VIDEO - Was Oswald the only one missing from the TSBD ?
Gil Jesus
Another LN "factoid" destroyed
Was Oswald the only one missing from the TSBD ?
A recording of a DPD radio broadcast transmitted after all of the
employees were counted.
eca...@tx.rr.com
when the assassination occurred. The reference
to Oswald being "the only one missing" applied
to those employees on the scene when the shots
were fired.
Ed Cage
0149Jul307
eca...@tx.rr.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Gil Oz was also the FIRST to LEAVE the
scene.
Ed
aeffects
> On Jul 3, 1:50 am, ecag...@tx.rr.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > Gil that's because Givens was not in/at the TSBD
> > when the assassination occurred. The reference
> > to Oswald being "the only one missing" applied
> > to those employees on the scene when the shots
> > were fired.
>
> > Ed Cage
> > 0149Jul307
>
> > On Jul 2, 10:13 pm, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > Kicking the trolls' asses once more before bedtime:
>
> > > Another LN "factoid" destroyed
>
> > > Was Oswald the only one missing from the TSBD ?
>
> > > A recording of a DPD radio broadcast transmitted after all of the
> > > employees were counted.
>
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Gil Oz was also the FIRST to LEAVE the
> scene.
> Ed
dance sweet gloria, DANCE.....
dearhunter
@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:
> Gil that's because Givens was not in/at the TSBD
> when the assassination occurred. The reference
> to Oswald being "the only one missing" applied
> to those employees on the scene when the shots
> were fired.
>
> Ed Cage
> 0149Jul307
>
> Check this out, he was there that day
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/givens.htm
Then go here and read down to 351 to 355
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/givens1.htm
He claims he was there but they wouldn't let him back into the building
shortly after the shots were fired. They took him downtown to make a
statement. It doesn't say what time they took him but the call was made at
1:30 PM. What is very puzzeling is he had a better memory 5 months after
the shooting than the day it happened?
eca...@tx.rr.com
post.. Givens by his testimony was not
at the TSBD when the shots were fired.
Therefore Oswald remains the only one who
was on the scene during the shots that was
not present for the roll-call. He was also
the FIRST to LEAVE the TSBD.
Ed Cage
1129Jul307
On Jul 3, 10:30 am, dearhunter <dearhun...@home.net> wrote:
> ecag...@tx.rr.com wrote in news:1183445449.526347.258690
> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ry9n8Uew4gE- Hide quoted text -
aeffects
> Thanks deerhunter.. A very good, helpful
> post.. Givens by his testimony was not
> at the TSBD when the shots were fired.
> Therefore Oswald remains the only one who
> was on the scene during the shots that was
> not present for the roll-call. He was also
> the FIRST to LEAVE the TSBD.
continuing the dance, Sweet Gloria, DANCE!
> > >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ry9n8Uew4gE-Hide quoted text -
JLeyd...@aol.com
The question you need to be asking is how many of the "missing" left a
rifle behind that was linked ballistically to the murder of the
President. I only know one guy who fits that description -- the late
Lee Harvey Oswald.
JGL
Gil Jesus
perpetrated the lie for all these years that Oswald was the only one
who had left the TSBD and was the only one the police were looking
for, when its clear that that was not the case at all ?
Will you LNers answer the question or will you continue to dance and
try to avoid it ?
MSwanberg
Okay, here's a theory... totally hypothetical...
Let's say that I am a government spook. Who knows for whom? It
doesn't matter. But I am privy to a plot to do SOMEthing. Maybe the
plot is to take shots at Kennedy to drum up support for military
action against Cuba, who will be framed for the deed. In any case, I
am at the periphery, somewhat in-the-know, but not in on all the
details. I have infiltrated this group, or maybe joined it of my own
accord, but I don't believe I am doing anything truly wrong.
Someone suckers me into bringing in my rifle one day. Or maybe they
just suckered me into buying a rifle and someone else has it.
Then, on the day that I know something is going to happen, but nothing
bad, I'm drinking a Coke when suddenly a cop points his gun at me and
my boss says the president has been shot...
I think I could put 2 and 2 together and come up with an answer that
means I need to high-tail it out of there in a hurry or else I will
end up in jail, or worse, in the morgue.
I believe at that time I would be pretty much in favor of getting the
heck outta' Dodge.
But it doesn't mean I killed anybody. It just means I was smart
enough to see the writing on the wall.
I have this same attitude about the Tippit murder... if LHO didn't
kill him then that points toward conspiracy. But if LHO DID shoot
Tippit, then all it says is that LHO was afraid, meaning that he
either shot JFK or knows he's being set up for that crime; either way,
it's inconclusive.
In the end, LHO hauling ass from the TSBD only means he knew
SOMEthing. And I think the very fact that he called himself a patsy,
rather than a victim of some sort, shows that he DID know something.
-Mike
eca...@tx.rr.com
himself a patsy, rather than a victim of
some sort, shows that he DID know something."
(What could possibly be more revealing?)
As for Oz having a gun pointed at him..
Where did you find that information?
After Baker asked if he worked there, and
his boss Truly explained that he did..
Then both Truly and Baker left.. The
"innocent" Oswald suddenly decides it's
time to flee the scene?!? Whar dew ya git
dis krap Mike?
Works for me.. This is a RREEeeeal stinker
of a post Mr Mike. You may go now..
MR ;~D
Ed Cage
1509Jul307
eca...@tx.rr.com
already drawn gun at Oz.. But after Truly ID'd Oswald, they both left.
Ed
> > -Mike- Hide quoted text -
dearhunter
news:1183480417....@n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com:
> Thanks deerhunter.. A very good, helpful
> post.. Givens by his testimony was not
> at the TSBD when the shots were fired.
> Therefore Oswald remains the only one who
> was on the scene during the shots that was
> not present for the roll-call. He was also
> the FIRST to LEAVE the TSBD.
> Ed Cage
> 1129Jul307
>
> Correct, but, however, I'm not quite sure I can trust his testimony a
100%. Five months later, he has everything down perfectly, except the
question: did he eat his lunch before or after the shooting. He had the
times down exactly of when he saw LHO, the people he saw and who he was
with, where he was exactly, what he was doing. But on Nov 22 the same day
about an hour or so after the shooting he was asked, how many shots were
fired, his response was: I think I heard three shots. Five months later
he was asked the same question:
Mr. BELIN. How many shots did you hear?
Mr. GIVENS. Three.
Also, The same day testimony he said: I worked up on the 6th floor today
until about 11:50 am. Then I went downstairs and into the bathroom.
Five months later he said:
Mr. BELIN. Now you said you saw Lee Oswald on the sixth floor around
11:55?
Mr. GIVENS. Right.
Mr. BELIN. Did you see Lee Oswald anywhere else in the building between
11:55 and the time you left the building?
Mr. GIVENS. No, sir.
( On Nov 22 he testified:) We walked up to Main and Record when the
President passed by. We then walked back to the parking lot after the
President had passed by. We had just got back to the lot when we heard
the shooting.
Five months later:
( After Belin asks him how many shots he heard he replies:)
Mr. BELIN. What did you do when you heard them?
Mr. GIVENS. Well, we broke and ran down that way, and by the time we got
to the corner down there of Houston and Elm, everybody was running, going
toward the underpass over there by the railroad tracks. And we asked--I
asked someone some white fellow there, 'What happened ?" And he said,
"Somebody shot the President." Like that. So I stood there for a while,
and I went over to try to get to the building after they found out the
shots came from there, and when I went over to try to get back in the
officer at the door wouldn't let me in.
If LHO was on trial and I was on the Jury, I would have a hard time with
Givens testimony?
Ben Holmes
says...
>
>No.. the question we need to ask is why has the LN community
>perpetrated the lie for all these years that Oswald was the only one
>who had left the TSBD and was the only one the police were looking
>for, when its clear that that was not the case at all ?
Why, the answer is obvious - LNT'ers *have* to omit and misrepresent the
evidence, and yes, even lie about it.
BECAUSE THE EVIDENCE DOESN'T SUPPORT THEIR FAITH.
It's as simple as that...
>Will you LNers answer the question or will you continue to dance and
>try to avoid it ?
My prediction - continue to dance. And a year from now, we'll hear the same
factoid calmly announced as if it were the truth by some new incarnation of a
LNT'er troll.
Ben Holmes
JLeyd...@aol.com says...
Rather anacronistic, wouldn't you say? How many rifles *were* in the building
at the time?
LNT'ers will dance, evade, and simply lie ... but they will *CONTINUE* to repeat
the same factoids no matter how many times we cite the proof of historical
accuracy.
David Von Pein
The pot/kettle dance continues unabated.
Pot...meet Mr. Kettle Holmes (aka: Ghostwriter for one "John W.
Hodges", whose new 2007 book will trash VB's tome). I can't wait.
dearhunter
>>
>>The question you need to be asking is how many of the "missing" left a
>>rifle behind that was linked ballistically to the murder of the
>>President. I only know one guy who fits that description -- the late
>>Lee Harvey Oswald.
>>
>>JGL
Let me ask you a better question. Supposingly LHO is and was the prime
suspect. Now, he makes all the plains on how to kill JFK. He knows
exactly what time JFK is riding through, he knows weather or not the 6th
floor will be empty of people at the time when he is going to shoot,
plus, he works in a building loaded with boxes! Now, if any half brain
asassin with an ounce of intelligence was going to plain a murder and not
want to get caught i'm sure he wouldn't leave the gun behind with shells
on the floor and boxes set up in front of the window as to show exactly
where the shots were fired and worst of all run. Now, I hope somebody out
there agrees with this so far, this is not rocket science. Here, days
before the asassin he has time to disguise anyone of the many boxes on
that floor where the gun could have easily been hidden for days, maybe
months along with the shells easily hidden seconds after the shooting.
The boxes in front of the window could have easily been moved aside
anywhere in 2-3 seconds. There were many windows opened that day as to
confuse the authorities, agree? He could have just moved to a different
window afterwards and said, I was watching the motorcade when it
happened, no? He ran, he kept saying & repeating he was/is a patsy, well,
just maybe he was. Maybe he knew as soon as it happened he was screwed,
that he was being setup, just maybe he had no other choice but to run.
I just can't understand how anybody could of or would have been that
stupid to leave a rifle, shells and a perch of boxes behind and run and
not expect to get caught.
Come judgement day, I don't think I would really be suprised if he was
innocent of killing JFK. These are just my thoughts, so don't crucify me!
tomnln
I wanted to be the First to point out your Stupidity AGAIN.
<eca...@tx.rr.com> wrote in message
news:1183494117.3...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
MSwanberg
>
> - Show quoted text -
Not sure... read it somewhere perhaps. Saw it on Stone's "JFK". Who
knows? It's immaterial whether he had a gun pointed at him or not.
Please don't focus on items that are neither here nor there.
I never said Oz was innocent. Where do you get that? In fact, my
whole post posits LHO as an accomplice before the fact. Perhaps
unwittingly, but an accomplice nonetheless.
I would truly appreciate it if you actually read my post before
critiquing, as you seem to have missed the entire basis on which it
was written.
My point, and I do have one, was that LHO had an involvement. Anyone
who thinks he was just minding his own business, a clerk and only a
clerk, when all this went down is fooling themselves. He definitely
had a hand in the events of that day. And it's the best way to
explain his behavior in and around the date/time of the assassination.
I have heard some LNers say that the very fact that he visited Marina
unannounced, left his ring and money, on a Thursday instead of the
weekend is enough to implicate him. I don't disagree. But it doesn't
mean he pulled the trigger.
And to be fair, if we're going to convict the man in our minds based
on his activity just prior to the event, we should also do so for
people like Jack Ruby. His volume of long-distance calls increased
almost exponentially in the months leading up to the assassination.
Isn't that enough to show that he had some foreknowledge?
-Mike