Answer for Walt - alt.conspiracy.jfk

Message from discussion Answer for Walt

Walt

More options Sep 22 2008, 6:11 pm

Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk

From: Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net>

Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 15:11:00 -0700 (PDT)

Subject: Re: Answer for Walt

  Reply to author
  |
  Forward
  | Print
  | View thread
  | Show original
  | Report this message
  | Find messages by this author
  

On 22 Sep, 16:10, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Sep 22, 9:50 am, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
> wrote:

> > On Sep 21, 5:38 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > On Sep 21, 11:05 am, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:

> > > > On 21 Sep, 12:37, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > On Sep 21, 9:46 am, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:

> > > > > > On 21 Sep, 10:31, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > This isn't very difficult, Curt..... You simply have to READ the bill
> > > > > > > > > > of lading.

> > > > > > > > Walt, I have aleady called you on the carpet to produce that "40.2"
> > > > > > > > rifles were on paperwork and not just surmized.

> > > > > > > > Curt, I'm here "on the carpet" to tell you about using commonsense and
> > > > > > > > logic.

> > > > > > > > As far as I know there is nothing in writing that states the guns that
> > > > > > > > Lifshultz delivered to Kleins were 40 inch long Mannlicher Carcanos
> > > > > > > > model 91 /38 Short Rifles.

> > > > > > > I knew that.

> > > > > > > > Is that clear? ...I'll restate it....... There is nothing in writing
> > > > > > > > that states the length of the rifles

> > > > > > > Yes it is, NOW.

> > > > > > > > HOWEVER..... Commonsense and logic tell us which model Mannlicher
> > > > > > > > Carcano was in the boxes because there is only one Mannlicher Carcano
> > > > > > > > model that weighs about 7 1/2 pounds.... That is the 40 inch long
> > > > > > > > model 91 /38.

> > > > > > > That's yer problem, Walt, yer version of commonsense and logic are
> > > > > > > lost in pounds and not in the facts surrounding those pounds. And you
> > > > > > > won't even address the simplest of those (down below) where I stated
> > > > > > > the month of the order from the magazine, when the order was ALLEGEDLY
> > > > > > > made, and when Klein's decided to advertise 40.2 inchers, don't match
> > > > > > > anything but having a short rifle to be offered for that time period.

> > > > > > > CJ

> > > > > > > > The AVERAGE weight given for the 40 inch long model 91 /38 Mannlicher
> > > > > > > > Carcano short rifle was 7 pounds 9 ounces. Therefore using that
> > > > > > > > average weight, the total weight for 100 rifles would be 756 pounds.
> > > > > > > > ( within 1% of the TARE weight shown on the invoice) Many books
> > > > > > > > give the weight of the model 91 /38 as ....7 1/2 pounds.... so that
> > > > > > > > is probably the weight Lifshultz used in calculating the figure of
> > > > > > > > $39.53 for 750 pounds of frieght.

> > > > > > > > We have gone at> length on this issue tied in with all the other's that would make this
> > > > > > > > > a firm concept and you didn't respond then, and I doubt you will
> > > > > > > > > now. It's amazing you think these rifles are thought of at this
> > > > > > > > > length at this time when Klein's didn't even advertise them until Apr.
> > > > > > > > > 63. Oswald's so-call order was made in February, so he couldn't have
> > > > > > > > > ordered a long rifle just on that alone.

> > > > > > Curt, it's not true that Klein's didn't offer any 40 inch model
> > > > > > 91/38's until April of 1963. The statement that Klein's didn't
> > > > > > advertise them until April of 63 is a lie and you should not believe
> > > > > > it.

> > > > > > I have photocopies that I've taken from many old gun magazines from
> > > > > > 1961 thru 1963. I wish I had a way to show you and everybody the ads
> > > > > > which show that your statement is NOT true. If someone wants to send
> > > > > > me a fax number I'll send them the photocopies so they can be entered
> > > > > > into a website that anybody can link to and see.

> > > > > > Here is a list of the Klein ads that I have

> > > > > > American Rifleman--- Feb 1961, July 1961, Dec.1961, May 1962, Aug
> > > > > > 1962, Dec 1962, Jan 1963, Feb 1963, April 1963, June 1963, July 1963,
> > > > > > Aug 1963, Sept 1963, and Oct. 1963,

> > > > > > Field and Stream---- Nov 1963,

> > > > > > Guns & Ammo--- Nov 1963

> > > > > > Here's a how the Klein ad appeared in the Feb and July 1961 issue of
> > > > > > AR.
> > > > > > There is a picture of a 40 inch long model 91 /'38 Mannlicher Carcano
> > > > > > WITHOUT a scope. The picture shows bottom sling swivels.

> > > > > > The text reads...In bold black letters "Berretta or Terni ----
> > > > > > Itaila "Suprema" Carbine---6.5mm Italian"
> > > > > > The smaller print reads These completely reconditioned guns come to
> > > > > > you like new ---Ready for immediate action! Lightweight carbine is
> > > > > > fast loading, clip fed. bolt action, 6 shot with thumb safety. Stock
> > > > > > and fore end oil finished. Weighs 7 1/2 pounds, 18 inch barrel 41 1/2
> > > > > > " overall. Pay only $2.00 dollars down, balance 89 cents a week for 22
> > > > > > weeks.

> > > > > > Kleins cash price............$18.87

> > > > > > The picture and the text were exactly the same for Feb and July of 61
> > > > > > except Klein's reduced the price in July from $18.87 to $14.99.

> > > > > > Here's how the Klein ad appeared in the May 1962 issue of AR...

> > > > > > The picture shows a 40 inch long model 91/38 MC WITH a scope attached,
> > > > > > and bottom sling swivels ( it's the same picture that appeared in the
> > > > > > Feb 1963 issue of AR)

> > > > > > The text reads:.... In bold black letters... "6.5 italian Carbine"
> > > > > > The smaller texrt reads Only 36' overall weighs only 5 !/2 pounds.
> > > > > > Shows only slight use, lightly oiled, test fired, and head spaced,
> > > > > > ready for shooting. Turned down bolt, thumb safety, 6 shot, clip
> > > > > > fed. Rear sight adjustable for elevation. Fast loading and fast
> > > > > > firing.

> > > > > > C20-T749....... Specially priced at only.......$11.88
> > > > > > C20- T750... Carbine with brand new good quality 4X scope, 3/4 " dia.
> > > > > > mounted as illustrated..... $19.95

> > > > > > That's two examples of the Klein ad PRIOR to February 1963. So your
> > > > > > statement that Klein's never offered the 40 inch Model 91 /38 before
> > > > > > April of 63 is NOT correct.

> > > > > > It's true that Kleins finally got their act together and prsented an
> > > > > > ad where the text matched the illustration in April of 63, but It's
> > > > > > obvious from viewing these ads that Klein's were real sloppy and
> > > > > > careless about what the text said. They claimed that the gun they
> > > > > > advertised in the early months of 1961 was "41 1/2 inches long
> > > > > > overall" and a "carbine" But there is NO Mannlicher Carcano that
> > > > > > measures 41 1/2 inches long, and the 40 inch long model 91/38 is NOT a
> > > > > > carbine. It is officially designated a Short Rifle.

> > > > > > > > > CJ

> > > > > > > -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> > > > > > - Show quoted text -

> > > > > Walt, I did not even hint that Klein's didn't sell the longer rifles
> > > > > prior.

> > > > Walt, I did not even hint that Klein's didn't sell the longer rifles
> > > > prior.

> > > > Oh really??? Did you write this Curt?:...." It's amazing you think
> > > > these rifles are thought of at this
> > > > length at this time when Klein's didn't even advertise them until Apr.
> > > > 63."

> > > > Did you write that Curt?

> > > Yes and what exactly does it mean to you? I said "at this time".
> > > That would not preclude other times. I didn't say Kleins didn't
> > > "advertise them ever", did I? So instead of looking at the main
> > > issue, you are just trying to look for lawyer-type loopholes instead
> > > of making your case. Sad. Sad, your little buddy is only doing his
> > > arguing for 'troll topics'. So you stop and avoid all the 'relevant'
> > > stuff to look at, along with the agendaized-only Ben....so I guess you
> > > both don't want to discuss this aspect of the case...and well you got
> > > your wishes from me.

> > > CJ

> > CJ - he tried this same trick on me. He fails to understand that many
> > researchers, including Armstrong and Griggs, looked into this had
> > learned that Klein's ONLY SOLD one model AT A TIME. I guess it was
> > more cost-effective for them to handle just one type of inventory at a
> > time.

> Rob, it gets to the point that there is a need for deception to make
> even a scenario. They try to pinpoint the months I was alluding to
> around the time of the adverising to get me to 'confess' that 40.2's
> were 'most probably there'. I even went to the effort of copying
> down ad's from 1962 that stated that there were only 200 left and that
> they were going for a close out price (much less than what an 'Oz'
> would have ordered for). It just does no good. They are really a
> waste of time for themselves and if no one has an interest in
> it.......it just seems fruitless. Why on earth would anyone want to
> adhere to something that came upon the ad scene in Apr. 63, when it
> was decided that the gun was ordered in Feb is just beyond my
> comprehension.

> > You are right, they DON'T want to discuss it, they are here to attack
> > and force their opinions on everyone else.

> They actually argue like dis-infomationalists. Wouldn't it be a hoot
> if they were wolves in sheep's clothing, and were gov't goons that
> were parading as hardcore CT'ers?

Hey Curt....It may seem like I'm the enemy to you, ( and perhaps I am)
because I'm sick and tired of screwballs proffering more lies and
bullshit about the murder of JFK. I think it's high time that we
start cleaning house and exposing the nonsense and lies, no matter
which side they come from. We need the facts and the truth NOT more
bullshit. You've jumped into this thread to support a lie.... True
you may not know it's a lie and you believe your source is reliable,
but that doesn't absolve you from spreading bullshit. To be more
specific.... I'm referring to the model of rifle that was sent to AJ
Hidell at PO Box 2915 in Dallas. It's important to establish the facts
as best we can with the information available. Perhaps I have a bit
of an advantage because I do my own research and I don't take anybodys
word for aything. Since I've done a lot of research over the last 40
years I probably know things that influence my thinking that your not
even aware of. One the issue of the Kleins ads I have many many
copies of Kleins ads that came from manu old magazines. When one reads
those old ads it becomes quite clear that Kleins was very sloppy and
in some case downright deceptive in their advertising. So therefore
you, and Armstrong, and Rob, and anybody else that wants to try to
give the impression that Kleins was 100% honest and accurate when they
offered a 36 inch 5 1/2 pound Mannlicher Carcano carbine in their ad
in the February issue of American Rifleman. By reading all of their
other ads over a two year period it's very obvious that they didn't
give a damn what the ad said so long as it sold the rifles.

Just as a used car salesman show a picture of a really nice car but
when the buyer shows up that car will already have been sold ...But
the salesman will have another almost identical to the one he sold.

So simply because the ad said they were selling a 36 inch carbine does
NOT make it a FACT. In fact the "weight" of the evidence would seem
to show that they sent a 40 inch long model 91 /38 ( as illustrated)
to AJ Hidell at PO Box 2915 in Dallas. Does any of this prove that
Oswald received the rifle??? Definitely NOT. Does any of this prove
that Oswald ordered the rifle for himself? Definitely NOT In fact I
believe there are records that show that Oswald was at work at the
time the Money Order was purchased, so somebody else would have had to
have bought that money order.

The approach that all of the evidence is fake and the Warren Report
doesn't contain even a sliver of truth is simply a poor way to attempt
to get to the truth. Because if you take that approach you have NO
SOLID ground to stand on.

Do you understand my position..... If you post what I believe to be
bullshit I'm going to challenge yo and presrnt evidence that supports
my views. If yoy can back up you point with solid evidence ( not lies)
then I may accept what you offer.

> CJ

> > > I've posted Kleins ad that shows they did in fact advertise 40 inch
> > > > long model 91 /38's PRIOR to April 1963.
> > > > Granted...They erronously called it a 41 1/2 inch carbine but any
> > > > knowledgable person would know that they were displaying in the
> > > > illustration a 40 inch model 91/38 rifle. So any claim that they never
> > > > offered the 40 inch rifle prior to April of 1963 is incorrect.

> > > > I suggest you read Armstrong's research as he goes through

> > > > > all the warehouses, paperworking's, rifle serviceing's sales, ads,
> > > > > testimonies, and of all the makes of the MC.

> > > > > Here is one blurb.. 'Klein's Sporting Goods -1958 thru February, 1962'

> > > > > Klein's Sporting Goods was

> ...

> read more »- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

Reply to author Forward