David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed

[Martin Weidmann]

Above we have two of the most ridiculous (and provably false) statements ever made by a JFK conspiracy believer.

First of all, I don't believe in the fairytale you call the WC report. Secondly, I don't have a conspiracy theory, nor do I care if it was a conspiracy or not. I just want to know what really happened.

And don't be a coward by just ridiculously claiming that my statements are "provably false". Prove them to be false, if you can.
But you won't, because you can't, and you know it. Hence the ridiculous claim.

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

Oh, it is the biggest mix-up that you have ever seen.
My father, he was Orange and me mother, she was green.
My father was an Ulster man, proud Protestant was he.
My mother was a Catholic girl, from county Cork was she.
They were married in two churches, lived happily enough,
Until the day that I was born and things got rather tough.
Oh, it is the biggest mix-up that you have ever seen.
My father, he was Orange and me mother, she was green.
Baptized by Father Riley, I was rushed away by car,
To be made a little Orangeman, me father's shining star.
I was christened "David Anthony, " but still, inspite of that,
To me father, I was William, while my mother called me Pat.
Oh, it is the biggest mix-up that you have ever seen.
My father, he was Orange and me mother, she was green.
With Mother every Sunday, to Mass I'd proudly stroll.
Then after that, the Orange lodge would try to save my soul.
For both sides tried to claim me, but i was smart because
I'd play the flute or play the harp, depending where I was.
Oh, it is the biggest mix-up that you have ever seen.
My father, he was Orange and me mother, she was green.
One day me Ma's relations came round to visit me.
Just as my father's kinfolk were all sitting down to tea.
We tried to smooth things over, but they all began to fight.
And me, being strictly neutral, I bashed everyone in sight.
Oh, it is the biggest mix-up that you have ever seen.
My father, he was Orange and me mother, she was green.
My parents never could agree about my type of school.
My learning was all done at home, that's why I'm such a fool.
They've both passed on, God rest 'em, but left me caught between
That awful color problem of the Orange and the Green.
Oh it is the biggest mix up that you have ever seen
My father, he was Orange and me mother, she was green.
Yes it is the biggest mix up that you have ever seen
My father, he was Orange and me mother, she was green.

[John Iacoletti]

First of all, I don't believe in the fairytale you call the WC report. Secondly, I don't have a conspiracy theory, nor do I care if it was a conspiracy or not. I just want to know what really happened.

Dave refers to anybody who doesn’t accept his assumptions and speculations as a “conspiracy theorist”.

[Michael Walton]

Some interesting things that are never mentioned by Dave and the LN team:

The House Committee from the 70s said there was a conspiracy. They didn't go all out but they DID say that. So who is right - the blue-ribbon WC team, or the blue-ribbon House Committee team? And I guess all of those folks on the House team were nutty conspiracy folks too, right?

Johnson knew others were involved. So I guess Johnson was a conspiracy nut too?

Nixon knew. So I guess what...another conspiracy kook?

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/06/05/nixon-helms-cia-jfk-assassination-00037232

And yet, Dave and others have absolutely no ability to just question things, to apply a little bit of critical thinking. Amazing.

[Andrew Mason]

Don't know about John, but those witness identifications during a pathetically conducted line up mean very little. The biggest give away is that normally when 5 people watch the same car accident, you will get five different versions of what actually happened. Here, in this case, we are supposed to believe that all the witnesses made the exact same identification. If you believe that for a second then I have a bridge in London to sell you.

I once watched a robbery happening before my eyes. I saw the guy walking behind a girl and instantly knew something was up. He then ran up to her and pulled her phone out of her hands. It all happened very quickly and when the police asked me if I would be able to positively identify the man, I said no simply because it all happened so quickly. Yet, in this case, the Davis sisters who only saw the killer run past their front door for no more than two or three seconds made a positive identification? Give me a break!

Positive ID is not needed if the person fit the general description AND the suspect was immediately followed into a general area, then as he was approached by police he punched an officer in the face, pulled out his the victim's phone out of his waistband and said "Well, its all over now", and was carrying ID that was identical to the ID he left at the scene of a robbery committed an hour earlier.  Or would that crime with those facts still be unsolveable for you?

[Richard Smith]

It would have been an enormous coincidence if the murders of JFK and Tippit were unrelated.  JFK is the only president to ever be murdered in Dallas.  Tippit was the only DPD officer to be murdered in a several year span before and after 1963.  Both were murdered in broad daylight within a short time and distance of one another.  Individuals such as Hugh Aynesworth left the TSBD upon learning of the Tippit murder in Oak Cliff because he thought the events were related.  That doesn't alone mean that they had to related, but there was a high probability of being related given the proximity in time and distance and extreme rarity of these events.  Now we know with absolute certainty that they were related based upon the evidence and investigation.  To suggest otherwise is another contrarian absurdity.

[Martin Weidmann]

Positive ID is not needed if the person fit the general description AND the suspect was immediately followed into a general area, then as he was approached by police he punched an officer in the face, pulled out his the victim's phone out of his waistband and said "Well, its all over now", and was carrying ID that was identical to the ID he left at the scene of a robbery committed an hour earlier.  Or would that crime with those facts still be unsolveable for you?

Positive ID is not needed if the person fit the general description

Contact the innocence project. They probably will disagree with you.

pulled out his the victim's phone out of his waistband and said "Well, its all over now", and was carrying ID that was identical to the ID he left at the scene of a robbery committed an hour earlier.

What in the world are you rambling on about?