Ya Wanna Fight?
Walt
I'm not sure I want to attempt to go into a battle of wits with
someone only half prepared, but I believe that the Walker shooting
incident is a key component of the framing of Oswald, and therefore
I'd love to have an intelligent debate about the evidence. I would
prefer debating someone who can think logically, and who will present
well thought out counter points, like Gil, or Ben. Rob, you seem to
be hell bent on trying to divorce Oswald from any connection with the
Walker shooting and you're not open to any evidence to the contrary,
but If you can stay focused on the subject and not drift away into
your fruedian fantasies maybe we can learn some FACTS about the Walker
shooting.
YoHarvey
Gil or Ben? roflmao, roflmao, roflmao, roflmao. You said "think
logically". I guess you too endorse the Connallys killing JFK. That
sound logical to you??? roflmao, roflmao.
robcap...@netscape.com
Walt is brain dead, there ARE NO FACTS that tie LHO to the Walker
shooting. I say this NOT because I care if LHO is innocent (This is a
typical LNer tactic by the way, they act like you like the guy, or
were related to the guy so your whole purpose for doing this is to
"free LHO", instead of tellling you the truth -- i.e. THERE IS NO
CREDIBLE EVIDENCE SHOWING LHO SHOT ANYONE ON 11/22/63.), but instead
that is what the evidence shows.
Start the debate with your "proof" of why LHO was guilty. Let's see
what you got.
YoHarvey
wrote:
Hey genius. There are NO facts that tie LHO to the Walker shooting?
Is that what you're telling this NG?
Forgetting for the moment he left Marina a note telling her what to do
in the event he got caught......how would Oswald have known about the
shooting on the very night Walker was shot UNLESS he was the one doing
the shooting?
Walt
You point is excellent....However you have one vital FACT wrong....
Walker was NOT shot.
- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Walt
wrote:
No Rob, I think I'll start with the FACT that walker was lying about
being "wounded" during the shooting.
Let's start with getting the house oriented on a map.... Just google
Walkers address (4011 Turtle Creek Blvd.) in Map quest and learn that
Walker's house ( he rented it) faced east toward Turtle Creek which
was across Turtle Creek Blvd from his house. The window that the shot
hit was on the north side of the house at the rear. ( N /W corner of
the house. ) The alley from where the shot was fired ran E / W along
the north side of Walker's lot, about 85 feet from the north side of
the house. None of the photos of the back of Walker's house are taken
from the snipers position. The photo of the 57 Chevy parked behind
Walkers house was taken from an alley that ran N/S behind the
house.
Summary... Walker's house faced east.. The room he was in at the time
of the shooting was at the N/W corner. The bullet passed through a
window that faced north toward the Morman church that was across the
alley, and church parking lot, from the north side of Walker's
house. Do you wish to dispute any of the information so far?
robcap...@netscape.com
Walt agrees with YoHarvey NOW!!!! Could he sink any lower???? He even
says YoHarvey makes an "excellent point" too!!!!
Hey Walt/YoHarvey why don't you PROVE this alleged note refers to LHO
shooting at Walker for us.
robcap...@netscape.com
Typical Walt here. He invites me to discuss the issue of whether LHO
shot at Walker, I then ask for his proof that he did like he and the
other LNers claim, and he SWITCHES IT TO A TOPIC I AM NOT INTERESTED
IN RIGHT NOW!!! IF I was I would have joined the thread Gil started.
What a coward Walt is.
> Let's start with getting the house oriented on a map.... Just google
> Walkers address (4011 Turtle Creek Blvd.) in Map quest and learn that
> Walker's house ( he rented it) faced east toward Turtle Creek which
> was across Turtle Creek Blvd from his house. The window that the shot
> hit was on the north side of the house at the rear. ( N /W corner of
> the house. ) The alley from where the shot was fired ran E / W along
> the north side of Walker's lot, about 85 feet from the north side of
> the house. None of the photos of the back of Walker's house are taken
> from the snipers position. The photo of the 57 Chevy parked behind
> Walkers house was taken from an alley that ran N/S behind the
> house.
Where's your proof LHO fired at Walker? That is what I'm interested
in as you keep claiming he did.
> Summary... Walker's house faced east.. The room he was in at the time
> of the shooting was at the N/W corner. The bullet passed through a
> window that faced north toward the Morman church that was across the
> alley, and church parking lot, from the north side of Walker's
> house. Do you wish to dispute any of the information so far?
All I want is the proof you must think you have because you keep
claiming LHO fired at Walker. Let's just deal with the evidence that
makes you think LHO fired a shot at Walker.
Walt
I'll take it that you don't want to dispute the way Walker's house was
oriented. Ok, Then moving right along.... we'll use Walker's
statement that he gave the Warren Commission about the trajectory of
the bullet.
Mr. Liebeler....It is my understanding that on the evening of April
10, 1963, some person fired a shot at you while you were in your home
on Turtle Creek Boulevard; is that correct?
General WALKER. That is correct.
Mr. Liebeler. ...Would you tell us the circumstances surrounding that
event, as you can now recall them?
General WALKER.... I was sitting behind my desk. It was right at 9
o'clock, and most of the lights were on in the house and the shades
were up. I was sitting down behind a desk facing out from a corner,
with my head over a pencil and paper working on my income tax when I
heard a blast and a crack right over my head.
Walker heard a "blast" and "crack" ....RIGHT OVER HIS HEAD.
Mr. Liebeler...What did you do then?
General WALKER...... I thought--we had been fooling with the screens
on the house and I thought that possibly somebody had thrown a
firecracker, that it exploded right over my head through the window
right behind me.
Through the window right (Immediately) BEHIND BEHIND me....
Since there is a church back there, often there are children playing
back there.
The Curch is the Morman Church that was located to the north SIDE of
Walkers house
Then I looked around and saw that the screen was not out, but was in
the window,
Walker twisted his head to the rear and looked toward the window that
was BEHIND him and noticed the screen was in place.
and this couldn't possibly happen, so I got up and walked around the
desk and looked back where I was sitting and I saw a hole in the wall
which would have been to my left while I was sitting to my right as I
looked back,
This statement only makes sense if the word "window" is inserted in
place of the word "wall"
I got up and walked around the desk and looked back where I was
sitting and I saw a hole in the (window) which would have been to my
left while I was sitting......
and the desk was catercornered in the corner up against this wall.
The wall that Walker is referring to has to be a N/S wall and since
his back was toward the NW corner, and he was facing toward the center
of the room, the window had to be on his LEFT side.
At this point I'd like someone to explain how Walker could have been
hit on his right arm if the bullet passed to the LEFT of him????
I noticed there was a hole in the wall, so I went upstairs and got a
pistol and came back down and went out the back door, taking a look to
see what might have happened.
Mr. Liebeler....Did you find anything outside that you 'could relate
to this attack on you?
General WALKER.... No, sir; I couldn't. As I crossed a window coming
downstairs in front, I saw a car at the bottom of the church alley
just making a turn onto Turtle Creek. The car was unidentifiable. I
could see the two back lights, and you have to look through trees
there, and I could see it moving out. This car would have been about
at the right time for anybody that was making a getaway.
Mr. Liebeler....Now as I understand it, there is an alley that runs
directly at the rear of your house; is that correct?
General WALKER. yes, sir.
Mr. Liebeler..Does that alley run directly into Turtle Creek
Boulevard, or does it join with another alley?
General WALKER.... No, sir; it joins with another alley, and it joins
with the street called Avondale.
tims...@gmail.com
Hi Walt,
Say, how come when you were debating Mark on the other thread entitled
*Strange question* you just wrote:
QUOTE ON:
I believe the police report indicates that Walker didn't know what had
hit his arm....as I recall he told the cops that "flying debris" stuck
him on the right arm.
QUOTE OFF
Yet now you've just said the following to robcap:
QUOTE ON:
No Rob, I think I'll start with the FACT that walker was lying about
being "wounded" during the shooting.
QUOTE OFF
You appear to be chopping and changing your argument as you go along,
Walt.
Question for you. Have you ever actually seen the police report you
are referring to? Do you know where to find it in the 26 volumes?
Surely you must, Walt, when you claim that your deductions about the
Walker shooting are better than both the DPD officers who examined the
crime scene at the time and General Walker himself.
Walt?
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
robcap...@netscape.com
In His Own Words" so I am familiar with all of these stuff. Let's get
to the "evidence" you claim shows LHO to be the man that fired the
shot at Walker. Okay? Why are you stalling?
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Walt
wrote:
> Top Post: I just did a post a week or so ago called "General Walker --
> In His Own Words" so I am familiar with all of these stuff. Let's get
> to the "evidence" you claim shows LHO to be the man that fired the
> shot at Walker. Okay? Why are you stalling?
I'm not stalling Rob....I'm merely establishing FACTS that show that
Walker was a liar. Do you now concede that Walker was a liar?? If
you're ready to admit that, then We can jump over a lot of other stuff
that shows that his word doesn't have the value of a burnt match.
What do you want to do concede that Walker was a liar, or do I have to
provide you with further evidence.??
aeffects
> TOP POST
>
> Hi Walt,
>
> Say, how come when you were debating Mark on the other thread entitled
> *Strange question* you just wrote:
>
<snip this idiots drivel trying to steal a thread, moron!>
YoHarvey
You point is excellent....However you have one vital FACT wrong....
Walker was NOT shot.
Are you saying Walker was not injured in the attempted assassination?
YoHarvey
Hey Walt/YoHarvey why don't you PROVE this alleged note refers to LHO
shooting at Walker for us.
Now, it's an alleged note roflmao. Robcap, you cannot possibly be
this ignorant in real life. If you are this ignorant in real life, it
only amplifies what historians have oft noted about CT's. They're
dumber than dirt.
Walt
QUOTE OFF
QUOTE ON:
QUOTE OFF
Psssst Timmy.... If you had a little better brain you would probavly
realize that the two statements are not contradictory.... I'm merely
repeating the testimony and the reports which show that it's all a lot
of BS. walker was a liar and anybody who believes his BS has a lower
IQ than the common garden slug.
> > house. Do you wish to dispute any of the information so far?- Hide quoted text -
Walt
Why would you ask such a stupid question.... I've stated that Walker
was NOT injured many many times,
tims...@gmail.com
Hi Walt,
So, we take that as a no, do we? You don't know where the DPD report
stating that Walker was wounded and didn't seek medical treatment is
in the 26 volumes?
You don't seem to have turned up a single document since you fell out
with Tom *tomnln* Rossley, Walt, LOL!
Your opinion now trumps evidence/testimony, does it Walt? I don't
think so.
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
tims...@gmail.com
Hey Wally, you seem a bit confused here. Why would you state that
Walker was NOT injured *many many times* [sic] when there is all sorts
of evidence to the contrary.
Let me see now, so far we have the following cites, detailing the
fact that Walker WAS injured:
1) DPD report of Tucker & Norvell of 10 April, 1963, the date of the
incident.
2) General Walker's WC testimony of 23 July, 1964.
3) 1976 TV interview of General Walker, describing what happened, and
transcript of same.
4) 1977 account by Lattimer of what Walker told him.
And you, Walt? What you got that says Walker wasn't injured when
Oswald shot at him.
1) Walt's opinion.
2) Gilly supporting Walt.
Is that the best you got, Wally? Not good enough by a long shot. Even
a garden slug could do better than that, Wally. Produce one single
FACT, not your stupid opinion, pal, LOL!
Walt
> On Dec 31, 11:10 am, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 30 Dec, 17:33, YoHarvey <bailey...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 30, 6:06 pm, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 30, 2:26 pm, timst...@gmail.com wrote:> TOP POST
>
> > > > > Hi Walt,
>
> > > > > Say, how come when you were debating Mark on the other thread entitled
> > > > > *Strange question* you just wrote:
>
> > > > sitdown troll, the men are busy discussing the case...
>
> > > > <snip this idiots drivel trying to steal a thread, moron!>
>
> > > You point is excellent....However you have one vital FACT wrong....
> > > Walker was NOT shot.
>
> > > Are you saying Walker was not injured in the attempted assassination?
>
> > Why would you ask such a stupid question.... I've stated that Walker
> > was NOT injured many many times,
>
> Hey Wally, you seem a bit confused here. Why would you state that
> Walker was NOT injured *many many times* [sic] when there is all sorts
> of evidence to the contrary.
Pssst Mr Garden Slug.... I have said many many times that walker was
not injured.
That means I have repeated my statement numerous times.
>
> Let me see now, so far we have the following cites, detailing the
> fact that Walker WAS injured:
>
> 1) DPD report of Tucker & Norvell of 10 April, 1963, the date of the
> incident.
>
> 2) General Walker's WC testimony of 23 July, 1964.
>
> 3) 1976 TV interview of General Walker, describing what happened, and
> transcript of same.
>
> 4) 1977 account by Lattimer of what Walker told him.
>
> And you, Walt? What you got that says Walker wasn't injured when
> Oswald shot at him.
>
> 1) Walt's opinion.
>
> 2) Gilly supporting Walt.
>
> Is that the best you got, Wally? Not good enough by a long shot. Even
> a garden slug could do better than that, Wally. Produce one single
> FACT, not your stupid opinion, pal, LOL!
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*- Hide quoted text -
tims...@gmail.com
That means you simply ignore the historical record and rely on your
own silly deductions, years later, doesn't it Walt? Did you attend the
crime scene at the time, Walt? I didn't think so. Officers Tucker and
Norvell did. They reported Walker was wounded.
You seem to believe you are able to apply some higher reasoning to
matters and then you keep coming up with absurd conclusions, LOL!
Walt
Pssst....Timmy.... You really nrrf to learn to read. I've said over
and over that Walker was not injured by any flying debris from the
shot..... I NEVER said that he wasn't scratched when he went through
the rose bushes outside looking for any evidence ( like a spent shell)
after the shooting.
Perhaps you should do just a modicum of research and try to orient the
desk in the room and learn that the bullet would have passed to
Walker's LEFT from the REAR. How would flying debris from Walker's
LEFT REAR hit his RIGHT forearm???
>
> You seem to believe you are able to apply some higher reasoning to
> matters and then you keep coming up with absurd conclusions, LOL!
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
robcap...@netscape.com
> On 30 Dec, 16:29, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Top Post: I just did a post a week or so ago called "General Walker --
> > In His Own Words" so I am familiar with all of these stuff. Let's get
> > to the "evidence" you claim shows LHO to be the man that fired the
> > shot at Walker. Okay? Why are you stalling?
>
> I'm not stalling Rob....I'm merely establishing FACTS that show that
> Walker was a liar. Do you now concede that Walker was a liar?? If
> you're ready to admit that, then We can jump over a lot of other stuff
> that shows that his word doesn't have the value of a burnt match.
> What do you want to do concede that Walker was a liar, or do I have to
> provide you with further evidence.??
I have said before Walker was caught in lies, but you have to prove
what you are claiming, and this has NOTHING to do with Walker's
words. YOU are claiming LHO fired at Walker on 4/10/63, thus you NEED
to prove this to be true. Where is the evidence for this claim?
Why are you trying to sidetrack the issue? Just use a bullet point
fashion for the "evidence" you believe shows LHO fired at Walker. It
is that simple so why are you trying to make this complicated?
justm...@gmail.com
wrote:
Did Walt make a cardboard replica of Walkers house too? ROFLMAO
Crapper? I bet you can't make a single post without using the words
THERE IS NO PROOF in it. You are the only CT alive that doesn't
believe a word of anything stated by LN's or CT's. You must live in
your own little world banging your head against walls. It's knocked
more then just a few screws loose. You are a complete idiot...and
reading your posts is all the PROOF we need.
muc...@gmail.com
wrote:
You kind of have a point, inasmuch as Walt's half-assed scenario
doesn't require Oswald's presence (just his rifle's) at the scene. If
something went wrong, and Oswald didn't get to Cuba, etc., the rifle
could be discarded, and no one would ever be able to connect him with
the shooting.
Walt
wrote:
> On Dec 30, 2:48 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > On 30 Dec, 16:29, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Top Post: I just did a post a week or so ago called "General Walker --
> > > In His Own Words" so I am familiar with all of these stuff. Let's get
> > > to the "evidence" you claim shows LHO to be the man that fired the
> > > shot at Walker. Okay? Why are you stalling?
>
> > I'm not stalling Rob....I'm merely establishing FACTS that show that
> > Walker was a liar. Do you now concede that Walker was a liar?? If
> > you're ready to admit that, then We can jump over a lot of other stuff
> > that shows that his word doesn't have the value of a burnt match.
> > What do you want to do concede that Walker was a liar, or do I have to
> > provide you with further evidence.??
>
> I have said before Walker was caught in lies,
I have said before Walker was caught in lies,
Rob, if you know that Walker was a unabashed liar....why do you
readily accept his word that the German reporter called him??
Especially when that doesn't even make logical sense. It's much more
believable that Walker called the reporter, not vise versa. Indeed
why would you not examine everything Walker said with a
microscope??
Walt
I disagree..... Oswald was required at the scene of the Walker
shooting.... They even thought that he might be captured and taken to
jail. ( read the note he left for Marina) In that event his
credentails as a Castro lovin commie would have been bostered even
more by the publicity it would have generated. His agency, would have
seen that he was allowed out of jail on bail, and then Oswald could
have fled to Cuba with a very believable dossier to hand to Castro's
agents.
muc...@gmail.com
That's one Hell of a plan, Walt, but he obviously wasn't captured at
the scene. What went wrong?
robcap...@netscape.com
> On 31 Dec, 09:59, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 30, 2:48 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > > On 30 Dec, 16:29, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > Top Post: I just did a post a week or so ago called "General Walker --
> > > > In His Own Words" so I am familiar with all of these stuff. Let's get
> > > > to the "evidence" you claim shows LHO to be the man that fired the
> > > > shot at Walker. Okay? Why are you stalling?
>
> > > I'm not stalling Rob....I'm merely establishing FACTS that show that
> > > Walker was a liar. Do you now concede that Walker was a liar?? If
> > > you're ready to admit that, then We can jump over a lot of other stuff
> > > that shows that his word doesn't have the value of a burnt match.
> > > What do you want to do concede that Walker was a liar, or do I have to
> > > provide you with further evidence.??
>
> > I have said before Walker was caught in lies,
>
> I have said before Walker was caught in lies,
>
> Rob, if you know that Walker was a unabashed liar....why do you
> readily accept his word that the German reporter called him??
Because there would have been a record of his call to Germany, but
there is NONE! It is totally believable he would "frame" LHO with his
background, but he DIDN'T! I am NOT basing LHO's guilt or innocence
on Walker's point of view like you are though, there is NO evidence
that is firm and credible that would show LHO was the shooter. NONE.
I have asked you to list it numerous times and all you do is dance
around and avoid the issue. IT TOOK YOHARVEY TO LIST IT FOR ME! Are
you letting YoHarvey speak for you now Walt?
> Especially when that doesn't even make logical sense. It's much more
> believable that Walker called the reporter, not vise versa.
Then there should be a record of this call. Where is the proof he
called the editor/reporter Walt? I have only asked you like 20 times
already. Logic ONLY replaces proof when it is something that is
abstract and NOT totally provable, but a phone call is provable, even
in 1963!
> Indeed
> why would you not examine everything Walker said with a
> microscope??
I think I have said the same thing to you before, and my point has
been in the final analysis Walker's point of view is NOT the important
thing, the evidence is. You have FAILED once again to provide any to
prove your claim that LHO fired at Walker. This is a dead issue until
you do.
tomnln
LIST OF WALLY’s LIES
Just as his Unsubstantiated Lyin
Bastard Claims below.
(Notice Wally's been RUNNIN from his own words
for Months)
Walt never proved that the rifle in CE-133A had
"Dual Sling Mounts".
Walt never proved that LHO worked for
RFK.
Walt never proved that General Walker called Germany.
Walt never proved
Mike Paine gave the DPD a copy of the CE-133A photo
on
11/22/63.
Walt never proved the wallet was found "INSIDE" the owner's
car
(allegedly LHO's).
Walt never proved Michael
Paine had same model rifle as LHO (Carcano
40").
Walt never proved General Walker believed LHO shot at him in
4/63.
Walt never proved that Capt. O A Jones said LHO shot AT General
Walker
in 4/63.
Walt never proved LHO received a
40" Carcano rifle.
Walt never proved that the bill of lading proved a
40" Carcano was
ordered by LHO.
Walt never proved
his claim that LHO shot at General Walker in 4/63.
Walt never proved
that LHO ordered a 40" Carcano rifle.
Walt never proved his claim that
LHO altered his OWN chin in CE-133A.
Walt never proved his claim that a
6.5mm was fired from a "sabot".
Walt never proved his claim that the
CIA was going to "rescue LHO."
Walt never proved there was a clip
inside the Carcano when it was
found at the
TSBD.
Walt never proved LHO ordered a rifle that was easily traceable
so he
could shoot at Gen. Walker with it.
Walt
never proved Marcello was a "payroll runner" for RFK.
Walt never proved
that Truly held a "roll call" and LHO was the ONLY
one
missing.
Walt never proved the casings found at the TSBD (6.5mm ammo)
came from a
Marine Corps order for the CIA.
Walt
never proved DeMohrenschildt actually owned the 40"
Carcano
allegedly ordered from Klein's.
Walt
never proved that the bullet recovered from Walker shooting was
copper-jacketed.
Walt never proved 133A (deMohrenschildt BY photo) came
from the SAME
negative as CE-133A.
Walt never
proved LHO went to Mexico
City in Sept./Oct. 1963.
Walt never proved his
claim that the DPD showed Weitzman a Mauser on
11/22/63.
Walt never proved that George DeMohrenschildt purchased the
money
order used allegedly for the Carcano rifle
order.
Walt never proved Marina did in fact take CE-133A (backyard
photo),
and it is AUTHENTIC.
Walt never proved
Fritz was just sloppy when timing the arrest report
ELEVEN
minutes BEFORE LHO was arrested.
Walt never proved the weight listed on
the "Bill of lading" was TARE
weight.
Walt never
proved the weight of the 40" Carcano is 7.5LBS when the ad
the WC used says 7.0LBS.
Walt never proved a "signed affadavit with a
notary seal" signed by
the LHO saying he was going to
hijack a plane and make the pilot fly
him to Cuba EVER
existed.
Walt never proved the rifle found on the roof was a DPD
shotgun and
NOT a Mauser as the Mentesana film
shows.
Wally is a WCR SHILL ! !
!
tims...@gmail.com
Looks like Walt is getting ready to throw in the towel. He's now
conceding that Walker was injured on the night of the shooting, but
he's trying to pass it off as Walker scratching himself on some non-
existent rose bushes, LOL!
Walt simply makes stuff up and then states it as fact. There must be a
clinical term for this.
Walt
The Stupid Bastard wrote:....."I have asked you to list it numerous
times and all you do is dance
> around and avoid the issue. IT TOOK YOHARVEY TO LIST IT FOR ME! "
Ha,ha,ha, hee,hee,hee...ROTFLMAO!!..... You're a brainless idiot ,
Rob.......
Here's what Yo yo wrote.......
Forgetting for the moment he left Marina a note telling her what to
do
in the event he got caught......how would Oswald have known about the
shooting on the very night Walker was shot UNLESS he was the one
doing
the shooting?
If I had wrote that same exact reply to you.... You would have
said:..."We have only Marina's word for what Oswald said, and that's
not proof"
Ha,ha,ha,hee,hee,hee..... Watta dumbass!
Are
> you letting YoHarvey speak for you now Walt?
>
> > Especially when that doesn't even make logical sense. It's much more
> > believable that Walker called the reporter, not vise versa.
>
> Then there should be a record of this call. Where is the proof he
> called the editor/reporter Walt? I have only asked you like 20 times
> already. Logic ONLY replaces proof when it is something that is
> abstract and NOT totally provable, but a phone call is provable, even
> in 1963!
>
> > Indeed
> > why would you not examine everything Walker said with a
> > microscope??
>
> I think I have said the same thing to you before, and my point has
> been in the final analysis Walker's point of view is NOT the important
> thing, the evidence is. You have FAILED once again to provide any to
> prove your claim that LHO fired at Walker. This is a dead issue until
> you do.- Hide quoted text -
Sam Brown
<tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4a2cd7ad-3f10-4bd9...@w24g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
Nuts covers it.
tims...@gmail.com
> <timst...@gmail.com> wrote in message
LOL! Sam, that about covers it in my view too! :-)