Proof Oswald was not a shooter
charles wallace
All rights reserved, copyright 1995
The Facial Image
from
Case Wide Open; A JFK Murder Investigation
Charles C. Wallace
June, 1995
What can be said about the facial image shown in news photographer Tom
Dillard's photograph which is partially obscured by the framing? The
face
appears in the window set next to the open window in which almost
every
researcher or investigative body accepts as being occupied by a
shooter
during the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Everyone accepts that
this
photograph was taken by Tom Dillard shortly after the assassination.
How soon
after is in dispute, but estimates range from a few seconds to
slightly over
one minute. Dillard took at least two photos during this time period.
The one
that shows the facial image, I contend was taken slightly over one
minute
after the assassination. The movement of a box in the window from its
position shown in a photograph taken 30 seconds after the
assassination by
Military Intelligence employee James Powell establishes the time
sequence. Thi
s sequence is confirmed by another photograph taken minutes later by
Dallas
photographer Jim Murray. Murray's box positions match Dillard's.
Shadows on
the building confirm all three photos were taken within minutes of
each
other. The timing eliminates Lee H. Oswald as the person seen.
Upon close examination of this figure in the window, it appears that
it is a
white male, Caucasian, approximately 35 years old. He has dark hair
and is
dressed in dark clothing with no hat. He is standing, and his height
appears
to be ( compared with inside building photographs ) five feet six
inches;
but, since he is back from the window, he is probably five feet eight
inches
or more. Judging from his facial appearance and approximate height, I
estimate his weight to be 150 pounds or more. His features or facial
expression appears to be stern, and he is looking possibly at the
photographer. The shadows on his face are consistent with the light
source
and what the window's framing would cast. There is a light place on
the top
of his left shoulder that I speculate to be consistent with the
appearance of
a Dallas policeman's uniform. DPD officers have dark uniforms with red
shoulder ribbons. There is a bright spot that could be a button on the
uniform. Even though the figure appears to be wearing a DPD uniform,
this
fact does not mean he was an actual policeman. Another light area
could be
that the top two buttons of his shirt are undone, and his t-shirt is
showing
slightly. A dark/light area at the window sill indicates his body is
blocking
one's view of the stacks of boxes in the background. The sill is
approximately fourteen inches above the floor.
A confirmation that the facial image is real, centers on the relative
size of
it. This size comparison can be made directly from two other faces
shown in
the photograph. On the floor below, the fifth floor, Bonnie Ray
Williams is
seen to the left, and to the right is Harold Norman. These employees
of the
Texas School Book Depository stayed at these windows at least a minute
or
more after the assassination until they saw the crowd in Dealey Plaza
converging on the grassy knoll. Then, they went to the western windows
to
observe this crowd. The facial image, while not clear and distinct, is
not
cartoonish looking, as if one were trying to use imagination to see
it. It is
definitely human looking and real in appearance.
Another confirmation that the facial image is real is to view other
photographs taken near the same point in time. These photos show no
such face
or even dust and dirt on the window of the same magnitude in size as
the
facial image shown in Dillard's photograph. This photograph belongs to
the
Dallas Morning News newspaper. This Dillard photograph has been shown
in
magazines, books, and even the Warren Commission Report. The facial
image can
be seen in all of these photographs with varying degrees of clarity,
depending on cropping and photo size. Ironically the best display of
this
facial image appears in the book by Gerald Posner entitled, Case
Closed. Yet,
its presence signifies a Case Wide Open.
----------------------------------------------
http://1078567.sites.myregisteredsite.com/dc/user_files/15699.jpg
President Kennedy
was assassinated " as a result of the hatred and bitterness that has
been
injected into the life of our nation by bigots." Chief Justice Earl
Warren, November 22, 1963. Dallas Morning News
timstter
So all this wild speculation rules out the facts that:
a) Oswald's hand and fingerprints are all over the boxes you are
talking about; the boxes in the sixth floor window that the shots were
fired from?
b) His own personal rifle was found on that same sixth floor?
c) He brought a long package into work that day?
LOL! Your nonsense is HARDLY proof Oswald was not a shooter, Charles.
It's really more proof that Charles is an idiot who can't see the
bleeding obvious, isn't it?
Informative Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
Walt
a) Oswald's hand and fingerprints are all over the boxes you are
talking about; the boxes in the sixth floor window that the shots were
fired from?
Wow!.... This is devastaing evidence.... Can you imagine Oswald's
finger prints found on boxes of books in the place where he was
employed to handle boxes of books?? Yer a regular Sherlock Holmes.
b) His own personal rifle was found on that same sixth floor?
Yes, and isn't it amazing Sherlock.... The rifle had "obviously been
well hidden" ( words of an officer who saw it) and Lee Oswald would
NOT have had enough time to bury that rifle beneath boxes of books
AFTER the shooting. Your beloved gospel tells us that according to
the WC's THEORY Oswald would have arrived at the second floor
lunchroom just one second before officer Baker reached the top of the
stairs on the second floor where he saw Oswald.
c) He brought a long package into work that day?
Apparently true....However the two witnesses who saw the package said
it was not any longer than 28 inches. And 28 inches is to short for
the package to have been that rifle.
LOL, Your "evidence" is HARDLY proof that Lee Oswald was a killer.
>
> LOL! Your nonsense is HARDLY proof Oswald was not a shooter, Charles.
>
> It's really more proof that Charles is an idiot who can't see the
> bleeding obvious, isn't it?
>
> Informative Regards,
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Gil Jesus
>
> So all this wild speculation rules out the facts that:
>
> a) Oswald's hand and fingerprints are all over the boxes you are
> talking about; the boxes in the sixth floor window that the shots were
> fired from?
Were his fingerprints the only ones found on the boxes ?
> b) His own personal rifle was found on that same sixth floor?
You sure about that ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3v_9pOsRL0o
> c) He brought a long package into work that day?
The Warren Commission said that Oswald took his rifle into the Texas
School Book Depository in a brown paper sack that measured 38 inches
long. The rifle broken down was 34.5 inches. In this clip, Buell
Wesley Frazier, the Oswald co-worker who gave him a ride to work on
the morning of the 22nd and one of two people who actually saw the
"gun sack" prior to the assassination, describes the package he saw.
His description of the length of the package and how Oswald held it
when he carried it indicates that the package Oswald took to work that
morning did not contain the Carcano later found in the TSBD.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDWaOjFqgHk
Here I try to carry a tape measure set at 35 inches in the fashion
that the WC claimed Oswald carried the package:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_-5L_JNF6g
> LOL! Your nonsense is HARDLY proof Oswald was not a shooter, Charles.
And your factoids are not supported by the facts, Fatman.
> It's really more proof that Charles is an idiot who can't see the
> bleeding obvious, isn't it?
Here's some advice: stop looking in the mirror.
bigdog
Why can't you dumbfucks figure out that if the bag Frazier saw Oswald
carry into the TSBD was not long enough to hold the MC, it means
Oswald brought two bags into the TSBD, the one Frazier saw and the one
they found near the sniper's nest with Oswald's palm print on it and
that bag was 38 inches long.
bigdog
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Hey, Waltards. Did you know there was a 38 inch bag with Oswald's palm
print on it found near the position where an eyewitness saw a man
firing shots at JFK. We know that bag was long enough to hold a
disassembled MC and we know Oswald carried that bag.
Gil Jesus
On Saturday afternoon, two witnesses, cab drivers William Whaley and
William Scoggins
viewed a police lineup with four individuals, one being Oswald. The
remaining three fillers
in the lineup were an 18-year old, a 17-year old and a Mexican.
If the lineup wasn't slanted toward Oswald, would any of the nutcases
care to guess
which witness who viewed this lineup originally identified Tippit's
killer as a
teenager or Mexican ? Was it ?
1. Whaley
2. Scoggins
3. Both
4. Neither
Take your time. Work through your denial.
mucher1
Both identified Oswald, but in your warped mind that's proof he wasn't
the shooter(?) Wow! And Whaley wasn't even a witness to any shooting!
Nice work, Gilly ;-)
curtjester1
>
> - Show quoted text -
Is that the latest, a bag within a bag, carry-in, theory?
CJ
curtjester1
>
> - Show quoted text -
Testimony of Ralph Leon Yates on 11/26/63 to FBI
RALPH LEON YATES, edit personal address....furnished the
folllowing information:
YATES stated that he is employed as a refrigeration
service-man for the Texas Butcher Supply Company, Dallas, Texas, and
in connection with this employment was driving a pickup truck on R.
L.
Thorton Expressway at approximately 10:30 AM, on either November 20
or
21, 1963. He stated he noticed a man hitchhiking at approximately
the
Beckley Street entrance to the R. L. Thornton Expressway, and he had
stopped and picked up this man.
YATES said after seeing photographs and television pctures of
LEE HARVEY OSWALD, he is of the opinion that this was identical with
OSWALD.
He continued that when the man walked up to get into the pickup
truck, was was carrying a package wrapped in brown wrapping paper
about 4 feet to 4 1/2 feet long. He said he told this man he could
put this package in the back of the truck, but the man said that the
package contained curtain rods and he would carry it with him in the
cab of the truck.
YATES stated as they drove along, the man had asked him if he
knew a certain party, whose name YATES cannot recall now, and he had
indicated to this man he did not. He said the man then asked if he
had ever been to the Carousel Club and YATES had replied that he had
serviced refrigerators in the past in a number of clubs and that
possibly he had been to this one, but he did not recall.
YATES said that he had said to the man that there was going to
be
a lot of excitement in Dallas soon, referring to the President's
visit, and the man had asked YATES what he meant. He said he replied
that the President was coming to Dallas, but that he personally felt
that the President should not come in view of the ADLAI STEVENSON
incident which had occurred previously.
YATES stated the man then asked YATES if he thought a person
could
assassinate the President. YATES replied that he guessed such a
thing
would be possible. The man then asked YATES if it could be done from
the top of a building or out of a window, high up, and YATES said he
guessed this was possible if one had a good rifle with a scope and
was
a good shot.
YATES advised about this time the man pulled out a picture which
showed a man with a rifle and asked YATES if he thought the President
could be killed with a gun like that one. YATES said he was driving
and did not look at the picture but indicated to the man that he
guessed so.
YATES said that the man then asked if he knew the President's
route for the parade in Dallas and YATES replied that he did not know
the route but had seen it in the paper. He said the man then said
that he had misunderstood him and that actually he asked YATES if he
thought that he President would change his route. YATES said he
replied that he doubted it unless they might for safety reasons.
He said as they approached downtown Dallas, the man indicated
that he was going on Houston Street and that although he was going to
Irving, he told the man he would drive off the expressway and to
Houston Street and let him out there, then would go back to the
expressway. YATES said he went off the Expressway on Commerce
Street,
turned off of Commerce on Houston, drove north on Houston and let the
man off on the corner of Elm and Houston Streets.
He said he saw the man cross Elm Street, but does not know where
he went from there. He said that as the man gout out the truck, he
recalled him saying something about the Triple Underpass, but cannot
recall exactly what was said.
YATES stated that he had mentioned this incident to another
employee at the Texas Butcher Supply Company, one DEMPSEY JONES,
prior
to the time that the President was assassinated.
11/26/63
taken by Special Agent Ben S. Harrison /rmb File # DL 44-1639
DL 89-3-1534
YATES stated that the man he thought was identical with LEE
HARVEY OSWALD whom he had picked up was a white male, approxiimately
5'9" tall, slender, with dark eyebrows and hair. He could furnish no
additional identifying data.
YATES stated he is married and has five children and that he
would
appreciate not receiving any type publicity from the fact was
furnishing this information.
CJ
bigdog
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
What is your source for this? A search of the WC 26 volumes got no
hits on anyone named Yates.
aeffects
focus shithead, F-O-C-U-S!
Walt
Ha,ha.ha,ha,hee,hee,hee....ROTFLMAP!!!..... This is hilarious!!
Hey big Hog, You shouldn't have tried to polish off that gallon of
wine that was left over from Thanksgiving dinner....cuz yer
drruuuuunk1
If you're not drunk then you certainly have exposed your lack of
reasoning. There was only ONE bag that Buell frazier and Linnie Mae
Randle saw in Oswald's hands and they both swore that it was no longer
than 28 inches. THAT bag was the one they saw and it could NOT have
contained that rifle PERIOD!!.... Are you suggesting that Lee Oswald
carried another longer bag that he had folded up and concealed .....
Did he have the rifle folded up in that bag also?? Hee,hee,hee......
Gil Jesus
> Both identified Oswald, but in your warped mind that's proof he wasn't
> the shooter(?) Wow! And Whaley wasn't even a witness to any shooting!
> Nice work, Gilly
Thanks.
Both identified Oswald after seeing his picture in the newspaper.
And even then, Whaley DIDN'T identify Oswald, He identified the # 2
man, 18-year old David Edmond
Knapp, as the one who rode in his cab. Oswald was # 3 in this lineup.
Mr. WHALEY. They asked me which number he was standing under and he
was standing under No. 2. ( 2 H 294 )
The Commission went back and forth, trying to confuse the witness.
They asked him whether the man he picked was # 2 from the right or #
2
from the left. The lineup entered from the left with # 4 entering
first, then # 3, then # 2, and finally # 1 last. They asked him
whether the man he picked was the second or third one to enter.
They went on with this charade and through it all, Whaley stuck to
his
guns: the man he selected in the lineup was # 2.
The reason why the Commission did this was that they had a problem---
Whaley's affidavit said that he had picked # 3 ( Oswald ).
Finally, the Commission asked Whaley WHY he insisted that the man he
chose was # 2 and yet his affidavit said that he chose # 3.
This is what he said:
Mr. WHALEY. I signed that statement before they carried me down to
see the lineup. I signed this statement, and then they carried me
down to the lineup at 2:30 in the afternoon. ( 6 H 430 )
SO HE SIGNED THE AFFIDAVIT IDENTIFYING OSWALD BEFORE HE EVEN SAW THE
LINEUP !!!!
****ROFLMAO***** and idiots like you take the documentation for real
when this is
proof positive that the affidavits were altered, just like Julia Ann
Mercer said hers was.
Go back to your little girl porn sites, Mucher1 and let people who
KNOW the testimony discuss the case.
Gil Jesus
> Are you suggesting that Lee Oswald
> carried another longer bag that he had folded up and concealed .....
> Did he have the rifle folded up in that bag also?? Hee,hee,hee......
Walt:
It's amazing how, when these idiots get themselves into a hole, they
just keep on digging.
bigdog
mind works. Your problem is you have a 38 inch long bag found near the
sniper's nest which had Oswald's palm print on it and was long enough
to hold the rifle. That is the bag you seem to have no explaination
for. If you don't want to believe that was the same bag Frazier and
Randle saw Oswald with, that leaves you with two bags.
What a stupid motherfucker!!!
curtjester1
Why, would they? It is detrimental to a LG theory, with the Carousel,
the curtain rods, the preview statements concerning a potential
shooting, a package that really could contain a rifle. etc. etc.
The first sentence of the post should have given you the clue..
"Testimony of Ralph Leon Yates on 11/26/63 to FBI"
CJ
timstter
> On Nov 27, 3:47 pm, timstter <timst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > So all this wild speculation rules out the facts that:
>
> > a) Oswald's hand and fingerprints are all over the boxes you are
> > talking about; the boxes in the sixth floor window that the shots were
> > fired from?
>
> Were his fingerprints the only ones found on the boxes ?
>
Who cares. His hand and fingerprints were found in a configuration
that the crime scene investigation officers concluded was supportive
of his having waited in the 6th floor window that the shots came from.
> > b) His own personal rifle was found on that same sixth floor?
>
> You sure about that ?
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3v_9pOsRL0o
>
LOL! That is PATHETIC, Gil! As has been pointed out to you before, of
the SIX available views of the sling mounts you choose ONE to support
your silly argument and it's the ONLY ONE that could be interpreted
that way. Other of the backyard photos CLEARLY show that the sling is
side mounted. Why are you a dishonest researcher, Gil?
> > c) He brought a long package into work that day?
>
> The Warren Commission said that Oswald took his rifle into the Texas
> School Book Depository in a brown paper sack that measured 38 inches
> long. The rifle broken down was 34.5 inches. In this clip, Buell
> Wesley Frazier, the Oswald co-worker who gave him a ride to work on
> the morning of the 22nd and one of two people who actually saw the
> "gun sack" prior to the assassination, describes the package he saw.
> His description of the length of the package and how Oswald held it
> when he carried it indicates that the package Oswald took to work that
> morning did not contain the Carcano later found in the TSBD.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDWaOjFqgHk
>
Hmm, didn't Vincent Bugliosi question Frazier under oath re this in
1986:
QUOTE ON:
VINCENT BUGLIOSI -- "Did you recall how he {Oswald} was carrying the
bag?"
BUELL WESLEY FRAZIER -- "Yes sir. He was carrying it parallel to his
body."
MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Okay, so he carried the bag right next to his
body....on the right side?"
MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes sir. On the right side."
MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Was it cupped in his hand and under his armpit? I
think you've said that in the past."
MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes sir."
MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Mr. Frazier, is it true that you paid hardly any
attention to this bag?"
MR. FRAZIER -- "That is true."
MR. BUGLIOSI -- "So the bag could have been protruding out in front of
his body, and you wouldn't have been able to see it, is that correct?"
MR. FRAZIER -- "That is true."
QUOTE OFF
> Here I try to carry a tape measure set at 35 inches in the fashion
> that the WC claimed Oswald carried the package:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_-5L_JNF6g
>
LOL! Please promise me you will NEVER cease making your comedy videos,
Verm. In case ya missed it:
QUOTE ON:
MR. BUGLIOSI -- "So the bag could have been protruding out in front of
his body, and you wouldn't have been able to see it, is that correct?"
MR. FRAZIER -- "That is true."
QUOTE OFF
> > LOL! Your nonsense is HARDLY proof Oswald was not a shooter, Charles.
>
> And your factoids are not supported by the facts, Fatman.
>
You're the purveyor of factoids, Verm. Why does your pile-of-junk *two
different rifles* video only use ONE of the SIX available views of the
sling mounts? Because you're an honest researcher? LOL!
> > It's really more proof that Charles is an idiot who can't see the
> > bleeding obvious, isn't it?
>
> Here's some advice: stop looking in the mirror.
Here's some advice. Stop telling lies about the Kennedy assassination.
You're no good at it and you're simply making a laughing stock of
yourself with those stupid videos.
bigdog
Imagine all of the other things he could be doing to make himself a
laughing stock.
Ben Holmes
Walt says...
>
>On Nov 27, 9:52=A0pm, bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 27, 10:18=A0pm, Gil Jesus <JFK63Conspir...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Nov 27, 3:47=A0pm, timstter <timst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > So all this wild speculation rules out the facts that:
>>
>> > > a) Oswald's hand and fingerprints are all over the boxes you are
>e
>> > > fired from?
>>
>> > Were his fingerprints the only ones found on the boxes ?
>>
>> > > b) His own personal rifle was found on that same sixth floor?
>>
>> > You sure about that ?
>>
>>
>> > > c) He brought a long package into work that day?
>>
>> > The Warren Commission said that Oswald took his rifle into the Texas
>> > School Book Depository in a brown paper sack that measured 38 inches
>> > long. The rifle broken down was 34.5 inches. In this clip, Buell
>> > Wesley Frazier, the Oswald co-worker who gave him a ride to work on
>> > the morning of the 22nd and one of two people who actually saw the
>> > "gun sack" prior to the assassination, describes the package he saw.
>> > His description of the length of the package and how Oswald held it
>> > when he carried it indicates that the package Oswald took to work that
>> > morning did not contain the Carcano later found in the TSBD.
>>
>>
>> > Here I try to carry a tape measure set at 35 inches in the fashion
>> > that the WC claimed Oswald carried the package:
>>
>>
>> > > LOL! Your nonsense is HARDLY proof Oswald was not a shooter, Charles.
>>
>> > And your factoids are not supported by the facts, Fatman.
>>
>> > > It's really more proof that Charles is an idiot who can't see the
>> > > bleeding obvious, isn't it?
>>
>> > Here's some advice: stop looking in the mirror.
>>
>> Why can't you dumbfucks figure out that if the bag Frazier saw Oswald
>> carry into the TSBD was not long enough to hold the MC, it means
>> Oswald brought two bags into the TSBD, the one Frazier saw and the one
>> they found near the sniper's nest with Oswald's palm print on it and
>> that bag was 38 inches long.
>
>Ha,ha.ha,ha,hee,hee,hee....ROTFLMAP!!!..... This is hilarious!!
>
>Hey big Hog, You shouldn't have tried to polish off that gallon of
>wine that was left over from Thanksgiving dinner....cuz yer
>drruuuuunk1
>
>If you're not drunk then you certainly have exposed your lack of
>reasoning. There was only ONE bag that Buell frazier and Linnie Mae
>Randle saw in Oswald's hands and they both swore that it was no longer
>than 28 inches. THAT bag was the one they saw and it could NOT have
>contained that rifle PERIOD!!.... Are you suggesting that Lee Oswald
>carried another longer bag that he had folded up and concealed .....
>Did he have the rifle folded up in that bag also?? Hee,hee,hee......
Walt - the solution is simple... Oswald was hiding the rifle in the 38" bag...
which was hidden in the 28" bag...
Since the rifle and 38" bag was hidden in the 28" bag, no eyewitnesses would
identify the longer bag...
See? Simple!
All you have to do is think like a LNT'er...
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Holmes
Learn to Make Money with a Website - http://www.burningknife.com
Ben Holmes
Gil Jesus says...
>
>On Nov 28, 5:09=A0pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
>> Are you suggesting that Lee Oswald
>> carried another longer bag that he had folded up and concealed .....
>
>Walt:
>
>It's amazing how, when these idiots get themselves into a hole, they
>just keep on digging.
They clearly don't mind looking stupid...
mucher1
> On Nov 28, 1:11 pm, mucher1 <much...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Both identified Oswald, but in your warped mind that's proof he wasn't
> > the shooter(?) Wow! And Whaley wasn't even a witness to any shooting!
> > Nice work, Gilly
>
> Thanks.
>
> Both identified Oswald after seeing his picture in the newspaper.
>
> And even then, Whaley DIDN'T identify Oswald, He identified the # 2
> man, 18-year old David Edmond
> Knapp, as the one who rode in his cab. Oswald was # 3 in this lineup.
Can't you read? It's *abundantly* clear from Whaley's testimony that
the man he identified was Oswald.
> Mr. WHALEY. They asked me which number he was standing under and he
> was standing under No. 2. ( 2 H 294 )
>
> The Commission went back and forth, trying to confuse the witness.
> They asked him whether the man he picked was # 2 from the right or #
> 2
> from the left. The lineup entered from the left with # 4 entering
> first, then # 3, then # 2, and finally # 1 last. They asked him
> whether the man he picked was the second or third one to enter.
>
> They went on with this charade and through it all, Whaley stuck to
> his
> guns: the man he selected in the lineup was # 2.
You choose to believe that he accurately remembered Oswald's place in
the lineup, but was confused (or lying) about the identification
itself. Most people would conclude the opposite: that he identified
Oswald on 11/23/63, but later got the numbers mixed up.
> The reason why the Commission did this was that they had a problem---
> Whaley's affidavit said that he had picked # 3 ( Oswald ).
So they were obviously trying to resolve a conflict, not to "confuse
the witness" as you claimed above.
> Finally, the Commission asked Whaley WHY he insisted that the man he
> chose was # 2 and yet his affidavit said that he chose # 3.
>
> This is what he said:
>
> Mr. WHALEY. I signed that statement before they carried me down to
> see the lineup. I signed this statement, and then they carried me
> down to the lineup at 2:30 in the afternoon. ( 6 H 430 )
>
> SO HE SIGNED THE AFFIDAVIT IDENTIFYING OSWALD BEFORE HE EVEN SAW THE
> LINEUP !!!!
Surely, you don't *honestly* believe that's what happened(?!?) Whaley
corrected himself moments later:
Mr. WHALEY. Let me tell you how they fixed this up. They had me in the
office saying that. They were writing it out on paper, and they wrote
it out on paper, and this officer, Leavelle, I think that is his name,
before he finished and before I signed he wanted me to go with him to
the lineup, so I went to the lineup, and I come back and he asked me
which one it was, which number it was, and I identified the man, and
we went back up in the office again, and then they had me sign this.
That is as near as I can remember.
My recollection for that afternoon in that office was very disturbed
because everytime they would open the door, some flash camera would
flash in your face and everybody coming in and out and asking you
questions. (6 H 430)
> ****ROFLMAO***** and idiots like you take the documentation for real
> when this is
> proof positive that the affidavits were altered, just like Julia Ann
> Mercer said hers was.
Proof positive? Perhaps to a dishonest moron like you.
> Go back to your little girl porn sites, Mucher1 and let people who
> KNOW the testimony discuss the case.
What did you mean when you said this was PROOF that Oswald didn't
shoot Tippit? Seems you thought that Whaley was a witness to the
shooting, eh? What a clueless asshole you are, Gilly. You're right
about one thing, though. I'd probably learn more about the JFK
assassination from surfing porn than discussing the case with you.
Walt
> In article <03b42c17-1714-4df5-92ae-b3f2ae4dd...@y3g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>,
Oh yeah....Now I see.....Why didn't I think of that?.......Hee,hee,hee
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ben Holmes
> Learn to Make Money with a Website -http://www.burningknife.com- Hide quoted text -
Ben Holmes
Walt says...
>
>On Nov 28, 6:05=A0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> In article <03b42c17-1714-4df5-92ae-b3f2ae4dd...@y3g2000vbm.googlegroups.=
>com>,
>> Walt says...
>>
>> >On Nov 27, 9:52=3DA0pm, bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> On Nov 27, 10:18=3DA0pm, Gil Jesus <JFK63Conspir...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > On Nov 27, 3:47=3DA0pm, timstter <timst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > > So all this wild speculation rules out the facts that:
>>
>> >> > > a) Oswald's hand and fingerprints are all over the boxes you are
>wer=3D
>> >e
>> >> > > fired from?
>>
>> >> > Were his fingerprints the only ones found on the boxes ?
>>
>> >> > > b) His own personal rifle was found on that same sixth floor?
>>
>> >> > You sure about that ?
>>
>>
>> >> > > c) He brought a long package into work that day?
>>
>> >> > The Warren Commission said that Oswald took his rifle into the Texas
>> >> > School Book Depository in a brown paper sack that measured 38 inches
>> >> > long. The rifle broken down was 34.5 inches. In this clip, Buell
>> >> > Wesley Frazier, the Oswald co-worker who gave him a ride to work on
>> >> > the morning of the 22nd and one of two people who actually saw the
>> >> > "gun sack" prior to the assassination, describes the package he saw.
>> >> > His description of the length of the package and how Oswald held it
>at
>> >> > morning did not contain the Carcano later found in the TSBD.
>>
>>
>> >> > Here I try to carry a tape measure set at 35 inches in the fashion
>> >> > that the WC claimed Oswald carried the package:
>>
>>
>> >> > > LOL! Your nonsense is HARDLY proof Oswald was not a shooter, Charl=
>es.
>>
>> >> > And your factoids are not supported by the facts, Fatman.
>>
>> >> > > It's really more proof that Charles is an idiot who can't see the
>> >> > > bleeding obvious, isn't it?
>>
>> >> > Here's some advice: stop looking in the mirror.
>>
>> >> Why can't you dumbfucks figure out that if the bag Frazier saw Oswald
>> >> carry into the TSBD was not long enough to hold the MC, it means
>> >> Oswald brought two bags into the TSBD, the one Frazier saw and the one
>> >> they found near the sniper's nest with Oswald's palm print on it and
>> >> that bag was 38 inches long.
>>
>>
>> >Hey big Hog, You shouldn't have tried to polish off that gallon of
>> >wine that was left over from Thanksgiving dinner....cuz yer
>> >drruuuuunk1
>>
>> >If you're not drunk then you certainly have exposed your lack of
>> >Randle saw in Oswald's hands and they both swore that it was no longer
>> >contained that rifle PERIOD!!.... Are you suggesting that Lee Oswald
>> >carried another longer bag that he had folded up and concealed .....
>>
>> Walt - the solution is simple... Oswald was hiding the rifle in the 38" b=
>ag...
>> which was hidden in the 28" bag...
>>
>uld
>> identify the longer bag...
>>
>> See? Simple!
>>
>> All you have to do is think like a LNT'er...
>
>Oh yeah....Now I see.....Why didn't I think of that?.......Hee,hee,hee
Because you're not stupid, I would presume...
It's *STILL* a fact that no LNT'er or troll will name the eyewitness whom he
believes completely in their 1963-64 statements.
The truth would appear to be that to a LNT'er, *NO* eyewitness has credibility.
So obviously, eyewitnesses who describe the bag, and *DESCRIBE THE BASIS FOR
THEIR PRESUMPTION OF LENGTH* - cannot be credible.
Or Oswald was a magician... take your pick.
Walt
> In article <b48eb180-7b41-42ed-b7cf-56a51f9bd...@e20g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>,
Lee Oswald wold have to have been a better magician that Houdini to
perform all the feats of magic that the LNer's attribute to him.
Hells bells, even the great Houdini couldn't have shrunk that rifle
down so that it would have fit in a 28 inch paper sack. Nor could he
have hit the target with a rifle that had the scope mounted crooked.
I'd love to get a LNer to bet me that he could hit an eight inch
target at 88 yards with a Carcano with the scope mounted EXACTLY like
the scope was mounted on the TSBD rifle.
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ben Holmes
bigdog
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Hey, Fruitcake. Oswald didn't put his rifle in a 28 inch sack. He put
it in the 38 inch sack that was found next to the sniper's nest. You
know. The one you want to pretend didn't exist. The fragmented bullet
found in the limo that was ballistically traced to the rifle found in
the TSBD with the misalligned scope proves that what you claim was
impossible was actually done. That rifle put a bullet on target from
88 yards away. That of course assumes the target was the head and not
the torso. If he was firing at the torso, his shot was high. The kind
of miss one might expect with a misalligned scope.
I'll give you credit for one thing. I've never come across a man who
was more determined to prove how fucking stupid he is than you are.
Walt
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
Hey, Fruitcake. Oswald didn't put his rifle in a 28 inch sack. He put
it in the 38 inch sack that was found next to the sniper's nest.
Oh really, Then why did you write this?....."Why can't you dumbfucks
figure out that if the bag Frazier saw Oswald carry into the TSBD was
not long enough to hold the MC, it means
Oswald brought two bags into the TSBD, the one Frazier saw and the one
they found near the sniper's nest with Oswald's palm print on it and
that bag was 38 inches long. "
You did write that didn't you Big Hog??.
You
> know. The one you want to pretend didn't exist. The fragmented bullet
> found in the limo that was ballistically traced to the rifle found in
> the TSBD with the misalligned scope proves that what you claim was
> impossible was actually done. That rifle put a bullet on target from
> 88 yards away. That of course assumes the target was the head and not
> the torso. If he was firing at the torso, his shot was high. The kind
> of miss one might expect with a misalligned scope.
>
I'll give you credit for one thing. I've never come across a man who
was more determined to prove how fucking stupid he is than you are.
Well someone who is more stupid than I wrote this:..."Why can't you
dumbfucks figure out that if the bag Frazier saw Oswald carry into the
TSBD was not long enough to hold the MC, it means
Oswald brought two bags into the TSBD, the one Frazier saw and the one
they found near the sniper's nest with Oswald's palm print on it and
that bag was 38 inches long.
Ha,ha,ha,ha, Hee,hee,hee,hee..... ROTFLMAO!....
bigdog
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> Hey, Fruitcake. Oswald didn't put his rifle in a 28 inch sack. He put
> it in the 38 inch sack that was found next to the sniper's nest.
>
> Oh really, Then why did you write this?....."Why can't you dumbfucks
> figure out that if the bag Frazier saw Oswald carry into the TSBD was
> not long enough to hold the MC, it means
> Oswald brought two bags into the TSBD, the one Frazier saw and the one
> they found near the sniper's nest with Oswald's palm print on it and
> that bag was 38 inches long. "
>
> You did write that didn't you Big Hog??.
>
position. If the bag Frazier and Randle saw Oswald carry that morning
really was only 28 inches long, than it couldn't have been the same
bag as the 38 inch long one found in the SN. It is my position that
the two bags were one and the same and that the witnesses were simply
mistaken about its length. If you reject that position then you have
two bags in evidence. I don't have to deal with evidence of two bags
you do. You have to explain how Oswald carried a 28 inch bag into the
TSBD that was never found and also left a 38 inch bag at the crime
scene, the one with his palm print on it.
charles wallace
Jas,
Judging from both of your posts you see a real person. You should
also know that court clerk Lillian Mooneyham worked across the street
and from Judge Hyer's office she saw a man in this window set after
the shots. She watched the assassination of JFK from Judge King's
courtroom. It takes approximately 2 minutes to walk from that
courtroom to Judge Hyer's office (window to window) where she saw a
man who was looking out of the 6th floor SE corner window set. This
photo and witness proves not only that Oswald was not the shooter it
also proves that our government can not be trusted to tell the truth
in this case. You should also know that the original Dillard negative
in the area that depicts the face was completely destroyed while in
our government's control.
Charles
Walt
Ya know Big Hog.... You're not fooling anyone. Everybody read your
post and knows that you said...
Quote:....." if the bag Frazier saw Oswald carry into the TSBD was not
long enough to hold the MC, it means Oswald brought two bags into the
TSBD, the one Frazier saw and the one they found near the sniper's
nest with Oswald's palm print on it and that bag was 38 inches
long"....unquote
It's also very clear that you're now trying to lie your way out of
your embarrassment.... Pathetic!... You're only making yourself look
even more stupid.
I'd love to hear a liar like you try to explain why there were a
couple of blanket fibers found on the bag, but there wasn't a single
blanket fiber found on the rifle. The rifle was allegedly wrapped in
the blanket for several months before the assassination.so it surely
would have picked up some of those loosely woven blanket fibers. Do
you really believe that it only picked up a couple of fibers from that
blanket and then dropped them both on the papwer sack?? I gotta tell
ya.... You're gonna hafta lie a lot better than you have been....if
you expect anybody to believe you.
Walt
You're a poor liar, Big Hog.... you wrote:..." if the bag Frazier saw
Oswald carry into the TSBD was not long enough to hold the MC, it
means Oswald brought two bags into the TSBD, the one Frazier saw and
the one they found near the sniper's nest with Oswald's palm print on
it and that bag was 38 inches long."
The one Frazier and Randle saw was only 28 inches long... It was NOT
38 inches long.
It is my position that
> the two bags were one and the same and that the witnesses were simply
> mistaken about its length. If you reject that position then you have
> two bags in evidence. I don't have to deal with evidence of two bags
> you do. You have to explain how Oswald carried a 28 inch bag into the
> TSBD that was never found and also left a 38 inch bag at the crime
> scene, the one with his palm print on it.
Gil Jesus
> Lee Oswald wold have to have been a better magician that Houdini to
> perform all the feats of magic that the LNer's attribute to him.
> Hells bells, even the great Houdini couldn't have shrunk that rifle
> down so that it would have fit in a 28 inch paper sack. Nor could he
> have hit the target with a rifle that had the scope mounted crooked.
> I'd love to get a LNer to bet me that he could hit an eight inch
> target at 88 yards with a Carcano with the scope mounted EXACTLY like
> the scope was mounted on the TSBD rifle.
SPEAKING OF THE SCOPE, WHEN THE ARMY TEST FIRED THE WEAPON
FOR ACCURACY, THEY COULD NOT SIGHT IT IN USING THE SCOPE
"....they could not sight the weapon in using the telescope......"
Testimony of Ronald Simmons
Chief of the Infantry Weapons Evaluation Branch of the
Ballistics Research Laboratory of the Department of the Army
( 3 H 442 )
That's some baaaad scope !!!
Looks like Lowry's gonna have get that taste out of his mouth by using
Listerine from now on.
aeffects
Not having the above testimony available at the moment. Does Simmons
testimony go into depth regarding problems the Weapons Evaluation
Branch (of the USArmy) had testing the rifle with the scope, i.e.,
physically damaged?
I'm wondering if the scope was possibly damaged dropping the rifle w/
scope attached between boxes, where it was ultimately found? It
appears critical, the scope-on-rifle had to be sighted in prior any
11/22/63 shooting. If the rifle was carefully *placed* in its hiding
nook, boxes built up around it, the rifle w/scope attached should of
been dead-on when tested!
Any nonsense posted from lone nuts regarding shoots utilizing MC "iron
sights" is irrelevant, the WCR based all TSBD 6th floor tests on a
"scoped" weapon...
Walt
NO !!!..... EMPHATICALLY NO!!..... Because the rifle was NOT simply
dropped "BETWEEN boxes of books.....It was carefully placed there and
then COVERED with boxes of books.
The was was decribed as being "WELL HIDDEN" beneath boxes of books,
and that's the reason it wasn't found on the first couple of
searches. But Ol Captain Fritz was claivoyent....and he told the
dozens of officers who were searching that sixth floor...."Just keep
looking, because that rifle is here somewhere". And sure enough ol
Fritz was right....Deputy Eugene Boone finally found it "WELL HIDDEN"
beneath those boxes of books after he shined his flash light down into
that cavern of books. THE RIFLE WAS NOT SIMPLY TOSSED ASIDE!!
Discovery of the patsy is alway important, and key
> to unravelling how the event(s) happened to begin with.
It
> appears critical, the scope-on-rifle had to be sighted in prior any
> 11/22/63 shooting. If the rifle was carefully *placed* in its hiding
> nook, boxes built up around it, the rifle w/scope attached should of
> been dead-on when tested!
>
> Any nonsense posted from lone nuts regarding shoots utilizing MC "iron
> sights" is irrelevant, the WCR based all TSBD 6th floor tests on a
> "scoped" weapon...- Hide quoted text -
aeffects
then would you agree Walt, IF the MC rifle was used on 11/22/63, then,
well hidden, thus found within an hour or two, that the same MC
*scoped* weapon should have performed with accuracy (100yards range )
when tested by the USArmy Weapons Evaluation Branch?
Walt
The Official government approved story is:.....The rifle was wrapped
in a blanket and put in the back of Ruth Paine's green and white 55
Chevy station wagon in New Orleans on September 23 1963. It remained
in that blanket until about 7:00 am 11/22/63. IF IF the scope was
ever even bore sighted I'd be surprised. Kleins simply attached the
scopes to the rifles they were selling and sent them out to the
purchaser. Kleins used a cheap stamped sheet metal scope mount to
mount the cheap scope. I'll bet that the rifle was never ever fired
after they shipped it to box 2915 in Dallas. But for the sake of this
discussion let's say that at some point Oswald aquired a ammo clip and
some good quality US made (for the CIA) ammo for the rifle, and
actually fired about $20.00 worth of ammo through it and zeroed the
scope. ( The FBI said that it was IMPOSSIBLE to zero the scope because
the scope mount was poorly stamped and it had to be shimmed to even
make it usable.) But lets live in fantasy world of a LNer for just a
minute and grant that Oswald had fired the rifle and zeroed the
scope. Any hunter will tell you that that cheap scope and mount
would NEVER maintain it's calibration while wrapped in a blanket and
roughly handled in moving and storage. And only a complete idiot
would attempt to go hunting with a rifle that had not been checked for
accuracy. Yet the Government would treat us like addled brained kids
and tell us that Oswald used that rifle and shot JFK with
it.
> > > Any nonsense posted from lone nuts regarding shoots utilizing MC "iron
> > > sights" is irrelevant, the WCR based all TSBD 6th floor tests on a
> > > "scoped" weapon...- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
bigdog
all doubt that Oswald's rifle was the one that put the bullets on the
target. But I would expect nothing less from you remedial class
dunces.
Walt
Really??.... Do you have PROOF that the bullets that were introduced
into evidence that they were REMOVED FROM THE TARGET???
Surely you're not so dumb that you don't know that NO BULLET that was
ballistically tracable was removed from either victim. The bulet and
bullet fragments were found FAR REMOVED from either victim....THAT IS
A FACT!!
But I would expect nothing less from you remedial class
> dunces.- Hide quoted text -
timstter
The large fragments were recovered from the crime scene, Walt, ie the
presidential limo.
You don't know this?
Concerned Regards,
Walt
DUH!...Dear Mr. Garden Slug.... The Limo was NOT a human victim. Can
you provide positive PROOF for the arrival of the bullet fragments
into the limo? Is there some way to know beyond a shadow of doubt
that the small fragments weren't dropped into the open limo by a
spectator at the hospital? I can think of a half dozen ways to put
those fragments into the limo, so that they would appear to have come
from a bullet during the shooting. In fact they were so small that
they could have been dropped into the limo long BEFORE the shooting,
and nobody would have noticed them. The point Mr Garden Slug is:
The fragments were NOT removed from either victim, nor was the
pristine bullet.... Therefore you have NO proof that these
projectiles were the ones that wounded either victim... Now isn't
that a fact??
>
> Concerned Regards,
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*- Hide quoted text -
Bud
These are the things the retards have to think up in their
desperation to deny the obvious. These are the people who think they
have grounds to criticize the WC. Is this what they think the WC
should have done, sit around imagining ways to disregard evidence?
Best leave that to the people who have no desire to determine what
really occurred, like Walt.
Walt
Hey Dud, I have an advantage over you....I know that the WR is a
crock, and I know that Lee Oswald was framed. The men behind the
murder were DESPERATE....They had to have been to plot to murder the
President. It goes without saying that they wanted someone else to
be blamed for their crime..... Therefore they planned to make Oswald
the scapegoat, and they planted the bullets and bullet fragments to
make it easy for the "Barney Fifes" to find evidence that pointed to
Oswald.
>
>
>
> > The point Mr Garden Slug is:
> > The fragments were NOT removed from either victim, nor was the
> > pristine bullet.... Therefore you have NO proof that these
> > projectiles were the ones that wounded either victim... Now isn't
> > that a fact??
>
> > > Concerned Regards,
>
> > > Tim Brennan
> > > Sydney, Australia
> > > *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
timstter
Huh? Too bad Oswald had a history of this bullshit, eh Walt?
Like when he wounded Maj. General Walker as he was trying to blow his
head off, leaving a bullet behind with the same general
characteristics as the bullet fragments found in the limo.
As usual, you have nothing but *Walt's opinion* and crackpot reasoning
to support your silly stance.
Informative Regards,
Bud
And I know you are retarded. You sit around imagining ways bullets
can be found in the place people were shot and they not be connected
with the shooting. If they ever have a contest to see who can come up
with the stupidest ideas regarding this event I suggest you join,
until then you are off the fucking case.
>The men behind the
> murder were DESPERATE....
No, you and your fellow kooks are desperate to believe Oswald was
innocent, so you concoct, contrive and fantasize the most moronic
speculation imaginable.
>They had to have been to plot to murder the
> President.
Because you need one. You need one like crackheads need crack.
> It goes without saying that they wanted someone else to
> be blamed for their crime..... Therefore they planned to make Oswald
> the scapegoat,
Yah, they planned for Oswald to bring a long bag into work that day.
They planned him to remain out of sight during the shooting. They
planned for him to flee, kill a cop, attack some others. They planned
for him to not say a single word against these people who did him so
wrong. I know you have written a retarded script that invents reasons
and justifications for these things, it`s what retards do. But until
the day comes when they reopen this case with the purpose of
entertaining the stupidest thinking ever exhibited I don`t think your
ideas have much chance of going any further than this bastion of
retardation.
> and they planted the bullets and bullet fragments to
> make it easy for the "Barney Fifes" to find evidence that pointed to
> Oswald.
But you are too clever to be fooled by evidence, right Walt? Just
put your defective brain into overdrive and imagine.
Gil Jesus
> The fragmented bullet
> found in the limo that was ballistically traced to the rifle found in
> the TSBD
Got the photo of that fragment in the limo as found ?
> I've never come across a man who
> was more determined to prove how fucking stupid he is than you are
Looking in the mirror again ?
Bud
> On Nov 29, 7:03 am, bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > The fragmented bullet
> > found in the limo that was ballistically traced to the rifle found in
> > the TSBD
>
> Got the photo of that fragment in the limo as found ?
Why do you say one was taken?
bigdog
>
> > The fragmented bullet
> > found in the limo that was ballistically traced to the rifle found in
> > the TSBD
>
> Got the photo of that fragment in the limo as found ?
As a matter of fact, we do, Baldy:
http://www.awesomestories.com/images/user/thumb_5e1bd0e5c7.gif
But why the fuck would we need a photo, dumbfuck? You can't tell
anything from a photo. To determine whether a bullet came from a
particular gun, you have to look at the actual bullet under a
microscope.
Your stupidity seems to be a bottomless pit.
>
> > I've never come across a man who
> > was more determined to prove how fucking stupid he is than you are
>
> Looking in the mirror again ?
I understand that to beautify your house, you had all the mirrors
removed.
Bud
> In article <b48eb180-7b41-42ed-b7cf-56a51f9bd...@e20g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>,
> Walt says...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Nov 28, 6:05=A0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> >> In article <03b42c17-1714-4df5-92ae-b3f2ae4dd...@y3g2000vbm.googlegroups.=
> >com>,
> >> Walt says...
>
All witnesses are human, therefore fallible.
> The truth would appear to be that to a LNT'er, *NO* eyewitness has credibility.
They have to earn credibility, it isn`t assumed.
> So obviously, eyewitnesses who describe the bag, and *DESCRIBE THE BASIS FOR
> THEIR PRESUMPTION OF LENGTH* - cannot be credible.
The witnesses didn`t give presumptions of length, retard, they gave
estimates and approximations on glimpses, glances and impressions.
> Or Oswald was a magician... take your pick.
Retards always reach right over available ordinary explanations for
extraordinary explanations.
Walt
> On Dec 5, 5:50 am, Gil Jesus <JFK63Conspir...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 29, 7:03 am, bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > The fragmented bullet
> > > found in the limo that was ballistically traced to the rifle found in
> > > the TSBD
>
> > Got the photo of that fragment in the limo as found ?
Gil asked Little mutt....."Got the photo of that fragment in the limo
as found ?...and Little mutt whined...As a matter of fact, we do,
Baldy:
Then the scraggly cur posted a link....
http://www.awesomestories.com/images/user/thumb_5e1bd0e5c7.gif... that
does NOT show the fragments in situ as Gill asked
The poor scraggly cur apparently can't even read.
robcap...@netscape.com
Ah, but what time did this happen? Was the limo still in the
jurisdiction of the crime?
bigdog
> On Dec 5, 8:50 am, bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 5, 5:50 am, Gil Jesus <JFK63Conspir...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 29, 7:03 am, bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > The fragmented bullet
> > > > found in the limo that was ballistically traced to the rifle found in
> > > > the TSBD
>
> > > Got the photo of that fragment in the limo as found ?
>
> Gil asked Little mutt....."Got the photo of that fragment in the limo
> as found ?...and Little mutt whined...As a matter of fact, we do,
> Baldy:
>
> does NOT show the fragments in situ as Gill asked
>
> The poor scraggly cur apparently can't even read.
>
>
>
>
>
> > As a matter of fact, we do, Baldy:
>
> >http://www.awesomestories.com/images/user/thumb_5e1bd0e5c7.gif
>
> > But why the fuck would we need a photo, dumbfuck? You can't tell
> > anything from a photo. To determine whether a bullet came from a
> > particular gun, you have to look at the actual bullet under a
> > microscope.
>
> > Your stupidity seems to be a bottomless pit.
>
> > > > I've never come across a man who
> > > > was more determined to prove how fucking stupid he is than you are
>
> > > Looking in the mirror again ?
>
> > I understand that to beautify your house, you had all the mirrors
>
> - Show quoted text -
I underestimated the stupidity of both you, which was pretty stupid of
me. It never occurred to me someone would think it was necessary to
take photos of the bullet fragments in the limo, since the fragments
would likely have moved, first during the drives to Parkland and Love
Field and certainly during the flight back to Washington which is
where the fragments were discovered. Why the fuck would anyone both
taking photos of where those fragments were found?
This is just another of Baldy's ridiculous red herring arguments which
he pollutes this forum with because he has nothing intelligent to
offer. I served on a jury in a murder trial a while back. We were
presented the bullets that had been recovered from the walls and the
floor. We did not receive photos of the bullets where they were found.
Neither the prosecution nor the defense thought that was important
because the issue was never raised. Only real dumbasses would think
that was something that should have been done. Oh wait, look who I'm
talking about.
PS. There was no blood on the bullets we were presented. I guess that
means those bullets didn't kill the girl. That's the thinking in
kookdom anyway.
Bud
It`s worse than that. If he is insinuating the fragments were
created by the FBI, how hard would it be to photograph them in the
limo? Wouldn`t a retard who would think they were created with the
purpose of inserting in the evidential record also be retarded enough
to reject a photo of them in the limo if one were taken?
And Walt Braindead was entertaining the idea that someone might have
had fragments of bullets fired from the rifle found in the TSBD and
threw them in the limo while it was outside of Parkland. If you need
to entertain such extraordinary speculation, isn`t more rational to
just accept Oswald`s guilt and call it a day?
Walt
Dave, that rifle was NOT used (fired) on 11/22/63.... It was hidden
beneath boxes of books BEFORE the shooting, just as the spent shells
were planted beneath that window BEFORE the shooting.
And NOBODY could fire that rifle accurately in the condition it was
found....because the scope mount was not a good quality mount. It
was just a cheap stamped sheet steel mount. Kleins simply attached
the mount and scope to the rifles they sold without regard to accuracy
for the way the mount was attached. I'm sure they never bothered to
bore sight the scope. They simply screwed the scope onto the rifles
and sent them out to the buyer. Therefore that mount had to be
shimmed to even get the bullet to hit on the target at 30 yards. And
even with the shims under that scope mount that had to adjust the
windage adjustment on the scope to it's maximum adjustment to get the
rifle to hit anywhere near the bullseye.
>
>
>
> > The was was decribed as being "WELL HIDDEN" beneath boxes of books,
> > and that's the reason it wasn't found on the first couple of
> > searches. But Ol Captain Fritz was claivoyent....and he told the
> > dozens of officers who were searching that sixth floor...."Just keep
> > looking, because that rifle is here somewhere". And sure enough ol
> > Fritz was right....Deputy Eugene Boone finally found it "WELL HIDDEN"
> > beneath those boxes of books after he shined his flash light down into
> > that cavern of books. THE RIFLE WAS NOT SIMPLY TOSSED ASIDE!!
>
> > Discovery of the patsy is alway important, and key
>
> > > to unravelling how the event(s) happened to begin with.
>
> > It
>
> > > appears critical, the scope-on-rifle had to be sighted in prior any
> > > 11/22/63 shooting. If the rifle was carefully *placed* in its hiding
> > > nook, boxes built up around it, the rifle w/scope attached should of
> > > been dead-on when tested!
>
> > > Any nonsense posted from lone nuts regarding shoots utilizing MC "iron
> > > sights" is irrelevant, the WCR based all TSBD 6th floor tests on a
> > > "scoped" weapon...- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
bigdog
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
The key word is "rational".
bigdog
planted at that window when he identified it as the source of the
gunfire?
> And NOBODY could fire that rifle accurately in the condition it was
> found....because the scope mount was not a good quality mount. It
> was just a cheap stamped sheet steel mount. Kleins simply attached
> the mount and scope to the rifles they sold without regard to accuracy
> for the way the mount was attached. I'm sure they never bothered to
> bore sight the scope. They simply screwed the scope onto the rifles
> and sent them out to the buyer. Therefore that mount had to be
> shimmed to even get the bullet to hit on the target at 30 yards. And
> even with the shims under that scope mount that had to adjust the
> windage adjustment on the scope to it's maximum adjustment to get the
> rifle to hit anywhere near the bullseye.
>
So what you're saying is that cheap scope mount could have easily been
knocked out of allignment when the rifle was dropped on the floor and
boxes dumped on top of it.
Walt
Duh!.... You exposed your ignorance once again... Brennan, like
everybody else in the world learned that the cops had found spent
rifle shells beneath that SE corner window from news reports.
He DID NOT identify that SE corner window as the source of the
shots.... Here's what Brennan wrote about the LOCATION where he saw a
man aiming a rifle out of an upper story window.
Brennan wrote a sworn affidavit about an hour after murder. here's
what he said....
Quote...." I proceeded to watch the President's car as it turned left
at the corner where I was, and about 50 yards from the intersection of
Elm and Houston and at a point I would say the President's back was in
line with the last window. ".....Unquote
In the above sentence Brennan said that the President's back was in
line with the last window of the TSBD. Since Brennan was sitting
across Elm street from the south EAST corner of the TSBD...So the LAST
window from Brennan's location would have been at the WEST end of the
TSBD west side of the TSBD.
Quote.. " I then saw this man I have previously decribed in the
window and he was taking aim with a high powered rifle. I could see
all of the barrel of the gun. I do not know if it had a scope on it or
not. I was looking at this man in the window at the time of the last
explosion. Then the man let the gun down to his side and stepped down
out of sight. He did not seem to be in any hurry. I could see this
man from about his belt up. There was nothing unusual about him in
appearance. I believe I could identify this man if I ever saw him
again"....Unquote
HB......" I could see all of the barrel of the gun."... Clearly HB
is talking about seeing the long metal barrel of a high powered
hunting rifle. In his WC testimony he clarified that statement by
saying that he could see all of the barel from the muzle back to the
man's hand as he stood and steadied the rifle against the side of the
window sill. Nobody would mention seeing "all of the barrel " of a
Mannlicher Carcano, because less than six inches of barrel is visible
on the MC.
HB.... "I could see this man from about his belt up" .... Only a
lunatic would think that Brennan would have said that, if he had been
looking at Lee Oswald who the Warren Commission THEORIZED was SITTING
DOWN on a box of books with a stack of books in front of him"
Brennan also said ...."Then the man let the gun down to his side and
stepped down out of sight."
Clearly Brennan was describing a man who was STANDING behind a WIDE
OPEN window.
The closing sentence of Brennan's affidavit says..quote..." I believe
I could identify this man if I ever saw him again"...unqoute
About five hours after Howard Brennan wrote that he was sure he could
identify the man if he ever saw him again,. he went to the Dallas
Police Station to view a line up of "suspects" one of which was Lee
Oswald. When he saw the men in the line up he told the police
officer who was there by his side that the man he'd seen with a
hunting rifle behind a wide open window of the TSBD was NOT present in
that line up.
>
> > And NOBODY could fire that rifle accurately in the condition it was
> > found....because the scope mount was not a good quality mount. It
> > was just a cheap stamped sheet steel mount. Kleins simply attached
> > the mount and scope to the rifles they sold without regard to accuracy
> > for the way the mount was attached. I'm sure they never bothered to
> > bore sight the scope. They simply screwed the scope onto the rifles
> > and sent them out to the buyer. Therefore that mount had to be
> > shimmed to even get the bullet to hit on the target at 30 yards. And
> > even with the shims under that scope mount that had to adjust the
> > windage adjustment on the scope to it's maximum adjustment to get the
> > rifle to hit anywhere near the bullseye.
>
> So what you're saying is that cheap scope mount could have easily been
> knocked out of allignment when the rifle was dropped on the floor and
> boxes dumped on top of it.- Hide quoted text -
Walt
Thank you for displaying your ignorance once again.... NO, I'm not
saying the scope was knocked out of alignment by rough handling either
in the move from New Orleans, in the Paine garage, or after the
shooting. I'm saying that the scope mount was MANUFACTURED and
MOUNTED poorly.... The shims were required to compensate for the way
the scope was attached to the rifle. In other words the scope was
carelessly attached to the rifle and the rifle could NEVER have been
fired accurately with the scope MOUNTED as it was. Which gets to the
CRUX of the matter.... That rifle was NEVER fired that day... It was
nothing but a stage prop "throw down gun" that was hidden beneath
those boxes of books BEFORE the shooting. It was planted there to
make it appear that Lee Oswald had fired at President Kennedy.
I mentioned the move from New Orleans and the storage on the floor of
the Paine's simple to emphasize the point that the rifle had been
subjected to careless handling BEFORE Nov 2. 1963 and there was NO
TIME that Lee Oswald could have tested the rifle for accuracy between
September 21 and November 22, 1963. Obviously you know little about
rifles...But ask any hunter if he'd go into the woods looking for game
with a rifle that he hadn't tested for accuracy. Without a doubt,
100% of those hunter's would tell you that nobody would take an
untested rifle into the woods and expect to bag a deer.
bigdog
that could only have been fired by one rifle in the entire world and
that rifle is the one you say could not have been fired that day. So
if you are correct, the plotters fired two bullets on another day, one
which fragmented and one which was bent and flattened and then planted
them in two different locations and were found by two different
entities. And of course, the plotters would have known in advance
where the bullets needed to be planted that would be compatible with
the wounds suffered by the victims and that no other bullets from any
other rifle would be found. You think they were clever enough to know
ahead of time, they would need a fragmented bullet in the limo and a
bent bullet found on a stretcher at the Parkland ER. Do you have any
idea how laugh-out-loud funny that sounds?
Walt
What do you mean "IF" I'm correct.... How can there be any doubt in
your mind. You're not drunk are you?
the plotters fired two bullets on another day, one
> which fragmented and one which was bent and flattened
The Whole bullet ( Ce 399) was only slightly flattened....I have one
nearly identical to CE 399 that I fired into a bullet trap in which
water was the arresting media. Apparently the bullet started to
tumble as the water slowed it and it struck the side of the container
and is slightly flattened on the rear end of the bullet.
and then planted
> them in two different locations and were found by two different
> entities. And of course, the plotters would have known in advance
> where the bullets needed to be planted that would be compatible with
> the wounds suffered by the victims
Huh??? I believe you are drunk....cuz yer babbling.
and that no other bullets from any
> other rifle would be found.
Well they must have been worried that a bullet that did NOT match the
TSBD rifle wound be found because someone sure as hell made a mess of
the tiny little wound in JFK's throat. All of the doctors who saw
photos of the wound in JFK's throat at Bethesda, were aghast at the
huge hole in his throat....They knew that was not the result of
placing a trach tube in JFK's throat. ( (Incidentally, I'm well
aquainted with tracheotomy incisions )
You think they were clever enough to know
> ahead of time, they would need a fragmented bullet in the limo and a
> bent bullet found on a stretcher at the Parkland ER.
Pssst.... Sober up.... The PRISTINE bullet was NOT found in the
Emergency Room... It was found on the floor in a hallway in front of
the elevator, which is a long way from the ER.
Do you have any
> idea how laugh-out-loud funny that sounds?- Hide quoted text -
bigdog
you have carved out for yourself.
> and that no other bullets from any
>
> > other rifle would be found.
>
> Well they must have been worried that a bullet that did NOT match the
> TSBD rifle wound be found because someone sure as hell made a mess of
> the tiny little wound in JFK's throat.
That's right, Fruitcake, it's called a tracheotomy. They were trying
to save his life, not preserve a good looking corpse.
> All of the doctors who saw
> photos of the wound in JFK's throat at Bethesda, were aghast at the
> huge hole in his throat....They knew that was not the result of
> placing a trach tube in JFK's throat. ( (Incidentally, I'm well
> aquainted with tracheotomy incisions )
>
Do you think Perry was such a butcher that he made such a gaping wound
or do you think the wound opened up post mortem as a result of fluids
draining away from the wound?
> You think they were clever enough to know
>
> > ahead of time, they would need a fragmented bullet in the limo and a
> > bent bullet found on a stretcher at the Parkland ER.
>
> Pssst.... Sober up.... The PRISTINE bullet was NOT found in the
> Emergency Room... It was found on the floor in a hallway in front of
> the elevator, which is a long way from the ER.
>
Oh, so now they were so dumb they didn't even plant the bullet in the
right place.
> Do you have any
>
>
>
> > idea how laugh-out-loud funny that sounds?- Hide quoted text -
>
Thanks again for another belly laugh.
Walt
The little scraggly cur wrote: ...."Oh, so now they were so dumb they
didn't even plant the bullet in the right place."
Hey littlecur.....Aren't you embarassed when you display your lack of
knowledge ( a kind way to say that you're ignorant) about this case in
front of the whole wide world??
The conspirators couldn't get anywhere near that ER room.... The area
around the ER where JFK was being worked on was swarming with pissed
of Secret Service agents with machine guns.
They wouldn't allow J.Edna Hoovers goons anywhere near that ER. On
man who flashed FBI credentials at Roy Kellerman and told him that the
FBI was taking charge found out real quick that
he had tried to muscle the wrong man. Kellerman smashed him alongside
the head with his machine gun and broke the guys jaw in knocking him
out. When Hoover's Extra Special, Special agent regained consciousness
he crawled away like a little cur while wimpering that J.Edgar Hoover
was "going to hear about this".
Since JFK's bodyguards weren't allowing Hoover's Extra Special,
Special Agents near the action, they were forced to ad lib. They
couldn't get into the ER with that bullet so they were forced to plant
it on a bloody stretcher that had been used by a small boy (Ronald
Fuller) who had a cut chin. aparently the man who planted that
bullet saw the bloody stretcher and assumed that JFK had been carried
into the hospital on it. Apparently they did manage to get close
enough to the Lincoln to drop the fragments into the car.
>
> > Do you have any
>
> > > idea how laugh-out-loud funny that sounds?- Hide quoted text -
>
> Thanks again for another belly laugh.- Hide quoted text -
curtjester1
Let me introduce something before the mis/disinfo gets a little too
thick between the prevailing sides here. Yes there was time for
Oswald to practice and that has been documented and even been
presented before the WC. There is also a scope mounting job that Walt
is either avoiding or his Alzheimer's is kicking in again, about the
Oswald order at the Oakcliff shop. BTAIM for the poor LN'ers,
Oswald's rifle at both places was NOT the rifle found in the TSBD (the
MC). Garland Slack testified that the Day rifle was not the one
Oswald shot at the Sport's Drome rifle range, and Dwayne Ryder
testified that the rifle Oswald brought in for mounting was not only
not the same rifle, the mounting bored holes were not the same as the
holes found in the MC at the TSBD. Like I said before earlier in the
thread, with Ralph Yates' account, all this curtain rod and rifle
stuff was evidence of a complete set up for the patsying of Oswald for
the crime of 11/22/63, well before the crime. I see a lot of
inconvience for these facts so far on what is being bantered about.
Here's the article, Gil, Lee Harvey Oswald and The Sports Drome
Range. Garland Slack included.
http://www.jfk-online.com/oswaldrifle.html
Dwight Dwayne Ryder also had an Oswald come in for the mounting of a
scope on a rifle. (Said he 'associate the man as the same on TV, but
wouldn't ID him.)
* Said it was an Argentine made rifle
* No recollection of doing a side mounted scope
* Said he never worked on any MC's ever
* Said it was different than the one discovered at the TSBD.
Different bolt assembly
* Had different drill amounts than the one found at the TSBD
* When the FBI visited him, they asked not the man's name, mailing
address, didn't take repair tickets, and made no attempts to locate
the man with an Argentine rifle.
CJ
> rifles...But ask any hunter if he'd go into the woods looking for game
> with a rifle that he hadn't tested for accuracy. Without a doubt,
> 100% of those hunter's would tell you that nobody would take an
> untested rifle into the woods and expect to bag a deer.
>
> - Hide quoted text -
>
>
>
>
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Walt
Why would they want to investigate a man who Ryder said was NOT Lee
Oswald, and the rifle in question was NOT a Mannlicher Carcano??
perhaps those FBI men were smart enough to know that someone had
pulled a prank on Ryder and scribbled Oswald's name on a gun repair
ticket just to have some fun.
bigdog
plant a whole bullet at Parkland and a fragmented bullet in the limo.
I'd love to hear the thought process for those decisions. How did they
know that none of the "real" bullets from the shooting wouldn't end up
in the victims' bodies or in the upholstery of the limo. What happens
if they recover one or more of the bullets from a rifle other than
Oswald's and then the "planted" bullets are also recovered. How would
that square with their plan to frame a single shooter? Did you think
this all out or are you just making this shit up as you go? The answer
to that seems too obvious.
curtjester1
resembled or was portraying to be Oswald, an Oswald, that put two
different places in the equation.
Now, you go and make this out to be a prank??!! How, WC of you. BTW,
in his testimony which if you believe Oswald was a patsy and would
have been set to take the fall, and have someone do ALL these deeds
which were MANY, would seem to think there WAS quite a RESEMBLANCE,
yet UNSURE. Why don't you read his testimony?
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/ryder.htm
There was no emphatic no. In fact, in the latter testimony he was
shown some pics of Oswald and picked out one that was VERY resembling.
Now, why don't you retract your other moment of 'inconvenience' about
the Sports Drome Rifle Range??!! Was that another practical joke by
the Dallas Community, again??!! Funny, how these wild pranks get
started well before assassination time, huh?
CJ
Walt
You're simply weird...... A sucker for any silly theory that strikes
your fancy.
bigdog
chooses to believe in.
curtjester1
legitimate events supported by many with no mistaking of the name
Oswald, and you act just like a WC'er. You don't like the testimony
or theory, so you INVENT one yuurself to dismiss further
investigation, run from present investigation, and then start makiing
light and fun of people who do investigate. Your just another Shill
trying to make the conspirators get away. You probably work for some
gov't watchdog group as an infilltrator.
CJ
>
>
>
> > > > CJ
>
> > > > > rifles...But ask any hunter if he'd go into the woods looking for game
> > > > > with a rifle that he hadn't tested for accuracy. Without a doubt,
> > > > > 100% of those hunter's would tell you that nobody would take an
> > > > > untested rifle into the woods and expect to bag a deer.
>
> > > > > - Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text --
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
Walt
Hey Weirdo ....I'm not one who believes stuff like ....
The rifle found was really a 7.65 Mauser!!
The cops found a rifle on the roof of the TSBD and brought it down on
the fire escape!!
There were about a dozen "Oswald impersonators" roaming the world from
1939 until 1963, with the intent of setting Lee Oswald up as the
assassin of the President in 1963!!
All of the evidence that shows that Lee Oswald ordered a rifle from
Kleins is fake evidence and it was planted!!
The conspirators beat Marina Oswald until she agreed to say that she'd
taken a photograph of Lee holding the rifle he'd received from
Kleins!!
I could continue this list of bullshit to at least a hundred weird
theories that you believe......Do you need more?
curtjester1
> The cops found a rifle on the roof of the TSBD and brought it down on
> the fire escape!!
>
Quit doing the DisInfo Dance and stick with the issues instead of
sidestepping into other stuff because you've been so nailed.
> There were about a dozen "Oswald impersonators" roaming the world from
> 1939 until 1963, with the intent of setting Lee Oswald up as the
> assassin of the President in 1963!!
>
I guess only a LN'er could believe that Oswald wasn't set up as a
patsy? Want to confess your real reason for being here yet? You
think it was an Elvis convention in Dallas, N.O. and many other parts
wouldn't one, with all those look alikes gettng their 15 minutes of
fame? Oh yeah, he doesn't believe Oswald threw down a wallet with his
information while the other Oswald was in the theater, and that he
showed his ID at the Jiffy Mart at 7-8:00 A.M. that morning on
Industrial. Evidence not good enough for an LN'er?
> All of the evidence that shows that Lee Oswald ordered a rifle from
> Kleins is fake evidence and it was planted!!
>
That's what METICULOUS analyzing shows, and what you always jump from,
as well as change the subject. Remember that you said that Oswald
couldn't have practiced shooting yet, Sherlock? Dial Ryder was a
victim of practical jokes, eh, Sir Gumshoe?
> The conspirators beat Marina Oswald until she agreed to say that she'd
> taken a photograph of Lee holding the rifle he'd received from
> Kleins!!
>
Hell, they took her away for three weeks, like Brennan. You think
they played tiddly winks? She would have to be awfully stupid to know
her husband was in Intelligence and that they operated like a
barbershop quartet. You have to be the most gullible person on earth,
or just another gov't whore who can't do anything in life but get by
illegally.
> I could continue this list of bullshit to at least a hundred weird
> theories that you believe......Do you need more?
>
I believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was a patsy, and that it took a lot
of framing to portray that. You obviously don't believe he was,
unless you want to take a side when CT's aren't looking.
CJ
Walt
Well hell, even a broken clock is correct twice a day.......
curtjester1
it. When you don't know how or why LHO was a patsy, it's like not
even being involved in the case, as you could never know how to fix
what an assassination did.
CJ
Walt
CJ wrote:...." If one doesn't know how it's broken, it's not going to
know how to fix it."
Oh, so now you're the "clock repairman"??? and you know how to "fix"
this broken mess.
When you don't know how or why LHO was a patsy,
Oh, so you know how and why LHO was made the patsy?..... Well don't
keep us waiting. We've been waiting to hear from someone who was
involved in the conspiracy to enlighen us.
it's like not
> even being involved in the case, as you could never know how to fix
> what an assassination did.
Huh???.... What do you mean, "I" couldn't ever know how to fix what
an assassination did?? Do you mean this case is unsolvable? If
that's your intent...I'd say that you're FOS. This case is easily
solvable, the first step is the removal of your head from your ass.
curtjester1
dead. To go to the extent to have someone in intelligence and tied in
with folks that were powerful enough for him to be accepted as an FBI
informant, he would have to be pretty ripe for picking's since he
already was used for deceptional purposes like being pro-Castro, etc.
etc, and wearing many faces. No one would go to those lengths if it
were just a few folk, and since we know that everything that Oswald
touched, shook, whether it was in Dallas, N.O., M.C. to the far
reaches of pockets in the CIA and in the FBI, to mobsters to right
wing money players; I would assume that his using and elimination
would have the highest stakes possible surrounding him. The Why would
be how the conspirators needed JFK gone. Money, power, and control
are always the answer. The How is the interesting. That involves the
planning, the subtlties of implenting things and getting things done,
in and surrounding the planning of the assassination, and the cover
up, which would include the cover up of the patsy's death. Of course
there are more than just one patsy. Am I getting too deep for you,
Walter?
CJ
> it's like not
>
> > even being involved in the case, as you could never know how to fix
> > what an assassination did.
>
> Huh???.... What do you mean, "I" couldn't ever know how to fix what
> an assassination did?? Do you mean this case is unsolvable? If
> that's your intent...I'd say that you're FOS. This case is easily
> solvable, the first step is the removal of your head from your ass.
>
I would but we are watching you with a fabricated weapon that points
to Oswald's guilt when we know it's part of the plan and cover-up is
UP YER's!!
CJ
Walt
An ex-General in control of a vicious right wing fanatical
organization wouldn't have much trouble getting the job done.
> in and surrounding the planning of the assassination, and the cover
> up, which would include the cover up of the patsy's death.
Since many members of the police department were members of the JBS
they would have been in position to frame the patsy.
Of course
> there are more than just one patsy. Am I getting too deep for you,
> Walter?
>
> CJ
>
> > it's like not
>
> > > even being involved in the case, as you could never know how to fix
> > > what an assassination did.
>
> > Huh???.... What do you mean, "I" couldn't ever know how to fix what
> > an assassination did?? Do you mean this case is unsolvable? If
> > that's your intent...I'd say that you're FOS. This case is easily
> > solvable, the first step is the removal of your head from your ass.
>
> I would but we are watching you with a fabricated weapon that points
> to Oswald's guilt when we know it's part of the plan and cover-up is
> UP YER's!!
>
> CJ
>
>
>
> > > CJ> You obviously don't believe he was,> unless you want to take a side when CT's aren't looking.
>
> > > > > CJ> > read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Walt
CJ you're unbelievable STUPID..... The Mannlicher Carcano found in the
TSBD was NOT even fired that day....So how could that point to
Oswald's guilt..ya dumbass!
>
> CJ
>
>
>
> > > CJ> You obviously don't believe he was,> unless you want to take a side when CT's aren't looking.
>
> > > > > CJ> > read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
curtjester1
somehow think it's true and necessary!! And when he's shown it was
fabricated like the Nov. 9 letter and so many things, he won't admit
and make up scenarios to try to support the WC's version of things!!
Hey he could have been a LOOKOUT, ya hind end of a donkey!!
CJ
Walt
Hey Dumbass....Oswald ordered that rifle LOOOOOOOONG before the
conspirators started drawing up the plot to murder JFK. When they
started plotting they started casting about for a dupe to blame it
on...and the settled on Oswald as the perfect patsy, because of his
"defection" he appeared to be a turn-coat traitor to them. Since they
knew that he'd participated in the ruse at Walker's house in April,
they knew he had ordered that rifle, and could be talked into pulling
a similiar stunt with JFK.
Do you honestly believe that the conspirators ( Rogue CIA men, and
Hoover's Extra Special, Special Agents) would have been so stupid that
they would have planted a mauser when they knew that Oswald had
ordered that Mannlicher Carcano???
curtjester1
about what Oswald could be instead of guilty by other means (many if
anyone thinks about it), he goes off into ANOTHER scenario!!!
> Hey Dumbass....Oswald ordered that rifle LOOOOOOOONG before the
> conspirators started drawing up the plot to murder JFK. When they
> started plotting they started casting about for a dupe to blame it
> on...and the settled on Oswald as the perfect patsy, because of his
> "defection" he appeared to be a turn-coat traitor to them. Since they
> knew that he'd participated in the ruse at Walker's house in April,
> they knew he had ordered that rifle, and could be talked into pulling
> a similiar stunt with JFK.
>
Hey, if he was knowing that he was part of a ruse at Walker's of which
a weapon ordered couldn' have been the weapon anyway with a different
caliber of bullet and type, then he could have been at the JFK arena
acting that part to....and STILL be guilty of at least knowing that
there was something going on. And why have to have a 'legit' rifle
come through before one can start planning an assassination event?
Imagine waiting to kill a Prez, and stating oh NOW we can do it, our
wannebee patsy has just ordered a rifle!!??? Walt, can't get in any
more deep and be a more cause for derision than this.
> Do you honestly believe that the conspirators ( Rogue CIA men, and
> Hoover's Extra Special, Special Agents) would have been so stupid that
> they would have planted a mauser when they knew that Oswald had
> ordered that Mannlicher Carcano???
>
Who says it was or had to be planted AT THAT TIME? I guess Walt
doesn't go much for that squealer Ellsworth who said they brought up a
rifle thrown behind a door and brought it up to the sixth floor,
much.
Wasn't it Hoover that said the FBI had nothing on Oswald when he had
received a letter on the 19th of November that was a fabricated letter
implicating Oswald and sent to Washington??!! Wasn't it Hoover that
had over half the evidence sent to him on 11/22/63 turn out to be
about 50% off when returned to DPD 3 days later??!! (and held from
the public to boot).
And you want to believe the rifle sent theory to Oswald's mailbox when
there are no bank stamps or proper paperwork from both ends??!!
You better stick to Brennan stuff, as that's all your capable of
because you're sure not good for anything else it appears.
CJ
Walt
Oswald knew "something was going on" and he was an active participant
in it.
Only what he "ASSUMED" was going on was NOT what he had agreed upon.
LHO thought that he was participating in another ruse similar to the
one he had been involved in at walker's in April of 63. He ASSUMED
that the staged stunt would make him appear to have fired a shot at
JFK, and then fled to Cuba to avoid prosecution in the US. He thought
that Castro would accept him as a brother revolutionary and then he
could pick up information in Cuba and send that information back to US
intelligence. ( perhaps the FBI) That's why it was his rifle that was
planted ( it wouldn't have made sense to plant a mauser that had no
connection to Oswald)
What Oswald didn't know was that he was being set up....The
conspirators were plotting to kill JFK and Oswald would be a willing
participant because they were tricking him into being the patsy. As
late as Sunday morning (just ten minutes before he was murdered ) Lee
was still clinging to the original plan, and he thought that he was
going to be "sprung" and allowed to "escape" to Cuba...
And why have to have a 'legit' rifle
> come through before one can start planning an assassination event?
> Imagine waiting to kill a Prez, and stating oh NOW we can do it, our
> wannebee patsy has just ordered a rifle!!??? Walt, can't get in any
> more deep and be a more cause for derision than this.
>
> > Do you honestly believe that the conspirators ( Rogue CIA men, and
> > Hoover's Extra Special, Special Agents) would have been so stupid that
> > they would have planted a mauser when they knew that Oswald had
> > ordered that Mannlicher Carcano???
>
> Who says it was or had to be planted AT THAT TIME? I guess Walt
> doesn't go much for that squealer Ellsworth who said they brought up a
> rifle thrown behind a door and brought it up to the sixth floor,
> much.
>
> Wasn't it Hoover that said the FBI ...
curtjester1
made up paperwork for a Mauser through Kleins??!!
> What Oswald didn't know was that he was being set up....The
> conspirators were plotting to kill JFK and Oswald would be a willing
> participant because they were tricking him into being the patsy. As
> late as Sunday morning (just ten minutes before he was murdered ) Lee
> was still clinging to the original plan, and he thought that he was
> going to be "sprung" and allowed to "escape" to Cuba...
>
Hey, they could have just said to play along so we can get out of
Dodge. Go to a theater and we'll pick you up there and we'll go to
Redbird..and get you out.....
See how easy it is to make stuff up??!!
> And why have to have a 'legit' rifle> come through before one can start planning an assassination event?
I'll answer since Walt won't. I doesn't matter.
CJ
Walt
See a shrink.... Your brain is deteriorating fast. What you wrote
above doesn't even make sense.
Here's what your proposing....He didn't order a rifle but "they" made
up paperwork, and money orders, and envelopes with his handwritng on
them. and postoffice cancellation stamps....... showing that he'd
bought a mauser and then planted a Mannlicher Carcano.... My
god!!...What a NUT!!
>
> > What Oswald didn't know was that he was being set up....The
> > conspirators were plotting to kill JFK and Oswald would be a willing
> > participant because they were tricking him into being the patsy. As
> > late as Sunday morning (just ten minutes before he was murdered ) Lee
> > was still clinging to the original plan, and he thought that he was
> > going to be "sprung" and allowed to "escape" to Cuba...
>
> Hey, they could have just said to play along so we can get out of
> Dodge. Go to a theater and we'll pick you up there and we'll go to
> Redbird..and get you out.....
That scenario don't fit with Oswald's actions....
>
> See how easy it is to make stuff up??!!
>
> > And why have to have a 'legit' rifle come through before one can start planning an assassination event?
You stupid bastard!..... The conspirators used what Oswald had
prepared for them....The rifle, that he ordered when he and De M were
planning the Walker ruse,the BY Photo, etc; After Oswald spilled
the beans about the Cuban exile training camps at Mandeville, La to
RFK, and Bobby ordered JE Hoover to send some of his agents along
with the ATF agents on the raid on those camps Hoover was livid, and
THAT's when they started plotting to murder JFK and get even with
RFK's little snitch Oswald for squealing on them.
>
> I'll answer since Walt won't. I doesn't matter.
>
> CJ
>
>
>
> > > Imagine waiting to kill a Prez, and stating oh NOW we can do it, our
> > > wannebee patsy has just ordered a rifle!!??? Walt, can't get in any
> > > more deep and be a more cause for derision than this.
>
> > > > Do you honestly believe that the conspirators ( Rogue CIA men, and
> > > > Hoover's Extra Special, Special Agents) would have been so stupid that
> > > > they would have planted a mauser when they knew that Oswald had
> > > > ordered that Mannlicher Carcano???
>
> > > Who says it was or had to be planted AT THAT TIME? I guess Walt
> > > doesn't go much for that squealer Ellsworth who said they brought up a
> > > rifle thrown behind a door and brought it up to the sixth floor,
> > > much.
>
> > > Wasn't it Hoover that said the FBI ...
>
> > > read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
curtjester1
was there bouncing from seat to seat. What might he have been looking
for?
As it was the real Oswald setting up this patsy got released
(detainment in balcony to the alley below) from the Theater (from
leading them there), and went to the restaurant by the roominghouse
where he was seen by someone approaching his vehicle. That vehicle
belonged to or was associated to Tippit's good friend, via license
plate written down and checked. Oswald then was directed to an
airstrip on the outskirts of Oakcliff and was picked up at 3:30 by a
CIA plane that was radioed in a nearby state. See Robert Vinson on
the picking up of Oswald.
>
> > See how easy it is to make stuff up??!!
>
> > > And why have to have a 'legit' rifle come through before one can start planning an assassination event?
>
> You stupid bastard!..... The conspirators used what Oswald had
> prepared for them....The rifle, that he ordered when he and De M were
Why guess, "that Oswald ordered from him"? You have no idea. If you
checked the papertrail and actions it was ALL fabricated. Nothing
could be proved and didn't fit.
> planning the Walker ruse,the BY Photo, etc; After Oswald spilled
> the beans about the Cuban exile training camps at Mandeville, La to
> RFK, and Bobby ordered JE Hoover to send some of his agents along
> with the ATF agents on the raid on those camps Hoover was livid, and
> THAT's when they started plotting to murder JFK and get even with
> RFK's little snitch Oswald for squealing on them.
>
>
LOL. That was the Oswald that was setting up. He was a right-
winger. They picked a patsy out of the CIA Oswald team because it was
easy with what they were both doing. The double crossed Oswald just
thought he was doing the right spy thing by giving them some leverage
to see what happened when the did the Cuba Samba, and actually could
have used an Oswald to go to Cuba but it would be to kill Castro.
That's why Oswald was working so feverishly to get that cancer
cocktail going with N.O. folks there. JFK was giving them so much
trouble on gettng to Castro, that they turned on him instead, so it
could have been quite late in the game if and when they were deciding
on Oswald's fate and role(s).
When Oswald was dead and they came up with a rifle for March (too bad
they couldn't get there act straight on it)....DeM knew the score and
knew he would have to 'corroborate' a rifle, just like Ruth Paine had
to come up with stuff to implicate Oswald like a letter, rings,
wallets, M.C. stuff....Intelligence people know if they don't
cooperate their statuses can change quickly. Marina knew that as
well.
CJ
Walt
Hey Jester.....You've read too many funny books, and believe them all.
curtjester1
person named Oswald ordered a rifle. That's why you never get
anywhere. If you knew that a rifle wasn't ordered, and was made out
to be ordered, then you can START to understand this case. Until
then, you will be Walt The Story Teller and your posts will always
have a funny book flair to them.
CJ
Walt
Ha,ha,ha,ha.hee,hee,hee..... ROTFLMAO!.......
The Jester is the FOOL... who has no reasoning ability.
>
> CJ
>
>
>
> > > > > I'll answer
curtjester1
pals J.E. Hoover, LBJ, and Allen Dulles. Then after he swallows their
ruses, he starts 'reasoning', which end up dead ends and worthless
scenarios. Is there anyone that mirrors Walt in his belief's and
thinking. NO. Not even Ben Holmes supports him, directly most of the
time.
CJ
Walt
The Jester (aka The Fool) Thinks that everybody else has to rely on
others for solutions to problems, just as he does.
The Fool can't solve a problem for himself, he's compelled to rely on
the ideas of others, and it appears that he loves bizarre
solutions.......Like multiple Oswald's running around and creating
havoc for witness identification after the assassination.
Hey Fool, Is it true that you believe that the government groomed two
Oswald's from 1939 to 1963.?
curtjester1
shooting of JFK, where do you think he would be?
> Hey Fool, Is it true that you believe that the government groomed two
> Oswald's from 1939 to 1963.?
>
>
Sure, the gov't is EVERYWHERE (Wolfman Jack howllllllll). Do you
think CIA people live in vacuums or don't have associations? David
Atlee Phillips was in the Dallas Petroleum Club and many of those folk
even Zapruder had CIA 'affiliations'. Mr. Byrd was the founder of CAP
where they recruited kids out of 9th grade or so to be Cadets and
trained by people like Capt. David Ferrie. Oswald's mom was known to
be in the circle of Mob folk, and the niece was a steady CIAer, and
even visited Oswald at Atsugi (oh yeah a spy base). You go to a high
school or college, they have even programs for military-orientated
folk. David Atlee Phillips said he could do more with the power of
his pen than a lot armed with warfare weapons. In fact, I believe
Mrs. Oswald knew some people who knew somebody else to try to get her
son in the military when he was underage if I'm not mistaken. Oh to
your question. Yes, why not?
CJ
Walt
Walt asked,...." Hey Fool, Is it true that you believe that the
government groomed two Oswald's from 1939 to 1963.?"
The Jester answered...."Yes, why not?"
Thank you Fool..... Henceforth, anybody who reads your posts will know
that you're a nut.
curtjester1
Well, they ALREADY know you are, so your opinion doesn't count or hold
weight. BTW, 1939 is a little early.
CJ
Lept Frog
Walt says...
>
>
>Walt asked,...." Hey Fool, Is it true that you believe that the
>government groomed two Oswald's from 1939 to 1963.?"
>
>The Jester answered...."Yes, why not?"
>
>Thank you Fool..... Henceforth, anybody who reads your posts will know
>that you're a nut.
replies to usenet. He lives near Corning New York where he claims to be a
devout Jehovah's Witness. He also claims to be a Vietnam veteran. Not to be
outdone, he claims that he was the one who actually wrote the book, 'Forrest
Gump,' and that he is going to go public with that information in the near
future.
Also, he believes that the 9:11 incident was an "inside job." And, let's see,
what else? Oh yes, he claims that Satan is a real person and that he and his
demon pals have control over the whole earth, while Jesus Christ returned to
earth invisibly in 1914. While still down here, in 1918, Jesus made a personal
inspection of all the world's religions and discovered that he could only
approve of one, while all the others were under Satan's control. The religion
that Jesus personally approved was lead by self-made preacher, Charles Taze
Russell, who led a group he called the International Bible Students Association.
Russell believed that Satan made the pyramids in Giza and that the year Jesus
Christ was to return to earth could be calculated by measuring the length of the
tunnels in inches in the largest Egyptian pyramid. Decades after his death, the
new IBSA leader renamed the cult, Jehovah's Witnesses.
CJ also believes that the Illuminati are controlling all the governments in the
world. Of course the Illuminati are under Satan's control.
curtjester1
it's gov't anti-CT ghost? Keep those black boxes hidden and don't do
anymore super thermite tests on those beams. Kinda makes one feel
important when one makes up a nic just for me. I must be dangerous
and with some clout, huh?
CJ
On Dec 18, 10:32 am, Lept Frog <Lept_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> In article <eae8acda-a561-478b-b826-934e1d6c9...@i32g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,