Why DID LHO Have A....
robcap...@netscape.com
only to either those injured on active duty to ensure their medical
coverage, or civilian employees overseas who needed military ID.
LHO's was numbered N 4,271,617 and this has brought some clarification
to his employ in the intelligence community (probably ONI in this
case) as there is no record of a serious injury to LHO while in the
Marines, thus the second option has to be the reason for the card.
His was issued on 9/11/59 and it is interesting to note Gary Powers
(U2 pilot) carried the type of card and it has been established he was
a CIA contract employee.
The FBI knew the importance of this card as they tried to obliterate
it to hide it, but it was finally released in December 1966 to the
public. A good picture of it, and more details of it, can be found in
"Oswald Talked" by Ray and Mary LaFontaine, and in Jesse Curry's
"Assassination Files."
Walt
wrote:
Francis Gary Powers the pilot of a CIA spy plane which crashed in
Russia on May Day 1960 carried a DD 1173 and so did another CIA
employee..... Richard Case Nagell. Oswald also carried a DD 1173
card .... It doesn't take a genius to see that that card was more than
just a depends medical Id card. FG Powers attempted to destroy his
1173 card before he was captured by the Russian soldiers. He didn't
succeed and the soldiers found most of the pieces of the card
( perhaps in his feces ) If that card was insignificant why did Powers
attempt to destroy it??
Richard Case Nagell had a Social Security card with Lee Oswald's name
and SS number on it when he "bungled" a bank robbery ( Federal
offense, FBI jurisdiction) in Elpaso Texas in September 1963. In
addition to a Social security card with Oswald's name and SS number,
Nagell also had a DD 1173 card with Oswald's name and vital statistics
on it when he was arrested. The picure on the DD 1173 card RESEMBLED
Lee Oswald but it was NOT a picture of Lee
Oswald. And the signature across the end of the card was NOT lee
Oswald's signature.
Walt
On page 109 of Curry's "Assassination Files" there is a photo of
Oswald's DD 1173 card.
The picture on that card only resembles Lee Oswald It may or may not
actually be a photo of LHO.
The card is a fake.... Probably created by Lee Oswald ....
All CIA contract employees were under orders to turn in their DD 1173
cards when they returned to the continental United States ( It was
illegal for the CIA to operate within the borders of the US) Oswald
apparently copied his card and kept the copy. The "official stamp"
on the card that is shown on pafe 109 was made by using a US quarter
dollar coin and an ink pad. ( get a good copy of the card and a
mirror and the letters "UARTER" ar clearly visible.)
On that same page in "Assassination Files" there is a copy of the
draft card that Oswald received in Minsk a couple of months after he
"defected". That Selective Service card has his classification as IV
A ( well qualified, and eligible to re-enlist) It is signed in a
scrawl by Gut Schiffer ( German. for Good Marine) Schiffer is mariner
in German. His handled wanted to secretly congradulate him for
successfully infiltrating the USSR so he sent LHO this Draft card that
showed he was well qualified and a good Marine.
Walt
Nagell said that he had been ordered to kill Lee Oswald because Oswald
was assigned to assassinate President Kennedy. Apparently Nagell did
in fact kill a man who was carrying the ID cards of Lee Oswald.
Although Nagell did not state that in plain english.... said that he
had intercepted Oswald in Mexico near the US border and killed him.
The cards Nagell had in his possession may have been removed from the
corpse before Nagell buried him.
Nagell thouht he had foiled the plot to assassinate JFK but he wasn't
sure and he didn't know that he himself might be framed as part of the
plot so he wanted to be in custody if JFK was murdered. Hoover
betrayed him...and had him committed to an insane assylum where he sat
and went crazy for about ten years.
- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
robcap...@netscape.com
> On 15 Oct, 10:50, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > DD 1173 card on him at the time of his arrest? This card is issued
> > only to either those injured on active duty to ensure their medical
> > coverage, or civilian employees overseas who needed military ID.
>
> > LHO's was numbered N 4,271,617 and this has brought some clarification
> > to his employ in the intelligence community (probably ONI in this
> > case) as there is no record of a serious injury to LHO while in the
> > Marines, thus the second option has to be the reason for the card.
>
> > His was issued on 9/11/59 and it is interesting to note Gary Powers
> > (U2 pilot) carried the type of card and it has been established he was
> > a CIA contract employee.
>
> > The FBI knew the importance of this card as they tried to obliterate
> > it to hide it, but it was finally released in December 1966 to the
> > public. A good picture of it, and more details of it, can be found in
> > "Oswald Talked" by Ray and Mary LaFontaine, and in Jesse Curry's
> > "Assassination Files."
>
> On page 109 of Curry's "Assassination Files" there is a photo of
> Oswald's DD 1173 card.
>
> The picture on that card only resembles Lee Oswald It may or may not
> actually be a photo of LHO.
>
> The card is a fake.... Probably created by Lee Oswald ....
There is NO proof this card is fake. I'm looking at it right now and
it looks like LHO to me.
For all folks interested in this go to the following sources:"
1) "Spy Saga" - Phil Melanson (1990)
2) "Oswald and the CIA" - John Newman (1995)
3) "Bloody Treason" - Noel Twyman (1997)
4) "JFK vs. CIA" - Michael Calder (1998)
5) "Body of Secrets" - James Bramford (2001)
Why do you think it is fake when you think CE-133A is real?
You started off so good to.
> All CIA contract employees were under orders to turn in their DD 1173
> cards when they returned to the continental United States ( It was
> illegal for the CIA to operate within the borders of the US) Oswald
> apparently copied his card and kept the copy. The "official stamp"
> on the card that is shown on pafe 109 was made by using a US quarter
> dollar coin and an ink pad. ( get a good copy of the card and a
> mirror and the letters "UARTER" ar clearly visible.)
Where is your proof he made a copy and/or faked it?
> On that same page in "Assassination Files" there is a copy of the
> draft card that Oswald received in Minsk a couple of months after he
> "defected". That Selective Service card has his classification as IV
> A ( well qualified, and eligible to re-enlist) It is signed in a
> scrawl by Gut Schiffer ( German. for Good Marine) Schiffer is mariner
> in German. His handled wanted to secretly congradulate him for
> successfully infiltrating the USSR so he sent LHO this Draft card that
> showed he was well qualified and a good Marine.- Hide quoted text -
Walt
wrote:
Duh..... The letters on that card are printed BACKWARD.... BUT if you
use a mirror it is very easy to see the UART on that card. In
addition I scaled that "stamp" many years ago..... I used a friends
card to obtain the actual size of the card and using that measurement
I was able to determine that the circlular stamp was EXACTLY the size
of a quarter.
>
>
>
> > On that same page in "Assassination Files" there is a copy of the
> > draft card that Oswald received in Minsk a couple of months after he
> > "defected". That Selective Service card has his classification as IV
> > A ( well qualified, and eligible to re-enlist) It is signed in a
> > scrawl by Gut Schiffer ( German. for Good Marine) Schiffer is mariner
> > in German. His handled wanted to secretly congradulate him for
> > successfully infiltrating the USSR so he sent LHO this Draft card that
> > showed he was well qualified and a good Marine.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
robcap...@netscape.com
I don't see any letters printed backwards in the pictures I'm looking
at, and the chin is a "cleft" one like he really had. Why didn't give
himself a square chin to look meaner in this picture?? LOL!!!
aaronhi...@yahoo.com
1. You want me to believe that Francis Gary Powers carried ID on him
when he flew the U-2? I doubt it. They are not supposed to carry
ID. Shades of Gene Hasenfus.
2.
>All CIA contract employees were under orders to turn in their DD 1173
>cards when they returned to the continental United States ( It was
>illegal for the CIA to operate within the borders of the US) Oswald
It is "illegal for the CIA to opeate within the borders of the US"?
They do it anyway. I am sure that all those Operation Mongoose guys
carried ID in their wallets. They didn't have to worry about being
arrested, either. "Check with Washington" is probably the first thing
they were taught to say.
Aaron HIrshberg
Walt
Dud ..Stupid Bastard.... here's what I wrote....."The picture on that
card only resembles Lee Oswald It may or may not
actually be a photo of LHO.
Do you read that as a POSITIVE statement that the photo is in fact
Oswald??
Now let me tell you WHY I left the posibility that the photo may not
be LHO.
It's possible that LHO copied his own DD 1173 CIA Identification card
to create a ID for a buddy who looked like LHO. I understand that
Gordon Novel , and Kerry Thornley both looked like LHO. So it's not
beyond the realm of possibilities that Oswald made a DD 1173 card for
Say kerry Thotn;ry but never gave it to him, and he still had it in
his possession on 11 /22 /63.
LOL!!!- Hide quoted text -
Walt
backwards in the pictures I'm looking at,"
I took the liberty of reading Stupid Bastard's thoughts.
and the chin is a "cleft" one like he really had. Why didn't give
> himself a square chin to look meaner in this picture?? LOL!!!- Hide quoted text -
Walt
<aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> There are two things you said that don't make sense.
>
> 1. You want me to believe that Francis Gary Powers carried ID on him
> when he flew the U-2? I doubt it. They are not supposed to carry
> ID. Shades of Gene Hasenfus.
I can only tell you to study up on the U-2 incident.... There are
photographs available of FG Powers mutilated DD 1173.
You are correct... CIA agents are forbidden to carry anything that may
betray them. They even wear only clothing that is made in the area
where they are operating. I don't remember what Powers excuse was for
carrying that card, and why he didn't pop the cyanide capsule he had
been given.
>
> 2.
>
> >All CIA contract employees were under orders to turn in their DD 1173
> >cards when they returned to the continental United States ( It was
> >illegal for the CIA to operate within the borders of the US) Oswald
>
It is "illegal for the CIA to opeate within the borders of the US"?
They do it anyway.
Yes, the "renigades" do....if they are caught they are automatically
disowned by the agency.
Why do you suppose they never came to Oswald's rescue ...even after he
made the public plea ..."I do request that "SOMEONE" come forward to
my legal assistance.....
They didn't know for sure that the story that LBJ and Hoover were
putting out wasn't the truth so they left Oswald hanging in the wind.
( the story was that Oswald was nuts and they had PROOF that he had
murdered JFK ) Rember the bold LIES being told by the Dallas
authorities on Friday night and Saturday??
Actually I think the CIA may have been secretly preparing to come to
Oswald's aid and Hoover got wind of it and ordered Oswald executed
immediately.
tomnln
"Walt" <papakoc...@evertek.net> wrote in message
news:59897179-90a7-4ecd...@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
With all of this "Speculation", you're making either side look BAD.
Ben Holmes
Walt says...
>
>On 15 Oct, 16:39, "aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com"
><aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> There are two things you said that don't make sense.
>>
>> when he flew the U-2? =A0I doubt it. =A0They are not supposed to carry
>> ID. =A0Shades of Gene Hasenfus.
>
>I can only tell you to study up on the U-2 incident.... There are
>photographs available of FG Powers mutilated DD 1173.
>You are correct... CIA agents are forbidden to carry anything that may
>betray them. They even wear only clothing that is made in the area
>where they are operating. I don't remember what Powers excuse was for
>carrying that card, and why he didn't pop the cyanide capsule he had
>been given.
>
>>
>> 2.
>>
>> >All CIA contract employees were under orders to turn in their DD 1173
>> >cards when they returned to the continental United States ( It was
>>
> It is "illegal for the CIA to opeate within the borders of the US"?
> They do it anyway.
>
>Yes, the "renigades" do....if they are caught they are automatically
>disowned by the agency.
>
>Why do you suppose they never came to Oswald's rescue ...even after he
>made the public plea ..."I do request that "SOMEONE" come forward to
>my legal assistance.....
>
>They didn't know for sure that the story that LBJ and Hoover were
>putting out wasn't the truth so they left Oswald hanging in the wind.
>( the story was that Oswald was nuts and they had PROOF that he had
>murdered JFK ) Rember the bold LIES being told by the Dallas
>authorities on Friday night and Saturday??
>
>Actually I think the CIA may have been secretly preparing to come to
>Oswald's aid and Hoover got wind of it and ordered Oswald executed
>immediately.
That doesn't square with the evidence. The greatly increased traffic flow of
calls in the weeks preceding the assassination between Ruby and the Mafia, the
evidence that at least implies that Ruby was 'stalking' Oswald.
The fact that both Oswald and the previous patsy in Miami both had 'strong'
Cuban ties, which was a hot topic with the CIA in those times, leads me to
believe that the CIA most assuredly would *not* have tried saving the designated
patsy - things were going exactly the way they wanted. (Then LBJ tripped 'em up
and refused to invade Cuba)
I think that the plan was to get rid of him right from the beginning - if he
hadn't been vouched for in the TSBD, he may very well have been shot right
there.
>=A0I am sure that all those Operation Mongoose guys
>> carried ID in their wallets. =A0They didn't have to worry about being
>> arrested, either. =A0"Check with Washington" is probably the first thing
Walt
> In article <1bd0dd27-60e1-477d-ba5f-963c185a6...@u65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
Ben, that would mean that the plot was hatched at the highest level of
the CIA. ie; The assassination of JFK was a plot that was if not
hatched in CIA heaquarters, it was at least approved at CIA
headquarters....
I simply can't accept that.....
I do believe there were CIA people involved in the plot. They were the
ones who fanned the flames of hatred for JFK because of THEIR fiasco
at BOP. BOP was a CIA baby from top to bottom...They conceived the
goofy idea and convinced a bunch of hot headed Cubans that they could
pull it off.... They failed in planning anf they failed in execution,
but like Rob they wanted to put the blame on JFK. JFK being an
honorable man, and the President publically accepted the blame altough
he was NOT the man most responsible for the mess.
Some of those Cuban exiles wanted JFK's head after he accepted the
responsibility for the fiasco. Their CIA handlers goaded and prodded
them to "go get him". Hoover learned of the plot and told LBJ... But
neither of them warned the JFK. Both Hoover and LBJ realized they
would profit by JFK's demise.
Some men at CIA headquarters, and RFK felt a responsibility to
Oswald, and wanted to provide him with a good lawyer.... If Oswald
lived to stand trial both LBJ's and Hoover's neck would have been in a
noose. They could not allow LHO to live a day longer.....the had to
get him executed while he was still in the custody of an entity that
Hoover and Johnson could control. Once Oswald was out of the
jurisdiction of DPD Chief Jesse Curry he chance of silencing Oswald
was not assured.
I believe it's important to keep in mind that there were about three
separate plots running simultaneously. CIA renegades with Cubans,
KKK and Minutemen, and Mafia ...... When the murder happened
everyone scurried for cover.
It's not important WHICH group was responsible....because the Hoover
and Johnson could have prevented any of the plots from succeeding.
But they had decided beforehand that which ever plot suceeded they
would help cover up the truth...... They were forced to cover up as a
matter of self peservation.
>
> I think that the plan was to get rid of him right from the beginning - if he
> hadn't been vouched for in the TSBD, he may very well have been shot right
> there.
Actually he wasn't "vouched for" in the TSBD..... Sure Truly said
"he's an employee"... "he belongs here"
But only an hour later he singled out Oswald as the only employee
missing....
Logically, Truly should have eliminated Oswald as a suspect because
he'd seen Oswald calmly drinking a coke in the lunchroom just seconds
after the shooting.
>
>
>
> >=A0I am sure that all those Operation Mongoose guys
> >> carried ID in their wallets. =A0They didn't have to worry about being
> >> arrested, either. =A0"Check with Washington" is probably the first thing
> >> they were taught to say.
>
> >> Aaron HIrshberg- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Ben Holmes
>.com>,
>> Walt says...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On 15 Oct, 16:39, "aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com"
>> ><aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> There are two things you said that don't make sense.
>>
>him
>> >> when he flew the U-2? =3DA0I doubt it. =3DA0They are not supposed to c=
>arry
>> >> ID. =3DA0Shades of Gene Hasenfus.
>>
>> >I can only tell you to study up on the U-2 incident.... There are
>> >photographs available of FG Powers mutilated DD 1173.
>> >You are correct... CIA agents are forbidden to carry anything that may
>> >betray them. They even wear only clothing that is made in the area
>> >carrying that card, and why he didn't pop the cyanide capsule he had
>> >been given.
>>
>> >> 2.
>>
>> >> >All CIA contract employees were under orders to turn in their DD 1173
>> >> >cards when they returned to the continental United States ( It was
>ald
>>
>> > It is "illegal for the CIA to opeate within the borders of the US"?
>> > They do it anyway.
>>
>> >Yes, the "renigades" do....if they are caught they are automatically
>> >disowned by the agency.
>>
>> >Why do you suppose they never came to Oswald's rescue ...even after he
>> >made the public plea ..."I do request that "SOMEONE" come forward to
>> >my legal assistance.....
>>
>> >They didn't know for sure that the story that LBJ and Hoover were
>> >putting out wasn't the truth so they left Oswald hanging in the wind.
>> >( the story was that Oswald was nuts and they had PROOF that he had
>> >murdered JFK ) Rember the bold LIES being told by the Dallas
>> >authorities on Friday night and Saturday??
>>
>> >Oswald's aid and Hoover got wind of it and ordered Oswald executed
>> >immediately.
>>
>low of
>> calls in the weeks preceding the assassination between Ruby and the Mafia=
>, the
>> evidence that at least implies that Ruby was 'stalking' Oswald.
>>
> The fact that both Oswald and the previous patsy in Miami both had
>'strong'
> Cuban ties, which was a hot topic with the CIA in those times, leads
>me to
> believe that the CIA most assuredly would *not* have tried saving the
>designated
>tripped 'em up
> and refused to invade Cuba)
>
>Ben, that would mean that the plot was hatched at the highest level of
>the CIA. ie; The assassination of JFK was a plot that was if not
>hatched in CIA heaquarters, it was at least approved at CIA
>headquarters....
>
>I simply can't accept that.....
Nor do I. But *many* people in the CIA had vested interest in the U.S. invading
Cuba. As did the military. (and obviously, the Mafia)
There was simply a 'cabal' if you will, of people all interested in the same
thing.
>I do believe there were CIA people involved in the plot.
I strongly agree. The evidence of the Oswald 'imposters' is a pure intelligence
gambit. Hoover wouldn't have done it, nor the Mafia, or any other organization.
>They were the
>ones who fanned the flames of hatred for JFK because of THEIR fiasco
>at BOP. BOP was a CIA baby from top to bottom...They conceived the
>goofy idea and convinced a bunch of hot headed Cubans that they could
>pull it off.... They failed in planning anf they failed in execution,
>but like Rob they wanted to put the blame on JFK. JFK being an
>honorable man, and the President publically accepted the blame altough
>he was NOT the man most responsible for the mess.
Yep... agreed.
>Some of those Cuban exiles wanted JFK's head after he accepted the
>responsibility for the fiasco. Their CIA handlers goaded and prodded
>them to "go get him". Hoover learned of the plot and told LBJ... But
>neither of them warned the JFK. Both Hoover and LBJ realized they
>would profit by JFK's demise.
I'm not entirely convinced that both of them were just passive observers. Both
of them had very strong, personal reasons to kill JFK.
>Some men at CIA headquarters, and RFK felt a responsibility to
>Oswald, and wanted to provide him with a good lawyer.... If Oswald
>lived to stand trial both LBJ's and Hoover's neck would have been in a
>noose. They could not allow LHO to live a day longer.....the had to
>get him executed while he was still in the custody of an entity that
>Hoover and Johnson could control. Once Oswald was out of the
>jurisdiction of DPD Chief Jesse Curry he chance of silencing Oswald
>was not assured.
>
>I believe it's important to keep in mind that there were about three
>separate plots running simultaneously. CIA renegades with Cubans,
>KKK and Minutemen, and Mafia ...... When the murder happened
>everyone scurried for cover.
>
>It's not important WHICH group was responsible....because the Hoover
>and Johnson could have prevented any of the plots from succeeding.
>But they had decided beforehand that which ever plot suceeded they
>would help cover up the truth...... They were forced to cover up as a
>matter of self peservation.
I suspect that the lower-level CIA functionaries who were involved knew quite
well that self-interest would force a coverup.
The evidence is quite strong that Oswald was an intelligence asset - it couldn't
come out that an 'agent' of the CIA had 'killed' JFK.
>> I think that the plan was to get rid of him right from the beginning - if=
> he
>> hadn't been vouched for in the TSBD, he may very well have been shot righ=
>t
>> there.
>
>Actually he wasn't "vouched for" in the TSBD..... Sure Truly said
>"he's an employee"... "he belongs here"
Yep... but you miss the point - Truly was a *WITNESS*... you can't just shoot
someone in cold blood with eyewitnesses around. If Truly had begun shouting -
"That's him!"... LHO would have been shot instantly.
>But only an hour later he singled out Oswald as the only employee
>missing....
I don't know this to be a fact. There was quite a bit 'twisted' by the WC. But
presuming this to *be* a fact, it can simply mean that pressure was already
being applied shortly afterward. Or that Truly was involved in some way, as
some have suggested.
>Logically, Truly should have eliminated Oswald as a suspect because
>he'd seen Oswald calmly drinking a coke in the lunchroom just seconds
>after the shooting.
Agreed. But Truly knew that Oswald was not the only one missing - so I look
more at the possibility that those 'in' on the conspiracy have done a little
reworking of history.
>> >=3DA0I am sure that all those Operation Mongoose guys
>> >> carried ID in their wallets. =3DA0They didn't have to worry about bein=
>g
>> >> arrested, either. =3DA0"Check with Washington" is probably the first t=
muc...@gmail.com
wrote:
6) Doug Horne memo D132 (1996-7)
http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/02/Doc-0031.txt
Walt
> In article <bb40a9ae-4223-4cdc-946a-031ea4f42...@64g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
I agree.... Neither LBJ nor Hoover were "passive observers" Either of
them could have been THE King pin who was behind the assassination.
But LBJ is the more likely suspect. I didn't mean to imply that they
merely sat on their hands and let it happen. But the assassination
originated with CIA operatives like E Howard Hunt and crazy
Cubans..... it probably was Hunt's brainchild. Once LBJ learned of
the plot ....he actively participated in it and helped make the
assassination a success. LBJ was totally unscrupulous, and ruthless
enough to participate as the king pin......but he wasn't smart enough
to plan the murder in the way the evidence reveals it was planned.
So you're right..... Both LBJ and Hoover had strong motives for
wanting JFK dead...... They merely used others as the tools to get
the job done.
>
>
> >Some men at CIA headquarters, and RFK felt a responsibility to
> >Oswald, and wanted to provide him with a good lawyer.... If Oswald
> >lived to stand trial both LBJ's and Hoover's neck would have been in a
> >noose. They could not allow LHO to live a day longer.....the had to
> >get him executed while he was still in the custody of an entity that
> >Hoover and Johnson could control. Once Oswald was out of the
> >jurisdiction of DPD Chief Jesse Curry he chance of silencing Oswald
> >was not assured.
>
> >I believe it's important to keep in mind that there were about three
> >separate plots running simultaneously. CIA renegades with Cubans,
> >KKK and Minutemen, and Mafia ...... When the murder happened
> >everyone scurried for cover.
>
> >It's not important WHICH group was responsible....because the Hoover
> >and Johnson could have prevented any of the plots from succeeding.
> >But they had decided beforehand that which ever plot suceeded they
> >would help cover up the truth...... They were forced to cover up as a
> >matter of self peservation.
>
> I suspect that the lower-level CIA functionaries who were involved knew quite
> well that self-interest would force a coverup.
Exactly.....
>
> The evidence is quite strong that Oswald was an intelligence asset - it couldn't
> come out that an 'agent' of the CIA had 'killed' JFK.
There's no doubt in my mind.... It's patently obvious that LHO was a
US intelligence agent.
>
> >> I think that the plan was to get rid of him right from the beginning - if=
> > he
> >> hadn't been vouched for in the TSBD, he may very well have been shot righ=
> >t
> >> there.
Strongly agree about the idea that they planned to kill Oswald
immediately after the assassination......
BUT I don't think Marrion Baker was in on the plot and I don't think
he was slated to kill Oswald.
( at one time I did believe that)
But if you stop to think about it ...... He could have dropped the
hammer on LHO without even opening the door to that lunchroom. He
could have shot LHO right through that door and then claimed that he
thought Oswald was armed. He would have been hailed as a hero...and
nobody would have questioned his action. Truly had already gone up to
the third floor so he wouldn't been there to see the actual
shooting.
No.... Marrion Baker wasn't part of the plot......he was just a cop
who BECAME an accessory after the fact.
>
> >Actually he wasn't "vouched for" in the TSBD..... Sure Truly said
> >"he's an employee"... "he belongs here"
>
> Yep... but you miss the point - Truly was a *WITNESS*... you can't just shoot
> someone in cold blood with eyewitnesses around. If Truly had begun shouting -
> "That's him!"... LHO would have been shot instantly.
>
> >But only an hour later he singled out Oswald as the only employee
> >missing....
>
> I don't know this to be a fact. There was quite a bit 'twisted' by the WC. But
> presuming this to *be* a fact, it can simply mean that pressure was already
> being applied shortly afterward. Or that Truly was involved in some way, as
> some have suggested.
>
> >Logically, Truly should have eliminated Oswald as a suspect because
> >he'd seen Oswald calmly drinking a coke in the lunchroom just seconds
> >after the shooting.
>
> Agreed. But Truly knew that Oswald was not the only one missing - so I look
> more at the possibility that those 'in' on the conspiracy have done a little
> reworking of history.
Truly was an active player in the plot..... Though he is still an
enigma. It's possible that he was KKK or minuteman.
>
>
>
> >> >=3DA0I am sure that all those Operation Mongoose guys
> >> >> carried ID in their wallets. =3DA0They didn't have to worry about bein=
> >g
> >> >> arrested, either. =3DA0"Check with Washington" is probably the first t=
> >hing
> >> >> they were taught to say.
>
Walt
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Hey Rob.....Have someone with a brain read this to you and explain
what is says.
Here's an excerpt from the document .....
Speculation: It is reasonable to assume that Oswald altered both the
DD
1173 and Selective Service cards (by affixing the Minsk photograph)
himse1~ and that they were probably altered by him while he was
employed
at the photographic firm of Jaggars- Chiles-Stovall in Dallas, Texas
from
autumn 1962 through spring 1963.
The man reached exactly the same conclusion I reached...But we took
different routes to atrrive at that conclusion.
My route is quicker and easier ...... Hells bells it's a piec-o-cake
to get a good copy of Oswald's DD1173 and enlarge it for study. The US
quarter dollar coin "Official stamp" is a dead give away that the
card is a fake.
Ben Holmes
>ups=3D
>> >.com>,
>> >> Walt says...
>>
>> >> >On 15 Oct, 16:39, "aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com"
>> >> ><aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> >> There are two things you said that don't make sense.
>>
>D on =3D
>> >him
>> >> >> when he flew the U-2? =3D3DA0I doubt it. =3D3DA0They are not suppos=
>ed to c=3D
>> >arry
>> >> >> ID. =3D3DA0Shades of Gene Hasenfus.
>>
>> >> >I can only tell you to study up on the U-2 incident.... There are
>> >> >photographs available of FG Powers mutilated DD 1173.
>y
>> >> >betray them. They even wear only clothing that is made in the area
>s for
>> >> >carrying that card, and why he didn't pop the cyanide capsule he had
>> >> >been given.
>>
>> >> >> 2.
>>
>173
>> >> >> >cards when they returned to the continental United States ( It was
>A0Osw=3D
>> >ald
>>
>> >> > It is "illegal for the CIA to opeate within the borders of the US"?
>> >> > They do it anyway.
>>
>> >> >Yes, the "renigades" do....if they are caught they are automatically
>> >> >disowned by the agency.
>>
>e
>> >> >made the public plea ..."I do request that "SOMEONE" come forward to
>> >> >my legal assistance.....
>>
>> >> >They didn't know for sure that the story that LBJ and Hoover were
>> >> >putting out wasn't the truth so they left Oswald hanging in the wind.
>> >> >( the story was that Oswald was nuts and they had PROOF that he had
>> >> >murdered JFK ) Rember the bold LIES being told by the Dallas
>> >> >authorities on Friday night and Saturday??
>>
>e to
>> >> >Oswald's aid and Hoover got wind of it and ordered Oswald executed
>> >> >immediately.
>>
>fic f=3D
>> >low of
>> >> calls in the weeks preceding the assassination between Ruby and the Ma=
>fia=3D
>> >, the
>> >> evidence that at least implies that Ruby was 'stalking' Oswald.
>>
>> > The fact that both Oswald and the previous patsy in Miami both had
>> >'strong'
>> > Cuban ties, which was a hot topic with the CIA in those times, leads
>> >me to
>> > believe that the CIA most assuredly would *not* have tried saving the
>> >designated
>> >tripped 'em up
>> > and refused to invade Cuba)
>>
>> >Ben, that would mean that the plot was hatched at the highest level of
>> >hatched in CIA heaquarters, it was at least approved at CIA
>> >headquarters....
>>
>> >I simply can't accept that.....
>>
> invading
>> Cuba. =A0As did the military. (and obviously, the Mafia)
>>
>> There was simply a 'cabal' if you will, of people all interested in the s=
>ame
>> thing.
>>
>> >I do believe there were CIA people involved in the plot.
>>
>elligence
>> gambit. =A0Hoover wouldn't have done it, nor the Mafia, or any other orga=
>nization.
>>
>> >They were the
>> >ones who fanned the flames of hatred for JFK because of THEIR fiasco
>> >goofy idea and convinced a bunch of hot headed Cubans that they could
>> >pull it off.... They failed in planning anf they failed in execution,
>> >honorable man, and the President publically accepted the blame altough
>> >he was NOT the man most responsible for the mess.
>>
>> Yep... agreed.
>>
>> >responsibility for the fiasco. =A0Their CIA handlers goaded and prodded
>> >them to "go get him". =A0Hoover learned of the plot and told LBJ... But
>> >neither of them warned the JFK. =A0Both Hoover and LBJ realized they
>> >would profit by JFK's demise.
>>
> Both
>> of them had very strong, personal reasons to kill JFK.
>
>I agree.... Neither LBJ nor Hoover were "passive observers" Either of
>them could have been THE King pin who was behind the assassination.
>But LBJ is the more likely suspect. I didn't mean to imply that they
>merely sat on their hands and let it happen. But the assassination
>originated with CIA operatives like E Howard Hunt and crazy
>Cubans..... it probably was Hunt's brainchild. Once LBJ learned of
>the plot ....he actively participated in it and helped make the
>assassination a success. LBJ was totally unscrupulous, and ruthless
>enough to participate as the king pin......but he wasn't smart enough
>to plan the murder in the way the evidence reveals it was planned.
>
>So you're right..... Both LBJ and Hoover had strong motives for
>wanting JFK dead...... They merely used others as the tools to get
>the job done.
>
>
>>
>>
>> >Oswald, and wanted to provide him with a good lawyer.... =A0If Oswald
>> >lived to stand trial both LBJ's and Hoover's neck would have been in a
>> >get him executed while he was still in the custody of an entity that
>> >jurisdiction of =A0DPD Chief =A0Jesse Curry he chance of silencing Oswal=
>d
>> >was not assured.
>>
>> >I believe it's important to keep in mind that there were about three
>> >KKK and Minutemen, and Mafia ...... =A0 When the murder happened
>> >everyone scurried for cover.
>>
>> >It's not important WHICH group was responsible....because the Hoover
>> >and Johnson could have prevented any of the plots from succeeding.
>> >would help cover up the truth...... They were forced to cover up =A0as a
>> >matter of self peservation.
>>
>> I suspect that the lower-level CIA functionaries who were involved knew q=
>uite
>> well that self-interest would force a coverup.
>
>Exactly.....
>
>>
>ouldn't
>> come out that an 'agent' of the CIA had 'killed' JFK.
>
>There's no doubt in my mind.... It's patently obvious that LHO was a
>US intelligence agent.
>
>
>>
> if=3D
>> > he
>> >> hadn't been vouched for in the TSBD, he may very well have been shot r=
>igh=3D
>> >t
>> >> there.
>
>Strongly agree about the idea that they planned to kill Oswald
>immediately after the assassination......
>BUT I don't think Marrion Baker was in on the plot and I don't think
>he was slated to kill Oswald.
>( at one time I did believe that)
I'm still an agnostic on this question. I'm not positive that Baker was
involved, but neither am I convinced that he wasn't.
>But if you stop to think about it ...... He could have dropped the
>hammer on LHO without even opening the door to that lunchroom. He
>could have shot LHO right through that door and then claimed that he
>thought Oswald was armed. He would have been hailed as a hero...and
>nobody would have questioned his action. Truly had already gone up to
>the third floor so he wouldn't been there to see the actual
>shooting.
>No.... Marrion Baker wasn't part of the plot......he was just a cop
>who BECAME an accessory after the fact.
>
>
>
>>
>> >Actually he wasn't "vouched for" in the TSBD..... Sure Truly said
>> >"he's an employee"... "he belongs here"
>>
>> Yep... but you miss the point - Truly was a *WITNESS*... you can't just s=
>hoot
>> someone in cold blood with eyewitnesses around. =A0If Truly had begun sho=
>uting -
>> "That's him!"... LHO would have been shot instantly.
>>
>> >But =A0only an hour later he singled out Oswald =A0as the only employee
>> >missing....
>>
>> I don't know this to be a fact. There was quite a bit 'twisted' by the WC=
>. =A0But
>> presuming this to *be* a fact, it can simply mean that pressure was alrea=
>dy
>> being applied shortly afterward. =A0Or that Truly was involved in some wa=
>y, as
>> some have suggested.
>>
>> >Logically, Truly should have eliminated Oswald as a suspect because
>> >he'd seen Oswald calmly drinking a coke in the lunchroom just seconds
>> >after the shooting.
>>
>> Agreed. =A0But Truly knew that Oswald was not the only one missing - so I=
> look
>> more at the possibility that those 'in' on the conspiracy have done a lit=
>tle
>> reworking of history.
>
>Truly was an active player in the plot..... Though he is still an
>enigma. It's possible that he was KKK or minuteman.
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>> >> >=3D3DA0I am sure that all those Operation Mongoose guys
>> >> >> carried ID in their wallets. =3D3DA0They didn't have to worry about=
> bein=3D
>> >g
>> >> >> arrested, either. =3D3DA0"Check with Washington" is probably the fi=
>rst t=3D
robcap...@netscape.com
Will Walt EVER STOP LYING??? I doubt it as he is a BORN LIAR. When
have I ever put the blame on JFK???
You are speculating more than a Wall Street trader in this thread, do
you have any proof at all?
Walt
Ben's simple statement above is the PRIMARY reason that Oswald was
made the Patsy. He was a PERFECT patsy...
The plotters knew that even if Oswald were still alive after the
assassination, there would have nobody who would come to his defense,
and he'd be left dangling in the wind after the assassination. Even if
he'd been provided an attorney, you can bet he'd have been given an
attorney who would merely have helped the prosecutor put a noose
around Oswald's neck.
For the sake of this discussion let's assume that Oswald's agency was
the CIA .Oswald had gone to the USSR as a CIA agent. They had
brought him in at the request of JFK and RFK .
(JFK had learned of the young agent Oswald when his mother Marg
Oswald had traveled to DC just a few days after JFK took office. She
was worried about Lee whom she had heard from for months. M. Oswald
suspected that Lee was an intelligence agent and she wanted JFK to
find out if her son was alive and well. )
When Oswald's name was made public just a couple of hours after the
assassination and the Dallas police were saying that thet had positive
proof that He had murdered JFK , the CIA was forced to remain silent.
They certainly didn't want to announce that He was one of there men,
and give the agency a black eye, And even if they had been willing
to go to his defense they couldn't publicly announce that he was one
of their spies because that would have placed other agents out in the
field in jeopardy.
RFK knew that Oswald was a gutsy young CIA agent whom he admired, and
who had sent him the info about the illegal military training camps
near New Orleans. But the first words out of Hoovers mouth when
J.Edna called him after Oswald's capture was" We got the man that
killed your brother....His name is Oswald,... Lee Harvey Oswald...and
he's a communist revolutionary working for Castro."
Of course RFK had no way to be sure that LHO wasn't a double agent,
who had shot JFK. He simply had to listen to Hoover and wait to see
what transpired. RFK was forced out of his office almost immediately
with the excuse that he needed time off to work with his grief and
help the rest of the family deal with the loss. Once he was out of
the way he had no real power to investigate the assassination.
robcap...@netscape.com
Why does a man who has "researched" this case for 40 years still pass
out faulty, supplied by the WC no less, information WITHOUT refuting
it???
Capt. W.P. Gannaway said LHO's descritption was broadcasted because he
was the ONLY one missing from a "roll call" of TSBD employees shortly
after the assassination. Gannaway said "he was the ONLY one who didn't
show up and couldn't be accounted for. (Dallas Morning News 11/23/63)
Whether he got this information from Truly or not is up in the air,
but more importantly is the accuracy of it.
First off, there was NO SUCH roll call (WCR, p. 156; VII, p. 382), and
secondly, LHO was far from the only person missing from the TSBD after
the assassination (the time they claimed to have taken the roll
call). This was looked into and they found the following:
1) 75 employees worked in the building on 11/22/63 (based on the names
given to them by Truly). (XXII, pp.632-86)
2) 48 were OUTSIDE at 12:30 PM. (Ibid)
3) 5 did NOT report for work that day.(Ibid, pp. 632 & 676)
4) Many of the remaining employees in the building left after the
shots had been fired and ceased. (Ibid, pp. 632, 645, 655-656, 665)
Add in the fact many were NOT allowed back in to the TSBD after the
assassination you have a slew of people "missing" by the time the
police began searching the building. LHO wasn't even the only one
missing among the ones who worked on the sixth floor that day as it
was said that LHO was NOT "the only one who didn't show up and
COULDN'T be accounted for." (VI, p. 321)
All of this was discussed in Mark Lane's "Rush To Judgement", how
could you have missed it for 40 years????
Anyone who claims LHO was the "only one missing" is a liar.
robcap...@netscape.com
Actually I got it from Jesse Curry's "Assassination Files", but thanks
for being so concerned about where it came from INSTEAD of what it
means.
Walt
wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
Dear Stupid Bastard....Go play with yourself..... You've amply
demonstrated that no rational person can put any credence in what you
say. Your an idiot and a liar.
Walt
The Stupid Bastard wrote:...." First off, there was NO SUCH roll
call .....
Here ya go SB..... Truly's testimony about counting noses. ( roll
call)
Mr. Truly.
Then in a few minutes--it could have been moments or minutes at a time
like that--I noticed some of my boys were over in the west corner of
the shipping department, and there were several officers over there
taking their names and addresses, and so forth.
Mr. Truly.
There were other officers in other parts of the building taking other
employees, like office people's names. I noticed that Lee Oswald was
not among these boys.So I picked up the telephone and called Mr. Aiken
down at the other warehouse who keeps our application blanks. Back up
there.First I mentioned to Mr. Campbell--I asked Bill Shelley if he
had seen him, he looked around and said no.
Mr. Belin.
When you asked Bill Shelley if he had seen whom?
Mr. Truly.
Lee Oswald. I said, "Have you seen him around lately," and he said no.
So Mr. Campbell is standing there, and I said, "I have a boy over here
missing. I don't know whether to report it or not." Because I had
another one or two out then. I didn't know whether they were all there
or not. He said, "What do you think"? And I got to thinking. He said,
"Well, we better do it anyway." It was so quick after that.
So I picked the phone up then and called Mr. Aiken, at the warehouse,
and got the boy's name and general description and telephone number
and address at Irving.
(WCR, p. 156; VII, p. 382), and
secondly, LHO was far from the only person missing from the TSBD
after
the assassination (the time they claimed to have taken the roll
call). This was looked into and they found the following:
> 1) 75 employees worked in the building on 11/22/63 (based on the names
> given to them by Truly). (XXII, pp.632-86)
> 2) 48 were OUTSIDE at 12:30 PM. (Ibid)
> 3) 5 did NOT report for work that day.(Ibid, pp. 632 & 676)
> 4) Many of the remaining employees in the building left after the
> shots had been fired and ceased. (Ibid, pp. 632, 645, 655-656, 665)
>
> Add in the fact many were NOT allowed back in to the TSBD after the
> assassination you have a slew of people "missing" by the time the
> police began searching the building. LHO wasn't even the only one
> missing among the ones who worked on the sixth floor that day as it
> was said that LHO was NOT "the only one who didn't show up and
> COULDN'T be accounted for." (VI, p. 321)
>
> All of this was discussed in Mark Lane's "Rush To Judgement", how
> could you have missed it for 40 years????
>
> Anyone who claims LHO was the "only one missing" is a liar.- Hide quoted text -
robcap...@netscape.com
LOL!!!! I was NOT denying he said it, but rather the accuracy of the
statement. I guess "Walt The Liar" missed the part about refuting it,
or he doesn't know what this means, as it was proven to be wrong like
43 years ago at the least, so why are you still passing it off as if
it is true????
Walt
Hey you Stupid Bastard...Did you write this??:...." First off, there
was NO SUCH roll call"
Didn't Roy Truly in his testimony say that he took inventory of his
"boys"??
Truly may not have performed a military type "Roll call' where he had
his "boys' standing in rank...but he did count noses which amounts to
the same thing.
>
I guess "Walt The Liar" missed the part about refuting it,
> or he doesn't know what this means, as it was proven to be wrong like
> 43 years ago at the least, so why are you still passing it off as if
> it is true????- Hide quoted text -
robcap...@netscape.com
And you believe this??? ONLY LNers believe this as the WC itself gave
evidence there was a ton of people missing at the time they claimed to
have taken "roll call" and said LHO was the ONLY one missing!!
> Truly may not have performed a military type "Roll call' where he had
> his "boys' standing in rank...but he did count noses which amounts to
> the same thing.
Tom, get the page warmed up as we have "Walt The Liar" now defending a
roll call that NEVER existed. He is again supporting the WC's version
of events.
tomnln
Looks like ole Wally has his head up "ARLEN SPECTOR'S ASS".
"robcap...@netscape.com" <robc...@netscape.com> wrote in message
news:385cfe42-034c-4f5d...@y29g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Walt
Hey Stupid Bastard ....go take a course in reading comprehension.
I did NOT say that I believed that Oswald was the only employee
missing, in fact I know that at least five of Truly's "Boys" had left
the area, and several more were not in the building at the time that
Truly took roll call. Buell Frazier, Charles Givens, Lee Oswald,
Bonnie Ray Williams, and Danny Arce ...all were missing
My post was NOT in support of the lie that Oswald was the only one
missing...It was merely to point out that you had your head up your
ass when you wrote..:...." First off, there was NO SUCH roll call"
because there most certainly was an "inventory of employees" (roll
call)
>
> > Truly may not have performed a military type "Roll call' where he had
> > his "boys' standing in rank...but he did count noses which amounts to
> > the same thing.
>
> Tom, get the page warmed up as we have "Walt The Liar" now defending a
> roll call that NEVER existed. He is again supporting the WC's version
> of events.- Hide quoted text -
robcap...@netscape.com
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Well your biggest defender thought the same thing as I did, as he was
dancing all around the issue as he is afraid of you. Here is what Ben
wrote in this thread:
>But only an hour later he singled out Oswald as the only employee
>missing.... (Walt)
I don't know this to be a fact. There was quite a bit 'twisted' by the
WC. But
presuming this to *be* a fact, it can simply mean that pressure was
already
being applied shortly afterward. Or that Truly was involved in some
way, as
some have suggested. (Ben)
Because Ben is afraid of you he wouldn't say you were proposing a
bunch of crap, but since I'm NOT afraid of you I will call you on it.
You were caught red-handed in a lie yesterday claiming you never said
anything about 133A and C being from the same negative and I showed
you DID claim this very thing.
Ben was soooo scared of you he attacks me instead of calling you a
liar like he does to everyone else in those situations.
Two peas in a pod.
Walt
Huh???.... Get yer head outta yer ass and learn to read...
Walt wrote: " Actually he wasn't "vouched for" in the TSBD..... Sure
Truly said "he's an employee"... "he belongs here" But only an hour
later he singled out Oswald as the only employee missing....
But only an hour later he singled out Oswald as the only employee
missing.... (Walt)
What that says, Stupid Bastard is: Truly called Oswald's absence to
the attention of the cops. He knew that Oswald was not the only man
missing.... but he never-the-less told the cops that Oswald was
missing. Truly had seen LHO in the lunchroom calmly drinking a coke
just seconds after the shooting so even though he was not there in the
TSBD Truly should have logically dismissed him as a suspect ,
Get your head outta yer ass and READ.....
Stupid Bastard wrote: " but since I'm NOT afraid of you ,I will call
you on it.
Seems to me we're on the same page....so you'll have ta "call yourself
"on it also.
( this oughta be good...... C'mon Stupid Bastard call yerself a liar )
You were caught red-handed in a lie yesterday claiming you never said
anything about 133A and C being from the same negative and I showed
you DID claim this very thing.
I said nothing of the kind..... In your foggy mind you think the De
Morhenschildt print is 133c
The De M print is NOT 133c.... It's the De Morhenschildt print and it
is an uncropped version of CE 133A
Since I KNOW that CE 133A and 133c are totally different photos I most
certainly would not have said that they were made from the same
negative.
HOWEVER .... The possibility MAY? exist that they share a common
background, I simply don't know, because I'm not an expert on
photography. On that basis they MAY? share the same negative... I
don't know.
But the point is it is YOU who has his head up his ass by thinking
that 133c is the De Morhenschildt print. AND in your stuborn
stupidity you refuse to accept that FACT.
robcap...@netscape.com
I have and Capt. Granaway NEVER mentioned Truly as the source for
LHO's whereabouts. There is no proof Truly told him anything, they
simply lied and said they held a roll call when they did not.
> Stupid Bastard wrote: " but since I'm NOT afraid of you ,I will call
>
> you on it.
>
> Seems to me we're on the same page....so you'll have ta "call yourself
> "on it also.
"Walt The Liar" claims we are on the same page when he claims Truly
told them LHO was not in the building and there is NO proof he did.
WTL wants us to believe there was a roll call to prove this when there
was NONE and many more people were missing than there. NO WTL, we
aren't on the same page.
> ( this oughta be good...... C'mon Stupid Bastard call yerself a liar )
We don't agree on this WTL, you are supporting the claims of the WC as
usual, and I'm saying there is NO proof for the aforementioned claims.
> You were caught red-handed in a lie yesterday claiming you never said
> anything about 133A and C being from the same negative and I showed
> you DID claim this very thing.
>
> I said nothing of the kind..... In your foggy mind you think the De
> Morhenschildt print is 133c
You are a liar, thus "Walt The Liar" is your new name. I simply stated
A and C were NOT from the same negative (no mention of what C was) and
you did what you always do - LIE. I proved it quite easily too.
> The De M print is NOT 133c.... It's the De Morhenschildt print and it
> is an uncropped version of CE 133A
Whatever, I have said we don't have to consider it to be C, the point
is I just said A and C and you claimed in September they were from the
same negative (you were ready to go at it with Herb too) yet yesterday
you claimed you never said any such thing. That is the problem with
lying constantly, you lose track of your lies WTL.
> Since I KNOW that CE 133A and 133c are totally different photos I most
> certainly would not have said that they were made from the same
> negative.
YOU DID, and I proved it in YOUR OWN WORDS. NOW you are denying you
wrote what you wrote, how far will WTL go????
> HOWEVER .... The possibility MAY? exist that they share a common
> background, I simply don't know, because I'm not an expert on
> photography. On that basis they MAY? share the same negative... I
> don't know.
NOW WTL is not an expert, but in September he sure was. You are an
out-and-out liar and it has been proven to be so many times here.
> But the point is it is YOU who has his head up his ass by thinking
> that 133c is the De Morhenschildt print. AND in your stuborn
> stupidity you refuse to accept that FACT.
Who is stubborn?? I said if it makes you feel better let's not say it
is the DeM picture, but how does that change your lie?? I simply said
A and C. It DOESN'T change it one bit and you are trying to wiggle
off the hook, but it is tooooooo late as we all know you are a LNer
and a born liar.
Walt
Stupid Bastard wrote:
Whatever, I have said we don't have to consider it to be C, the point
is I just said A and C and you claimed in September they were from
the
same negative (you were ready to go at it with Herb too) yet
yesterday
you claimed you never said any such thing. That is the problem with
lying constantly, you lose track of your lies WTL.
Walt replied:
Since I KNOW that CE 133A and 133c are totally different photos I
most
certainly would not have said that they were made from the same
negative.
Stupid Bastard insisted:
YOU DID, and I proved it in YOUR OWN WORDS. NOW you are denying you
wrote what you wrote, how far will WTL go????
Here's my own words from September 22
Hey Stupid Bastard.... CE 133A is the photo that Marina took of Lee
In
their back yard. However someone has clumsily added a light colored
"sling" onto the photo negative. You can speculate as well as I
about who drew that "sling" onto the photo, and guess the reason for
doing it....... but that won't alter the fact that it is the ONE and
ONLY photo that Marina took.
Ha, ha,ha,ha, hee, hee, hee.... ROTFLMAO...... Aren't you the guy
that just an hour ago crowed about his vast knowledge of the
assassination?????.
Let's see if your even smart enought to count....CE 133A is one, CE
133B is two, the Geneva White photo 133C is three.... There ya go
stupid bastard.... What's the total?
Can ya understand that with yer foggy brain? I clearly wrote: "the
Geneva White photo 133C is three"
I don't even mention the De Morhenschildt print, and I clearly stated
that the the Geneva White photo is 133C
Sam McClung
> news:385cfe42-034c-4f5d...@y29g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> 1) 75 employees worked in the building on 11/22/63 (based on the
> names given to them by Truly). (XXII, pp.632-86)
> 3) 5 did NOT report for work that day.(Ibid, pp. 632 & 676)
Plenty of room for speculation here,
were the 5 no-shows ever identified?
Did any of the 5 have any kind of foreknowledge of the assassination?
Walt
wrote:
Yeah...I knew that was a poor sentence structure.... But what the hell
you deserve as much blame as anybody because of your betral of the
ideals that JFK called for... "Ask Not what your
Country .............
What I meant to say was: Like Rob who wants to blame everybody else
for his mistakes..... they blamed JFK.
Ben Holmes
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On Oct 15, 11:28=A0pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>> On 15 Oct, 20:44, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>ps.com>,
>> > Walt says...
>>
>> > >On 15 Oct, 16:39, "aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com"
>> > ><aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > >> There are two things you said that don't make sense.
>>
>n him
>> > >> when he flew the U-2? =3DA0I doubt it. =3DA0They are not supposed to=
> carry
>> > >> ID. =3DA0Shades of Gene Hasenfus.
>>
>> > >I can only tell you to study up on the U-2 incident.... There are
>> > >photographs available of FG Powers mutilated DD 1173.
>> > >You are correct... CIA agents are forbidden to carry anything that may
>> > >betray them. They even wear only clothing that is made in the area
>or
>> > >carrying that card, and why he didn't pop the cyanide capsule he had
>> > >been given.
>>
>> > >> 2.
>>
>73
>> > >> >cards when they returned to the continental United States ( It was
>swald
>>
>> > > It is "illegal for the CIA to opeate within the borders of the US"?
>> > > They do it anyway.
>>
>> > >Yes, the "renigades" do....if they are caught they are automatically
>> > >disowned by the agency.
>>
>> > >Why do you suppose they never came to Oswald's rescue ...even after he
>> > >made the public plea ..."I do request that "SOMEONE" come forward to
>> > >my legal assistance.....
>>
>> > >They didn't know for sure that the story that LBJ and Hoover were
>> > >putting out wasn't the truth so they left Oswald hanging in the wind.
>> > >( the story was that Oswald was nuts and they had PROOF that he had
>> > >murdered JFK ) Rember the bold LIES being told by the Dallas
>> > >authorities on Friday night and Saturday??
>>
>o
>> > >Oswald's aid and Hoover got wind of it and ordered Oswald executed
>> > >immediately.
>>
> flow of
>> > calls in the weeks preceding the assassination between Ruby and the Maf=
>ia, the
>> > evidence that at least implies that Ruby was 'stalking' Oswald.
>>
>> 'strong'
>> =A0Cuban ties, which was a hot topic with the CIA in those times, leads
>> me to
>> =A0believe that the CIA most assuredly would *not* have tried saving the
>> designated
>> =A0patsy - things were going exactly the way they wanted. =A0(Then LBJ
>> tripped 'em up
>> =A0and refused to invade Cuba)
>>
>> Ben, that would mean that the plot was hatched at the highest level of
>> hatched in CIA heaquarters, it was at least approved at CIA
>> headquarters....
>>
>> I simply can't accept that.....
>>
>> I do believe there were CIA people involved in the plot. They were the
>> ones who fanned the flames of hatred for JFK because of THEIR fiasco
>> goofy idea and convinced a bunch of hot headed Cubans that they could
>> pull it off.... They failed in planning anf they failed in execution,
>> honorable man, and the President publically accepted the blame altough
>> he was NOT the man most responsible for the mess.
>>
>> responsibility for the fiasco. =A0Their CIA handlers goaded and prodded
>> them to "go get him". =A0Hoover learned of the plot and told LBJ... But
>> neither of them warned the JFK. =A0Both Hoover and LBJ realized they
>> would profit by JFK's demise.
>>
>> Oswald, and wanted to provide him with a good lawyer.... =A0If Oswald
>> lived to stand trial both LBJ's and Hoover's neck would have been in a
>> get him executed while he was still in the custody of an entity that
>> jurisdiction of =A0DPD Chief =A0Jesse Curry he chance of silencing Oswald
>> was not assured.
>>
>> I believe it's important to keep in mind that there were about three
>> KKK and Minutemen, and Mafia ...... =A0 When the murder happened
>> everyone scurried for cover.
>>
>> It's not important WHICH group was responsible....because the Hoover
>> and Johnson could have prevented any of the plots from succeeding.
>> would help cover up the truth...... They were forced to cover up =A0as a
>> matter of self peservation.
>>
>>
>>
>> > I think that the plan was to get rid of him right from the beginning - =
>if he
>> > hadn't been vouched for in the TSBD, he may very well have been shot ri=
>ght
>> > there.
>>
>> Actually he wasn't "vouched for" in the TSBD..... Sure Truly said
>> "he's an employee"... "he belongs here"
Another excellent example of Rob's poor reading skills.
Ben Holmes
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On Oct 16, 12:20=A0pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>> On 16 Oct, 10:56, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Oct 15, 11:28=A0pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>>
>> > > On 15 Oct, 20:44, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>>
>groups.com>,
>> > > > Walt says...
>>
>> > > > >On 15 Oct, 16:39, "aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com"
>> > > > ><aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > > > >> There are two things you said that don't make sense.
>>
>ID on him
>> > > > >> when he flew the U-2? =3DA0I doubt it. =3DA0They are not suppose=
>d to carry
>> > > > >> ID. =3DA0Shades of Gene Hasenfus.
>>
>> > > > >I can only tell you to study up on the U-2 incident.... There are
>> > > > >photographs available of FG Powers mutilated DD 1173.
> may
>> > > > >betray them. They even wear only clothing that is made in the area
>as for
>> > > > >carrying that card, and why he didn't pop the cyanide capsule he h=
>ad
>> > > > >been given.
>>
>> > > > >> 2.
>>
>> > > > >> >All CIA contract employees were under orders to turn in their D=
>D 1173
>> > > > >> >cards when they returned to the continental United States ( It =
>was
>> > > > >> >illegal for the CIA to operate within the borders of the US) =
>>
>> > > > > It is "illegal for the CIA to opeate within the borders of the US=
>"?
>> > > > > They do it anyway.
>>
>ly
>> > > > >disowned by the agency.
>>
>r he
>> > > > >made the public plea ..."I do request that "SOMEONE" come forward =
>to
>> > > > >my legal assistance.....
>>
>> > > > >They didn't know for sure that the story that LBJ and Hoover were
>nd.
>> > > > >( the story was that Oswald was nuts and they had PROOF that he ha=
>d
>> > > > >murdered JFK ) Rember the bold LIES being told by the Dallas
>> > > > >authorities on Friday night and Saturday??
>>
>me to
>> > > > >Oswald's aid and Hoover got wind of it and ordered Oswald executed
>> > > > >immediately.
>>
>ffic flow of
>> > > > calls in the weeks preceding the assassination between Ruby and the=
> Mafia, the
>> > > > evidence that at least implies that Ruby was 'stalking' Oswald.
>>
>> > > 'strong'
>> > > =A0Cuban ties, which was a hot topic with the CIA in those times, lea=
>ds
>> > > me to
>> > > =A0believe that the CIA most assuredly would *not* have tried saving =
>the
>> > > designated
>> > > =A0patsy - things were going exactly the way they wanted. =A0(Then LB=
>J
>> > > tripped 'em up
>> > > =A0and refused to invade Cuba)
>>
>> > > Ben, that would mean that the plot was hatched at the highest level o=
>f
>> > > the CIA. =A0ie; The assassination of JFK was a plot that was if not
>> > > hatched in CIA heaquarters, it was at least approved at CIA
>> > > headquarters....
>>
>> > > I simply can't accept that.....
>>
>e
>> > > ones who fanned the flames of hatred for JFK because of THEIR fiasco
>> > > goofy idea and convinced a bunch of hot headed Cubans that they could
>> > > pull it off.... They failed in planning anf they failed in execution,
>> > > honorable man, and the President publically accepted the blame altoug=
>h
>> > > he was NOT the man most responsible for the mess.
>>
>ed
>> > > them to "go get him". =A0Hoover learned of the plot and told LBJ... B=
>ut
>> > > neither of them warned the JFK. =A0Both Hoover and LBJ realized they
>> > > would profit by JFK's demise.
>>
>> > > Oswald, and wanted to provide him with a good lawyer.... =A0If Oswald
>> > > lived to stand trial both LBJ's and Hoover's neck would have been in =
>a
>> > > noose. =A0They could not allow LHO to live a day longer.....the had t=
>o
>> > > get him executed while he was still in the custody of an entity that
>> > > jurisdiction of =A0DPD Chief =A0Jesse Curry he chance of silencing Os=
>wald
>> > > was not assured.
>>
>> > > I believe it's important to keep in mind that there were about three
>> > > KKK and Minutemen, and Mafia ...... =A0 When the murder happened
>> > > everyone scurried for cover.
>>
>> > > It's not important WHICH group was responsible....because the Hoover
>> > > and Johnson could have prevented any of the plots from succeeding.
>> > > would help cover up the truth...... They were forced to cover up =A0a=
>s a
>> > > matter of self peservation.
>>
>g - if he
>> > > > hadn't been vouched for in the TSBD, he may very well have been sho=
>t right
>> > > > there.
>>
>> > > Actually he wasn't "vouched for" in the TSBD..... Sure Truly said
>> > > "he's an employee"... "he belongs here"
>> after
>> =A0the assassination (the time they claimed to have taken the roll
>> =A0call). =A0This was looked into and they found the following:
>
>LOL!!!! I was NOT denying he said it, but rather the accuracy of the
>statement. I guess "Walt The Liar" missed the part about refuting it,
>or he doesn't know what this means, as it was proven to be wrong like
>43 years ago at the least, so why are you still passing it off as if
>it is true????
Rob likes to "refute" testimony with his uncorroborated word.
Must be nice to solve cases like this...
Ben Holmes
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On Oct 16, 12:41=A0pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>> On 16 Oct, 11:32, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Oct 16, 12:20=A0pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>>
>> > > On 16 Oct, 10:56, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
>> > > wrote:
>>
>>
>> > > > > On 15 Oct, 20:44, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>>
>oglegroups.com>,
>> > > > > > Walt says...
>>
>> > > > > > >On 15 Oct, 16:39, "aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com"
>> > > > > > ><aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > >> There are two things you said that don't make sense.
>>
>ied ID on him
>> > > > > > >> when he flew the U-2? =3DA0I doubt it. =3DA0They are not sup=
>posed to carry
>> > > > > > >> ID. =3DA0Shades of Gene Hasenfus.
>>
>> > > > > > >I can only tell you to study up on the U-2 incident.... There =
>are
>> > > > > > >photographs available of FG Powers mutilated DD 1173.
>that may
>> > > > > > >betray them. They even wear only clothing that is made in the =
>area
>> > > > > > >where they are operating. =A0I don't remember what Powers excu=
>se was for
>> > > > > > >carrying that card, and why he didn't pop the cyanide capsule =
>he had
>> > > > > > >been given.
>>
>> > > > > > >> 2.
>>
>ir DD 1173
>> > > > > > >> >cards when they returned to the continental United States (=
> It was
>> > > > > > >> >illegal for the CIA to operate within the borders of the US=
>) =3DA0Oswald
>>
>> > > > > > > It is "illegal for the CIA to opeate within the borders of th=
>e US"?
>> > > > > > > They do it anyway.
>>
>ically
>> > > > > > >disowned by the agency.
>>
>after he
>> > > > > > >made the public plea ..."I do request that "SOMEONE" come forw=
>ard to
>> > > > > > >my legal assistance.....
>>
>ere
>> > > > > > >putting out wasn't the truth so they left Oswald hanging in th=
>e wind.
>> > > > > > >( the story was that Oswald was nuts and they had PROOF that h=
>e had
>> > > > > > >murdered JFK ) Rember the bold LIES being told by the Dallas
>> > > > > > >authorities on Friday night and Saturday??
>>
>=A0come to
>> > > > > > >Oswald's aid and Hoover got wind of it and ordered Oswald exec=
>uted
>> > > > > > >immediately.
>>
>> > > > > > That doesn't square with the evidence. =A0The greatly increased=
> traffic flow of
>> > > > > > calls in the weeks preceding the assassination between Ruby and=
> the Mafia, the
>> > > > > > evidence that at least implies that Ruby was 'stalking' Oswald.
>>
> had
>> > > > > 'strong'
>> > > > > =A0Cuban ties, which was a hot topic with the CIA in those times,=
> leads
>> > > > > me to
>> > > > > =A0believe that the CIA most assuredly would *not* have tried sav=
>ing the
>> > > > > designated
>> > > > > =A0patsy - things were going exactly the way they wanted. =A0(The=
>n LBJ
>> > > > > tripped 'em up
>>
>> > > > > Ben, that would mean that the plot was hatched at the highest lev=
>el of
>> > > > > the CIA. =A0ie; The assassination of JFK was a plot that was if n=
>ot
>> > > > > hatched in CIA heaquarters, it was at least approved at CIA
>> > > > > headquarters....
>>
>> > > > > I simply can't accept that.....
>>
>e the
>> > > > > ones who fanned the flames of hatred for JFK because of THEIR fia=
>sco
>> > > > > at BOP. =A0BOP was a CIA baby from top to bottom...They conceived=
> the
>> > > > > goofy idea and convinced a bunch of hot headed Cubans that they c=
>ould
>> > > > > pull it off.... They failed in planning anf they failed in execut=
>ion,
>> > > > > but like Rob they wanted to put the blame on JFK. =A0JFK being an
>> > > > > honorable man, and the President publically accepted the blame al=
>tough
>> > > > > he was NOT the man most responsible for the mess.
>>
> the
>> > > > > responsibility for the fiasco. =A0Their CIA handlers goaded and p=
>rodded
>> > > > > them to "go get him". =A0Hoover learned of the plot and told LBJ.=
>.. But
>> > > > > neither of them warned the JFK. =A0Both Hoover and LBJ realized t=
>hey
>> > > > > would profit by JFK's demise.
>>
>> > > > > Oswald, and wanted to provide him with a good lawyer.... =A0If Os=
>wald
>> > > > > lived to stand trial both LBJ's and Hoover's neck would have been=
> in a
>> > > > > noose. =A0They could not allow LHO to live a day longer.....the h=
>ad to
>> > > > > get him executed while he was still in the custody of an entity t=
>hat
>> > > > > Hoover and Johnson could control. =A0 Once Oswald was out of the
>g Oswald
>> > > > > was not assured.
>>
>ree
>> > > > > separate plots running simultaneously. CIA =A0renegades with Cuba=
>ns,
>> > > > > KKK and Minutemen, and Mafia ...... =A0 When the murder happened
>> > > > > everyone scurried for cover.
>>
>> > > > > It's not important WHICH group was responsible....because the Hoo=
>ver
>> > > > > and Johnson could have prevented any of the plots from succeeding=
>.
>> > > > > But =A0they had decided beforehand that which ever plot suceeded =
>they
>> > > > > would help cover up the truth...... They were forced to cover up =
>=A0as a
>> > > > > matter of self peservation.
>>
>> > > > > > I think that the plan was to get rid of him right from the begi=
>nning - if he
>> > > > > > hadn't been vouched for in the TSBD, he may very well have been=
> shot right
>> > > > > > there.
>>
>> > > > > Actually he wasn't "vouched for" in the TSBD..... Sure Truly said
>> > > > > "he's an employee"... "he belongs here"
>ployee
>> > > > > missing....
>>
>> > > > Why does a man who has "researched" this case for 40 years still pa=
>ss
>> > > > out faulty, supplied by the WC no less, information WITHOUT refutin=
>g
>> > > > it???
>>
>> > > > Capt. W.P. Gannaway said LHO's descritption was broadcasted because=
> he
>> > > > was the ONLY one missing from a "roll call" of TSBD employees short=
>ly
>> > > > after the assassination. Gannaway said "he was the ONLY one who did=
>n't
>> > > > show up and couldn't be accounted for. (Dallas Morning News 11/23/6=
>3)
>> > > > Whether he got this information from Truly or not is up in the air,
>> > > > but more importantly is the accuracy of it.
>>
>> > > The Stupid Bastard wrote:...." First off, there was NO SUCH roll
>>
>> > > call .....
>>
>> > > Here ya go SB..... Truly's testimony about counting noses. ( roll
>> > > call)
>>
>> > > Mr. Truly.
>e
>> > > like that--I noticed some of my boys were over in the west corner of
>> > > the shipping department, and there were several officers over there
>> > > taking their names and addresses, and so forth.
>>
>> > > Mr. Truly.
>> > > There were other officers in other parts of the building taking other
>> > > employees, like office people's names. I noticed that Lee Oswald was
>n
>> > > down at the other warehouse who keeps our application blanks. Back up
>> > > there.First I mentioned to Mr. Campbell--I asked Bill Shelley if he
>> > > had seen him, he looked around and said no.
>>
>> > > Mr. Belin.
>> > > When you asked Bill Shelley if he had seen whom?
>>
>> > > Mr. Truly.
>.
>> > > So Mr. Campbell is standing there, and I said, "I have a boy over her=
>e
>> > > missing. I don't know whether to report it or not." Because I had
>e
>> > > or not. He said, "What do you think"? And I got to thinking. He said,
>> > > "Well, we better do it anyway." It was so quick after that.
>> > > So I picked the phone up then and called Mr. Aiken, at the warehouse,
>> > > and got the boy's name and general description and telephone number
>> > > and address at Irving.
>>
>> > > (WCR, p. 156; VII, p. 382), and
>> > > after
>> > > =A0the assassination (the time they claimed to have taken the roll
>> > > =A0call). =A0This was looked into and they found the following:
>>
>> =A0LOL!!!! I was NOT denying he said it, but rather the accuracy of the
>> =A0statement.
>>
>> Hey you Stupid Bastard...Did you write this??:...." First off, there
>> was NO SUCH roll call"
>>
>> Didn't Roy Truly in his testimony say that he took inventory of his
>> "boys"??
>
>And you believe this??? ONLY LNers believe this as the WC itself gave
>evidence there was a ton of people missing at the time they claimed to
>have taken "roll call" and said LHO was the ONLY one missing!!
>
>
>> Truly may not have performed a military type "Roll call' where he had
>> his "boys' standing in rank...but he did count noses which amounts to
>> the same thing.
>
>Tom, get the page warmed up as we have "Walt The Liar" now defending a
>roll call that NEVER existed. He is again supporting the WC's version
>of events.
When Rob doesn't like something - he just calls it a lie.
No need for any other evidence... his faith is all that matters...
Walt
> In article <385cfe42-034c-4f5d-9e45-3f8518a02...@y29g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
Ben, much to my chagrin.......I'm compelled to disagree with you. Rob
doesn't have poor reasoning skills..... ......
They're non-existant.
This should be positive proof for Rob, that you and I don't agree on
everything......
Ben Holmes
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On Oct 16, 1:23=A0pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>> On 16 Oct, 11:49, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Oct 16, 12:41=A0pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>>
>> > > On 16 Oct, 11:32, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
>> > > wrote:
>>
>>
>> > > > > On 16 Oct, 10:56, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.co=
>m>
>> > > > > wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > On Oct 15, 11:28=A0pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > On 15 Oct, 20:44, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>>
>c.googlegroups.com>,
>> > > > > > > > Walt says...
>>
>> > > > > > > > >On 15 Oct, 16:39, "aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com"
>> > > > > > > > ><aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> There are two things you said that don't make sense.
>>
>carried ID on him
>> > > > > > > > >> when he flew the U-2? =3DA0I doubt it. =3DA0They are not=
> supposed to carry
>> > > > > > > > >> ID. =3DA0Shades of Gene Hasenfus.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >I can only tell you to study up on the U-2 incident.... Th=
>ere are
>> > > > > > > > >photographs available of FG Powers mutilated DD 1173.
>ing that may
>> > > > > > > > >betray them. They even wear only clothing that is made in =
>the area
>> > > > > > > > >where they are operating. =A0I don't remember what Powers =
>excuse was for
>> > > > > > > > >carrying that card, and why he didn't pop the cyanide caps=
>ule he had
>> > > > > > > > >been given.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> 2.
>>
> their DD 1173
>> > > > > > > > >> >cards when they returned to the continental United Stat=
>es ( It was
>> > > > > > > > >> >illegal for the CIA to operate within the borders of th=
>e US) =3DA0Oswald
>>
>> > > > > > > > > It is "illegal for the CIA to opeate within the borders o=
>f the US"?
>> > > > > > > > > They do it anyway.
>>
>omatically
>> > > > > > > > >disowned by the agency.
>>
>ven after he
>> > > > > > > > >made the public plea ..."I do request that "SOMEONE" come =
>forward to
>> > > > > > > > >my legal assistance.....
>>
>er were
>> > > > > > > > >putting out wasn't the truth so they left Oswald hanging i=
>n the wind.
>> > > > > > > > >( the story was that Oswald was nuts and they had PROOF th=
>at he had
>> > > > > > > > >murdered JFK ) Rember the bold LIES being told by the Dall=
>as
>> > > > > > > > >authorities on Friday night and Saturday??
>>
>to =A0come to
>> > > > > > > > >Oswald's aid and Hoover got wind of it and ordered Oswald =
>executed
>> > > > > > > > >immediately.
>>
>> > > > > > > > That doesn't square with the evidence. =A0The greatly incre=
>ased traffic flow of
>> > > > > > > > calls in the weeks preceding the assassination between Ruby=
> and the Mafia, the
>> > > > > > > > evidence that at least implies that Ruby was 'stalking' Osw=
>ald.
>>
>> > > > > > > =A0The fact that both Oswald and the previous patsy in Miami =
>both had
>> > > > > > > 'strong'
>> > > > > > > =A0Cuban ties, which was a hot topic with the CIA in those ti=
>mes, leads
>> > > > > > > me to
>> > > > > > > =A0believe that the CIA most assuredly would *not* have tried=
> saving the
>> > > > > > > designated
>> > > > > > > =A0patsy - things were going exactly the way they wanted. =A0=
>(Then LBJ
>> > > > > > > tripped 'em up
>>
>> > > > > > > Ben, that would mean that the plot was hatched at the highest=
> level of
>> > > > > > > the CIA. =A0ie; The assassination of JFK was a plot that was =
>if not
>> > > > > > > hatched in CIA heaquarters, it was at least approved at CIA
>> > > > > > > headquarters....
>>
>> > > > > > > I simply can't accept that.....
>>
> were the
>> > > > > > > ones who fanned the flames of hatred for JFK because of THEIR=
> fiasco
>> > > > > > > at BOP. =A0BOP was a CIA baby from top to bottom...They conce=
>ived the
>> > > > > > > goofy idea and convinced a bunch of hot headed Cubans that th=
>ey could
>> > > > > > > pull it off.... They failed in planning anf they failed in ex=
>ecution,
>> > > > > > > but like Rob they wanted to put the blame on JFK. =A0JFK bein=
>g an
>> > > > > > > honorable man, and the President publically accepted the blam=
>e altough
>> > > > > > > he was NOT the man most responsible for the mess.
>>
>pted the
>> > > > > > > responsibility for the fiasco. =A0Their CIA handlers goaded a=
>nd prodded
>> > > > > > > them to "go get him". =A0Hoover learned of the plot and told =
>LBJ... But
>> > > > > > > neither of them warned the JFK. =A0Both Hoover and LBJ realiz=
>ed they
>> > > > > > > would profit by JFK's demise.
>>
>y to
>> > > > > > > Oswald, and wanted to provide him with a good lawyer.... =A0I=
>f Oswald
>> > > > > > > lived to stand trial both LBJ's and Hoover's neck would have =
>been in a
>> > > > > > > noose. =A0They could not allow LHO to live a day longer.....t=
>he had to
>> > > > > > > get him executed while he was still in the custody of an enti=
>ty that
>> > > > > > > Hoover and Johnson could control. =A0 Once Oswald was out of =
>the
>> > > > > > > jurisdiction of =A0DPD Chief =A0Jesse Curry he chance of sile=
>ncing Oswald
>> > > > > > > was not assured.
>>
>t three
>> > > > > > > separate plots running simultaneously. CIA =A0renegades with =
>Cubans,
>> > > > > > > KKK and Minutemen, and Mafia ...... =A0 When the murder happe=
>ned
>> > > > > > > everyone scurried for cover.
>>
> Hoover
>> > > > > > > and Johnson could have prevented any of the plots from succee=
>ding.
>> > > > > > > But =A0they had decided beforehand that which ever plot sucee=
>ded they
>> > > > > > > would help cover up the truth...... They were forced to cover=
> up =A0as a
>> > > > > > > matter of self peservation.
>>
>> > > > > > > > I think that the plan was to get rid of him right from the =
>beginning - if he
>> > > > > > > > hadn't been vouched for in the TSBD, he may very well have =
>been shot right
>> > > > > > > > there.
>>
>> > > > > > > Actually he wasn't "vouched for" in the TSBD..... Sure Truly =
>said
>> > > > > > > "he's an employee"... "he belongs here"
>y employee
>> > > > > > > missing....
>>
>> > > > > > Why does a man who has "researched" this case for 40 years stil=
>l pass
>> > > > > > out faulty, supplied by the WC no less, information WITHOUT ref=
>uting
>> > > > > > it???
>>
>> > > > > > Capt. W.P. Gannaway said LHO's descritption was broadcasted bec=
>ause he
>> > > > > > was the ONLY one missing from a "roll call" of TSBD employees s=
>hortly
>> > > > > > after the assassination. Gannaway said "he was the ONLY one who=
> didn't
>> > > > > > show up and couldn't be accounted for. (Dallas Morning News 11/=
>23/63)
>> > > > > > Whether he got this information from Truly or not is up in the =
>air,
>> > > > > > but more importantly is the accuracy of it.
>>
>> > > > > The Stupid Bastard wrote:...." First off, there was NO SUCH roll
>>
>> > > > > call .....
>>
>> > > > > Here ya go SB..... Truly's testimony about counting noses. ( roll
>> > > > > call)
>>
>> > > > > Mr. Truly.
> time
>> > > > > like that--I noticed some of my boys were over in the west corner=
> of
>> > > > > the shipping department, and there were several officers over the=
>re
>> > > > > taking their names and addresses, and so forth.
>>
>> > > > > Mr. Truly.
>ther
>> > > > > employees, like office people's names. I noticed that Lee Oswald =
>was
>> > > > > not among these boys.So I picked up the telephone and called Mr. =
>Aiken
>> > > > > down at the other warehouse who keeps our application blanks. Bac=
>k up
>> > > > > there.First I mentioned to Mr. Campbell--I asked Bill Shelley if =
>he
>> > > > > had seen him, he looked around and said no.
>>
>> > > > > Mr. Belin.
>> > > > > When you asked Bill Shelley if he had seen whom?
>>
>> > > > > Mr. Truly.
>d no.
>> > > > > So Mr. Campbell is standing there, and I said, "I have a boy over=
> here
>> > > > > missing. I don't know whether to report it or not." Because I had
>there
>> > > > > or not. He said, "What do you think"? And I got to thinking. He s=
>aid,
>> > > > > "Well, we better do it anyway." It was so quick after that.
>use,
>> > > > > and got the boy's name and general description and telephone numb=
>er
>> > > > > and address at Irving.
>>
>> > > > > (WCR, p. 156; VII, p. 382), and
>BD
>> > > > > after
>> > > > > =A0the assassination (the time they claimed to have taken the rol=
>l
>> > > > > =A0call). =A0This was looked into and they found the following:
>>
>> > > =A0LOL!!!! I was NOT denying he said it, but rather the accuracy of t=
>he
>> > > =A0statement.
>>
>> > > Hey you Stupid Bastard...Did you write this??:...." First off, there
>> > > was NO SUCH roll call"
>>
>> > > Didn't Roy Truly in his testimony say that he took inventory of his
>> > > "boys"??
>>
>> > And you believe this??? ONLY LNers believe this as the WC itself gave
>> > evidence there was a ton of people missing at the time they claimed to
>> > have taken "roll call" and said LHO was the ONLY one missing!!
>>
>> Hey Stupid Bastard ....go take a course in reading comprehension.
>>
>> I did NOT say that I believed that Oswald was the only employee
>> missing, in fact I know that at least five of Truly's "Boys" had left
>> the area, and several more were not in the ...
>>
>
No Rob, I didn't. Don't drag me into your fantasies.
>as he was
>dancing all around the issue as he is afraid of you.
Rob is back to child molesting, I see...
>Here is what Ben
>wrote in this thread:
>
>>But only an hour later he singled out Oswald as the only employee
>>missing.... (Walt)
>
>I don't know this to be a fact. There was quite a bit 'twisted' by the
>WC. But
>presuming this to *be* a fact, it can simply mean that pressure was
>already
>being applied shortly afterward. Or that Truly was involved in some
>way, as
>some have suggested. (Ben)
>
>Because Ben is afraid of you he wouldn't say you were proposing a
>bunch of crap, but since I'm NOT afraid of you I will call you on it.
Embarrassing for you, Rob - but you don't seem to recognize it.
>You were caught red-handed in a lie yesterday claiming you never said
>anything about 133A and C being from the same negative and I showed
>you DID claim this very thing.
>
>Ben was soooo scared of you he attacks me instead of calling you a
>liar like he does to everyone else in those situations.
Rob ... when you have to invent "facts", all you do is embarrass yourself. When
all you have is lies, then you just look stupid.
Ben Holmes
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On Oct 16, 2:21=A0pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>> On 16 Oct, 12:38, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
>>
>> > > On 16 Oct, 11:49, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
>> > > wrote:
>>
>>
>> > > > > On 16 Oct, 11:32, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.co=
>m>
>> > > > > wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > On Oct 16, 12:20=A0pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > On 16 Oct, 10:56, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscap=
>e.com>
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > On Oct 15, 11:28=A0pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wr=
>ote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > > On 15 Oct, 20:44, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wro=
>te:
>>
>> > > > > > > > > > In article <1bd0dd27-60e1-477d-ba5f-963c185a6...@u65g20=
>00hsc.googlegroups.com>,
>> > > > > > > > > > Walt says...
>>
>> > > > > > > > > > >On 15 Oct, 16:39, "aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com"
>> > > > > > > > > > ><aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > >> There are two things you said that don't make sense.
>>
>ers carried ID on him
> not supposed to carry
>> > > > > > > > > > >> ID. =3DA0Shades of Gene Hasenfus.
>>
>> > > > > > > > > > >I can only tell you to study up on the U-2 incident...=
>. There are
>> > > > > > > > > > >photographs available of FG Powers mutilated DD 1173.
>nything that may
>> > > > > > > > > > >betray them. They even wear only clothing that is made=
> in the area
>> > > > > > > > > > >where they are operating. =A0I don't remember what Pow=
>ers excuse was for
>> > > > > > > > > > >carrying that card, and why he didn't pop the cyanide =
>capsule he had
>> > > > > > > > > > >been given.
>>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> 2.
>>
>n in their DD 1173
>States ( It was
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >illegal for the CIA to operate within the borders o=
>f the US) =3DA0Oswald
>>
>> > > > > > > > > > > It is "illegal for the CIA to opeate within the borde=
>rs of the US"?
>> > > > > > > > > > > They do it anyway.
>>
> automatically
>> > > > > > > > > > >disowned by the agency.
>>
>...even after he
>> > > > > > > > > > >made the public plea ..."I do request that "SOMEONE" c=
>ome forward to
>> > > > > > > > > > >my legal assistance.....
>>
>Hoover were
>> > > > > > > > > > >putting out wasn't the truth so they left Oswald hangi=
>ng in the wind.
>> > > > > > > > > > >( the story was that Oswald was nuts and they had PROO=
>F that he had
>> > > > > > > > > > >murdered JFK ) Rember the bold LIES being told by the =
>Dallas
>> > > > > > > > > > >authorities on Friday night and Saturday??
>>
>ing to =A0come to
>> > > > > > > > > > >Oswald's aid and Hoover got wind of it and ordered Osw=
>ald executed
>> > > > > > > > > > >immediately.
>>
>> > > > > > > > > > That doesn't square with the evidence. =A0The greatly i=
>ncreased traffic flow of
>> > > > > > > > > > calls in the weeks preceding the assassination between =
>Ruby and the Mafia, the
> Oswald.
>>
>> > > > > > > > > =A0The fact that both Oswald and the previous patsy in Mi=
>ami both had
>> > > > > > > > > 'strong'
>> > > > > > > > > =A0Cuban ties, which was a hot topic with the CIA in thos=
>e times, leads
>> > > > > > > > > me to
>ried saving the
>> > > > > > > > > designated
>> > > > > > > > > =A0patsy - things were going exactly the way they wanted.=
> =A0(Then LBJ
>> > > > > > > > > tripped 'em up
>> > > > > > > > > =A0and refused to invade Cuba)
>>
>> > > > > > > > > Ben, that would mean that the plot was hatched at the hig=
>hest level of
>> > > > > > > > > the CIA. =A0ie; The assassination of JFK was a plot that =
>was if not
>> > > > > > > > > hatched in CIA heaquarters, it was at least approved at C=
>IA
>> > > > > > > > > headquarters....
>>
>> > > > > > > > > I simply can't accept that.....
>>
>They were the
>> > > > > > > > > ones who fanned the flames of hatred for JFK because of T=
>HEIR fiasco
>> > > > > > > > > at BOP. =A0BOP was a CIA baby from top to bottom...They c=
>onceived the
>> > > > > > > > > goofy idea and convinced a bunch of hot headed Cubans tha=
>t they could
>> > > > > > > > > pull it off.... They failed in planning anf they failed i=
>n execution,
>> > > > > > > > > but like Rob they wanted to put the blame on JFK. =A0JFK =
>being an
>> > > > > > > > > honorable man, and the President publically accepted the =
>blame altough
>> > > > > > > > > he was NOT the man most responsible for the mess.
>>
>accepted the
>> > > > > > > > > responsibility for the fiasco. =A0Their CIA handlers goad=
>ed and prodded
>> > > > > > > > > them to "go get him". =A0Hoover learned of the plot and t=
>old LBJ... But
>> > > > > > > > > neither of them warned the JFK. =A0Both Hoover and LBJ re=
>alized they
>> > > > > > > > > would profit by JFK's demise.
>>
>ility to
>> > > > > > > > > Oswald, and wanted to provide him with a good lawyer.... =
>=A0If Oswald
>> > > > > > > > > lived to stand trial both LBJ's and Hoover's neck would h=
>ave been in a
>> > > > > > > > > noose. =A0They could not allow LHO to live a day longer..=
>...the had to
>> > > > > > > > > get him executed while he was still in the custody of an =
>entity that
>> > > > > > > > > Hoover and Johnson could control. =A0 Once Oswald was out=
> of the
>> > > > > > > > > jurisdiction of =A0DPD Chief =A0Jesse Curry he chance of =
>silencing Oswald
>> > > > > > > > > was not assured.
>>
>about three
>> > > > > > > > > separate plots running simultaneously. CIA =A0renegades w=
>ith Cubans,
>> > > > > > > > > KKK and Minutemen, and Mafia ...... =A0 When the murder h=
>appened
>> > > > > > > > > everyone scurried for cover.
>>
> the Hoover
>> > > > > > > > > and Johnson could have prevented any of the plots from su=
>cceeding.
>> > > > > > > > > But =A0they had decided beforehand that which ever plot s=
>uceeded they
>> > > > > > > > > would help cover up the truth...... They were forced to c=
>over up =A0as a
>> > > > > > > > > matter of self peservation.
>>
>> > > > > > > > > > I think that the plan was to get rid of him right from =
>the beginning - if he
>ave been shot right
>> > > > > > > > > > there.
>>
>uly said
>> > > > > > > > > "he's an employee"... "he belongs here"
> only employee
>> > > > > > > > > missing....
>>
>> > > > > > > > Why does a man who has "researched" this case for 40 years =
>still pass
>> > > > > > > > out faulty, supplied by the WC no less, information WITHOUT=
> refuting
>> > > > > > > > it???
>>
>> > > > > > > > Capt. W.P. Gannaway said LHO's descritption was broadcasted=
> because he
>> > > > > > > > was the ONLY one missing from a "roll call" of TSBD employe=
>es shortly
>> > > > > > > > after the assassination. Gannaway said "he was the ONLY one=
> who didn't
>> > > > > > > > show up and couldn't be accounted for. (Dallas Morning News=
> 11/23/63)
>> > > > > > > > Whether he got this information from Truly or not is up in =
>the air,
>> > > > > > > > but more importantly is the accuracy of it.
>>
>oll
>>
>> > > > > > > call .....
>>
>> > > > > > > Here ya go SB..... Truly's testimony about counting noses. ( =
>roll
>> > > > > > > call)
>>
>> > > > > > > Mr. Truly.
>> > > > > > > Then in a few minutes--it could have been moments or minutes =
>at a time
>> > > > > > > like that--I noticed some of my boys were over in the west co=
>rner of
>> > > > > > > the shipping department, and there were several officers over=
> there
>> > > > > > > taking their names and addresses, and so forth.
>>
>> > > > > > > Mr. Truly.
>ng other
>> > > > > > > employees, like office people's names. I noticed that Lee Osw=
>ald was
>> > > > > > > not among these boys.So I picked up the telephone and called =
>Mr. Aiken
>> > > > > > > down at the other warehouse who keeps our application blanks.=
> Back up
>> > > > > > > there.First I mentioned to Mr. Campbell--I asked Bill Shelley=
> if he
>> > > > > > > had seen him, he looked around and said no.
>>
>> > > > > > > Mr. Belin.
>> > > > > > > When you asked Bill Shelley if he had seen whom?
>>
>> > > > > > > Mr. Truly.
> said no.
>> > > > > > > So Mr. Campbell is standing there, and I said, "I have a boy =
>over here
>> > > > > > > missing. I don't know whether to report it or not." Because I=
> had
>> > > > > > > another one or two out then. I didn't know whether they were =
>all there
>> > > > > > > or not. He said, "What do you think"? And I got to thinking. =
>He said,
>> > > > > > > "Well, we better do it anyway." It was so quick after that.
>rehouse,
>> > > > > > > and got the boy's name and general description and telephone =
>number
>> > > > > > > and address at Irving.
>>
>> > > > > > > (WCR, p. 156; VII, p. 382), and
>e TSBD
>> > > > > > > after
>> > > > > > > =A0the assassination (the time they claimed to have taken the=
> roll
>> > > > > > > =A0call). =A0This was looked into and they found the followin=
>g:
>>
>> > > > > =A0LOL!!!! I was NOT denying he said it, but rather the accuracy =
>of the
>> > > > > =A0statement.
>>
>> > > > > Hey you Stupid Bastard...Did you write this??:...." First off, th=
>ere
>> > > > > was NO SUCH roll call"
>>
>is
>> > > > > "boys"??
>>
>> > > > And you believe this??? ONLY LNers believe this as the WC itself ga=
>ve
>> > > > evidence there was a ton of people missing at the time they claimed=
> to
>> > > > have taken "roll call" and said LHO was the ONLY one missing!!
>>
>> > > Hey Stupid Bastard ....go take a course in reading comprehension.
>>
>> > > I did NOT say that I believed that Oswald was the only employee
>> > > missing, in fact I know that at least five of Truly's "Boys" had left
>> > > the area, and several more were not in the ...
>>
>>
>> > > - Show quoted text -
>>
>> > Well your biggest defender thought the same thing as I did, as he was
>n
>> > wrote in this thread:
>>
>e
>> > >missing.... (Walt)
>>
>> > I don't know this to be a fact. There was quite a bit 'twisted' by the
>> > presuming this to *be* a fact, it can simply mean that pressure was
>> > already
>> > way, as
>> > some have suggested. (Ben)
>>
>> =A0bunch of crap,
>>
>> Huh???.... Get yer head outta yer ass and learn to read...
>>
>e
>>
>> Truly said "he's an employee"... "he belongs here" But =A0only an hour
>> later he singled out Oswald =A0as the only employee missing....
>>
>> But =A0only an hour later he singled out Oswald =A0as the only employee
>> missing.... (Walt)
>>
>> What that says, Stupid Bastard is: =A0 =A0Truly called Oswald's absence t=
>o
>> the attention of the cops. =A0He knew that Oswald was not the only man
>> missing.... but he never-the-less told the cops that Oswald was
>> just seconds after the shooting so even though he was not there in the
>> TSBD Truly should have logically dismissed him as a suspect ,
>>
>> Get your head outta yer ass and READ.....
>
>I have and Capt. Granaway NEVER mentioned Truly as the source for
>LHO's whereabouts. There is no proof Truly told him anything, they
>simply lied and said they held a roll call when they did not.
Of course, Truly must have been lying too...
It's convenient when you can simply label anything you don't like as a "lie".
Perhaps Rob's experience as a liar helps him in this.
>> Stupid Bastard wrote: " but since I'm NOT afraid of you ,I will call
>>
>> you on it.
>>
>> Seems to me we're on the same page....so you'll have ta "call yourself
>> "on it also.
>
>"Walt The Liar" claims we are on the same page when he claims Truly
>told them LHO was not in the building and there is NO proof he did.
>WTL wants us to believe there was a roll call to prove this when there
>was NONE and many more people were missing than there. NO WTL, we
>aren't on the same page.
Sad to say for your "reading ability", Walt never asserted that Oswald was the
only person missing from the TSBD.
Because you can't read, Rob - you just end up looking stupid.
Ben Holmes
Walt says...>> In article <385cfe42-034c-4f5d-9e45-3f8518a02...@y29g2000hsf.googlegroups=
>.com>,
>> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Oct 15, 11:28=3DA0pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>> >> On 15 Oct, 20:44, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>>
>rou=3D
>> >ps.com>,
>> >> > Walt says...
>>
>> >> > >On 15 Oct, 16:39, "aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com"
>> >> > ><aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> > >> There are two things you said that don't make sense.
>>
> ID o=3D
>> >n him
>> >> > >> when he flew the U-2? =3D3DA0I doubt it. =3D3DA0They are not supp=
>osed to=3D
>> > carry
>> >> > >> ID. =3D3DA0Shades of Gene Hasenfus.
>>
>> >> > >I can only tell you to study up on the U-2 incident.... There are
>> >> > >photographs available of FG Powers mutilated DD 1173.
>may
>> >> > >betray them. They even wear only clothing that is made in the area
>was f=3D
>> >or
>> >> > >carrying that card, and why he didn't pop the cyanide capsule he ha=
>d
>> >> > >been given.
>>
>> >> > >> 2.
>>
>> >> > >> >All CIA contract employees were under orders to turn in their DD=
> 11=3D
>> >73
>> >> > >> >cards when they returned to the continental United States ( It w=
>as
>> >> > >> >illegal for the CIA to operate within the borders of the US) =3D=
>3DA0O=3D
>> >swald
>>
>> >> > > It is "illegal for the CIA to opeate within the borders of the US"=
>?
>> >> > > They do it anyway.
>>
>y
>> >> > >disowned by the agency.
>>
> he
>> >> > >made the public plea ..."I do request that "SOMEONE" come forward t=
>o
>> >> > >my legal assistance.....
>>
>> >> > >They didn't know for sure that the story that LBJ and Hoover were
>d.
>> >> > >( the story was that Oswald was nuts and they had PROOF that he had
>> >> > >murdered JFK ) Rember the bold LIES being told by the Dallas
>> >> > >authorities on Friday night and Saturday??
>>
>ome t=3D
>> >o
>> >> > >Oswald's aid and Hoover got wind of it and ordered Oswald executed
>> >> > >immediately.
>>
>affic=3D
>> > flow of
>> >> > calls in the weeks preceding the assassination between Ruby and the =
>Maf=3D
>> >ia, the
>> >> > evidence that at least implies that Ruby was 'stalking' Oswald.
>>
>d
>> >> 'strong'
>> >> =3DA0Cuban ties, which was a hot topic with the CIA in those times, le=
>ads
>> >> me to
>> >> =3DA0believe that the CIA most assuredly would *not* have tried saving=
> the
>> >> designated
>> >> =3DA0patsy - things were going exactly the way they wanted. =3DA0(Then=
> LBJ
>> >> tripped 'em up
>> >> =3DA0and refused to invade Cuba)
>>
>> >> Ben, that would mean that the plot was hatched at the highest level of
>> >> hatched in CIA heaquarters, it was at least approved at CIA
>> >> headquarters....
>>
>> >> I simply can't accept that.....
>>
>> >> I do believe there were CIA people involved in the plot. They were the
>> >> ones who fanned the flames of hatred for JFK because of THEIR fiasco
>e
>> >> goofy idea and convinced a bunch of hot headed Cubans that they could
>> >> pull it off.... They failed in planning anf they failed in execution,
>> >> honorable man, and the President publically accepted the blame altough
>> >> he was NOT the man most responsible for the mess.
>>
>e
>> >> responsibility for the fiasco. =3DA0Their CIA handlers goaded and prod=
>ded
>> >> them to "go get him". =3DA0Hoover learned of the plot and told LBJ... =
>But
>> >> neither of them warned the JFK. =3DA0Both Hoover and LBJ realized they
>> >> would profit by JFK's demise.
>>
>> >> Oswald, and wanted to provide him with a good lawyer.... =3DA0If Oswal=
>d
>> >> lived to stand trial both LBJ's and Hoover's neck would have been in a
>to
>> >> get him executed while he was still in the custody of an entity that
>> >> jurisdiction of =3DA0DPD Chief =3DA0Jesse Curry he chance of silencing=
> Oswald
>> >> was not assured.
>>
>> >> I believe it's important to keep in mind that there were about three
>> >> KKK and Minutemen, and Mafia ...... =3DA0 When the murder happened
>> >> everyone scurried for cover.
>>
>> >> It's not important WHICH group was responsible....because the Hoover
>> >> and Johnson could have prevented any of the plots from succeeding.
>y
>> >> would help cover up the truth...... They were forced to cover up =3DA0=
>as a
>> >> matter of self peservation.
>>
> - =3D
>> >if he
>> >> > hadn't been vouched for in the TSBD, he may very well have been shot=
> ri=3D
>> >ght
>> >> > there.
>>
>> >> Actually he wasn't "vouched for" in the TSBD..... Sure Truly said
>> >> "he's an employee"... "he belongs here"
>loyee
>> >> missing....
>>
>> >Why does a man who has "researched" this case for 40 years still pass
>> >out faulty, supplied by the WC no less, information WITHOUT refuting
>> >it???
>>
>> >Capt. W.P. Gannaway said LHO's descritption was broadcasted because he
>> >was the ONLY one missing from a "roll call" of TSBD employees shortly
>> >after the assassination. Gannaway said "he was the ONLY one who didn't
>> >show up and couldn't be accounted for. (Dallas Morning News 11/23/63)
>> >Whether he got this information from Truly or not is up in the air,
>> >but more importantly is the accuracy of it.
>>
>> >First off, there was NO SUCH roll call (WCR, p. 156; VII, p. 382), and
>> >secondly, LHO was far from the only person missing from the TSBD after
>> >the assassination (the time they claimed to have taken the roll
>>
>> >1) 75 employees worked in the building on 11/22/63 (based on the names
>> >given to them by Truly). (XXII, pp.632-86)
>> >2) 48 were OUTSIDE at 12:30 PM. (Ibid)
>> >3) 5 did NOT report for work that day.(Ibid, pp. 632 & 676)
>> >4) Many of the remaining employees in the building left after the
>> >shots had been fired and ceased. (Ibid, pp. 632, 645, 655-656, 665)
>>
>> >Add in the fact many were NOT allowed back in to the TSBD after the
>> >assassination you have a slew of people "missing" by the time the
>> >missing among the ones who worked on the sixth floor that day as it
>> >was said that LHO was NOT "the only one who didn't show up and
>> >COULDN'T be accounted for." (VI, p. 321)
>>
>> >All of this was discussed in Mark Lane's "Rush To Judgement", how
>> >could you have missed it for 40 years????
>>
>> >Anyone who claims LHO was the "only one missing" is a liar.
>>
> Another excellent example of Rob's poor reading skills.
>
>Ben, much to my chagrin.......I'm compelled to disagree with you. Rob
>doesn't have poor reasoning skills..... ......
>
>They're non-existant.
>
>This should be positive proof for Rob, that you and I don't agree on
>everything......
Chalk it up to optimism... I don't like to believe the worst of anyone... but
the more Rob posts, the more he demonstrates a rather complete inability to
comprehend what he reads, and an almost total lack of the average ability to
handle everyday logic.
And he *still* can't find that other pencil...
robcap...@netscape.com
Walt is right here, I got the wrong lie. I took my eye off the ball.
The A and C pictures coming from the same negative was NOT the lie,
the LIE was him claiming the DeMohrenscildt photo came from CE-133A.
Due to the UNCROPPED nature of the DeM photo it is impossible to claim
it came from CE-133A. I knew he claimed something came from A, and I
made a mistake by associating C with it. My apologies to Walt. Now
on to the real lie:
"Hey Stupid Bastard.... **The De Mohrenschildt print was made from
the
same negative as CE 133A.** It is an uncropped copy of CE 133A.
You're
so stupid that you don't even have enough brains to keep your mouth
shut." (Walt 9/23/08)
Here is what I responded with:
"You know nothing do you? The mere fact the DeMohrenschildt picture
is
NOT cropped means it COULD NOT be linked to the film plane aperture
according to Jack White. This (the film plane aperture) is how the
FBI linked the second picture (CE-133B) to the first one, but this
one
COULD NOT BE linked that way due to it being printed full negative.
There is NO proof to link the DeM photo to CE-133A, just another
wacky
Walt claim." (Robert 9/23/98)
> Ha, ha,ha,ha, hee, hee, hee.... ROTFLMAO...... Aren't you the guy
> that just an hour ago crowed about his vast knowledge of the
> assassination?????.
> Let's see if your even smart enought to count....CE 133A is one, CE
> 133B is two, the Geneva White photo 133C is three.... There ya go
> stupid bastard.... What's the total?
>
> Can ya understand that with yer foggy brain? I clearly wrote: "the
> Geneva White photo 133C is three"
Yes you did there, but you also wrote:
"Hey Stupid Bastard.... **The De Mohrenschildt print was made from
the
same negative as CE 133A.** It is an uncropped copy of CE 133A.
You're
so stupid that you don't even have enough brains to keep your mouth
shut." (Walt 9/23/08)
Now, how about proving the DeM photo came from the negative of A????
I knew the photo was tied in somehow, so let's call it D if it will
make you happen. I don't care. Just back up your lie that it came
from the A negative.
> I don't even mention the De Morhenschildt print, and I clearly stated
> that the the Geneva White photo is 133C
You mentioned it here:
"Hey Stupid Bastard.... **The De Mohrenschildt print was made from
the
same negative as CE 133A.** It is an uncropped copy of CE 133A.
You're
so stupid that you don't even have enough brains to keep your mouth
shut." (Walt 9/23/08)
robcap...@netscape.com
Big deal, you two are kissing each other's butt more than you and
Dave. Watch out, Dave may get jealous.
Now I did get tied up in the "C" thing, but unfortunately for you I
can show you still lied. You said:
"Hey Stupid Bastard.... **The De Mohrenschildt print was made from
the
same negative as CE 133A.** It is an uncropped copy of CE 133A.
You're
so stupid that you don't even have enough brains to keep your mouth
shut." (Walt 9/23/08)
Now show us all how an UNCROPPED photo (DeM) can be tied to a negative
of a cropped photo again.
Walt
wrote:
Rob, If you don't mind I'll re-phrase your statement above.........
I'm sorry, I was confused about which Back Yard photo was which. It's
not entirely my fault because the bastards that covered up the truth
about the murder planned to confuse the unwary. I should have paid
closer attention to what you posted, and evaluated what you wrote
before I called you a liar. I've jumped to conclusions all my life
and it's a difficult habit to break. If you'll just cut me a little
slack, I'll try to change my ways.
Thank You
>but unfortunately for you I can show you still lied.
> You said:
>
> "Hey Stupid Bastard.... **The De Mohrenschildt print was made from
> the
> same negative as CE 133A.** It is an uncropped copy of CE 133A.
> You're
> so stupid that you don't even have enough brains to keep your mouth
> shut." (Walt 9/23/08)
>
> Now show us all how an UNCROPPED photo (DeM) can be tied to a negative
> of a cropped photo again.- Hide quoted text -
robcap...@netscape.com
> In article <4179bcb3-b047-48c2-b483-56aa736c1...@e17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
LOL!!!!! Since when????
> but
> the more Rob posts, the more he demonstrates a rather complete inability to
> comprehend what he reads, and an almost total lack of the average ability to
> handle everyday logic.
What is incomprehensible is how Ben continues to support Walt's lies.
Perhaps I was a bit off base with saying Walt said C was the DeM
photo, but all one had to due was click the link I provided or read
the comment he wrote, which was:
"Hey Stupid Bastard.... **The De Mohrenschildt print was made from
the
same negative as CE 133A.** It is an uncropped copy of CE 133A.
You're
so stupid that you don't even have enough brains to keep your mouth
shut." (Walt 9/23/08)
anyone who know this case would know this is a lie. Now maybe Ben is
ignorant of this area or has NO interest, but why not look into it if
he wants the truth?
No, instead Ben opts for his favorite pastime of jumping on all CTers
but Walt. Dave likes to call us CTers "ABOs" (Anybody But Oswald), but
Ben is definitely an "ABW" (Anybody But Walt) kind of guy. How sad
that he is supporting a liar like Walt. I wonder why?
> And he *still* can't find that other pencil...
LOL!!! He says I have NO logic when he compares a pencil to a weapon
with a UNIQUE barrel characteristic that SEPERATES it from all other
weapons in the world. Do pencils have this capability?
robcap...@netscape.com
All I missed is YOU designated the WHITE photo C. It doesn't change
YOUR LIE WTL! Now prove the DeM came from the negative of A or we
Walt
wrote:
No Rob, you weren't "a bit off base".....you weren't even in the same
ball park.
Now c'mon, if your gonna confess to being wrong, then be a man and DO
IT.
but all one had to due was click the link I provided or read
> the comment he wrote, which was:
>
> "Hey Stupid Bastard.... **The De Mohrenschildt print was made from
> the
> same negative as CE 133A.** It is an uncropped copy of CE 133A.
> You're
> so stupid that you don't even have enough brains to keep your mouth
> shut." (Walt 9/23/08)
>
> anyone who know this case would know this is a lie. Now maybe Ben is
> ignorant of this area or has NO interest, but why not look into it if
> he wants the truth?
>
> No, instead Ben opts for his favorite pastime of jumping on all CTers
> but Walt. Dave likes to call us CTers "ABOs" (Anybody But Oswald), but
> Ben is definitely an "ABW" (Anybody But Walt) kind of guy. How sad
> that he is supporting a liar like Walt. ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
robcap...@netscape.com
LOL!!! So by mistaking you saying the DeM is C is way off topic John?
Please. Now how about this claim?
"Hey Stupid Bastard.... **The De Mohrenschildt print was made from
the
same negative as CE 133A.** It is an uncropped copy of CE 133A.
You're
so stupid that you don't even have enough brains to keep your mouth
shut." (Walt 9/23/08)
> Now c'mon, if your gonna confess to being wrong, then be a man and DO
> IT.
Already did John, CAN'T you read???
Walt
Rob....I don't know if CE 133A and the De Morhenschildt print were
actually made from the same negative. .........or if CE 133A is
actually a photograph of the De Morhenschildt photo. or vise versa.
(I'm not an expert on photography )
But I DO know that they both are identical with the exception that CE
133A has been cropped.
If you'd just listen to reason, and work with me, there may be
something we can learn together about CE 133A and the De
Morhenschildt. But Let me make myself perfectly clear...I will NOT
tollerate any nonsense about CE 133A being a fake photo created by the
conspirators. That's utterly ridiculous and I have no time for
nonsense.
Now maybe Ben is
> ignorant of this area or has NO interest, but why not look into it if
> he wants the truth?
>
> No, instead Ben opts for his favorite pastime of jumping on all CTers
> but Walt. Dave likes to call us CTers "ABOs" (Anybody But Oswald), but
> Ben is definitely an "ABW" (Anybody But Walt) kind of guy. How sad
> that he is supporting a liar like Walt. ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
robcap...@netscape.com
> > "Hey Stupid Bastard.... **The De Mohrenschildt print was made from
> > the
> > same negative as CE 133A.** It is an uncropped copy of CE 133A.
> > You're
> > so stupid that you don't even have enough brains to keep your mouth
> > shut." (Walt 9/23/08)
>
> > anyone who know this case would know this is a lie.
>
> Rob....I don't know if CE 133A and the De Morhenschildt print were
> actually made from the same negative. .........or if CE 133A is
> actually a photograph of the De Morhenschildt photo. or vise versa.
> (I'm not an expert on photography )
> But I DO know that they both are identical with the exception that CE
> 133A has been cropped.
Well, this is NOT what you claimed last month. Others have disagreed
with you in terms of them being the same as for example White says the
DeM 133A-deM is much clearer and sharper, suggessting it was taken
with a better camera. Also the fact it is UNCROPPED severs any claim
it came from A, thus we have a totally different photo right there.
At least you are admitting your claim was NOT a fact for once.
> If you'd just listen to reason, and work with me, there may be
> something we can learn together about CE 133A and the De
> Morhenschildt. But Let me make myself perfectly clear...I will NOT
> tollerate any nonsense about CE 133A being a fake photo created by the
> conspirators. That's utterly ridiculous and I have no time for
> nonsense.
Then we can't work together, as I believe ALL of the photos are fake.
It makes NO sense to have a real one and three fakes. Especially when
the one you claim is real has the same issues the other ones do -
square chin; straight down shadow under his nose, but angled shadows
for the body indicating two different times of the day; etc... How
can you claim A is real but the DeM is NOT when you claimed it came
from the same negative before?
By you demanding I accept CE133A as real you are saying you really
DON'T want to work together.
Walt
wrote:
It doesn't??? Let's see if you can understand this....
CE 133A is the photo taken by Marina in the back yard. The De M photo
is basically the same photo except for the facr that CE 133A is
cropped. That AUTHENTIC photo shows a 40 inch Mannlicher Carcano with
an empty sling swivel hanging beneath the foregrip of the rifle. It
clearly as NOT the TSBD rifle!!!
The FBI photo experts spotted that little problem in flash...and they
KNEW that they could not present that photo to the public because it
PROVES that Oswald's rifle was NOT the TSBD rifle, because the TSBD
rifle (CE 139) has the sling swivels on the LEFT SIDE only and NONE on
the bottom. They knew that there were other copies of Marina's photo
(CE 133A ) floating around and they didn't know when another copy
might surface.
They needed a way to discredit the one and ONLY authentic backyard
photo.....and they knew the best way to do that was to create a couple
more photos that would look like they were taken at the same time as
CE 133A . And those photos would show a Mannlicher Carcano with side
sling swivels. The fake photos would confuse the issue and keep the
dumbass public arguing for an eternity .
aeffects
lmao!
tomnln
"Walt" <papakoc...@evertek.net> wrote in message
news:4d03c68d-cf39-4238...@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
Rob....I don't know if CE 133A and the De Morhenschildt print were
actually made from the same negative. .........or if CE 133A is
actually a photograph of the De Morhenschildt photo. or vise versa.
(I'm not an expert on photography )
But I DO know that they both are identical with the exception that CE
133A has been cropped.
If you'd just listen to reason, and work with me, there may be
something we can learn together about CE 133A and the De
Morhenschildt. But Let me make myself perfectly clear...I will NOT
tollerate any nonsense about CE 133A being a fake photo created by the
conspirators. That's utterly ridiculous and I have no time for
nonsense.
I write;
WALLY WALLY WALLY
You've Already Admitted that the Chin in CE133-a has been "Tampered With".
You even had the Audacity to claim that it was LHO himself that "Altered
it".
(Never proving it)
tomnln
Wally World Already Admitted the CHIN was Tampered With ! ! ! !
tomnln
HOW can you call CE133-a "Authentic", when you've Already Admitted that the
Chin was Altered????
"Walt" <papakoc...@evertek.net> wrote in message
news:c08115f5-aa51-4ade...@t42g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Walt
> WALLY WALLY WALLY
>
> HOW can you call CE133-a "Authentic", when you've Already Admitted that the
> Chin was Altered????
>
>
> news:c08115f5-aa51-4ade...@t42g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On 17 Oct, 12:04, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 17, 12:30 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > > > "Hey Stupid Bastard.... **The De Mohrenschildt print was made from
> > > > the
> > > > same negative as CE 133A.** It is an uncropped copy of CE 133A.
> > > > You're
> > > > so stupid that you don't even have enough brains to keep your mouth
> > > > shut." (Walt 9/23/08)
>
> > > > anyone who know this case would know this is a lie.
>
> > > Rob....I don't know if CE 133A and the De Morhenschildt print were
> > > actually made from the same negative. .........or if CE 133A is
> > > actually a photograph of the De Morhenschildt photo. or vise versa.
> > > (I'm not an expert on photography )
> > > But I DO know that they both are identical with the exception that CE
> > > 133A has been cropped.
>
> > Well, this is NOT what you claimed last month. Others have disagreed
> > with you in terms of them being the same as for example White says the
> > DeM 133A-deM is much clearer and sharper, suggessting it was taken
> > with a better camera. Also the fact it is UNCROPPED severs any claim
> > it came from A, thus we have a totally different photo right there.
>
> > At least you are admitting your claim was NOT a fact for once.
It's the same thing I told you a month ago, but you had yer head too
far up yer ass to pay attention.
> > DON'T want to work together.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
tomnln
ALL in her own words.
"Walt" <papakoc...@evertek.net> wrote in message
news:bdb72ec1-2a33-4a26...@c60g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Walt
> WHO is Walt?>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
>
> ALL in her own words.
Eh?? What?? I still can't hear you.... Talk into that microphone under
my dog's tail.
tomnln
http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
ALL in your own words ! ! ! !
Choking on your own words is a LOT tougher than choking on your Cub Scout
Troops Huh Wally ! ! ! !
"Walt" <papakoc...@evertek.net> wrote in message
news:73853eea-9915-4e8d...@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com...
Walt
Thank you for apologizing for and calling me a liar ....when in fact
it was your mistake.
Now then,... Unless The De M print is actually a photograph of CE
133A or vice versa....both CE 133A and the De M print have been made
from the same negative. And even if the De M photo is a photo of CE
133A it is still technically produced from the original negative. In
other words neither photo could exist if the original negative had not
been used to produce a print.
As far as your idea that the De M print could not have been made from
CE 133A.... That's simple pure bunk.. Both photos could have been
produced off the same negative and Oswald cropped his to fit in his
wallet, whereas De M left the copy that Oswald gave him full size.
Why do you think they can't be connected to a single negative just
because one is cropped and one isn't?
Do you know what the word "crop" means??
Ben Holmes
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On Oct 17, 9:31=A0am, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> In article <4179bcb3-b047-48c2-b483-56aa736c1...@e17g2000hsg.googlegroups=
>.com>,
>> Walt says...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On 17 Oct, 07:55, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>ups=3D
>> >.com>,
>> >> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>>
>> >> >On Oct 15, 11:28=3D3DA0pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>> >> >> On 15 Oct, 20:44, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>>
>leg=3D
>> >rou=3D3D
>> >> >ps.com>,
>> >> >> > Walt says...
>>
>> >> >> > >On 15 Oct, 16:39, "aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com"
>> >> >> > ><aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> >> > >> There are two things you said that don't make sense.
>>
>rried=3D
>> > ID o=3D3D
>> >> >n him
>> >> >> > >> when he flew the U-2? =3D3D3DA0I doubt it. =3D3D3DA0They are n=
>ot supp=3D
>> >osed to=3D3D
>> >> > carry
>> >> >> > >> ID. =3D3D3DA0Shades of Gene Hasenfus.
>>
>> >> >> > >I can only tell you to study up on the U-2 incident.... There ar=
>e
>> >> >> > >photographs available of FG Powers mutilated DD 1173.
>at =3D
>> >may
>> >> >> > >betray them. They even wear only clothing that is made in the ar=
>ea
>> >> >> > >where they are operating. =3D3DA0I don't remember what Powers ex=
>cuse =3D
>> >was f=3D3D
>> >> >or
>> >> >> > >carrying that card, and why he didn't pop the cyanide capsule he=
> ha=3D
>> >d
>> >> >> > >been given.
>>
>> >> >> > >> 2.
>>
>> >> >> > >> >All CIA contract employees were under orders to turn in their=
> DD=3D
>> > 11=3D3D
>> >> >73
>> >> >> > >> >cards when they returned to the continental United States ( I=
>t w=3D
>> >as
>> >> >> > >> >illegal for the CIA to operate within the borders of the US) =
>> >3DA0O=3D3D
>> >> >swald
>>
>> >> >> > > It is "illegal for the CIA to opeate within the borders of the =
>US"=3D
>> >?
>> >> >> > > They do it anyway.
>>
>all=3D
>> >y
>> >> >> > >disowned by the agency.
>>
>ter=3D
>> > he
>> >> >> > >made the public plea ..."I do request that "SOMEONE" come forwar=
>d t=3D
>> >o
>> >> >> > >my legal assistance.....
>>
>> >> >> > >They didn't know for sure that the story that LBJ and Hoover wer=
>e
>> >> >> > >putting out wasn't the truth so they left Oswald hanging in the =
>win=3D
>> >d.
>> >> >> > >( the story was that Oswald was nuts and they had PROOF that he =
>had
>> >> >> > >murdered JFK ) Rember the bold LIES being told by the Dallas
>> >> >> > >authorities on Friday night and Saturday??
>>
>3DA0c=3D
>> >ome t=3D3D
>> >> >o
>> >> >> > >Oswald's aid and Hoover got wind of it and ordered Oswald execut=
>ed
>> >> >> > >immediately.
>>
>> >> >> > That doesn't square with the evidence. =3D3DA0The greatly increas=
>ed tr=3D
>> >affic=3D3D
>> >> > flow of
>> >> >> > calls in the weeks preceding the assassination between Ruby and t=
>he =3D
>> >Maf=3D3D
>> >> >ia, the
>> >> >> > evidence that at least implies that Ruby was 'stalking' Oswald.
>>
>th ha=3D
>> >d
>> >> >> 'strong'
>> >> >> =3D3DA0Cuban ties, which was a hot topic with the CIA in those time=
>s, le=3D
>> >ads
>> >> >> me to
>> >> >> =3D3DA0believe that the CIA most assuredly would *not* have tried s=
>aving=3D
>> > the
>> >> >> designated
>> >> >> =3D3DA0patsy - things were going exactly the way they wanted. =3D3D=
>A0(Then=3D
>> > LBJ
>> >> >> tripped 'em up
>> >> >> =3D3DA0and refused to invade Cuba)
>>
>> >> >> Ben, that would mean that the plot was hatched at the highest level=
> of
>> >> >> the CIA. =3D3DA0ie; The assassination of JFK was a plot that was if=
> not
>> >> >> hatched in CIA heaquarters, it was at least approved at CIA
>> >> >> headquarters....
>>
>> >> >> I simply can't accept that.....
>>
>the
>> >> >> ones who fanned the flames of hatred for JFK because of THEIR fiasc=
>o
>> >> >> at BOP. =3D3DA0BOP was a CIA baby from top to bottom...They conceiv=
>ed th=3D
>> >e
>> >> >> goofy idea and convinced a bunch of hot headed Cubans that they cou=
>ld
>> >> >> pull it off.... They failed in planning anf they failed in executio=
>n,
>> >> >> but like Rob they wanted to put the blame on JFK. =3D3DA0JFK being =
>an
>> >> >> honorable man, and the President publically accepted the blame alto=
>ugh
>> >> >> he was NOT the man most responsible for the mess.
>>
>ed th=3D
>> >e
>> >> >> responsibility for the fiasco. =3D3DA0Their CIA handlers goaded and=
> prod=3D
>> >ded
>> >> >> them to "go get him". =3D3DA0Hoover learned of the plot and told LB=
>J... =3D
>> >But
>> >> >> neither of them warned the JFK. =3D3DA0Both Hoover and LBJ realized=
> they
>> >> >> would profit by JFK's demise.
>>
>to
>> >> >> Oswald, and wanted to provide him with a good lawyer.... =3D3DA0If =
>Oswal=3D
>> >d
>> >> >> lived to stand trial both LBJ's and Hoover's neck would have been i=
>n a
>> >> >> noose. =3D3DA0They could not allow LHO to live a day longer.....the=
> had =3D
>> >to
>> >> >> get him executed while he was still in the custody of an entity tha=
>t
>> >> >> Hoover and Johnson could control. =3D3DA0 Once Oswald was out of th=
>e
>> >> >> jurisdiction of =3D3DA0DPD Chief =3D3DA0Jesse Curry he chance of si=
>lencing=3D
>> > Oswald
>> >> >> was not assured.
>>
>> >> >> I believe it's important to keep in mind that there were about thre=
>e
>> >> >> separate plots running simultaneously. CIA =3D3DA0renegades with Cu=
>bans,
>> >> >> KKK and Minutemen, and Mafia ...... =3D3DA0 When the murder happene=
>d
>> >> >> everyone scurried for cover.
>>
>r
>> >> >> and Johnson could have prevented any of the plots from succeeding.
>d the=3D
>> >y
>> >> >> would help cover up the truth...... They were forced to cover up =
>> >as a
>> >> >> matter of self peservation.
>>
>ing=3D
>> > - =3D3D
>> >> >if he
>> >> >> > hadn't been vouched for in the TSBD, he may very well have been s=
>hot=3D
>> > ri=3D3D
>> >> >ght
>> >> >> > there.
>>
>> >> >> Actually he wasn't "vouched for" in the TSBD..... Sure Truly said
>> >> >> "he's an employee"... "he belongs here"
>nly emp=3D
>> >loyee
>> >> >> missing....
>>
>> >> >Why does a man who has "researched" this case for 40 years still pass
>> >> >out faulty, supplied by the WC no less, information WITHOUT refuting
>> >> >it???
>>
>e
>> >> >was the ONLY one missing from a "roll call" of TSBD employees shortly
>t
>> >> >show up and couldn't be accounted for. (Dallas Morning News 11/23/63)
>> >> >Whether he got this information from Truly or not is up in the air,
>> >> >but more importantly is the accuracy of it.
>>
>d
>> >> >secondly, LHO was far from the only person missing from the TSBD afte=
>r
>> >> >the assassination (the time they claimed to have taken the roll
>>
>> >> >1) 75 employees worked in the building on 11/22/63 (based on the name=
>s
>> >> >given to them by Truly). (XXII, pp.632-86)
>> >> >2) 48 were OUTSIDE at 12:30 PM. (Ibid)
>> >> >3) 5 did NOT report for work that day.(Ibid, pp. 632 & 676)
>> >> >4) Many of the remaining employees in the building left after the
>> >> >shots had been fired and ceased. (Ibid, pp. 632, 645, 655-656, 665)
>>
>> >> >Add in the fact many were NOT allowed back in to the TSBD after the
>> >> >assassination you have a slew of people "missing" by the time the
>e
>> >> >missing among the ones who worked on the sixth floor that day as it
>> >> >was said that LHO was NOT "the only one who didn't show up and
>> >> >COULDN'T be accounted for." (VI, p. 321)
>>
>> >> >All of this was discussed in Mark Lane's "Rush To Judgement", how
>> >> >could you have missed it for 40 years????
>>
>> >> >Anyone who claims LHO was the "only one missing" is a liar.
>>
>> > Another excellent example of Rob's poor reading skills.
>>
>> >Ben, much to my chagrin.......I'm compelled to disagree with you. Rob
>> >doesn't have poor reasoning skills..... ......
>>
>> >They're non-existant.
>>
>> >This should be positive proof for Rob, that you and I don't agree on
>> >everything......
>>
>> Chalk it up to optimism... I don't like to believe the worst of anyone...
>
>LOL!!!!! Since when????
>
>> but
>to
>> comprehend what he reads, and an almost total lack of the average ability=
> to
>> handle everyday logic.
>
>What is incomprehensible is how Ben continues to support Walt's lies.
What's *truly* incomprehensible is Rob's continued insistence that he has
fantasies about his mother that would sicken the ordinary mind...
>Perhaps I was a bit off base with saying Walt said C was the DeM
>photo, but all one had to due was click the link I provided or read
>the comment he wrote, which was:
>
>"Hey Stupid Bastard.... **The De Mohrenschildt print was made from
>the
>same negative as CE 133A.** It is an uncropped copy of CE 133A.
>You're
>so stupid that you don't even have enough brains to keep your mouth
>shut." (Walt 9/23/08)
>
>anyone who know this case would know this is a lie. Now maybe Ben is
>ignorant of this area or has NO interest, but why not look into it if
>he wants the truth?
>
>No, instead Ben opts for his favorite pastime of jumping on all CTers
>but Walt. Dave likes to call us CTers "ABOs" (Anybody But Oswald), but
>Ben is definitely an "ABW" (Anybody But Walt) kind of guy. How sad
>that he is supporting a liar like Walt. I wonder why?
When you have to lie to make a point, the only point you've made is that you're
a liar.
>> And he *still* can't find that other pencil...
>
>LOL!!! He says I have NO logic when he compares a pencil to a weapon
>with a UNIQUE barrel characteristic that SEPERATES it from all other
>weapons in the world. Do pencils have this capability?
Rob *still* can't find that pencil...