|
|
 Up |
|
  |
Author: David Von PeinDavid Von Pein Date: Mar 4, 2008 11:53
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/18f532582a1b35c7/89...?#890169ca1787e705
DEBATING THE JFK CASE (PART 32):
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT -- The JFK Assassination: The Ongoing "Lone Assassin vs.
Conspiracy" Debate.
FEATURED TEXT -- Archived JFK Forum Messages From February 2005 and
February 2007.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CTer (A CONSPIRACY THEORIST) -- NO ONE ever put Lee Harvey Oswald on
the 6th floor at the time of the shooting. It's a lie to assert
otherwise.
DVP (DAVID VON PEIN) -- Howard Brennan's existence makes the above
statement a complete falsehood.
But the CT-Kook who wrote that nonsense doesn't WANT Brennan to be
right....so we'll continue to have to contend with such stupid
statements as the one quoted above.
|
| Show full article (12.76Kb) |
|
| | 11 Comments |
|
|
Author: David Von PeinDavid Von Pein Date: Mar 4, 2008 11:59
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/6285ffaa95b36dcb/ba...?#ba327c06bc876aab
DEBATING THE JFK CASE (PART 12):
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT -- The JFK Assassination: The Ongoing "Lone Assassin vs.
Conspiracy" Debate.
FEATURED TEXT -- Archived JFK Forum Messages From February 2006, March
2006, June 2006, November 2006, and March 2007.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CTer (A CONSPIRACY THEORIST) -- {Lee Harvey} Oswald's ties with the
Soviet Union make me suspicious that they put him up to killing
Kennedy.
DVP (DAVID VON PEIN) -- And via such a plot, Oswald was just willing
to use his own rifle to murder the President, huh? And was willing to
leave that traceable weapon in the building after doing the deed?
Now, yes, I believe Oswald did do those two things -- but it ONLY
makes sense if he was acting alone, with nobody pulling his strings.
|
| Show full article (14.95Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Date: Mar 5, 2008 03:16
On Mar 4, 5:59 am, David Von Pein aol.com> wrote:> www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/6285ffaa...
>
> DEBATING THE JFK CASE (PART 12):
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> SUBJECT -- The JFK Assassination: The Ongoing "Lone Assassin vs.
> Conspiracy" Debate.
>
> FEATURED TEXT -- Archived JFK Forum Messages From February 2006, March
> 2006, June 2006, November 2006, and March 2007.
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> CTer (A CONSPIRACY THEORIST) -- {Lee Harvey} Oswald's ties with the
> Soviet Union make me suspicious that they put him up to killing
> Kennedy.
|
| Show full article (22.47Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: David Von PeinDavid Von Pein Date: Mar 5, 2008 04:35
>>> "You obviously selectively read, otherwise you would have known about these {BOH witnesses}..." <<<
Any and ALL "BOH Wound" witnesses are trumped (forever and always) by
the following two pieces of related evidence/information:
1.) This X-ray of the right side of JFK's head:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0061b...
-- And: --
2.) This statement from the HSCA:
"The evidence indicates that the autopsy photographs and X-rays
were taken of President Kennedy at the time of his autopsy and that
they had not been altered in any manner." -- HSCA; Vol. 7; Pg. 41
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0026a...
But, Rob, please continue to totally ignore the above 2 critical items
of evidence and "not altered in any manner" information. Being the
kook you are (or are pretending to be), surely you shall continue to
ignore those items. Correct?
Addendum......
Today's "Just For Laughs" Idiotic CT-Kook Quote Of The Day:
|
| Show full article (1.21Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: David Von PeinDavid Von Pein Date: Mar 5, 2008 04:55
DEBATING THE JFK CASE (PART 3):
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT -- The JFK Assassination: The Ongoing "Lone Assassin vs.
Conspiracy" Debate.
FEATURED TEXT -- Archived JFK Forum Messages From March 2005 and March
2007.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CTer (A CONSPIRACY THEORIST) -- I have chosen to accept what WAS 1st-
day evidence. Witnesses can be coerced in a variety of ways as time
marches on.
DVP (DAVID VON PEIN) -- Which brings up another interesting point (re.
"1st Day Evidence") -- If you've ever watched the November 22nd "As-
It-
Is-Happening" news broadcasts from any of the three TV networks, you
will no doubt notice an obvious "LN/Oswald Only" trend right from the
very first bulletins and first-day accounts.
|
| Show full article (12.77Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: David Von PeinDavid Von Pein Date: Mar 5, 2008 09:47
>>> "If only you had an extra non-Oswald bullet to rely on. Too bad." <<<
ROB THEN SAID:
>>> "I've got extra bullets, Dave. Too bad for you. I have the windshield bullet, the curb bullet and the bullet that hit the sidewalk, plus the 3 for JFK and 2 for JBC." <<<
DVP THEN SAID:
>>> "Hidden in your basement, huh?" <<<
ROB THEN SAID:
>>> "Why would they be in my basement? I have a permit for my gun. They are near the gun safe." <<<
DVP NOW SAYS:
Lord H. God! I even need to talk Robby through my "basement" retort.
Well, I'm not going to. Let him figure it out (some month/year).
ROB SAID:
>>> "Where are they {all the extra bullets} indeed?" <<<
DVP NOW SAYS:
Oh, I can tell you, if you want to know. .... They're all in your
head. And NOWHERE ELSE.
|
| Show full article (7.36Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Date: Mar 7, 2008 00:59
On Mar 4, 10:35 pm, David Von Pein aol.com> wrote:>>>> "You obviously selectively read, otherwise you would have known about these {BOH witnesses}..." <<<
"Any and ALL "BOH Wound" witnesses are trumped (forever and always) by
the following two pieces of related evidence/information:"
First of all, which BOH wound are we talking about? The one the
autopsy doctors said or the one the Clark panel moved FOUR inches
higher? Finck wouldn't budge on this move as he felt the autopsy
doctors knew better than people who just examined photos.
"1.) This X-ray of the right side of JFK's head:"
Again the autopsy report contridicts BOTH the photos and the X-rays so
this is moot.
"-- And: --
"2.) This statement from the HSCA:"
"The evidence indicates that the autopsy photographs and X-rays were
taken of President Kennedy at the time of his autopsy and that they
had not been altered in any manner." -- HSCA; Vol. 7; Pg. 41"
|
| Show full article (1.98Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Robert HarrisRobert Harris Date: Mar 7, 2008 07:21
David, why do you only go after the WEAKEST arguments for conspiracy?
Post your rebuttal to this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ql6VqZDiC6s
Bad theories often sound good at a glance, but they quickly fall apart
as you go deeper and deeper into the evidence.
What I found out years ago, was that the deeper you go into this the
more solid it becomes. I first learned about that 285 shot, reading
Nellie's testimony although my articles back then referenced a shot at
frame 284.
At that early stage, I had no clue that Alvarez placed the noise at 285,
or even that the huge consensus of witnesses recalled closely bunched
shots at the end.
I hadn't looked at Clint Hill, Charles Brehm, Kellerman, Greer, etc.
etc, all of whom confirmed that shot in a multitude of ways.
Even if you don't buy it now, you need to look at it for the simple
reason, that this is an explanation that you cannot even begin to
refute.
And if you REALLY believe your theory is correct then there are no
plausible challenges that you should ever ignore.
|
| Show full article (14.58Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Ben HolmesBen Holmes Date: Mar 7, 2008 15:48
In article earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
Robert Harris says...>
>
>
>David, why do you only go after the WEAKEST arguments for conspiracy?
>
>Post your rebuttal to this:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ql6VqZDiC6s
>
>Bad theories often sound good at a glance, but they quickly fall apart
>as you go deeper and deeper into the evidence.
>
>What I found out years ago, was that the deeper you go into this the
>more solid it becomes. I first learned about that 285 shot, reading
>Nellie's testimony although my articles back then referenced a shot at
>frame 284.
>
>At that early stage, I had no clue that Alvarez placed the noise at 285, ...
|
| Show full article (1.53Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: aeffectsaeffects Date: Mar 7, 2008 19:22
On Mar 6, 10:21 pm, Robert Harris yahoo.com> wrote:> David, why do you only go after the WEAKEST arguments for conspiracy?
>
> Post your rebuttal to this:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ql6VqZDiC6s
>
> Bad theories often sound good at a glance, but they quickly fall apart
> as you go deeper and deeper into the evidence.
>
> What I found out years ago, was that the deeper you go into this the
> more solid it becomes. I first learned about that 285 shot, reading
> Nellie's testimony although my articles back then referenced a shot at
> frame 284.
these frame numbers and ANY-ALL relationship[s] to same mean EXACTLY
what, IF the Zapruder film is altered, please?
> At that early stage, I had no clue that Alvarez placed the noise at 285,
> or even that the huge consensus of witnesses recalled closely bunched
> shots at the end.
>
> I hadn't looked at Clint Hill...
|
| Show full article (10.42Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
