The three greatest revelations thanks to the ARRB?
Steve
revelations that came to light thanks to the release of the previously
sealed documents later revealed by the ARRB?
Generally when I ask this question none of the conspiracy nuts can
produce anything of substance so let's see if you group of crazies can
do any better.
lazu...@webtv.net
she developed autopsy photographs that are not in the extant
collection.She did not recognize any of the current ones available. Not
only that, she showed the printing paper that was used which is
different. Also, she said she saw a brain photographed next to JFK in
one shot, & the wound in the throat was a circular thumb sized wound
that doesn't correspond to the big messy throat wound in the current
pictures. And she saw a hole clearly in the back of the head matching
some 40 other witnesses. To believe the offical fairytale Spencer who
was very sure of her observations would have to have been wrong on at
least 5 different points...what are the odds? Seems to me anybody that
has any curiosity left,even if they were 80% LHO acted alone which,
certainly is not a 100%hardcore lone nutter that infests these boards,
would be mighty interested in what Spencer says.
2.Douglas Horne meticulously recounts the evidence for a 2 brain exam
shell game. The evidence for a substitute brain that doesn't match the
official Ida Dox tracings.Too much to go into, or remember precisely,
but You can google it
3. I would say the sum revelations about Mac Wallace the fingerprint
issue, which gets into LBJ and the owner D.H. Byrd. That was made
available to the ARRB.
aeffects
Steve-o-reno is attempting to wrest (know what that means shithead?)
control of this board...
Good luck toots-e-roll....
Steve
Wait a minute....THOSE are the greatest revelations made public thanks
to the ARRB? Alleged discrepancies in photographs (none of which are
proven, simply allegations) and Doug Horne nutty duplicate brain
theory? Millions of previously top-secret records get released and
THAT is all the nuts out there found that was worth while?
Boy what a disappointment. I thought some of the nuttier contributors
such as Rosstards and Giltard would have a list a mile-long of all the
incredible revelations that came to light thanks to the ARRB's work.
I guess there wasn't any evidence of conspiracy after all. Is that
right you nuts? All the demands for the release of the records and
NOTHING was in there that pointed to anyone besides Oswald? Boy what
a laugh that turned out to be huh?
As usual Healy didn't contribute ANYTHING worthwhile. Some things
never change.
Gil Jesus
What if we just ignore you ?
Will you misread that as our inability to answer ?
mucher1
Well, you didn't ignore him, did you? Perhaps he hit a sore spot.
bigdog
> 1. Saundra Spencer of the Naval Photographic Center told the ARRB that
> she developed autopsy photographs that are not in the extant
> collection.She did not recognize any of the current ones available. Not
> only that, she showed the printing paper that was used which is
> different. Also, she said she saw a brain photographed next to JFK in
> one shot,
All a small subset of the autopsy photographs and x-rays are in the
public domain, so there is no wonder why her picture of the brain is
not one of them.
> & the wound in the throat was a circular thumb sized wound
> that doesn't correspond to the big messy throat wound in the current
> pictures.
So you think the Parkland staff lied about performing a tracheotomy
over the bullet wound?
> And she saw a hole clearly in the back of the head matching
> some 40 other witnesses.
So why don't we see that hole clearly in the back of the head in the Z-
film?
> To believe the offical fairytale Spencer who
> was very sure of her observations would have to have been wrong on at
> least 5 different points...
You've already demonstrated two and showed another misunderstanding.
> what are the odds?
Pretty good, actually
> Seems to me anybody that
> has any curiosity left,even if they were 80% LHO acted alone which,
> certainly is not a 100%hardcore lone nutter that infests these boards,
> would be mighty interested in what Spencer says.
>
Oh, I find this very in-ter-est.....ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
> 2.Douglas Horne meticulously recounts the evidence for a 2 brain exam
> shell game.
JFK had two brains? That I didn't know.
> The evidence for a substitute brain
They propably substituted a CT's brain. I wasn't being used anyway.
> that doesn't match the
> official Ida Dox tracings.
I hate when that happens.
> Too much to go into, or remember precisely,
God forbid a CT would ever be precise.
> but You can google it
>
The standard CT reply when faced with questions they have no answer
for.
lazu...@webtv.net
released by the ARRB which strengthens the case against Oswald?
Steve
> How about putting the shoe on the other foot? Name one bit of evidence
> released by the ARRB which strengthens the case against Oswald?
The case against Oswald was already iron-clad by the time the ARRB was
even formed--there was no need to further establish Oswald's guilt.
By the time of the formation of the ARRB we already had:
1. Oswald carrying an unaccounted for package into work the morning
of the assassination but NOT leaving with a similar package.
2. A rifle, matched to Oswald's purchase, ownership, and possession
found in the TSBD within a couple of hours of the assassination.
3. ALL bullets and identifiable fragments matched that rifle to the
exclusion of all other weapons on the planet.
4. Oswald's prints were found on the murder weapon and NO ONE elses.
5. Fibers matching Oswald's clothing trapped inthe butt plate.
6. Eyewitnesses placed the gunman in the SE corner window of the TSBD
at the time of the shooting and one eyewitness even gave a description
of Oswald to police.
7. Oswald fled the building within 2 minutes of the assassination and
never returned to work later that day.
8. Oswald raced to catch a bus that was scheduled to stop across the
street of the TSBD within minutes.
9. Oswald, in frantic flight, changed his clothes, picked up his
revolver, and then shot and killed J.D. Tippit a hour after the
assassination.
10. Oswald in a desperate attempt to avoid capture hid in the Texas
Theater and then tried to also murder Officer Nick McDonald during his
arrest.
11. Oswald's handwriting matched the handwriting on the order form
for the rifle.
12. Oswald was photographed holding both murder weapons by his wife,
who to this day confesses she took those photographs.
13. Oswald lied repeatedly during questioning whenever questions were
raised about ownership of his rifle or living at the Neely Street
address (where the photographs were taken.)
and on ....
and on ....
and on ....
We didn't need the ARRB to tell us the shoe was a perfect fit for
Oswald and ONLY Oswald. The conspiracy nuts have tried for 45 years
to force the glass slipper on someone else's foot to no avail. It
only fits one person today--the same person it fit 45 years ago:
Lee Harvey Oswald.
Steve
> released by the ARRB which strengthens the case against Oswald?
Gil has plenty to say when he thinks he is in control of the
conversation, but when he is cornered and forced to provide hard
evidence of a conspiracy he feins ignoring me so that he doesn't have
to be exposed as a nut, a fake, and a fraud. If you really DID have
any evidence produced by the ARRB doed anyone really think you would
ignore my challenge? You would LOVE to produce mountains of evidence
to support your glassy-eyed claims. But when asked to "put up or shut
up" you chose to shut up. I think that speaks volumes to the
objective mind as to the weakness of your imagined case.
bigdog
> How about putting the shoe on the other foot? Name one bit of evidence
> released by the ARRB which strengthens the case against Oswald?
Unlike CTs, we haven't convinced ourselves that there is or was
evidence hidden away somewhere to prove something we can't prove with
the evidence that is available. The case against Oswald was presented
by the WC and it was open and shut. We see no reason to believe there
is hidden evidence that would reveal an alternate truth. The concept
that there could be an alternate truth is laughable. It only happened
one way and that is the way the WC said it happened. I know you CTs
would all like to be the one that finally finds out the truth about
what happened, but unfortunately for all of you, The WC beat you to
that 45 years ago. There is nothing left for you to do than to try to
prove that fairy tales are real.
tomnln
"bigdog" <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6dbc9a5e-2f82-4d8d...@z34g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
bigdog
I participated in an online forum back around the time the movie JFK
was released. That movie was the catalyst for the formation of the
ARRB and the CTs were licking their chops, convinced the release of
classified documents would finally prove that what they had been
telling us all along was true. It was just a matter of time they told
us. When the material began to be released, CT researchers were going
over it with a fine tooth comb. What they produced was one giant YAWN.
Of course they tried to make mountains out of the molehills they did
find, just as they had been doing for almost 30 years with the 26
volumes of information issued by the WC. But, surprise, surprise, no
smoking gun was found that they were convinced was going to be there.
It makes you wonder what it is that they think they are going to find
now after all these years that will finally make their case for them.
What do they expect to come out that hasn't and where do they expect
that to come from? They've been chasing their tails for 45 years but
they just keep going around and around.
tomnln
"bigdog" <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7788f31a-786b-4ce2...@l31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 20, 11:23 am, Steve <sahist...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Aug 20, 7:42 am, lazuli...@webtv.net wrote:
>
> > How about putting the shoe on the other foot? Name one bit of evidence
> > released by the ARRB which strengthens the case against Oswald?
>
> Gil has plenty to say when he thinks he is in control of the
> conversation, but when he is cornered and forced to provide hard
> evidence of a conspiracy he feins ignoring me so that he doesn't have
> to be exposed as a nut, a fake, and a fraud. If you really DID have
> any evidence produced by the ARRB doed anyone really think you would
> ignore my challenge? You would LOVE to produce mountains of evidence
> to support your glassy-eyed claims. But when asked to "put up or shut
> up" you chose to shut up. I think that speaks volumes to the
> objective mind as to the weakness of your imagined case.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOGSHIT WROTE;
I participated in an online forum back around the time the movie JFK
was released. That movie was the catalyst for the formation of the
ARRB and the CTs were licking their chops, convinced the release of
classified documents would finally prove that what they had been
telling us all along was true. It was just a matter of time they told
us. When the material began to be released, CT researchers were going
over it with a fine tooth comb. What they produced was one giant YAWN.
Of course they tried to make mountains out of the molehills they did
find, just as they had been doing for almost 30 years with the 26
volumes of information issued by the WC. But, surprise, surprise, no
smoking gun was found that they were convinced was going to be there.
It makes you wonder what it is that they think they are going to find
now after all these years that will finally make their case for them.
What do they expect to come out that hasn't and where do they expect
that to come from? They've been chasing their tails for 45 years but
they just keep going around and around.
I write;
When we chased YOUR Tail;
All we found was an ASSHOLE ! ! !
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
RUN FELON RUN
Robert
> On Aug 20, 7:42 am, lazuli...@webtv.net wrote:
>
> > How about putting the shoe on the other foot? Name one bit of evidence
> > released by the ARRB which strengthens the case against Oswald?
>
> The case against Oswald was already iron-clad by the time the ARRB was
> even formed--there was no need to further establish Oswald's guilt.
LOL!! When was LHO's guilt EVER "established" in the first place?
> By the time of the formation of the ARRB we already had:
>
> 1. Oswald carrying an unaccounted for package into work the morning
> of the assassination but NOT leaving with a similar package.
What package? YOU have NO package that has a chain of custody or a
link to the alleged murder weapon.
> 2. A rifle, matched to Oswald's purchase, ownership, and possession
> found in the TSBD within a couple of hours of the assassination.
Which one? YOU have evidence on your side that shows a rifle TOTALLY
different from the alleged type would have been ordered IF any were
ordered at all.
Don't panic Steve, Walt and Ben can back you up on this one though.
> 3. ALL bullets and identifiable fragments matched that rifle to the
> exclusion of all other weapons on the planet.
So what? There is NO direct link between the rifle and LHO, and there
is NO direct link between the magic bullet and the fragments to JFK
and JBC, thus you have NOTHING.
> 4. Oswald's prints were found on the murder weapon and NO ONE elses.
That is wide open to conjecture as NO prints were ever photographed in
situ, and the man who was the expert, Latona, said he found NO prints
that were identifiable. All you have is a claim of a print of LHO's
being on the rifle.
Don't panic Steve as Walt can back you up on this one.
> 5. Fibers matching Oswald's clothing trapped inthe butt plate.
Big deal. It matched a shirt LHO was NOT wearing at the time of the
shooting! Explain for us how fibers from a shirt he had on when
arrested got on the rifle Steve.
> 6. Eyewitnesses placed the gunman in the SE corner window of the TSBD
> at the time of the shooting and one eyewitness even gave a description
> of Oswald to police.
This is an out and out lie. Neither thing happened.
> 7. Oswald fled the building within 2 minutes of the assassination and
> never returned to work later that day.
Big deal, many others left and several other did not come back. How
does this prove guilt?
> 8. Oswald raced to catch a bus that was scheduled to stop across the
> street of the TSBD within minutes.
Yes, he allegedly caught a bus that WENT BACK IN THE DIRECTION he
allegedly just fled from! Explain how this makes any sense for us
Steve.
> 9. Oswald, in frantic flight, changed his clothes, picked up his
> revolver, and then shot and killed J.D. Tippit a hour after the
> assassination.
Good of you to ADMIT he changed his clothes, so explain for us how the
shirt he changed into would eventually leave fibers on the alleged
murder weapon when he left it allegedly at the TSBD when he "fled?"
> 10. Oswald in a desperate attempt to avoid capture hid in the Texas
> Theater and then tried to also murder Officer Nick McDonald during his
> arrest.
There is no evidence for this, and explain for us why a man so close
to the Mexican border would go to a movie theater instead of leaving
town?
> 11. Oswald's handwriting matched the handwriting on the order form
> for the rifle.
The sample is too small, and besides, the order form shows a catalog
number and a dollar amount that does NOT match the alleged murder
weapon type. Explain this for us Steve.
Don't panic, Ben and Walt can help you.
> 12. Oswald was photographed holding both murder weapons by his wife,
> who to this day confesses she took those photographs.
There is NO evidence that supports this claim, including the part of
where they had them developed. Show us evidence that proves they are
authentic.
Don't panic, Ben and Walt can help you.
> 13. Oswald lied repeatedly during questioning whenever questions were
> raised about ownership of his rifle or living at the Neely Street
> address (where the photographs were taken.)
LHO's comments have NEVER BEEN PROVEN to be lies as the parts he was
asked about WERE NEVER PROVEN TO BE TRUE. ALL LNers have trouble with
this as they claim folks lie when they CAN'T prove what they say the
person disagrees with was the truth in the first place.
The ONLY thing that goes on and on are your lies!
Don't panic, get with Ben and Walt and work out a game plan.
> and on ....
>
> and on ....
>
> and on ....
>
> We didn't need the ARRB to tell us the shoe was a perfect fit for
> Oswald and ONLY Oswald. The conspiracy nuts have tried for 45 years
> to force the glass slipper on someone else's foot to no avail. It
> only fits one person today--the same person it fit 45 years ago:
YOU have never proved it fit LHO. Too bad for you, but hey, the lie
gets you gainful employment, right?
bigdog
> I write;
>
> When we chased YOUR Tail;
>
> All we found was an ASSHOLE ! ! !
>
colostomy bags like you who no longer have a functioning one.
bigdog
Thank you for the litany of stupid excuses for dismissing every piece
of rock solid evidence of Oswald's guilt. You really have to go
through some mental gymnastics to find that the list Steve provided,
which is just a partial list of all the evidence against Oswald, is
not conclusive proof of Oswald's guilt. In order to do that, for each
item of evidence listed, you have to accept the most bizarre
explainations for every piece of evidence, rather than the most
simple, straight forward, and obvious explainations. In order to
believe in Oswald's innocence one has to believe:
Oswald brought a package into the TSBD which was long enough to hold a
disassembled MC rifle like the one found on the 6th floor of the TSBD
but did not actually hold the rifle that was found on the 6th floor of
the TSBD, and that he ripped open the package, discarded the unknown
contents, and then conveniently left the discarded paper from the
package in the southeast corner of the 6th floor of the TSBD where, oh
yeah, three spent shells were also found and eyewitnesses saw a rifle
being fired from. That sure was nice of the patsy to supply the
conspirators with such an incriminating piece of evidence wasn't it.
What the fuck does chain of custody have to do with this? Then we must
believe that Oswald filled out an order for an MC rifle, addressed the
envelope the order form was sent to Klein's in, and this order form
contained the shipping address of Oswald's PO box, and the order was
made under the same name that Oswald carried a fake ID for, but
somebody other than Oswald actually sent the order form to Klein's.
Then Klein's ships an MC rifle with the same serial number as the
rifle that would be found on the 6th floor of the TSBD but that
somebody other than Oswald picked up the rifle from the PO box but
later on, Oswald was photographed with a different MC rifle than the
one that Klein's had shipped to his PO box.
Whew!!! Let me catch my breath a minute.
Okay, now somebody fired three shots from the 6th floor of the TSBD,
but apparently not from the rifle that was found on the 6th floor of
the TSBD, but these were not the shots that killed JFK and wounded JBC
because, according to Robert, the fragments found in the front of the
limo could not be linked to either JFK or JBC. Apparently, the bullets
that killed JFK and wounded JBC but were not fired from the rifle that
was found on the 6th floor magically dispappeared after inflicting the
damage. Then the conspirators who were planning on framing a lone
assassin and had just shot JFK with a different rifle than the one
found on the 6th floor of the TSBD decided it would be a good idea to
plant a bullet from the rifle that was found on the 6th floor of the
TSBD without figuring out that if the bullets that did kill JFK were
ever recovered, they would than have introduced bullets from two
different guns thus destroying the case for a lone gunmen. Boy, those
guys were dumb.
I need another breather.
Within minutes of the shooting, the entire DPD began a coordinated
effort to begin manufacturing evidence against poor little Lee Harvey
Oswald (maybe that's why he shot one of their guys). Apparently every
officer involved decided to go along with this deception. Now I need a
little help here. Were they told about this in advance or were they
given the orders following the shooting? Anyway, DPD fingerprint
expert Lt. Day lifted Oswald's palmprint from somewhere other than the
rifle that was found on the 6th floor of the TSBD and sent this lifted
print on a card to the FBI labs in Washington. Any ideas where he got
that lifted print from? Meanwhile, Oswald who did not fire a shot from
the rifle that was found on the 6th floor of the TSBD, decided to
leave his workplace in the middle of the day but apparently before he
did, he took off the shirt he was wearing at the time of the shooting
and changed to a shirt that had fibers that exactly matched the fibers
found on the butt plate of the rifle that was found on the 6th floor
of the TSBD but apparently those fibers came from somebody else's
shirt who fired the rifle that was found on the 6th floor of the TSBD
but that wasn't the rifle that was used to kill JFK so they must have
fired the shots earlier and knew which shirt Oswald would change into
after the shooting. A short time later his former landlady, Mary
Bledsoe, saw him get on the bus wearing the shirt he had just changed
into that matched the fibers found on the rifle that was found on the
6th floor of the TSBD.
This is all starting to make sense to me.
Then two witnesses claimed to have seen a rifle being fired from the
southeast corner window of the 6th floor of the TSBD but obviously
they were lying and they just happened to point out the window on the
6th floor of the TSBD where shells and the discarded paper bag were
found. Meanwhile, Oswald after first boarding a bus, decides to get
off of it when it got stuck in traffic because Dealey Plaza had been
blocked off, walks several blocks and then boards a taxi that takes
him to a location a couple blocks past his rooming house rather than
having the driver take him to his rooming house. He then walks back to
his rooming house and decides to take in a movie not knowing that
somebody has stolen his revolver from his rooming house and while
Oswald was walking to the movie theater, somebody else was walking
just a couple blocks south of him to a point where he decides to shoot
a cop who stopped to question him but apparently the guy who shot the
cop began feeling guilty about having stolen Oswald's gun because he
apparently chased him down and gave it back to him before Oswald got
to the theater. Then while Oswald is sitting in the theater enjoying
the movie, the cops ruin it for him by turning on the house lights and
approaching him. Oswald was so pissed off, he punched the first cop to
reach him and then he pulled the gun out, pointed it at the cop and
pulled the trigger but obviously he really wasn't trying to kill the
cop because he allowed the cop to get his hand between the hammer and
the firing pin while he pulled the trigger.
I think I finally understand. How could I have been so wrong about
poor old Lee Harvey Oswald for all these years. He didn't really kill
JFK like I thought. He was just a poor little working stiff who just
happened to have a real unlucky day, the same day JFK got shot right
outside his workplace. Ain't life a bitch.
Steve
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Robert deserves no serious rebuttal, He is an evidence denier. He
changes history in his own mind and convinces himself that what
happened really didn't. Talking to Robert is as effective as talking
to a photo of a man holding a photo of a horse. Even facts that have
been established beyond any and ALL resonable doubt are denied by
Robert. He is not a person an educated person can carry on a debate
with. Robert is willing to stare directly at the sun and tell
everyone it is midnight.
Ignore him.
bigdog
You are describing at least half of the CT community. The Oswald-
deniers will all engage in similar completely illogical games to avoid
confronting the absolutely crystal clear certainty that Oswald shot
JFK. Anyone who can look at the evidence against Oswald and claim he
is innocent has toys in their attic. But it's fun to rattle their
cages every once in a while.
tomnln
Mine works just fine every time you Orally Vacuum it ! ! !
YOURS don't work every time I STUFF it with your own evidence/testim ony>>>
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
When I get you on the radio debate, am I gonna be charged with "Voluntary
Womanslaughter"?
bigdog
> "bigdog" <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
If and when when you ever manage to bullshit your way onto the public
airwaves again, it won't be Womanslaughter. It will be Woman's
laughter. Men will be laughing at you too. Just like everyone on this
forum does.
lazu...@webtv.net
medical professionals? What an arrogant slimy cocksucker you Von pein
and co. are to think you know better than Spencer, or Robinson,
Jenkins,Custer, etc.
David Von Pein
>>> "your opinion is somehow better than the medical professionals?" <<<
The pot & kettle-ism of the above statement from Ol' Laz is enough to
make anybody's bladder burst wide open.
I.E.,
Laz and all of his pathetic "scumbag" CT cohorts think they know way
more about JFK's wounds than the "medical professionals" that you
kooks love to undermine (and call liars) -- e.g., Humes, Boswell,
Finck, Baden, Fisher, Davis, and all the other pathologists who said
that JFK was shot only twice from behind.
Would you care to retract your above "medical professionals"
statement, Ol' Laz? Or do you prefer to look like the idiot you've
proven yourself to be over and over again on these fora?
Gil Jesus
ALSO:
THE ARRB REVEALED THAT THE HSCA WITHHELD INFORMATION ABOUT THE
BOH WOUND FROM ITS MEDICAL PANEL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4PcJLdiZhM
THE ARRB REVEALED THAT THE KENNEDY PHASED WITHDRAWAL FROM VIETNAM WAS
REAL AND OVERTURNED AFTER HIS DEATH
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcr5Q2RfhSQ
THE ARRB REVEALED THAT THE MEDIA CONSPIRED WITH THE CIA TO DESTROY THE
GARRISON INVESTIGATION
Walt
> On Aug 20, 7:42 am, lazuli...@webtv.net wrote:
>
> > How about putting the shoe on the other foot? Name one bit of evidence
> > released by the ARRB which strengthens the case against Oswald?
>
> The case against Oswald was already iron-clad by the time the ARRB was
> even formed--there was no need to further establish Oswald's guilt.
> By the time of the formation of the ARRB we already had:
An unthinking and gullible dupe listed 13 reasons that he believes
prove Oswald murdered President Kennedy......
1. Oswald carrying an unaccounted for package into work the morning
of the assassination but NOT leaving with a similar package.
This statement is not wholly true..... Oswald said he carried his
lunch, the LNer's believe he carried a 40 inch rifle concealed in a 36
inch brown paper bag
2. A rifle, matched to Oswald's purchase, ownership, and possession
found in the TSBD within a couple of hours of the assassination.
The evidence seems to support this statement ... But it seems just a
little to good to be true. It seems more appros to a staged scene.
3. ALL bullets and identifiable fragments matched that rifle to the
exclusion of all other weapons on the planet.
Hoover's lap dogs attested to this fact.... and it "MAY" be true
however...NONE ...I repeat NONE of the bulet, or bullet fragments,
were recovered from either of the victims. ALL of the bullets were
recovered from places far removed from the victims. HOW did those
bullets arrive at the places they were found?????
4. Oswald's prints were found on the murder weapon and NO ONE elses.
This statement is simply a flat out lie..... and I'd be embarrassed if
I had written it.
5. Fibers matching Oswald's clothing trapped inthe butt plate.
True....Apparently fibers were found on the butt of the rifle which
matched the shirt that Oswald was wearing AT THE TIME OF HIS
ARREST....However he had gone to his room and changed clothes BEFORE
he was arrested.... So the fibers should have matched the shirt he's
left in his room, and NOT the shirt that he was wearing when arrested.
6. Eyewitnesses placed the gunman in the SE corner window of the
TSBD
at the time of the shooting and one eyewitness even gave a
description
of Oswald to police.
This statement simply is another lie..... Witnesses saw a man in light
colored clothing moving around behind the windows on the sixth floor
BEFORE the motocade arrived, but AT THE TIME of the shooting the ONLY
ONLY witness that actually saw the man in the light colored clothing
fire the hunting rifle out of a window DESCRIBED that window as being
WIDE OPEN. That window was at the WEST end of the sixth floor. Another
eyewitness, Arnold Rowland, said that he's seen the man with the
hunting rifle with the large scope behind that very wide open window
just before the motorcade arrived. Rowland told his wife that there
was a secret service man with a rifle up there in the TSBD.
7. Oswald fled the building within 2 minutes of the assassination
and
never returned to work later that day.
This statement is another distirtion of the facts.... Apparently
Oswald left the TSBD and caught a bus to go to the Texas Theater.
Boarding a slow moving bus can hardly be viewed as a killer fleeing
the scene..... Only an idiot would try to distort Oswald's actions as
that of a desperate killer fleeing......
8. Oswald raced to catch a bus that was scheduled to stop across the
street of the TSBD within minutes.
Oswald WALKED to the bus stop..... You really should learn the FACTS,
because most everybody in this NG knows the basic facts and they can
spot a lie and a liar in a heartbeat.
9. Oswald, in frantic flight, changed his clothes, picked up his
revolver, and then shot and killed J.D. Tippit a hour after the
assassination.
There's too much distortion and assumption in this short statement to
even address..... I could write a whole page refuting this nonsense
step by step....but I'm not going to waste my time .
10. Oswald in a desperate attempt to avoid capture hid in the Texas
Theater and then tried to also murder Officer Nick McDonald during
his
arrest.
Just another lie based on some idiots imagination....
11. Oswald's handwriting matched the handwriting on the order form
for the rifle.
WOW! .... You got one right. Now what does that prove???
12. Oswald was photographed holding both murder weapons by his wife,
who to this day confesses she took those photographs.
NOT true CE 133A shows Oswald holding a Model 91/38 Mannlicher Carcano
with bottom sling swivels, the TSBD rifle had the sling mounted on the
side. The rifle in Oswald's hand in CE 133a is NOT the TSBD rifle.
13. Oswald lied repeatedly during questioning whenever questions
were
raised about ownership of his rifle or living at the Neely Street
Ridiculous..... There apparently are NO RECORDS of what Oswald told
the authorities.... You're merely accepting the words of the very men
who tried to get Howard brennan to identify Oswald as the man Brennan
had seen aiming the hunting rifle out of the wide open sixth floor
window. Those same men led Oswald into Jack Ruby's S&W.38 bulldog.
Steve
>
> - Show quoted text -
Walt, Walt, Walt the great evidence denier.
1. Walt leaves out the fact the the size of the paper bag was never
determined. Linnie Mae and Wesley admitted they paid very little
attention to the size of the package...why would they? But it WAS a
LONG package wrapped in paper taken from the TSBD. And when this
paper was found it contained Oswald's palm print and index finger
print, and there is NO evidence it ever contained any food. Oswald
told Frazier that he DIDN'T bring his lunch that day didn't he?
2. Walt's logic here is just plain silly. His argument is that since
the evidence points to Oswald it therefore must not be true, it HAS to
have been staged. Thank goodness Walt has NEVER been trusted with ANY
investigation. He wouldn't ever catch anyone, because any evidence
pointing to the guilty party would have to be dismissed as being
planted.
3. This argument is also just plain silly. It is not uncommon at all
for police to locate bullet or fragments beyond the body of the
victim. If the police had to dismiss and ignore all bullets and
fragments that were not in the body of the victim very few murders
would ever be solved. Again, we are all lucky that Walt is not in
charge of ANY sort of investigation with his limited skills of
deduction. I have to assume that if Walt came across a stabbing
victim, he would be unable to solve the case unless the knife was
still protruding from the victim's body. If the knife had been
removed, Walt would tip his police cap back, scratch his head, and be
totally baffled as to what happened to this poor victim.
4. Apparently Walt needs to read about the palm print found on the
rifle and the recovered fingerprint on the trigger guard--both of
which matched Oswald and NO ONE ELSE. Did you really not know this
Walt or are you just ignoring uncomfortable evidence?
5. Walt cannot even admit this obvious piece of evidence since it is
so painful. He has to qualify his statement with "apparently". This
fact just tears poor Walt apart. But he totally misses the point of
the evidence. It doesn't support the fact that Oswald wore that shirt
at the time of the assassination it PROVES beyond ALL doubt that
Oswald owned the MC found in the TSBD and that he was in possession of
it. This is a really tough fact for conspiracy nuts to get their
minds around. They LOVE claiming that the MC found was NOT Oswald's
but to do so they have to ignore the evidence that Oswald's clothing
was found in the butt plate. Sorry you missed that point Walt.
6. I guess Walt has never read Bob Jackson's testimony that he saw
the rifle protruding from the SE corner window of the TSBD during the
shooting. Also apparently Walt has never read Howard Brennan's
eyewitness testimony placing the rifle in Oswald's hands and even
firing the third shot--all of which Brennan saw and later told
police. You need to read more Walt. Incidentally, Arnold Rowland's
wife standing next to him didn't see any of the things he claimed to
have seen. His testimony is riddled wiht inconsistencies and has NO
supporting evidence behind it.
7. I'm glad you used the word "idiot" in your answer. It is clear
you know how to spell it after using it to sign your checks all these
years. You DON'T think that Oswald racing from the building withini
two minutes, and running, jogging, or quickly walking sevel blocks to
catch a bus as evidence of fleeing the scene of the crime. Please
provide a list of all the other employees who behavied in a similar
fashion after the assassination--remembering that Charles Givens DID
return to work later that afternoon. If you don't see Oswald's
actions as fleeing the scene of the crime it can be only attributed to
your ignorance or blindness to the facts of this case.
8. SInce no one saw Oswald traveling to the bus your statement is
simply stupid and made up. Please provide your witnesses who saw
Oswald WALKING down Elm street where he caught the bus. You claim to
know the evidence, please teach me. I will await your list of
witnesses who saw Oswald WALKING down Elm street.
9. Conveniently you chose to ignore Oswald actions of returnin home
and changing his clothings in mid-day for no apparent reason. I can't
say as I blame you Walt. I would avoid this point too if I was an
Oswald lover. It IS hard to explain if you assume he is innocent.
10. To say that Oswald didn't attempt to shoot Officer McDonald
reflects your bias and blind ignorance of the facts in this case. For
someone who boastfully claims to have a great knowledge of this case
you sure make a lot of stupid statements reflecting either blindness
or ignorance.
11. What does Oswald's handwriting on the order form for the murder
weapon prove? You REALLY are unable to connect those two dots? No
one will ever accuse you of careful reasoning and deep thinking will
they?
12. This is a silly statement that has become the latest desperate
attempt by conspiracy crazies to get the murder weapon out of Oswald's
hand. Please enlighten all of us as to what happened to the rifle in
the photograph then? When did Oswald purchase this second rifle? Why
didn't Marina ever see two rifles? What evidence do you have of this
second purchase? Where is the photograph rifle today?
All you are doing is misinterpreting the details of the backyard
photographs. Admit it, you don't know what you are talking about.
The rifle in question was ordered by Oswald (as you admitted) it was
owned by Oswald (as you admitted with conceding HIS fibers were found
in the butt plate) and it was found on the floor where Oswald worked,
and it had Oswald's palm and finger print on it, and all bullets, and
fragments were matched to it. yet you are out in left field screaming
that there was a mysterious second rifle in Oswald's hand in the
backyard photographs. A rifle that no one else ever saw, has never
been found, was never purchased by Oswald, etc... You say a LOT of
silly things Walt. It is little wonder people make fun of you on this
site.
13. Of course I believe what the police testified to. I have no
reason to doubt their words. And you are in a corner with your
comments here and you are too dumb to even see it. Of course you
claim Oswald was not guilty of any wrongdoing yet you admit that Ruby
shot Oswald. Why would Ruby shoot an innocent Oswald? What is Ruby
afraid an innocent Oswald is going to say? And how would Ruby know
that Oswald hadn't already spilled his guts by Sunday morning. It
makes absolutely NO SENSE for Ruby to shoot Oswald UNLESS Oswald was
the guilty party. But since you don;'t believe Oswald was guilty you
are exposed as being in a illogical, unwinnable position.
Sorry to point out the obvious Walt but your ridiculous, childlike
theories are bumping into one another and they contradict each other's
position.
Nice try though.
ShutterBun
> This statement is not wholly true..... Oswald said he carried his
> lunch, the LNer's believe he carried a 40 inch rifle concealed in a 36
> inch brown paper bag
Wow, that must have been one hell of a submarine sandwich!
> 2. A rifle, matched to Oswald's purchase, ownership, and possession
> found in the TSBD within a couple of hours of the assassination.
>
> The evidence seems to support this statement ... But it seems just a
> little to good to be true. It seems more appros to a staged scene.
Finding a murder weapon in the vicinity of the crime isn't terribly
unusual, neither is determining its owner (particularly in the case of
firearms).
> 3. ALL bullets and identifiable fragments matched that rifle to the
> exclusion of all other weapons on the planet.
>
> Hoover's lap dogs attested to this fact.... and it "MAY" be true
> however...NONE ...I repeat NONE of the bulet, or bullet fragments,
> were recovered from either of the victims. ALL of the bullets were
> recovered from places far removed from the victims. HOW did those
> bullets arrive at the places they were found?????
I assume you're discounting Connally's wrist fragments, since they
didn't contain rifling, and you're chosing to discount the NAA
evidence. Fair enough. The other fragments were found in the car
(except CE399) where a guy just happened to get his head blown off.
To suppose that a group of conspirators had "created" a mangled bullet
& fragments by firing Oswald's rifle into a goat skull, or something,
then removed all of the "real" fragments, and substituted their own,
is pretty hard to swallow.
>
> 4. Oswald's prints were found on the murder weapon and NO ONE elses.
>
> This statement is simply a flat out lie..... and I'd be embarrassed if
> I had written it.
Who else's were found on it? Fritz's? Day's?
> 5. Fibers matching Oswald's clothing trapped inthe butt plate.
>
> True....Apparently fibers were found on the butt of the rifle which
> matched the shirt that Oswald was wearing AT THE TIME OF HIS
> ARREST....However he had gone to his room and changed clothes BEFORE
> he was arrested.... So the fibers should have matched the shirt he's
> left in his room, and NOT the shirt that he was wearing when arrested.
It's a bit disingenuos to flatly state with certainty that Oswald
changed his shirt when he went to the rooming house. There is
conflicting testimony on both sides of the issue. But one piece of
physical evidence does suggest he was wearing the same shirt: his bus
transfer was found in his shirt pocket when he was arrested. Of
course, it's entirely possible he simply took the transfer out of his
pocket and put it in his new shirt pocket, but it's at least something
to consider.
> 6. Eyewitnesses placed the gunman in the SE corner window of the
> TSBD
> at the time of the shooting and one eyewitness even gave a
> description
> of Oswald to police.
>
> This statement simply is another lie..... Witnesses saw a man in light
> colored clothing moving around behind the windows on the sixth floor
> BEFORE the motocade arrived, but AT THE TIME of the shooting the ONLY
> ONLY witness that actually saw the man in the light colored clothing
> fire the hunting rifle out of a window DESCRIBED that window as being
> WIDE OPEN.
No, Brennan only said that he didn't remember the window being closed
as far as it was.
> That window was at the WEST end of the sixth floor. Another
> eyewitness, Arnold Rowland, said that he's seen the man with the
> hunting rifle with the large scope behind that very wide open window
> just before the motorcade arrived. Rowland told his wife that there
> was a secret service man with a rifle up there in the TSBD.
Rowland made a lot of other strange claims about the man he saw in the
window. He's unreliable. Even his wife didn't believe him.
> 7. Oswald fled the building within 2 minutes of the assassination
> and
> never returned to work later that day.
>
> This statement is another distirtion of the facts.... Apparently
> Oswald left the TSBD and caught a bus to go to the Texas Theater.
> Boarding a slow moving bus can hardly be viewed as a killer fleeing
> the scene..... Only an idiot would try to distort Oswald's actions as
> that of a desperate killer fleeing......
Wow, talk about a distortion of the facts. Why leave out the part
where he got off the bus when it got bogged down in traffic? Or the
part where he goes home to change his pants and put on a new jacket?
(having hastily left his other jacket at work)
> 8. Oswald raced to catch a bus that was scheduled to stop across the
> street of the TSBD within minutes.
>
> Oswald WALKED to the bus stop..... You really should learn the FACTS,
> because most everybody in this NG knows the basic facts and they can
> spot a lie and a liar in a heartbeat.
How were you able to determine he walked?
> 9. Oswald, in frantic flight, changed his clothes, picked up his
> revolver, and then shot and killed J.D. Tippit a hour after the
> assassination.
>
> There's too much distortion and assumption in this short statement to
> even address..... I could write a whole page refuting this nonsense
> step by step....but I'm not going to waste my time .
Do you deny that he changed his pants, and put on a different jacket?
> 10. Oswald in a desperate attempt to avoid capture hid in the Texas
> Theater and then tried to also murder Officer Nick McDonald during
> his
> arrest.
>
> Just another lie based on some idiots imagination....
I think it's based on the testimony of several eyewitnesses, partially
coroborrated even by Oswald himself (who admitted having the gun, and
striking his arresting officer)
> 11. Oswald's handwriting matched the handwriting on the order form
> for the rifle.
>
> WOW! .... You got one right. Now what does that prove???
That he ordered the rifle.
> 12. Oswald was photographed holding both murder weapons by his wife,
> who to this day confesses she took those photographs.
>
> NOT true CE 133A shows Oswald holding a Model 91/38 Mannlicher Carcano
> with bottom sling swivels, the TSBD rifle had the sling mounted on the
> side. The rifle in Oswald's hand in CE 133a is NOT the TSBD rifle.
Your interpretation of the rifle in CE133A is in stark contrast with
the HSCA's photographic experts.
> 13. Oswald lied repeatedly during questioning whenever questions
> were
> raised about ownership of his rifle or living at the Neely Street
>
> Ridiculous..... There apparently are NO RECORDS of what Oswald told
> the authorities....
Fritz at least took notes.
> You're merely accepting the words of the very men
> who tried to get Howard brennan to identify Oswald as the man Brennan
> had seen aiming the hunting rifle out of the wide open sixth floor
> window. Those same men led Oswald into Jack Ruby's S&W.38 bulldog.
Wrong. Ruby used a Colt Cobra. You aren't very familiar with the
FACTS in this case, are you? ;-)
David Von Pein
>>> "Do you deny that he changed his pants, and put on a different jacket?" <<<
I'll interject my 2 cents here....
I definitely deny that point.
There's no way, IMO, that Oswald changed his pants (or shirt).
Why would he feel compelled to take the extra time to change his pants
or shirt at that point in time when he was obviously running for his
own life?
And the term "different jacket" is not accurate. He wasn't wearing ANY
jacket when he rushed into his roominghouse on 11/22/63. His blue
jacket, in fact, was found in the Domino Room of the TSBD in early
December, just where he left it on Nov. 22nd.
And the fact that Oswald quickly slipped on a jacket (ANY jacket) when
he was in his room on that somewhat-balmy Friday afternoon is another
indication, IMO, that Oswald did not change his shirt. Because the
jacket he was putting on over his brown shirt was, in effect,
providing any "change of clothing" and/or "change in appearance" that
LHO might have required at that particular moment (plus, the jacket
helped conceal his revolver a little better too, of course).
ShutterBun
> >>> "Do you deny that he changed his pants, and put on a different jacket?" <<<
>
> I'll interject my 2 cents here....
>
> I definitely deny that point.
>
> There's no way, IMO, that Oswald changed his pants (or shirt).
>
> Why would he feel compelled to take the extra time to change his pants
> or shirt at that point in time when he was obviously running for his
> own life?
Good point. Nailing down whether he changed his pants or not is even
more difficult than the shirt issue. I guess all we really have is
Marina's somewhat unsure recollection that he wore his grey pants when
he left for work that morning, Oswald's statement to Fritz that he
changed them, but (as we've seen) Oswald's not the most reliable
character out there.
> And the term "different jacket" is not accurate. He wasn't wearing ANY
> jacket when he rushed into his roominghouse on 11/22/63. His blue
> jacket, in fact, was found in the Domino Room of the TSBD in early
> December, just where he left it on Nov. 22nd.
Correct. Unfortunate choice of words on my part, but I meant "a
different jacket than he wore in to work."
> And the fact that Oswald quickly slipped on a jacket (ANY jacket) when
> he was in his room on that somewhat-balmy Friday afternoon is another
> indication, IMO, that Oswald did not change his shirt. Because the
> jacket he was putting on over his brown shirt was, in effect,
> providing any "change of clothing" and/or "change in appearance" that
> LHO might have required at that particular moment (plus, the jacket
> helped conceal his revolver a little better too, of course).
Agreed.
Coondog
> >
> THE ARRB REVEALED THAT THE KENNEDY PHASED WITHDRAWAL FROMVIETNAMWAS
> REAL AND OVERTURNED AFTER HIS DEATH
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcr5Q2RfhSQ
>
What a shithead reference. It begins with Stoned Stone’s B-grade
movie and Fletcher Prouty, a known nutcase. May I suggest you dig
deeper than movies and U-Tube for your history?
Dr. Ed Moise (a real historian of the left) says a small but
insignificant change occurred between the draft NSAM 273 JFK was
prepared to sign and the formal version that LBJ signed. Do you savvy
“insignificant”? It had to do with the OPLAN 34A operations, the
beginnings under JFK and the increase in these operations under LBJ.
Moise describes these operations as a “pin prick” which means they
didn’t amount to a hill of beans under JFK or LBJ.
The 1,000 man withdrawal was mostly playing politics with Diem and at
home. McNamara says the men simply were not needed. There is no
indication that this was the beginning of a scheduled withdrawal and
NSAM 263 signed by JFK states this will be done without harming the
war effort in SV.
1965 is the target date for training the ARVN so we could leave. It
does not say we WILL leave in 1965 but says we should be able to leave
by then. If fact, JFK says if 1965 doesn’t work we’ll get a new date.
Try these real references and see if you can learn something.
1. http://tapes.millercenter.virginia.edu/clips/1963_1002_vietnam_am/
2. http://tapes.millercenter.virginia.edu/clips/1963_1002_vietnam_pm/ind...
3. http://tapes.millercenter.virginia.edu/clips/1963_1005_vietnam/index.htm
Bill Clarke
David Von Pein
>>> "Nailing down whether he changed his pants or not is even more difficult than the shirt issue." <<<
Indeed.
>>> "I guess all we really have is Marina's somewhat unsure recollection that he wore his grey pants when he left for work that morning..." <<<
Yes, but even Marina's testimony on this issue must be taken with a
grain of salt, because I believe there's some discrepancy and
confusion concerning what Marina saw and did on the morning of
November 22nd.
According to some sources (Priscilla Johnson McMillan for one, unless
I'm mistaken), Marina didn't even wake up in time to see Lee leave the
Paine house on 11/22. So she might have been sleeping the whole time,
and therefore wouldn't know for certain what color pants LHO was
wearing that day.
And FWIW, the David L. Wolper movie "Four Days In November" is another
source for the theory that Marina was sound asleep when Lee left for
work, with narrator Richard Basehart telling us: "Without awakening
anyone, he [LHO] leaves the silent Paine household".*
>>> "...Oswald's statement to Fritz that he changed them [his pants], but (as we've seen) Oswald's not the most reliable character out there." <<<
For sure. But here are my thoughts on Oswald's comment to Captain
Fritz that he changed his "trousers" (which is the word used by Fritz
in his official report, located on Page 601 of the Warren Commission
Report):
WR; Pg. 601:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0313a.htm
Oswald told Fritz he went home to change his pants (even though he did
no such thing, IMO) because that was something that LHO probably felt
he needed to say under the circumstances.
In other words, Oswald needed an innocent-sounding excuse for going
home when he did go there around 1:00 PM on November 22nd. And the "I
went home to change my pants/clothes" excuse is as good as any.
Yes, according to Captain Fritz' report (also on Page 601 of the WR),
at the same time Oswald was telling Fritz he went home to change his
trousers, he also told Fritz he "got his pistol" at the same time.
But when looking at this EXTRA item of information supplied
voluntarily by Lee Oswald from strictly Oswald's own point-of-view
(i.e., the fact that LHO picked up his revolver at his roominghouse
after the assassination took place), he obviously couldn't deny the
fact that he DID, indeed, have a gun on him when he was arrested. And
that gun didn't get in his hands by way of magic.
So, Oswald must have retrieved that weapon at some point on November
22. So he decided to tell the truth in this rare instance, so he
admitted he picked up the gun at the same time he made up his lie
about changing his pants.
But the "pants" lie, IMO, would have been considered the MAIN reason
for going home when he did on November 22 (from Oswald's POV of trying
to spin a tale of being innocent of JFK's murder). Because I kind of
doubt that Oswald wanted to admit the following truthful fact to Will
Fritz:
"Yes, Captain Fritz, I went home that afternoon right after the
shooting that took place right on the doorstep of my workplace. And
the only reason I went home was to arm myself with a gun (and many
extra bullets that I put in my pants pocket), because I felt I might
become involved in a shootout with the police shortly thereafter."
Now, the above paragraph IS the truth of the matter, in my view. But
Oswald obviously couldn't admit such a thing; so he invented an extra
reason for going home when he did -- the "change of clothes" excuse.
* = www.Four-Days-In-November.blogspot.com
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/87362abad980a00e
Walt
Liar.... Frazier showed the FBI how much of the seat of his 53 Chevy
was covered by the package.....The FBI measured the distance Frazier
indicated and it measired 27 inches...
Linnie Mae Randle said that the sack she saw Oswald carrying was about
28 inches long..... She showed the FBI how Oswald carried that sack
with his arm straight down at his side....The FBI determined that the
distance from Oswald's had to his ankle was about 28 inches.
Linnie Mae and Wesley admitted they paid very little
> attention to the size of the package...why would they? But it WAS a
> LONG package wrapped in paper taken from the TSBD. And when this
> paper was found it contained Oswald's palm print and index finger
> print, and there is NO evidence it ever contained any food. Oswald
> told Frazier that he DIDN'T bring his lunch that day didn't he?
>
> 2. Walt's logic here is just plain silly. His argument is that since
> the evidence points to Oswald it therefore must not be true, it HAS to
> have been staged. Thank goodness Walt has NEVER been trusted with ANY
> investigation. He wouldn't ever catch anyone, because any evidence
> pointing to the guilty party would have to be dismissed as being
> planted.
Apparently you're ignorant of the fact that Nick Katzenbach said the
very same thing that I said...."the evidence seems just a little to
pat too be true....Therefore we need to present a story to the
American people that will convince them that Oswald was just a lone
nut killer, and any discussion about his possible motive should be cut
off.
>
> 3. This argument is also just plain silly. It is not uncommon at all
> for police to locate bullet or fragments beyond the body of the
> victim. If the police had to dismiss and ignore all bullets and
> fragments that were not in the body of the victim very few murders
> would ever be solved. Again, we are all lucky that Walt is not in
> charge of ANY sort of investigation with his limited skills of
> deduction. I have to assume that if Walt came across a stabbing
> victim, he would be unable to solve the case unless the knife was
> still protruding from the victim's body. If the knife had been
> removed, Walt would tip his police cap back, scratch his head, and be
> totally baffled as to what happened to this poor victim.
Duh.... Are you really this stupid??.... Simply because a spent bullet
is found near a victim that has been shot does NOT mean that the
bullet found was the one that killed the victim...
THINK about it ..... If a person wanted to murder someone and throw
suspiction away from himself he could shoot his victim through the
body and then throw down a bullet near the body that matched some
other poor sap's gun. In this case ALL of the bullet fragments and
the whole bullet were found far removed from the victims.
>
> 4. Apparently Walt needs to read about the palm print found on the
> rifle and the recovered fingerprint on the trigger guard--both of
> which matched Oswald and NO ONE ELSE. Did you really not know this
> Walt or are you just ignoring uncomfortable evidence?
I'll bet you any dollar amount that you want to wager that I have
studied this aspect of the case more than any researcher you care to
name. I KNOW that there was NO palm print of any kind found on that
rifle....and I can PROVE it. Of course to prove it a person has to
be willing to accept the FACTS. And the FBI report shows that the
partial finger prints that were found on the rifle's magazine were
insufficient to identify the person who left them on the rifle.
>
> 5. Walt cannot even admit this obvious piece of evidence since it is
> so painful. He has to qualify his statement with "apparently". This
> fact just tears poor Walt apart. But he totally misses the point of
> the evidence. It doesn't support the fact that Oswald wore that shirt
> at the time of the assassination it PROVES beyond ALL doubt that
> Oswald owned the MC found in the TSBD and that he was in possession of
> it. This is a really tough fact for conspiracy nuts to get their
The fibers on the butt plate were "Fresh" according to the FBI.... The
ONLY time that the rifle could have come in contact with that ARREST
shirt was AFTER both the shirt and the rifle were in the hands of the
authorities.
> minds around. ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
Walt
> On Aug 21, 7:15 am, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > This statement is not wholly true..... Oswald said he carried his
> > lunch, the LNer's believe he carried a 40 inch rifle concealed in a 36
> > inch brown paper bag
>
> Wow, that must have been one hell of a submarine sandwich!
Stupid Bastard!!..... Oswald never said his lunch FILLED that sack....
>
> > 2. A rifle, matched to Oswald's purchase, ownership, and possession
> > found in the TSBD within a couple of hours of the assassination.
>
> > The evidence seems to support this statement ... But it seems just a
> > little to good to be true. It seems more appros to a staged scene.
>
> Finding a murder weapon in the vicinity of the crime isn't terribly
> unusual, neither is determining its owner (particularly in the case of
> firearms).
And it's not unusal for a gun to be left at the crime scene to mislead
the detectives.....
>
> > 3. ALL bullets and identifiable fragments matched that rifle to the
> > exclusion of all other weapons on the planet.
>
> > Hoover's lap dogs attested to this fact.... and it "MAY" be true
> > however...NONE ...I repeat NONE of the bulet, or bullet fragments,
> > were recovered from either of the victims. ALL of the bullets were
> > recovered from places far removed from the victims. HOW did those
> > bullets arrive at the places they were found?????
>
> I assume you're discounting Connally's wrist fragments, since they
> didn't contain rifling, and you're chosing to discount the NAA
> evidence. Fair enough. The other fragments were found in the car
> (except CE399) where a guy just happened to get his head blown off.
> To suppose that a group of conspirators had "created" a mangled bullet
> & fragments by firing Oswald's rifle into a goat skull, or something,
> then removed all of the "real" fragments, and substituted their own,
> is pretty hard to swallow.
You seem to be forgetting that the killers were plotting to murder the
President of the United States.... They knew what needed to be done
to frame a patsy.
>
>
>
> > 4. Oswald's prints were found on the murder weapon and NO ONE elses.
>
> > This statement is simply a flat out lie..... and I'd be embarrassed if
> > I had written it.
>
> Who else's were found on it? Fritz's? Day's?
There were NO identifiable prints found on that gun.....
>
> > 5. Fibers matching Oswald's clothing trapped inthe butt plate.
>
> > True....Apparently fibers were found on the butt of the rifle which
> > matched the shirt that Oswald was wearing AT THE TIME OF HIS
> > ARREST....However he had gone to his room and changed clothes BEFORE
> > he was arrested.... So the fibers should have matched the shirt he's
> > left in his room, and NOT the shirt that he was wearing when arrested.
>
> It's a bit disingenuos to flatly state with certainty that Oswald
> changed his shirt when he went to the rooming house. There is
> conflicting testimony on both sides of the issue. But one piece of
> physical evidence does suggest he was wearing the same shirt: his bus
> transfer was found in his shirt pocket when he was arrested. Of
> course, it's entirely possible he simply took the transfer out of his
> pocket and put it in his new shirt pocket, but it's at least something
> to consider.
OR is it possible that the cops found that bus transfer in the shirt
that Oswald took off and left in his room?? The bus transfer
certainly doesn't look like one that's been in the shirt pocket of a
fugitive on the run on that warm and humid day....nor does it look
like it's been in the pocket of a shirt that was nearly ripped of
Oswald's back in the struggle in the theater....It's in nearly
pristine condition, like it would have been if it had been left in the
shirt pocket at the rooming house.
>
> > 6. Eyewitnesses placed the gunman in the SE corner window of the
> > TSBD
> > at the time of the shooting and one eyewitness even gave a
> > description
> > of Oswald to police.
>
> > This statement simply is another lie..... Witnesses saw a man in light
> > colored clothing moving around behind the windows on the sixth floor
> > BEFORE the motocade arrived, but AT THE TIME of the shooting the ONLY
> > ONLY witness that actually saw the man in the light colored clothing
> > fire the hunting rifle out of a window DESCRIBED that window as being
> > WIDE OPEN.
>
> No, Brennan only said that he didn't remember the window being closed
> as far as it was.
>
WRONG!!.... READ Brennan's DESCRIPTION of the gunman firing the
hunting rifle ...He DESCRIBES a man STANDING behind a window that had
to be WIDE OPEN.
> > That window was at the WEST end of the sixth floor. Another
> > eyewitness, Arnold Rowland, said that he's seen the man with the
> > hunting rifle with the large scope behind that very wide open window
> > just before the motorcade arrived. Rowland told his wife that there
> > was a secret service man with a rifle up there in the TSBD.
>
> Rowland made a lot of other strange claims about the man he saw in the
> window. He's unreliable. Even his wife didn't believe him.
Is this the best you can do???..... Make a cheap attempt to discredit
Rowland.......
>
> > 7. Oswald fled the building within 2 minutes of the assassination
> > and
> > never returned to work later that day.
>
> > This statement is another distirtion of the facts.... Apparently
> > Oswald left the TSBD and caught a bus to go to the Texas Theater.
> > Boarding a slow moving bus can hardly be viewed as a killer fleeing
> > the scene..... Only an idiot would try to distort Oswald's actions as
> > that of a desperate killer fleeing......
>
> Wow, talk about a distortion of the facts. Why leave out the part
> where he got off the bus when it got bogged down in traffic? Or the
> part where he goes home to change his pants and put on a new jacket?
> (having hastily left his other jacket at work)
I was merely pointing out the absurity of Oswald "fleeing" by walking
up Elm street and boarding a SLOW moving bus. You stupid assholes have
attempted to paint this silly picture for 45 years. You claim that
Oswald planned to kill JFK by smuggling his rifle into the TSBD but
then he failed to formulate a plan that would have allowed him to
escape. What an absurd scenario!!..
And you can't deny that Oswald steadfastly denied that he had shot
JFK. A nutty assassin who wanted to be caught so he could tell the
whole world that he had done the deed probably wouldn't plan an
escape ...but according to your scenario Oswald wanted to escape but
never planned for that escape....
>
> > 8. Oswald raced to catch a bus that was scheduled to stop across the
> > street of the TSBD within minutes.
>
> > Oswald WALKED to the bus stop..... You really should learn the FACTS,
> > because most everybody in this NG knows the basic facts and they can
> > spot a lie and a liar in a heartbeat.
>
> How were you able to determine he walked?
The Warren Commission determined that he WALKED to the bus
stop....Don't you even know what is in your bible??
>
> > 9. Oswald, in frantic flight, changed his clothes, picked up his
> > revolver, and then shot and killed J.D. Tippit a hour after the
> > assassination.
>
> > There's too much distortion and assumption in this short statement to
> > even address..... I could write a whole page refuting this nonsense
> > step by step....but I'm not going to waste my time .
>
> Do you deny that he changed his pants, and put on a different jacket?
>
> > 10. Oswald in a desperate attempt to avoid capture hid in the Texas
> > Theater and then tried to also murder Officer Nick McDonald during
> > his
> > arrest.
>
> > Just another lie based on some idiots imagination....
>
> I think it's based on the testimony of several eyewitnesses, partially
> coroborrated even by Oswald himself (who admitted having the gun, and
> striking his arresting officer)
You THINK wrong!!..... But don't bother to check the facts....I know
that you've got your mind made up.
>
> > 11. Oswald's handwriting matched the handwriting on the order form
> > for the rifle.
>
> > WOW! .... You got one right. Now what does that prove???
>
> That he ordered the rifle.
Big deal.... I've never had a problem with Oswald ordering a rifle
NINE months before the assassination...... The real question is: For
whom did he order that rifle?? Who bought the Money order that was
sent to Kleins?? WHAT was going on in Oswald's life at the time he
ordered the rifle??
bigdog
That's Mr. Cocksucker to you, asshole. But I thank you anyway. That
means a lot coming from a raving lunatic such as yourself. If you had
actually been paying attention to these forums the past few weeks,
months, years, you would know that I don't consider myself qualified
to judge the work of the medical professionals and for that reason, I
have deferred to their judgment. I have pointed out on many occassions
that every single qualified medical professional who has had the
opportunity to review the medical evidence has agreed with the finding
that JFK was shot twice from behind, once in the upper back and once
in the back of the head. The evidence for that is so conclusive that
no forensic medical professional would jeopardize his professional
reputation by claiming other wise. I have made that assertion numerous
times and not one CT has ever challenged me on it. Would you care to
be the first. Can you name ONE qualified forensic medical professional
who has gone on record and disagreed with the conclusion that JFK was
shot twice from behind? We both already know that you can't which
should tell anyone who is paying attention that the medical evidence
alone confirms that JFK was shot twice from behind and that there is
no medical evidence of any shot from any other direction.
bigdog
of a boat.
> 3. This argument is also just plain silly. It is not uncommon at all
> for police to locate bullet or fragments beyond the body of the
> victim. If the police had to dismiss and ignore all bullets and
> fragments that were not in the body of the victim very few murders
> would ever be solved. Again, we are all lucky that Walt is not in
> charge of ANY sort of investigation with his limited skills of
> deduction. I have to assume that if Walt came across a stabbing
> victim, he would be unable to solve the case unless the knife was
> still protruding from the victim's body. If the knife had been
> removed, Walt would tip his police cap back, scratch his head, and be
> totally baffled as to what happened to this poor victim.
>
This is painfully obvious to anyone with a functioning brain which
does not include Walt, Rossley, or Girlie Jesus. I served on a jury in
which a young woman was killed by her boyfriend in a domestic dispute.
One bullet was recovered from the wall of the apartment and the other
bullet was found between the carpet and the concrete subfloor
underneath the head of the victim, but by Walt's logic, we shouldn't
have assumed either bullet had caused the fatal wounds. What were we
thinking when we convicted that poor schmuck.
> 4. Apparently Walt needs to read about the palm print found on the
> rifle and the recovered fingerprint on the trigger guard--both of
> which matched Oswald and NO ONE ELSE. Did you really not know this
> Walt or are you just ignoring uncomfortable evidence?
>
> 5. Walt cannot even admit this obvious piece of evidence since it is
> so painful. He has to qualify his statement with "apparently". This
> fact just tears poor Walt apart. But he totally misses the point of
> the evidence. It doesn't support the fact that Oswald wore that shirt
> at the time of the assassination it PROVES beyond ALL doubt that
> Oswald owned the MC found in the TSBD and that he was in possession of
> it. This is a really tough fact for conspiracy nuts to get their
> minds around.
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -...
bigdog
>
> Apparently you're ignorant of the fact that Nick Katzenbach said the
> very same thing that I said...."the evidence seems just a little to
> pat too be true....Therefore we need to present a story to the
> American people that will convince them that Oswald was just a lone
> nut killer, and any discussion about his possible motive should be cut
> off.
>
So know we have it on the record. We shouldn't believe evidence that
indicates Oswald was guilty because it is so obvious that he was
guilty. If there had been a security camera on the 6th floor of the
TSBD that recorded Oswald firing three shots, by Walt's thinking, this
should be one more indication that he did not fire the shots. Is it
possible anyone could be more headfucked than Walt?
ShutterBun
> I was merely pointing out the absurity of Oswald "fleeing" by walking
> up Elm street and boarding a SLOW moving bus. You stupid assholes have
> attempted to paint this silly picture for 45 years. You claim that
> Oswald planned to kill JFK by smuggling his rifle into the TSBD but
> then he failed to formulate a plan that would have allowed him to
> escape. What an absurd scenario!!..
So, in other words, you're saying that not only was Oswald innocent of
the shooting, he was not even a knowing participant, and literally had
NO FEAR of capture after the killing? That he casually walked to the
bus without a care in the world? Is that what you're saying? (I'm
just trying to be clear here)
> And you can't deny that Oswald steadfastly denied that he had shot
> JFK.
Wow, OK. And this proves...what?
> A nutty assassin who wanted to be caught so he could tell the
> whole world
And you know this because?
> that he had done the deed probably wouldn't plan an
> escape ...but according to your scenario Oswald wanted to escape but
> never planned for that escape....
It's called "making it up as you go along." It's not particularly
unheard of in criminal matters.
Walt
Let me see if I can follow your convoluted 'thinking"........
So yer saying that Oswald plotted and planned the assassination of JFK
for months, but never gave a thought to how he would escape after the
shooting??
Do you really believe that this is rational logic??
If I'm following your "logic" Oswald who expressed admiration for JFK,
decided that he wanted to kill him, for no reason, so he started
planning the murder in February of 1963 by buying a unusal rifle
( easy to trace) from a mail order house. Obviously according to
your "logic" Oswald wanted to leave an easily tracable trail so there
would be no question that he deserved the credit for killing
JFK.....and yet he didn't just walk out of the TSBD and surrender and
crow...." I got him".
Are you kidding me??
After the shooting Oswald walked to the bus stop and boarded a
bus..... Hardly the actions of a desperate killer fleeing the
scene..... But the likely actions of a man who had decided that there
wouldn't be anymore work in the TSBD that day so he'd take the
afternoon off.
curtjester1
> All right you group of nuts, what would you list as the three greatest
> revelations that came to light thanks to the release of the previously
> sealed documents later revealed by the ARRB?
>
> Generally when I ask this question none of the conspiracy nuts can
> produce anything of substance so let's see if you group of crazies can
> do any better.
Who cares when they can't authenticate the Zapruder Film, quiet the
front of limo witnesses for shots, account for witnesses right after
the crime that differ with the holes in JFK's head with 'other
reports', could never establish an ordering for the rifle to a
suspect, couldn't account for all the anomalies of evidence pointing
to faking evidence to pin a patsy on a subject for the Tippit murder,
or find any timeline for putting a suspect in any sniper's nest??????
CJ
Walt
>
> > I was merely pointing out the absurity of Oswald "fleeing" by walking
> > up Elm street and boarding a SLOW moving bus. You stupid assholes have
> > attempted to paint this silly picture for 45 years. You claim that
> > Oswald planned to kill JFK by smuggling his rifle into the TSBD but
> > then he failed to formulate a plan that would have allowed him to
> > escape. What an absurd scenario!!..
>
> So, in other words, you're saying that not only was Oswald innocent of
> the shooting, he was not even a knowing participant, and literally had
> NO FEAR of capture after the killing? That he casually walked to the
> bus without a care in the world? Is that what you're saying? (I'm
> just trying to be clear here)
So, in other words, you're saying that not only was Oswald innocent
of
the shooting, he was not even a knowing participant, and literally
had
NO FEAR of capture after the killing? That he casually walked to the
bus without a care in the world? Is that what you're saying? (I'm
just trying to be clear here)
Bingo!... By god yer not as dumb as you appear to be .........
Oswald was exactly what he said he was.....A patsy. He knew that
he'd been played for a sucker, but at the same time he still retained
the notion that he would be "sprung" and allowed to flee to Cuba where
he would be welcomed by Castro. He then would have been in position to
spy on events in Cuba and report his observations. Oswald simply
couldn't abandon his spy persona, and accept the fact that the "game
was over".
He was set up to be the patsy by people he trusted ( Hoover and his
cronies) he thought that he was working for the FBI and his mission
when he was "hired on" at the TSBD was to spy on the members of the
American GI Forum who worked in the TSBD (Hoover thought the AGIF was
a subversive organization) Once he was in place in the TSBD they gave
him his primary mission....Set up a stage prop scenario that would
make it appear that he had tried to shoot JFK and then fled. Oswald
being the naive dupe, who fancied himself to be a rising "James Bond".
after his success of infiltrating the USSR had a bit of a "big head",
and didn't realize that he was playing with cut throat bastards who
were using him. He happily went along with the plot that would make
it appear that he had shot AT ... AT... JFK .
And your right.... Oswald had "NO FEAR of capture after the killing?
That he casually walked to the bus without a care in the world? Is
that what you're saying?
Oswald was still under the impression that nobody would interfere with
his "escape to Cuba" when he left the TSBD. AT THE TIME that he left
Nobody in the vincinity of the TSBD KNEW FOR A FACT that JFK had been
hit. Oswald heard that when he went out to the street in front of the
TSBD, but he probably just dismissed it as over active imaginations.
He thought it was only supposed to appear as if he had taken a shot a
JFK, and the spectators had allowed their imaginations to run wild and
were saying that the President had been shot. He KNEW that he hadn't
shot JFK so he wasn't worried....He also knew that the plan called for
him to "flee to Cuba" and nobody would interfere with his escape.
There was one thing that had to have bothered him as he boarded that
bus....There were more shots than could attributed to him, and he
started to suspect that he was being set up.
Oswald called out to his handler.... "I do request that "SOMEONE" come
forward to my legal aid"...... And.... He was still under the
impression that he'd be sprung on Sunday morning when he said.... "Oh,
so this is now the plan" in response to what he thought was "couched
language" informing him that he would be allowed to escape while he
was being transferred to the county jail.
bigdog
>
> - Show quoted text -
Or a man who wanted to leave the scene but couldn't drive himself and
public transportation was the quickest way for him to get out of
downtown. Why, if he simply wanted to go home to his Beckley residence
would he have decided to abandon the bus rather than wait for traffic
to clear. Why was he in such a hurry to get out of there. Why would he
have been so impatient that he would forgo the bus fare he had already
spent and spend four times that amount to take a cab home instead? Or
better yet, since he normally returned to Irving on weekends, why not
drive back their with Frazier. But then again, he had just gone to
Irving the night before. Gee, I wonder why he did that.
Workers don't decide on their own there will be no more work to do.
Supervisors do. Oswald left the TSBD before he had been authorized to
do so and before the building became crawling with police. Marrion
Baker was the only cop who initially thought the shots came from the
TSBD. His presence alone would not make it clear to anyone that the
TSBD would be shut down for the rest of the day. It took six minutes
for the rest of the police in DP to zero in on the TSBD as the source
of the shots and by that time, Oswald was gone. Of course, Oswald
could have made a pretty good guess, that the cops would soon be
taking over the building because he knew the shots had been fired from
inside it. He knew that because he had fired the shots. Oswald did not
leave the building because he was told he could go home. Oswald went
AWOL.
Like everything else you post, this is totally illogical.
bigdog
>
> - Show quoted text -
Earth to Walt....Earth to Walt....please return. You've been gone much
too long.
Walt
If you knew the testimony, I believe you'd know that Oswald said that
nobody paid much attention to the workers....They were free to come
and go .
And he also said that his supervisor told him there wouldn't be any
more work done that afternoon.
Oswald left the TSBD before he had been authorized to
> do so and before the building became crawling with police. Marrion
> Baker was the only cop who initially thought the shots came from the
> TSBD. His presence alone would not make it clear to anyone that the
> TSBD would be shut down for the rest of the day. It took six minutes
> for the rest of the police in DP to zero in on the TSBD as the source
> of the shots and by that time, Oswald was gone. Of course, Oswald
> could have made a pretty good guess, that the cops would soon be
> taking over the building because he knew the shots had been fired from
> inside it. He knew that because he had fired the shots. Oswald did not
> leave the building because he was told he could go home. Oswald went
> AWOL.
>
> Like everything else you post, this is totally illogical.- Hide quoted text -
bigdog
of the many lies Oswald told. Imagine trying to run a warehouse where
the workers were free to come and go as they pleased. And to think
you're gullible enough to believe such a ridiculous statement.
> And he also said that his supervisor told him there wouldn't be any
> more work done that afternoon.
>
Oh really. Just when did his supervisor tell him that? Did Roy Truly
tell him that during the lunchroom encounter? I don't recall that in
any of the testimony. Could you please cite a reference where Roy
Truly or any other supervisor said they told Oswald he could go home.
Here's something you just can't get around, Walt. Oswald left his
workplace before the police had determined that it was the source of
the shots. Until the cops came in and essentially took over the
building, there was no reason that work could not have continued. None
of the workers had been told they were authorized to leave when Oswald
left the premises. He did that on his own without any authorization
from any of his superiors and then he lied about it later. When Oswald
left his workplace, losing his job was the furthest thing from his
mind. He knew he was never going to work another minute at the TSBD.
He probably knew there was little chance he was going to get away with
it but that didn't stop him from at least trying. He was as guilty as
sin and anyone with a functioning brain and a knowledge of the
evidence knows that as well. My only regret is that Oswald lost
consciousness shortly after he got shot by Jack Ruby and didn't suffer
nearly enough to suit me. If it had been up to me, that worthless
little motherfucker would have been burned at the stake and I would
have considered it a privilage to be the one to light the match.
David Von Pein
>>> "Just when did his supervisor tell him [Oswald] that? Did Roy Truly tell him that during the lunchroom encounter? I don't recall that in any of the testimony. Could you please cite a reference where Roy Truly or any other supervisor said they told Oswald he could go home." <<<
There's an interesting endnote in Vince Bugliosi's book about this
subject (or at least a variation of this topic; this is actually a
rare instance where Bugliosi is defending Oswald to a certain extent,
but it touches on the topic at hand -- i.e., did Oswald have
permission to leave work?):
"There is one alleged lie of Oswald’s that doesn’t stand up.
Page 182 of the Warren Report reads that “Oswald told [Captain] Fritz
that after lunch [and presumably the shooting] he went outside, talked
with Foreman Bill Shelley for 5 or 10 minutes and then left for home.
He said that he left work because Bill Shelley said that there would
be no more work done that day in the building.”
"But there is nothing in the three citations the Warren Report
gives to back this statement up. Indeed, the name Bill Shelley isn’t
even mentioned in the text referred to by the three citations.
(Shelley, by the way, testified that he did not tell anyone to go home
after the shooting, and it is clear from his testimony that he did not
see Oswald after the shooting [7 H 391; 6 H 329–331].)
"Wondering where in the world the Commission had come up with
this, if at all, the closest I could come is in the contemporaneous
handwritten notes of Captain Fritz, taken at the time of the
interrogation--five brief pages written during twelve hours of
interrogation.
"Such severe condensation automatically causes distortion. On
page 1, Fritz writes, “Claims 2nd Floor Coke when Off [Officer] came
in, to 1st fl had lunch, out with Bill Shelley in front. Left wk
[work] opinion nothing be done that day.”
"With respect to Fritz’s handwritten note that Oswald said he
had lunch on the first floor after the confrontation with the officer
on the second floor, Oswald couldn’t have told Fritz this, since he
couldn’t expect anyone to believe that after his confrontation with
the officer (Baker) in the second-floor lunchroom, which had to be
after the shooting in Dealey Plaza, he proceeded to go down to the
first floor and have his lunch and then left.
[DVP INTERJECTION -- Although I agree with Mr. Bugliosi's above
comment regarding the unbelievability of Oswald's alleged tale of
having lunch AFTER the President had already been shot (that would
have certainly been a lie if Oswald had really said that to anybody
after his arrest, because we know for a fact that Oswald left the
building at approximately 12:33 PM that day), I must also point out
that some other Depository employees are on record as doing that very
thing (going back inside the TSBD to eat their lunch) AFTER the
shooting had occurred!
One such employee is Buell Wesley Frazier. As unbelievable as
it might sound (and it does seem unbelievable and incredible to me),
Frazier testified that after the assassination had taken place, he
went back into the Depository Building (and down into the basement, no
less!) to eat his lunch! I talk about that a little more in my
"EXAMINING THE TESTIMONY OF BUELL WESLEY FRAZIER" article linked
below:
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/1bf35acc576f521c
Now back to Vince Bugliosi's "Reclaiming History" endnote:]
"And in his subsequent thirteen-page typewritten report of his
interrogations of Oswald (WR, pp.599–611), Fritz says that Oswald told
him he was having lunch on the first floor at the time of the
shooting. When Fritz asked him where he was when the officer stopped
him, Oswald said he was on the second floor drinking a Coca-Cola.
(Fritz doesn’t say, as his contemporaneous notes do, that Oswald then
told him he returned to the first floor to have lunch.)
"When Fritz asked him why he left the building thereafter,
Oswald said there was so much excitement that he didn’t think there
would be any more work that day. Fritz makes no reference to Oswald
telling him that Shelley had told him this. (WR, pp.600–601)
"It would seem that Fritz’s writing, in his handwritten notes,
“Bill Shelley in front” probably was a reference to Oswald telling him
during the interrogation that on his way out of the building, he saw
Bill Shelley in front of the building. In any event, I could find no
evidence that Oswald told the lie that Shelley told him he could leave
because there would be no more work that day." -- Vincent Bugliosi;
Page 537 of "Reclaiming History" (Endnotes)
www.ReclaimingHistory.blogspot.com
www.Quoting-Common-Sense.blogspot.com
>>> "[LHO] probably knew there was little chance he was going to get away with it but that didn't stop him from at least trying. He was as guilty as sin and anyone with a functioning brain and a knowledge of the evidence knows that as well. My only regret is that Oswald lost consciousness shortly after he got shot by Jack Ruby and didn't suffer nearly enough to suit me. If it had been up to me, that worthless little motherfucker would have been burned at the stake and I would have considered it a privilage to be the one to light the match." <<<
Or you sure we aren't identical twins, bigdog? Because that sure
sounds like something I would have written too.
(Don't tell Healy I said that though. Because he doesn't need much of
an excuse at all to start a thread entitled "Bigdog And DVP Are The
Same Shithead"!)
ShutterBun
Good analysis, DVP. And while I'm loathe to broach the subject with
you, I'll just state the the only reason I ever though LHO changed his
trousers when he went to his room that day (see other thread) was
because of Bugliosi's book. I'm on page 1034 at the moment, and
reading the end notes in sequence. (So, while it's hardly the lynch-
pin of the entire investigation, between me and you, Bugliosi was the
first person to suggest to me that LHO changed his pants that day)
bigdog
>
> >>> "[LHO] probably knew there was little chance he was going to get away with it but that didn't stop him from at least trying. He was as guilty as sin and anyone with a functioning brain and a knowledge of the evidence knows that as well. My only regret is that Oswald lost consciousness shortly after he got shot by Jack Ruby and didn't suffer nearly enough to suit me. If it had been up to me, that worthless little motherfucker would have been burned at the stake and I would have considered it a privilage to be the one to light the match." <<<
>
> Or you sure we aren't identical twins, bigdog? Because that sure
> sounds like something I would have written too.
>
On the other hand, folks like Walt probably think we should erect a
statue for LHO in Dealey Plaza since he apparently considers Oz to be
a martyr.
> (Don't tell Healy I said that though. Because he doesn't need much of
> an excuse at all to start a thread entitled "Bigdog And DVP Are The
> Same Shithead"!)
>
Who's Healy? :)
Walt
"[LHO] probably knew there was little chance he was going to get away
with it but that didn't stop him from at least trying. He was as
guilty as sin and anyone with a functioning brain and a knowledge of
the evidence knows that as well. My only regret is that Oswald lost
consciousness shortly after he got shot by Jack Ruby and didn't suffer
nearly enough to suit me. If it had been up to me, that worthless
little motherfucker would have been burned at the stake and I would
have considered it a privilage to be the one to light the match."
Only a gullible fool who allows others to do his thinking for him
would write such a heavily bias statement. Big Hog, What is it that
causes you to burry your head in the sand? There is a mountain of
evidence that shows that LBJ's hand picked committee (the Warren
Commission) was nothing but a white wash panel, hand picked by LBJ
(with Hoover's help) to cover up the facts .
Is it because you're to yellow to face the facts?.... Is it because
you are one of the egotistical elitists who will regurgitate the lies
simply because it's unpopular to go against the official government's
decree? .... Or is it because you're just too stupid to
understand?
Walt
>
> - Show quoted text -
If you study the record for yourself, instead of letting someone like
da Bug influence you'll find that Captain Fritz said in his hand
scribbled notes, that Oswald went to his room and changed his trousers.
Walt
> On Aug 22, 7:53 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > >>> "[LHO] probably knew there was little chance he was going to get away with it but that didn't stop him from at least trying. He was as guilty as sin and anyone with a functioning brain and a knowledge of the evidence knows that as well. My only regret is that Oswald lost consciousness shortly after he got shot by Jack Ruby and didn't suffer nearly enough to suit me. If it had been up to me, that worthless little motherfucker would have been burned at the stake and I would have considered it a privilage to be the one to light the match." <<<
>
> > Or you sure we aren't identical twins, bigdog? Because that sure
> > sounds like something I would have written too.
>
> On the other hand, folks like Walt probably think we should erect a
> statue for LHO in Dealey Plaza since he apparently considers Oz to be
> a martyr.
On the other hand, folks like Walt probably think we should erect a
statue for LHO in Dealey Plaza since he apparently considers Oz to be
a martyr.
I think nothing of the kind...But I DO believe in justice, and the
true killers got away with murder and let Oswald pay the price for
their crime.
I only hope and pray that your son or grandson is made a patsy just
as Oswald was made a patsy....Because that is the only thing that
would pull you from the fantasy land that you live in.
bigdog
>
> - Show quoted text -
Let's all have one big group cry for poor old Lee Harvery Oswald. Just
because he murdered our President and a decent, hard working cop in a
span of about 45 minutes doesn't mean he was a bad person. He was just
a mixed up kid who deserved a second chance to make something of
himself.
As for me, I would feel much better if I knew that in the short time
from when Jack Ruby fired a single shot into the motherfucker's gut
until he checked out, he suffered excruciating pain. He deserved no
less. As far as I'm concernced, he got off too easy.
bigdog
>
> > I only hope and pray that your son or grandson is made a patsy just
> > as Oswald was made a patsy....Because that is the only thing that
> > would pull you from the fantasy land that you live in.
>
>
> Let's all have one big group cry for poor old Lee Harvery Oswald. Just
> because he murdered our President and a decent, hard working cop in a
> span of about 45 minutes doesn't mean he was a bad person. He was just
> a mixed up kid who deserved a second chance to make something of
> himself.
>
> As for me, I would feel much better if I knew that in the short time
> from when Jack Ruby fired a single shot into the motherfucker's gut
> until he checked out, he suffered excruciating pain. He deserved no
>
PS. I should have added, if a son or grandson of mine did what Lee
Harvey Oswald did, he would deserve no better than what Lee Harvey
Oswald got. I'm all for justice. We should have given Oswald a fair
trial and then burned him.
Steve
>
> - Show quoted text -
Walt is confused as to the meaning of LHO's statement "I'm just a
patsy."
NEVER did Oswald say he had been set up for the crime, and when he DID
say he was a patsy it was in reference as to WHY he had been arrested
since he had lived for a period of time in Russia and since he worked
at the TSBD. NOT because he felt he had been wrongfully set up for
the assassination. If Walt chooses to get a little smarter he will
read the entire exchange between reporters and Oswald when Oswald made
that statement. That single line of Oswald's has been taken out of
context perhaps more than anything Oswald ever said.
Incidentally just because Oswald said that he was a patsy doesn't mean
it was true. Remember O.J. SImpson also said that he was framed for a
crime he didn't commit. Does that make him magically innocent as
well?
David Von Pein
No need to read the entire "patsy" exchange....I can supply the audio
of it, right here:
ShutterBun
> If you study the record for yourself, instead of letting someone like
> da Bug influence you'll find that Captain Fritz said in his hand
> scribbled notes, that Oswald went to his room and changed his trousers.
Um, yeah. That's kinda how these things work. A source (Cpt. Fritz)
says it, then a few years later, a writer writes about it, and cites
the original source. I'll admit that Cpt. Fritz's comments slipped my
mind, but insofar as I've recently ready Reclaiming History, it was so
much "news to me" that Oswald was said to have changed his pants. My
memory is certainly prone to "proximity bias," but I would never have
cited Bugliosi as an original source, if he hand't also backed it up
with Fritz's statements.
See? I'm drunk as not as you am, I think.
Walt
Stever the deceiver wrote:....."Incidentally just because Oswald said
that he was a patsy doesn't mean it was true."
Yer right Steve..... HOWEVER at least two people who saw Oswald in a
police line up substantiated Oswald's claim. Both William Whaley and
Howard Brennan recognized that Oswald was being made the patsy.
Remember O.J. SImpson also said that he was framed for a crime he
didn't commit. Does that make him magically innocent as well?
Steve, I'm not surprised that you would ask such a STUPID question.....
(because you're Rob caprio's twin brother)
The answer is patently obvious.... 99% of the criminals who are
brought to court claim that they are innocent. BUT if you listen to
what's taking place in Dallas this very day, you'll hear that one of
those good ol Texas boys, Henry Wade, is being exposed as nothing less
than a dirty lying bastard, who routinely railroaded some poor sucker
just so he could carve another notch in his gavel.
Walt
Maybe you're not totally '"falling down" drunk...but it's obvious that
your mental facilties are not functioning like a rational person's
Um, yeah. That's kinda how these things work. A source (Cpt. Fritz)
says it, then a few years later, a writer writes about it, and cites
the original source.
Fritz WROTE it at the time that he was interrogating Lee Oswald.....
Haven't you ever seen his scribbled notes?
I'll admit that Cpt. Fritz's comments slipped my
mind, but insofar as I've recently ready Reclaiming History, it was
so
much "news to me" that Oswald was said to have changed his pants. My
memory is certainly prone to "proximity bias," but I would never have
cited Bugliosi as an original source, if he hand't also backed it up
with Fritz's statements.
THAT'S..the point.... Bugliosi is a damned liar..... You've
apparently read his book and now you think you know the truth, but da
Bug is just another shyster lying lawyer like those who worked for
LBJ's hand picked "Blue Ribbon" committe.
Thanks for admitting that you're a mentally deficient sucker.
cdddraftsman
"I doubt Walt could catch a cold. He couldn't find water if he fell
out
of a boat. Is it possible anyone could be more headfucked than Walt?"
His research standards were once described to me as a "submarine
without a periscope" .
I thnk that sums it up pretty well .
tl
Walt
Now there's about the best Ol "Tuff Luck" can do.....an ad hominem
attack. He, like most Lner's can't refute FACTS so they have to fall
back on attacking the messenger.
Not that I give a damn.... ad hominem attacks are merely proof that
the attacker can't truthfully deny the message.
bigdog
> On Aug 26, 8:04 am, cdddraftsman <cdddrafts...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 21, 8:17 pm, bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > "I doubt Walt could catch a cold. He couldn't find water if he fell
> > out
> > of a boat. Is it possible anyone could be more headfucked than Walt?"
>
> > His research standards were once described to me as a "submarine
> > without a periscope" .
>
> > I thnk that sums it up pretty well .
>
> > tl
>
> Now there's about the best Ol "Tuff Luck" can do.....an ad hominem
> attack. He, like most Lner's can't refute FACTS so they have to fall
> back on attacking the messenger.
>
opposed to factoids.
> Not that I give a damn.... ad hominem attacks are merely proof that
> the attacker can't truthfully deny the message.
No, the ad hominem attacks are something we do just for extra credit.