The Framing of Lee Oswald
Walt
eyes of the general public was the publishing of an enlarged copy of a
Back Yard photo on the cover of the February 21, 1964 issue of LIFE.
That photo was copied from the evidence in the custody of the Warren
Commission and "leaked" to the Detroit Free Press ( Gerald Ford's turf
) The DFP published it, and then passed the photo on to the editor of
LIFE. LIFE magazine printed a 10 X 13 copy of it on the cover of the
February 21, 1964 issue of LIFE. The publishing of the enlarged photo
on the cover of LIFE served as an old fachioned "Wanted Poster" when it
appeared on supermarket news stands across the country. People
viewing that photo were convinced that the caption accompanying the
photo was factual. That caption read...." Lee Oswald ( in large bold
letters) with the weapons he used to kill President Kennedy and Officer
Tippit."
In Feb 1964 the public was becoming restless and many were
questioning Oswald's guilt. Hoover and Johnson wanted something that
would quench the embers of suspiction that were rapidly bursing into
flame. The "leaking" of the photo and it's publication worked to stop
the flames, but the embers still smoldered. After a small initial run
of the February 21st issue of life were run, the presses were stopped
and a different copy of the Back Yard photo replaced the original BY
photo.
Some one had discovered that the rifle shown in Oswald's hands
in the photo was NOT the same rifle that had been found in the TSBD.
The original LIFE photo is shown in a tread in this news group entitled
LIFE magazine / Saturday Evening Post. It's obvious that the rifle
shown in that photo is NOT the rifle that was found in the TSBD because
the rifle in the LIFE photo has about 14 inches of metal barrel
extending past the wooden foestock, and the TSBD rifle has only 5.5
inches of metal barrel extending past the wooden stock.
Is there anybody who can't see that the dead Oswald was being framed?
Walt
David Von Pein
WRONG RIFLE, huh?
But, then again, those plotters evidently weren't exactly the sharpest
tools in the shed -- based on the other idiotic errors they made
throughout the process of framing their lone patsy.
A few scattered examples:
1.) Using an "Oswald Imposter" in Mexico City who looks nothing like
Patsy Oswald.
2.) Shooting JFK with three or more guns when the whole nine yards must
(somehow) fall back into only Patsy Oswald's lap & nest & gun.
3.) Planting the wrong number of shells in the SN (two; per some
CTers).
4.) Planting the wrong type of rifle in the TSBD (Mauser).
5.) Planting the wrong paper bag in the SN (too long; no oil stains;
etc.; blah-blah).
6.) Planting the wrong type of shells at the Tippit murder site (from
an automatic)....or, as an alternative to this, I guess CTers would
have us believe that the "real killers" of Tippit used an "automatic",
but couldn't care less that Oswald's gun was a revolver.
7.) Using two people to kill Tippit (per some theories), even though
the plotters must somehow frame ONLY Patsy Oswald for this second 11/22
murder too.
8.) Just letting Patsy Oswald roam around at his leisure at 12:30 PM
during the JFK shooting (per Oliver Stone's comedy of errors).
9.) Allowing Patsy Oswald to waltz outside the TSBD at 12:30 PM to be
PHOTOGRAPHED by Jim Altgens in the doorway (per still another CT
version of events).
~~~~~~~
There are no doubt many more items that can be added to the above "HOW
COULD ANY PATSY-FRAMERS HAVE POSSIBLY BEEN THIS STUPID" Starter List.
Forum members should feel free to add to the above list at their
leisure. In fact...please do. I want to see if we can get the list up
to an even 100 items. Shouldn't be too hard, since Oswald was being
framed by a team of utter boobs (so it would seem).
Grizzlie Antagonist
> In Feb 1964 the public was becoming restless and many were
> questioning Oswald's guilt.
Oh, bullshit! Mark Lane and Thomas Buchanan were not "the public".
You Communists have an amazing capacity for believing that you speak
for everyone.
> It's obvious that the rifle
> shown in that photo is NOT the rifle that was found in the TSBD because
> the rifle in the LIFE photo has about 14 inches of metal barrel
> extending past the wooden foestock, and the TSBD rifle has only 5.5
> inches of metal barrel extending past the wooden stock.
And what's more, the real-life LHO was about 5 feet 8 inches tall, but
the Life Magazine cover photo shows him to be only 11 inches tall.
It's very suspicious that a photograph of a 5'8" tall man could
actually fit onto a much smaller cover.
> Is there anybody who can't see that the dead Oswald was being framed?
What, on a magazine cover? Isn't "framing" him better than making him
a centerfold and leaving him with a staple on his belly button?
These days, Communist conspiracy theorists not only "frame" him over
the fireplace but light candles to his image.
David Von Pein
continuation.....
Just for Donald Willis:
10.) Let's frame Patsy Oswald by planting all the evidence on the SIXTH
floor of the TSBD...but let's actually do the shooting from the FIFTH
floor...and let's also show how smart we are by having TWO rifles being
potentially visible from TWO different FIFTH-floor windows...with one
of these rifles actually being DELIBERATELY WAVED OUT THE WINDOW so
that witnesses can get the best possible view of it (while just hoping
nobody notices the OTHER rifle doing the actual shooting at the same
time, and hoping that every witness will mis-identify the rifle-waver's
floor number as the SIXTH floor instead of the actual fifth).
Whew! That one's almost worthy of two (or three) slots on my "HOW COULD
ANY PATSY-FRAMERS HAVE POSSIBLY BEEN THIS STUPID" list. Don't ya think?
David Von Pein
LHO, even though one ACTUAL, LEGIT photo already exists.
This way, we (the bumbling Barney Fife-like Patsy-Framers) have lots of
extra chances of being exposed (via the needless additional faked
photos that might be revealed as frauds in the future).
David Von Pein
plot -- but let's LEAVE IN the "rear head snap", which is a "snap" that
almost all CTers think is one of THE MAIN REASONS they should believe
in a conspiracy in the first place....a conspiracy that we (the
Kindergarten-educated Patsy-Framers) are trying to cover up and
eradicate by faking the film.
Yeah, it's a MUCH better idea to start faking stuff in the film having
to do with the shoes and socks of the WITNESSES IN THE FILM'S
BACKGROUND, instead of faking anything to do with John F. Kennedy's
wounds.
Don't you agree?
aeffects
you have no idea the lengths fools will go when it comes to P_O_W_E_R!
Then again you're probably not aware of 3 thousand years of written
history we have available....
> Don't you agree?
Don't you agree?
David Von Pein
order to say.....
.....nothing!
You prove that time and time again.
David Von Pein
11/22/63, at a time which could prove deadly to our "Let's Frame
Oswald" game, since John Connally was still in surgery at the time of
this "planting", and we (the Dumb & Dumber plotters) couldn't possibly
have any idea where ALL of the bullets were located at this point in
time (and, per most kooks, there surely must be GOBS of different
bullets to account for by way of our idiotic multi-shooter, one-patsy
assassination scheme).
13A.) Alternate to #13 -- Let's plant the WRONG bullet in Parkland
Hospital (a bullet that cannot possibly be linked to Patsy Oswald's
MC/C2766 weapon). This way, we can add a little more "Maybe We'll Get
Caught By Being This Stupid!" excitement to the Patsy-Frame-Up. Not to
mention adding a little more needless legwork for other plotters, who
now have to undo this major gaffe on the part of the bullet-planter by
having to "switch"/"substitute"/"shuffle" the bullets after the
non-C2766 missile had been planted.
Walt
Huh?? What the hell are you babbling about.....Stop drooling like an
idiot and take a look at the rifle in the LIFE photo. Yer idiot buddy
posted the link....LIFE : Lee Oswald with the weapons he used to kill
President Kennedy
and Officer Tippit
http://tinypic.com/view/?pic=2n1vznp
Walt
Walt
Who is the more true American.....Someone who would allow their elected
President to be murdered and then cover up for the killers ....or the
person who would attempt to expose the killers and bring them to
justice?
Use this link and get yer head outta yer ass to see with your own
eyes.LIFE : Lee Oswald with the weapons he used to kill President
Kennedy and Officer Tippit
http://tinypic.com/view/?pic=2n1vznp
Walt
David Von Pein
than the Patsy kills Officer J.D. Tippit (maybe even TWO non-Oswald
killers remember!)....even though we surely HAVE to know that this
wallet will be found out to be a "fake" (i.e., not Lee Harvey
Oswald's).
Footnote --- It's funny, though, that the plotters couldn't manage to
steal the "real" Oswald wallet and plant that real one on 10th Street.
These conspirators could seemingly steal everything else this Patsy had
(sans any detection by the owner of said articles)....guns, bullets,
camera, you name it....but I guess the wallet was just too hard to come
by.
But, then again, in many instances, it apparently didn't matter if the
boob Patsy-Framers had the REAL Oswald stuff or not -- they were gonna
screw it all up anyway by planting the WRONG stuff (rifle, shells,
stretcher bullet, wallet, jacket).
I wonder how much this clan of idiots got paid for messing up all this
stuff every step of the way? However much it was, it was too much.
David Von Pein
SN" stuff has to be trashed after all!
The whole case has been solved (via that extra length of barrel showing
above the stock in one photograph -- a photograph that was determined
to be genuine and was determined by photo experts to be showing Rifle
C2766 as well; but, well, Walt knows better than those guys I guess).
I'll tell Vince B. to stop the presses on his 1,632-page LN tome.
Oswald was framed....this picture proves it:
http://tinypic.com/2n1vznp.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6e/Oswaldrifle.jpg/350px-Oswaldrifle.jpg
cdddraftsman
I put it in my ms paint program and doodled it in the best I could .
Sorry for causing a defcom 3 alert in the critical community again ;
us silly conspirators from the old country cia have antiquated
equipement that stretches back to 1963 , let alone stretches the mind
that someone could believe the load of manure you peddle out the back
end of your manure cart . Haaaaaaaa ! What a Bozo . My Papi had a
saying , keep your mouth shut when you don't know what you talking
about , its better to have people think your stupid , then open it and
prove that you are stupid . ......You should follow that axiom ! ....
:-) ...........TL
cdddraftsman
conspiracy I feel honored . Although I was only in the third grade at
the time of the shooting this shouldn't be a excuse for conspiracists
not to suspect me also . Hells bells . if I get under all of their
skins I might even get the honor of being put on the ' Mysterious Death
List ' and you know what that means , I'll probably live to be 108
years old .....................TL
David Von Pein wrote:
> BTW, to pull a CT tactic for a moment.....
>
> How the heck do I know that that LIFE pic of LHO hasn't been "touched
> up" by somebody just for the purpose of being able to say what Walt has
> said in this thread -- i.e., "Look! The rifle barrel is different!"?
>
> EDIT/FOOTNOTE --- Actually, now that I've got two pics to compare to
> each other, my above allegation appears to be accurate (for real).
>
> Just look. The LIFE photo has had "extra barrel" painted in, it would
> appear. Weird.
>
> Too bad, Walt. Looks like you'll have to search for another way to get
> Saint Oswald off the hook, because, as you can see below, copies of
> that photo do exist that show the "shorter barrel" above the stock.
> .....
>
> http://tinypic.com/2n1vznp.jpg
>
> http://www.dallasnews.com/img/photo/11-03/oswaldgunthen.jpg
David Von Pein
How the heck do I know that that LIFE pic of LHO hasn't been "touched
up" by somebody just for the purpose of being able to say what Walt has
said in this thread -- i.e., "Look! The rifle barrel is different!"?
EDIT/FOOTNOTE --- Actually, now that I've got two pics to compare to
each other, my above allegation appears to be accurate (for real).
Just look. The LIFE photo has certainly been touched up (for some
reason). The barrel of the rifle looks as fake as all get out. And it
definitely doesn't match the photo below it. Weird.
Grizzlie Antagonist
> Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
> > Walt wrote:
> >
> > > In Feb 1964 the public was becoming restless and many were
> > > questioning Oswald's guilt.
> >
> >
> >
> > Oh, bullshit! Mark Lane and Thomas Buchanan were not "the public".
> > You Communists have an amazing capacity for believing that you speak
> > for everyone.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > It's obvious that the rifle
> > > shown in that photo is NOT the rifle that was found in the TSBD because
> > > the rifle in the LIFE photo has about 14 inches of metal barrel
> > > extending past the wooden foestock, and the TSBD rifle has only 5.5
> > > inches of metal barrel extending past the wooden stock.
> >
> >
> >
> > And what's more, the real-life LHO was about 5 feet 8 inches tall, but
> > the Life Magazine cover photo shows him to be only 11 inches tall.
> > It's very suspicious that a photograph of a 5'8" tall man could
> > actually fit onto a much smaller cover.
> >
> >
> >
> > > Is there anybody who can't see that the dead Oswald was being framed?
> >
> >
> > What, on a magazine cover? Isn't "framing" him better than making him
> > a centerfold and leaving him with a staple on his belly button?
> >
> > These days, Communist conspiracy theorists not only "frame" him over
> > the fireplace but light candles to his image.
>
> Who is the more true American
Anti-Communists are truer Americans than Communists are. A "true
American" does not espouse Communism and does not reflexively defend
Communist assassins.
> Use this link and get yer head outta yer ass to see with your own
> eyes.LIFE : Lee Oswald with the weapons he used to kill President
> Kennedy and Officer Tippit
I see it perfectly. That sounds like a fairly accurate description of
the picture to me.
Walt
cdddraftsman wrote:
> Walt , when I scanned it on my scanner the whole thing wouldn't fit so
> I put it in my ms paint program and doodled it in the best I could .
> Sorry for causing a defcom 3 alert in the critical community again ;
> us silly conspirators from the old country cia have antiquated
> equipement that stretches back to 1963 , let alone stretches the mind
> that someone could believe the load of manure you peddle out the back
> end of your manure cart . Haaaaaaaa ! What a Bozo . My Papi had a
> saying , keep your mouth shut when you don't know what you talking
> about , its better to have people think your stupid , then open it and
> prove that you are stupid . ......You should follow that axiom ! ....
> :-) ...........TL
Very good.....So you admit that were the one who altered the photo. Are
you also the one who added the phoney sling to the rifle in the photo?
Exhibits 1303 & 1304 in the Warren Report, show that the TSBD rifle
has a dark colored dull leather sling. The "sling" in the photo on the
cover of LIFE is light colored and it wasn't in the original photo.
The "sling" has been painted in. The person who painted in the phoney
light colored sling, showed their stupidity, and lack of knowledge of
the weapon, just as you did in altering the barrel of the rifle. The
person who painted in the sling had no experience or knowledge of how
slings are attached to rifles. They merely made a short arc beneath the
rifle that looks like the carrying strap on a shopping bag. They should
have painted in the sling to make it appear to be passing through the
front sling loop ( which is hanging empty in the photo) and flattened
the arc to make it appear the the sling was attached beneath the stock
at the butt of the rifle.
I find it more than a little odd that you would alter the photo of the
rifle to eliminate the fact that the rifle on Oswalds hands in the
photo has the front sling loop on the bottom of the barrel. The photo
as it appears on the cover of the LIFE magazine clearly shows the front
sling loop hanging beneath the barrel of the rifle. You eliminated
that Sling loop, probably because it it the very thing that shows that
the rifle in Oswald's hands is DIFFERENT than the TSBD rifle. That
front sling loop is the feature that distinguishes this rifle from the
TSBD rifle. The TSBD rifle ( Exhibits 1303 & 1304) has the sling
attached to the left SIDE of the rifle barrel, while the rifle in the
LIFE photo has the sling loop BENEATH the rifle barrel. Some folks
should learn their subject before they attempt to lie about that
subject.
Walt
Gil Jesus
Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
> Anti-Communists are truer Americans than Communists are. A "true
> American" does not espouse Communism and does not reflexively defend
> Communist assassins.
Gil Jesus:
Let me say, first of all, that I've never heard of anyone "espousing
communism" in this newsgroup. Second of all, I've never heard of anyone
claiming to be a communist. Third of all, Oswald himself was never a
member of the Communist party, either while he was in the Soviet Union
or here in the United States.
A "true American" as you put it, believes in truth. A true American
believes in Justice. A true American believes in openness. A true
American believes in freedom from, not freedom to. A true American
follows the rule of law, for America is a nation of laws. No true
American is above the law, nor will he or she willingly attempt to
circumvent the law.
There was no openness in this "investigation", there was no justice
done, the truth was abandonned and instead there was accepted a
fore-gone conclusion from a man whose whole life was a lie. (Hoover)
The law WAS circumvented, evidence was sustituted, destroyed and
ignored, in support of the conclusions of this pathological liar, who
was about to be "retired" by the Kennedys.
The men responsible for this charade were not "true Americans". They
were murderers and accessories to murder. They should have gone to
prison.
And I'd like to make a statement because you deemed it necessary to
attack Walt on this subject: I've known Walt for a while from this
newsgroup and he's forgotten more on the subject of this assassination
than you'll ever know. And he doesn't forget.
I submit that folks like you who support these fascist murderers and
their crimes and keep their lies alive are the ones who are not "true
Americans", for true Americans do not support murder as a means to an
end. You don't believe your government would lie to you, and yet you
fail to realize that it was a lie that led us to our present situation
in Iraq. The government lies to us still. Wake Up !!
Gil Jesus
David Von Pein wrote:
>
> I'll tell Vince B. to stop the presses on his 1,632-page LN tome.
> Oswald was framed....this picture proves it:
Gil Jesus: I don't think that you can take your nose out of his @ss
long enough to say the words, "stop the presses".
wig...@xit.net
Lee Harvey Oswald "... In the event of war I would kill any American
who put a uniform on in defense of the American Government, any
American." How much clearer did LHO need to be?
Gil Jesus
Gil Jesus: Because someone said they'd shoot someone isn't EVIDENCE
they shot someone else. Not in America, anyways.
Now answer this question : can you name ONE TIME when Oswald threatened
President Kennedy specifically ? There WERE threats against Kennedy.
The SS claimed that 1 million people were considered threats to the
President at the time of his murder.
Ever quote any of them ?
Did you know that weeks before the assassination, that Dallas oil-man
H.L.Hunt blasted the administration on its policies, calling it
"tyrannical" and "bypassing Congress to follow a line enunciated from
Moscow", because the IRS was revoking his tax-exemption as a religious
organization. Why ? Because his organization was allowing itself to be
used as a front to funnel money to political extremist groups like the
John Birch Society. That way, donations
earmarked for the Birchers would go first through LIFELINE to achieve a
tax-exempt status, then be sent on the the JBS.
During one of his LIFELINE broadcasts shortly before the assassination,
Hunt said that it was time for "extreme patriotism".
Do you have any idea what "extreme patriotism" means ? Do you think it
means contacting your congressman ?
Did you know that Senator Ralph Yarborough had scheduled hearings for
January 19, 1964 on the subject of right-wing religious groups and the
IRS' investigation and recommendations on their tax-emempt status ?
Did you also know that on the morning of the assassination, that Lyndon
Johnson tried to talk Kennedy into letting Yarborough ride with him in
the limo instead of John Connally and that Kennedy refused ?
Walt
Dear Wigg.....I suspect you're a naive kid who hasn't yet learned to
question statements made by some people. You seem to be a person who
takes things at face value. Politicians and con-men ( one and the same)
would love you.
Lee Oswald had just infiltrated the USSR and knew the Russians would be
opening the mail he sent and received, when he wrote in a letter to his
Brother,.........."In the event of war I would kill any American who
put a uniform on in defense of the American Government, any American."
That statement was written to convince the Russians that he was a
bonafide defector.
What do think would have happened if Lee had written ...."Hey Robert, I
made it past these stupid Russian security officers, I'm now in
position here in Minsk, to identify the young Cubans that Castro sent
to the spy school , and learn what they are being taught.
Walt
aeffects
looks like the beef-sticks were up all night, Walt..... just mention
LHO, the usual cast of characters flock together....he-he!
aeffects
wasn't LHO a MARXIST?
You re-writing all the history books, AGAIN?
Grizzlie Antagonist
Gil Jesus wrote:
> Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
>
> > Anti-Communists are truer Americans than Communists are. A "true
> > American" does not espouse Communism and does not reflexively defend
> > Communist assassins.
>
> Gil Jesus:
>
> Let me say, first of all, that I've never heard of anyone "espousing
> communism" in this newsgroup.
Saying that "I believe that Oswald was innocent" is tantamount to
saying, "I am a Communist and a disloyal American".
Anthony Marsh
> Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
>
>> Anti-Communists are truer Americans than Communists are. A "true
>> American" does not espouse Communism and does not reflexively defend
>> Communist assassins.
>
> Gil Jesus:
>
> Let me say, first of all, that I've never heard of anyone "espousing
> communism" in this newsgroup. Second of all, I've never heard of anyone
> claiming to be a communist. Third of all, Oswald himself was never a
> member of the Communist party, either while he was in the Soviet Union
> or here in the United States.
>
Not being a card carrying member does not mean he can't be a Communist.
Many Communists did not join the party, either out of fear of
persecution or disagreement about goals.
Oswald was specifically asked if he was a Communist and he said that no
he is not a Communist. He only called himself a Marxist-Leninist.
Anthony Marsh
> BTW, to pull a CT tactic for a moment.....
>
> How the heck do I know that that LIFE pic of LHO hasn't been "touched
> up" by somebody just for the purpose of being able to say what Walt has
> said in this thread -- i.e., "Look! The rifle barrel is different!"?
>
How would you know ANYTHING about this case when you never bother to
research it? BTW, LIFE did admit to the WC that they had altered the photo.
> EDIT/FOOTNOTE --- Actually, now that I've got two pics to compare to
> each other, my above allegation appears to be accurate (for real).
>
> Just look. The LIFE photo has had "extra barrel" painted in, it would
> appear. Weird.
Anthony Marsh
> 13.) Let's plant CE399 in Parkland Hospital prior to 2:00 PM (CST) on
> 11/22/63, at a time which could prove deadly to our "Let's Frame
> Oswald" game, since John Connally was still in surgery at the time of
> this "planting", and we (the Dumb & Dumber plotters) couldn't possibly
> have any idea where ALL of the bullets were located at this point in
> time (and, per most kooks, there surely must be GOBS of different
> bullets to account for by way of our idiotic multi-shooter, one-patsy
> assassination scheme).
>
Who says it came from Connally? It was supposed to come from President
Kennedy and died at 1:07. Plenty of time to plant a bullet on his stretcher.
Anthony Marsh
> Mighty stupid of the Patsy-Framers to fake a photo that included the
> WRONG RIFLE, huh?
>
> But, then again, those plotters evidently weren't exactly the sharpest
> tools in the shed -- based on the other idiotic errors they made
> throughout the process of framing their lone patsy.
>
> A few scattered examples:
>
> 1.) Using an "Oswald Imposter" in Mexico City who looks nothing like
> Patsy Oswald.
>
How do you know the Oswald impostor did not look anything like the real
Oswald? Show us a photo of the impostor. The CIA officially denied that
the mystery man was the impostor. Different guy.
> 2.) Shooting JFK with three or more guns when the whole nine yards must
> (somehow) fall back into only Patsy Oswald's lap & nest & gun.
>
They could rely on stooges like you to lie about the evidence to conceal
the other shooters.
> 3.) Planting the wrong number of shells in the SN (two; per some
> CTers).
>
> 4.) Planting the wrong type of rifle in the TSBD (Mauser).
>
> 5.) Planting the wrong paper bag in the SN (too long; no oil stains;
> etc.; blah-blah).
>
> 6.) Planting the wrong type of shells at the Tippit murder site (from
> an automatic)....or, as an alternative to this, I guess CTers would
> have us believe that the "real killers" of Tippit used an "automatic",
> but couldn't care less that Oswald's gun was a revolver.
>
> 7.) Using two people to kill Tippit (per some theories), even though
> the plotters must somehow frame ONLY Patsy Oswald for this second 11/22
> murder too.
>
> 8.) Just letting Patsy Oswald roam around at his leisure at 12:30 PM
> during the JFK shooting (per Oliver Stone's comedy of errors).
>
> 9.) Allowing Patsy Oswald to waltz outside the TSBD at 12:30 PM to be
> PHOTOGRAPHED by Jim Altgens in the doorway (per still another CT
> version of events).
>
> ~~~~~~~
>
> There are no doubt many more items that can be added to the above "HOW
> COULD ANY PATSY-FRAMERS HAVE POSSIBLY BEEN THIS STUPID" Starter List.
>
More straw.
> Forum members should feel free to add to the above list at their
> leisure. In fact...please do. I want to see if we can get the list up
> to an even 100 items. Shouldn't be too hard, since Oswald was being
> framed by a team of utter boobs (so it would seem).
>
Grizzlie Antagonist
> Some folks
> should learn their subject before they attempt to lie about that
> subject.
>
> Walt
It's too late for you. You've told too many lies, Communist.
David Von Pein
What Tony "Mr. Comprehensive" Marsh really means here is:
Unless a person researches every last thing (no matter how small and
utterly insignificant it may or may not be) re. the JFK murder case,
then that person cannot have an informed opinion about who killed the
35th U.S. President.
Nice philosophy (for rabid CTers anyway).
~~Awaiting Tony's next post: "Not my theory; stop putting words in
CTers' mouths, beef-stick."~~
(BTW -- I do seem to recall, even before yesterday, hearing about how
the LIFE photo had been re-touched in some manner, which is quite
obvious when looking at the LIFE pic vs. the real B.Y. photo. The LIFE
photo is, of course, unimportant in the long run...except to kooks like
Walt, who will attempt to prop up ANY discrepancy in ANY part of the
Kennedy murder case to bolster his weak-ass set of conspiracy theories.)
aeffects
we know ALL about photo re-touching... fact of life. Does your"recall"
mention ALL photos indeed retouched?
Gil Jesus
Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
> Saying that "I believe that Oswald was innocent" is tantamount to
> saying, "I am a Communist and a disloyal American".
Gil Jesus:
They tried that mentality in the 1950's. A bozo named McCarthy was
being fed that same BS by a meglomaniac named Hoover. Whether or not
one believes someone is innocent has nothing to do with their political
beliefs. My opinions are based on the evidence, or lack thereof.
Everyone who disagreed with the McCarthy witchhunts were accused of
being communists. None were.
Your hero Hoover took credit for the arrest of John Dillinger,
although it was Melvin Purvis who got him. Hoover also allowed Ethel
Rosenberg to be executed, although she was clearly innocent. Hoover
lived a secret homosexual life, enjoyed dressing up in women's clothes,
and picking up young boys and driving them up to the hill overlooking
LA for sexual trysts. This is the character of the man whose
declaration that "Oswald was guilty", you support. A man who was
clearly not a "real American". A scumbag, to say the least.
I find it interesting that the "real Americans" such as yourself find
it difficult to express your views without name-calling or putting
labels on people. I suppose you find it difficult to believe that your
fascist brothers in Germany could have gassed 6 million Jews during
WWII.
Grizzlie Antagonist
Gil Jesus wrote:
> Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
>
> > Saying that "I believe that Oswald was innocent" is tantamount to
> > saying, "I am a Communist and a disloyal American".
>
> Gil Jesus:
>
> They tried that mentality in the 1950's. A bozo named McCarthy was
> being fed that same BS by a meglomaniac named Hoover.
Today, the bozos are on the Left, exonerating the Marxist assassin and
trying to manufacture a false case against the Right.
> Whether or not
> one believes someone is innocent has nothing to do with their political
> beliefs. My opinions are based on the evidence, or lack thereof.
No they aren't. You believe that Oswald is innocent because he was a
Communist and you are a Communist.
Gil Jesus
Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
You believe that Oswald is innocent because he was a
> Communist and you are a Communist.
Gil Jesus :
I'd be careful if I were you of using slanderous remarks on an open
forum. Just because your on an unmoderated newsgroup doesn't mean that
you're not subject to libel laws. You may find yourself in court trying
to prove what you say is true.
wig...@xit.net
On Jan 7, 12:55 pm, "Walt" <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
> wigg...@xit.net wrote:
> > Lee Harvey Oswald "... In the event of war I would kill any American
> > who put a uniform on in defense of the American Government, any
> > American." How much clearer did LHO need to be?Dear Wigg.....I suspect you're a naive kid who hasn't yet learned to
> question statements made by some people. You seem to be a person who
> takes things at face value. Politicians and con-men ( one and the same)
> would love you.
>
> Lee Oswald had just infiltrated the USSR and knew the Russians would be
> opening the mail he sent and received, when he wrote in a letter to his
> Brother,.........."In the event of war I would kill any American who
> put a uniform on in defense of the American Government, any American."
>
> That statement was written to convince the Russians that he was a
> bonafide defector.
> What do think would have happened if Lee had written ...."Hey Robert, I
> made it past these stupid Russian security officers, I'm now in
> position here in Minsk, to identify the young Cubans that Castro sent
> to the spy school , and learn what they are being taught.
>
> Walt
That's OK I've been called worse & I don't claim to have any amazing
depth to provide in these discussions. My post of the LHO quote was
meant to show a state of mind rather than a motive. When compiled with
the attack on his sister-inlaw, attempted suicide, attempt on Walker,
beatings of his wife, etc.. I don't believe LHO's lifelong sociopathic
behavior will provide any clear motives that are comprehensible (so
much as the actions of John Hinckley, Charles Manson, & Mark Chapman).
If LHO had an accomplice, I've missed that piece of evidence. May have
been plenty of people with "motive" but no evidence of any involvement
now for forty plus years, that's the face value as you stated above.
Walt
Wigg..... At least you're smart enough to admit that you haven't
studied Oswald's life in depth and are merely repeating the distorted
information provided by the Warren Commission.
The current case against the Duke Lacrosse players is an excellent
example of how a egomaniac can make a "mountain outta a gopher mound".
Walt
Grizzlie Antagonist
And if the CT's wanted to make themselves useful, they would apply
their energies towards exonerating the innocent Duke Lacrosse players
instead of attempting to futilely exonerate the guilty Marxist Oswald.
But CT's -- being members of the hard Left -- are not about to place
themselves on the "wrong" side of the racial/sexual divide of that
case.
What a pathetic bunch of left-wing losers you all are. You'd tear all
off your own clothes for a living if someone would pay you a dollar for
it, but no one would.
Walt
Huh??.... Are you really this obtuse, Grizz?? I gave the example of
the attempted framing of the Lacrosse
players as an example of how an egomaniac can use the power of his
office for his own selfserving purposes, and you obviously missed that
point. Perhaps you could benefit from a course in reading
comprehension.
Walt
Walt
cdddraftsman wrote:
> Walt , when I scanned it on my scanner the whole thing wouldn't fit so
> I put it in my ms paint program and doodled it in the best I could .
> Sorry for causing a defcom 3 alert in the critical community again ;
> us silly conspirators from the old country cia have antiquated
> equipement that stretches back to 1963 , let alone stretches the mind
> that someone could believe the load of manure you peddle out the back
> end of your manure cart . Haaaaaaaa ! What a Bozo . My Papi had a
> saying , keep your mouth shut when you don't know what you talking
> about , its better to have people think your stupid , then open it and
> prove that you are stupid . ......You should follow that axiom ! ....
> :-) ...........TL
I believe the old axiom is a little more subtle.... My Grandpa related
it to me as..."When you don't know much about a subject being
discussed....It is better to remain silent, and thought to be an
ignoramus, than to open yer mouth and remove all doubt"
Incidentally....your posts indicate that you have not heeded your
Papi's advice.
Since you've admitted that you altered rifle barrel the B.Y. Photo on
the cover of LIFE magazine, I'm compelled to ask:....Are you also the
one who altered the photo at the Dallas Police station, by painting in
the "sling" on the rifle on the evening of 11-23-63?
Walt
>
>
> Walt wrote:
> > David Von Pein wrote:
> > > 12.) Let's fake the Zapruder Film as part of our "Let's Frame Oswald"
> > > plot -- but let's LEAVE IN the "rear head snap", which is a "snap" that
> > > almost all CTers think is one of THE MAIN REASONS they should believe
> > > in a conspiracy in the first place....a conspiracy that we (the
> > > Kindergarten-educated Patsy-Framers) are trying to cover up and
> > > eradicate by faking the film.
> > >
> > > Yeah, it's a MUCH better idea to start faking stuff in the film having
> > > to do with the shoes and socks of the WITNESSES IN THE FILM'S
> > > BACKGROUND, instead of faking anything to do with John F. Kennedy's
> > > wounds.
> > >
> > > Don't you agree?
> >
> > Huh?? What the hell are you babbling about.....Stop drooling like an
> > idiot and take a look at the rifle in the LIFE photo. Yer idiot buddy
> > posted the link....LIFE : Lee Oswald with the weapons he used to kill
> > President Kennedy
> > and Officer Tippit
> > http://tinypic.com/view/?pic=2n1vznp
> >
> >
> > Walt
David Von Pein
Here's the altered (for some reason) version of the LIFE cover photo:
http://tinypic.com/2n1vznp.jpg
Here's the un-retouched LIFE version, showing an unaltered version of
the Backyard Photo (which shows the "shorter" barrel beyond the stock):
http://www.timemachinetoys.com/toypics/Lifeoswald.JPG
Now, Walt, would you care to explain these two obviously-different LIFE
photo variants?
Would you like to now retract this whole silly thread re. the rifle in
the LIFE photo not being rifle #C2766 found in the TSBD?
Or do you think that BOTH of the above photos are "fakes"?
A whole lot of work awaits a kook named Walt. Better get crackin'....or
else Oswald might ACTUALLY start to look guilty even in a kook's eyes.
>>> "Is there anybody who can't see that the dead Oswald was being framed?"
Me. (And anyone else with some common sense.)
Walt
David Von Pein wrote:
> >>> "It's obvious that the rifle shown in that photo is NOT the rifle that was found in the TSBD. .... The TSBD rifle has only 5.5 inches of metal barrel extending past the wooden stock." <<<
>
> Here's the altered (for some reason) version of the LIFE cover photo:
>
> http://tinypic.com/2n1vznp.jpg
>
> Here's the un-retouched LIFE version, showing an unaltered version of
> the Backyard Photo (which shows the "shorter" barrel beyond the stock):
>
> http://www.timemachinetoys.com/toypics/Lifeoswald.JPG
>
> Now, Walt, would you care to explain these two obviously-different LIFE
> photo variants?
Forget about the difference in barrel lengths....that was a ploy to
suck an LNer into attempting to say that the Back yard photo wasn't
altered. I needed a sounding board to make the point about the
addition of the sling to the rifle in Oswald's hands. Some shallower
minds might still have difficuty in understanding the importance of the
alteration but most folks will see that the sling was painted into the
BY photo to make it appear that the rifle in Oswald's hands had a sling
just like the TSBD rifle. But more important than the fake sling......
The enlargement of the photo by LIFE was intended to serve as a large
"wanted" poster, and it did......BUT it also brought out features of
the rifle that aren't easily seen in a smaller copy of the photo. One
of those features is the front sling loop hanging below the barrel.
The Mannlicher Carcano was produced with two styles of sling
mounts.....One style had the sling attached on the left side of the
rifle, as is seen in the TSBD rifle. The other style had the sling
attached BENEATH the rifle, as is seen in the LIFE photo. There is NO
sling attached in the LIFE photo but the sling loop is clearly
visible.....proving that the rifle in Oswald's habnds is NOT the TSBD
rifle..... And I thank you for your support.
Walt
David Von Pein
Oh, goodie. Now Walt-Kook wants to FORGET about the very thing he said
in Post #1 was providing the proof that Oswald was framed.
>>> "I needed a sounding board to make the point about the addition of the sling to the rifle..." <<<
Oh. Yeah. Sure. Gotcha.
(Kook.)
>>> "BUT it also brought out features of the rifle that aren't easily seen in a smaller copy of the photo." <<<
And the kooky bullshit mounts ever higher. With Walt-Kook now seemingly
wanting to rely heavily on OTHER STUFF in a KNOWN-TO-BE-ALTERED PHOTO.
Nice. (And Classic.)
Walt
Talk is cheap....Anybody can look at the photo of the cover of LIFE
and see with their own eyes that the rifle in Oswald's hands is NOT the
same rifle that was found in the TSBD. Talk that til yer outta wind,
and blue in the face..... it won't convince anybody who actually looks
at the photo.
Walt