Quoting Common Sense

[David Von Pein]

"There is nothing new to be unveiled concerning the way John F. Kennedy died on November 22, 1963. JFK was shot by a lone loser named Lee Harvey Oswald. And that lone loser who hated America and its "representatives" just happened to own a cheap mail-order rifle and he also just happened to work in a building that overlooked the very last portion of President Kennedy's motorcade route through Dallas. The combination of things I just mentioned above was a lethal combination. And it's also, whether you want to believe it or not, a combination of circumstances brought about by nothing except pure garden-variety coincidence and happenstance." -- David Von Pein; January 2008

http://Quoting-Common-Sense.blogspot.com

[David Von Pein]

"All of the post-assassination talk about the motorcade route is Monday-morning quarterbacking, of course. The Secret Service had taken JFK past tall buildings at slow speeds in an open car many, many times during motorcades preceding the Dallas parade, and there's no reason to think that the SS or the DPD felt there was anything remotely dangerous or unusual about taking the President around those two curves in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63.

For heaven's sake, Kennedy's car even came to a complete stop on two occasions before reaching Dealey Plaza that day in Dallas, and yet I've never heard even one CTer ever balk or gripe about those two COMPLETE STOPS the President made.

The CTers don't seem to think that STOPPING the President's limo completely was the slightest bit out of line or a violation of Secret Service protocol, but many conspiracists do seem to feel that the hairpin turn from Houston onto Elm WAS a terrible violation of some Secret Service rule or regulation. Weird.

Do conspiracy theorists want to believe that the Secret Service should have been of the opinion (as of the morning of 11/22/63) that there was MORE danger to the President by taking him slowly through Dealey Plaza (moving at about 11 MPH) than there was during those two complete stops that JFK made in his open limo that same afternoon?"

-- DVP; August 28, 2008

[David Von Pein]

"It's amazing how all the good stuff falls just out of range of photographic capabilities, always in the realm of interpretation and speculation. The conspirators must have just known that no camera was going to get a clear picture of all the stuff they were doing. In fact they were banking their lives on it. Yet they still left the person they put so much effort into framing stand out front with everyone during the assassination and had shooters all over in an area with plenty of cameras and home movies. Incredible guts and incredible luck, if conspiracy ideas have any merit."

-- Bud; August 12, 2012

[David Von Pein]

"The notion that major federal agencies of government (or even one such agency) would decide to murder Kennedy because they didn't agree with certain policies of his is sufficiently demented to be excluded at the portals of any respectable mental institution short of an insane asylum."

-- Vincent Bugliosi; Page 987 of "Reclaiming History"

[David Von Pein]

"Regardless of WHERE the large exit wound was located (which was in the right-front of [JFK's] head, of course), and regardless of how many degrees the bullet deflected after striking Kennedy's cranium, the basic ironclad fact of "Only One Bullet Hit JFK's Head From Behind" will never change, which makes all the arguments surrounding these sub-topics moot and rather meaningless when all is said and done."

-- David Von Pein; July 14, 2008

[Sky Throne 19efppp]

On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 11:10:37 AM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> "Regardless of WHERE the large exit wound was located (which was in the right-front of [JFK's] head, of course), and regardless of how many degrees the bullet deflected after striking Kennedy's cranium, the basic ironclad fact of "Only One Bullet Hit JFK's Head From Behind" will never change, which makes all the arguments surrounding these sub-topics moot and rather meaningless when all is said and done."
>
> -- David Von Pein; July 14, 2008

Delusional David Von Kook quotes stupid things he said 15 years ago, and calls it "common sense."

[John Corbett]

You and common sense seem to be complete strangers.

[David Von Pein]

"DiIdiot [James DiEugenio, that is] said it best when he wrote...

*** "...Jean Davison's book looks today like a smoking pile of rubbish. Useless to anyone except maybe David Von Pein or John McAdams." ***

So, it is useless for a conspiracy retard but just fine for reasonable and rational people. An excellent endorsement."

-- Bud; September 24, 2015

[David Von Pein]

"IMO, the prayer man theory has the same fatal weakness as other JFK conspiracy theories: Instead of a narrative explaining how the evidence fits together to show what happened, we get a bunch of things that look “suspicious” and unseen plotters who plant evidence, suborn perjury, and do anything else necessary to frame the poor patsy.

The problem is that the masterminds are, as usual, all-powerful and yet incredibly stupid. They plant a weapon they’ve tied to Oswald yet somehow neglect to keep the patsy from wandering outside to acquire what should’ve been an ironclad alibi.

So now they have to get anyone who knew the truth to lie about it. But hey, no problem. With the right threats, who wouldn’t agree to help frame an innocent man in a president’s murder and keep quiet about it forever, right? Even better, Oswald doesn’t mention his alibi either."

-- Jean Davison; May 1, 2016

[David Von Pein]

"A 5-year-old child could have solved the Tippit murder. Given the evidence, there's no human way for Lee Harvey Oswald to be innocent of killing Officer J.D. Tippit.

The only thing that conspiracy theorists can cling to in the Tippit murder case is their own silly imaginations -- such as when they pretend that all of the evidence against LHO was faked or manipulated by the evil DPD, which is a theory that's so ridiculous that another 5-year-old could see that it's nothing but pure desperation on the part of the conspiracists in their feeble attempts to exonerate a murderer named Oswald.

There's not a single conspiracy theorist in the world who can logically (and believably) answer the following question:

*** Why on Earth would the Dallas Police Department have had any desire whatsoever to want to frame and railroad an innocent Lee Harvey Oswald for the murder of one of their FELLOW OFFICERS AND FRIENDS, all the while not caring at all that they were allowing the real killer or killers of Officer Tippit to get off scot-free? ***

Conspiracy theorists have their imaginations and crazy assertions. Reasonable people, however, have the hard evidence. Lee Harvey Oswald murdered J.D. Tippit. And Oswald murdered John F. Kennedy too."

-- David Von Pein; December 18, 2009

[Gil Jesus]

On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 12:34:46 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:

> *** Why on Earth would the Dallas Police Department have had any desire whatsoever to want to frame and railroad an innocent Lee Harvey Oswald for the murder of one of their FELLOW OFFICERS AND FRIENDS, all the while not caring at all that they were allowing the real killer or killers of Officer Tippit to get off scot-free? ***

John Stickels, a University of Texas at Arlington criminology professor and a director of the Innocence Project of Texas, blames a culture of "win at all costs."
"When someone was arrested, it was assumed they were guilty," he said. "I think prosecutors and investigators basically ignored all evidence to the contrary and decided they were going to convict these guys."

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791

Henry Wade even executed an innocent man.

https://www.dmagazine.com/publications/d-magazine/2016/may/henry-wade-executed-innocent-man/

They didn't give a shit about getting the right guy, they just wanted to get a conviction.
Whoever they arrested was the right guy.
Why is that so hard for you to understand ?

[Bud]

On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 3:44:02 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
> On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 12:34:46 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
>
> > *** Why on Earth would the Dallas Police Department have had any desire whatsoever to want to frame and railroad an innocent Lee Harvey Oswald for the murder of one of their FELLOW OFFICERS AND FRIENDS, all the while not caring at all that they were allowing the real killer or killers of Officer Tippit to get off scot-free? ***
> John Stickels, a University of Texas at Arlington criminology professor and a director of the Innocence Project of Texas, blames a culture of "win at all costs."
> "When someone was arrested, it was assumed they were guilty," he said. "I think prosecutors and investigators basically ignored all evidence to the contrary and decided they were going to convict these guys."

Now we know John Stickles` opinion, for whatever that is worth.

> https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
>
> Henry Wade even executed an innocent man.
>
> https://www.dmagazine.com/publications/d-magazine/2016/may/henry-wade-executed-innocent-man/

The guy confessed. Twice.

> They didn't give a shit about getting the right guy, they just wanted to get a conviction.

So they were okay with Tippit`s murderer getting away with his murder?

> Whoever they arrested was the right guy.

Good thing the guy they just randomly grabbed had so much incriminating evidence against him, eh?

Rest, Gil.

> Why is that so hard for you to understand ?

I can`t understand how such a poor thinker as yourself reached adulthood.

[David Von Pein]

On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 3:44:02 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

> They didn't give a shit about getting the right guy, they just wanted to get a conviction. Whoever they arrested was the right guy. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

How is it even possible for a person who has focused so much of his life on the JFK & Tippit murder cases (namely someone named Gilbert J. Jesus) to utter the nonsense he just uttered above?

Do you, Gil, think that the DPD just randomly chose Oswald to arrest for Tippit's murder on Nov. 22? And they were perfectly fine with their decision to charge an innocent person with the Tippit killing while giving the true murderers a free pass?

And do you truly believe the DPD had no *REAL & VALID EVIDENCE* against Oswald in either the Kennedy or Tippit cases?

(I think Gil needs a new hobby.)

[John Corbett]

On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 3:44:02 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

> On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 12:34:46 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
>
> > *** Why on Earth would the Dallas Police Department have had any desire whatsoever to want to frame and railroad an innocent Lee Harvey Oswald for the murder of one of their FELLOW OFFICERS AND FRIENDS, all the while not caring at all that they were allowing the real killer or killers of Officer Tippit to get off scot-free? ***
> John Stickels, a University of Texas at Arlington criminology professor and a director of the Innocence Project of Texas, blames a culture of "win at all costs."
> "When someone was arrested, it was assumed they were guilty," he said. "I think prosecutors and investigators basically ignored all evidence to the contrary and decided they were going to convict these guys."
>

There was no evidence to the contrary.

> https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
>
> Henry Wade even executed an innocent man.
>
> https://www.dmagazine.com/publications/d-magazine/2016/may/henry-wade-executed-innocent-man/
>
> They didn't give a shit about getting the right guy, they just wanted to get a conviction.
> Whoever they arrested was the right guy.
> Why is that so hard for you to understand ?

Because it's not true. They got the right guy for the Kennedy and Tippit murders. They would
have easily convicted him and it is almost certain he would have been given a death sentence.
I have my doubts it would have been carried out before the Supreme Court set aside all
pending death sentences in 1971.

[David Von Pein]

"The Warren Commission critics and conspiracy theorists have succeeded in transforming a case very simple and obvious at its core--Oswald killed Kennedy and acted alone--into its present form of the most complex murder case, by far, in world history.

Refusing to accept the plain truth, and dedicating their existence for over forty years to convincing the American public of the truth of their own charges, the critics have journeyed to the outer margins of their imaginations. Along the way, they have split hairs and then proceeded to split the split hairs, drawn far-fetched and wholly unreasonable inferences from known facts, and literally invented bogus facts from the grist of rumor and speculation.

With over 18,000 pages of small print in the 27 Warren Commission volumes alone, and many millions of pages of FBI and CIA documents, any researcher worth his salt can find a sentence here or there to support any ludicrous conspiracy theory he might have. And that, of course, is precisely what the conspiracy community has done."

-- Vincent Bugliosi

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2023/09/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1368.html

[David Von Pein]

Bonus Link........

DVP's Kennedy Gallery:

http://Kennedy-Photos.blogspot.com

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 2 Sep 2023 08:05:52 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>"All of the post-assassination talk about the motorcade route is
>Monday-morning quarterbacking, of course. The Secret Service had taken
>JFK past tall buildings at slow speeds in an open car many, many times
>during motorcades preceding the Dallas parade, and there's no reason
>to think that the SS or the DPD felt there was anything remotely
>dangerous or unusual about taking the President around those two
>curves in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63.

Other than the common sense you claim to have, of course...

>For heaven's sake, Kennedy's car even came to a complete stop on two
>occasions before reaching Dealey Plaza that day in Dallas, and yet
>I've never heard even one CTer ever balk or gripe about those two
>COMPLETE STOPS the President made.

Or the complete stop the limo made in Dealey Plaza...

Oh, that's right, you violently disagree with the dozens of
eyewitnesses on this issue.

> The CTers don't seem to think that STOPPING the President's limo
> completely was the slightest bit out of line or a violation of Secret
> Service protocol

You don't seem to think molesting small children is wrong...

> but many conspiracists do seem to feel that the hairpin turn from
> Houston onto Elm WAS a terrible violation of some Secret Service rule
> or regulation. Weird.

Nah... what's weird is that you are happy to lie about what critics
have stated - because you can't refute what we ACTUALLY DO SAY.

> Do conspiracy theorists want to believe that the Secret Service
> should have been of the opinion (as of the morning of 11/22/63) that
> there was MORE danger to the President by taking him slowly through
> Dealey Plaza (moving at about 11 MPH) than there was during those two
> complete stops that JFK made in his open limo that same afternoon?"

Yes, and yes. You're quite the kook trying to argue that making slow
turns, or coming to a complete stop isn't against SS policy, or
putting the President in danger from a sniper.

Tell us kook - just what *WOULD* put JFK in danger if not slow turns
and limo stops???

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 2 Sep 2023 08:03:55 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>"There is nothing new to be unveiled concerning the way John F.
>Kennedy died on November 22, 1963.

Other than, of course, the thousands of documents still classified.


I deleted the rest of your speculations and logical fallacies...

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 2 Sep 2023 09:17:15 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:


>You and common sense seem to be complete strangers.

Can you name this logical fallacy?

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 2 Sep 2023 15:21:39 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>Bonus Link........
>
>DVP's Kennedy Gallery:
>
>http://Kenned

What have I told you about links before?

[Ben Holmes]

Can you quote a single sentence out of the above that is *NOT* a
provable logical fallacy?

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 2 Sep 2023 08:07:33 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>"It's amazing how all the good stuff falls just out of range of
> photographic capabilities, always in the realm of interpretation and
> speculation.

Can you name this logical fallacy?

> The conspirators must have just known that no camera was going to
> get a clear picture of all the stuff they were doing. In fact they
> were banking their lives on it. Yet they still left the person they
> put so much effort into framing stand out front with everyone during
> the assassination and had shooters all over in an area with plenty of
> cameras and home movies. Incredible guts and incredible luck, if
> conspiracy ideas have any merit."

Can you name these logical fallacies?

As Huckster points out:

Curiously, you posted no evidence. no citations, no documents, no
testimony, no exhibits, no witness videos.

Only comments. We gain nothing from the above.

Which makes who exactly the fool?

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 2 Sep 2023 13:02:57 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:


So, according to Bugliosi, it was this "oval" shape that was
"virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?

Chickenshit is TERRIFIED of this simple honest question. He knows
that Bugliosi was a moron if he truly thought this... yet you can't
get Chickenshit to publicly acknowledge that Bugliosi said this.

It's a simple "Yes" or "No" question, and Chickenshit cannot cite
where he has EVER answered it. (Without immediately denying it.)

So it's going to keep getting asked until Chickenshit answers it.

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 2 Sep 2023 09:33:05 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>"IMO, the prayer man theory has the same fatal weakness as other JFK
> conspiracy theories: Instead of a narrative explaining how the
> evidence fits together to show what happened, we get a bunch of things
> that look “suspicious” and unseen plotters who plant evidence, suborn
> perjury, and do anything else necessary to frame the poor patsy.

This is simply a logical fallacy masquerading as an argument.

> The problem is that the masterminds are, as usual, all-powerful and
> yet incredibly stupid. They plant a weapon they’ve tied to Oswald yet
> somehow neglect to keep the patsy from wandering outside to acquire
> what should’ve been an ironclad alibi.

Yet another logical fallacy... the appeal to ridicule...

> So now they have to get anyone who knew the truth to lie about it.
> But hey, no problem. With the right threats, who wouldn’t agree to
> help frame an innocent man in a president’s murder and keep quiet
> about it forever, right?

Doubling up on the logical fallacies ... the appeal to ridicule
again...

Amusingly, even though everyone *KNOWS* the evidence for eyewitness
intimidation in this case, it's only the believers who deny it.

> Even better, Oswald doesn’t mention his alibi
> either.

Actually, he does. And you know that to be a fact.

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 2 Sep 2023 09:34:44 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>"A 5-year-old child could have solved the Tippit murder. Given the
> evidence, there's no human way for Lee Harvey Oswald to be innocent of
> killing Officer J.D. Tippit.

A purposely meaningless statement.

> The only thing that conspiracy theorists can cling to in the Tippit
> murder case is their own silly imaginations -- such as when they
> pretend that all of the evidence against LHO was faked or manipulated
> by the evil DPD, which is a theory that's so ridiculous that another
> 5-year-old could see that it's nothing but pure desperation on the
> part of the conspiracists in their feeble attempts to exonerate a
> murderer named Oswald.

Can you point to a single sentence there that was not a logical
fallacy?

> There's not a single conspiracy theorist in the world who can
> logically (and believably) answer the following question:

ROTFLMAO!!!

>*** Why on Earth would the Dallas Police Department have had any
> desire whatsoever to want to frame and railroad an innocent Lee Harvey
> Oswald for the murder of one of their FELLOW OFFICERS AND FRIENDS, all
> the while not caring at all that they were allowing the real killer or
> killers of Officer Tippit to get off scot-free? ***

Several logical fallacies in that question... so let's deal with them
one by one.

Your first complaint is asking why police officers would intentionally
frame someone they know to be innocent.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=police+planting+evidence

Take your pick. Now let's see you admit you were wrong.

Next issue - your claim that the police *KNEW* that Oswald was
innocent, and that they were letting the real criminal get away... can
you see any other possibilities?

Perhaps it was a fellow cop who murdered Tippit? Would that be a
reason to frame an innocent man?

It's not exactly unheard of for cops to "frame" someone they believe
is guilty. Trying to 'improve' the evidence.

Now, I've answered your logically fallacious question, and I've even
provided you with evidence for my answer.

You can now begin running away...

>Conspiracy theorists have their imaginations and crazy assertions.

And believers *LOVE* these kooks who help their case.

I generally killfile them just as quickly as I do the trolls on the
side of believers..

But, of course, you're lying when you assert that **ALL** critics

"have their imaginations and crazy assertions."

It's not something you can support with evidence.

> Reasonable people, however, have the hard evidence.

Polling has shown time and time again what "reasonable people" accept
in this case.

You lose.

You're TERRIFIED of the "hard evidence" in this case... indeed, you
refuse to define it, or cite it.

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 2 Sep 2023 15:01:34 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 3:44:02?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

>> On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 12:34:46?PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
>>
>>> *** Why on Earth would the Dallas Police Department have had any desire whatsoever to want to frame and railroad an innocent Lee Harvey Oswald for the murder of one of their FELLOW OFFICERS AND FRIENDS, all the while not caring at all that they were allowing the real killer or killers of Officer Tippit to get off scot-free? ***
>> John Stickels, a University of Texas at Arlington criminology professor and a director of the Innocence Project of Texas, blames a culture of "win at all costs."
>> "When someone was arrested, it was assumed they were guilty," he said. "I think prosecutors and investigators basically ignored all evidence to the contrary and decided they were going to convict these guys."
>>
>There was no evidence to the contrary.

And you're a damned liar... You clearly didn't bother to click on the
link given, and read the story.

DNA and tire tracks were clearly stated.


Tell us moron, why do you keep lying when you *claim" common sense?

>> https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
>>
>> Henry Wade even executed an innocent man.
>>
>> https://www.dmagazine.com/publications/d-magazine/2016/may/henry-wade-executed-innocent-man/
>>
>> They didn't give a shit about getting the right guy, they just wanted to get a conviction.
>> Whoever they arrested was the right guy.
>> Why is that so hard for you to understand ?
>
>Because it's not true.

This is merely *ONE* example that proves you're a liar:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AviW5GwSczU

Gil's cite also proves that it's true.

Police officers are not angels.

Why is that so hard for you to understand?

>They got the right guy for the Kennedy and Tippit murders.

Begging the question.

>They would have easily convicted him and it is almost certain he
> would have been given a death sentence.

Begging the question *AND* sheer speculation...


>I have my doubts...


Just not about the important things...

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 2 Sep 2023 08:10:35 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>"Regardless of WHERE the large exit wound was located

Then by your OWN ASSERTED CLAIM ABOVE, you won't mind putting it where
dozens of eyewitnesses and the Autopsy Report put it - in the
occipital parietal.

The fact that you won't ... simply proves you lied above...

> the basic ironclad fact of "Only One Bullet Hit JFK's Head From
> Behind" will never change,

You mean, your BELIEF will never change. But you can't explain the
actual evidence, such as the trail of fragments seen in the side X-ray
of JFK.

Indeed, you PROVE that you understand the problems, because time and
time again I've asked believers to state where the LARGEST fragments
are, along that trail - and NOT ONE SINGLE TIME has a believer ever
answered that question.

You can't.

It proves that one bullet struck JFK in the temple.

> which makes all the arguments surrounding these sub-topics moot and
> rather meaningless when all is said and done."

This is an unsupportable lie on your part. As PROVEN by your refusal
to answer the above noted question.

But this is what cowards do...

They run from the evidence...

EVERY

SINGLE

TIME!!

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 2 Sep 2023 08:08:36 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>"The notion that major federal agencies of government (or even one
> such agency) would decide to murder Kennedy because they didn't agree
> with certain policies of his is sufficiently demented to be excluded
> at the portals of any respectable mental institution short of an
> insane asylum."

No better example of the logical fallacy of "Appeal to Ridicule" could
be posted in this forum.

Both Von Penis and Bugliosi are proven morons by such arguments.

No-one ever makes the argument that "federal agencies" decide or
commit murder. It's people who do that.

When we say that the Secret Service, or CIA, were involved in this
assassination - few indeed are the intelligent people who think that
EVERYONE in the organization got together and agreed.

This is merely an example of the inability of believers to understand
and reason.

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 2 Sep 2023 13:47:13 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 3:44:02?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>> They didn't give a shit about getting the right guy, they just
>> wanted to get a conviction. Whoever they arrested was the right guy.
>> Why is that so hard for you to understand?
>
> How is it even possible for a person who has focused so much of his
> life on the JFK & Tippit murder cases (namely someone named Gilbert J.
> Jesus) to utter the nonsense he just uttered above?

Because this is what the evidence shows...

Take, for example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AviW5GwSczU

That you can't understand this simply shows your dishonesty, nothing
more...

> Do you, Gil, think that the DPD just randomly chose Oswald to arrest
> for Tippit's murder on Nov. 22? And they were perfectly fine with
> their decision to charge an innocent person with the Tippit killing
> while giving the true murderers a free pass?

Do you, Von Penis, think that the officer in the video cited above
just randomly chose victims to frame? And he was perfectly fine with
ruining innocent men & women's lives?

> And do you truly believe the DPD had no *REAL & VALID EVIDENCE*
> against Oswald in either the Kennedy or Tippit cases?

Why not cite it?

Coward... aren't you?

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 2 Sep 2023 12:44:00 -0700 (PDT), Gil Jesus
<gjjma...@gmail.com> wrote:

Because he's a believer.

You don't need evidence to believe.

Or honesty...

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 2 Sep 2023 15:02:01 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

> The Warren Commission critics and conspiracy theorists have
> succeeded in transforming a case very simple and obvious at its
> core--Oswald killed Kennedy and acted alone--into its present form of
> the most complex murder case, by far, in world history.

It was complex on 11/22/63.

>Refusing to accept the plain truth

Name this logical fallacy, or forever be known as a moron.

> and dedicating their existence for over forty years to convincing the
> American public of the truth of their own charges, the critics have
> journeyed to the outer margins of their imaginations.

No need to "convince" the American public of what they already
believe.

> Along the way, they have split hairs and then proceeded to split the
> split hairs, drawn far-fetched and wholly unreasonable inferences from
> known facts, and literally invented bogus facts from the grist of
> rumor and speculation.

Name a *SINGLE* "bogus fact" that I've ever posted. Quote a *SINGLE*
"far-fetched and wholly unreasonable inference" I've ever posted. Or
admit you're a liar.

You are, of course...

> With over 18,000 pages of small print in the 27 Warren Commission
> volumes alone, and many millions of pages of FBI and CIA documents,
> any researcher worth his salt can find a sentence here or there to
> support any ludicrous conspiracy theory he might have. And that, of
> course, is precisely what the conspiracy community has done."

Using data known *ONLY IN THE FIRST 24 HOURS* we can make our case for
both a conspiracy, and a frameup.

[Gil Jesus]

On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 4:47:15 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 3:44:02 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
> > They didn't give a shit about getting the right guy, they just wanted to get a conviction. Whoever they arrested was the right guy. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
> How is it even possible for a person who has focused so much of his life on the JFK & Tippit murder cases (namely someone named Gilbert J. Jesus) to utter the nonsense he just uttered above?

Because that's what the evidence revealed.
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791

> Do you, Gil, think that the DPD just randomly chose Oswald to arrest for Tippit's murder on Nov. 22?

Nope. He was chosen as the patsy by the CIA while he was in New Orleans.

> And they were perfectly fine with their decision to charge an innocent person with the Tippit killing while giving the true murderers a free pass?

That's what the article says:
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791

> And do you truly believe the DPD had no *REAL & VALID EVIDENCE* against Oswald in either the Kennedy or Tippit cases?

No they didn't.

>
> (I think Gil needs a new hobby.)

I think you're a fucking asshole.

[Gil Jesus]

On Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 10:42:38 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> Name a *SINGLE* "bogus fact" that I've ever posted. Quote a *SINGLE*
> "far-fetched and wholly unreasonable inference" I've ever posted. Or
> admit you're a liar.

That egotistical jackass can't refute a single thing.
No clue how the southern justice system worked in the 50s and 60s.
He has a long reputation as a loser.

[Ben Holmes]

On Tue, 5 Sep 2023 08:57:10 -0700 (PDT), Gil Jesus
<gjjma...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 10:42:38?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> Name a *SINGLE* "bogus fact" that I've ever posted. Quote a *SINGLE*
>> "far-fetched and wholly unreasonable inference" I've ever posted. Or
>> admit you're a liar.
>
>That egotistical jackass can't refute a single thing.
>No clue how the southern justice system worked in the 50s and 60s.
>He has a long reputation as a loser.

David Von Penis is a liar, and I predict he'll **NEVER** support his
words with a credible answer to my question above.

[John Corbett]

On Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 11:34:52 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
> On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 4:47:15 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> > On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 3:44:02 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
> > > They didn't give a shit about getting the right guy, they just wanted to get a conviction. Whoever they arrested was the right guy. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
> > How is it even possible for a person who has focused so much of his life on the JFK & Tippit murder cases (namely someone named Gilbert J. Jesus) to utter the nonsense he just uttered above?
> Because that's what the evidence revealed.
> https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
> > Do you, Gil, think that the DPD just randomly chose Oswald to arrest for Tippit's murder on Nov. 22?
> Nope. He was chosen as the patsy by the CIA while he was in New Orleans.

So the CIA chose a patsy for the DPD to pin the murder of Tippit on months before Tippit was
murdered. And that makes sense to you?

> > And they were perfectly fine with their decision to charge an innocent person with the Tippit killing while giving the true murderers a free pass?

> That's what the article says:
> https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791

The article doesn't even mention Tippit or the Dallas police in general. IOW, you lied.

> > And do you truly believe the DPD had no *REAL & VALID EVIDENCE* against Oswald in either the Kennedy or Tippit cases?

> No they didn't.

As long as you appoint yourself the arbiter of what constitutes real and valid evidence. In most
trials, a real judge makes those decisions, not a pretend defense counsel.

> >
> > (I think Gil needs a new hobby.)
> I think you're a fucking asshole.

One of you is correct and the other goes by the name of Gil Jesus.

[Ben Holmes]

On Tue, 5 Sep 2023 12:35:15 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 11:34:52?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>> On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 4:47:15?PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:

>>> On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 3:44:02?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>>>> They didn't give a shit about getting the right guy, they just wanted to get a conviction. Whoever they arrested was the right guy. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
>>> How is it even possible for a person who has focused so much of his life on the JFK & Tippit murder cases (namely someone named Gilbert J. Jesus) to utter the nonsense he just uttered above?
>> Because that's what the evidence revealed.
>> https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
>>> Do you, Gil, think that the DPD just randomly chose Oswald to arrest for Tippit's murder on Nov. 22?
>> Nope. He was chosen as the patsy by the CIA while he was in New Orleans.
>
>So the CIA chose a patsy for the DPD to pin the murder of Tippit on months before Tippit was
>murdered. And that makes sense to you?

ROTFLMAO!!!

Yes ... you can't make this up, folks!!! Corbutt thinks a vast
conspiracy took the life of Tippit... planned months in advance...

>>> And they were perfectly fine with their decision to charge an innocent person with the Tippit killing while giving the true murderers a free pass?
>
>> That's what the article says:
>> https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
>
>The article doesn't even mention Tippit or the Dallas police in general. IOW, you lied.

You clearly aren't capable of following what someone is pointing out.

I've oft laughed at the thought of believers being able to use
reason...

>>> And do you truly believe the DPD had no *REAL & VALID EVIDENCE* against Oswald in either the Kennedy or Tippit cases?
>
>> No they didn't.

Logical fallacy deleted.

>>> (I think Gil needs a new hobby.)
>> I think you're a fucking asshole.

Gil spanks Corbutt again...

[Hank Sienzant]

On Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 3:45:09 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Sep 2023 12:35:15 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
> <geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 11:34:52?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
> >> On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 4:47:15?PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> >>> On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 3:44:02?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
> >>>> They didn't give a shit about getting the right guy, they just wanted to get a conviction. Whoever they arrested was the right guy. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
> >>> How is it even possible for a person who has focused so much of his life on the JFK & Tippit murder cases (namely someone named Gilbert J. Jesus) to utter the nonsense he just uttered above?
> >> Because that's what the evidence revealed.
> >> https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
> >>> Do you, Gil, think that the DPD just randomly chose Oswald to arrest for Tippit's murder on Nov. 22?
> >> Nope. He was chosen as the patsy by the CIA while he was in New Orleans.
> >
> >So the CIA chose a patsy for the DPD to pin the murder of Tippit on months before Tippit was
> >murdered. And that makes sense to you?
> ROTFLMAO!!!
>
> Yes ... you can't make this up, folks!!! Corbutt thinks a vast
> conspiracy took the life of Tippit... planned months in advance...

No, that’s the clear implication of Gil’s argument. John is pointing that out to Gil.
Try to follow along.

> >>> And they were perfectly fine with their decision to charge an innocent person with the Tippit killing while giving the true murderers a free pass?
> >
> >> That's what the article says:
> >> https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
> >
> >The article doesn't even mention Tippit or the Dallas police in general. IOW, you lied.
> You clearly aren't capable of following what someone is pointing out.
>
> I've oft laughed at the thought of believers being able to use
> reason...

John’s claim is factual. Gil hasn't shown that Wade got every case wrong, or that he got this one wrong. Nor has he shown that Wade’s rate of convictions overturned is greater than the average, average, or below average.

> >>> And do you truly believe the DPD had no *REAL & VALID EVIDENCE* against Oswald in either the Kennedy or Tippit cases?
> >
> >> No they didn't.
> Logical fallacy deleted.
> >>> (I think Gil needs a new hobby.)
> >> I think you're a fucking asshole.
> Gil spanks Corbutt again...

So do you think Oswald “was chosen as the patsy by the CIA while he was in New Orleans”, as Gil stated?

Gil presumably means the summer of 1963, but I'll leave him to clarify that. Gil is reminded Oswald lived in New Orleans for many of his 24 years. Maybe Gil meant the CIA chose Oswald in 1954, for all I know.

[Ben Holmes]

On Tue, 5 Sep 2023 14:46:43 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 3:45:09?PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Tue, 5 Sep 2023 12:35:15 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
>> <geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 11:34:52?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 4:47:15?PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
>>>>> On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 3:44:02?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>>>>>> They didn't give a shit about getting the right guy, they just wanted to get a conviction. Whoever they arrested was the right guy. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
>>>>> How is it even possible for a person who has focused so much of his life on the JFK & Tippit murder cases (namely someone named Gilbert J. Jesus) to utter the nonsense he just uttered above?
>>>> Because that's what the evidence revealed.
>>>> https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
>>>>> Do you, Gil, think that the DPD just randomly chose Oswald to arrest for Tippit's murder on Nov. 22?
>>>> Nope. He was chosen as the patsy by the CIA while he was in New Orleans.
>>>
>>>So the CIA chose a patsy for the DPD to pin the murder of Tippit on months before Tippit was
>>>murdered. And that makes sense to you?
>> ROTFLMAO!!!
>>
>> Yes ... you can't make this up, folks!!! Corbutt thinks a vast
>> conspiracy took the life of Tippit... planned months in advance...
>

>No, that’s the clear implication ...


Say that about me, and I'd label you a child molester.

Believers never can seem to deal with what we ACTUALLY say - you
*ALWAYS* need to put words in our mouth to argue against.

This fact says it all.

>>>>> And they were perfectly fine with their decision to charge an innocent person with the Tippit killing while giving the true murderers a free pass?
>>>
>>>> That's what the article says:
>>>> https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
>>>
>>>The article doesn't even mention Tippit or the Dallas police in general. IOW, you lied.
>> You clearly aren't capable of following what someone is pointing out.
>>
>> I've oft laughed at the thought of believers being able to use
>> reason...
>
>John’s claim is factual.

Corbutt's claim is a lie. Just as you're now lying.

>>>>> And do you truly believe the DPD had no *REAL & VALID EVIDENCE* against Oswald in either the Kennedy or Tippit cases?
>>>
>>>> No they didn't.
>> Logical fallacy deleted.
>>>>> (I think Gil needs a new hobby.)
>>>> I think you're a fucking asshole.
>> Gil spanks Corbutt again...
>

>So do you think...

Why would **YOU** think that you should get any answers to your
questions when you REPEATEDLY run from mine?

Here you go:

Huckster so stupid that he believes (and refuses to deny):

That the "A.B.C.D" description in the Autopsy Report refers to the
location of the bullet wound in the back of JFK's head.

Yet is TERRIFIED of quoting the sentence that precedes that in the
Autopsy Report.

And why do you make the baseless and lyiing claim that JFK's neck
wound was dissected?

Watch, as Huckster simply runs away from his unsupported claims.

[David Von Pein]

"Conspiracists fail to outline the scenario that would be necessary for the bag to have actually been as short as Frazier and Randle describe it. It would require that the "phony bag" be forged in absolutely record time, in exactly the right length, and carried from the Depository even before the Dallas cops in the Depository knew that Frazier was saying that Oswald had carried a bag in to work! And somehow they got Oswald's prints on it. You've got to admire the foresight of those cops. They really lucked out when Frazier said that Oswald had carried a bag just like that into work that morning."

-- John McAdams; July 16, 2000

[Brian Doyle]

On Thursday, September 7, 2023 at 4:42:24 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:


> "Conspiracists fail to outline the scenario that would be necessary for the bag to have actually been as short as Frazier and Randle describe it. It would require that the "phony bag" be forged in absolutely record time, in exactly the right length, and carried from the Depository even before the Dallas cops in the Depository knew that Frazier was saying that Oswald had carried a bag in to work! And somehow they got Oswald's prints on it. You've got to admire the foresight of those cops. They really lucked out when Frazier said that Oswald had carried a bag just like that into work that morning."
>
> -- John McAdams; July 16, 2000

McAdams never stops to consider what he calls "foresight" is more appropriately called "planned conspiracy"...More particularly in this case "Assassination Black Operation"...

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 13:42:22 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>"Conspiracists fail to outline the scenario that would be necessary
> for the bag to have actually been as short as Frazier and Randle
> describe it.

This is simply their testimony. You *SPECULATE* that the bag was
longer, yet still not long enough to put the rifle in without being
taken apart.

You *SPECULATE* that there was a broken down rifle rifle in the paper
bag, DESPITE the evidence that contradicts this.

We don't have to "outline" a "scenario". We're dealing with the
evidence.

It is *YOU* who's desperate to "outline" a "scenario" that allows you
to get the rifle into the TSBD via Oswald's lunch bag. And helps your
speculation...

> It would require that the "phony bag" be forged in
> absolutely record time,

Support that. Document when the bag was photographed being walked out
of the TSBD.

Then you can explain the folds in the paper bag...

(But you won't.)

> in exactly the right length,

But it *wasn't* in the length you need!

So this is simply an outright LIE on your part.

> and carried from
> the Depository even before the Dallas cops in the Depository knew that
> Frazier was saying that Oswald had carried a bag in to work!

Document and source these empty claims of yours. Of course,
Chickenshit has already stated that these are lies.

> And somehow they got Oswald's prints on it.

Not hard to do. He WORKED there.

> You've got to admire the
> foresight of those cops. They really lucked out when Frazier said that
> Oswald had carried a bag just like that

Just like **WHAT**? Sounds like another lie to me...

> into work that morning."
>
>-- John McAdams; July 16, 2000

Logical fallacies, speculations, and crying about the eyewitnesses who
didn't say what you wanted them to say.

Not convincing anyone... according to polling...

[Bud]

On Thursday, September 7, 2023 at 5:24:43 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 13:42:22 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
> <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >"Conspiracists fail to outline the scenario that would be necessary
> > for the bag to have actually been as short as Frazier and Randle
> > describe it.
> This is simply their testimony. You *SPECULATE* that the bag was
> longer,

Deductive reasoning. Not surprising you don`t recognize it, you never use it.

> yet still not long enough to put the rifle in without being
> taken apart.

Of course the rifle would fit in the bag, why wouldn`t it?

> You *SPECULATE* that there was a broken down rifle rifle in the paper
> bag, DESPITE the evidence that contradicts this.

Like?

> We don't have to "outline" a "scenario". We're dealing with the
> evidence.

Try applying reasoning to it instead.

> It is *YOU* who's desperate to "outline" a "scenario" that allows you
> to get the rifle into the TSBD via Oswald's lunch bag. And helps your
> speculation...

Deductive reasoning. You can think that Oswald went to the location the rifle was kept on an unusual day and left with a long package that had nothing to do with the assassination if you like. The world needs stumps also.

> > It would require that the "phony bag" be forged in
> > absolutely record time,
> Support that. Document when the bag was photographed being walked out
> of the TSBD.

What time wouldn`t qualify as 'record time"?

> Then you can explain the folds in the paper bag...

They were made when the bag was folded. If you fold the bag in half, and half again you get those kinds of folds. Now pretend this hasn`t been explained to you before.

> (But you won't.)
> > in exactly the right length,
> But it *wasn't* in the length you need!

It is the length you don`t need it to be.

> So this is simply an outright LIE on your part.
> > and carried from
> > the Depository even before the Dallas cops in the Depository knew that
> > Frazier was saying that Oswald had carried a bag in to work!
> Document and source these empty claims of yours. Of course,
> Chickenshit has already stated that these are lies.

Stop lying about what I`ve said.

> > And somehow they got Oswald's prints on it.
> Not hard to do. He WORKED there.

How would they know what he touched? How would they know if something he touched produced recoverable prints?

> > You've got to admire the
> > foresight of those cops. They really lucked out when Frazier said that
> > Oswald had carried a bag just like that
> Just like **WHAT**? Sounds like another lie to me...

"big sack".

> > into work that morning."
> >
> >-- John McAdams; July 16, 2000
> Logical fallacies, speculations, and crying about the eyewitnesses who
> didn't say what you wanted them to say.

They wanted them to say what they saw. What they related is fine, for people who look at the right things correctly.

> Not convincing anyone... according to polling...

Let`s see what the polls say about this bag. "What bag?" would be almost everyone polled.

Now show everyone how I own you and do your troll thing.

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 14:47:10 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

[David Von Pein]

Stumps like Holmes can't figure out the easiest of the easy things connected with the JFK and Tippit murders ---- like:

....Oswald carrying his own rifle to work in a homemade paper bag on 11/22.

....Oswald shooting and killing Officer Tippit on 10th Street.

....Oswald purchasing his mail-order rifle from Klein's in March '63.

But if you're a Super Stump (like Holmes), none of the above facts are to be considered "facts" at all --- even though all 3 things above ARE, indeed proven and provable FACTS, without a shred of a doubt.

LNers rely on the evidence.
CT Stumps throw all the evidence in the toilet and pretend it was all faked.

IOW, LNers live in the real world.
CT Stumps reside in a Fantasy Land where everybody was out to frame a total stranger named Oswald.

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 15:39:34 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>Stumps like Holmes can't figure out the easiest of the easy things connected with the JFK and Tippit murders ---- like:

"When you start with ad hominem we know it won't go well for you." -
Huckster Sienzant

"Not only did you still not eliminate indigestion, you failed to
explain what this had to do with anything. Instead, when challenged to
make a case for anything, anything at all, you not only failed to make
that case, you went straight to the name-calling, as if calling anyone
who questions you names help support your claims.

It doesn’t. It establishes you cannot support your claims." - Huckster
Sienzant.

>....Oswald carrying his own rifle to work in a homemade paper bag on 11/22.

Sorry, assertions without evidence and begged questions don’t
establish anything. - Huckster Sienzant

>....Oswald shooting and killing Officer Tippit on 10th Street.

"I see you offering your opinion, and nothing else. I also see you
making an attempt to shift the burden of proof. Where’s your
evidence? Your argument, your burden." - Huckster Sienzant

>....Oswald purchasing his mail-order rifle from Klein's in March '63.

"...since you present no evidence in support of your assertion, I
feel free to reject your assertion." - Huckster Sienzant

> But if you're a Super Stump (like Holmes), none of the above facts
> are to be considered "facts" at all --- even though all 3 things above
> ARE, indeed proven and provable FACTS, without a shred of a doubt.

And yet, TIME AND TIME AGAIN I challenge you morons to CITE THE
EVIDENCE for these claims... and you keep running away.

As you do...

EVERY

SINGLE

TIME!

>LNers rely on the evidence.

No, you provably don't. As my current series detailing proven lies
told by the WCR clearly shows.

>CT Stumps throw all the evidence in the toilet and pretend it was all faked.

Logical fallacies won't save you. Nor convince anyone.

>IOW, LNers live in the real world.

Another empty unsupported claim... a lie, according to Chickenshit.

>CT Stumps reside in a Fantasy Land where everybody was out to frame a total stranger named Oswald.

Logical fallacies won't convince anyone.

Only the evidence, AND CITATIONS TO THAT EVIDENCE, can do so.

[David Von Pein]

"The 'bracketing' of when the SBT bullet struck the two victims in the limousine, in fact, only further makes me think more highly of the Warren Commission and its detailed study of the assassination.

The WC and FBI did very detailed angle measurements in May '64, via a surveyor and "thru-the-Oswald-rifle-scope" determinations from the Sniper's Nest. And it was determined (as best as could be determined, circa 1964) that both victims were generally lined up in the limo to receive the "SBT" bullet from approx. Z210 through approx. Z225.

Conspiracy theorists scoff at this "bracketing", saying it can't be right. But those CTers are attempting to place an EXACTITUDE on the event that can't really be placed there. Some things MUST be estimated to a degree....and the WC did that. And did a damn good job at it too. Because "Z210-Z225" certainly encompasses the now-widely-accepted SBT Z-Frame of Z224 (a frame I fully endorse for many, many reasons).

In other words, the WC got it perfectly correct DECADES prior to the digital Z-Film copies fully backing up their findings of a SBT hit somewhere between Z210 and Z225. So what's the big gripe, is my question? The Warren Commission GOT IT RIGHT IN THE FIRST PLACE. Conspiracists just don't wish to accept the Occam's-like SBT scenario of one bullet transitting both victims.

Instead, conspiracy advocates would rather rely on pure guesswork, involving multiple disappearing bullets and an SBT-like alignment of wounds on two men (created by two or three gunmen!) that would make David Copperfield proud."

-- David Von Pein; April 8, 2007

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 16:24:16 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

Notice folks, Von Penis ran from the ENTIRE refutation of his post...

>"The 'bracketing' of when the SBT bullet struck the two victims in
> the limousine, in fact, only further makes me think more highly of the
> Warren Commission and its detailed study of the assassination.

A meaningless statement.

> The WC and FBI did very detailed angle measurements in May '64, via
> a surveyor and "thru-the-Oswald-rifle-scope" determinations from the
> Sniper's Nest. And it was determined (as best as could be determined,
> circa 1964) that both victims were generally lined up in the limo to
> receive the "SBT" bullet from approx. Z210 through approx. Z225.

"I see you offering your opinion, and nothing else. I also see you
making an attempt to shift the burden of proof. Where’s your
evidence? Your argument, your burden." - Huckster Sienzant

Von Penis keeps offering his own speculation, and simply forgets to
cite any evidence that supports it.

So we know he's a liar, according to Chickenshit.

> Conspiracy theorists scoff at this "bracketing", saying it can't be
> right. But those CTers are attempting to place an EXACTITUDE on the
> event that can't really be placed there. Some things MUST be estimated
> to a degree....and the WC did that. And did a damn good job at it too.
> Because "Z210-Z225" certainly encompasses the now-widely-accepted SBT
> Z-Frame of Z224 (a frame I fully endorse for many, many reasons).

JFK was killed in the limo. An equally brilliant observational
analogy to your speculation.

> In other words, the WC got it perfectly correct DECADES prior to the
> digital Z-Film copies fully backing up their findings of a SBT hit
> somewhere between Z210 and Z225. So what's the big gripe, is my
> question? The Warren Commission GOT IT RIGHT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
> Conspiracists just don't wish to accept the Occam's-like SBT scenario
> of one bullet transitting both victims.

You are, of course, simply begging the question... not a SHRED of
evidence, and no citations in sight...

> Instead, conspiracy advocates would rather rely on pure guesswork,
> involving multiple disappearing bullets and an SBT-like alignment of
> wounds on two men (created by two or three gunmen!) that would make
> David Copperfield proud."

Sorry moron - the "guesswork" is entirely on your part.

Still no citations...

>-- David Von Pein; April 8, 2007

The coward runs when I refute his nonsense...

EVERY

SINGLE

TIME!

[John Corbett]

Z210 is also the earliest Oswald would have had a clear line of sight to JFK. Had the WC had
the technology we have today and decades to observe the Z-film. I think they could have given
us a tighter bracket. The bulging of Connally's lapel at Z224 and the simultaneous arm flips of
the two victims at Z226 make be very confident the single bullet struck in the Z222-223 window.

[donald willis]

On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 9:33:07 AM UTC-7, David Von Pein wrote:
> "IMO, the prayer man theory has the same fatal weakness as other JFK conspiracy theories: Instead of a narrative explaining how the evidence fits together to show what happened, we get a bunch of things that look “suspicious” and unseen plotters who plant evidence, suborn perjury, and do anything else necessary to frame the poor patsy.
>

> The problem is that the masterminds are, as usual, all-powerful and yet incredibly stupid. They plant a weapon they’ve tied to Oswald yet somehow neglect to keep the patsy from wandering outside

That's what led me to believe that the "masterminds" kept him from wandering by making him a shooter. (Happy LNs!) On the 5th floor (Unhappy LNs!)

dcw

to acquire what should’ve been an ironclad alibi.
>

> So now they have to get anyone who knew the truth to lie about it. But hey, no problem. With the right threats, who wouldn’t agree to help frame an innocent man in a president’s murder and keep quiet about it forever, right? Even better, Oswald doesn’t mention his alibi either."
>
> -- Jean Davison; May 1, 2016

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 17:51:24 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Z210 is also the earliest Oswald would have had a clear line of sight to JFK. Had the WC had
>the technology we have today and decades to observe the Z-film. I think they could have given
>us a tighter bracket. The bulging of Connally's lapel at Z224 and the simultaneous arm flips of
>the two victims at Z226 make be very confident the single bullet struck in the Z222-223 window.

You are, of course, simply begging the question. As Huckster says: "I

[Chuck Schuyler]

On Thursday, September 7, 2023 at 6:46:24 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 16:24:16 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
> <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> Notice folks, Von Penis ran from the ENTIRE refutation of his post...

In your opinion.

> >"The 'bracketing' of when the SBT bullet struck the two victims in
> > the limousine, in fact, only further makes me think more highly of the
> > Warren Commission and its detailed study of the assassination.

> A meaningless statement.

To you, a kook.

> > The WC and FBI did very detailed angle measurements in May '64, via
> > a surveyor and "thru-the-Oswald-rifle-scope" determinations from the
> > Sniper's Nest. And it was determined (as best as could be determined,
> > circa 1964) that both victims were generally lined up in the limo to
> > receive the "SBT" bullet from approx. Z210 through approx. Z225.

> "I see you offering your opinion, and nothing else. I also see you
> making an attempt to shift the burden of proof. Where’s your
> evidence? Your argument, your burden." - Huckster Sienzant
> Von Penis keeps offering his own speculation, and simply forgets to
> cite any evidence that supports it.

This is a fringe reset. The evidence is well known by you, the conclusions drawn from the evidence by the WC and HSCA is available online. You know this.

>
> So we know he's a liar, according to Chickenshit.


> > Conspiracy theorists scoff at this "bracketing", saying it can't be
> > right. But those CTers are attempting to place an EXACTITUDE on the
> > event that can't really be placed there. Some things MUST be estimated
> > to a degree....and the WC did that. And did a damn good job at it too.
> > Because "Z210-Z225" certainly encompasses the now-widely-accepted SBT
> > Z-Frame of Z224 (a frame I fully endorse for many, many reasons).

> JFK was killed in the limo. An equally brilliant observational
> analogy to your speculation.


> > In other words, the WC got it perfectly correct DECADES prior to the
> > digital Z-Film copies fully backing up their findings of a SBT hit
> > somewhere between Z210 and Z225. So what's the big gripe, is my
> > question? The Warren Commission GOT IT RIGHT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
> > Conspiracists just don't wish to accept the Occam's-like SBT scenario
> > of one bullet transitting both victims.

> You are, of course, simply begging the question... not a SHRED of
> evidence, and no citations in sight...

Fringe reset. The SBT is and has been cited repeatedly by your critics, the cites well known by you already. You lie and pretend links to the WCR and HSCA must be provided ad nauseam. We've all been posting here forever, and this is SBT stuff is well-worn territory. You know the studies, you know how to find them.

> > Instead, conspiracy advocates would rather rely on pure guesswork,
> > involving multiple disappearing bullets and an SBT-like alignment of
> > wounds on two men (created by two or three gunmen!) that would make
> > David Copperfield proud."
> Sorry moron - the "guesswork" is entirely on your part.
>
> Still no citations...

Provided below. Again.

https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report

[Ben Holmes]

On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 08:04:50 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thursday, September 7, 2023 at 6:46:24?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 16:24:16 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
>> <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> Notice folks, Von Penis ran from the ENTIRE refutation of his post...
>
>In your opinion.

There's no "opinion" about it... you can't cite where he did.

>>>"The 'bracketing' of when the SBT bullet struck the two victims in
>>> the limousine, in fact, only further makes me think more highly of the
>>> Warren Commission and its detailed study of the assassination.
>
>> A meaningless statement.
>
>To you, a kook.

To you ... watch folks, as Chuckles ABSOLUTELY REFUSES to explain it.

>>> The WC and FBI did very detailed angle measurements in May '64, via
>>> a surveyor and "thru-the-Oswald-rifle-scope" determinations from the
>>> Sniper's Nest. And it was determined (as best as could be determined,
>>> circa 1964) that both victims were generally lined up in the limo to
>>> receive the "SBT" bullet from approx. Z210 through approx. Z225.
>
>> "I see you offering your opinion, and nothing else. I also see you
>> making an attempt to shift the burden of proof. Where’s your
>> evidence? Your argument, your burden." - Huckster Sienzant
>> Von Penis keeps offering his own speculation, and simply forgets to
>> cite any evidence that supports it.
>
>This is a fringe reset.

Nope. As Huckster points out: "...since you present no evidence in

support of your assertion, I feel free to reject your assertion."

>> So we know he's a liar, according to Chickenshit.

Chuckles is afraid of upsetting Chickenshit... so he says nothing...

>>> Conspiracy theorists scoff at this "bracketing", saying it can't be
>>> right. But those CTers are attempting to place an EXACTITUDE on the
>>> event that can't really be placed there. Some things MUST be estimated
>>> to a degree....and the WC did that. And did a damn good job at it too.
>>> Because "Z210-Z225" certainly encompasses the now-widely-accepted SBT
>>> Z-Frame of Z224 (a frame I fully endorse for many, many reasons).
>
>> JFK was killed in the limo. An equally brilliant observational
>> analogy to your speculation.

Dead silence...

>>> In other words, the WC got it perfectly correct DECADES prior to the
>>> digital Z-Film copies fully backing up their findings of a SBT hit
>>> somewhere between Z210 and Z225. So what's the big gripe, is my
>>> question? The Warren Commission GOT IT RIGHT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
>>> Conspiracists just don't wish to accept the Occam's-like SBT scenario
>>> of one bullet transitting both victims.
>
>> You are, of course, simply begging the question... not a SHRED of
>> evidence, and no citations in sight...
>
>Fringe reset.

Nope. As Huckster points out: "You’re not interested in a discussion
of the facts and evidence in the case, because you know it will go
badly for you."

>>> Instead, conspiracy advocates would rather rely on pure guesswork,
>>> involving multiple disappearing bullets and an SBT-like alignment of
>>> wounds on two men (created by two or three gunmen!) that would make
>>> David Copperfield proud."
>>
>> Sorry moron - the "guesswork" is entirely on your part.
>>
>> Still no citations...
>
>Provided below. Again.
>
>https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report

It's sad that I have to keep correcting morons... a cite to EVIDENCE
is what I **always* mean. Unless the topic is the WCR, citations *to*
the WCR are meaningless.

>>>-- David Von Pein; April 8, 2007
>
>> The coward runs when I refute his nonsense...
>>
>> EVERY
>>
>> SINGLE
>>
>> TIME!

Von Penis did indeed run. And Chuckles can't deny it.

[Chuck Schuyler]

A summary of the FBI tests, the commission exhibit numbers, etc. is all provided in the WCR. The commission found persuasive evidence that the bullet which hit JFK in the upper back fired from above and behind went on to strike Connally. You know this. You know the tests, you know the story behind how the SBT was developed, who is the principal author of the SBT, and so on. You know the exhibit numbers by heart, the conclusions, and on and on. This is all well known and well discussed by all of us over the past several decades. Any crying jag on your part claiming nothing has been provided shows what a troll you really are.

You know what you still haven't provided? Any tests or links to tests, etc. to support your hobby point that a bullet was fired from in front of the limo, piercing the front limo windshield and striking JFK or JBC. Get busy. Get off your lazy ass and do some work. Stop shifting the burden and provide back-up for your hobby points.

> >>>-- David Von Pein; April 8, 2007
> >
> >> The coward runs when I refute his nonsense...
> >>
> >> EVERY
> >>
> >> SINGLE
> >>
> >> TIME!

> Von Penis did indeed run. And Chuckles can't deny it.

I hereby deny it.

Now what?

[John Corbett]

The WC deserve kudos for figuring all his out in a limited amount of time without modern
film enhancement techniques we have now. They missed what I think is the clincher for the
SBT. That would be the simultaneous raising of their arms by JFK and JBC. Looking at
the Z-film in normal speed without enhancements, it appears that JFK is already reacting
to his wound when he reappears from behind the sign at Z225. However, by enhancing the
frames and stabilizing the image, we can see JFK's right hand in Z224 even though his face
is not yet visible. It definitely has continued down in Z225. His reaction doesn't happen until
one frame later when his hand reverses direction as he begins to lift his arms. JBC described
his reaction in doubling over but that was a secondary reaction which occurred about a half
second later. His initial reaction which was completely reflexive and involuntary, was to flip
his right arm upward which he did at the exact moment JFK's arms came upward. This is
confirmation that the WC got it right despite missing this compelling clue.

[Ben Holmes]

On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 11:18:10 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Friday, September 8, 2023 at 10:16:29?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 08:04:50 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
>> <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>On Thursday, September 7, 2023 at 6:46:24?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 16:24:16 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
>>>> <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Notice folks, Von Penis ran from the ENTIRE refutation of his post...
>>>
>>>In your opinion.
>
>> There's no "opinion" about it... you can't cite where he did.

As usual, Chuckles ran...

>>>>>"The 'bracketing' of when the SBT bullet struck the two victims in
>>>>> the limousine, in fact, only further makes me think more highly of the
>>>>> Warren Commission and its detailed study of the assassination.
>>>
>>>> A meaningless statement.
>>>
>>>To you, a kook.
>
>> To you ... watch folks, as Chuckles ABSOLUTELY REFUSES to explain it.

And, as usual, Chuckles ran...

>>>>> The WC and FBI did very detailed angle measurements in May '64, via
>>>>> a surveyor and "thru-the-Oswald-rifle-scope" determinations from the
>>>>> Sniper's Nest. And it was determined (as best as could be determined,
>>>>> circa 1964) that both victims were generally lined up in the limo to
>>>>> receive the "SBT" bullet from approx. Z210 through approx. Z225.
>>>
>>>> "I see you offering your opinion, and nothing else. I also see you
>>>> making an attempt to shift the burden of proof. Where’s your
>>>> evidence? Your argument, your burden." - Huckster Sienzant
>>>> Von Penis keeps offering his own speculation, and simply forgets to
>>>> cite any evidence that supports it.
>>>
>>>This is a fringe reset.
>
>> Nope. As Huckster points out: "...since you present no evidence in
>> support of your assertion, I feel free to reject your assertion."

Chuckles doesn't want to make Huckster mad... so he ran.

>>>> So we know he's a liar, according to Chickenshit.
>> Chuckles is afraid of upsetting Chickenshit... so he says nothing...

Even when it's pointed out, he runs...

>>>>> Conspiracy theorists scoff at this "bracketing", saying it can't be
>>>>> right. But those CTers are attempting to place an EXACTITUDE on the
>>>>> event that can't really be placed there. Some things MUST be estimated
>>>>> to a degree....and the WC did that. And did a damn good job at it too.
>>>>> Because "Z210-Z225" certainly encompasses the now-widely-accepted SBT
>>>>> Z-Frame of Z224 (a frame I fully endorse for many, many reasons).
>>>
>>>> JFK was killed in the limo. An equally brilliant observational
>>>> analogy to your speculation.
>>
>> Dead silence...

Chuckles is clearly a coward.

>>>>> In other words, the WC got it perfectly correct DECADES prior to the
>>>>> digital Z-Film copies fully backing up their findings of a SBT hit
>>>>> somewhere between Z210 and Z225. So what's the big gripe, is my
>>>>> question? The Warren Commission GOT IT RIGHT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
>>>>> Conspiracists just don't wish to accept the Occam's-like SBT scenario
>>>>> of one bullet transitting both victims.
>>>
>>>> You are, of course, simply begging the question... not a SHRED of
>>>> evidence, and no citations in sight...
>>>
>>>Fringe reset.
>>
>> Nope. As Huckster points out: "You’re not interested in a discussion
>> of the facts and evidence in the case, because you know it will go
>> badly for you."

Again, Chuckles is TERRIFIED of the wrath of Huckster...

>>>>> Instead, conspiracy advocates would rather rely on pure guesswork,
>>>>> involving multiple disappearing bullets and an SBT-like alignment of
>>>>> wounds on two men (created by two or three gunmen!) that would make
>>>>> David Copperfield proud."
>>>>
>>>> Sorry moron - the "guesswork" is entirely on your part.
>>>>
>>>> Still no citations...
>>>
>>>Provided below. Again.
>>>
>>>https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report
>
>> It's sad that I have to keep correcting morons... a cite to EVIDENCE
>> is what I **always* mean. Unless the topic is the WCR, citations *to*
>> the WCR are meaningless.
>
> A summary of the FBI tests, the commission exhibit numbers, etc. is
> all provided in the WCR.

This is your unsupported assertion.

As Huckster says: :I see you offering your opinion, and nothing else.

I also see you making an attempt to shift the burden of proof. Where’s
your evidence? Your argument, your burden."

I deleted all your whining about what someone concluded.

> You know what you still haven't provided? Any tests or links to
> tests, etc. to support your hobby point that a bullet was fired from
> in front of the limo,


You know what you still haven't provided? Any tests or links to

tests, etc. to support your hobby point that a bullet killed JFK.

>>>>>-- David Von Pein; April 8, 2007
>>>
>>>> The coward runs when I refute his nonsense...
>>>>
>>>> EVERY
>>>>
>>>> SINGLE
>>>>
>>>> TIME!
>
>> Von Penis did indeed run. And Chuckles can't deny it.

Notice, I didn't say Chuckles can't *LIE* about it, I stated that

Chuckles can't deny it.

Note that Chuckles provided no links to where Von Penis answered my
refutation.

[Ben Holmes]

On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 11:32:03 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

>The WC deserve kudos for figuring all his out in a limited amount of time without modern
>film enhancement techniques we have now. They missed what I think is the clincher for the
>SBT. That would be the simultaneous raising of their arms by JFK and JBC. Looking at
>the Z-film in normal speed without enhancements, it appears that JFK is already reacting
>to his wound when he reappears from behind the sign at Z225. However, by enhancing the
>frames and stabilizing the image, we can see JFK's right hand in Z224 even though his face
>is not yet visible. It definitely has continued down in Z225. His reaction doesn't happen until
>one frame later when his hand reverses direction as he begins to lift his arms. JBC described
>his reaction in doubling over but that was a secondary reaction which occurred about a half
>second later. His initial reaction which was completely reflexive and involuntary, was to flip
>his right arm upward which he did at the exact moment JFK's arms came upward. This is
>confirmation that the WC got it right despite missing this compelling clue.