Gil, I Want To Discuss The Walker Shooting With You 08/15/08
aaronhi...@yahoo.com
home was a steel jacketed bullet and the rifle linked to LHO could not
have fired it.
The real issue is the caliber of the slug. The NYT reported 30-06
originally. But it eventually became a slug of undetermined caliber.
As I mentioned recently, "The Dallas Conspiracy", by Peter Dale Scott,
has a short chapter devoted to the official "resizing" of the slug
with footnotes. If you cannot get this book to read, I can scan in
some of the pages and email them to you.
After 16 years and reading 40 or so books and articles on the
assassination, I believe the issue in the Walker shooting is that the
authorities changed the caliber of the slug recovered in order to pin
the shooting on LHO. Whether the slug was steel or copper jacketed
was moot.
Aaron Hirshberg
Gil Jesus
You'll get no argument from me that the caliber of the bullet was
important. Likewise, you'll get no argument from me that the
authorities changed the caliber to frame the attempt on Oswald.
The copy of the police report that I have ( thanks to Tom Rossley )
makes no mention of the caliber ( if it were 6.5, why didn't it say so
in the report, right ?) but it DID mention that the bullet was a
"STEEL jacket" (ed) bullet. Absent any mention of the caliber in the
report, it's apparent that a STEEL jacketed bullet could not have been
fired by Oswald's rifle.
Not only does the report describe the bullet recovered as a steel
jacketed bullet, it also ( as I stated above ) makes no mention of the
caliber, making your point that the authorities did not know what
caliber the bullet was.
So the question is this: if the authorities didn't know the caliber of
the bullet when it was recovered, how did they know the caliber of the
bullet seven months later on 11/22/63 ?
It took them seven months to find out what caliber it was ?
I don't buy it. I'm inclined to believe that there was some evidence
tampering there.
Here's a copy of the report if you want to look at it :
http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1LzYNJcJiuSvbv4xQp5Fd3Ig=/large/
tomnln
http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
"Steel Jacketed of Unknown caliber".
<aaronhi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:0ab4da40-c3aa-4683...@k7g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
"Gil Jesus" <gjj...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:147e144a-d8b5-425a...@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1LzYNJcJiuSvbv4xQp5Fd3Ig=/large/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALSO;
The metalurgical components did NOT match>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Walt
There's little doubt that the authorities were tampering with evidence
in their efforts to frame Oswald.
HOWEVER.... I believe there is way too much credibility placed on a
rookie cops police report about that bullet. I suspect that he wrote
"steel jacked" when he meant METAL jacketed. A steel jacketed bullet
would have been quite rare in any caliber. Steel jacketed bullets
are meant for armor piercing and are stricly a military item. If the
bullet that went through the sah of walker's window had been STEEL
jacketed it would still have been in pristine condition when it was
dug out of the wall inside the house. And since it would have been in
pristine condition there would have been NO DOUBT about the caliber.
Photos of the bullet that alledgedly was removed from the Walker
house, show that it is badly mangled. A stell jacketed bullet would
not have been mangled.
Thereis just too much evidence that Oswald was involved to firing the
bullet through Walker's window. What his motive was, and if he
intended to kill Walker remains a mystery. It's very doubful that he
intended to kill Walker because according to the evidence Walker was a
"sitting duck" who Oswald could not have missed if he had intended to
hit him. The distance from the fence to the window was less than 100
feet.
>
> Here's a copy of the report if you want to look at it :
>
> http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1LzY...- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Walt
> "Gil Jesus" <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ALSO;
> The metalurgical components did NOT match
What does this mean? What components don't match? Are you
comparing CE 399 to the Walker bullet? You don't need a chemistry
expert to know that the Walker bullet and CE 399 are made by different
manufacturers. Just look at the difference in the serrations in the
cannellures of the two bullets.
>>>http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hide quoted text -
Gil Jesus
You might have to dumb it down a little bit for me, Walt.
Are you saying that Oswald fired the shot at Walker using different
ammuntion than WCC ammo ?
Thanks.
Walt
Absolutely!..... There is NO EVIDENCE that Oswald fired any shot at
JFK. CE 399 was "found" at Parkland hospital at about 1:40 pm just as
Johnson was leaving to go to hijack JFK's plane.
CE 399 is said to have been fired from the TSBD rifle, and perhaps it
was but it certainly wasn't fired from that rifle at the time JFK was
murdered. CE 399 is a full metal (copper) jacketed bullet
manufactured by Western Cartridge company for the CIA under a Marine
Corps purchase order.
All US manufactures use serrations ( like the notches on a dime coin)
in the cannelure of their bullets as a way of identifing their
bullets. Some use a a coarser serration than others. One can tell in
a glance that the Walker Bullet and CE 399 were manufactured by
different companies.
Personally I have little doubt that Oswald was involved in some ruse
or publicity stunt at walker's house when a bullet was fired through
walker's window. That bullet was recovered and it definitely is NOT a
Western Cartridge Company bullet. It appears to be a 6.5mm full
metal jacketed bullet of US manufacture. When the two bullets are
compared even a blind man can tell that they are made by diferent
manufacturers. Why the Warren Cammission didn't see this and follow
through, is stark evidence that they simply didn't want too see any
evidence that didn't fit with J.Edgar Hover THEORY.
Gil Jesus
OK I follow you so far, but I'm curious why it is that you believe
that it was Oswald who fired the shot ( at Walker's house, that is )
and not someone else, like one of the Schmidts ?
Bud
Gil has a police report, and pretends it`s a ballistic report. He
is an idiot like that.
> I suspect that he wrote
> "steel jacked" when he meant METAL jacketed. A steel jacketed bullet
> would have been quite rare in any caliber. Steel jacketed bullets
> are meant for armor piercing and are stricly a military item. If the
> bullet that went through the sah of walker's window had been STEEL
> jacketed it would still have been in pristine condition when it was
> dug out of the wall inside the house. And since it would have been in
> pristine condition there would have been NO DOUBT about the caliber.
>
> Photos of the bullet that alledgedly was removed from the Walker
> house, show that it is badly mangled. A stell jacketed bullet would
> not have been mangled.
>
> Thereis just too much evidence that Oswald was involved to firing the
> bullet through Walker's window.
WHAT!?! Walt, who can`t figure out that Oswald killed Kennedy, with
a mountain of evidence, or figure out that Oswald killed Tippit, with
twice as much, concludes Oswald shot at Walker because "their is too
much evidence". Behold the kook brain, in all it`s wondrous glory.
This looks to be fun, though, Walt accidently spoke the truth,
causing a rift between him and his fellow kooks (even Ben will disown
for this heresy), while also making him vulnerable to my attacks. I
think I`ll proceed slowly and cautiously in my attempts to exploit
this development...
Walt, does the fact that Oswald tried to assassinate a political
figure in any way speak to the possibility he assassinated Kennedy? I
mean, how many people try to kill political figures?
Also, what rifle do you suppose Oswald used in his attempt against
Walker?
> What his motive was, and if he
> intended to kill Walker remains a mystery. It's very doubful that he
> intended to kill Walker because according to the evidence Walker was a
> "sitting duck" who Oswald could not have missed if he had intended to
> hit him. The distance from the fence to the window was less than 100
> feet.
>
>
>
> > Here's a copy of the report if you want to look at it :
>
> >http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1LzY...Hide quoted text -
Bud
John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt?
Did one of the Schimidt`s have photos of the area around Walker`s
house amongst his belongings? Did any Schmidt wifes say "one of the
Schmidts" confessed the crime to them?
I`m stoked that Walt has finally got an aspect of the case right,
though. This shows the value of letting you kooks talk amongst
yourselves, you let you guard down, and say what you really think. It
isn`t pretty, but it is enlightening.
Walt
Dear Dumbass, please present the PROOF that Oswald "tried to assinaste
a political figure"
If Oswald meant to "assassinate a political figure" (Walker) He had
ample opportunity, because he was less than 100 feet away from Walker
who was SITTING STILL behind his desk, AND he remained behind that
window in a well lit room for several minutes AFTER the gunshot. If
Oswald had intended to assassinate him it would have been very easy
for Oswald to have done that. He did not even wound Walker.....So an
intelligent mind ( Leaves you out ,Dud) would know that he never
intended to harm Walker.
> mean, how many people try to kill political figures?
>
> Also, what rifle do you suppose Oswald used in his attempt against
> Walker?
>
>
>
> > What his motive was, and if he
> > intended to kill Walker remains a mystery. It's very doubful that he
> > intended to kill Walker because according to the evidence Walker was a
> > "sitting duck" who Oswald could not have missed if he had intended to
> > hit him. The distance from the fence to the window was less than 100
> > feet.
>
> > > Here's a copy of the report if you want to look at it :
>
> > >http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1LzY...quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Walt
Oswald told Marina that he had taken a shot at Walker. Oswald had
taken photos of the back of Walker's house and Marina still had one in
her possession which she tried to keep hidden from the cops. Here are
the FACTS about the shooting at the Walker house.
One shot was fired
Nobody was hurt, and the motive is unknown.
Oswald told Marina that he had fired a shot at Walker but even though
he told Marina that he had shot at Walker does NOT constitute PROOF
that he was actually shooting AT Walker. Personally I can't believe
that he could have missed if he truely was firing AT Walker.
Oswald wasn't "running around" with the Schmidts....He WAS running
with De Morhenschildt and Mike Paine at the time of the Walker
shooting. I believe both De M and Paine were involved in the "Walker
incident". I suspect it was a CIA sanctioned ruse to make Oswald
appear to be an enemy of walker and a friend of Castro.
Bud
> > much evidence". Behold the kook brain, in all it`s wondrous glory.
>
> > This looks to be fun, though, Walt accidently spoke the truth,
> > causing a rift between him and his fellow kooks (even Ben will disown
> > for this heresy), while also making him vulnerable to my attacks. I
> > think I`ll proceed slowly and cautiously in my attempts to exploit
> > this development...
>
> > Walt, does the fact that Oswald tried to assassinate a political
> > figure in any way speak to the possibility he assassinated Kennedy?
>
> Dear Dumbass, please present the PROOF that Oswald "tried to assinaste
> a political figure"
You think Oswald just had a grudge against Walker`s window, then?
> If Oswald meant to "assassinate a political figure" (Walker) He had
> ample opportunity, because he was less than 100 feet away from Walker
> who was SITTING STILL behind his desk,
You kooks should make up your minds. When he misses, you claim he
should have hit, when he hits, you claim he should have missed.
> AND he remained behind that
> window in a well lit room for several minutes AFTER the gunshot. If
> Oswald had intended to assassinate him it would have been very easy
> for Oswald to have done that. He did not even wound Walker.....So an
> intelligent mind ( Leaves you out ,Dud) would know that he never
> intended to harm Walker.
So, you think he went there to assassinate Walker`s window sash? He
fired into the man`s house, into the room the man was in, and you
don`t consider this an attempt on his life? Kook logic, the fact that
Walker wasn`t killed proves Oswald wasn`t trying to kill him.
Ok, how many people fire bullets towards political figures?
> > mean, how many people try to kill political figures?
>
> > Also, what rifle do you suppose Oswald used in his attempt against
> > Walker?
Ouch! Nothing here, Walt? Do you think Oswald threw the bullet at
Walker`s house?
> > > What his motive was, and if he
> > > intended to kill Walker remains a mystery. It's very doubful that he
> > > intended to kill Walker because according to the evidence Walker was a
> > > "sitting duck" who Oswald could not have missed if he had intended to
> > > hit him. The distance from the fence to the window was less than 100
> > > feet.
>
> > > > Here's a copy of the report if you want to look at it :
>
> > > >http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1LzY...text -
Walt
> Bud,
>
> Walt has stated his kook belief in the past that BOTH the Walker
> shooting and the JFK shooting were "staged attempts". They evidently
> were merely exercises in PRETENDING, per Walt The Idiot.
Wel I'll be damned.... I squeeze a boil named Dud, and out pops a
maggot named Pea brain.
>
> Here's what Walt said early last year:
>
> "[The Walker shooting was] part of a ruse to make it APPEAR that
> I tried to kill one of Castro's most bitter and vocal foes. ....
> Walker...revealed that he knew that Oswald had put the bullet hole
> through his window on the night of April 10 1963. At the time that
> they staged the attempt on Walker, General Walker thought Oswald was
> an American secret agent setting up a ruse to infiltrate Castro's
> Cuba." -- Walt The Kook; 03/29/2007
>
> Full post:http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/12a8ef40dc48b718
>
> Here's one of my replies within that 2007 thread:
>
> <2007 DVP quote on>
>
> >>> "You're a fool to attempt to make it appear that I skew the evidence. Anybody reading my posts can see that they consist mainly of posting the original testimony of the people who actually witnessed the murder." <<<
>
> You're exhibiting those "fool" traits again I see.
>
> So, you think there's SOLID EVIDENCE (somewhere in the RECORDS of the
> case) that Oswald made a "staged attempt" on Gen. Walker on Apr. 10th?
> And that Oswald WANTED the cops to find his rifle after that "staged
> attempt"? Right?
>
> Is that why Oswald BURIED the rifle...to help the cops find it more
> easily?
>
> And your "version" of Brennan's testimony is ALL in the verified
> transcripts, too, right? Including the part about positively seeing a
> shooter on the WEST end of the TSBD? Right?
>
> That stuff is actually IN THE WC TESTIMONY for all to see, right? But
> nobody EXCEPT WALT has interpreted it correctly. Right?
>
> And Belin, et al, were sweatin' bullets I'll bet when they asked
> Brennan open-ended questions like: "Is there anything else you'd like
> to add?" and "Will you tell us what happened?"
>
> Walt, I know you're smarter than you actually appear on these Forum
> (Nuthouse) pages. (How can you not be?) ;)
>
> Therefore, you cannot possibly actually believe that you HAVEN'T
> skewed and manipulated the testimony of Howard Brennan to suit your
> OWN "west-end TSBD gunman" theory. Can you?
>
> And the "staged" Walker thing is just too silly to believe as well.
> With no hard evidence to back up your claims.
>
> And I think you even went so far a while back to purport that the JFK
> assassination was meant to be merely a "staged attempt" too. Isn't
> that correct? (But they got UNlucky and actually killed him!)????
>
> Walt -- Stop....Breathe....Think....And re-evaluate the two (or more)
> hunks of nonsense that you posted via the links I provided above.
>
> Brennan saw no gunman (or anybody at all) in that West-End
> window....and you know he didn't.
>
> <2007 DVP quote off>
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/threa...
David Von Pein
Walt has stated his kook belief in the past that BOTH the Walker
shooting and the JFK shooting were "staged attempts". They evidently
were merely exercises in PRETENDING, per Walt The Idiot.
Here's what Walt said early last year:
"[The Walker shooting was] part of a ruse to make it APPEAR that
[LHO] tried to kill one of Castro's most bitter and vocal foes. ....
Full post:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/12a8ef40dc48b718
<2007 DVP quote on>
<2007 DVP quote off>
tomnln
"Walt" <papakoc...@evertek.net> wrote in message
news:9c7f8d27-b90b-4808...@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
The report speaks for itself.
The metal components of the Walker bullet do NOT match the metal components
of the Unfired bullet found in CE-139.
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tomnln
"Gil Jesus" <gjj...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:f7d956bb-a22e-46f7...@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
Bud
> On 15 Aug, 20:47, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Bud,
>
> > Walt has stated his kook belief in the past that BOTH the Walker
> > shooting and the JFK shooting were "staged attempts". They evidently
> > were merely exercises in PRETENDING, per Walt The Idiot.
>
> Wel I'll be damned.... I squeeze a boil named Dud, and out pops a
> maggot named Pea brain.
You didn`t squeeze me, idiot, I squoze (not a real word, but I like
it) you. You voiced an opinion here. I asked questions about that
opinion. Now you are clamming up.
Bud
> Bud,
>
> Walt has stated his kook belief in the past that BOTH the Walker
> shooting and the JFK shooting were "staged attempts". They evidently
> were merely exercises in PRETENDING, per Walt The Idiot.
This is the thinking of the people that criticize the WC. They
think they can replace the WC`s findings and conclusions with the
scatter-brained musings of idiots. Can you imagine if the WC returned
with findings like the retarded speculation Walt offers?
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/threa...
Walt
> Bud,
>
> Walt has stated his kook belief in the past that BOTH the Walker
> shooting and the JFK shooting were "staged attempts". They evidently
> were merely exercises in PRETENDING, per Walt The Idiot.
>
> Here's what Walt said early last year:
>
> "[The Walker shooting was] part of a ruse to make it APPEAR that
> [LHO] tried to kill one of Castro's most bitter and vocal foes. ....
> Walker...revealed that he knew that Oswald had put the bullet hole
> through his window on the night of April 10 1963. At the time that
> they staged the attempt on Walker, General Walker thought Oswald was
> an American secret agent setting up a ruse to infiltrate Castro's
> Cuba." -- Walt The Kook; 03/29/2007
>
> Full post:http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/12a8ef40dc48b718
>
> Here's one of my replies within that 2007 thread:
>
> <2007 DVP quote on>
>
> >>> "You're a fool to attempt to make it appear that I skew the evidence. Anybody reading my posts can see that they consist mainly of posting the original testimony of the people who actually witnessed the murder." <<<
>
> You're exhibiting those "fool" traits again I see.
>
> So, you think there's SOLID EVIDENCE (somewhere in the RECORDS of the
> case) that Oswald made a "staged attempt" on Gen. Walker on Apr. 10th?
> And that Oswald WANTED the cops to find his rifle after that "staged
> attempt"? Right?
>
> Is that why Oswald BURIED the rifle...to help the cops find it more
Oswald told Marina only WHAT HE WANTED HER KNOW so she would only be
able to tell the authorities what he had told her.
The De Morenschildt plot called for Oswald to fired a shot through
General Walker's window in a staged ruse that made it appear that
Oswald had tried to assassinate General Walker. Oswald had prepared
Marina ( who spoke no english) for the event by telling her that if
any emergency ever arose and she needed help when he wasn't home, she
should call Ruth Paine, and Ruth would take care of the emergency.
Oswald assumed that Marina would find the note he'd left for her to
find and become alarmed when it got late and he hadn't come home.
( The note said that he might be killed or in Jail) Oswald assumed
that Marina would follow his directions and call Ruth Paine and Marina
would her about the alarming note. Ruth would have called the police
and hinted at the possibility of a connection between the Walker
Shooting and Oswald's note. The cops would have been on Oswald's
trail as he fled to Cuba where he would have been welcomed by Castro.
The ruse never "got off the ground" because Marina was embarrassed
and afraid to call Ruth Paine.
>
> And your "version" of Brennan's testimony is ALL in the verified
> transcripts, too, right? Including the part about positively seeing a
> shooter on the WEST end of the TSBD? Right?
No.... Brennan's ORIGINAL affidavit that he wrote just a couple of
hours after the shooting is the best source of information. The
authorities went to work on Brennan immediately to intimidate him into
puttting the finger on Oswald. At the time he gave his affidavit he
was merely an honest eyewitness who related exactly what he saw at
the time of the assassination. In that affidavit he DESCRIBED a
gunman who was NOT Lee Oswald. He DESCRIBED the window where he had
seen the gunman, and he DESCRIBED the gun as a hunting rifle. The
window he DESCRIBED was NOT the east end window..... It was the WIDE
OPEN window at the WEST end of the sixth floor.
>
> That stuff is actually IN THE WC TESTIMONY for all to see, right? But
> nobody EXCEPT WALT has interpreted it correctly. Right?
>
> And Belin, et al, were sweatin' bullets I'll bet when they asked
> Brennan open-ended questions like: "Is there anything else you'd like
> to add?" and "Will you tell us what happened?"
>
> Walt, I know you're smarter than you actually appear on these Forum
> (Nuthouse) pages. (How can you not be?) ;)
>
> Therefore, you cannot possibly actually believe that you HAVEN'T
> skewed and manipulated the testimony of Howard Brennan to suit your
> OWN "west-end TSBD gunman" theory. Can you?
>
> And the "staged" Walker thing is just too silly to believe as well.
> With no hard evidence to back up your claims.
>
> And I think you even went so far a while back to purport that the JFK
> assassination was meant to be merely a "staged attempt" too. Isn't
> that correct? (But they got UNlucky and actually killed him!)????
>
> Walt -- Stop....Breathe....Think....And re-evaluate the two (or more)
> hunks of nonsense that you posted via the links I provided above.
>
> Brennan saw no gunman (or anybody at all) in that West-End
> window....and you know he didn't.
>
> <2007 DVP quote off>
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/threa...
Walt
> On Aug 15, 9:53 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > On 15 Aug, 20:47, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > Bud,
>
> > > Walt has stated his kook belief in the past that BOTH the Walker
> > > shooting and the JFK shooting were "staged attempts". They evidently
> > > were merely exercises in PRETENDING, per Walt The Idiot.
>
> > Wel I'll be damned.... I squeeze a boil named Dud, and out pops a
> > maggot named Pea brain.
>
> You didn`t squeeze me, idiot, I squoze (not a real word, but I like
> it) you. You voiced an opinion here. I asked questions about that
> opinion. Now you are clamming up.
Hey Dud..... This may come as a surprise to you, but I respond where
and when I damn well want to.
I don't "dance to yer fiddlin".
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/threa...- Hide quoted text -
robcap...@netscape.com
What about the bullet really being a 30.06 caliber? That was the main
point of this post, what happened to this rifle? Also, just for fun -
couldn't Gen. Walker's men get military steel jacketed bullets?
> Photos of the bullet that alledgedly was removed from the Walker
> house, show that it is badly mangled. A stell jacketed bullet would
> not have been mangled.
And you believe this to be the "actual" bullet taken from the house?
I ask because we know of all the planted evidence in the JFK case.
> Thereis just too much evidence that Oswald was involved to firing the
> bullet through Walker's window.
What evidence beyond Marina's word for it?
> What his motive was, and if he intended to kill Walker remains a mystery.
>It's very doubful that he intended to kill Walker because according to the
>evidence Walker was a "sitting duck" who Oswald could not have missed
>if he had intended to hit him. The distance from the fence to the window
>was less than 100 feet.
And you believe the whole story told by Gen. Walker? What about the
authorities removing he license plate of the car in the driveway?
> > Here's a copy of the report if you want to look at it :
>
> >http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1LzY...Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
robcap...@netscape.com
I'm not buying it either. There is NO proof LHO fired at Walker that
I have read.
Bud
> On 16 Aug, 07:44,Bud<sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 15, 9:53 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > > On 15 Aug, 20:47, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > >Bud,
>
> > > > Walt has stated his kook belief in the past that BOTH the Walker
> > > > shooting and the JFK shooting were "staged attempts". They evidently
> > > > were merely exercises in PRETENDING, per Walt The Idiot.
>
> > > Wel I'll be damned.... I squeeze a boil named Dud, and out pops a
> > > maggot named Pea brain.
>
> > You didn`t squeeze me, idiot, I squoze (not a real word, but I like
> > it) you. You voiced an opinion here. I asked questions about that
> > opinion. Now you are clamming up.
>
> Hey Dud..... This may come as a surprise to you, but I respond where
> and when I damn well want to.
>
> I don't "dance to yer fiddlin".
I understand, you want to check out the links in the "Freaky Hoes"
post first. When you get a chance, I`d appreciate a response...
> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/threa...Hide quoted text -
Walt
wrote:
I agree that there is no solid proof that Oswald fired the bullet
through Walker's window. HOWEVER there is a fair amount of evidence
that Oswald was there at the time the shot was fired. The photo taken
of Walker's house and Marina's testimony are strong evidence that he
was there. The problem with you guys that don't want to accept that
evidence is: you believe that it was a real attempt to murder
Walker. The evidence does NOT support that contention. The shot
missed Walker completely (If he was even in the room at the time?)
Hell, even a very poor shot could not have missed Walker from the
short range of less than 100 feet. I suspect that Walker was part
and parcel to the plot..... He basically revealed that he knew that
it was Oswald who had fired the shot through his window when he
talked to the German Newsman the day after the assassination. Walker
knew all along that Oswald was the man who fired the shot at his
house.
Walt
<aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> You mentioned in a recent post that the bullet recovered at the Walker
> home was a steel jacketed bullet and the rifle linked to LHO could not
> have fired it.
>
> The real issue is the caliber of the slug. The NYT reported 30-06
> originally.
Aaron, there is no such thing as a 30.06 bullet.... There is a 30.06
CARTRIDGE that contains a 30 CALIBER bullet.(projectile) But there are
dozens of rifles that are designed to fire a 30 caliber bullet. (The
actual diameter of the bullet is.308", but it is commonally called a
30 caliber bullet.) Once the BULLET ( projectile) is fired from the
CARTRIDGE there is no way to determine if it was fired from a 30.06
CARTRIDGE or a 30-40 Krag, or a 300 H&H, or a 300 Winchester Magnum,
or a 300 Savage, or a 308 Winchester, or a 7.62 Russian, to name a few
rifles that use a .308 caliber bullet (projectile)
An ignorant reporter (or cop) could easily have erred and referred to
the bullet as a 30.06 but there is no way he could have known by
looking at the bullet ( projectile) that it had been fired from a
30.06 Springfield Cartridge.
tomnln
The Walker photo was "Altered" 4 times.
Marina's testyimony was given "Under Threat of Deportation".
Walker DENIED that it was Oswald who took a shot at him.
Walt
> Hohohohohoho
>
> "Gil Jesus" <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote in message
I've already answered this question for Gil, but let me repeat....
Yes, the bulet that was fired through Walker's window was NOT
manufactured by Western Cartridge company but the "Magic Bullet" CE
399 WAS manufactured by Western Cartridge Company. This FACT is
CRYSTAL CLEAR!! And the fact that the Warren Commission chose to
ignore this fact is proof that they weren't really investigating the
case. The Walker bullet and the Magic Bullet were manufactured by two
different companies. Your next question might be .... Were the
conspirators so dumb that they would have used two different kinds of
cartridges in the two shootings if they were framing Oswald? The
answer is: They never dreamed that the Walker bullet would ever
appear to be compared with the bullet that they planted at Parkland.
( the thought simply didn't even occur to them) It's very doubtful
that they even gave any thought to the manufacturer of either of the
bullets. If they had, they would not have used the catridges that
were made for the CIA. If they had planned throughly they would have
reloaded some Italian ammo with fresh powder and the original Italian
bullets.
These are the kind of stupid mistakes that criminals make..... But
when you know that the head of the FBI will cover your mistakes you
don't worry about the small details.
Walt
> On Aug 16, 10:22 am, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 16 Aug, 07:44,Bud<sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 15, 9:53 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > > > On 15 Aug, 20:47, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >Bud,
>
> > > > > Walt has stated his kook belief in the past that BOTH the Walker
> > > > > shooting and the JFK shooting were "staged attempts". They evidently
> > > > > were merely exercises in PRETENDING, per Walt The Idiot.
>
> > > > Wel I'll be damned.... I squeeze a boil named Dud, and out pops a
> > > > maggot named Pea brain.
>
> > > You didn`t squeeze me, idiot, I squoze (not a real word, but I like
> > > it) you. You voiced an opinion here. I asked questions about that
> > > opinion. Now you are clamming up.
>
> > Hey Dud..... This may come as a surprise to you, but I respond where
> > and when I damn well want to.
>
> > I don't "dance to yer fiddlin".
>
> I understand, you want to check out the links in the "Freaky Hoes"
> post first. When you get a chance, I`d appreciate a response...
Hey Dud.... Just hold yer breath....
> > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/threa...quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Walt
> "Walt" <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote in message
Have you read what he told the German newsman when he talked to him on
the phone the day after the assassination?? I could dig it up and
post it verbatim but for now l'll just tell you what he said.....
Walker called his friend the German newsman on early Sunday morning
11 / 24 / 63 and tried to influence the newsman into publishing a
story about the history of JFK's accused assassin, Lee Oswald. He
wanted the world to know that JFK's accused killer was a Communist
with an unsavory past. In his conversation with the newsman he
mentioned that Oswald had taken a pot shot at him back in April.
Walker had always pretended that he didn't know who had fired a bullet
through his window and yet he told that Newsman that it was Oswald who
had been the culprit. HOW COULD HE HAVE KNOWN THAT???
>
> SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm- Hide quoted text -
Walt
>
> - Show quoted text -
Here's the portion of Walker's testimony concerning the conversation
with the German newsman.
It's rather convoluted, but it's pretty obvious that Walker was lying
through his teeth when he said he didn't tell the newsman that Oswald
had took a pot shot at him. Di he really think that Liebler would
not see through his lie?? Did he expect Liebler to believe that some
German newsman who probably wouldn't even have known anything about
the shooting at Walker house in April would suggest that it was
Oswald who had fired the shot??? GIMME A BREAK!!!
Mr. Liebeler.
Do you know Helmet Hubert Muench?
General WALKER. That name is not familiar to me. Can you give me
anything to refresh me?
Mr. Liebeler.
Yes. He is a West German journalist who wrote an article that appeared
in the Deutsche Nationalzeitung und Soldatenzeitung, a Munich,
Germany, newspaper.
General WALKER. No; I don't know him.
Mr. Liebeler.
Did you ever talk to him?
General WALKER. Not that I know of.
Mr. Liebeler.
Did you talk to him on a transatlantic telephone call in which you
told him about the fact or the alleged fact that Lee Harvey Oswald was
the person who made an attempt on your life?
General WALKER. I don't recall that name. Did he speak English? I
don't speak German.
Mr. Liebeler.
Have you ever seen a copy of that newspaper?
General WALKER. Yes; I have.
Mr. Liebeler.
In fact, I suggest that you have seen the November 29, 1963, copy of
that newspaper which had on its front page a story entitled in German
"The Strange Case of Oswald", that told about how Oswald had allegedly
attacked you.
General WALKER. November 29, that is correct.
Mr. Liebeler.
Now, where did that newspaper get that information, do you know?
General WALKER. I do not. There was all article in the paper that he
probably got from me.
Mr. Liebeler.
Well, in fact, the issue of that newspaper has right on the front page
what purports to be a transcript of a telephone conversation between
you and some other person.
General WALKER. Thorsten?
Mr. Liebeler.
Yes. Hasso Thorsten, is that the man?
General WALKER. He called me in Shreveport.
Mr. Liebeler.
When were you in Shreveport?
General WALKER. He called me the morning of November 23, 1963, about 7
a.m.
Mr. Liebeler.
That is when you gave him this information about Oswald having
attacked you?
General WALKER. I didn't give him all the information--I think the
portion you are referring to, I didn't give him, because I had no way
of knowing that Oswald attacked me. I still don't. And I am not very
prone to say in fact he did. In fact, I have always claimed he did
not, until we can get into the case or somebody tells us differently
that he did.
Mr. Liebeler.
Do you have a record here that indicates when you were in Shreveport?
General WALKER. I don't know that I have a record here. I can tell you
definitely when I was in Shreveport.
Mr. Liebeler.
Would you?
General WALKER. Well, starting back to make the record clear, I had a
speaking engagement in Hattiesburg, Miss., either the 18th or 19th of
November. I went from there to New Orleans and stayed 2 or 3 days. I
was in the airplane between New Orleans and Shreveport about halfway,
when the pilot announced that the President had been assassinated. I
landed in Shreveport and went to the Captain Shreve Hotel and stayed
there two nights and returned to Dallas and was walking into my house,
just about the time of the immediate rerun of the shooting of Oswald.
I had been out of the city on speaking engagements.
Mr. Liebeler.
The question was, when were you in Shreveport, and when did you talk
to this man?
General WALKER. I was in Shreveport the night of the 23d and the night
of the 22d. Do you have a transcript of my conversation with Mr.
Thorsten?
Mr. Liebeler.
Yes, sir.
General WALKER. Sir?
Mr. Liebeler.
I have what appears to be that; yes.
General WALKER. Where did you get that?
Mr. Liebeler.
It is apparently taken from the newspaper. The newspaper itself had a
transcript printed right in it.
General WALKER. I believe the article you referred to in the newspaper
was separate from the other article in the paper which evolved out of
the conversation.
Mr. Liebeler.
Now so that there were in this particular issue of the newspaper two
transcripts of a conversation between yourself and Thorsten, and also
a story about how Oswald had allegedly fired at you, is that correct?
General WALKER. In the newspaper I remember two separate articles. One
based upon the conversation we had between us, as he understood it,
and then as a separate article which I consider that the newspaper had
done on its own.
Mr. Liebeler.
What was the separate article about? Did that have any reference to
the fact that Oswald had allegedly fired at you?
General WALKER. Yes. As I remember the article, it alleged that Oswald
was the one that had fired at me, and that this had been known
earlier, and that this had been known and that nothing was done about
it.
And if something had been done about it at that time, he wouldn't have
been the man that--it wouldn't have been possible for him to have
killed the President.
Mr. Liebeler.
Well, now, did you tell anybody from this newspaper that Oswald had
shot at you and that this had been known prior to the time of the
assassination of the President?
Mr. Liebeler.
General WALKER. No; I did not. I wouldn't have known it. It was much
later that they began to tie Oswald into me, and I don't even know it
yet.
Mr. Liebeler.
And you certainly didn't know it before November 22?
General WALKER. Or the morning of the 23d, certainly not. I was very
surprised to see the article.
Mr. Liebeler.
So the best of your recollection is that you never provided them with
the information?
General WALKER. I did not. I didn't know it at the time of this
conversation at all. I didn't know it until I started reading the
newspaper, which would have been later than then.
Mr. Liebeler.
I think that is right, so that you only had two conversations with
these people, is that correct?
General WALKER. In connection with this incident, as I remember, there
was a call back to verify something on the original conversation? I
don't remember how the conversation came about. There were two
telephone conversations; right.
Mr. Liebeler.
They both took place while you were down in Louisiana, the 23d and the
22d of November?
General WALKER. The first one was 7 o'clock in the morning the 23d,
and it woke me up.
Mr. Liebeler.
You didn't have the faintest idea that Oswald had taken a shot at you
and you didn't make a statement to that effect to the newspaper?
General WALKER. No; I didn't know.
Mr. Liebeler.
You didn't make a statement to the newspaper or anybody connected with
it at any other time, isn't that a fact?
General WALKER. No.
Mr. Liebeler.
Is it not a fact?
General WALKER. I might have said that the reports over here had
connected Oswald with me some subsequent time.
Mr. Liebeler.
I am somewhat puzzled by the whole thing, because the newspaper in
which this apparently appeared is dated November 29, and in fact, that
information was not known to anybody that I know of until a later date
than that--
General WALKER. Much later.
Mr. Liebeler.
Several days, at any rate.
General WALKER. People began to guess it immediately. I should say
guess at it.
Mr. Liebeler.
It might have been that the article was based on speculation, and it
might have been the newspaper was postdated too. I think that
sometimes happens.
General WALKER. I think that paper was definitely postdated.
Mr. Liebeler.
Yes; that would explain it. That is what I mean, predated.
Ha, ha,ha, ha..... ROTFLMAO!!.... A "predated" story explains this
whole convoluted pack of lies!!
Liebler KNEW Walker was lying and helped him off the hook..... Any
questions about the honesty of the Warren Commission's lawyers?
tomnln
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Walt;
You're quoting what a German newspaper "Claimed" Walker said.
You should already know that a BIG portion of media is "CIA Influenced".
I Quoted Walker HIMSELF.
REPEAT;
The Walker photo was "Altered" 3 times.
Marina's testyimony was given "Under Threat of Deportation".
Walker DENIED that it was Oswald who took a shot at him.
http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tomnln
General WALKER. I didn't give him all the information--I think the
portion you are referring to, I didn't give him, because I had no way
of knowing that Oswald attacked me. I still don't. And I am not very
prone to say in fact he did. In fact, I have always claimed he did
not, until we can get into the case or somebody tells us differently
that he did.
ALONG WITH>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
"Walt" <papakoc...@evertek.net> wrote in message
news:d52441a8-7175-426c...@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
Walt
>
> - Show quoted text -
The Walker photo was "Altered" 4 times.
Tom, you placed quotation marks arond the word "Altered"..... What do
you mean in saying it was altered four times? Are you aware that
there are at least 3 different photos of the back of Walker's
house ?
Two of them are made from the same negative and the other is an
entirely different photo but taken from the same spot as the other
one. One of the photos shows the license plate obliterate by
scratching a hole in the photo, but there is no crease indicating that
the photo had been folded.. Another copy of that photo shows
evidence that it was folded in half, but the hole is not there. This
is probably the photo that Marina folded and hid in her shoe. I
suspect that the photo with the hole in it was provided to the cops by
Mike Paine. There is another photo of the back of Walker's house
which shows a 1953 Ford parked where the 1957 Chevy is parked in the
other photo.
Gil Jesus
>
> Aaron, there is no such thing as a 30.06 bullet.... � There is a 30.06
> CARTRIDGE that contains a 30 CALIBER bullet.(projectile)
Walt, isn't the 30.06 a hunting rifle ? I find it interesting that the
bullet was first described as coming from a hunting rifle and that the
witnesses who claimed to have seen the rifle in Dealey Plaza doing the
shooting described it as a hunting rifle.
Interesting.
Walt
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
>
> Walt;
>
> You're quoting what a German newspaper "Claimed" Walker said.
Tom you seem to be missing the point...... HOW COULD THE NEWSMAN HAVE
KNOWN ABOUT THE SHOOTING AT WALKER'S HOUSE??? Walker had to have
told him......
HOW WOULD THE GERMAN NEWSMAN HAVE EVER MADE THE QUANTUM LEAP THAT IT
WAS OSWALD WHO HAD FIRED THE SHOT ?? Walker had to have told him!
Keep in mind that Oswald was still alive at the time that walker was
telling the newsman that Oswald was the culprit who had taken a shot
at him. AT THAT TIME Walker was attempting to build a public
hysteria against the commie Oswald to cover his own ass in the plot
to murder JFK.
I invite you to find someone who can read German and have them read
the transcript of the conversation between Walker and the Newsman that
was published in the German newspaper ...... Perhaps then you'll get a
clearer picture of the what was going on when Liebler was helping
Walker off the hook as a suspect in the plot to murder of JFK.
> You should already know that a BIG portion of media is "CIA Influenced".
>
> I Quoted Walker HIMSELF.
>
> REPEAT;
> The Walker photo was "Altered" 3 times.
> Marina's testyimony was given "Under Threat of Deportation".
> Walker DENIED that it was Oswald who took a shot at him.
>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hide quoted text -
Walt
30.06 is a CARTRIDGE.... It was originally designed for the 1903 bolt
action Springfield rifle which was designed for the United States
Army. The CARTRIDGE became very popular with sportsman and there are
many rifles designed to fire the 30.06 Springfield cartridge. When the
cartridge is used as hunting ammo it is loaded with a half metal
jacketed bullet in place of the military full metal jacket.
Gil, While I sincerely believe that Brennan, Rowland, and other
witnesses saw a HUNTING rifle in the hands of the gunman on the sixth
floor, I don't think their observations have anything to do with the
kind of rifle that was used to put a hole on the sash of walker's
window. I believe that the bullet that was presented to the WC as the
bullet that was fired at Walker's house is in FACT that bullet.
If the liars of the Warren Commission were going to substitute a 6.5mm
bullet for the original 30 caliber bullet they would have used a
bullet that was made by the same manufacturer as CE 399.
In other words if the Walker bullet had originally been a 30 caliber
bullet but they wanted to pin the Walker shooting firmly on Oswald
they would have substituted a bullet made by Western cartridge
company. The FACT that the Walker bullet is NOT a Western bullet
speaks volumes about the honesty or ineptitude of the Warren
Commission. Because they should have known that the two bullets were
made by different companies and investigated this aspect of the case.
They simply accepted that Oswald all by himself decided to shoot a
hole in Walker's window, but he only had five rounds of ammo, four of
which were made by Western Cartridge company and one that was made by
Norma.
robcap...@netscape.com
You have said on many occassions that Marina was threatened with
deportation, so why would you believe her now? Who did the 1957 Chevy
in the driveway belong to? Those three photos could easily have been
claimed to have been in LHO's possession but acutally planted.
The problem with you guys that don't want to accept that
> evidence is: you believe that it was a real attempt to murder
> Walker.
Not in my case, I don't care if it was real or fake, there is still NO
real evidence showing LHO fired the shot. The only witness saw TWO
men and many others saw others in the days leading up to the shooting.
The evidence does NOT support that contention. The shot
> missed Walker completely (If he was even in the room at the time?)
> Hell, even a very poor shot could not have missed Walker from the
> short range of less than 100 feet. I suspect that Walker was part
> and parcel to the plot..... He basically revealed that he knew that
> it was Oswald who had fired the shot through his window when he
> talked to the German Newsman the day after the assassination. Walker
> knew all along that Oswald was the man who fired the shot at his
> house.
I don't know if it was staged or not, but the bottom line is the real
evidence says it was not LHO shooting at Walker, if it was you, or
anyone else who believes he did, needs to prove where the other rifle
went to since it was a 30.06 bullet. Even Walker said the bullet the
HSCA presented was NOT the one he saw taken from his house that day.
tomnln
"Walt" <papakoc...@evertek.net> wrote in message
news:7fbff799-afc5-4758...@j22g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
You should already know that a BIG portion of media is "CIA Influenced".
You should already know that a BIG portion of media is "CIA Influenced".
You should already know that a BIG portion of media is "CIA Influenced".
You should already know that a BIG portion of media is "CIA Influenced".
You should already know that a BIG portion of media is "CIA Influenced".
"Walt" <papakoc...@evertek.net> wrote in message
news:f7ac1cac-d462-46de...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
Bud
> On 15 Aug, 16:00, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 15, 4:36 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > You might have to dumb it down a little bit for me, Walt.
>
> > Are you saying that Oswald fired the shot at Walker using different
> > ammuntion than WCC ammo ?
>
> > Thanks.
>
> Absolutely!..... There is NO EVIDENCE that Oswald fired any shot at
> JFK. CE 399 was "found" at Parkland hospital at about 1:40 pm just as
> Johnson was leaving to go to hijack JFK's plane.
>
> CE 399 is said to have been fired from the TSBD rifle, and perhaps it
> was but it certainly wasn't fired from that rifle at the time JFK was
> murdered. CE 399 is a full metal (copper) jacketed bullet
> manufactured by Western Cartridge company for the CIA under a Marine
> Corps purchase order.
>
> All US manufactures use serrations ( like the notches on a dime coin)
> in the cannelure of their bullets as a way of identifing their
> bullets. Some use a a coarser serration than others. One can tell in
> a glance that the Walker Bullet and CE 399 were manufactured by
> different companies.
Lets produce photos of the two bullets, to let people decide whether
your claim has merit...
First the bullet found on the gurney at Parkland, CE399...
http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/9/9a/Photo_naraevid_CE399-1.jpg
Heres the Walker bullet. CE573...
http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/a/a9/Photo_naraevid_CE573-2.jpg
I wonder what Walt thinks he sees that makes him so positive they
are two different make of bullets.
tomnln
The authorities Relpaced the "Steel Jacketed" bullet with a "Copper
Jacketed" bullet in an attempt to frame Oswald.
The metal components of the Walker bullet does NOT match the metal
components of the bullet found in CE-139.
It's all here in official records.>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
tomnln
April 10, 1963 DPD Report.
SEE it HERE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
news:22b0223b-d6ee-473a...@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
Bud
> The Walker bullet was ID's as "Steel-Jacketed of unknown caliber" in the
> April 10, 1963 DPD Report.
Thats a preliminary police report, idiot, not a ballistics report.
> SEE it HERE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
>
> "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote in message
tomnln
> On Aug 16, 8:48 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
>> The Walker bullet was ID's as "Steel-Jacketed of unknown caliber" in the
>> April 10, 1963 DPD Report.
>
> Thats a preliminary police report, idiot, not a ballistics report.
SEE it HERE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
See the First Exhibit (Appendix G)
Bud would have preferred a report from those Boy Scouts he's been Eating.
Bud;
You're giving me a Superiority Complex.
Walt
It's so simple that even you can understand it Dud.... Thank you for
posting links to the photos of the two bullets .... Now , Simply
count the number of notches in the cannelure of both bullets. There
are four notches in the width of the rifling groove on CE 399 while
there are seveb nothches in the width of the rifling groove on the
Walker bullet. Which means the two bullets were manufactured by
different companies. Or if you want to count the total number visible
on each bullet you can count the number visible and than multiply that
number by 2 to find the total number of notches on each bullet.
You'll find that The Walker bullet has nearly twice as many notches as
CE 399.
>
>
>
> > Personally I have little doubt that Oswald was involved in some ruse
> > or publicity stunt at walker's house when a bullet was fired through
> > walker's window. That bullet was recovered and it definitely is NOT a
> > Western Cartridge Company bullet. It appears to be a 6.5mm full
> > metal jacketed bullet of US manufacture. When the two bullets are
> > compared even a blind man can tell that they are made by diferent
> > manufacturers. Why the Warren Cammission didn't see this and follow
> > through, is stark evidence that they simply didn't want too see any
> > evidence that didn't fit with J.Edgar Hover THEORY.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
David Von Pein
>>> "There are four notches in the width of the rifling groove on CE 399 while there are seven notches in the width of the rifling groove on the Walker bullet. Which means the two bullets were manufactured by different companies." <<<
Walt The Idiot thinks that in order to prove that the Walker bullet
and CE399 are both MC/WCC bullets, the MUCH-MORE-FLATTENED Walker
bullet should have an identical number of notches/grooves in the
"width" of the bullets as seen in those two pictures displayed above.
He doesn't take into account the FLATTENING of the Walker bullet,
which would (naturally) explain why we can see MORE GROOVES & NOTCHES
in CE573 (the Walker bullet) than we can in the much-less-flattened
CE399.
Therefore, more of CE573's grooves are exposed to the camera due to
the bullet's flattened condition. Which, of course, is quite obviously
going to be the case, seeing as how the flattened portion of CE573
makes that part of the bullet MUCH WIDER than the same not-nearly-as-
damaged area of CE399, which isn't nearly as flattened (and is nearly
round):
www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/9/9a/Photo_naraevid_CE399-1.jpg
www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/a/a9/Photo_naraevid_CE573-2.jpg
Footnote:
As Bud has said many times.....Kooks like Walter Cakebread shouldn't
be looking into this case at all. And Walt's last post about bullets
CE573 and CE399 is a perfect example to illustrate that excellent
point. (In fact, come to think about it, it's debatable whether kooks
like Walt should even be walking around...period. But that's a topic
for another day.)
Bud
You can show your gratitude by answering the questions I asked you
earlier.
>.... Now , Simply
> count the number of notches in the cannelure of both bullets. There
> are four notches in the width of the rifling groove on CE 399 while
> there are seveb nothches in the width of the rifling groove on the
> Walker bullet.
Are the rifling grooves all equally distant apart? These views of
CE399 indicates differently...
http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/6/60/Photo_naraevid_CE399-7.jpg
http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/8/84/Photo_naraevid_CE399-4.jpg
> Which means the two bullets were manufactured by
> different companies. Or if you want to count the total number visible
> on each bullet you can count the number visible and than multiply that
> number by 2 to find the total number of notches on each bullet.
> You'll find that The Walker bullet has nearly twice as many notches as
> CE 399.
This is why, during the WC`s investigation, Judge Warren never
uttered the words "Enough of these experts, I want an idiots opinion.
Bring me Walt Cakebread!"
This different view of the Walker buller shows about 5-8 notches,
while it`s your contention that it should show the same amount from
any view. The reason why is the jacket has split, exposing gaps of
lead, and more of the jacket is around the other side.
http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/f/f3/Photo_naraevid_CE573-1.jpg
Walt
> www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/c9dc30d0...
>
> >>> "There are four notches in the width of the rifling groove on CE 399 while there are seven notches in the width of the rifling groove on the Walker bullet. Which means the two bullets were manufactured by different companies." <<<
>
> Walt The Idiot thinks that in order to prove that the Walker bullet
> and CE399 are both MC/WCC bullets, the MUCH-MORE-FLATTENED Walker
> bullet should have an identical number of notches/grooves in the
> "width" of the bullets as seen in those two pictures displayed above.
>
> He doesn't take into account the FLATTENING of the Walker bullet,
> which would (naturally) explain why we can see MORE GROOVES & NOTCHES
> in CE573 (the Walker bullet) than we can in the much-less-flattened
> CE399.
Whoa thar!!....Ya stupid freakin mule..... Have someone with a
modicum of intelligence read what I wrote. I said count the number
of notches IN THE WIDTH OF A RIFLING GROOVE. lets assign an
arbitrary number of 1/8" for the groove on the bullet which was made
by a land in the barrel of the rifle from which it was fired. If
both bullets were fired from the same rifle that 1/8" number applies
to both bullets. Are ya following me Dumbass?? I understand this
is all very difficult for you but I'll try to keep it at intellectual
level.
Ok ... So now you should know that the groove is the same width on
both bullets. Now find someone who can count to at least seven, and
count the number of nothches on theMagic Bullet (CE 399) I believe
you'll find there are four notches in that groove. Now count the
number of notches in the Walker bullet ( CE 573) ... I believe you'll
find that there are seven. It makes no difference whether you agree
with my numbers, because it's obvious that the Walker bullet (CE573)
has a finer serration (Oh I'm sorry I said I'd keep this at your
intellectual level) I mean the notches on the Walker Bullet are much
closer together than the notches on the Magic Bullet ( CE399)
OK.... Did yoy understand that Pea Brain??
Walt
DUH.... Dud, Your question is irrelevant and reveals your
stupidity. If the Magic bullet (CE 399) and the Walker bullet ( CE
573) were both fired from the same rifle the groove will be the same
width on both bullets. If you argue that CE 573 has been flattened
and distorted, then you're using the argument of a moron, because any
distortion that applies to the groove also applies to the notches
across that groove. Or in other words the number of notches will not
change because the bullet is distorted. If there were four notches
across the groove when it left the barrel of the rifle there would
still be four notches across the groove when it was dug out of the
wall in Walker's house.
Can you understand that, Dud?
Walt
> On Aug 16, 11:56 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > It's so simple that even you can understand it Dud.... Thank you for
> > posting links to the photos of the two bullets .... Now , Simply
> > count the number of notches in the cannelure of both bullets. There
> > are four notches in the width of the rifling groove on CE 399 while
> > there are seveb nothches in the width of the rifling groove on the
> > Walker bullet. Which means the two bullets were manufactured by
> > different companies. Or if you want to count the total number visible
> > on each bullet you can count the number visible and than multiply that
> > number by 2 to find the total number of notches on each bullet.
> > You'll find that The Walker bullet has nearly twice as many notches as
> > CE 399.
>
>
> Walt just employed his highly analytical "count the notches and
> multiple by two" method of damaged bullet identification.
>
> Walt, I don't know if this is funnier than the cardboard/lincoln log/
> lego model of Dealey Plaza you constructed with the Hot Wheel limo,
> but it does rank up there.
>
> You certainly have a flair for doing stupid things!
>
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Hey Schmuck....What's tickled you? Are you looking in the mirror
again?
Any intelligent school kid knows that you can only see the one side of
an object... That's the side facing you.
That's exactly the way a camera records the object. It "sees" the
side facing the camera lens.
If that object is cylindrical and has equally spaced marks around
it's circumference ( like the notches on a U.S. quarter dollar coin)
then the total number of notches on that coin, or cylindrical object
can be determined by counting the number of notches visible and
multiplying by two. If the serrations are very fine (close together)
and blurr together at the outter edges of the object , so they can't
be counted, then simply count the number on the quarter quadrant of
the object that is directly in from of the camera lense. Since you are
only counting 1/4 of the total number of notches around the
circumference then it's elementary that you multply the number of
notches by 4 to obtain the total number of nothches on the
cylinderical object.
I realize that this is very difficult for a simple mind to comprehend,
but you can prove the idea is true by placing 10-12- 14 or any number
of marks equally spaced around your coffee cup with a felt tip pen.
If you place 14 equally spaced marks then seven will be visible on the
side of the cup facing you. CAN YOU UNDERSTAND THIS SCHMUCK??
Walt
> On Aug 15, 4:36 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> You might have to dumb it down a little bit for me, Walt.
>
> Are you saying that Oswald fired the shot at Walker using different
> ammuntion than WCC ammo ?
>
> Thanks.
Gil, Yesterday I posted a lot of information about the shooting
incident at Walker's house. It should be apparent to you now that
Oswald did in fact fire a bullet through Walker's window on the night
of 4 /10/63. But that doesn't mean he was trying to kill
walker.....On the contrary the FACT that the shot missed Walker
completely is strong evidence that Oswald never intended to hit
Walker.
If It was Oswald who had the 6.5mm Mannlicher Carcano in his hands at
the time the shot was fired then it's obvious that the recovered
bullet would be a 6.5mm bullet. And that's exactly what CE 573
appears to be ( a full metal jacketed, 6.5mm, bullet) HOWEVER it was
made by a different manufacturer than CE 399 ( the magic Bullet) Since
it is a FMJ it must have been manufactured for a military outfit.
( Possibly a foreign army that used the Mannlicher Carcano)
It appears to be a bullet that was made by a US manufacturer because
it has serrations in the cannelure which is the method used by U.S.
ammo manufacturers to identify their ammo. ( It's their "signature")
Since it was made by a U.S. manufacturer as a MILITARY bullet one has
to wonder where this bullet came from?? Was it some surplus ammo
that had been made in the U.S. for the Italians before WWII?? Who
knows?? An honest investigation would have answered these
questions.
But the bottom line is:.... The bullet from the Walker shooting was
made by a DIFFERENT manufacturer than the bullet that was planted at
Parkland Hospital. I'd bet the farm that the FBI KNEW this FACT, but
put up a smoke screen to cover the fact. They didn't want the public
to ask any questions .... They wanted us to simply take their word
that Oswald was a "Lone Nut killer without motive"
aeffects
[...]
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
ya know Dudster, posting your girlfriends commentary about your b
edoom exploits only serves to embarass you further, give yourself a
break son. Have your mom reads your postings BEFORE you them on their
way...
Walt
> On Aug 17, 11:15 am, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 17 Aug, 02:53, Chuck Schuyler <chu...@am-mtg.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 16, 11:56 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > > > It's so simple that even you can understand it Dud.... Thank you for
> > > > posting links to the photos of the two bullets .... Now , Simply
> > > > count the number of notches in the cannelure of both bullets. There
> > > > are four notches in the width of the rifling groove on CE 399 while
> > > > there are seveb nothches in the width of the rifling groove on the
> > > > Walker bullet. Which means the two bullets were manufactured by
> > > > different companies. Or if you want to count the total number visible
> > > > on each bullet you can count the number visible and than multiply that
> > > > number by 2 to find the total number of notches on each bullet.
> > > > You'll find that The Walker bullet has nearly twice as many notches as
> > > > CE 399.
>
> > > Oh, this site is soooo fun sometimes.
>
> > > Walt just employed his highly analytical "count the notches and
> > > multiple by two" method of damaged bullet identification.
>
> > > Walt, I don't know if this is funnier than the cardboard/lincoln log/
> > > lego model of Dealey Plaza you constructed with the Hot Wheel limo,
> > > but it does rank up there.
>
> > > You certainly have a flair for doing stupid things!
>
> > > HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>
> > Hey Schmuck....What's tickled you? Are you looking in the mirror
> > again?
>
> > Any intelligent school kid knows that you can only see the one side of
> > an object... That's the side facing you.
> > That's exactly the way a camera records the object. It "sees" the
> > side facing the camera lens.
>
> > If that object is cylindrical and has equally spaced marks around
> > it's circumference ( like the notches on a U.S. quarter dollar coin)
> > then the total number of notches on that coin, or cylindrical object
> > can be determined by counting the number of notches visible and
> > multiplying by two. If the serrations are very fine (close together)
> > and blurr together at the outter edges of the object , so they can't
> > be counted, then simply count the number on the quarter quadrant of
> > the object that is directly in from of the camera lense. Since you are
> > only counting 1/4 of the total number of notches around the
> > circumference then it's elementary that you multply the number of
> > notches by 4 to obtain the total number of nothches on the
> > cylinderical object.
>
> > I realize that this is very difficult for a simple mind to comprehend,
> > but you can prove the idea is true by placing 10-12- 14 or any number
> > of marks equally spaced around your coffee cup with a felt tip pen.
> > If you place 14 equally spaced marks then seven will be visible on the
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
>
> Your analysis is one of the DUMBEST THINGS I HAVE EVER READ IN MY
> LIFE!!!!!
>
> You're an old guy hunched over a computer ALL DAY trying to SOLVE the
> KENNEDY ASSASSINATION!
>
> You are a DELUSIONAL BUFF. A JFK TRUTHER! A KOOK!
>
> You've constructed CARDBAORD MODELS of Dealey Plaza to SOLVE THE
> KENNEDY ASSASSINATION!
>
> Now Walt is employing the highly scientific coffee cup-felt tip pen
> method of forensic bullet identification!!!!!
>
> I'm sure this method is taught at the FBI Academy in Quantico,
> Virginia, right???!!!!!
>
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
>
> Oh, God help me....I think I'm going to die
> laughing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> You look at a PHOTO of a smushed, flattened, distorted bullet and
> claim that you-with NO BACKROUND in ballistics forensics-can employ
> the highly accurate and scientific method of "counting the groves and
> multiplying by two" (in conjunction with the coffee cup-felt tip pen
> method, of course) to determine that this isn't a bullet possibly
> fired by Oswald.
>
> What a joke!!!!!
>
> Walt, do you have ANY BACKROUND in the disciplines you keep
> pontificating about?
>
> Have you personally examined the bullet?
>
> WHAT A JOKE!
Joke???.... The joke's on you jerk. Only a simple minded jerk
would accept the Warren Report as gospel.
Chuck Schuyler
> Joke???.... The joke's on you jerk. Only a simple minded jerk
> would accept the Warren Report as gospel.
I don't accept it as gospel, Truther. It's much better than your
cardboard Dealey Plaza models or your coffee cup-felt tip pen
ballistics work.
The investigation was overwhelmingly honest and fair, and the WCR
holds up pretty darn well. All alone, Oswald shot Kennedy and Connally
and is a cop killer to boot. In other words, he's just the kind of guy
you and Rossley and Gil would love to have over for dinner.
Walt
> On Aug 17, 12:11 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > Joke???.... The joke's on you jerk. Only a simple minded jerk
> > would accept the Warren Report as gospel.
>
> I don't accept it as gospel, Truther. It's much better than your
> cardboard Dealey Plaza models or your coffee cup-felt tip pen
> ballistics work.
Oh really!??....... Are you now saying that the THEORIES presented by
the Warren Commission trump simple arithmetic?? Marking your coffe
cup and counting is about as simple as it gets....There's no
convoluted THEORY involved. You're simply making a bigger fool of
yourself by continuing to argue against the simple principle I've
demonstrated.
Chuck Schuyler
> On Aug 17, 12:53 am, Chuck Schuyler <chu...@am-mtg.com> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>
> edoom exploits only serves to embarass you further, give yourself a
> break son. Have your mom reads your postings BEFORE you them on their
> way...
I see the brown sugar has been flowing into the veins of Healy from
Dealey extra early today. I'll bet that eases the hangover and keeps
that big red alcoholic nose from glowing too much, though.
Try to follow along, Truther.
Walt
>
> - Show quoted text -
Hey Schmuck, Please keep arguing against solid mathmetical
principles..... And encourage Dud and Pea Brain to keep up their
posting also. I love it when you assholes make bigger fools of
yourselves.
Walt
> On Aug 17, 11:15 am, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > On Aug 16, 11:56 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > > > It's so simple that even you can understand it Dud.... Thank you for
> > > > posting links to the photos of the two bullets .... Now , Simply
> > > > count the number of notches in the cannelure of both bullets. There
> > > > are four notches in the width of the rifling groove on CE 399 while
> > > > there are seveb nothches in the width of the rifling groove on the
> > > > Walker bullet. Which means the two bullets were manufactured by
> > > > different companies. Or if you want to count the total number visible
> > > > on each bullet you can count the number visible and than multiply that
> > > > number by 2 to find the total number of notches on each bullet.
> > > > You'll find that The Walker bullet has nearly twice as many notches as
> > > > CE 399.
>
> > > Oh, this site is soooo fun sometimes.
>
> > > Walt just employed his highly analytical "count the notches and
> > > multiple by two" method of damaged bullet identification.
>
> > > Walt, I don't know if this is funnier than the cardboard/lincoln log/
> > > lego model of Dealey Plaza you constructed with the Hot Wheel limo,
> > > but it does rank up there.
>
> > > You certainly have a flair for doing stupid things!
>
>
> > Hey Schmuck....What's tickled you? Are you looking in the mirror
> > again?
>
> > Any intelligent school kid knows that you can only see the one side of
> > an object... That's the side facing you.
> > That's exactly the way a camera records the object. It "sees" the
> > side facing the camera lens.
>
> > If that object is cylindrical and has equally spaced marks around
> > it's circumference ( like the notches on a U.S. quarter dollar coin)
> > then the total number of notches on that coin, or cylindrical object
> > can be determined by counting the number of notches visible and
> > multiplying by two. If the serrations are very fine (close together)
> > and blurr together at the outter edges of the object , so they can't
> > be counted, then simply count the number on the quarter quadrant of
> > the object that is directly in from of the camera lense. Since you are
> > only counting 1/4 of the total number of notches around the
> > circumference then it's elementary that you multply the number of
> > notches by 4 to obtain the total number of nothches on the
> > cylinderical object.
>
> > I realize that this is very difficult for a simple mind to comprehend,
> > but you can prove the idea is true by placing 10-12- 14 or any number
> > of marks equally spaced around your coffee cup with a felt tip pen.
> > If you place 14 equally spaced marks then seven will be visible on the
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Schmuck wrote: "You look at a PHOTO of a smushed, ...( What's
"SMUSHED" mean, is this one of your "highly accurate" words which
reflect your highly intelligent mind?) flattened, distorted bullet and
claim that you-with NO BACKROUND in ballistics forensics-can employ
the highly accurate and scientific method of "counting the groves and
multiplying by two" .. (Where did I say anything about counting
"GROVES" I know yer "lost in the woods" but perhaps you mean't
GROOVES ) But even then I never said anything about counting
GROOVES....I said count the number of serrations (notches) in the
width of a GROOVE on the bullet.
(in conjunction with the coffee cup-felt tip pen method, of course) to
determine that this isn't a bullet possibly
fired by Oswald.
Huh!??..... Where did I even imply that the Walker bullet (CE573) was
not fired by Oswald????? Why don't you get a brain and then take a
course in reading comprehension?
Bud
I understand you are an idiot. The distances between the scratches
on the bullet made by the rifling are different. So, naturally, the
number of notches that fall between these scratches will be different.
How do you know you examining the same specific rifling scratches on
both bullets?
Walt
Huh!!??? Are you really this stupid?? If the bullets were both
fired from the same rifle the imprint left by the lands in the barrel
will be EXACTLY the same! ( Thats how ballistics experts determine if
a suspect bullet was fired from a certain weapon. ) The imprint
left by the lands in a rifle barrel on a bullet are called GROOVES.
Those grooves are the same width and it is irrelevant if that groove
is stretched or shrunk.... The number of serrations (notches) will
remain the same.
> How do you know you examining the same specific rifling scratches on
> both bullets?
It's not necessary to be examining the same groove..... because ALL OF
THE GROOVES LEFT BY THE BARREL'S LANDS WILL BE THE SAME WIDTH.
Thank you for exposing your stupidity. The more often you display
your stupidity the less credibility you wil maintain.
Bud
So, you accept that both bullets were fired from the same rifle.
Since when did you become an LN?
> ( Thats how ballistics experts determine if
> a suspect bullet was fired from a certain weapon. ) The imprint
> left by the lands in a rifle barrel on a bullet are called GROOVES.
> Those grooves are the same width and it is irrelevant if that groove
> is stretched or shrunk.... The number of serrations (notches) will
> remain the same.
Well, you have your nomenclature wrong...
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/Gun_Data_grooves_pic.jpg
The name for the marks made on the bullet is "striations".
> > How do you know you examining the same specific rifling scratches on
> > both bullets?
>
> It's not necessary to be examining the same groove..... because ALL OF
> THE GROOVES LEFT BY THE BARREL'S LANDS WILL BE THE SAME WIDTH.
If that were the case, you couldn`t identify a bullet as having been
fired from a particular rifle, as bullets from that particular make of
rifle would all make identical striations (because all rifles on that
model would have the same grooves in the barrel).
> Thank you for exposing your stupidity. The more often you display
> your stupidity the less credibility you wil maintain.
You often need to look for these striations with a microscope, but
only experts need to worry about these trivial things, idiots can tell
"at a glance".
And you aren`t taking into account into your retarded analysis is
the shifting of the outer jacket on the Walker bullet.
Walt
No Dumbass.... Striations are microscopic "scratch marks" that are
imparted to the bullet as it is fired down the barrel of a gun. When
the barrel is machined the boring tool leaves microscopic machine
marks in the barrel of the gun. Those marks, striations or
"scratches" are like the fingerprints of that weapon. The GROOVES on
the bullet are made by the LANDS in the barrel of the rifle. If it is
a four groove barrel it will also have four lands which are equally
spaced around the inside circumference of the barrel. The GROOVES are
relatively deep and are easily visible to the eye, without the need of
a magnifying glass or microscope. The grooves re very visible on both
CE 399 and CE 537.
Walt
Huh?? WHERE have I said that both bullets were fired from the same
rifle???
It would appear that both bullets were fired from a 6.5mm rifle with
rifling having a right hand twist.
But that certainly doesn't mean that they were fired from the same
rifle.
>
Gil Jesus
Your saying that Oswald fired the shot at Walker, that the evidence
indicates that the rifle and ammo he used was NOT the 6.5 MC
attributed to him nor the WCC ammo and your suggesting that neither
the rifle nor the ammo now in "evidence" was ever owned or fired by
Oswald and in fact were planted to frame him.
Is that a correct summation of your point ?
Because it would make a helluva lotta sense. Setting up a fake
assassination attempt on Walker, then sending Oswald down to New
Orleans to be sheep-dipped, photographed, videotaped and to even
appear on a radio program.........
........and the Walker "attack" coming just days after a right-wing
nut meeting in of all places, New Orleans, where the assassination of
the President was discussed.
It seems to make quite a bit of sense.
Walt
> Walt, I think I get what you're saying:
>
> Your saying that Oswald fired the shot at Walker, that the evidence
> indicates that the rifle and ammo he used was NOT the 6.5 MC
> attributed to him nor the WCC ammo and your suggesting that neither
> the rifle nor the ammo now in "evidence" was ever owned or fired by
> Oswald and in fact were planted to frame him.
>
> Is that a correct summation of your point ?
Yes, That's partly correct...... However, let me clarify a point.
The rifle now in evidence (C2766) is NOT the rifle that Oswald was
holding when Marina snapped the Back Yard photo., but it is the rifle
that was sent to his PO box in Dallas. ( This doesn't prove that LHO
actually owned that rifle, He may have ordered it at the request of
G.deM who gave him the money order to buy it) LHO was at work at the
time the MO was purchased. The rifle in Oswald's hand is a Model 91/38
Mannlicher Carcano Short rifle which measures 40 1/8" long, and very
similiar to the TSBD rifle C2766 but the two rifles have different
sling swivels.
This FACT indicates that someone else close to Oswald also had
possession of a Mannlicher Carcano Model 91/38 and somehow they got
the rifles switched. Oswald had ordered the C2766 rifle from Kleins
Sporting goods probably after seeing the other person's ( Mike Paine?)
MC. I believe that Oswald was encouraged to send for the rifle so
that it could be traced to him after the police found it under a brush
pile near the site of the shooting at General Walker's house. This
was all part of the CIA plot to infiltrate Oswald into Castro's
Cuba. ( It was probably sanctioned by Bobby Kennedy)
>
> Because it would make a helluva lotta sense. Setting up a fake
> assassination attempt on Walker, then sending Oswald down to New
> Orleans to be sheep-dipped, photographed, videotaped and to even
> appear on a radio program.........
Absolutely.... although dispatching Oswald to New Orleans wasn't part
of the original plan. G.DeM merely capitalized on the Walker shooting
and used it as part of Oswald's portfolio of a dedicated Communist and
Castro supporter. The Walker shooting ruse never got off the ground
because Marina failed to act as anticipated. If Marina had panicked
and called Ruth Paine after reading the alarming note that Lee had
left for her to "stumble upon". Ruth would have called the police and
suggested that a friend of hers husband was missing, and he had left a
very alarming note that might be tied to the shooting at the residence
of Genral Walker that was being reported on the news. If Marina had
called Ruth Paine as Oswald had instructed her to do, the cops would
have been on his trail as he fled to Cuba. The Back Yard photo would
have appeared in the newspapers to lend credence to Oswald being a
radical Commie who had tried to kill one of Castro's most vocal foes.
>
> ........and the Walker "attack" coming just days after a right-wing
> nut meeting in of all places, New Orleans, where the assassination of
> the President was discussed.
>
> It seems to make quite a bit of sense.
The Mannlicher Carcano that was sent to Oswald's PO box is probably
the rifle that was used to shoot a hole in Walker's window, and it was
left under a pile of brush a short distance from Walker's house, with
the idea that the police would bring tracking dogs to the scene and
folow the scent to the brush pile, where the cops would find the rifle
and trace it to Oswald ....Lending more credibility to his image as a
radical Castro supporter.
The FACT that the bullet that was fired through Walker's window was
manufactured by a different manufacturer than the bullet that was
planted at Parkland hospital is a strong indicator that BOTH bullets
were supplied from a CIA source. The CIA supplied the Cuban exiles
with Mannlicher Carcano's so it's evident that they had relatively
fresh MILITARY ammo for those rifles. It's a known fact that the CIA
supplied U.S. manufactured military ammo for the Albanian rebels in
1954. Was the bullet that was dug out of the wall at Walkers house a
bullet from that source?? It may not be too late to have that bullet
tested to determine if it was also manufactured for the CIA.
Anymore questions?
tomnln
"Walt" <papakoc...@evertek.net> wrote in message
news:ccb3efae-9a18-41dd...@25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
Walt
> Awful lot of "Assumptions" here.
Perhaps...... but if you know the facts of the case, then you'll
recognize that all of the "assumptions" fit with the overall scenario,
as provided by the testimonies of the various witnesses before the
Warren Commission. Whereas NONE of the "assumptions" that Oswald was
not involved in the Walker shooting fit with the overall picture.
>
> "Walt" <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote in message
> > Anymore questions?- Hide quoted text -
robcap...@netscape.com
Yes, quite a few. Why was there NO alias listed on LHO's Dallas P.O.
Box by the name of A. Hidell? How can a rifle be delivered to someone
who does NOT exist when they are not listed on the box number? (He
did list the alias in N.O.)
Why did the police list the bullet/cartridge as deriving from a 30.06
when you are saying it was froma Carcano? Why are you not addressing
Castro ordered many M-C's as well? Who did the 1957 Chevy belong to?
Why did the only witness say it was two men and before they drove off
they gave something to another man (dark complicted) who then put it
in his back seat? Why do you rely on the very sources (Marina and the
WC theory) you impune on a constant basis to make this case? Why do
you think LHO would really be welcomed in Cuba? Why would you believe
anything the traitor Walker said? There are more but this is a good
start.
tomnln
Perhaps...... but if you know the facts of the case, then you'll
recognize that all of the "assumptions" fit with the overall scenario,
as provided by the testimonies of the various witnesses before the
Warren Commission. Whereas NONE of the "assumptions" that Oswald was
not involved in the Walker shooting fit with the overall picture.
Evidence/testimony indicate that Oswald had NOTHING to do with the Walker
shooting.
http://whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
Walt
wrote:
All I can say Rob.....is suit yourself..... But be aware that you're
destined to be "in a fog" forever.
And that "fog" is of your own making.
- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
robcap...@netscape.com
I doubt that as I know LHO did not shoot at Walker, JFK or JDT. I
have moved on to finding out who was/is behind the assassination. I
know the evidence and it does not show LHO shooting at anyone.
You're in a fog as you will use sources to support some of your
thoeries you doubt for other things. How does that make any sense
Walt? I am consistent at least, whether you agree with me or not.
Mr. Evica dealt with this issue in 1975 (and he was highly respected
in the CT community) when he viewed FBI reports that said: "...the
bullet recovered in the assassination attempt on General Walker does
NOT match with EITHER CE399 or the two fragments recovered from
President Kennedy's limousine; the Warren Commission's linking of Lee
Harvey Oswald the General Walker assassination attempt is severly
weakened." And as stated Gen. Walker said the bullet presented by the
HSCA was NOT the same bullet he saw removed from his house.
Since you won't answer who owned the 1957 Chevy I'll tell you, it was
one Filipe Vidal Santiago who was a member of the militant cuban exile
group Alpha 66. He had been seen associating with Walker on several
occassions. I do agree it was a staged attempt to make LHO look
guilty, but I do not believe LHO is the one who fired the shot. LHO
could easily have purchased all the weapons and ammo he wanted without
leaving a trail if this was his goal. He was delibrately setup to
look guilty. This same car (the 1957 Chevy) will be seen near the
Tippit slaying as well and this is the man I believe Coleman saw
putting something in the back seat of his car. Max Claunch, Walker's
aide, will see a dark complected man in a 1957 Chevy cruising around
Walker's home several times the day before the shooting.
You believe what you want, but the evidence doesn't support your
thoery in full. I do suspect DeMohrenschildt of setting up LHO, but I
don't think LHO was the shooter. Also, Nagell admitted to using the
alias "Hidell" himself, so we have to be careful in associating
everything under that name to LHO alone.
> - Hide quoted text -
>
>
>
>
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
muc...@gmail.com
> count the number of notches in the cannelure of both bullets. There
> are four notches in the width of the rifling groove on CE 399 while
> there are seveb nothches in the width of the rifling groove on the
> Walker bullet.
[Groove impression widths]
CE 399: 7 notches (in cannelure)
CE 573: 7 notches
[Land impression widths]
CE 399: 4 notches
CE 573: 4 notches
Perhaps you were confused by a scratch (looks like a narrow land
impression) in the upper half of the following picture.
http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/9/9a/Photo_naraevid_CE399-1.jpg
> Which means the two bullets were manufactured by
> different companies. Or if you want to count the total number visible
> on each bullet you can count the number visible and than multiply that
> number by 2 to find the total number of notches on each bullet.
> You'll find that The Walker bullet has nearly twice as many notches as
> CE 399.
[Bullet widths]
CE 399: 20 notches (visible)
CE 573: 26 notches (visible)
It seems, however, that the above difference can be explained in terms
of trying to compare 3D and 2D objects. You can easily imagine the
outermost few notches in the cannelure disappearing from view, if the
bullet in the following picture was restored to original shape and
size (as indicated by its base portion).
http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/a/a9/Photo_naraevid_CE573-2.jpg
(Links to images previously posted by Bud and DVP)
-Mark
Walt
I'm well aware that CE 399 has a scratch mark running nearly the
length of the bullet, I'm not confused about what are grooves, and
what are "scratch marks". I've spent months studying photos of CE
399.
And you're right there are four serrations in cannelure at the width
of the groove.
>
> http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/9/9a/Photo_naraevid_CE399-1.jpg
>
> > Which means the two bullets were manufactured by
> > different companies. Or if you want to count the total number visible
> > on each bullet you can count the number visible and than multiply that
> > number by 2 to find the total number of notches on each bullet.
> > You'll find that The Walker bullet has nearly twice as many notches as
> > CE 399.
>
> [Bullet widths]
> CE 399: 20 notches (visible)
> CE 573: 26 notches (visible)
>
> It seems, however, that the above difference can be explained in terms
> of trying to compare 3D and 2D objects. You can easily imagine the
> outermost few notches in the cannelure disappearing from view, if the
> bullet in the following picture was restored to original shape and
> size (as indicated by its base portion).
Perhaps you'd better recount the number of serrations on CE 399.....
There are 16 visible, which means the total number on the bullet is 32
notches.
I agree with your count on CE 573..... There are 26 serrations
visible, which means there are a total of 52 serrations on that
bullet.
>
> http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/a/a9/Photo_naraevid_CE573-2.jpg
>
> (Links to images previously posted by Bud and DVP)
>
> -Mark
>
>
>
> > > > Personally I have little doubt that Oswald was involved in some ruse
> > > > or publicity stunt at walker's house when a bullet was fired through
> > > > walker's window. That bullet was recovered and it definitely is NOT a
> > > > Western Cartridge Company bullet. It appears to be a 6.5mm full
> > > > metal jacketed bullet of US manufacture. When the two bullets are
> > > > compared even a blind man can tell that they are made by diferent
> > > > manufacturers. Why the Warren Cammission didn't see this and follow
> > > > through, is stark evidence that they simply didn't want too see any
> > > > evidence that didn't fit with J.Edgar Hover THEORY.- Hide quoted text -
Bud
Here is a link to a page you might find interesting, Mark, I found
it surfing for information. The "Walt Cakebread" mentioned on this
page is our own Walt here.
It might provide some background or insight (if nothing else, it has
a lot of visuals). The "argument against the six-groove bullet
interpretation" will take you to another page with more information
worth a look.
For myself, I thought it would make for an interesting discussion
about Walt`s belief that Oswald shot at a political figure previous to
11-22-63. He doesn`t seem to want to engage on that, and I`m not much
interested in arguing with a kook about what he claims he can see in
photos. They see puppets, gunmen, smoke, white patches or
whatererthefuck else they want to see in photos.
Walt
The rifle was delivered to a the Dallas Post office. ..... Nobody gave
a damn what the name was on the package. The Postal clerk simply
looked at the box number, and then placed a notice of parcel to be
picked up in PO Box 2915. Postal mail sorters are too busy to match
names with box numbers. If a piece of mail is addressed to Box # 2722
then that's where the piece of mail goes. I've used PO boxes enough
to know that I've received other people mail in my box simply because
my address was on the envelope. ....
>
> > > Why did the police list the bullet/cartridge as deriving from a 30.06
> > > when you are saying it was froma Carcano?
They DIDN"T.... Where do you get this garbage?
Why are you not addressing Castro ordered many M-C's as well?
I'm not aware that he did.... All the photos I've seen show Castro's
forces with weapons that were manufacturered in the Soviet Bloc
Who did the 1957 Chevy belong to?
Do you know??.... I've always suspected that it belonged to James P.
Hosty.
> > > Why did the only witness say it was two men and before they drove off
> > > they gave something to another man (dark complicted) who then put it
> > > in his back seat? Why do you rely on the very sources (Marina and the
> > > WC theory) you impune on a constant basis to make this case? Why do
> > > you think LHO would really be welcomed in Cuba?
I don't know if he would have ben welcomed or put in prison..... But
"HE" thought he would be welcomed as a fellow communist revolutionary
and a "Hunter of Nazis'' as the caption on the back of the photo
read.
Why would you believe anything the traitor Walker said?
My god !!.... do you think a person lies 100% of the time?? You
have to sift what a person says and try to separate the gnat shit from
the pepper.
tomnln
walt wrote;
The rifle was delivered to a the Dallas Post office. ..... Nobody gave
a damn what the name was on the package. The Postal clerk simply
looked at the box number, and then placed a notice of parcel to be
picked up in PO Box 2915. Postal mail sorters are too busy to match
names with box numbers. If a piece of mail is addressed to Box # 2722
then that's where the piece of mail goes. I've used PO boxes enough
to know that I've received other people mail in my box simply because
my address was on the envelope. ....
I write;
Does this mean that "I" can pick up mail from YOUR P O Box without
Identifying myself as Walt Cakebread?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
muc...@gmail.com
In that case, I don't understand how you can state above that there
are "four notches in the width of the rifling groove on CE 399".
Please explain. To my eye, those impressions are (approximately) seven
serrations wide.
> And you're right there are four serrations in cannelure at the width
> of the groove.
Yes, groove in the bullet. Terminology:
Impression made by rifling land = bullet groove
Impression made by rifling groove = (?)
> >http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/9/9a/Photo_naraevid_CE399-1.jpg
>
> > > Which means the two bullets were manufactured by
> > > different companies. Or if you want to count the total number visible
> > > on each bullet you can count the number visible and than multiply that
> > > number by 2 to find the total number of notches on each bullet.
> > > You'll find that The Walker bullet has nearly twice as many notches as
> > > CE 399.
>
> > [Bullet widths]
> > CE 399: 20 notches (visible)
> > CE 573: 26 notches (visible)
>
> > It seems, however, that the above difference can be explained in terms
> > of trying to compare 3D and 2D objects. You can easily imagine the
> > outermost few notches in the cannelure disappearing from view, if the
> > bullet in the following picture was restored to original shape and
> > size (as indicated by its base portion).
>
> Perhaps you'd better recount the number of serrations on CE 399.....
What are you looking at? I count between 18 and 20 serrations in the
five side views published at maryferrell.org.
> There are 16 visible, which means the total number on the bullet is 32
> notches.
Certainly more than 32. Try this simple experiment:
1) Grab a sheet of ruled paper
2) Count the lines (=N)
3) Roll it to a cylinder
4) Count the lines visible from the side (=n)
For N=32, I can guarantee n<16.
> I agree with your count on CE 573..... There are 26 serrations
> visible, which means there are a total of 52 serrations on that
> bullet.
Give or take a few.
muc...@gmail.com
Thanks, Bud. Good stuff.
> It might provide some background or insight (if nothing else, it has
> a lot of visuals). The "argument against the six-groove bullet
> interpretation" will take you to another page with more information
> worth a look.
Looks pretty convincing to me. Don't know if Walt has abandoned that
particular theory, but somehow doubt it (old loves die hard).
> For myself, I thought it would make for an interesting discussion
> about Walt`s belief that Oswald shot at a political figure previous to
> 11-22-63. He doesn`t seem to want to engage on that, and I`m not much
> interested in arguing with a kook about what he claims he can see in
> photos. They see puppets, gunmen, smoke, white patches or
> whatererthefuck else they want to see in photos.
They occassionally see an object for what it is, only to misinterpret
other things about it. Like Ben's *Lady in Yellow Pants* figure.
Walt
Many years ago my grandfather told me that there is nothing to be
gained by arguing with a dishonest liar who will not admit simple
facts. If the person you're debating insists that 2+2=5 then just
drop the argument and let him continue to display his ignorance
elsewhere. You will none the poorer for waking away from the moron.
I'll just heed my grandfather's advice..... But in parting let me ask
that anybody reading this, to count the number of serrattions in the
cannelure across the width of the grooves on both bullets and decide
for yourself if the Walker bullet (CE 573) and the Magic Bullet ( CE
399) were manufactured by the same company.
>
>
>
> > > > > > Personally I have little doubt that Oswald was involved in some ruse
> > > > > > or publicity stunt at walker's house when a bullet was fired through
> > > > > > walker's window. That bullet was recovered and it definitely is NOT a
> > > > > > Western Cartridge Company bullet. It appears to be a 6.5mm full
> > > > > > metal jacketed bullet of US manufacture. When the two bullets are
> > > > > > compared even a blind man can tell that they are made by diferent
> > > > > > manufacturers. Why the Warren Cammission didn't see this and follow
> > > > > > through, is stark evidence that they simply didn't want too see any
> > > > > > evidence that didn't fit with J.Edgar Hover THEORY.- Hide quoted text -
muc...@gmail.com
Thanks for the advice, Walt, but someone has to try to make an honest
man out of Ben.
> I'll just heed my grandfather's advice..... But in parting let me ask
> that anybody reading this, to count the number of serrattions in the
> cannelure across the width of the grooves on both bullets and decide
> for yourself if the Walker bullet (CE 573) and the Magic Bullet ( CE
> 399) were manufactured by the same company.
The numbers match, Walt.
robcap...@netscape.com
So you are saying they deliver packages to people who are NOT
registered to receive them? What????? So I could send a package to
"A. Hidell" to your P.O. Box (if you have one) and you think they will
deliver it to you?? The simple act of opening a letter not addressed
to you is a FEDERAL offense. Sell that junk to someone else. If you
have poor mailpeople that is your problem, but ID is required to pick
up a package. Surely you don't think a rifle would fit into a P.O.
Box do you? Researchers have searched for years at that particular
Post Office and they have found NO ONE who said they gave the package
to LHO. There is simply NO proof he ever picked up the rifle.
> > > > Why did the police list the bullet/cartridge as deriving from a 30.06
> > > > when you are saying it was froma Carcano?
>
> They DIDN"T.... Where do you get this garbage?
Come on. It was in the initial post of this thread and I have read it
in numerous books and articles (and don't me anymore crap about
reading books as you read plenty of them, just see the link Bud put on
here about you reading "Reasonable Doubt").
> Why are you not addressing Castro ordered many M-C's as well?
>
> I'm not aware that he did.... All the photos I've seen show Castro's
> forces with weapons that were manufacturered in the Soviet Bloc
From what Talbot writes he had ordered many of them. Also, I have read
many things that said he was backed by us (some say he was a CIA
agent) to oust Batista, but he turned the table on the CIA. This is
supposedly why they were so obsessed with getting rid of him.
> Who did the 1957 Chevy belong to?
> Do you know??.... I've always suspected that it belonged to James P.
> Hosty.
Read my other post, I tell you who it belonged to and he was a member
of Alpha 66 (Filipe Vidal Santiago).
> > > > Why did the only witness say it was two men and before they drove off
> > > > they gave something to another man (dark complicted) who then put it
> > > > in his back seat? Why do you rely on the very sources (Marina and the
> > > > WC theory) you impune on a constant basis to make this case? Why do
> > > > you think LHO would really be welcomed in Cuba?
>
> I don't know if he would have ben welcomed or put in prison..... But
> "HE" thought he would be welcomed as a fellow communist revolutionary
> and a "Hunter of Nazis'' as the caption on the back of the photo
> read.
This is your reasoning, not proof. Do you think Castro wouldn't know
he was sheep-dipped? Please.
> Why would you believe anything the traitor Walker said?
>
> My god !!.... do you think a person lies 100% of the time?? You
> have to sift what a person says and try to separate the gnat shit from
> the pepper.
In the case of Walker he had an agenda and he was a traitor, so yes I
tend not to believe him. You do what you want, but you have not
offered any hard proof.
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
Walt
Rob wrote:...."ID is required to pick up a package. ".....
Rob....You simply don't know what yer talkin about..... I've picked up
many packages at the PO without showing any ID... ( I fact I can't
think of a single time that I was ever asked to show my ID.) I simply
take the notice card that they place in my PO box to the window and
the clerk goes to the storage area and retrieves my parcel.
Surely you don't think a rifle would fit into a P.O.
> Box do you? Researchers have searched for years at that particular
> Post Office and they have found NO ONE who said they gave the package
> to LHO. There is simply NO proof he ever picked up the rifle.
It may be true that no postal clerk ever recalled deliving a package
to Oswald. DO YOU FIND THIS UNUSUAL???? Considering all of the
thousands of parcels that passed through the Dallas PO between
February and December of 1963? And while I agree that there is no
proof that he received the rifle, I think the ideas that you present,
trying to make a case, are specious and silly.
>
> > > > > Why did the police list the bullet/cartridge as deriving from a 30.06
> > > > > when you are saying it was froma Carcano?
>
> > They DIDN"T.... Where do you get this garbage?
>
> Come on. It was in the initial post of this thread and I have read it
> in numerous books and articles (and don't me anymore crap about
> reading books as you read plenty of them, just see the link Bud put on
> here about you reading "Reasonable Doubt").
Please present the official police record that says the bullet was
fired from a 30.06.
>
> > Why are you not addressing Castro ordered many M-C's as well?
>
> > I'm not aware that he did.... All the photos I've seen show Castro's
> > forces with weapons that were manufacturered in the Soviet Bloc
>
> From what Talbot writes he had ordered many of them. Also, I have read
> many things that said he was backed by us (some say he was a CIA
> agent) to oust Batista, but he turned the table on the CIA. This is
> supposedly why they were so obsessed with getting rid of him.
>
> > Who did the 1957 Chevy belong to?
> > Do you know??.... I've always suspected that it belonged to James P.
> > Hosty.
>
> Read my other post, I tell you who it belonged to and he was a member
> of Alpha 66 (Filipe Vidal Santiago).
What other post? ...where?... Would it be too much trouble for you
to provide PROOF that the 57 Chevy belonged to Filipe Vidal Santiago??
>
> > > > > Why did the only witness say it was two men and before they drove off
> > > > > they gave something to another man (dark complicted) who then put it
> > > > > in his back seat? Why do you rely on the very sources (Marina and the
> > > > > WC theory) you impune on a constant basis to make this case? Why do
> > > > > you think LHO would really be welcomed in Cuba?
>
> > I don't know if he would have ben welcomed or put in prison..... But
> > "HE" thought he would be welcomed as a fellow communist revolutionary
> > and a "Hunter of Nazis'' as the caption on the back of the photo
> > read.
>
> This is your reasoning, not proof.
Do you think Oswald would have traveled to Mexico City and begged the
Cubans at the embassy for a visa if he DIDN"T believe that he would
be welcomed by Castro. Do you think he would have traveled all the
way to Mexico City and asked for a visa if he thought that he'd be
stood before a firuing squad once he got to Cuba?? I'd like to hear
your answer.......
Do you think Castro wouldn't know he was sheep-dipped? Please.
Of course Castro was aware that the CIA was sending agents to Cuba.
He executed several suspected CIA agents by firing squad. One of whom
had credentials similiar to Oswald.
Do you think Castro has remained in power for nearly 50 years by being
a fool??
Why didn't Castro's agents at the embassy in Mexico City accept oswald
as a bonafide, honesty to goodness, communist revolutionary??
>
>
>
> > Why would you believe anything the traitor Walker said?
>
> > My god !!.... do you think a person lies 100% of the time?? You
> > have to sift what a person says and try to separate the gnat shit from
> > the pepper.
>
> In the case of Walker he had an agenda and he was a traitor, so yes I
> tend not to believe him. You do what you want, but you have not
Walt
Hey Dud.......It's difficult to engage in a battle of wits with a wimp
like yourself, who is only half prepared for battle.
If you were able to comprehend what you read you'd know that I believe
that Oswald was involved in putting a bullet hole in Walker's window.
Whether he was the man who had the rifle in his hands at that time
remains a mystery. He told Marina that he was the man who fired the
rifle so perhaps he was the actual triggerman. But the FACT
remains ..... Nobody was hit by that bullet. There was merely a
bullet hole in the window to support the story that Walker told the
cops. It's incongrous that you LNer's will maintain that Oswald was
better than the best rifleman in the world, but then
accept that he missed a stationary target less than 100 feet away. If
it was Oswald who had the rifle at Walker's house that night, and he
intended to kill Walker, then he couldn't have missed hitting
Walker.... Because Walker was a "sitting duck" and remained a "sitting
duck" for a time period long enough to fire a full clip ( six rounds)
at Walker. Since only one shot was fired and it missed Walker
completely, it's obvious that Oswald never intended to kill Walker,
and the whole episode was some kind of a ruse.
It's true that one witness, who heard the shot, said he saw a couple
of men leave the area in a hurry after the shot was fired. Who were
those men? Were they accomplices of Oswald? Or were they a couple
of other men who were spying on Walker? Ron Lewis said that Oswald
told him that he ( Oswald) didn't even know those two guys were hiding
in the bushes close by until he fired the shot. After he fired the
shot those two guys jumped up and ran like a couple of scared rabbits
and jumped into a car and fled.
Have I made myself clear, Dud??.... Now go and arm yourself before
challenging me, I don't like beating up wimps.
and I`m not much
> interested in arguing with a kook about what he claims he can see in
> photos. They see puppets, gunmen, smoke, white patches or
> whatererthefuck else they want to see in photos.
>
>
>
> > > > > Personally I have little doubt that Oswald was involved in some ruse
> > > > > or publicity stunt at walker's house when a bullet was fired through
> > > > > walker's window. That bullet was recovered and it definitely is NOT a
> > > > > Western Cartridge Company bullet. It appears to be a 6.5mm full
> > > > > metal jacketed bullet of US manufacture. When the two bullets are
> > > > > compared even a blind man can tell that they are made by diferent
> > > > > manufacturers. Why the Warren Cammission didn't see this and follow
> > > > > through, is stark evidence that they simply didn't want too see any
> > > > > evidence that didn't fit with J.Edgar Hover THEORY.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
tomnln
Do I understand correctly that Walt believes>>>
1. Oswald ordered/received the 6.5 rifle CE-139?
2. The REAL Oswald was in Mexico City?
3. The Real Oswald fired that CE-139 at General Walker on April 10th?
"Walt" <papakoc...@evertek.net> wrote in message
news:ec5fe423-f1ac-4921...@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
Bud
Do you also believe that it was the plan of the hijackers of
flight 93 to auger that plane into a field in Pennsylvania? That is
what happened, so that must be what they intended to do, right?
> There was merely a
> bullet hole in the window to support the story that Walker told the
> cops. It's incongrous that you LNer's will maintain that Oswald was
> better than the best rifleman in the world, but then
> accept that he missed a stationary target less than 100 feet away. If
> it was Oswald who had the rifle at Walker's house that night, and he
> intended to kill Walker, then he couldn't have missed hitting
> Walker.... Because Walker was a "sitting duck" and remained a "sitting
> duck" for a time period long enough to fire a full clip ( six rounds)
> at Walker.
Meaningless, if Oswald didn`t stick around.
> Since only one shot was fired and it missed Walker
> completely, it's obvious that Oswald never intended to kill Walker,
> and the whole episode was some kind of a ruse.
You think Oswald was aiming at the window sash, knowing his bullet
would be deflected away from Walker? This is just another episode of
"Walt Cakebread, Idiot Detective".
> It's true that one witness, who heard the shot, said he saw a couple
> of men leave the area in a hurry after the shot was fired. Who were
> those men? Were they accomplices of Oswald? Or were they a couple
> of other men who were spying on Walker? Ron Lewis said that Oswald
> told him that he ( Oswald) didn't even know those two guys were hiding
> in the bushes close by until he fired the shot. After he fired the
> shot those two guys jumped up and ran like a couple of scared rabbits
> and jumped into a car and fled.
>
> Have I made myself clear, Dud??.... Now go and arm yourself before
> challenging me, I don't like beating up wimps.
How can I stand against such an arsenal of retard conjecture?
Bud
> Just for "Clarification".
>
> Do I understand correctly that Walt believes>>>
> 1. Oswald ordered/received the 6.5 rifle CE-139?
> 2. The REAL Oswald was in Mexico City?
> 3. The Real Oswald fired that CE-139 at General Walker on April 10th?
Even a brocken clock shows the right time sometimes.
> thousands of parcels that passed through the ...
>
> read more »
aeffects
to be expected Walt, Lone Nuts can't wrap their minds around 2
Carcano's (with the same serial number) either...
You've done great work re the 2 Carcano issue. I request [in a
seperate thread, the request] that you post a few essay's concerning
same?
muc...@gmail.com
"To be expected"(?) In case you missed it, Walt called your beloved
Master a dishonest liar, ignorant, a moron...
> You've done great work re the 2 Carcano issue. I request [in a
> seperate thread, the request] that you post a few essay's concerning
> same?
Did you follow Walt's suggestion and count the serrations?
Walt
Dud, I don't know what kind of mind altering substance you've been
using, but whatever it is you'd be well advised to leave it alone.
Yer babbling about another subject entirely. Please give up that
stuff and try to focus on the subject under discussion.
Walt
Whoa thar, ya stupid mule...... Isn't it true that you believe that
Oswald went to Walker house with murder in his heart? If he was
truely obsessed with killing Walker as you believe, and the
opportunity was never better, then WHY didn't he fire whatever number
of shots necessary to get the job done??
Your argment that he high tailed it out of there simply won't wash,
because he stuck around long enough to watch the two young guys dash
to their car and skedaddle. He wasn't particularly afraid of being
captured or killed, because the in the note he left for Marina he
informed her that he might be killed or captured. Ya really need to
learn ta find someone with an ounce of brains and help you think your
position through before you post.
Walt
> Just for "Clarification".
>
> Do I understand correctly that Walt believes>>>
> 1. Oswald ordered/received the 6.5 rifle CE-139?
Walt doesn't totally believe that.... The evidence seems to point in
that direction, HOWEVER there is no solid proof that Oswald ever had
possession of CE 139. In fact the one and ONLY Back Yard photo that
Marins took shows him with a Mannlicher Carcano that IS NOT CE 139.
> 2. The REAL Oswald was in Mexico City? Yes I believe Lee Harvey Oswald (Margurite Oswald's son) was in fact in Mexico City in Sept/ Oct 1963. However there was also someone else who was using the name Oswald there in Mexico City at about the same time.
> 3. The Real Oswald fired that CE-139 at General Walker on April 10th?
Yes, no, and I don't know.... Yes the "real" Lee Harvey Oswald was
involved in the shooting incident at Walker's house. NO.... He did
NOT shoot AT Walker. ( He put a bullet hole in the window sash) And
How the hell would I know if he was using CE 139 or someone elses
Carcano that night??
> thousands of parcels that passed through the ...
Bud
I was applying you twisted logic to another historical event. Does
the fact that this plane hit a field in Pennsylvania establish this to
be the hijacker`s intent?
Bud
The fact that he didn`t indicates that he wouldn`t. And the fact
that he did stick around to fire more shots at Kennedy shows he
learned a lesson from his first attempt at political assassination.
> Your argment that he high tailed it out of there simply won't wash,
> because he stuck around long enough to watch the two young guys dash
> to their car and skedaddle. He wasn't particularly afraid of being
> captured or killed, because the in the note he left for Marina he
> informed her that he might be killed or captured.
It was a possibility, not a desired result.
> Ya really need to
> learn ta find someone with an ounce of brains and help you think your
> position through before you post.
You think Oswald fired a shot, intending to hit a window sash to
deflect his bullet away from Walker. I`d say you short of an ounce of
brains by about an ounce.
robcap...@netscape.com
Walt...you are comparing Dallas in 1963 to wherever you pick up mail.
I can't help they give you the mail and packages without making sure
you are Walk Cakebread, I would have a problem with that if I were
you. The point is the policy of the Post Office in 1963 was to ask
for ID when picking up a package so to compare what you experience
with what was required is off base. Since you want to say he got the
package then I want proof he did in fact picked it up. I will expect
to see this proof in your next message.
> Surely you don't think a rifle would fit into a P.O.
>
> > Box do you? Researchers have searched for years at that particular
> > Post Office and they have found NO ONE who said they gave the package
> > to LHO. There is simply NO proof he ever picked up the rifle.
>
> It may be true that no postal clerk ever recalled deliving a package
> to Oswald. DO YOU FIND THIS UNUSUAL???? Considering all of the
> thousands of parcels that passed through the Dallas PO between
> February and December of 1963? And while I agree that there is no
> proof that he received the rifle, I think the ideas that you present,
> trying to make a case, are specious and silly.
You are sounding like a LNer Walt, full of excuses and short on
proof. Sure, my ideas are sillier than your goofy ones. LOL!!! As
always, Walt wants his ideas to be accepted without proof, but if
someone else offers some ideas of their own they are "suspicious (I
guess this is what specious is supposed to be) and silly."
> > > > > > Why did the police list the bullet/cartridge as deriving from a 30.06
> > > > > > when you are saying it was froma Carcano?
>
> > > They DIDN"T.... Where do you get this garbage?
>
> > Come on. It was in the initial post of this thread and I have read it
> > in numerous books and articles (and don't me anymore crap about
> > reading books as you read plenty of them, just see the link Bud put on
> > here about you reading "Reasonable Doubt").
>
> Please present the official police record that says the bullet was
> fired from a 30.06.
Tom as already done that as he added a link to it.
> > > Why are you not addressing Castro ordered many M-C's as well?
>
> > > I'm not aware that he did.... All the photos I've seen show Castro's
> > > forces with weapons that were manufacturered in the Soviet Bloc
>
> > From what Talbot writes he had ordered many of them. Also, I have read
> > many things that said he was backed by us (some say he was a CIA
> > agent) to oust Batista, but he turned the table on the CIA. This is
> > supposedly why they were so obsessed with getting rid of him.
>
> > > Who did the 1957 Chevy belong to?
> > > Do you know??.... I've always
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -