triangulation of crossfire" conspiracy plot that people like Oliver
Stone and Jim Garrison imagine took place.

I always invite people to watch (and listen to) the original "as it is
happening" TV and radio coverage from 11/22/63. And after performing
that kind of exercise, the first question I would then ask any
conspiracy believer is this one:

Where within that first-day television and/or radio coverage from
November 22, 1963, is there even a HINT of the kind of THREE-GUN, SIX-
SHOTS-FIRED shooting scenario that was endorsed and thrown up on the
movie screen by fantasist filmmaker Oliver Stone?

Answer: It doesn't exist. Nowhere within any of the TV and radio
footage (50+ hours of which are provided at the links below) are you
going to find any bulletins that come even close to this kind of
crackpottery:

THREE GUNMEN FIRED SIX SHOTS AT PRESIDENT KENNEDY'S MOTORCADE TODAY IN
DALLAS! THE PRESIDENT WAS HIT IN THE HEAD BY A BULLET FIRED FROM THE
GRASSY KNOLL TO THE FRONT OF KENNEDY'S LIMOUSINE!

Instead, what you'll find in the footage below is report after report
indicating the following:

ONE GUNMAN FIRED THREE SHOTS AT PRESIDENT KENNEDY'S MOTORCADE ON ELM
STREET IN DALLAS, TEXAS. AND THAT ONE GUNMAN LATER SHOT AND KILLED
POLICE OFFICER J.D. TIPPIT IN OAK CLIFF. AND THAT SAME ONE GUNMAN,
JUST 35 MINUTES AFTER KILLING TIPPIT, WAS THEN APPREHENDED IN A MOVIE
THEATER AS HE TRIED TO KILL MORE POLICEMEN WITH THE SAME GUN HE USED
ON OFFICER TIPPIT.

In 47 years, nobody has produced a single solitary piece of physical
evidence to support their make-believe multi-gun conspiracies in the
JFK assassination. And they never will produce any physical evidence
to support their theories, because no such evidence exists--nor did it
ever exist in the first place except in the imaginations of
conspiracists who have a kooky desire to change history and accuse
dozens and dozens of innocent people of being liars, frauds, and
"cover-up" agents for the United States Government.

As another student of the JFK assassination case once said (and it's
oh so true):

It was either Lee Harvey Oswald alone, or many, many people attempting
to make it LOOK like Lee Harvey Oswald alone.

I ask -- which of the two above choices is the most reasonable?

THE JFK ASSASSINATION--AS IT HAPPENED:

http://YouTube-Playlists.blogspot.com

http://JFK-Assassination-As-It-Happened.blogspot.com

aeffects

unread,

Jan 3, 2011, 7:13:49 PM1/3/11

to

On Jan 3, 1:57 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
<snip Von Pein's lunacy>
you've got 75,000 posts to various internet USENET boards and
forums... and you STILL don't understand the WCR....
keep coming back Studley.... ROTFLMFAO! ! ! !

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 3, 2011, 8:10:17 PM1/3/11

to

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 5, 2011, 1:28:33 AM1/5/11

to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/985bd4d12f15226a/65111eda07d61d0e?#65111eda07d61d0e

ANTHONY MARSH SAID:

>>> "Try actually watching and listening to the As it Happened TV coverage from that day. Several commentators said that it was obvious[ly] a conspiracy, even before they knew that Tippit was killed." <<<

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Some commentators gave their OPINION about it being a conspiracy, yes.
But, so what? Those people were merely expressing a wholly unproven
opinion about the events in Dallas.

And in some cases, it was a completely irresponsible opinion that was
being put forth on live TV and radio on 11/22 -- for example: when ABC
executive James Hagerty went on live television within hours of JFK's
death and announced to the world that the assassination simply "had to
be a well-planned conspiracy" [paraphrasing].

Hogwash. Hagerty knew NOTHING of a concrete or firm nature that would
have justified him making such a silly and unwarranted announcement to
the world on live television on the afternoon of November 22nd.

And then there was Mayor Earle Cabell's ridiculous statement on live
TV, in which he said that practically the whole country should share
in the shame and disgrace of the President's murder.

Cabell wasn't talking about a "conspiracy", but his statement was
still unwarranted and irresponsible (IMO). He was suggesting that
somehow EVERY citizen in the USA should take part of the blame for
driving the assassin to the evil act that was committed in Dallas.
That's just plain silly, and Cabell should have been scorned because
of such an outlandish statement. (Was he scorned? I don't know.)

In any event, my main point brought up in my thread-starting post is
still as valid and 100% correct as ever -- i.e., when watching or
listening to the original 11/22/63 TV and radio coverage, you will not
find even a hint of the kind of massive multiple-shooter assassination
plot that many conspiracy theorists advocate.

And you're certainly not going to find a single original news report
that comes even close to the number of gunshots that many CTers also
believe in -- such as Oliver Stone's six shots, Bob Groden's 8 to 12
shots, or Don Adams' 11 shots.

And the reason you won't hear any such "6-to-12 shot" reports is
because there simply weren't nearly that many shots fired in Dealey
Plaza. It's as simple as that.

http://JFK-Assassination-As-It-Happened.blogspot.com

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 6, 2011, 11:03:27 AM1/6/11

to

http://Amazon.com/Bugliosi-misrepresents-the-medical-evidence/forum/Fx2TVHW5I0UEY9A/Tx2UO07S5P4XQFJ/6/ref=cm_cd_et_md_pl?_encoding=UTF8&cdMsgNo=128&asin=0393045250&cdSort=oldest&cdMsgID=Mx3CXWMZ1B6KXBH#Mx3CXWMZ1B6KXBH

>>> "Who's the Kook?" <<<

You are, Mr. Charlie Ochelli. That's quite obvious.

You and all other conspiracists don't have the slightest idea how to
evaluate evidence properly (and reasonably).

A good example being the way you talk about Oswald demanding a lawyer
and yet (says you) the DPD refused to provide him with one.

That's a crock of nonsense and you know it. Oswald told Mr. Nichols on
Saturday, 11/23 that he didn't even want a lawyer at that time. (I
suppose H. Louis Nichols was a liar too, huh Charlie?)

Nichols' live news conference on Nov. 23 is all anyone needs to hear
to properly evaluate the "Oswald Wants A Lawyer" question.

Yes, Oswald did say on live TV that he wanted a lawyer. But obviously
he was just begging for a little bit of pity at that time (or he was
playing one of his mind games with the authorities, like he was known
to do, such as when he toyed with them about the backyard photos being
faked).

If Oswald truly was desperate for legal counsel, he would have jumped
at Nichols' offer, instead of just brushing him aside.

It's a shame that more people can't (or simply refuse) to step back
from their conspiracy-tinged abyss long enough to properly evaluate
the totality of evidence in the JFK/Tippit case. But they never will
do that--and that's because people like Oliver Stone and Jim Douglass
and Charles Ochelli WANT a conspiracy to exist in this case. And even
though they have zero pieces of physical evidence to back up their
theories, they will continue their hunt for chaff from now till the
year 2525. Because that's what they do best--promote fantasies, sans
any non-Oswald bullets (or rifles).

And btw, I never once "attacked" Mr. Remington's "Biting The Elephant"
book on this Amazon site. Don't believe everything a kook named
DiEugenio tells you. He's wrong about almost everything. He actually
thinks Buell Frazier and Linnie Randle just made up their stories
about the paper bag. That's how delusional some of these nuts have
gotten over the years.

But, of course, it doesn't matter how many innocent people a person
like Jimbo D. has to call liars or cover-up operatives. The more, the
merrier in the conspiracy fantasy world. And, incredibly, he actually
gets more CTers to jump on his bandwagon of buffoonery.

Rob Caprio

unread,

Jan 6, 2011, 11:22:28 AM1/6/11

to

Now I see why Dave has no time to interact with others as he is busy
talking with himself!

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 6, 2011, 11:31:45 AM1/6/11

to

Click the source link from Amazon, Kook Kaprio. Or is that beyond your
capacity?

Rob Caprio

unread,

Jan 6, 2011, 11:44:08 AM1/6/11

to

On Jan 6, 11:31 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> Click the source link from Amazon, Kook Kaprio. Or is that beyond your
> capacity?

Wow! Do you realize this means you are talking with me? Why do you
lurk at the other board and say nothing?

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 6, 2011, 10:21:11 PM1/6/11

to

>>> "Wow! Do you realize this means you are talking with me?" <<<

Yeah, I know. It's creepy.
I think I'll go take a shower now after this slimy experience.

Rob Caprio

unread,

Jan 7, 2011, 10:27:12 AM1/7/11

to

Dave, you avoid me because I routinely kick your ass. You have tried
to best me under many names, but you get the same result each time.

Lurking is what is creepy! Either you have something to say or you
should find something else to do with your time!

chuck ochelli the blind jfk researcher

unread,

Feb 4, 2011, 2:38:18 PM2/4/11

to

On Jan 6, 11:22 am, Rob Caprio <robcap...@netscape.com> wrote:
> Now I see why Dave has no time to interact with others as he is busy
> talking with himself!

I am the in-the-flesh pot that the kettle called black

Not a ct as DVP contends

just know LHO is not guilty based on the known evidence

DVP wants to put the tin foil cap on me cuz I wrote some op-ed peices
calling restraining history and Forrest Gump out in some NY and NJ
papers as well as my little stuff i give away

DAVE has to defend vinny as we know .... and vin has to except it

after all if I spent 20+ years having others write my book "for the
ages" as poorly as vinny allowed I would take help from people who
don't read entire works , and despite being clearly psychologicly
weakened by old age I might even not be able to deal with mild
chalenges from jesse ventura too .

And I know how much the truTV show was wrong DAVE better than you do i
am sure .

He brought it here to make the mud etc ... thicker and contaminated is
all

David Von Pein

unread,

Feb 5, 2011, 12:59:23 AM2/5/11

to

It's difficult to even decipher Charles Ochelli's last horribly
written post of nonsense. But nonsense it still is nonetheless.

(Chuck seems to write better when he's spreading his pro-conspiracy
tripe at Amazon.com. He'll actually use punctuation and proper
capitalization there.)

http://JFK-Archives.blogspot.com
http://YouTube-Playlists.blogspot.com

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

Feb 6, 2011, 1:50:55 AM2/6/11

to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/985bd4d12f15226a/badf9aea157de04c?#badf9aea157de04c

I see that Mr. Charles "Chuck" Ochelli is in a "Let's Attack DVP For A
Few Days At Various Forums" mode.

But I'm enjoying Chuck's February 2011 round of pro-conspiracy and
anti-Bugliosi crappola. Stupid junk like Chuck's always makes me
smile, especially the part where he insinuates that I didn't even read
all of Mr. Bugliosi's outstanding book. [LOL.]

And the part about Bugliosi not doing his own work/research is a howl
too. Naturally, Mr. Ochelli will instantly believe the accusations of
David "It Was Ghostwritten" Lifton as if they were the Gospel.

Maybe he should read the post below before accepting the unfounded and
ridiculous claims made by Lifton in May 2007:

http://JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/ghostwriting.html

In the final (reasonable) analysis, Vincent Bugliosi's "Reclaiming
History" has not been torn to shreds by people like James DiEugenio or
David Lifton or anyone else. And that's because there is rock-solid
evidence within the 2,800+ pages of "Reclaiming History" to illustrate
that every conspiracy theorist's favorite patsy was, instead, a double-
murderer.

And no long-time CTer wants to ever admit to that (double) fact.
Certainly not David Lifton or Jim DiEugenio, who have spent years and
years trying to convince people that a massive conspiracy took place
in Dallas on November 22, 1963.

Conspiracy theorists who think Lee Harvey Oswald was totally innocent
of shooting both President Kennedy and Officer Tippit are attempting
to extinguish a six-alarm fire with a squirt gun.

And that's just exactly what the CTers have done with Vincent Bugliosi
and his book "Reclaiming History". They are trying to make the massive
amount of evidence against Lee Oswald disappear by merely pretending
that ALL of this evidence is phony. And that's a really silly approach
(especially considering the sheer volume of evidence that exists
against Oswald--in TWO separate murders too).

The constant refrain that we always hear (year after year) about every
single piece of evidence against Oswald being faked or manipulated or
planted is just not going to cut it. And it never did cut it.

http://ReclaimingHistory.blogspot.com

http://YouTube-Playlists.blogspot.com

David Von Pein

unread,

Feb 6, 2011, 1:51:22 AM2/6/11

to

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/985bd4d12f15226a/762ddde0acf42836?#762ddde0acf42836

TONY MARSH SAID:

>>> "I've never seen you criticize Bugliosi." <<<

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Then you haven't been paying close enough attention. See my comments
about Chapters 3 and 4 here:

http://ReclaimingHistory.blogspot.com

And scroll about 60% of the way down the following webpage, and look
for the paragraph that begins with these words:

"One mistake made by Bugliosi that DiEugenio could definitely
have raked Vince over the hot coals for is..."

http://JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-12.html

chuck ochelli the blind jfk researcher

unread,

Feb 7, 2011, 5:15:31 PM2/7/11

to

LOL

I was not attacking you.
I have no desire to argue with anyone who is so obviously married to
the official lie that it would be easier to tell a drunk guy at a
party he is with the ugly chick despite a level of intoxication that
causes him to be unaware he has urinated on himself . Pointless

Friendly question ?... Do you think Bugliousi accurately quoted all of
his interview subjects?
Did he publish discredited scientific
data as proof for his thesis?
As the only author credited did he do
all the work himself?
How was a CD-ROM created and edited by
an author who says he does not use a computer?
Is the book agenda driven?
Does he misquote and misrepresent
people living and dead?
Is Vins view of the RFK case so
irrelavent that is is unworthy of space in the 2600 pg tome?

Not even as a logical point of contrast?

I agree that 80% of the conspiracy literature I have been compelled to
examine is garbage.
Problem is even the math the FBI , WC , HSCA , Bugliousi , Posner ,
etc on the side of the official lie fails when vaguely studied thus
causing 80% of what I call the Dulles/Specter storyline to wither when
the sunlight of reality is thrust upon it.

I am not happy with any of this. It is nearly as disgusting as the
puppet that occupies the white house today.

My opinions are my own. developed iby me. I belong to no group or
organisation and take my lead from myself.

So go ahead and attack me based on the true nature of my stance. I am
sure that you are mistaken in your impressions but that does not
hinder your zealous nature clearly displayed in the forums that
tolerate it.

And thanks for letting me know that I can't be understood by you
without keeping my text orderly I will do my best to post in a more
proper format for you.

bigdog

unread,

Feb 7, 2011, 6:02:13 PM2/7/11

to

On Feb 7, 5:15 pm, chuck ochelli the blind jfk researcher

At least you have the decency not to blame someone else for them.