JFK Assassination Forum Archives -- Misc. Topics Of Interest (Part 106)

Vincent Bugliosi talked to the top men in charge of both the HSCA and
the ARRB (Robert Blakey and John Tunheim)...and those men assured
Vince that EVERY file and document HAS BEEN SEEN by the HSCA and/or
the ARRB.

Vince says that "a fraction of 1%" of the files are still under lock
and key (and this is for reasons of privacy of certain individuals
mentioned in a few documents, if I remember Vince correctly on that
point; I'm sure it's in VB's book, but I haven't memorized every
single page of the book--I've only memorized approximately 2,457 pages
of it to date.) ~grin~

And Vince in 2007 on the radio (and in his book) explains the myth
about the files being "locked away for 75 years". The files were
sealed and locked up...but it had nothing to do with Earl Warren's
wishes or the Warren Commission's requests to do so.

It was an old National Archives rule that said that files from an
official Government body (like the WC) were to be sealed for 75 years
(which was then considered to be the average lifespan of a human
being).

But Earl Warren's cover letter to the National Archives concerning the
WC files called for full disclosure of the files. But Warren wasn't
calling the shots regarding the "sealing of the records". The National
Archives was doing that. So CTers should go blame the Archives and
point at them as being part of the "cover-up" too.

There might be a few additional CIA files that haven't been made
public. But, as I understand Mr. Bugliosi's comments on this matter,
those CIA documents would fall into the "less than 1%" of ALL files
relating to the JFK case that have not yet been released.

aeffects

unread,

Jul 31, 2009, 6:05:54 PM7/31/09

to

On Jul 31, 2:18 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:

your fear is palpable, shithead.... AND no advertising dipshit!

David Von Pein

unread,

Jul 31, 2009, 6:35:06 PM7/31/09

to

www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,865.msg11097.html#msg11097

PAUL MAY SAID:

>>> "Ya gotta love the JFKmurdersolved.com crowd. Wish I had some real estate to sell them. The fact that Files was a con man/murderer his entire life means he has credibility to that group. Amazing." <<<

DVP SAID:

Indeed, Paul.

It's not surprising to me in the slightest that so many kooks believe
the "James Files Did It" fairy tale.

Many of those same CTers actually think that this person on the right
(who must be at least 6-feet-3, because Jimmy Files is 5-feet-11!)
killed J.D. Tippit:

www.jfkmurdersolved.com/images/tip.jpg

www.idoc.state.il.us/subsections/search/inms_print.asp?idoc=N14006

Lee Oswald, of course, was 5'9" tall. So the idiots who were
supposedly "framing" Oswald for Tippit's murder decided to pick a guy
to kill Tippit who didn't look a thing like Oswald and was about half-
a-foot taller than the "patsy" they're trying to frame. Brilliant
plot!

The conspiracy crazies can't even get the really, really EASY stuff
right -- like figuring out that it was Lee Harvey Oswald who murdered
Officer J.D. Tippit.

More about Wim Dankbaar's retarded nonsense here:

www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/59e025a70efa9ef5

Samples of Dankbaar's idiocy (from his own lips):

"As you know, my opinion is that everyone who advocates a LN
position is either ignorant, talking out of his ass, or part of the
cover-up." -- Wim Dankbaar; July 23, 2005

"Hey Von Pein, another lying lone-nutter! Found an audience to
deceive here?" .... "I am never nice to lone-nutters, since I consider
them treacherous liars. Get used to it." -- Wim Dankbaar; January 2,
2006

"I have not substantiated two teams [of JFK assassins]. I
believe there was more than one team; probably three. ... But there
were at least 6 shooters." -- Wim Dankbaar; January 5, 2006

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

Aug 1, 2009, 6:33:50 AM8/1/09

to

>>> "In June 1964, the Warren Commission had an FBI agent take CE399 to the men who handled the bullet on 11/22/63 to see if they would positively identify it as the bullet they handled. .... Not one of them would sign an affidavit confirming it as the bullet they had in their hands that day. .... O.P Wright adamantly denied that it was the bullet he saw and handled that day. He pulled out a pointed tip bullet from a drawer and told [Josiah] Thompson that the bullet he saw that day was the same shape, unlike CE399." <<<

I always love it when a conspiracy theorist talks about the "pointy-
tipped" bullet that was supposedly found by Darrell Tomlinson (instead
of the bullet that was actually found by him, CE399 from Oswald's
rifle).

The reason I get such a big kick out of destroying this "pointy-
tipped" argument is because it forces the CTers to abandon another one
of their long-favored inaccurate beliefs, which is their firm belief
(especially favored by noted CTer Cyril H. Wecht) that NO BULLET IN
THE WORLD could have possibly caused the damage to Governor Connally
and then emerge in very good condition (much like CE399).

But no conspiracy theorist has ever managed to debunk the logic of the
following argument:

If a "pointy-tipped" bullet could emerge on Connally's stretcher with
its "pointy tip" STILL POINTY after having gone through John
Connally's chest and wrist....then why in the world do conspiracy
theorists think that it's absolutely impossible for Bullet CE399 to
have done the same damage to Connally's body and emerge in very good
condition also?

And CTers surely don't want to argue that the "pointy" bullet was a
"planted" bullet...do they?

If so, we must believe that the bullet-planters were some really,
really stupid goofballs, because they then had to "switch" the pointy
bullet for yet another phony bullet later on -- CE399.

And CTers surely don't want to pretend that a "pointy" bullet was
found on the stretcher right next to Connally's at Parkland
Hospital....do they?

Because via that silly scenario, we're back to the pointy bullet being
a "planted" bullet again--and that's just stupid as we all can easily
see.

So, CTers....which dumb road of conspiracy do you want to go down?:

1.) A pointy bullet was found that hit Connally's wrist and that
bullet was then switched later for CE399.

2.) A pointy bullet was found on Ronnie Fuller's stretcher and not
Connally's stretcher, and then this "planted" pointy bullet was later
switched for CE399.

3.) Connally was really hit by more than just one bullet (which is a
theory that has no evidence or additional bullets or major fragments
to lend support to it), with one of these multiple bullets being the
"pointy-tipped" bullet found by Darrell Tomlinson. And then this
pointy bullet was later switched for CE399. All the while, the "other"
mystery bullet(s) that also struck Connally completely disappeared
into a puff of smoke (evidently).

As can be seen, any of the above three options is extraordinary and
just plain silly when compared to what really is the truth, with that
truth being:

Bullet CE399 was fired by Lee Harvey Oswald from the TSBD on 11/22/63,
with that bullet travelling through both JFK's and Connally's bodies.
The bullet then fell out of the Governor's shallow thigh wound onto
his hospital stretcher, where it was found by Parkland engineer
Darrell Tomlinson prior to 2:00 PM CST on Nov. 22nd.

And then months later, Tomlinson, O.P. Wright, and Richard Johnsen
simply could not positively say whether CE399 was the exact same whole
bullet they each saw at Parkland on 11/22/63.

But, amazingly, options #1, #2, and #3 displayed above are always more
attractive (and reasonable) to a conspiracist when discussing the saga
of CE399.

But, then too, common sense and logic are usually in short supply when
dealing with conspiracy theorists when the topic of 399 surfaces.

www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com

David Von Pein

unread,

Aug 2, 2009, 3:10:25 AM8/2/09

to

>>> "There is no evidence that the "pointy tipped bullet" that Tomlinson found went through Connally's body at all." <<<

Of course, since no "pointy" bullet was found by Tomlinson at all,
it's a moot point.

But it gets better folks....just watch the retarded kook go to town
below:

>>> "For all anyone knows, the bullet could have accidentally been dropped on the gurney by a Secret Service man or Dallas cop, or could have caused one of Connally's wounds and fallen out. Another possibility is that the bullet was planted on the gurney." <<<

With absolutely no due respect at all -- it's stupid statements like
the above that make a lot of CTers look awfully bad (and utterly
retarded).

"Accidentally dropped by a Secret Service man"???

~Big Laugh~

And MY theories aren't to be taken seriously, huh?

~Bigger Laugh~

Plus -- As always, my previous comments about how dumb it would be to
"plant" a pointy bullet go sailing right past a CT-Kook.

I'm pretty sure that the person known as "HeeHawHarry" thinks that Lee
Oswald was being set up and framed by evil conspirators. And yet at
the same time, HeeHawRetard also thinks it's quite possible that a
POINTY-TIPPED bullet was "planted on the gurney" at Parkland Hospital
on 11/22/63.

I'll just stop right there to allow the total idiocy of believing in
those two things IN TANDEM to sink in.

aeffects

unread,

Aug 2, 2009, 8:23:29 AM8/2/09

to

the time is rapidly approaching for this shithead, David Von Pein (aka
Dave Reitzes) to wallow in his own excrement, he can't get enough
USENET ego satisfaction on his own. It's apparent he needs other sick
lone nut-trolls to prop his ego up... AND to support the WCR idiotic
Single Bullet Theory (ya there Dale Myers, LMFAO?)...

Ya gotta gird those tender loins of yours, shithead. Show up in front
of a microphone and camera -- be a MAN, of all seasons -- not another
simple-minnded coward amongst the nutter-trolls.

Message has been deleted

aeffects

unread,

Aug 9, 2009, 12:00:52 AM8/9/09

to

On Aug 8, 8:55 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/4808ae18124f48a1
>
> >>> "In RH ["Reclaiming History"][,] the Bug [Vincent T. Bugliosi, Esq.] repeatedly calls CTs 'cooks' [sic] and 'paranoid' or worse." <<<
>
> Of course, if "Pam" had really taken the time to read "Reclaiming
> History", "she" would easily be able to see that Vince hardly ever
> calls CTers "kooks" (or even "cooks", as "Pamela" suggests; are all
> CTers chefs too, "Pam"?).
>
> When referring to conspiracy theorists, Bugliosi utilizes the word
> "kook" very seldom in his masterwork known as "Reclaiming History".
> For some reason, "Pam" thinks that Vince uses that word quite often
> throughout the 2,700+-page book. But she is wrong.
>
> Vince uses different words to describe CTers throughout "RH", but the
> specific word "kooks" is used very seldom to describe conspiracy
> theorists (if at all, in fact).
>
> Vince describes Lee Oswald as a "kook" on many occasions (and he's
> right, of course). But that's hardly the same thing as calling a
> conspiracist a "kook".
>
> >>> "While "DVP" may sincerely believe...<snip>" <<<
>
> Still living in that make-believe world where "DVP" doesn't even
> exist, eh "Pamela"?
>
> Please maintain that silly belief, "Pam". Because, frankly, I love it.
>
> www.blogger.com/profile/12501570830179992520

love this shithead....

the time is rapidly approaching for this shithead, David Von Pein (aka
Dave Reitzes) to wallow in his own excrement, he can't get enough
USENET ego satisfaction on his own. It's apparent he needs other sick

lone nut-trolls to prop his ego up... AND... to support the WCR

idiotic
Single Bullet Theory (ya there Dale Myers, LMFAO?)...

Ya gotta gird those tender loins of yours, shithead. Show up in front
of a microphone and camera -- be a MAN, of all seasons -- not another

simple-minded coward amongst nutter-trolls.

David Von Pein

unread,

Aug 9, 2009, 12:26:02 AM8/9/09

to

www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/4808ae18124f48a1

>>> "In RH ["Reclaiming History"][,] the Bug [Vincent T. Bugliosi, Esq.] repeatedly calls CTs 'cooks' [sic] and 'paranoid' or worse." <<<

Of course, if "Pam" had really taken the time to read "Reclaiming
History", "she" would easily be able to see that Vince hardly ever
calls CTers "kooks" (or even "cooks", as "Pamela" suggests; are all
CTers chefs too, "Pam"?).

When referring to conspiracy theorists, Bugliosi utilizes the word
"kook" very seldom in his masterwork known as "Reclaiming History".
For some reason, "Pam" thinks that Vince uses that word quite often
throughout the 2,700+-page book. But she is wrong.

Vince uses different words to describe CTers throughout "RH", but the

word "kooks" is used very seldom to specifically describe conspiracy
theorists. A few times, yes. But Vince doesn't use the perfectly-
accurate "K" word to describe CTers nearly as much as I would have if
my name had appeared on the cover of VB's book.

Vince, especially in his radio and TV interviews in 2007, described
Lee Harvey Oswald as a "kook" on many occasions (and he's right about
that, of course). But that's hardly the same thing as calling a
conspiracy theorist a "kook".

aeffects

unread,

Aug 9, 2009, 2:10:16 AM8/9/09

to

love this shithead....

David Von Pein

unread,

Aug 9, 2009, 11:54:08 PM8/9/09

to

www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/4c28a345e0612c9d

>>> "Let's start with a chapter heading, p. 872 [of "Reclaiming History"] -- "The Zanies (and Others) Have their say". In the first para[graph] alone[,] he [VB] manages to call the ct's 'crackpots' and witnesses 'cu[c]koo birds' as well as gullibles who seize 'on these stories as holy writ and totally worthy of belief.' " <<<

LOL.

"Pam" actually thinks that "Reclaiming History" author Vincent
Bugliosi is talking about CONSPIRACY THEORISTS on Page 872. Of course,
as per usual, "Pamela" is wrong. All of the words like "cuckoo birds"
and "zanies" and "crackpots" that Bugliosi uses on Page 872 are
referring to assassination WITNESSES, not conspiracy THEORISTS.

For example, when Bugliosi writes the word "crackpots" on Page 872, he
isn't referring to "CTers". He's referring to the "crackpot" witnesses
like Gordon Arnold, etc.

And the "zanies" referred to by Vince in that chapter are not
conspiracy theorists either. The "zanies" are people like Ed Hoffman,
Gordon Arnold, Jean Hill, Julia Mercer, Richard Carr, and Tom Tilson
(et al).

Maybe "Pam" should learn how to evaluate the words she is reading
before shouting her anti-Bugliosi claptrap from the rooftops. That'd
be nice, wouldn't it?

Footnote:

Now, I'm not saying that Bugliosi NEVER calls the conspiracy theorists
some rather unflattering names throughout the nearly 2,800 pages of
"Reclaiming History", because Vince does, indeed, blast the CTers with
some good verbal salvos in his book and accompanying CD-ROM computer
disc. (And, of course, the CTers deserve every verbal blast that VB
unleashes upon them, IMO.)

In fact, I want to retract the last five words of my August 9th aaj
forum comment reprinted below (because since writing that post, I
looked and found three instances of Bugliosi calling conspiracy
theorists "kooks" among the 958 pages of endnotes on the CD-ROM). But,
still, only three "kook" references in 958 pages is a tiny number,
IMO.

If I had written "RH", that number would be in triple digits (at
least). I haven't done a page-by-page "kook" check of the 1,600+ pages
of the hardcover book, however. So I'm not sure how many times Mr.
Bugliosi was able to work in the very accurate "K" word in the
physical volume itself when speaking of the loony conspiracy theorists
who are very much responsible for taking twenty years out of Vincent's
life. .....

"Vince uses different words to describe CTers throughout "RH",

but the specific word "kooks" is used very seldom to describe
conspiracy theorists (if at all, in fact)." -- DVP; 08/09/09

My corrected and updated version of that 8/9/09 aaj post resides at
the acj post archived below:

www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/1450078cce8108ab

But in the examples cited by "Pamela" in her last Internet message,
"Pam" hasn't a leg to stand on, because Vince Bugliosi is talking
about WITNESSES on Page 872 when VB says "crackpots" etc., not
CONSPIRACY THEORISTS.

www.ReclaimingHistory.blogspot.com

aeffects

unread,

Aug 9, 2009, 11:58:29 PM8/9/09

to

On Aug 9, 8:54 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:

Ya gotta gird those tender loins of yours, shithead. Show up in front
of a microphone and camera -- be a MAN, of all seasons -- not another
simple-minded coward amongst nutter-trolls.

Carry on, moron!

David Von Pein

unread,

Aug 13, 2009, 10:54:40 PM8/13/09

to

www.JFKAssassinationForum.com/index.php/topic,994.msg13288.html#msg13288

>>> "Can someone explain why a bone [from President Kennedy's head] went to the trunk area if the shot was from the back? Isn't that what Jackie grabs at?" <<<

A piece of the dummy head from the 2008 "Inside The Target Car"
program is thrown to the REAR after the head was hit FROM BEHIND.

The above sentence I just wrote invalidates all arguments by
conspiracy theorists suggesting that ONLY a shot from the FRONT could
result in a chunk of President Kennedy's head being blown onto the
limo's trunk.

Plus -- Since we know (and we can all SEE) JFK's head being thrown
violently to the REAR after being shot (i.e., his head, after moving
slightly forward upon being shot by Oswald's bullet from the TSBD, is
moving in a direction TOWARD THE LIMO'S TRUNK), then why is it
surprising to ANYBODY (CTer or LNer) that a chunk of JFK's head could
conceivably have been thrown BACKWARD onto the trunk as a result of
the violent to-the-rear head movement that we see in the Zapruder
Film?

Why this topic is constantly being rehashed over and over again is
anyone's guess. Because it's just plain ridiculous (for the reason
stated above).

Footnote --- There is no proof that Jacqueline Kennedy went to the
trunk in order to retrieve a piece of her husband's head. In fact,
IMO, that theory is just flat-out silly. The piece of JFK's head that
Jackie handed to Dr. Pepper Jenkins at Parkland could very easily have
been obtained by Jackie while Jackie was cradling JFK's head in her
arms on the way to Parkland (and that's probably how it actually
happened, IMO).

www.Blogger.com/profile/12501570830179992520