Solid Validation That Oswald Was In That Sniper's Nest On 11/22/63
David VP
BOOK DEPOSITORY'S "SNIPER'S NEST" AT 12:30 PM ON NOVEMBER 22ND, 1963:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many, many people believe Lee Harvey Oswald was completely innocent of
murdering President Kennedy in November of 1963. They think Oswald was
nothing more than an unwitting "Patsy", set up and framed to take the
fall after the tragic assassination of America's 35th President.
This "Patsy" viewpoint is just pure nonsense, IMHO. There is so much
evidence verifying Oswald's guilt (evidence that any "Patsy plotters"
themselves could not possibly have "controlled"), that any such "Patsy"
notions fall completely apart upon even a cursory glance at the
evidence in the case.
Oswald's own rifle was found on the 6th Floor of the Book Depository
Building. .... Oswald was seen by witnesses in the sniper's window on
that same 6th Floor. .... And Oswald's fingerprints were found on boxes
within the Sniper's Nest.
In addition to the above, there's also another very incriminating set
of Oswald prints found on that Sixth Floor of the Depository........
Oswald's fingerprints were on the homemade paper bag which was found
right next to the Sniper's Nest window. ..... This information re. the
bag is detailed on Page #135 of the Warren Commission Report.
Three different fingerprint experts identified the TWO prints lifted
from the paper bag as those of Lee Harvey Oswald. Sebastian F. Latona
of the FBI first IDed the prints as positively being Oswald's. Then, in
a separate independent examination of the prints found on the bag, two
other experts (Ronald G. Wittmus of the FBI and Arthur Mandella of the
N.Y.C. Police Dept.) came back with the very same results.
It's also very interesting to note just exactly which prints of
Oswald's were discovered on the paper bag and WHERE, in particular, one
of the prints was located. The two prints discovered on the bag were
.... One of Oswald's left index finger and the other (the key one in a
crucial respect, IMO) being Oswald's right palmprint. This right
palmprint was found on the END of the CLOSED side of the bag --
indicating that Oswald had held the bag in such a manner where his
right palm was supporting the weight of whatever was inside the bag
(just exactly matching Wesley Frazier's testimony of how Oswald carried
the bag into the TSBD back entrance the morning of 11/22). ........
Via Wesley Frazier's Nov. 22 affidavit (providing solid evidence that
Oswald did, indeed, WALK INTO the back door of the Depository WITH
PACKAGE IN HAND, rather than empty-handed) --- "I saw him go in the
back door at the Loading Dock of the building that we work in, and he
still had the package under his arm."
In my view, this valuable and incriminating evidence against Oswald is
quite possibly the BEST "print" evidence there is in the whole case.
Oswald's own prints being found on his very own rifle ARE rather
incriminating, yes. But, as conspiracy promoters like to point out with
zealous glee, it's possible that the print taken from the rifle by the
FBI might have been left there by Oswald at some time prior to November
22 (since he was the owner of the weapon since March of 1963).
And the other hard, physical evidence that exists (fingerprint-wise)
suggesting very strongly that Oswald was at the sniper's window at some
point on November 22nd is the evidence of Oswald's prints (three of
them) being found on two of the boxes used WITHIN THE SNIPER'S NEST
ITSELF.
This "box" evidence is very strong to support the idea that Oswald was
present at that southeast corner window on Nov. 22nd, but (as CTers
will also point out) it doesn't HAVE to mean that LHO "constructed" the
"Nest" or that he was at the window with a rifle at precisely 12:30 PM
shooting at anybody. This due to the fact that, as an "order filler"
for the Depository, Oswald obviously COULD conceivably have
touched/handled those exact cartons sometime prior to the
assassination.
Although the LOCATION of the prints on the cartons, IMO, is quite
compelling and interesting (in an "Oswald-did-it" kind of fashion).
PLUS: As I said, the cartons with LHO's prints were NOT just the
cartons stacked high up all around the "Nest" (i.e.: the "shielding"
cartons on the outside of the SN). But, instead, the Oswald prints were
found WITHIN the Nest itself -- on the box the sniper would have used
to probably SIT on while aiming his rifle; AND two prints on one of the
exact boxes that was used as a 'rifle rest' by the assassin.
I'd like to know the odds that ONLY Oswald's prints would have been
found on those PRECISE boxes, while no other DISCERNIBLE prints could
be lifted off of them?
Did the "plotters" who many CTers say "framed" Oswald as their 'Patsy'
just get extremely lucky and PICK AT RANDOM two boxes to place INSIDE
the bowels of their Sniper's Perch which JUST HAPPENED to have three of
Lee Harvey Oswald's prints on them? Just exactly HOW did these crack
conspirators orchestrate this "plan" so perfectly to ensure that ONLY
OSWALD'S fingerprints/palmprints would be found on those particular
boxes? How did they KNOW for certain which cartons on the sixth floor
Oswald touched and which ones he had not handled? More incredible
foresight on the part of the plotters it would appear.
The "paper bag fingerprints" are also, IMO, very damaging to Oswald and
indicative of guilt (more so than even the prints on the rifle or his
prints on the boxes) because it places Lee Harvey Oswald -- via his
identifiable, verifiable fingerprints -- at just EXACTLY the same
location where three cartridge cases were also found (with all of these
shells being linked to Oswald's rifle) and just exactly the same
location -- the 6th-Floor 'Sniper's Nest' -- where witnesses saw a man
who resembled Oswald.
Plus: The "bag" prints place Oswald's fingerprints on an item (the
brown bag) that has no logical or explainable or valid reason to be
where we find it after the assassination -- just lying on the floor
below the 'SN' window.
I cannot see ANY possible wiggle room for CTers with regard to this
very strong fingerprint evidence on the paper bag itself -- given the
location of the prints on the bag, plus WHERE the bag was found, plus
Wesley Frazier's testimony about seeing Oswald carrying a very
similar-looking paper bag into the Depository at approximately 8:00 AM
on Nov. 22nd, plus the OTHER "Oswald print" evidence found on the very
same sixth floor (the rifle itself and the two SN boxes).
HOW can this evidence be twisted and turned into a CT argument which
has Oswald NOT at that Sniper's Nest window at some point during the
day of November 22, 1963? How?
Do conspiracy buffs think that Oswald just happened to unwrap his
"curtain rods" right beneath the SN window, and then just left the bag
in the Nest (and also, evidently, just DITCHED these "rods" somewhere,
because we know he didn't enter his roominghouse with any curtain rods
at 1:00 PM; nor were any rods found inside the TSBD after the
shooting)?
One way some CTers have tried to wrangle out of Oswald's obvious guilt
and obvious presence at that 6th-Floor window on 11/22 has been to
claim that the Dallas Police "planted" the bag in the SN after the
shooting to make Oswald seem MORE guilty.
This theory is about as believable as the "Patsy" theory as a whole
(which is wholly-UNBELIEVABLE right from the Get-Go, IMO). Because --
We'd then have to believe that the DPD had somehow been able to "plant"
Oswald's prints on a "fake" bag (without any non-plotters noticing of
course, as per the norm with ALL CT theories -- NO non-conspirators
ever notice a thing, amazingly).
Or: We'd have to believe that the DPD just MADE UP from whole cloth the
"fingerprints" story re. the bag. Which, of course, also must mean that
the THREE fingerprint experts mentioned earlier (Latona, Wittmus, and
Mandella) are part of the "Frame The Patsy" plot, because they ALL
three said they had examined the bag and found Oswald's prints on said
article.
-------------------
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 "Oswald's Innocent" explanation for that bag being
where it was found after the shooting, and with Lee Harvey Oswald's
fingerprints on it.
David Von Pein
May 2005
tomnln
With this much dialogue you could have addressed the List of Destruction of
Evidence.
"David VP" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1144529483....@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
David VP
Destruction of Evidence."
Why don't you change Mottos/Mantras, Tom? This one's wearing thin. All
items on your list have been explained in non-conspiratorial ways. And
the most hilarious piece of "destruction of evidence" that you seem to
think will ultimately lead the rest of the world to "other assassins"
in the JFK case is the "Hosty Note Toilet Flush" (which, incredibly is
the "#1" item on Tom's Big 18).
As Chad (and no doubt others as well) have pointed out, the 'Hosty
Flush' was done almost assuredly to cover the Bureau's ass after
discovering that they had a file on Oswald, and that Hosty, just 21
days earlier, had paid Marina a visit.
Let's face it -- the FBI screwed that one up. They should have had a
better eye on Oswald (who was a known defector to Russia, but NOT YET a
known shooter of another prominent politcal figure, Gen. Walker...which
also means there's no "violent history" in Oswald's FBI "file" to raise
Hosty's eyebrows leading up to 11/22/63).
But does the FBI and Hosty "screwing up" prior to 11/22 automatically
indicate that a multi-shooter conspiracy to assassinate JFK was
underway? To some CT factions, I guess that answer is Yes. To most
reasoned-thinking individuals who have thought through the "Hosty/Note
Flush/Embarrassment To The Bureau" situation -- No, it does not lead
automatically to conspiracy to kill the U.S. President in Dallas.
Another thing that leads towards a "No FBI Involvement In The
Assassination" conclusion re. the Hosty/Note thing ..... WHY did Hosty
ever come forward and ADMIT to everybody who would push a camera in his
face that there was a note to flush in the first place?!
Did he HAVE to admit to this obviously-hinky-looking activity? If so,
why did he have to?
Didn't Hosty get the FBI internal memo post-11/22 that said -- "Do not
talk to anybody about this Oswald situation....Signed, J. Edgar"?
This next comment might not be an accurate one, but it's something I've
always noticed whenever I've seen Mr. Hosty on the various JFK
documentaries --- It doesn't seem to me as though Mr. Hosty is the
sharpest tool in the garage. I know I might be totally off base re.
that not-too-kind comment, but that's the impression I get when
watching Hosty nevertheless.*
* = Grain of salt required there. For, I have no idea what kind of FBI
Agent Hosty truly was in his years with the Bureau. Maybe he was a
top-flight agent. Weren't most of them? Otherwise how do you get to be
one of Hoover's agents? Beats me. I was just giving my personal opinion
about Mr. Hosty whenever he pops up on TV. Others might fully disagree.
As is your right to do so.
Back to Tom's "List Of 18" --- I also find it remarkable that Tom has
his little "This Proves Conspiracy" list of 18 items that were
"felonized" by being destroyed or changed around or whatever --- and
yet, at the end of all that "destruction of evidence", we're still left
with so much stuff that points to only Oswald, it should make a CTer's
head spin.
And, giving Tom's "18" another glance, it appears that virtually
nothing he's got written there would be affecting a whole gob of stuff
that STILL would have Oswald implicated as the lone killer of both JFK
and Tippit (even AFTER this so-called "destruction of evidence" in
certain areas, per Tom).
E.G., These three items on "Tom's 18".......
9. Washing out Limo at Parkland Hospital thus Destroying Evidence.
10. Stealing body from Dallas jurisdiction under Gun Point.
11. Stealing limo from Dallas Jurisdiction.
.....are the only items I can see that could even (via a CT mindset) be
considered to be ways to "control and change the evidence" with respect
to Oswald's guilt or innocence in THE PARTICULAR 11/22 MURDER OF JFK
ONLY. (#18 re. the Z-Film is so stupid, I've omitted that from the
above items...because that never happened and anyone with some CS&L
knows it.)*
* = Footnote: And it's my opinion that none of the above items is proof
of "conspiracy" or "cover-up" either. A rabid CTer obviously HAS to
make that grand leap from "Moving The Evidence" to "Grand Conspiracy
And Cover-Up". I find such leaps difficult to manage.
But, in fact, I'd have been very surprised if the limo and the body had
NOT been shipped back to Washington immediately after the shooting,
despite the fact that "assassinating a President" was NOT a "Federal
Crime" in 1963. Such Govt. action didn't look good to many people, I'll
grant you. But, IMO, it was understandable that they wanted to get the
body and limo back to Washington for full examinations with the FBI IN
CHARGE. Why is that difficult to fathom for CTers? Kennedy worked for
the Federal Government. The FBI was going to definitely have a hand in
investigating this case, without question. So moving these items back
to Washington, IMO, seems perfectly reasonable (technically "illegal"
or otherwise).
I'd wager to say that the VERY same "moving" of evidence, technically
illegal or not, would have occurred in 1943 if FDR had been, let's say,
killed by a sniper in California someplace. Or if Truman had been
murdered in 1951 in Montana or anywhere other than Washington, D.C.
Illegal or not, the moving of JFK's body and the limousine does NOT
"prove conspiracy", despite CTers' protestations.
These remaining items on Tom's list......
1. Destroying Oswald's note to Dallas FBI Office
2. Withholding Hosty's name, address, phone number and license plate
number from Oswald's notebook.
3. Destroying Walker back yard photo.
4. Changing Walker bullet from "Steel-Jacketed" to Copper Jacketed.
5. Changing transcript of Oswald's radio debate.
6. Lying when claiming Paper for gun bag matched TSBD paper.
7. Lying by stating Oswald had No connection to CIA.
8. Lying about Oswald going to Mexico City.
12.. Destroying part 3 of P O Box Rental Application.
13. Showed LHO 133A BEFORE it was Found. WCR App XI
14.. Dry Cleaning/Pressing JBC's Clothing.
15.. Switch Entrance/Exit wounds on JBC's Wrist would.
16.. JFK's brain missing.
17. Autopsy slides missing.
18. Alteration of "Z" film.
......Fail to explain ALL THE OTHER STUFF that tells us Oswald's guilty
of two murders on 11/22.
E.G., Even if we assume for a moment that all of the 15 items above are
true, and all these things were monkeyed-around with after the
assassination....
How do those specific items REMOVE FROM EVIDENCE these items showing
Oswald to be a guilty bastard/murderer? ......
Oswald's rifle found on 6th Floor of TSBD.
Oswald's prints everywhere where an assassin was on 11/22.
Oswald's not having a verifiable alibi for 12:30 PM precisely.
Oswald's bullet shells underneath SN window.
Oswald's constant lies and denials after his arrest. ("I don't own a
rifle." That's my favorite.)
Witnesses who saw Oswald (or someone who looked very much like LHO) in
the SN at 12:29 PM and exactly 12:30 PM.
And ALL of the evidence re. Oswald's obvious guilt in the Tippit
killing.
So, even WITH such "destruction" of certain items, the amount still
LEFT BEHIND tells us Oswald is guilty as hell.
You'd better add a few more to your "Big 18", Tom. Because even if
these things WERE "destroyed/altered" (and I'm not conceding that they
were for a minute, keep in mind), Lee Harvey Oswald's "Signature" is
still wallowing all over those two 1963 murders.
tomnln
JUST SO YOU UNDERSTAND;
We can send this whole post to everyone in the chat room.
We can discuss this post "Line By Line" in my chat room.
We can Forward ANY Exhibit of Evidence/Testimony to everyone in the chat
room Instantly.
Whatever Official Record Necessary to buttress our position.
THAT is a SURE Fire way to make your Points of Guilt to people who are
interested in Truth/Justice.
Unless of course you don't have any proof?
Unless of course you don't have the courage to defend your Position?
"David VP" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1144535692.7...@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
isht...@netscape.net
For your consideration: why there was no shot from the grassy knoll.
There are many pics of the fence taken about the time of the alleged
shot, but none show someone above th fence. Suoosedly the slleged
shooter was hiding behind the fence until receiving a signal [how and
from where?] that JFK was coming into view. The shooter would then
have ro stand, with at least his body above th armpits above the fence
holding the weapon, presumably a rifle. He (she?) would then have to
locate the target, JFK. And iInasmuch as the limo was travelling from
left to right in front of the shooter, after locating the target, it
would have to be led. All this takes time. Since there were people on
the slope in front of the fence, the shooter would have to avoid
squeezing the trigger when a shot would hit a standee. Think about it.
Dolan
Papa Andy
if so was the WC lying or just totally misinformed?
A
and the VP is still Shotgun Dick
David VP
I imagine you realize what the only three letters that are really
required here are...right? .....
W
T
F
?
tomnln
Tell the people WHY that witness against Oswald Needed "Immunity"???
"David VP" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1144551621.0...@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
David VP
spinning tales when he IDed LHO as the man who killed JFK.
Yeah, that'd be nice to see proof of that.
tomnln
"David VP" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1144552238.3...@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
> Instead...let's let Tom "Old Fart" NLN prove that Mr. Brennan was
> spinning tales when he IDed LHO as the man who killed JFK.
>
> Yeah, that'd be nice to see proof of that.
>
Mr. BELIN. You want to put a "B" on that one?
Now, after you saw the man--well, just tell what else you saw during that
afternoon.
Mr. BRENNAN. Well, as the parade came by, I watched it from a distance of
Elm and Main Street, as it came on to Houston and turned the corner at
Houston and Elm, going down the incline towards the railroad underpass. And
after the President had passed my position, I really couldn't say how many
feet or how far, a short distance I would say, I heard this crack that I
positively thought was a backfire.
Mr. BELIN. You thought it was backfire?
Mr. BRENNAN. Of a motorcycle.
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you observe or hear?
Mr. BRENNAN. Well, then something, just right after this explosion, made me
think that it was a firecracker being thrown from the Texas Book Store. And
143
Page 144
I glanced up. And this man that I saw previous was aiming for his last shot.
Mr. BELIN. This man you saw previous? Which man are you talking about now?
Mr. BRENNAN. The man in the sixth story window.
Mr. BELIN. Would you describe just exactly what you saw when you saw him
this last time?
Mr. BRENNAN. Well, as it appeared to me he was standing up and resting
against the left window sill, with gun shouldered to his right shoulder,
holding the gun with his left hand and taking positive aim and fired his
last shot. As I calculate a couple of seconds. He drew the gun back from the
window as though he was drawing it back to his side and maybe paused for
another second as though to assure hisself that he hit his mark, and then he
disappeared.
And, at the same moment, I was diving off of that firewall and to the right
for bullet protection of this stone wall that is a little higher on the
Houston side.
Mr. BELIN. Well, let me ask you. What kind of a gun did you see in that
window?
Mr. BRENNAN. I am not an expert on guns. It was, as I could observe, some
type of a high-powered rifle.
Mr. BELIN. Could you tell whether or not it had any kind of a scope on it?
Mr. BRENNAN. I did not observe a scope.
Mr. BELIN. Could you tell whether or not it had one? Do you know whether it
did or not, or could you observe that it definitely did or definitely did
not, or don't you know?
Mr. BRENNAN. I do not know if it had a scope or not.
Mr. BELIN. I believe you said you thought the man was standing. What do you
believe was the position of the people on the fifth floor that you
saw--standing or sitting?
Mr. BRENNAN. I thought they were standing with their elbows on the window
sill leaning out.
Mr. BELIN. At the time you saw this man on the sixth floor, how much of the
man could you see?
Mr. BRENNAN. Well, I could see at one time he came to the window and he sat
sideways on the window sill. That was previous to President Kennedy getting
there. And I could see practically his whole body, from his hips up. But at
the time that he was firing the gun, a possibility from his belt up.
Mr. BELIN. How much of the gun do you believe that you saw?
Mr. BRENNAN. I calculate 70 to 85 percent of the gun.
Mr. BELIN. Do you know what direction the gun was pointing.
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. And what direction was the gun pointing when you saw it?
Mr. BRENNAN. At somewhat 30 degrees downward and west by south.
Mr. BELIN. Do you know down what street it was pointing?
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes. Down Elm Street toward the railroad underpasses.
Mr. BELIN. Now, up to the time of the shots, did you observe anything else
that you have not told us about here that you can think of right now?
Mr. BRENNAN. Well, not of any importance. I don't remember anything else
except--
Mr. BELIN. Let me ask you this. How many shots did you hear?
Mr. BRENNAN. Positively two. I do not recall a second shot--
Mr. BELIN. By a second shot, you mean a middle shot between the time you
heard the first noise and the last noise?
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes; that is right. I don't know what made me think that there
was firecrackers throwed out of the Book Store unless I did hear the second
shot, because I positively thought the first shot was a backfire, and
subconsciously must have heard a second shot, but I do not recall it. I
could not swear to it.
Mr. BELIN. Could you describe the man you saw in the window on the sixth
floor?
Mr. BRENNAN. To my best description, a man in his early thirties, fair
complexion, slender but neat, neat slender, possibly 5-foot 10.
Mr. BELIN. About what weight?
Mr. BRENNAN. Oh, at--I calculated, I think, from 160 to 170 pounds.
Mr. BELIN. A white man?
144
Page 145
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. Do you remember what kind of clothes he was wearing?
Mr. BRENNAN. Light colored clothes, more of a khaki color.
Mr. BELIN. Do you remember the color of his hair?
Mr. BRENNAN. No.
Mr. BELIN. Now, I believe you said that after the last shot you jumped off
this masonry structure on which you were sitting. Why did you jump off?
Mr. BRENNAN. Well, it occurred to me that there might be more than one
person, that it was a plot which could mean several people, and I knew
beyond reasonable doubt that there were going to be bullets flying from
every direction.
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do after that? Or what did you see?
Mr. BRENNAN. I observed to my thinking that they were directing their
search towards the west side of the building and down Houston Street.
Mr. BELIN. When you say "they", who do you mean?
Mr. BRENNAN. Law-enforcement officers.
Mr. BELIN. By the west side of the building, you mean towards the underpass
or railroad tracks?
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. After you saw that, what did you do?
Mr. BRENNAN. I knew I had to get to someone quick to tell them where the
man was. So I ran or I walked--there is a possibility I ran, because I have
a habit of, when something has to be done in a hurry, I run. And there was
one
officer standing at the corner of the Texas Book Store on the street. It
didn't seem to me he was going in any direction. He was standing still.
Mr. BELIN. What did you do or what did you say to him?
Mr. BRENNAN. I asked him to get me someone in charge, a Secret Service man
or an FBI. That it appeared to me that they were searching in the wrong
direction for the man that did the shooting.
And he was definitely in the building on the sixth floor.
I did not say on the sixth floor. Correction there.
I believe I identified the window as one window from the top.
Mr. BELIN. All right.
Mr. BRENNAN. Because, at that time, I did not know how many story building
it was.
Representative FORD. But you did say to the policeman it was a window on
the second floor from the top?
Mr. BRENNAN. Right.
Mr. BELIN. And then what happened?
Mr. BRENNAN. He
The CHAIRMAN. May I ask there. By the second floor from the top, do you
mean the one directly underneath the top floor?
Mr. BRENNAN. Underneath the top floor, excluding the roof, yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN. And then what happened, sir?
Mr. BRENNAN. He said, "just a minute." And he had to give some orders or
something on the east side of the building on Houston Street. And then he
had taken me to, I believe, Mr. Sorrels, an automobile sitting in front of
the Texas Book Store.
Mr. BELIN. And then what happened there?
Mr. BRENNAN. I related my information and there was a few minutes of
discussion, and Mr. Sorrels had taken me then across the street to the
sheriff's building.
Mr. BELIN. Did you describe the man that you saw in the window?
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes; I believe I did.
Mr. BELIN. Mr. Brennan, later that afternoon, or the next day, did you have
occasion to go down to the Dallas Police Station to try to identify any
person?
Mr. BRENNAN. That evening, the Secret Service picked me up, Mr. Patterson,
believe, at 6 o'clock, at my home, and taken me to the Dallas Police
Station.
Mr. BELIN. All right. Could you tell us what happened there, please?
Mr. BRENNAN. If I might add a part, that I left out a couple of minutes
ago--
Mr. BELIN. Go right ahead, sir.
145
Page 146
Mr. BRENNAN. As Mr. Sorrels and some more men were discussing this, I
mentioned these two colored guys.
Mr. BELIN. Yes.
Mr. BRENNAN. Came out of the book store, running down the steps.
Mr. BELIN. You mean the two
Mr. BRENNAN. That I had previously saw on the fifth floor.
Mr. BELIN. All right.
Mr. BRENNAN. And I immediately identified these two boys to the officers
and Mr. Sorrels as being on the fifth floor.
Mr. BELIN. Do you have anything else you wish to add now?
Mr. BRENNAN. No; that concludes that.
Mr. McCLOY. They were running out of the building?
Mr. BRENNAN. They came running down the front steps of the building on the
Elm street side.
Mr. McCLOY. Did they then disappear in the crowd?
Mr. BRENNAN. No; they took them in custody, I suppose, and questioned them.
Representative FORD. The law enforcement officers stopped them, and you did
what, then?
Mr. BRENNAN. No. I believe Mr. Sorrels or the Secret Service man stopped
them.
I am not sure, but I don't believe an officer of the police department
stopped them.
Representative FORD. But you were standing on the steps of the Texas School
Book Depository Building talking to whom?
Mr. BRENNAN. Mr. Sorrels and another man, and I believe there was an
officer standing there, a police officer.
Representative FORD. And these two Negroes came out of the front door?
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes, sir.
Representative FORD. And you did what then?
Mr. BRENNAN. I---
Representative FORD. Spoke to Mr. Sorrels?
Mr. BRENNAN. Spoke to Mr. Sorrels, and told him that those were the two
colored boys that was on the fifth floor, or on the next floor underneath
the man that fired the gun.
Representative FORD. You positively identified them?
Mr. BRENNAN. I did, at that time.
Mr. BELIN. Is there anything else now up to the time you got down to the
Dallas Police Station?
Mr. BRENNAN. Well, nothing except that up until that time, through my
entire life, I could never remember what a colored person looked like if he
got out of my sight. And I always thought that if I had to identify a
colored person I could not. But by coincidence that one time I did recognize
those two boys.
Representative FORD. Did those two Negro men say in your presence that they
had been in the fifth floor window
Mr. BRENNAN. I don't recall. I don't recall.
Mr. BELIN. Is there anything else, sir, now up to the time you got down to
the Dallas Police Station?
Mr. BRENNAN. On Friday evening, you are speaking of?
Mr. BELIN. Yes.
Mr. BRENNAN. No.
Mr. BELIN. All right.
What happened when you got down to the Dallas Police Station?
Mr. BRENNAN. Mr. Patterson, if I am correct in the Secret Service that
picked me up, directed me to go to the fourth floor, a certain room on that
floor.
(At this point, Mr. Warren and Representative Ford withdrew from the
hearing room. )
Mr. BRENNAN. I later was introduced to several men-Captain Fritz in Mr.
Sorrels office, and several more men. I do not remember their names.
Mr. BELIN. All right.
Before I go any further, do you remember the name of the officer you talked
to in front of the School Book Depository Building?
Mr. BRENNAN. I don't believe I ever heard it I do not remember his name.
146
Papa Andy
During the evening of November 22, Brennan identified Oswald as the
person in the lineup who bore the closest resemblance to the man in the
window but he said he was unable to make a positive identification.
you said witnesses anyway
A
tomnln
"Papa Andy" <playiso...@email.com> wrote in message
news:1144555626.4...@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
BRENNAN
AFFIDAVIT OF HOWARD LESLIE BRENNAN
The following affidavit was executed by Howard Leslie Brennan on
May 7, 1964
PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
ON THE ASSASSINATION OF AFFIDAVIT
PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY
STATE OF TEXAS,
County of Dallas, ss:
I, Howard Leslie Brennan, being first duly sworn, do upon oath
depose and state:
On or about March 24, 1964, I testified in Washington, D.C.,
before the President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy.
In that connection I testified as to the reasons why I declined on November
22, 1963, to give positive identification of Lee Harvey Oswald as the man I
saw firing a rifle from the southeast corner of the sixth floor of the Texas
School Book Depository Building on November 22, 1963.
Included in these reasons at pages 3629 and 3630 of Volume 28 of
the transcript of the Commission proceedings are the following reasons:
"And then I felt that my family could be in danger, and I, myself,
might be in danger. And since they already had the man for murder, that he
wasn't going to be set free to escape and get out of the country
immediately, and I could very easily sooner than the FBI or the Secret
Service wanted me, my testimony in, I could very easily get in touch with
them, if they didn't get in touch with me and to see that the man didn't get
loose."
"... "Because I had already more or less give a detailed
description of the man, and I talked to the Secret Service and gave them my
statement, and they had convinced me that it would be strictly confidential
and all that. But still I felt like if I was the only eye witness, that
anything could happen to me or my family."
I have also been advised that on page 3595 of Volume 28 of the
transcript the Commission proceedings, the following appears:
"Mr. BELIN. What do you mean by security reasons for your family,
and yourself?
"Mr. BRENNAN. I believe at that time, and I still believe it was a
Communist activity, and I felt like there had been more than one eye
witness, and if it got
206
Page 207
to be a known fact that I was an eye witness, my family or I, either one,
might not be safe."
I hereby state that this is a court reporter's error and that in
truth and in fact my answer to the question was:
"Mr. BRENNAN: I believe at that time, and I still believe it was a
Communist activity, and I felt like there hadn't been more than one eye
witness, and if it got to be a known fact that I was an eye witness, my
family or I either one, might not be safe."
Signed the 7th day of May 1964.
(S) Howard Leslie Brennan.
HOWARD LESLIE BRENNAN.
aeffects
Mr. Brennan: was that the man you saw in the TSBD 6th floor window?
Well, ah yeah, he looks like him - kinda-sorta, I'm not sure, can't
make a positive identification it was him, but it kinda looks like
him...
VonPain, you need to do a little damage control....
tomnln
"aeffects" <aeff...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1144557771.8...@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
AFFIDAVIT OF HOWARD LESLIE BRENNAN
PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY
STATE OF TEXAS,
County of Dallas, ss:
206
Page 207
(S) Howard Leslie Brennan.
HOWARD LESLIE BRENNAN.
Mr. BELIN. You want to put a "B" on that one?
David VP
Correct, yes I did.
And that's because I thought you were speaking of BOTH the JFK and
Tippit murders. You were, evidently, only talking about the JFK
killing. So, I apologize for that.
Yes, only ONE witness positively IDed Oswald as Kennedy's killer --
Howard Brennan.
And Brennan DID positively I.D. Oswald as the man firing from the 6th
Floor.....
"Brennan also testified that Lee Harvey Oswald, whom he viewed in a
police lineup on the night of the assassination, was the man he saw
fire the shots from the sixth-floor window of the Depository Building."
-- WR; Pg. 143
The WR goes on to explain the reasons for Brennan not giving a positive
identification on Nov. 22.
"In an interview with FBI agents on December 17, 1963, Brennan stated
that he was sure that the person firing the rifle was Oswald." -- WR;
Pg. 145
----------------
Off-Topic (but extremely important re. the "LN/LHO/3 Shots Fired From
SN" Status.......
Who here thinks Harold Norman was full of shit when he claimed to hear
the rifle's bolt being worked directly over his head on 11/22 during
the shooting...and hearing exactly THREE shots fired from over his
head...and hearing EXACTLY THREE spent hulls hitting the floor above
him?
This is damning additional evidence of Oswald's guilt (coupled with all
the other ballistics, witness, fingerprint, and fiber evidence that
back up LHO's guilt as well).
And it's interesting to note in the Warren Report, that ALL 7
Commissioners for the WC (in three separate re-creations of bullet
shells hitting the floor above Norman's position on the 5th Floor) each
easily were able to hear the cartridge cases hitting the floor.
Now, either Harold Norman was an amazing liar, or somebody fired three
shots from just above Norman's 5th-Floor position on 11/22/63 (with
three shells hitting the floor too).
Many CTers think the three shells were "planted" in the SN after the
shooting. But Norman heard the shells dropping to the floor DURING THE
SHOOTING, not several seconds AFTER the shooting ceased. (Did the
plotters have a guy standing in the SN dropping shells to the floor IN
REAL TIME during the actual 8 seconds of assassination gunfire on
November 22nd? ... "Real Time, As-It's-Happening Shell Planting! Now
THAT'S CT organization and efficiency for ya!)
So, if Norman's not a liar (and there's absolutely no reason to think
he is), then three shots WERE definitely fired from that SE corner
window of the Depository's 6th Floor. Period. Which is something that
very, very few CTers I've ever talked to actually believe occurred that
day.
And -- Harold Norman's testimony, all by itself, makes Robert Groden's
crazy "No Shots Fired From The SN Window" theory look even MORE
ludicrous.
Papa Andy
after LHO is dead
after every major news outlet labels him the killer
after x interviews with law enforcement
then
Brennan can make a 'positive' ID
which legally would be totally worthless
A
Ben Holmes
says...
>
>HARD, SOLID, COMMON-SENSE VALIDATION THAT LEE HARVEY OSWALD WAS IN THE
>BOOK DEPOSITORY'S "SNIPER'S NEST" AT 12:30 PM ON NOVEMBER 22ND, 1963:
Can't be done. It would contradict other eyewitnesses... as well as the cheek
paraffin test.
But Davey-Boy wouldn't respond should I go point by point and refute what he's
written, so there's no point in doing so.
--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth
Ben Holmes
isht...@netscape.net says...
<Davey-Boy's nonsense snipped>
>For your consideration: why there was no shot from the grassy knoll.
>
>There are many pics of the fence taken about the time of the alleged
>shot, but none show someone above th fence.
Of course, this is *exactly* what the Moorman photo shows.
>Suoosedly the slleged
>shooter was hiding behind the fence until receiving a signal [how and
>from where?] that JFK was coming into view.
How silly... they just *looked*.
>The shooter would then
>have ro stand, with at least his body above th armpits above the fence
>holding the weapon, presumably a rifle.
Again, how silly...
What part of shooting a rifle requires the body from the armpits up to be in
view?
>He (she?) would then have to
>locate the target, JFK.
Yep... using *eyesight*. A very difficult and tricky procedure, to a LNT'er.
>And iInasmuch as the limo was travelling from
>left to right in front of the shooter, after locating the target, it
>would have to be led.
Yep... a tricky procedure, considering that LNT'ers think that a "marksman" with
a more difficult shot hit two out of three.
>All this takes time.
Yep... therefore it must have been impossible.
>Since there were people on
>the slope in front of the fence, the shooter would have to avoid
>squeezing the trigger when a shot would hit a standee.
Naturally - any shooter on behind the fence was too stupid to locate an open
position...
>Think about it.
I did. I laughed...
>Dolan
Steve
tomnln
Ladies & Gentlemen of the Jury, "I Rest My Case"
"Steve" <sba...@i71.net> wrote in message
news:1144610243.8...@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
"tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote in message news:...
Steve
um...'scuse me, but it's "GK" shooter. not "GN".
Tom wrote:
ANOTHER CONFESSION ! ! ! ! ! !
Ladies & Gentlemen of the Jury, "I Rest My Case"
Steve vwrites:
Tom, you have no "case" *to* rest.
Tomwrote:
Oooooooooooh the Penalties of "SNIPPING"
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
"tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote in message news:...
> ANOTHER CONFESSION ! ! ! ! ! !
> Ladies & Gentlemen of the Jury, "I Rest My Case"
> "Steve" <sbar...@i71.net> wrote in message
> news:1144610243.8...@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> um...'scuse me, but it's "GK" shooter. not "GN".
Stevewrites:
Duh...Tom...
The "GN" vs. GK I was referring to is the headline of the thread!
Ben habitually and erroneously refers to the "grassy knoll" (GK) as
"GN".
Walt
>
> Oswald's rifle found on 6th Floor of TSBD.
I can show that the rifle found in the TSBD was a different rifle than the
one in Oswalds hands in CE 133A, therefore I don't believe the TSBD rifle
belonged to Oswald..... I know the authorities claimed it was his but they
presented no chain of evidence showing that Oswald ever had possession of
the TSBD rifle.
> Oswald's prints everywhere where an assassin was on 11/22.
Circular logic.... Not worth addressing
> Oswald's not having a verifiable alibi for 12:30 PM precisely.
He sure did..... He said he was in the lunchroom and Officer Baker and Roy
Truly saw him there just seconds after the shooting.
> Oswald's bullet shells underneath SN window.
Oswald's shell's??? Prove the empty cases, or the live round, were ever in
Oswalds hands!
> Oswald's constant lies and denials after his arrest. ("I don't own a
rifle." That's my favorite.)
His denials are entirely consistant with someone being accused of something
he didn't do. We know he had a Mannlicher Carcano ( not the TSBD Carcano)
in his possession in March of 1963.....
BUT,.... did he OWN it.... Or was it George De Morhenschildt's???
> Witnesses who saw Oswald (or someone who looked very much like LHO) in
> the SN at 12:29 PM and exactly 12:30 PM.
Hmmmm... Let's examine this claim....
The star W.C. witness said that the man he saw with a rifle in the sixth
floor window was..... " About 35 years old", he weighed about 175 pounds,
and was wearing a "light tan colored khaki shirt and trousers".
Oswald had just celebrated his 24 birthday on October 18, Oswald weighed 125
pounds, and Oswald was wearing a DARK reddish brown shirt, and dark gray
trousers.
Please show me how to match the description of Oswald to the gunman.
Walt
Anthony Marsh
So, you finally got booted from CompuServe? Or is CompuServe official
dead now? And why the alias Ishtar? Are you a fan of the movie?
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
isht...@netscape.net
Ben Holmes wrote:
> In article <1144542240....@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> isht...@netscape.net says...
>
> <Davey-Boy's nonsense snipped>
>
> >For your consideration: why there was no shot from the grassy knoll.
> >
> >There are many pics of the fence taken about the time of the alleged
> >shot, but none show someone above th fence.
>
> Of course, this is *exactly* what the Moorman photo shows.
So your imagination tells you. That's not true.
>
> >Suoosedly the slleged
> >shooter was hiding behind the fence until receiving a signal [how and
> >from where?] that JFK was coming into view.
>
> How silly... they just *looked*.
Oh? how did the supposed whooter know when to look? Did he bounce up
and down? Several conspiracy nuts claim there was a signaler. Did they
lie, like you?
>
> >The shooter would then
> >have ro stand, with at least his body above th armpits above the fence
> >holding the weapon, presumably a rifle.
>
>
> Again, how silly...
Oh? You were supposedly a Marine, which I have come to doubt, doubt,
Benjy, as you have ducked telling in what units you served in over the
decade you claim to have served,
>
> What part of shooting a rifle requires the body from the armpits up to be in
> view?
You don't know? More evidence you never received Marine marksmanship
training or were a Marine since you don;t know how to hold a rifle.
>
>
> >He (she?) would then have to
> >locate the target, JFK.
>
>
> Yep... using *eyesight*. A very difficult and tricky procedure, to a LNT'er.
Liar!!. A sick, stupid comment,
>
>
> >And inasmuch as the limo was travelling from
> >left to right in front of the shooter, after locating the target, it
> >would have to be led.
>
>
> Yep... a tricky procedure, considering that LNT'ers think that a "marksman" with
> a more difficult shot hit two out of three.
Again you display your ignornance and show you are a liar, Benjy-boy.
The shots from the TSBD were easy.
>
>
> >All this takes time.
>
>
> Yep... therefore it must have been impossible.
Oh! How idiotic? The time is in seconds that conspiracy nuts always
discuss.
>
>
> >Since there were people on
> >the slope in front of the fence, the shooter would have to avoid
> >squeezing the trigger when a shot would hit a standee.
>
> Naturally - any shooter on behind the fence was too stupid to locate an open
> position...
Is that what you believe?
>
>
> >Think about it.
>
>
> I did. I laughed...
What were you smoking? It probably made it very difficult for you
to think.
isht...@netscape.net
Absolutely not but you are well known for you cheap shots.
>
> Or is CompuServe official dead now?
"CompuServe official"? who is that? Nevr heard of such an "official".
>
And why the alias Ishtar?
It is not an alias but, since your father was at NSA, you should know.
>
Are you a fan of the movie?
What movie?
> *** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
> *** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
Marsh, is this somethingyou have money in and is why you are pushing it?
Anthony Marsh
> Ben Holmes wrote:
>> In article <1144542240....@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
>> isht...@netscape.net says...
>>
>> <Davey-Boy's nonsense snipped>
>>
>>> For your consideration: why there was no shot from the grassy knoll.
>>>
>>> There are many pics of the fence taken about the time of the alleged
>>> shot, but none show someone above th fence.
>> Of course, this is *exactly* what the Moorman photo shows.
>
> So your imagination tells you. That's not true.
>>> Suoosedly the slleged
>>> shooter was hiding behind the fence until receiving a signal [how and
>> >from where?] that JFK was coming into view.
>>
>> How silly... they just *looked*.
>
> Oh? how did the supposed whooter know when to look? Did he bounce up
> and down? Several conspiracy nuts claim there was a signaler. Did they
> lie, like you?
The "whooter"? What was the whooter's job? To Whoot when the the limo
came into view? Are you claiming that the whooter was the signaler? BTW,
I would hope that you do know of some historical cases where a signaler
was used.
>>> The shooter would then
>>> have ro stand, with at least his body above th armpits above the fence
>>> holding the weapon, presumably a rifle.
>>
>> Again, how silly...
> Oh? You were supposedly a Marine, which I have come to doubt, doubt,
> Benjy, as you have ducked telling in what units you served in over the
> decade you claim to have served,
Typical CIA technique of character assassination.
>> What part of shooting a rifle requires the body from the armpits up to be in
>> view?
>
> You don't know? More evidence you never received Marine marksmanship
> training or were a Marine since you don;t know how to hold a rifle.
More meaningless drivel disguised as Argument by Authority.
Does a sniper try to make himself visible? Oh, I forgot, you never
qualified as a sniper.
>>
>>> He (she?) would then have to
>>> locate the target, JFK.
>>
>> Yep... using *eyesight*. A very difficult and tricky procedure, to a LNT'er.
>
> Liar!!. A sick, stupid comment,
>>
>>> And inasmuch as the limo was travelling from
>>> left to right in front of the shooter, after locating the target, it
>>> would have to be led.
>>
>> Yep... a tricky procedure, considering that LNT'ers think that a "marksman" with
>> a more difficult shot hit two out of three.
>
> Again you display your ignornance and show you are a liar, Benjy-boy.
> The shots from the TSBD were easy.
Then how could that shooter miss hitting everything in Dealey Plaza with
one shot which the WC said missed?
>>
>>> All this takes time.
>>
>> Yep... therefore it must have been impossible.
>
> Oh! How idiotic? The time is in seconds that conspiracy nuts always
> discuss.
Many assassinations are within seconds. So what?
>>
>>> Since there were people on
>>> the slope in front of the fence, the shooter would have to avoid
>>> squeezing the trigger when a shot would hit a standee.
>> Naturally - any shooter on behind the fence was too stupid to locate an open
>> position...
>
> Is that what you believe?
>>
>>> Think about it.
>>
>> I did. I laughed...
>
> What were you smoking? It probably made it very difficult for you
> to think.
>>
>>> Dolan
>>
>> --
>> NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth
>
Ben Holmes
isht...@netscape.net says...
>
>
>Ben Holmes wrote:
>> In article <1144542240....@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
>> isht...@netscape.net says...
>>
>> <Davey-Boy's nonsense snipped>
>>
>> >For your consideration: why there was no shot from the grassy knoll.
>> >
>> >There are many pics of the fence taken about the time of the alleged
>> >shot, but none show someone above th fence.
>>
>> Of course, this is *exactly* what the Moorman photo shows.
>
>So your imagination tells you. That's not true.
You're just jealous that my imagination is better than your imagination...
>> >Suoosedly the slleged
>> >shooter was hiding behind the fence until receiving a signal [how and
>> >from where?] that JFK was coming into view.
>>
>> How silly... they just *looked*.
>
>Oh? how did the supposed whooter know when to look?
Perhaps the same way the hundreds of spectators knew when to look?
Why do you think a man with a rifle in his hand becomes deaf, dumb and blind?
>Did he bounce up and down?
Why? Did the spectators do so? Can you cite a single spectator who needed to
jump up and down to see JFK?
>Several conspiracy nuts claim there was a signaler.
And several LNT'er kooks think that the SBT is a serious theory. Who am I to
disabuse them?
>Did they lie, like you?
It clearly doesn't matter how many times I challenge someone to *QUOTE* my
words, and provide the citation that contradicts my words... kooks will continue
to spout off without evidence. Of course, this is *exactly* what LNT'ers do
routinely... spout off *without evidence*.
>> >The shooter would then
>> >have ro stand, with at least his body above th armpits above the fence
>> >holding the weapon, presumably a rifle.
>>
>>
>> Again, how silly...
>
>
> Oh? You were supposedly a Marine, which I have come to doubt, doubt,
>Benjy, as you have ducked telling in what units you served in over the
>decade you claim to have served,
Actually, I've not ducked a question like that at all. And if you're anything
like the others who've tried to assert that I've never been in the Marine Corps,
you won't put any money where your mouth is - and you *CERTAINLY* wouldn't dare
say it face to face... so that makes you a coward, doesn't it?
Unless, of course, you happen to have a spare $100 sitting around that you'd
like to put on the line. Of course, if you're *really* sporting, we can make it
a $1,000.
But my crystal ball tells me I'm dealing with a yellow coward...
>> What part of shooting a rifle requires the body from the armpits up to be in
>> view?
>
>You don't know? More evidence you never received Marine marksmanship
>training or were a Marine since you don;t know how to hold a rifle.
ROTFLMAO!!!
Tell you what... bring two rifles of your choice. We'll test fire both of them,
to make sure they both work. Then at 500 feet, facing each other, we'll stand
behind our respective solid brick fences. You must keep your body from the
armpits *above* in view, and I'll fire anyway I want to.
Oops.. my crystal ball is yelling at me again...
>> >He (she?) would then have to
>> >locate the target, JFK.
>>
>>
>> Yep... using *eyesight*. A very difficult and tricky procedure, to a
>> LNT'er.
>
>Liar!!. A sick, stupid comment,
What lie? Anyone shooting a rifle virtually *ALWAYS* uses his eyesight to
locate the target.
Again, would you care to face me, rifles at 500 ft... - I'll use my eyesight,
and you can be blindfolded... and locate me any way you want.
>> >And inasmuch as the limo was travelling from
>> >left to right in front of the shooter, after locating the target, it
>> >would have to be led.
>>
>>
>> Yep... a tricky procedure, considering that LNT'ers think that a "marksman"
>> with a more difficult shot hit two out of three.
>
>Again you display your ignornance and show you are a liar, Benjy-boy.
>The shots from the TSBD were easy.
“We reconstructed the whole thing: the angle, the range, the moving target, the
time limit, the obstacles, everything. I don’t know how many times we tried it,
but we couldn’t duplicate what the Warren Commission said Oswald did. Now if I
can’t do it, how in the world could a guy who was a non-qual on the rifle range
and later only qualified 'marksman' do it?” - Carlos Hathcock
I think I'll take Hathcock's experience and opinion over yours anyday...
And once again, the casually tossed assertion that I've lied has been
demolished, as usual...
>> >All this takes time.
>>
>>
>> Yep... therefore it must have been impossible.
>
>Oh! How idiotic? The time is in seconds that conspiracy nuts always
>discuss.
Yep... it took 5 seconds, so it must have been impossible for any shooter other
than LHO. No, it took 8 seconds, so it must have been impossible for any
shooter other than LHO. No, it took 30 seconds, so it must have been impossible
for any shooter other than LHO.
You may insert your own favored timeframe, and assert that it makes it
impossible for anyone else other than LHO to fire...
>> >Since there were people on
>> >the slope in front of the fence, the shooter would have to avoid
>> >squeezing the trigger when a shot would hit a standee.
>>
>> Naturally - any shooter on behind the fence was too stupid to locate an open
>> position...
>
>Is that what you believe?
I find it easier to believe that a sniper would look for an unobstructed view,
than to believe that a man with a rifle suddenly turns deaf, dumb, and blind...
had to jump up and down to spot his target, and was so stupid as to pick a spot
directly behind an obstacle to his shot. And couldn't have fired anyway because
of time constraints.
You may believe anything you want. Don't let my opinion stop you.
>> >Think about it.
>>
>>
>> I did. I laughed...
>
>What were you smoking? It probably made it very difficult for you
>to think.
What we have here, folks, is clearly a genius. He disagrees with the opinion of
the most accomplished sniper in America, believes that snipers have to jump up
and down to view their target, can't fire because they were too stupid to locate
open lanes, couldn't have fired anyway due to time constraints, and are dumb
enough to put a good portion of their body, from armpits up - in view, just to
get a shot.
Ben Holmes
isht...@netscape.net says...
>
>
>Anthony Marsh wrote:
<snipped>
>> *** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
>>*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from
>>http://www.SecureIX.com ***
>
>Marsh, is this somethingyou have money in and is why you are pushing it?
Isn't it embarrassing when your ignorance makes you spout off nonsense like
this?
Anthony Marsh
"Nevr"?
Is CompuServe officially dead now? Is that the reason for your newest alias?
> It is not an alias but, since your father was at NSA, you should know.
> Are you a fan of the movie?
>
Many people consider it one of the worst Hollywood movies ever made. The
plot revolved around two hapless guys who were used as pawns by the CIA
in its plot to overthrow the Emir of Ishtar.
Are you claiming that you had some hand in it? Or just a fan?
> What movie?
>
Ishtar.
>> *** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
>> *** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
>
> Marsh, is this somethingyou have money in and is why you are pushing it?
>
In what? The tag at the end is add automatically after a message is sent
to advertise the newsserver which has free usage. Comcast limits usage
and throttles.
Anthony Marsh
> In article <1144714044.3...@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> isht...@netscape.net says...
>>
>> Anthony Marsh wrote:
>
> <snipped>
>
>>> *** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
>>> *** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from
>>> http://www.SecureIX.com ***
>> Marsh, is this somethingyou have money in and is why you are pushing it?
>
> Isn't it embarrassing when your ignorance makes you spout off nonsense like
> this?
>
>
Like what? Like <snip><snip>?
What the <snip> are you talking about?
Ben Holmes
says...
>
>Ben Holmes wrote:
>> In article <1144714044.3...@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>> isht...@netscape.net says...
>>>
>>> Anthony Marsh wrote:
>>
>> <snipped>
>>
>>>> *** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
>>>> *** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from
>>>> http://www.SecureIX.com ***
>>> Marsh, is this somethingyou have money in and is why you are pushing it?
>>
>> Isn't it embarrassing when your ignorance makes you spout off nonsense like
>> this?
>>
>>
>
>Like what? Like <snip><snip>?
>What the <snip> are you talking about?
It's not enough that Ishtar has to look stupid... now Tony wants to get in on
it. Tony... learn to follow a thread! Count the '>' if you have to.
Grizzlie Antagonist
You've never kissed a girl.
Grizzlie Antagonist
tomnln wrote:
> DAVID;
> JUST SO YOU UNDERSTAND;
>
> We can send this whole post to everyone in the chat room.
> We can discuss this post "Line By Line" in my chat room.
>
> We can Forward ANY Exhibit of Evidence/Testimony to everyone in the chat
> room Instantly.
> Whatever Official Record Necessary to buttress our position.
Jesus F****** Christ, tomass!
INTERCOURSE your list! INTERCOURSE your 21 points! INTERCOURSE your
goddamned chat room!
Grizzlie Antagonist
> um...'scuse me, but it's "GK" shooter. not "GN".
He might be thinking of the former coach of the Pittsburgh Steelers,
Chuck Noll.
When he had a full head of hair, he might have been considered a grassy
noll.
tomnln
"Grizzlie Antagonist" <lloydso...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1144905042.9...@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Grizzlie Antagonist
tomnln wrote:
> I hear that from a Lot of Felon Supporters.
How many do you know?