Message from discussion
A Question, Submitted With Trepidation
Path: g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "David VP" <davevonp...@aol.com>
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: A Question, Submitted With Trepidation
Date: 18 Aug 2006 17:36:27 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 52
Message-ID: <1155947787.719031.171160@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>
References: <1155941906.642590.27010@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
<8399-44E64FCF-156@storefull-3236.bay.webtv.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.29.91.72
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1155947792 30057 127.0.0.1 (19 Aug 2006 00:36:32 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 00:36:32 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <8399-44E64FCF-156@storefull-3236.bay.webtv.net>
User-Agent: G2/0.2
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.6) Gecko/20060728 Firefox/1.5.0.6,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com; posting-host=65.29.91.72;
posting-account=sgUHew0AAADuQuRCEBrYpAHDv2Wzy39d
>>> "THE ONLY TWO WITNESSES WHO SAW OSWALD WITH THE PACKAGE SAID IT WAS 27-28 INCHES MAXIMUM." <<<
And you've got pictures of Linnie Mae and Buell poring over the package
with a tape measure in each hand...right Mr. Kook?? (I guess those
pictures that prove Randle & Frazier physically MEASURED Oswald's
package are among the convenient "missing" evidence in the case, huh?)
Plus...Linnie Randle (via the 1964 film "Four Days In November") said
the package was "approximately two-and-a-half feet long"....i.e.,
approx. 30 inches.
That particular 1964 Randle estimate (which was only off by 8 total
inches from the actual bag length of 38 inches) is a fairly-decent one,
given the fact she only saw the package for a very short time and had
no real reason to take note of its dimensions at all on the morning of
November 22nd. Nor did Frazier.
But those common-sense things won't stop the CT-Kooks from insisting
that Frazier and Randle got it exactly right when estimating the bag's
length.
Plus --- I'm eagerly awaiting the logical and believable "CT"
explanation that will answer the question of why that 38-inch brown
paper sack (which could house Oswald's 34.8-inch disassembled rifle),
with Oswald's fingerprints on it, was in the place where it was found
after the assassination -- the Sniper's Nest -- and yet still NOT have
Oswald present at the SN window on November 22nd, 1963. I, for one,
cannot think of a single "innocent" explanation for that bag being
where it was after the shooting with Lee Harvey Oswald's fingerprints
on it.
The CT-Kooks have plenty of explanations for it (and all of them keep
Oswald as pure as a new-fallen snow). But, again, I said I hadn't yet
heard the "logical and believable CT explanation" to explain away that
extremely-incriminating hunk of Oswald-Did-It evidence...i.e., a brown
paper bag in the SN with a right-hand palmprint on it in JUST EXACTLY
the place on the bag where you'd expect to find it if Oswald had,
indeed, carried the bag the way Wes Frazier said LHO carried a paper
bag into the building on 11/22/63.
Nice coincidence there, huh? No wonder the CT-Kooks want to make Wesley
Frazier out to be a co-conspirator in the plot to frame poor Lee
Harvey. Because if Frazier was NOT involved in such a scheme, then
Wesley's testimony (when coupled with the paper bag/palmprint evidence)
ALONE would tell any reasonable person who would have been sitting on
the jury at Oswald's trial (had there been one) that Lee Harvey Oswald
was in that Sniper's Nest around noontime on November 22, 1963.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/909b5b194cab1cbe
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/182cecc7c4e37bb2
|
