Lee Harvey Oswald and Charles Whitman
bigdog
This has been raised before but I just watched a History International
program about infamous murderers and one of the subjects was Charles
Whitman, the infamous tower sniper at the University of Texas. Like
Oswald, Whitman was a USMC Sharpshooter, which is to say, he reached the
second of the USMC qualifying level. Neither Oswald nor Whitman achieved
the rank of Expert. In fact Whitman's best score was 215, just 3 points
above Oswald's Sharpshooter qualifying score. Less than 3 years after the
JFK assassination and just down I-35 from Dallas, Whitman murdered 15
people in a gruesome crime spree. First he stabbed his sleeping wife to
death, then went to his mother's house and stabbed her to death. He then
drove to the University of Texas, dragged a foot locker with several
firearms and lots of ammo to the observation deck of the UT tower. He
killed three more people at the entrance to the observation deck, went out
on the deck and barricaded the door behind him. Over the course of the
next several hours, he killed 10 more people and wounded many more from a
height and distance far greater than Oswald shot and killed JFK from. He
did this despite a skill level barely above that of LHO.
In the movie Full Metal Jacket, the USMC drill seargent, masterfully
played by R. Lee Ermey, bragged about the prowess of both Oswald and
Whitman as the recruits began marksmanship training. I bring this up only
for the purposes of illustrating the level of USMC training and how even
average Marines, such as Oswald and Whitman, were deadly accurate with a
rifle.
Oswald and Whitman had one more thing in common. Neither was convicted of
their crimes. Both were shot to death before they could stand trial. Some
would argue that this should entitle both to the presumption of innocence.
Really? You be the judge.
Anthony Marsh
>
> This has been raised before but I just watched a History International
> program about infamous murderers and one of the subjects was Charles
> Whitman, the infamous tower sniper at the University of Texas. Like
> Oswald, Whitman was a USMC Sharpshooter, which is to say, he reached the
> second of the USMC qualifying level. Neither Oswald nor Whitman achieved
> the rank of Expert. In fact Whitman's best score was 215, just 3 points
> above Oswald's Sharpshooter qualifying score. Less than 3 years after the
> JFK assassination and just down I-35 from Dallas, Whitman murdered 15
> people in a gruesome crime spree. First he stabbed his sleeping wife to
> death, then went to his mother's house and stabbed her to death. He then
> drove to the University of Texas, dragged a foot locker with several
> firearms and lots of ammo to the observation deck of the UT tower. He
> killed three more people at the entrance to the observation deck, went out
> on the deck and barricaded the door behind him. Over the course of the
> next several hours, he killed 10 more people and wounded many more from a
> height and distance far greater than Oswald shot and killed JFK from. He
> did this despite a skill level barely above that of LHO.
>
And did he use a piece of junk like the Mannlicher-Carcano? NO. Apples
and oranges again.
> In the movie Full Metal Jacket, the USMC drill seargent, masterfully
> played by R. Lee Ermey, bragged about the prowess of both Oswald and
> Whitman as the recruits began marksmanship training. I bring this up only
> for the purposes of illustrating the level of USMC training and how even
> average Marines, such as Oswald and Whitman, were deadly accurate with a
> rifle.
>
Which rifle? Any rifle?
Ace Kefford
Just yesterday I was talking about that scene in Full Metal Jacket, as
my friend recalled one of the young Marines referring to Oswald as
shooting the President "from that Book Suppository."
Ace
timstter
Nonsense, Marsh. You can shoot or you can't shoot. Oswald and Whitman
could both shoot.
This *apples and oranges* stuff is a ridiculous argument. The
Mannlicher-Carcano is a perfectly capable killing device, as Oswald
proved.
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
Coondog
Oswald was deadly accurate with the Carcano in Dallas that day.
Whitman was deadly accurate with a scoped Remington 6mm that day in
Austin.
While Whitman was better armed they both were deadly accurate.
Bill Clarke
John Blubaugh
>
> - Show quoted text -
LHO may never have fired a shot that day.....
JB
bigdog
>
>
Which day? If you are talking about August 1, 1966, you are probably
right. The evidence indicates Whitman was acting alone that day, just
as the evidence indicates on November 22, 1963, Oswald was acting
alone.
Bud
... had somebody stopped him.
> JB
HistorianDetective
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > This has been raised before but I just watched a History International
> > program about infamous murderers and one of the subjects was Charles
> > Whitman, the infamous tower sniper at the University of Texas. Like
> > Oswald, Whitman was a USMC Sharpshooter, which is to say, he reached the
> > second of the USMC qualifying level. Neither Oswald nor Whitman achieved
> > the rank of Expert. In fact Whitman's best score was 215, just 3 points
> > above Oswald's Sharpshooter qualifying score. Less than 3 years after the
> > JFK assassination and just down I-35 from Dallas, Whitman murdered 15
> > people in a gruesome crime spree. First he stabbed his sleeping wife to
> > death, then went to his mother's house and stabbed her to death. He then
> > drove to the University of Texas, dragged a foot locker with several
> > firearms and lots of ammo to the observation deck of the UT tower. He
> > killed three more people at the entrance to the observation deck, went out
> > on the deck and barricaded the door behind him. Over the course of the
> > next several hours, he killed 10 more people and wounded many more from a
> > height and distance far greater than Oswald shot and killed JFK from. He
> > did this despite a skill level barely above that of LHO.
>
RE:
> And did he use a piece of junk like the Mannlicher-Carcano?
A piece of junk that's inferior to other more sophisticated
weaponry, but certainly not when originally produced.
That piece of junk performed quite adequately on 11/22/63.
A very subjective argument here, Tony. You really need
for the Carcano to be a piece of junk and pose nothing
but subjective arguments in this regard.
>NO. Apples and oranges again.
Cliche! Cliche! Apples and Oranges are the norm in Reality. Most times
very difficult to get apples and apples, oranges and oranges.
JM/HD
Jason Burke
Now you're REALLY stretching. Do you HONESTLY believe ANYTHING you're
saying?
Anthony Marsh
> On Jan 28, 11:26 am, Anthony Marsh<anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On 1/27/2011 10:50 PM, bigdog wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> This has been raised before but I just watched a History International
>>> program about infamous murderers and one of the subjects was Charles
>>> Whitman, the infamous tower sniper at the University of Texas. Like
>>> Oswald, Whitman was a USMC Sharpshooter, which is to say, he reached the
>>> second of the USMC qualifying level. Neither Oswald nor Whitman achieved
>>> the rank of Expert. In fact Whitman's best score was 215, just 3 points
>>> above Oswald's Sharpshooter qualifying score. Less than 3 years after the
>>> JFK assassination and just down I-35 from Dallas, Whitman murdered 15
>>> people in a gruesome crime spree. First he stabbed his sleeping wife to
>>> death, then went to his mother's house and stabbed her to death. He then
>>> drove to the University of Texas, dragged a foot locker with several
>>> firearms and lots of ammo to the observation deck of the UT tower. He
>>> killed three more people at the entrance to the observation deck, went out
>>> on the deck and barricaded the door behind him. Over the course of the
>>> next several hours, he killed 10 more people and wounded many more from a
>>> height and distance far greater than Oswald shot and killed JFK from. He
>>> did this despite a skill level barely above that of LHO.
>>
>
> RE:
>
>> And did he use a piece of junk like the Mannlicher-Carcano?
>
> A piece of junk that's inferior to other more sophisticated
> weaponry, but certainly not when originally produced.
>
It was inferior on the day it was born. It has a very high midrange
trajectory which makes it miss the target completely at closer ranges.
Whereas the M-1 has a very flat trajectory which ensures a hit with even
the most incompetent shooter.
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/Whelan81.jpg
WC defenders go out of their way to deny the simplest facts lest they
give the conspiracy believers a toe hold.
> That piece of junk performed quite adequately on 11/22/63.
>
> A very subjective argument here, Tony. You really need
> for the Carcano to be a piece of junk and pose nothing
> but subjective arguments in this regard.
>
Subjective? I am the only one uploading documentation. Nothing from you
yet except babbling.
Anthony Marsh
You are begging the question again.
WC defenders constantly do that because they don't have the evidence on
their side.
Bud
By all means, present your evidence that Kennedy was killed by a
rifle other than a Mannlicher-Carcano.
John Blubaugh
>
Stop the bullshit. You know what I meant.
JB
John Blubaugh
Or perhaps he was downstairs drinking a Coke when the shots were
fired. The police would seem like a pretty firm alibi to me.
JB
John Blubaugh
wrote:
Experts who were hired to duplicate the shots fired during the
assassination referred to the MC has a piece of junk weapon. Only a few
nutters here think it was reliable in any way.
Jb
John Blubaugh
>
> > JB
>
> Now you're REALLY stretching. Do you HONESTLY believe ANYTHING you're
>
Of course I believe it. He was downstairs having a Coke when the shots
were fired and a policeman verifies his alibi.
JB
Anthony Marsh
Again and again you misrepresent what I have said.
Is this the only tactic you guys know?
I said the rifle on the grassy knoll was a Mannlicher-Carcano.
bigdog
I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. It is rather silly to
think Oswald didn't fire a shot on 11/22/63 when there is overwhelming
evidence that he did. But you seem to find any excuse imaginable to
dismiss each and every piece of that rock solid evidence.
bigdog
If only a cop had been with him when the shots were fired. Then he would
have an alibi. Unfortunately for Oswald, the only person who saw him when
the shots were fired was Howard Brennan.
bigdog
It was certainly reliable enough to do the job given that the only
recovered bullets were fired by Oswald's MC. Whatever deficiencies it
might have had, it was still sufficient to get the job done.
bigdog
What a crock. No policeman verified where Oswald was when the shots were
fired. If Baker knew where Oswald was when the shots were fired, he
wouldn't have asked Truly to vouch for him. Why would Baker draw his gun
on Oswald if he knew Oswald had been in the lunchroom? Since Baker
suspected he could have been the shooter, he wanted Truly to identify him
before releasing him.
Bud
The cop wasn`t in the lunchroom during the shooting. The cop
stopping Oswald with his gun out shows that the cop didn`t think being
in the building the shots were fired from constituted an alibi.
> JB
Bud
And the Italian Army for decades.
> Jb
Bud
Spit it out.
> Is this the only tactic you guys know?
Is making empty claims that LNers don`t have the evidence on their
side the only tactic you know?
> I said the rifle on the grassy knoll was a Mannlicher-Carcano.
<snicker> Firing explosive bullets?
Bud
timstter
Well why was the sniper's nest, from whence the shots came, smothered
with his fingerprints?
And why was his rifle found nearby?
Because he didn't do it?
Curious Regards,
John Blubaugh
>
Recovered by who? Recovered how? If LHO was set up wouldn't you expect
all that to match? It still doesn't show that he pulled the
trigger....
JB
John Blubaugh
>
But he was seen seconds later downstairs and not one person saw him on the
stairs..... You have nothing that shows LHO fired those shots. Brennan
couldn't ID him either.
JB
John Blubaugh
What overwhelming evidence? Who collected it? How was it collected?
JB
Jason Burke
Hoo boy...
Jason Burke
Once again. It doesn't matter how reliable the MC is in general. All
that matters is that it was good enough to hit the target two of three
times from less than 100 yards on Nov 22 1963.
Which it undoubtedly did.
bigdog
The Secret Service.
> Recovered how?
By looking in the limo.
> If LHO was set up wouldn't you expect
> all that to match?
Only if everyone involved was trying to set him up. That's a cast of
thousands.
> t still doesn't show that he pulled the
> trigger....
>
Try coming up with another reasonable explaination that fits ALL the
hard evidence. It can't be done. That's why CTs inevitably are forced
to resort to playing the evidence-was-planted card. If they accept the
evidence as is, they must accept Oswald's guilt and they refuse to do
that.
bigdog
You say that like it was only a few seconds. Your ambiguous statement
would be true even if he had been seen downstairs one year later. It
would mean he was seen 31,536,000 seconds later. The truth is you
don't know how many seconds after the shooting Oswald was seen
entering the lunchroom.
> and not one person saw him on the
> stairs.....
Why would they if they weren't on the stairs at the same time he was.
> You have nothing that shows LHO fired those shots.
You mean other than all the hard evidence.
> Brennan
> couldn't ID him either.
>
Brennan swore under oath it was Oswald he saw. He is corroborated by
the physical evidence.
bigdog
collected by the law enforcement agencies investigating the crime. It
was collected the way evidence is normally collected.
John Blubaugh
I don't think anyone here denies that it did. The doubt some of us free
thinkers have is about who pulled the trigger. LHO had a pretty good alibi
drinking that Coke down stairs.
JB
John Blubaugh
>
No, "Hoo Boy" didn't see him but a member of the Dallas Police
Department did.
JB
John Blubaugh
He worked there and it was his job to move those boxes around. Were
his the only prints found on those boxes? Were the other people who
had prints on the boxes also shooting?
> And why was his rifle found nearby?
>
It seems that several people brought their rifles to the TSBD. Did he
still own the rifle then?
> Because he didn't do it?
>
Yes, it is circumstantial evidence against him but the fact that he
was downstairs calmly drinking a Coke raises reasonable doubt that it
was LHO who fired the rifle.
JB
John Blubaugh
I don't know, genius, why did he stop him? A better question would be
why did he let him go? Or how did he get there so quickly without
being seen if he was the shooter?
JB
John Blubaugh
>
WRONG. It was mishandled and not collected properly. They carried the
shells around and then placed them in a row and claimed they found them
that way. The SS washed and cleaned the limo and did not collect fragments
properly. Your famous paperbag was mishandled and allowed to become
contaminated after the FBI examined it. The list is just about endless.
The policeman who logged in the magic bullet could not identify it later.
What you claim as frivolous and just coincidence is a pattern for anyone
looking with a critical eye.
JB
John Blubaugh
>
No explanation, including yours, will ever fit all of the hard
evidence because it was moved, mishandled and some of it may have been
planted (not by the police but by the real assassins).
JB
Anthony Marsh
Brennan refused to identify Oswald at first. Have you ever heard of the
word perjury? The police had to help him remember that it was supposed
to be Oswald that he saw.
Anthony Marsh
What about the FBI?
>> Recovered how?
>
> By looking in the limo.
>
No bullets were recovered from the limo.
Only fragments.
>> If LHO was set up wouldn't you expect
>> all that to match?
>
> Only if everyone involved was trying to set him up. That's a cast of
> thousands.
>
More like 2 or 3. Was the entire US government involved in the Watergate
break-in?
>> t still doesn't show that he pulled the
>> trigger....
>>
> Try coming up with another reasonable explaination that fits ALL the
> hard evidence. It can't be done. That's why CTs inevitably are forced
> to resort to playing the evidence-was-planted card. If they accept the
> evidence as is, they must accept Oswald's guilt and they refuse to do
> that.
>
Usually when the government destroys evidence that indicates that they
are trying to cover up something.
Jason Burke
Well, sure. If he was there at the time of the shooting.
Which he wasn't, no matter how many times you say he was. Saying
something hundreds of times doesn't make it true.
Jason Burke
Yes a member of the Dallas police saw him.
But no, he didn't see him *at the time of the shooting*.
It's not that difficult of a concept.
Jason Burke
But he was not "downstairs calmly drinking a Coke" at the time of the
assassination.
Bud
> On Jan 30, 11:59 pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 30, 2:32 pm, John Blubaugh <jbluba...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 29, 4:18 pm, Jason Burke <jason-bu...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > > > On 1/29/2011 7:35 AM, John Blubaugh wrote:
>
> > > > >> While Whitman was better armed they both were deadly accurate.
>
> > > > >> Bill Clarke- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > LHO may never have fired a shot that day.....
>
> > > > > JB
>
> > > > Now you're REALLY stretching. Do you HONESTLY believe ANYTHING you're
> > > > saying?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > Of course I believe it. He was downstairs having a Coke when the shots
> > > were fired and a policeman verifies his alibi.
>
> > Why did that cop stop him?
>
> I don't know, genius, why did he stop him?
Why do you think genius? To get change for the soda machine?
> A better question would be
> why did he let him go?
Because he assumed the shooter would be someone who shouldn`t be in
the building.
>Or how did he get there so quickly without
> being seen if he was the shooter?
I guess he thought enough time had elapsed so that Oswald could be
the shooter he thought had fired from the roof.
> JB
Bud
A case of getting what you pay for.
>have is about who pulled the trigger. LHO had a pretty good alibi
> drinking that Coke down stairs.
Being in the building the shots were fired from is a lousy alibi,
especially when it`s your rifle doing the shooting.
>
> JB
Anthony Marsh
You are begging the question again. BTW, it was the fact that his rifle
was such a piece of junk that caused them to take that shot from the
grassy knoll which revealed the conspiracy. When it jammed.
> Which it undoubtedly did.
>
Anthony Marsh
Because he worked there. I bet your house is smothered with your
fingerprints. So if anyone is murdered in your house that proves that
you are the murderer, right?
> And why was his rifle found nearby?
>
Because the evidence shows that it fired three shots during the
assassination.
> Because he didn't do it?
>
Up in our area a woman was murdered and they found that the murder
weapon in a gun cabinet of her father whose fingerprints were all over
it. So does that prove that the father murdered his daughter? No, it was
the husband who murdered his wife by stealing the gun from his father in
law and then putting it back.
bigdog
If you don't deny the MC was the murder weapon, why do you keep
raising issues with it's quality. If it got the job done, any inherent
flaws are irrelevant.
> The doubt some of us free
> thinkers have is about who pulled the trigger. LHO had a pretty good alibi
> drinking that Coke down stairs.
>
Oswald didn't have an alibi that he was downstairs drinking a Coke
because nobody saw him doing that at the time the shots were fired.
The first person to see him with a Coke was Mrs. Reid who saw him walk
by with a Coke in his hand well after the encounter with Baker. Being
seen a few minutes after a crime was committed a short distance from
the crime scene does not give you an alibi. It makes you a suspect.
That is probably why Baker drew his gun on Oswald.
bigdog
>
> No, "Hoo Boy" didn't see him but a member of the Dallas Police
> Department did.
>
bigdog
Is there any myth you won't believe.
> The SS washed and cleaned the limo and did not collect fragments
> properly.
Are you claiming washing the limo had anything to do with the bullet
fragments that were found. Did wiping down part of the limo magically
make bullet fragments from Oswald's rifle appear.
> Your famous paperbag was mishandled and allowed to become
> contaminated after the FBI examined it.
More myths. AKA bullshit.
> The list is just about endless.
> The policeman who logged in the magic bullet could not identify it later.
> What you claim as frivolous and just coincidence is a pattern for anyone
> looking with a critical eye.
>
The list of silly things you will belief is about endless.
Anthony Marsh
> On Jan 30, 2:32 pm, John Blubaugh<jbluba...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 29, 4:18 pm, Jason Burke<jason-bu...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 1/29/2011 7:35 AM, John Blubaugh wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>> Bill Clarke- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>> LHO may never have fired a shot that day.....
>>
>>
>>> Now you're REALLY stretching. Do you HONESTLY believe ANYTHING you're
>>> saying?- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> Of course I believe it. He was downstairs having a Coke when the shots
>> were fired and a policeman verifies his alibi.
>
> Why did that cop stop him?
>
Because that cop wanted his Coke?
He didn't know who the guy was an was looking for a stranger as the suspect.
>> JB
>
>
Anthony Marsh
>> On 1/30/2011 10:30 AM, Bud wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jan 29, 10:23 pm, Anthony Marsh<anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> On 1/28/2011 9:46 PM, timstter wrote:
>>>>>>> their crimes. Both were shot to death before they could stand trial. Some
>>>>>>> would argue that this should entitle both to the presumption of innocence.
>>>>>>> Really? You be the judge.
>>
>>>>> Nonsense, Marsh. You can shoot or you can't shoot. Oswald and Whitman
>>>>> could both shoot.
>>
>>>>> This *apples and oranges* stuff is a ridiculous argument. The
>>>>> Mannlicher-Carcano is a perfectly capable killing device, as Oswald
>>>>> proved.
>>
>>>> You are begging the question again.
>>>> their side.
>>
>>> By all means, present your evidence that Kennedy was killed by a
>>> rifle other than a Mannlicher-Carcano.
>>
>> Again and again you misrepresent what I have said.
>
> Spit it out.
>
>> Is this the only tactic you guys know?
>
> Is making empty claims that LNers don`t have the evidence on their
> side the only tactic you know?
>
>> I said the rifle on the grassy knoll was a Mannlicher-Carcano.
>
> <snicker> Firing explosive bullets?
>
On explosive bullet. There was a rumor that some CIA officer asked the
TSD to design an explosive bullet for the Mannlicher-Carcano.
bigdog
planted card because to accept the evidence is to accept Oswald's
guilt. LNs explain the evidence, CTs try to explain it away. That in
itself speaks volumes.
Anthony Marsh
>
Do I really have to remind you that the Italians lost the war? The
cause? The inferior Mannlicher-Carcano which missed its target most of
the time.
Would any country equip its troops with a rifle that doesn't work
correctly? Ask the US soldiers who died in Vietnam when their brand new
M-16s jammed during a fire fight.
>> Jb
>
>
Coondog
> On 1/29/2011 12:55 PM, HistorianDetective wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 28, 11:26 am, Anthony Marsh<anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> On 1/27/2011 10:50 PM, bigdog wrote:
>
> >>> This has been raised before but I just watched a History International
> >>> program about infamous murderers and one of the subjects was Charles
> >>> Whitman, the infamous tower sniper at the University of Texas. Like
> >>> Oswald, Whitman was a USMC Sharpshooter, which is to say, he reached the
> >>> second of the USMC qualifying level. Neither Oswald nor Whitman achieved
> >>> the rank of Expert. In fact Whitman's best score was 215, just 3 points
> >>> above Oswald's Sharpshooter qualifying score. Less than 3 years after the
> >>> JFK assassination and just down I-35 from Dallas, Whitman murdered 15
> >>> people in a gruesome crime spree. First he stabbed his sleeping wife to
> >>> death, then went to his mother's house and stabbed her to death. He then
> >>> drove to the University of Texas, dragged a foot locker with several
> >>> firearms and lots of ammo to the observation deck of the UT tower. He
> >>> killed three more people at the entrance to the observation deck, went out
> >>> on the deck and barricaded the door behind him. Over the course of the
> >>> next several hours, he killed 10 more people and wounded many more from a
> >>> height and distance far greater than Oswald shot and killed JFK from. He
> >>> did this despite a skill level barely above that of LHO.
>
> > RE:
>
> >> And did he use a piece of junk like the Mannlicher-Carcano?
>
> > A piece of junk that's inferior to other more sophisticated
> > weaponry, but certainly not when originally produced.
>
> trajectory which makes it miss the target completely at closer ranges.
You put it on your web site but you just can't understand it. We have
discussed battle zero, we have explained how a marksman knows his
weapon and allows for the mid-range trajectory and you still don't get
it. The mid-range trajectory of the Carcano does not cause it to miss
"completely" at close range when fired by anyone that knows anything
about exterior ballastics. That leaves you out.
> Whereas the M-1 has a very flat trajectory which ensures a hit with even
> the most incompetent shooter.
So Oswald should have qualified Expert. Blubaugh isn't going to like
this one.
This is, of course, is so much crap. Nothing ensures a hit. Period,
no ands, ifs or buts nothing "ensures" a hit. Many things aid making
a hit but nothing "ensures" one. Again you fail to understand your
own reference.
> http://the-puzzle-palace.com/Whelan81.jpg
>
> WC defenders go out of their way to deny the simplest facts lest they
> give the conspiracy believers a toe hold.
>
> > That piece of junk performed quite adequately on 11/22/63.
>
> > A very subjective argument here, Tony. You really need
> > for the Carcano to be a piece of junk and pose nothing
> > but subjective arguments in this regard.
>
> Subjective? I am the only one uploading documentation. Nothing from you
> yet except babbling.
Not true again. The Dave Emary document has been posted numerous
times and speaks very highly of the Carcano. There have been other
articles posted that speak well of the Carcano. You don't read them
because they aren't what you want to hear.
Bill Clarke
Jason Burke
Perhaps more specifically, it was collected the way evidence (was)
normally collected *at that time*.
John Blubaugh
>
There were people in the stairways. If ran down there, why didn't anyone
see him? Maybe he was just thirsty? The timing is so close it would
certainly have been a great defense argument.
JB
John Blubaugh
But it was so quickly afterward. How did he get down those stairs without
being seen? Why would he have gone for a Coke? I think it is a solid
alibi.
JB
Bud
Norman worked there, wheres his prints?
> I bet your house is smothered with your
> fingerprints. So if anyone is murdered in your house that proves that
> you are the murderer, right?
I think it`s unusual for prints on paper and cardboard to have a
long life.
> > And why was his rifle found nearby?
>
> Because the evidence shows that it fired three shots during the
> assassination.
>
> > Because he didn't do it?
>
> Up in our area a woman was murdered and they found that the murder
> weapon in a gun cabinet of her father whose fingerprints were all over
> it. So does that prove that the father murdered his daughter? No, it was
> the husband who murdered his wife by stealing the gun from his father in
> law and then putting it back.
Thats nice, I hate it when people borrow something and don`t return
it.
John Blubaugh
I think you are confused. You are the one who believes in silly things
like the single bullet fantasy and that you could get a broken down MC
into a bag that was folded too short to hold it. But, you have a vision
problem and you can't even see JFK's violent "back and to the left"
reaction to being shot in the temple from the grassy knoll.
JB
John Blubaugh
>
What speaks volumes is the nutter ability to believe anything the
government tells them no matter how silly it is.
JB
John Blubaugh
I do deny that the MC was the murder weapon. The fact is the shooter there
failed and that is why the shooter on the knoll had to make the kill shot.
The other question is who pulled the trigger on the MC in the TSBD? I
think there is reasonable doubt that it was LHO.
> > The doubt some of us free
> > thinkers have is about who pulled the trigger. LHO had a pretty good alibi
> > drinking that Coke down stairs.
>
> Oswald didn't have an alibi that he was downstairs drinking a Coke
> because nobody saw him doing that at the time the shots were fired.
> The first person to see him with a Coke was Mrs. Reid who saw him walk
> by with a Coke in his hand well after the encounter with Baker. Being
> seen a few minutes after a crime was committed a short distance from
> the crime scene does not give you an alibi. It makes you a suspect.
> That is probably why Baker drew his gun on Oswald.- Hide quoted text -
>
Probably, may have been, I'm guessing, well that is about as substantive
as you get. He was seen leaving the stairwell to the floor where the
bullets were fired. He has to be calmest assassin in history to just have
a Coke and stroll around a bit.
JB
John Blubaugh
But so soon afterward that there is a reasonable doubt that LHO could
have made the shots and gotten there so quickly and be so calm.
JB
Bud
> On 1/30/2011 11:58 PM,Budwrote:
So did the Germans, and they had some pretty nifty hardware for the
times.
>The
> cause?
The Italians?
>The inferior Mannlicher-Carcano which missed its target most of
> the time.
All rifles miss most of the time. I wouldn`t mind a dollar for every
person killed by one of these rifles, and you don`t even have to count
Kennedy.
> Would any country equip its troops with a rifle that doesn't work
> correctly? Ask the US soldiers who died in Vietnam when their brand new
> M-16s jammed during a fire fight.
The US sent submarines out in WWII with torpedoes that wouldn`t explode.
But these are temporary glitches that were corrected. The Italians used
the M-C for decades, if it couldn`t shoot they wouldn`t have beaten the
Ethiopians.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> Jb
bigdog
>
Good point. As the Warren Court became more and more protective of the
rights of the accused. police had to take greater and greater care with
the handling of evidence, making sure not to give defense lawyers legal
justification for throwing out good evidence. Many felt the Warren Court
swung the pendulum way too far in protecting the rights of the accused at
the expense of protecting society from dangerous criminals. Not much
changed with the Burger Court, but the Rehnquist Court restored some
common sense to the rules of evidence.
This also illustrates why Earl Warren should not have presided over the
Presidential Commision. Had the case ever reached the SCOTUS, Warren would
almost certainly have had to recuse himself. Perhaps because it was fairly
obvious from the get-go that Oswald was the assassin and his death made it
unlikely the case would ever reach SCOTUS, LBJ was able to convince Warren
to preside. Still I think Warren should have declined the request on
seperation of powers grounds. The head of Judiciary branch of government
should not be acting on behalf of the head of the Executive branch.
Anthony Marsh
The book pointed out how the average soldier in combat would miss the
target completely due to the very high curve of the trajectory, a problem
that the M-1 on which Oswald trained did not have.
>> Whereas the M-1 has a very flat trajectory which ensures a hit with even
>> the most incompetent shooter.
>
> So Oswald should have qualified Expert. Blubaugh isn't going to like
> this one.
It just shows how bad a shot he was.
Anthony Marsh
Just because his rifle fired three shots does not mean it fired ALL the
shots, or especially the fatal shot, unless you think, as Lattimer does,
that the back shot would be fatal.
Jason Burke
Seriously? Come now. It's no alibi at all.
Jason Burke
Well, at least this time you've come up with something original. Which
reminds me... Have you got around to explaining that leftward movement
yet?
Jason Burke
Kind of like the <snicker> "evidence" of the fourth shot by the HSCA?
Which, if I'm not mistaken, was a government panel.
Jason Burke
But daddy was a sniper, wasn't he? Didn't you ever ask him how calm he was
after wasting someone? Seems you did talk to him a lot about the JFK
assassination...
bigdog
>
> - Show quoted text -
You believed the HSCA, I didn't. You believed their accoustics
evidence. I didn't. So who is the one who is blindly accepting what
the government tells us.
bigdog
So anyone who acts calm can't be guilty? There's a real litmus test.
You must think every killer acts like Don Knotts after 6 cups of
coffee. Oswald's appearance in the lunchroolm does not establish
reasonable doubt because recreations have shown he could easily reach
the lunchroom ahead of Baker and Truly. The physical evidence and an
eyewitness establish Oswald's presence in the sniper's nest and your
misconceptions about what is possible doesn't establish reasonable
doubt. There is nothing reasonable about your doubts.
bigdog
> On Jan 31, 6:12 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > Do I really have to remind you that the Italians lost the war?
>
> So did the Germans, and they had some pretty nifty hardware for the
> times.
>
John Blubaugh
>
> - Show quoted text -
I didn't talk to him a lot about it. I talked to others in his company
about him and what he did. They told me he could stay rock still for
hours at a time waiting for a target to expose himself. I expect he
was calm but he had done a lot of this.
JB
John Blubaugh
>
> - Show quoted text -
I have explained it many times. It is caused by the shot to JFK's
John Blubaugh
>
> - Show quoted text -
Seriously, it is. Where a person is within seconds of a crime is very
material and in this case it is an alibi. It would not be enough by
itself but if you add to it the fact that no one saw him on the
stairway or coming from the shooting area, it mounts up. It is hard to
just explain away.
JB
Sandy McCroskey
Can't be. No way on this planet that it could be. It happens much too
slowwwwwwwly to be the result of the impact of any projectile with
enough force to move the entire upper half of a grown man's body so
violently, whether that be Marsh's magical exploding bullet or a
guided missile.
But bigdog is only asking you to describe what you claim to see so
clearly. Should be easy, if you really see it.
Or is your vocabulary limited to Oliver Stone's mantra?
/sm
Sandy McCroskey
What's hard to "explain away"? What a bizarre statement.
That no one saw him on the stairway or leaving the sixth floor window
would be relevant only if someone else had been on the stairway or on
the sixth floor to see him. Since no one was, it's immaterial.
It's been repeatedly shown that there was plenty of time for Oswald to
get downstairs after stashing the rifle. How can you claim that there
wasn't?
That's a rhetorical question.
You can't argue with someone who says the moon is made of green
cheese. If they can believe that, nothing will convince them
otherwise. That's what they want to believe.
/sm
bigdog
Not if you don't know how many seconds.
> and in this case it is an alibi.
An alibi is something that establishes a suspect could not have been at
the scene of the crime at the time the crime was committed. Oswald had no
alibi.
> It would not be enough by
> itself but if you add to it the fact that no one saw him on the
> stairway or coming from the shooting area, it mounts up. It is hard to
> just explain away.
>
Doesn't have to be explained or explained away. You would have to
establish there was someone on the stairs at the time Oswald had to come
down them and that either they were moving in the opposite direction as he
was, or that they were moving so slowly that he would have to have passed
him. If no one was on the stairs during the first couple of minutes
following the shooting or they were going down the stairs at roughly the
same pace as Oswald, there would be no reason to believe they would have
seen him. Do you have anybody who meets that criteria. If not, it seems
you are striking out all over in your attempts to create an alibi for Oz.
Anthony Marsh
The difference is that we confirmed it ourselves with our own analysis.
You, not so much.
Anthony Marsh
They developed new weapons. The Italians, not so much.
>> The
>> cause?
>
> The Italians?
>
>> The inferior Mannlicher-Carcano which missed its target most of
>> the time.
>
> All rifles miss most of the time. I wouldn`t mind a dollar for every
> person killed by one of these rifles, and you don`t even have to count
> Kennedy.
>
>> Would any country equip its troops with a rifle that doesn't work
>> correctly? Ask the US soldiers who died in Vietnam when their brand new
>> M-16s jammed during a fire fight.
>
> The US sent submarines out in WWII with torpedoes that wouldn`t explode.
> But these are temporary glitches that were corrected. The Italians used
> the M-C for decades, if it couldn`t shoot they wouldn`t have beaten the
> Ethiopians.
>
They could have beaten the Ethiopians with a stick. They couldn't be the
Americans.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>> Jb
>
>
Anthony Marsh
All over the place. SO what?
>> I bet your house is smothered with your
>> fingerprints. So if anyone is murdered in your house that proves that
>> you are the murderer, right?
>
> I think it`s unusual for prints on paper and cardboard to have a
> long life.
>
I think you don't know what you are talking about.
John Blubaugh
>
> - Show quoted text -
I didn't believe the HSCA, they made numerous errors in my opinion. I
believed the acoustic scientists and I still do. They nailed the three
shots from the TSBD and they believe the shot from knoll hit JFK. So
do I.
JB
John Blubaugh
Isn't that the witness who first said the shooter was black? And didn't he
fail to indentify LHO until he was prodded a bit by the DPD? I don't think
you have ANY credible evidence that LHO was in that sniper's nest. His MC
was there, that doesn't mean that he was.
JB
John Blubaugh
>
Then why ask the question? You knew what my answer would be. Do you think
you have changed my mind? Do you think you have EVER changed on person's
mind? The rest of the world resolved these issues long ago and it was done
before anyone ever heard of Oliver Stone.
JB
John Blubaugh
>
Actually, there were people in the stairway and no, I am not going to
do your research for you.
JB
Sandy McCroskey
No, they said it missed.
If you contest this, back it up. I can't find anyplace where it's said
that *any* of them changed their minds about that.
(It's silly, though. The motorcycle wasn't even in Dealey Plaza.)
/sm
bigdog
>
> I didn't believe the HSCA, they made numerous errors in my opinion. I
> believed the acoustic scientists and I still do. They nailed the three
> shots from the TSBD and they believe the shot from knoll hit JFK. So
> do I.
>
And you are both wrong.
You were also wrong when you claimed I would believe whatever the
government told me. The last official word from the government was that
there was a probable conspiracy as presented by the HSCA. I don't believe
that, I don't believe there was a fourth shot from the GK, so obviously I
don't believe whatever the government tells me and just obviously you are
wrong......AGAIN!!!
Sandy McCroskey
What is "Then" a reference to in "Then why ask the question?"
I don't see any reason why not.
Here's why I ask the question: To laugh when I see you refuse to
answer it again.
> You knew what my answer would be. Do you think
> you have changed my mind? Do you think you have EVER changed on person's
> mind?
About anything? On a regular basis. Things are often debated at my
workplace, and I often get "my way."
> The rest of the world resolved these issues long ago and it was done
> before anyone ever heard of Oliver Stone.
>
> JB
Your "the rest of the world" leaves out a lot of people.
/sm
Sandy McCroskey
You're not going to do any research for *yourself*, so why should you
do any "for me"?
So I'll take this as another implicit confession that you don't know
what you're talking about.
/sm
Jason Burke
And just WHERE did they say that the "shot from the knoll" hit JFK?
Methinks you're making stuff up. Something new.
Jason Burke
Yeah, Marsh. I'm gonna believe YOUR analysis.
Especially since the motorcycle wasn't in DP at the time the dictabelt
recording was made.
Or did you forget that part?
John Blubaugh
> >> evidence. I didn't. So who is the one who is blindly accepting what
> >> the government tells us.- Hide quoted text -
>
>
> > believed the acoustic scientists and I still do. They nailed the three
> > shots from the TSBD and they believe the shot from knoll hit JFK. So
> > do I.
>
> > JB
>
> And just WHERE did they say that the "shot from the knoll" hit JFK?
>
I do not believe they specified where, but the sound waves indicated that
it hit JFK. I believe that is the temple entrance wound. And, no, I am not
making anything up. I just do a lot of reading.
JB
John Blubaugh
Of course you will and nothing I would say or do would convince you
otherwise. But, not to worry, I certainly think the same about you.
JB
John Blubaugh
>
Read Marsh's recent posts on the subject. They insist it did hit and he
even listed their names to help you track that down.
JB
Jason Burke
Obviously a lot of fiction reading...