David Von Pein - Child Molester...

[Ben Holmes]

David will continue to run, and all other believers will refuse to admit that David was caught lying here about what I'd stated, so here's a repost:

Coward David admits to molesting children again: "Only a rabid conspiracy believer could possibly manage to transform this description of President Kennedy's head (exit) wound.... "...a large irregular defect of the scalp and skull on the right involving chiefly the parietal bone but extending somewhat into the temporal and occipital regions..." [Warren Report, Page 540] ....into a wound that is ENTIRELY in the occipital region of JFK's head."

What part of "Occipital-Parietal" is *ENTIRELY* in the occipital?

These are simple questions David...

No wonder you keep blatantly lying about what I've stated... and refuse to answer them...

Now, does the Autopsy Report place the wound EVEN PARTIALLY in the back of the head?

(You can run, David - but you can't hide...)

*************************************************************

Now, I'll make a challenge to ALL BELIEVERS & TROLLS... either *QUOTE* where I stated that the wound was "ENTIRELY" in the occipital, or STATE PUBLICLY THAT DAVID VON PEIN LIED ABOUT WHAT I'VE STATED.

If any believer or troll can do that - I will never again accuse anyone of child molestation.

It's up to you.

[conantheco...@gmail.com]

The simple way to clear up your problem would be to describe the sequence of the shooting.

[Ben Holmes]

> The simple way to clear up your problem would be to describe
> the sequence of the shooting.

Your suggestion DOESN'T EVEN ADDRESS the problem.

The problem is believers who blatantly LIE about what I've stated.

Now how do you propose to fix that?

[conantheco...@gmail.com]

Sure it would. Describe the origin or origins of each shot and indicate the nature of the wounds from each of the shots. Problem solved.

[Ben Holmes]

On Tuesday, May 9, 2017 at 9:14:05 AM UTC-7, conantheco...@gmail.com wrote:

> Sure it would. Describe the origin or origins of each shot
> and indicate the nature of the wounds from each of the shots.
> Problem solved.

I can understand why you don't quote what you're responding to.

It proves you a liar.

The *PROBLEM* is believers who blatantly LIE about what I've stated... how does anything *MORE* that I state fix what dishonest believers do?

Run coward... RUN!!!

[conantheco...@gmail.com]

There is no requirement to repost the previous post. Too bad you won't list your shooting scenario for all to see. I had no problem doing just that. Why all of these cowardly stalling tactics, Ben Holmes? Do you have trouble remembering what you said?

[Ben Holmes]

Of *course* you don't want the previous post that you're allegedly answering reposted.

You've lied.

The previous post PROVES that you lied.

And if you're claiming to have given your shooting scenario, then you're a liar again...

I DEFY you to quote & cite it.

[BT George]

On Tuesday, May 9, 2017 at 11:57:05 AM UTC-5, conantheco...@gmail.com wrote:
> There is no requirement to repost the previous post. Too bad you won't list your shooting scenario for all to see. I had no problem doing just that. Why all of these cowardly stalling tactics, Ben Holmes? Do you have trouble remembering what you said?

It's called developmental challenges. ...Or else it's just that he's lying *again*, who knows *better* than to try. Why see how good a job he did here:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.assassination.jfk/EBdwYmtoWS0/OQUm2-6vR_cJ

You'll have to pardon the length of the exchange. Ben needs *lots* of wiggle room and that requires *lots* of space. :-)

[conantheco...@gmail.com]

Nice work, BT George. I applaud the call for rational discourse. You and I do not agree on most things related to the JFK assassination, but at least we agree about people who operate like Ben Holmes, Ed Cage, and Bob Harris.

[Ben Holmes]

I see "BT George" is also a coward...

[Ben Holmes]

On Tuesday, May 9, 2017 at 1:21:09 PM UTC-7, conantheco...@gmail.com wrote:
> Nice work, BT George. I applaud the call for rational discourse. You and I do not agree on most things related to the JFK assassination, but at least we agree about people who operate like Ben Holmes, Ed Cage, and Bob Harris.

Of *course* believers agree with other believers...

[BT George]

...Duhhhh! Of course *LN's* agree with other *LN's*on most issues!

...But sometimes we can also agree with *rational* CT's who are not part of the wholesale evidence-dismissing ABO crowd too.

[conantheco...@gmail.com]

And if Ben Holmes agrees with me that Harry Holmes might have been part of HTLINGUAL then wouldn't make him an LN if we use his "logic?"

[Ben Holmes]

On Tuesday, May 9, 2017 at 2:33:38 PM UTC-7, BT George wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 9, 2017 at 4:02:15 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > On Tuesday, May 9, 2017 at 1:21:09 PM UTC-7, conantheco...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > Nice work, BT George. I applaud the call for rational discourse. You and I do not agree on most things related to the JFK assassination, but at least we agree about people who operate like Ben Holmes, Ed Cage, and Bob Harris.
> >
> > Of *course* believers agree with other believers...
>
> ...Duhhhh! Of course *LN's* agree with other *LN's*on most issues!

This fails to explain why believers will never correct another believer EVEN WHEN IT'S CRYSTAL CLEAR THAT THEY ARE DEAD WRONG.

[Ben Holmes]

On Tuesday, May 9, 2017 at 3:08:31 PM UTC-7, conantheco...@gmail.com wrote:
> And if Ben Holmes agrees with me that Harry Holmes might have been part of HTLINGUAL then wouldn't make him an LN if we use his "logic?"

No, that merely makes a believer partially honest on one small point.

[conantheco...@gmail.com]

What LN would say that the WC was a whitewash, that the SBT is wrong, and that Harry Holmes could have been part of HTLINGUAL?

Answer: None. Not one LN would say this and I have said all of these things in this forum.

Why are you so weak that you won't say how or what part of the Zapruder Film was altered. You aren't even willing to give an opinion on the elapsed time between Z-132 and Z-133.

Why not? Your CT credentials are sorely lacking in content. This should be a red flag to all of the lurkers.

[Ben Holmes]

On Tuesday, May 9, 2017 at 11:37:18 PM UTC-7, conantheco...@gmail.com wrote:
> What LN would say that the WC was a whitewash,

None of them... the WCR is their bible.

>that the SBT is wrong,

Some of them. Indeed, some of the Warren Commissioners didn't accept the SBT as given by the Commission.

Here's a partial transcript of Commissioner Russell:

Senator Richard Russell: “No, no. They’re trying to prove that the same bullet that hit Kennedy first was the one that hit Connally, went through him and through his hand, his bone, and into his leg…I couldn’t hear all the evidence and cross-examine all of ‘em. But I did read the record…I was the only fellow there that…suggested any change whatever in what the staff got up. This staff business always scares me. I like to put my own views down. But we got you a pretty good report.”

President Lyndon Johnson: Well, what difference does it make which bullet got Connally?

Senator Richard Russell: Well, it don’t make much difference. But they said that…the commission believes that the same bullet that hit Kennedy hit Connally. Well, I don’t believe it.

President Lyndon Johnson: I don’t either.

Senator Richard Russell: And so I couldn’t sign it. And I said that Governor Connally testified directly to the contrary and I’m not gonna approve of that. So I finally made ‘em say there was a difference in the commission, in that part of ‘em believed that that wasn’t so. And, course if a fellow was accurate enough to hit Kennedy right in the neck on one shot and knock his head off in the next one—and he’s leaning up against his wife’s head—and not even wound her—why he didn’t miss completely with that third shot. But according to their theory, he not only missed the whole auto mobile, but he missed the street! Well, a man that’s a good enough shot to put two bullets right into Kennedy, he didn’t miss that whole automobile.”

Of course, Russell didn't understand that to deny the SBT was the same as stating that there was a conspiracy. But he clearly understood that the Commission was wrong on the SBT.

> and that Harry Holmes could have been part of HTLINGUAL?

Any of them who are at least somewhat honest.

> Answer: None. Not one LN would say this and I have said all of these things in this forum.

Not accurate, as I've shown above.

> Why are you so weak that you won't say how or what part of the Zapruder Film was altered. You aren't even willing to give an opinion on the elapsed time between Z-132 and Z-133.

It's really simple - you, and other believers - won't accept anything I say. So I force *YOU* to say it. Then you have to accept it.

There's *NO TIME AT ALL* that I could post that you'd publicly accept, is there?

> Why not? Your CT credentials are sorely lacking in content. This should be a red flag to all of the lurkers.

ROTFLMAO!!! "CT credentials" indeed!

I'm reminded of a statement I once read in a book to the effect that anyone who goes through Marine Corps Boot Camp never again in his life needs to justify his courage or manhood.

I'll equally assert that anyone who's so denigrated and feared by believers never has to justify his "CT credentials"...

Indeed, the fact that John McAdams is afraid to debate shows my "credentials" quite clearly.

The fact that *YOU* refuse to debate shows my "credentials".

[conantheco...@gmail.com]

I have expressed my specific opinions on the subject in numerous instances in this forum. All you have done is give wimpy vague answers every time. You're so pathetic that you have to beg for people to engage your nonsense by making heinous statements like the one made in the subject line of this thread.


If you were a Marine like you claim to have been, you must have been the biggest coward in the Corps. Either that or my opinion of the Corps just plummeted.

[Ben Holmes]

On Wednesday, May 10, 2017 at 8:02:20 AM UTC-7, conantheco...@gmail.com wrote:
> I have expressed my specific opinions on the subject in numerous instances in this forum. All you have done is give wimpy vague answers every time. You're so pathetic that you have to beg for people to engage your nonsense by making heinous statements like the one made in the subject line of this thread.
>
>
> If you were a Marine like you claim to have been, you must have been the biggest coward in the Corps. Either that or my opinion of the Corps just plummeted.

Here's the post you were afraid to answer:

[conantheco...@gmail.com]

Nope.

You split up my response.

You're the chicken shit who chose to sidestep the totality of my statement. No LN would say that the SBT was incorrect, while also saying that Harry Holmes might have been part of the HTLINGUAL program in addition to saying that the WC was a whitewash. No WC defender as you claim me to be would make those combination of statements. Not one....


On the other hand, YOU have only said that the Zapruder Film was altered yet you are reticent to provide any specific example in your own words of what was altered or how it was altered at any point that I have been a part of this forum.

[Ben Holmes]

On Wednesday, May 10, 2017 at 8:22:10 AM UTC-7, conantheco...@gmail.com wrote:
> Nope.
>
> You split up my response.

You're lying again...

I quoted your ENTIRE statement.

Now... publicly agree that Richard Russell is on record as denying the validity of the SBT.

Or run away again... who cares?

[conantheco...@gmail.com]

Nope.

You altered it by addressing them as if they were individual comments unrelated to each other. Sure...Richard Russell said he didn't think the SBT was right and he was adamant about it, but did that make Russell who was highly reluctant to be on the WC in the first place a staunch WC defender?

Not really.

You also fail to mention that most members of the WC WERE NOT GIVEN ALL OF THE PERTINENT INFORMATION on Oswald and many other aspects of the case. Their conclusions were essentially pre-ordained because of political expediency.....at least in my opinion.

Why are you scared to death to give a specific opinion in your own words about the allegedly altered Zapruder Film.

[Ben Holmes]

On Wednesday, May 10, 2017 at 9:54:01 AM UTC-7, conantheco...@gmail.com wrote:
> Nope.
>
> You altered it by addressing them as if they were individual comments unrelated to each other. Sure...Richard Russell said he didn't think the SBT was right and he was adamant about it, but did that make Russell who was highly reluctant to be on the WC in the first place a staunch WC defender?
>
> Not really.

ROTFLMAO!!!

Now you're claiming that Richard Russell wasn't a LN!!!

*THAT IS THE TOPIC*!!!

What a moron!!!

The depths liars will go to avoid admitting any error is truly amusing!

[David Von Pein]

Re: The SBT....

No reasonable person who knows the JFK evidence in any kind of detail at all (and who has the ability to gaze upon CE903 and the Zapruder Film) can possibly conclude, as almost all CTers do, that "The SINGLE-BULLET THEORY IS A FAIRY TALE".

It's just not possible to utter that above statement and still be considered a "reasonable" individual. Because, given all the evidence and angles, the SBT is so obviously the only way the double-man wounding of JFK & JBC could have occurred on Elm Street on 11/22/63. There just is no escaping that FACT. (IMO.)

http://Single-Bullet-Theory.blogspot.com

[conantheco...@gmail.com]

David Von Pein

The SBT is not accurate in my opinion. However, I do believe that one bullet did indeed enter JFK's back and eventually exit Connally's chest. I also think that a portion of the bullet that passed through JFK's head also struck Connolly's wrist and possibly left thigh as well. I also obviously believe that all of the shots came from behind the limo.

[David Von Pein]

On Wednesday, May 10, 2017 at 4:16:35 PM UTC-4, conantheco...@gmail.com wrote:
> David Von Pein
>
> The SBT is not accurate in my opinion. However, I do believe that one bullet did indeed enter JFK's back and eventually exit Connally's chest. I also think that a portion of the bullet that passed through JFK's head also struck Connolly's wrist and possibly left thigh as well. I also obviously believe that all of the shots came from behind the limo.

Then what happened to the bullet after it left Connally's chest? Keep in mind, by the time it exited Connally's chest, it had certainly INCREASED its downward trajectory (from 17+ degrees downward when it exited Oswald's rifle to a steeper downward angle of about 25 degrees when it coursed through Connally's chest along the ribcage).

So that means the bullet, per your anti-SBT scenario, would have somehow missed Connally's wrist and missed everything else in the car, even though that bullet is heading DOWNWARD into the car at a steeper angle (~25 degrees) than when it started.

Where did the bullet go? How could it NOT have hit the car or some other part of Governor Connally at that angle of about 25 degrees?

[David Von Pein]

Plus, Conan, how do you account for CE399 on Connally's stretcher if, as you believe, NO WHOLE BULLET really fell out of Connally's thigh at all?

Per your theory, there should be no "CE399" at all.

The SBT explains ALL of those things. And that's one of the reasons why the SBT is the truth. There are no "loose ends" at all. Your anti-SBT theory has a bunch of loose ends.

[Ben Holmes]

On Wednesday, May 10, 2017 at 1:55:53 PM UTC-7, David Von Pein wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 10, 2017 at 4:16:35 PM UTC-4, conantheco...@gmail.com wrote:
> > David Von Pein
> >
> > The SBT is not accurate in my opinion. However, I do believe that one bullet did indeed enter JFK's back and eventually exit Connally's chest. I also think that a portion of the bullet that passed through JFK's head also struck Connolly's wrist and possibly left thigh as well. I also obviously believe that all of the shots came from behind the limo.
>
> Then what happened to the bullet after it left Connally's chest?

Struck somewhere inside the car, most likely - assuming it had been shot from a higher floor.

> Keep in mind, by the time it exited Connally's chest, it had certainly INCREASED its downward trajectory (from 17+ degrees downward when it exited Oswald's rifle to a steeper downward angle of about 25 degrees when it coursed through Connally's chest along the ribcage).

No, that's merely speculation on your part.

You're *PRESUMING* what you cannot prove.

> So that means the bullet, per your anti-SBT scenario, would have somehow missed Connally's wrist

It certainly did.

Since the bullet that struck Connally's wrist entered the OUTSIDE of his wrist, it's a virtual certainty that it had nothing to do with the bullet that struck Connally's chest.

Believers simply refuse to address this issue.

> and missed everything else in the car, even though that bullet is heading DOWNWARD into the car at a steeper angle (~25 degrees) than when it started.

Two more presumptions on your part.

> Where did the bullet go? How could it NOT have hit the car or some other part of Governor Connally at that angle of about 25 degrees?

It probably *DID* hit the limo.

You're pretending that absence of evidence is evidence of absence.

Henry Sienzant would be ashamed of you...

[Ben Holmes]

On Wednesday, May 10, 2017 at 2:02:04 PM UTC-7, David Von Pein wrote:
> Plus, Conan, how do you account for CE399 on Connally's stretcher if,
> as you believe, NO WHOLE BULLET really fell out of Connally's thigh
> at all?

You make a presumption, then you draw conclusions from those
speculative presumptions.

But it's easy to actually *LOOK* at the evidence, and realize that
what it really supports is a different bullet being found on a
different stretcher.

> Per your theory, there should be no "CE399" at all.

Start with nonsense, end up with nonsense...

> The SBT explains ALL of those things. And that's one of the reasons
> why the SBT is the truth. There are no "loose ends" at all. Your
> anti-SBT theory has a bunch of loose ends.

The *NON* SBT also explains everything. And indeed, it explains
evidence that cannot be explained by the SBT.

Such as the location of the entry wound at T-3/4.

The complete lack of any evidence for transit.

The differing angles of entry.

The eyewitness testimony describing a different shot hitting Connally.

The timing of the extant Z-film - showing Connally reacting to shots
AFTER JFK was shown reacting. (The so-called "Delayed Reaction")

The witness testimony showing shots from more than one direction.

[conantheco...@gmail.com]

Ben Holmes

Autopsy photos confirm that any claim that the entry wound on JFK's back in the vicinity of the 3rd or 4th thoracic vertebra is entirely inaccurate and ridiculous for several reasons These photos ALSO conclusively prove that the stated "base of the neck" entry point from the Warren Report is inaccurate as well. In my opinion, the entry wound on JFK's back is less than 2 inches to the right of the spine at a level just below the main body of the 1st thoracic vertebra.


David Von Pein

The other possibility is that CE-399 did indeed strike Connally on his leg (backwards by necessity) creating a superficial wound while also leaving material behind, but certainly NOT after passing through Connally's wrist. The bullet would show more damage even with Sturdivan's adjusted numbers that were conveniently different from his HSCA testimony. Have you ever noticed that he never mentions what damage would happen to a bullet that struck cortical bone (like that of the wrist) while travelling anywhere between 700 and 1700 fps? I wonder why that is?

If you assume the official SBT is accurate then CE-399 would have been inside Connalys pant leg while on the gurney when it happened to fall out. Is that what you believe as well?

The clear advantage to my theory (Realistic Bullet Theory aka RBT) that TWO bullets passed through JFK and then struck Connally is that it actually makes the lack of damage to CE-399 far more plausible and drowns out the understandable (but misguided) belief of many that the bullet was not genuine evidence.

I am still at a loss why some LNs object to my alternate theory when it states that all of the shots come from behind the limo and also allows for the possibility of a single shooter while giving a better explanation for the lack of damage to CE-399.

If you follow Sturdivan's testimony to the HSCA he essentially says that CE-399 struck Connally's ribs while traveling at a velocity of roughly 1800 fps. He also states that the bullet that struck JFK's occipital bone on the back of his head (which is significantly less dense than the ulna or radius or even the ribs) was travelling at a velocity roughly 1900 fps and came apart even though it obviously arrived at the head tip first.

Doesn't that disparity of what happened in the official narrative to those 2 bullets despite the fact that that they struck bone at speeds that were only roughly 100 fps apart bother you at all? The only solution is that Sturdivan's numbers are wrong (both sets) and that something different from the official narrative occurred.

[Ben Holmes]

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 10:32:19 AM UTC-7, conantheco...@gmail.com wrote:
> Ben Holmes
>
> Autopsy photos confirm that any claim that the entry wound on JFK's back in the vicinity of the 3rd or 4th thoracic vertebra is entirely inaccurate and ridiculous for several reasons

You're lying again, "Conan"...

[David Von Pein]

Conan,

No, it doesn't "bother" me, because CE399 was obviously tumbling greatly when it did the damage inside Connally's chest, severely slowing down (and flattening) the bullet as it did so, while the bullet that hit JFK's head struck the skull straight-on (nose first). Obviously that bullet would sustain much more damage than 399 did. And it did. (Mr. Sturdivan's speed estimates notwithstanding.)

[Ben Holmes]

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 1:29:36 PM UTC-7, David Von Pein wrote:
> Conan,
>

> No, it doesn't "bother" me...

It bothers other people... child molestation is a serious crime.

By the way, since you don't object to "Bud" slicing up a paragraph to change the meaning, I'm sure you won't object to me doing it as well.

[conantheco...@gmail.com]

David Von Pein

You have two problems then. If the bullet was tumbling through Connally's torso then not only would CE-399 have had more damgage to it as the sides of a bullet are weaker than the tip, but it would also decelerate at a much faster rate than a bullet passing through point first. Sturdivan's testimony alleges that CE-399 would have lost only 400 fps by passing through Connally's torso. If so, than it would have hit Connally's wrist at roughly 1400 fps which should have caused significant damage at that speed and even Studivan's altered number in his book essentially makes that contradictory statement. Keep in mind also that after CE-399 passed through the back of Connally's coat, skin, and minimal muscle layers on right side of his back the very next thing the bullet struck was the 5th rib.....allegedly at roughly 1800 according to Sturdivan's testimony. He also makes it very clear in his book that the side of a bulletis significantly weaker than the tip when striking a hard surface. So do you still want to claim that you have no problem with this? You really should have a problem.

I also noticed that you passed over some of my other reasonable questions. Why would an LN be against the RBT (Realistic Bullet Theory) if it eliminates the problem of the lack of greater damage to CE-399 while maintaining that all shots came from behind and easily from a single shooter? Are some LNs so committed to the idea that Oswald did it that the only way for it to be true is if the SBT is accurate? Why paint yourself into a corner like that?

[David Von Pein]

Conan,

Don't you think that the 2004 Australian documentary ("JFK: Beyond The Magic Bullet") pretty much proved that a bullet COULD do essentially everything that CE399 did and remain in pretty good shape? (The test bullet definitely was MORE damaged than 399, but it took a similar course through TWO mock torsos and ended up in one piece, with its nose still round.)

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/jfk-beyond-magic-bullet.html

[Ben Holmes]

David Von Pein... Coward Extraordinaire...

[conantheco...@gmail.com]

David Von Pein

I don't believe that "Beyond the Magic Bullet" did a good job proving the SBT especially since the bullet did not appear to exit JFK's throat on its way to hitting Connally. If you notice, they never show a closeup of the resultong damage to the front of the Kennedy torso. Their bullet was significantly more damaged than CE-399 and I have to wonder how many more test shots were done prior to filming that didn't give them the results they wanted. Only having a short time to shoot after the cellophane was removed because the material would melt or harden is a bit troubling for me as well if you want to consider consistency of the material being shot through. If you add the Chad Zimmerman section of this "documentary" where the voice over claims that Chad Zimmerman can "pinpoint" the location of the entry wound to JFK's back based on the hole in the jacket then we have an even bigger howler!!! If you cannot confirm how far the jacket bunched up JFK'S back then you cannot confirm the location of the back wound with an x-ray. That is absolutely stupid and stupid CTs try to do the same thing with equally bad logic. It would have been far intelligent to tape a marker 14 cm down from the tip of the mastoid process directly to the skin and then taken an x-ray to better determine the location of the wound as it relates to the spine. Why the producers of that propagandistic program didn't consider that, I will never know.

Very, very dumb!!

[Ben Holmes]

Any doctor who can't palpate the spine to give an accurate description
isn't much of a doctor.

Any doctor who gives a location on the back the way Dr. Humes did is
trying to hide something.

If you think it would have been "far [more] intelligent" to determine
the location by "taping a marker 14 cm down from the tip of the
mastoid process" then you really don't understand this case at all.

There's only three pieces of information needed to locate any wound on
the back... left or right, vertically by vertebrae, and distance from
the center of the spine.

The mastoid process has *NOTHING* to do with this...

[conantheco...@gmail.com]

Ben Holmes

Of course the the landmarks used for the descriptions of the wounds were very poor choices. However, if you manage to look at the autopsy photo at the dividing lines for the metric scale are clearly marked ascentimeters and the back wound absolutely appears to be 14 centimeters from the mastoid process....at least in that photo. All you have to have to figure that out is a really good resolution photo to do some basic photogrammetry work. Obviously basing the wound location relative to a point on the spine would have been a much better choice.

[David Von Pein]

Conan,

In your opinion, what is causing John Connally's rapid right arm movement in frame 226 of the Zapruder Film? You don't think Connally's right wrist has been hit by a bullet at this time (Z226), but you DO think that SAME right arm (wrist) IS going to get hit by a bullet fragment in about 5 seconds from that point in time.

Just a funny "right arm" coincidence here? ....

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-pqHV1ZHUal0/WRo7Bc8dH6I/AAAAAAABL0I/3gbqoFJwHNcLEdSUbfxa898LwU5wdhVRACLcB/s1600/Z225-Z226.gif

The SBT stands tall and erect. And the Z225-Z226 looped image above is just one of the many reasons to know the SBT is true.

[David Von Pein]

Addendum....

And please take note of KENNEDY'S right arm moving upward (toward his wounded throat) at the EXACT same instant at Z226. Another amazing "SBT"-like coincidence, Conan?

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-pqHV1ZHUal0/WRo7Bc8dH6I/AAAAAAABL0I/3gbqoFJwHNcLEdSUbfxa898LwU5wdhVRACLcB/s1600/Z225-Z226.gif

[Ben Holmes]

You failed to address what I stated.

I can understand why you're terrified to quote what you're
"answering"... since it makes it clear that you've run from the points
raised like cowards often do.

No need to answer this - since you'll only snip the response and run
from it.

[David Von Pein]

"CONAN" SAID:

If you assume the official SBT is accurate[,] then CE-399 would have been inside Connalys pant leg while on the gurney when it happened to fall out. Is that what you believe as well?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Oh, yes. I certainly do believe that -- just as I said here....

http://single-bullet-theory.blogspot.com/#From-Pants-To-Stretcher

[Ben Holmes]

This is simply another example of the sillyness believed by
believers...

Here's the original post again, the one that David is TERRIFIED to
answer:

David will continue to run, and all other believers will refuse to
admit that David was caught lying here about what I'd stated, so
here's a repost:

Coward David admits to molesting children again: "Only a rabid
conspiracy believer could possibly manage to transform this
description of President Kennedy's head (exit) wound.... "...a large
irregular defect of the scalp and skull on the right involving chiefly
the parietal bone but extending somewhat into the temporal and
occipital regions..." [Warren Report, Page 540] ....into a wound that
is ENTIRELY in the occipital region of JFK's head."

What part of "Occipital-Parietal" is *ENTIRELY* in the occipital?

These are simple questions David...

No wonder you keep blatantly lying about what I've stated... and
refuse to answer them...

Now, does the Autopsy Report place the wound EVEN PARTIALLY in the
back of the head?

(You can run, David - but you can't hide...)

*************************************************************

Now, I'll make a challenge to ALL BELIEVERS & TROLLS... either *QUOTE*
where I stated that the wound was "ENTIRELY" in the occipital, or
STATE PUBLICLY THAT DAVID VON PEIN LIED ABOUT WHAT I'VE STATED.

If any believer or troll can do that - I will never again accuse
anyone of child molestation.

It's up to you.

(I'm guessing that David doesn't mind being pointed out as a child
molester...)

[conantheco...@gmail.com]

David Von Pein

Of course I believe that a bullet transversed the upper torsos of JFK and Connally at roughly Z-223 or so. I just don't believe that Connally was struck in the wrist at that point and Connally's hand movement seems to indicate that the wrist was slightly out of the trajectory. That does not appear to be the case after Z-313 as his hand appears to have been driven foreward.

I appreciate your reasonable responses (unlike the bullshit spewing from the mouths of assholes like Ben Holmes) and the attempts to convince me of your belief, but you are ignoring some rather important questions about the SBT along the way. I would prefer it if you would try to respond to them.

[Ben Holmes]

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 10:30:20 PM UTC-7, conantheco...@gmail.com wrote:
> David Von Pein

And, since this is a public forum, anyone else as well...

> Of course I believe that a bullet transversed the upper torsos of
> JFK and Connally at roughly Z-223 or so.

This firmly puts you in the ranks of believers - as I stated RIGHT FROM THE BEGINNING.

I can smell a believer from miles away... they have the EXACT SAME TACTICS as believers do - they refuse to answer questions, they don't like citations, and they're TERRIFIED of debate with a knowledgeable critic.

> I just don't believe that Connally was struck in the wrist at that
> point and Connally's hand movement seems to indicate that the wrist
> was slightly out of the trajectory. That does not appear to be the
> case after Z-313 as his hand appears to have been driven foreward.

Not a *hint* of the fact that the entry of the bullet was on the BACK OF THE WRIST. Making it almost *IMPOSSIBLE* to have been the mythical SBT bullet.

> I appreciate your reasonable responses (unlike the bullshit spewing
> from the mouths of assholes like Ben Holmes)

Yep... you lost.

The moment you employ ad hominem instead of evidential & logical argument, you've admitted that you can't.

You *can't* utilize the evidence to make your case... which is why you run from every single question I raise.

EVERY SINGLE ONE!!!

That makes you a coward... and, being a description of your actions, it's not an ad hominem attack, but merely an accurate description.

> and the attempts to convince me of your belief, but you are ignoring
> some rather important questions about the SBT along the way. I would
> prefer it if you would try to respond to them.

No, that's silly... believers don't try to convince others of their beliefs... if they did, THEY'D HAVE TO ADDRESS THE REASONABLE QUESTIONS THAT I RAISE ON THE JFK CASE.

Questions such as:

Why was the closest police eyewitness to the murder - who just coincidentally would have testified in contradiction to the SBT, never questioned by the FBI or Warren Commission prior to the release of the WCR?

Why were the NAA results buried by the WC?

Why were the test results of firing a rifle at Oak Ridge buried, and are still denied by most LNT'ers today?

Why was a ballistics expert hired by the WC fired when he refused to endorse their theory?

Why did the FBI engage in a pattern of eyewitness intimidation to get the statements they wanted?

What is the 6.5mm virtually round object that no-one saw in the AP X-ray on the night of the Autopsy... and why was everyone so blind on the night of the autopsy?

How can a bullet transit without breaking the spine, as has been conclusively demonstrated with CAT scans?

Why was dissection of the bullet track, and neck wound, forbidden to the prosectors? Why were they allowed to dissect the chest incisions, which were clearly *not* bullet wounds, but not allowed to dissect the bullet wounds?

Why have photographs and X-rays disappeared out of the inventory? Only the government had control of them...

Why did the CIA have a program of harassment of CT authors, and why did they actively promote the WCR through their friendly news contacts?

Why did the Secret Service remove the limo from the jurisdiction of the DPD? Perhaps an argument can be made for removing JFK's body - as Johnson needed Jackie with him to provide an aura of legitimacy, but there was *NO* valid reason to remove the scene of the crime from Dallas - or was there? Can you provide it?

Why is there no 'chain of evidence' on so much of the evidence in this case? CE399, for example, almost no-one who originally handled it will identify it.

Why did the FBI seem so insistent on erasing the record of a Minox camera owned by LHO? Why were military intelligence files on LHO never released... even to government investigators?

Why did both the WC and HSCA find it necessary to *LIE* about their own collected evidence in order to support their conclusions? In the case of the HSCA, it's not even disputable - they lied blatantly about the medical testimony... why??

Why have so many *new* "scientific" theories been developed for this case? Never before heard - such as the "jet effect" and "eyewitness unreliability" and "photographs trump eyewitnesses"?

Why does Altgens show Chaney in a position that he's *never* seen in the extant Z-film?

Why do *dozen's* of eyewitnesses agree on a slowdown or stop of the limo, yet we can't see it in the Z-film?

Why do *dozens* of eyewitnesses agree with each other on the location of the large wound on the back of JFK's head, in contradiction to the BOH photo?

Why does the Autopsy Report contradict the BOH photo?

When and where did Chaney speak with Curry? Why don't any photos or videos show this?

[David Von Pein]

Thank you, Conan. I appreciate your efforts....and your theory isn't TOO far away from what actually happened (obligatory "IMO"). But I think the thing that sinks your theory is the two-frame GIF I provided earlier---the Z225-226 clip, which positively shows Kennedy & Connally lifting their right arms in unison and harmony at the precise same instant in Z-Film time (Z226). That's pretty powerful, IMO. And it shows that a part of John Connally's body which we know WAS injured by a bullet on November 22nd---his RIGHT ARM/WRIST---IS moving around in what appears (to me) to be an "involuntary" and uncontrolled manner.

You may disagree with me about the "involuntary" and "uncontrolled" assessment, but, in my opinion, everything we see happening to John Connally between frames 224 and about 229 of the Zapruder Film are things that indicate he is involuntarily reacting to an external stimulus -- i.e., Oswald's CE399 Carcano bullet, which has just struck the Governor in the upper right part of his back at circa Z224.

And included in that "everything" is the raising of Connally's right arm at Z226, which (to me) is indicating the bullet has struck his right wrist by that time, thus debunking your theory about Connally's wrist being hit by a bullet fragment after Z313.

[conantheco...@gmail.com]

David Von Pein

I never claimed that Connally's arm movement at Z-226 wasn't involuntary. The visible elevation of Connally's wrist at roughly Z-226 does not convince me that his wrist was struck at that moment. After all, Kennedy is also elevating his wrist after being shot in the extreme upper torso as well. That pretty much sinks your belief that Connally's wrist was hit at that moment which also derails the SBT. If that was your final argument for the SBT, then you should probably jump on the RBT train because it really does make more sense....in my opinion.

[David Von Pein]

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 2:36:05 PM UTC-4, conantheco...@gmail.com wrote:
> David Von Pein
>
> I never claimed that Connally's arm movement at Z-226 wasn't involuntary. The visible elevation of Connally's wrist at roughly Z-226 does not convince me that his wrist was struck at that moment. After all, Kennedy is also elevating his wrist after being shot in the extreme upper torso as well. That pretty much sinks your belief that Connally's wrist was hit at that moment which also derails the SBT. If that was your final argument for the SBT, then you should probably jump on the RBT train because it really does make more sense....in my opinion.

I'm not saying Connally's wrist was hit AT Z226. His wrist was struck two frames earlier (maybe three), at circa Z224. But there has to be at least one to three frames reaction time, which is perfectly compatible with Connally's arm movement. He was hit at Z224. His wrist reacted at Z226.

But, IMO, it's just too much of a coincidence to think his right arm/wrist just happens to fly up (involuntarily) at Z226, and yet, per your theory, THAT SAME WRIST has not yet been injured at all by a bullet. That scenario would, indeed, be remarkable IF your theory were true and JBC wasn't hit in his wrist until about Z313.

That type of incredible "SBT"-like coincidence is something that I have argued with many CTers about over the years too --- with the CTers believing that all of the various things going on with Connally right after Z224 (shrugging, grimacing, flinching, lapel movement, tie dance, mouth opens, and arm raising) are NOT the result of any bullet hitting him. Those things are either totally ignored by CTers or the CTer tries to explain away Connally's movements in utterly absurd and unbelievable ways. Such as this cuckoo explanation tossed my way by James Gordon of The Education Forum a couple years back....

"I agree in your clip the right arm/shoulder [of John Connally] does indeed appear to move. But that change is not on frame 224 — therefore it has to be some kind of distortion on the film. .... Between 224 and 230 John Connally is turning his body to his left. What allows you to think that Connally has been injured in these frames is: a) that 20º turn between 224 and 225 [and] b) the total blurred distortion in frames 226 - 228. That is why it is being suggested that Connally has been wounded, when actually Connally is turning to his left. .... Having studied these frames - Z 222 to Z 230 - it is clear that what is happening is that John Connally is turning his body to the left so that by Z 230 he is actually facing forward. These frames in a gif would demonstrate that - were Z 226 and Z 227 and Z 228 not partially or wholly blurred. Unfortunately they are blurred and when incorporated into a gif these same frames throw up extraordinary results. It is these same extraordinary results that allow members like you [DVP] to suggest that these very frames actually suggest that John Connally is reacting to being struck by a bullet when - in fact - he has not been struck." -- James R. Gordon

For the record....

My response to James Gordon's hilarious SBT denial was the following....

"This is hilarious. And absolutely mind-boggling, to boot. The levels of total denial the CTers will rise to in order to ignore the obvious signs of John Connally being in distress in Z225-Z230.

It couldn't be more obvious that Connally's shoulders are shrugging from a flinch starting at Z225, and yet I'm supposed to believe it only looks that way because JBC is turning to his left. Does EVERY "left turn" made by all limo occupants give the false appearance of "shoulder shrugging", James? Get real.

And I guess you still want to ignore Connally's moving tie, eh? Is his tie bulging outward due to his "left turn" too? And the startled look that we can see on his face starting in Z225 too? And the opening of the mouth? Are none of these things enough to give you pause to even consider the possibility that Connally has just been shot and is reacting to that shot in an involuntary manner starting at Z225?

And then there's the hat flip at Z226 too. Are we really to believe that JBC's arm-raising is also NOT indicative of Connally reacting to a bullet---even when we know JBC was struck by a bullet in that very SAME right arm/wrist that's flipping upward ultra-fast at Z226? You're not going to pass off the hat/arm flip as "video distortion" too, are you Jim?" -- DVP

[conantheco...@gmail.com]

David Von Pein

All of your extraneous verbiage about CTs denying that Connally was struck in the torso effectively at the same instant as JFK would make sense if I was saying the same thing. Obviously I am not doing that.

Once again, I believe that a bullet entered JFK's back, exited his throat and went on to strike Connally's torso as well. Why wouldn't Connally elevate his arm in reaction to a bullet leaving his chest? Kennedy did the same and his wrist was not hit.

[David Von Pein]

Okay, Conan. Point taken. I just think the "wrist coincidence" would be quite amazing if your theory is true. Obviously, you don't think it was really much of an amazing "coincidence" at all.

But I will also add this point --- JFK's arm-raising at Z226 was to bring his hands up to very near *A POINT OF PAIN & INJURY* that Kennedy had just sustained in his throat. Connally's arm-raising, OTOH, seems to be totally involuntary and kind of "random". And Connally's right arm goes right back DOWN again as well, unlike Kennedy's rather strange arm movements

Also....

What about Dr. Martin Fackler's 1992 tests with human wrist bones and Carcano bullets? Do you, Conan, find fault with Fackler's perfectly "pristine" bullet that he achieved after doing his wrist experiment in '92? (Fackler's full report available in my post below.)

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2016/06/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1140.html

[conantheco...@gmail.com]

David Von Pein

Tell you what. Since I have addressed multiple concepts and questions related to your position on the SBT, I think it would only be fair if you answered some of my questions that I specifically addressed to you previously on this thread. This way there will still be some good give and take in this conversation. Thanks

[conantheco...@gmail.com]

David Von Pein

Fackler's experiment is missing some very important elements in my opinion.

Was any material remaining in the cadaver wrists?

Why choose that velocity (1100 fps) when Studivan testified that the bullet was probably traveling at 1400 fps?

Why did they shoot directly into the wrist when the official narrative has the bullet tumbling and thus be more prone to greater damage???

What was the condition of the wounds on the cadaver wrists? Were the entry wounds larger than the exit?

How did they "lose" some of their data? Oops!!!

[David Von Pein]

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 10:23:14 PM UTC-4, conantheco...@gmail.com wrote:
> David Von Pein
>
> Tell you what. Since I have addressed multiple concepts and questions related to your position on the SBT, I think it would only be fair if you answered some of my questions that I specifically addressed to you previously on this thread. This way there will still be some good give and take in this conversation. Thanks

Okay. Fair enough....

CONAN SAID:

If the bullet was tumbling through Connally's torso then not only would CE-399 have had more damage to it as the sides of a bullet are weaker than the tip, but it would also decelerate at a much faster rate than a bullet passing through point first.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

It sounds like you've got a lot of assumptions in those conclusions, Conan. I think the only way you're going to be able to prove what you just said above is if we were to dig up both JFK and John Connally and re-create the SBT shot in Dealey Plaza using a MC/WCC 6.5mm bullet. But I *do* think that some fairly good "re-creations" HAVE been accomplished in the past that go a long way toward proving that the SBT was--at the very LEAST--possible. Two of those tests being the 2004 Australian test (which you hate, I know) and Dr. Fackler's 1992 wrist/bullet test.

CONAN SAID:

Sturdivan's testimony alleges that CE-399 would have lost only 400 fps by passing through Connally's torso. If so, than it would have hit Connally's wrist at roughly 1400 fps which should have caused significant damage at that speed and even Studivan's altered number in his book essentially makes that contradictory statement.

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Yeah, I've been a bit skeptical about some of the "bullet velocity" numbers that Larry Sturdivan offers up in his 2005 book, "The JFK Myths" (which I think, overall, is a great book). But some of the figures Larry uses in his book seem a bit on the slow side to me. But I'm certainly not a "Wound Ballistics Expert". Sturdivan is. Your point is well taken, however, about Sturdivan's different figures when comparing his HSCA numbers to the figures in his book.

I'd like to see some additional tabulations from a different ballistics expert. There probably are some more data tables out there, possibly produced by some of the CTers. I'm not sure. But short of digging up the two victims to try and re-create every nuance of the SBT, I doubt any definitive results can be achieved that would satisfy everybody. The best that can be done is to make estimated guesses.

CONAN SAID:

I also noticed that you passed over some of my other reasonable questions. Why would an LN be against the RBT (Realistic Bullet Theory) if it eliminates the problem of the lack of greater damage to CE-399 while maintaining that all shots came from behind and easily from a single shooter? Are some LNs so committed to the idea that Oswald did it that the only way for it to be true is if the SBT is accurate? Why paint yourself into a corner like that?

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Point taken (again). Your alternate theory, which incorporates a large part of (but not all) of the Warren Commission's SBT, is an interesting theory, I must admit. Your theory is not 100% accurate, in my opinion, for the reasons I stated previously. (And, yes, I think the Z225-226 GIF clip is a very solid piece of information supporting the SBT, with Kennedy and Connally clearly reacting simultaneously, with Connally's right arm flying upward at the exact same moment when John Kennedy's right arm goes up too.)

But let me also say this ---

Your alternative theory, Conan, is much more REASONABLE and SENSIBLE than **ANY ALTERNATE ANTI-SBT THEORY** that any conspiracy theorist that I have ever encountered has ever come up with, because your theory doesn't require a belief in any of the various improbable or impossible things that virtually all "anti-SBT" theories require -- such as: multiple disappearing rifle bullets that enter JFK's body from opposite directions, with those bullets then stopping on a dime inside the President's body (while causing virtually no damage to Kennedy's innards).

[Ben Holmes]

On Tue, 16 May 2017 20:29:09 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:


>Your alternative theory, Conan, is much more REASONABLE and SENSIBLE
>than **ANY ALTERNATE ANTI-SBT THEORY** that any conspiracy theorist
>that I have ever encountered has ever come up with, because your theory
> doesn't require a belief in any of the various improbable or impossible
>things that virtually all "anti-SBT" theories require -- such as: multiple
>disappearing rifle bullets that enter JFK's body from opposite directions,
>with those bullets then stopping on a dime inside the President's body
>(while causing virtually no damage to Kennedy's innards).

This is known as creating a strawman, then beating it mercilessly.

What you *WON'T* do is actually explain the evidence that points to a
non-SBT...

You're absolutely TERRIFIED of what was happening to JFK's body
between 6:40 and 8pm... for example.

So too is "Conan."

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

[David Von Pein]

Addendum.....

I said this to Conan earlier:

"It sounds like you've got a lot of assumptions in those conclusions, Conan."

For the sake of fairness, I feel compelled to say this:

Larry Sturdivan had to rely on some "assumptions" too relating to his tests regarding bullet velocities and bullet damage, etc.

[Ben Holmes]

What was happening to JFK's body between the hours of 6:40pm and 8pm?

Why the cowardice, David?

Surely you can answer, right?

Did Dr. Humes need to do a craniotomy to remove the brain?

You may now demonstrate your cowardice by running away...