THE TRUTH ABOUT THE "BAG"
Gil Jesus
by Oswald, it wasn't "made" by paper from the shipping room of the
TSBD and it never held a rifle.
Following the assassination, James C. Cadigan, an FBI agent whose
expertise was the examination of questionable documents, was asked to
examine a brown paper bag that was allegedly found on the sixth floor
of the Texas School Book Depository, not far from the "sniper's nest".
He also was asked to examine the tape on the bag.
This bag would later become Commission Exhibit No. 142.
In addition, he examined the paper and tape that was allegedly taken
from the mailroom of the TSBD by Dallas Police Lieutenant J.C. Day and
Detective Studebaker and which Lt. Day gave to FBI agent Vincent Drain
on the night of the assassination. This sample that Day took for
comparison would become Commission Exhibit No. 677.
Let me preface the examination of the paper by saying that when papers
have the same composition, the same texture and structural
characteristics, they are the same. If the paper and tape are coming
from the same source, all papers should have the same characteristics
as far as composition goes. For the paper to be the same, their
molecular composition must be EXACT without ANY variation.
It might be interesting to note that the paper used by the TSBD
arrived on March 19, 1963 from the St. Regis Paper Mills of
Jacksonville, Florida and that this shipment of paper was not
completely used up until January of 1964. (Hearings, Vol. IV, p. 96)
In other words, the paper that was in the building when Oswald was
hired and Kennedy was murdered was the same paper used until January,
1964.
But on December 1, 1963, the FBI took samples of the paper and tape
from the TSBD mailroom and compared that sample (Exhibit # 364) to the
other two (exhibits 142 and 677). This is what they found:
They found that the paper from the sixth floor bag (142) had the same
composition as the paper that Day SAID that he got from the TSBD
shipping room (677). However, the FBI sample from the same TSBD
shipping room (364) did not match either of the other two. (Hearings,
Vol. IV, p. 94)
http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1LwaqJS1yQ*TYv4xQp5Fd3Ig=/large/
Mr. DULLES. Do I understand correctly, though, you have testified that
a sample taken 10 days later was different---or approximately 10 days
later?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Approximately 10 days.
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; this was a sample taken December 1. I could tell
that it was different from this sample, 677, taken on the day of the
assassination, and different from the bag, Exhibit 142.
The implications are staggering. First of all, the FBI comparison of
Exhibits 142, 677 and 364 proved that the paper bag found on the sixth
floor was NOT made with the paper that the TSBD had in its mailroom up
until January 1964.
Secondly, and perhaps even more sinisterly, since Day's sample
matched the bag and the sample was not the same as the paper used by
the TSBD mailroom, the FBI examination proved that a.) the Dallas
Police Lieutenant lied and DID NOT get his sample from the TSBD
mailroom and b.) the "bag" was not made from paper used at the TSBD.
Not only did the "paper bag" not come from the TSBD, it never
contained a rifle.
In his testimony to the Warren Commission, James Cadigan explained
that, "there were no marks on this bag that I would say were caused by
this rifle or any other rifle." The rifle left no impression of
itself, not a little hole, not even the tiniest little scratch on the
bag. Cadigan's opinion simply stated was that this bag never contained
a rifle. (Hearings, Vol. IV, p. 97)
In addition, CE 2974 is an FBI memo that describes the rifle's firing
pin and firing spring as being "well oiled" and describes the rifle as
being in "well oiled condition" when the firing pin was examined. Yet
further proof that the alleged Oswald bag never contained a rifle--the
bag never had the smallest drop or smudge of oil on it, despite the
rifle allegedly having been inside of it DISASSEMBLED (emphasis
mine)..
So what was the bag, where did it come from, and how did it get into
the TSBD ?
The bag was a protector, into which new books were placed to protect
their covers during shipping. Once the books were inside the
protective "bag" the bag was then placed into a shipping carton. A
photograph of the "bag" shows what appears to be "folds" in it, which
are actually stress creases caused by the weight and movement of the
books during handling.
http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1L73C1ZvTPKh8v4xQp5Fd3Ig=/large/
The source of this bag was the company who shipped the books TO the
depository, which is why the bag didn't match the paper used in the
TSBD mailroom. The "bag" got into the TSBD inside cartons of books
through normal shipping procedures.
David Von Pein
Oswald probably folded the paper after he swiped it from the TSBD (for
easier concealment and in order to carry it more easily, naturally).
>>> "The "bag" got into the TSBD inside cartons of books through normal shipping procedures." <<<
No, idiot -- LHO carried the bag into the building on 11/22 AM when he
smuggled his Carcano into the TSBD.
BTW, how did LHO's two prints get on a paper bag he supposedly never
touched (per you kooks)?
bigdog
>
> So what was the bag, where did it come from, and how did it get into
> the TSBD ?
>
> The bag was a protector, into which new books were placed to protect
> their covers during shipping. Once the books were inside the
> protective "bag" the bag was then placed into a shipping carton. A
> photograph of the "bag" shows what appears to be "folds" in it, which
> are actually stress creases caused by the weight and movement of the
> books during handling.
>
>
> The source of this bag was the company who shipped the books TO the
> depository, which is why the bag didn't match the paper used in the
> TSBD mailroom. The "bag" got into the TSBD inside cartons of books
> through normal shipping procedures.
Right, Chico. We are supposed to believe the publishers make a
protective bag by hand with tape and wrapping paper for every box of
books they ship. Now there's an efficient use of manpower. I don't
suppose you could produce another example of such a shipping bag. I
don't suppose you could reference any other TSBD employee who said
such bags existed.
I didn't think it was possible, but you seem to be getting stupider by
the day. The only mystery to me is how a dumbfuck like you is able to
feed and clothe himself.
Walt
> >>> "A photograph of the "bag" shows what appears to be "folds" in it, which are actually stress creases caused by the weight and movement of the books during handling." <<<
>
> Oswald probably folded the paper after he swiped it from the TSBD (for
> easier concealment and in order to carry it more easily, naturally).
Don't expose your stupidity so blatantly in public.... Cuz anybody
with one good eye can see that the brown paper bag was not "SHAPED
LIKE A GUNCASE" and the folds indicate that it was wrapped around
books that were about 7"X 9".
The early reports said that a paper sack SHAPED LIKE A GUNCASE had
been found near the rifle on the sixth floor of the TSBD. Are you
really so dumb that you would accept that any ol rectangular, brown
paper wrapper, could be described as "SHAPED LIKE A GUNCASE"??
aeffects
DavidVP is suffering shock and trauma after reading mark Lsnes
scathing review of daBugliosi's "cinderblock" (compliments of a Barnes
& Noble employee) Reclaiming History. I suspect ole Davey is
questioning his allegiances these day's...
robcap...@netscape.com
"No, idiot -- LHO carried the bag into the building on 11/22 AM when
he smuggled his Carcano into the TSBD."
Prove it.
"BTW, how did LHO's two prints get on a paper bag he supposedly never
touched (per you kooks)?"
Uh, he worked there? One of his jobs was unloading the books from the
cartons.
YoHarvey
wrote:
OMG, OMG, OMG.....Chico Jesus/Robcap using the word TRUTH for this
thread. Sort of like Richard Nixon's infamous "I am NOT a crook"
comment.
Gil Jesus
>
> The source of this bag was the company who shipped the books TO the
> depository, which is why the bag didn't match the paper used in the
> TSBD mailroom. The "bag" got into the TSBD inside cartons of books
> through normal shipping procedures.
The WC LIED about how the "bag" got into the building.
The DPD LIED about the paper coming from the TSBD.
The DPD LIED about the "bag" being in the "sniper's nest".
The WC LIED about the bag containing a rifle.
LIES..LIES...LIES... and no need to lie if they weren't trying to
frame someone.
David Von Pein
>>> "Don't expose your stupidity so blatantly in public." <<<
The above sentence was written by a person who also said this on Aug.
18, 2006 (and at other times as well):
"The photo Croft took shows a tiny piece of JFK's white shirt
being blown out through the BACK of his dark suit jacket. .... The
Croft photo is proof that one bullet did transit JFK's body." --
Walter Kookbread
No, I'm not kidding, folks. I'm not pulling your collective NG legs.
Walt The Kook really DID utter the above incredibly-stupid nonsense in
August of 2006. Here's the verified proof:
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/211bf3a959b994f5
So, as the above 2006 verbatim quote amply demonstrates, I couldn't
even begin to compete with you, Walt, in the "blatantly stupid"
department.
(Walt will probably come back into this thread and actually THANK me
for re-posting his make-believe "CROFT PHOTO PROVES CONSPIRACY"
idiocy. Just watch. He likes having his "moron" status propped up
again and again for all to witness. An odd hobby indeed. But one that
Walt evidently relishes.)
>>> "The early reports said that a paper sack SHAPED LIKE A GUNCASE had been found near the rifle on the sixth floor of the TSBD. .... Are you really so dumb that you would accept that any ol rectangular, brown paper wrapper could be described as "SHAPED LIKE A GUNCASE"??" <<<
Given the following two facts that go ALONG WITH such a "gun case"
observation....yes, absolutely, I can certainly understand why those
words were chosen to describe Oswald's paper bag:
1.) A rifle was found on the sixth floor.
2.) An EMPTY paper bag was found on the sixth floor (right under the
same window from where bullet shells were also found and from where a
gunman was seen firing a RIFLE out that window).
In short, that empty bag was just perfect to serve as a "gun case" for
the assassination weapon. And obviously the authorities thought the
very same thing on 11/22 after seeing the bag (which is why Lt. Carl
Day wrote these words right on the bag: "Found next to the sixth floor
window gun fired from. May have been used to carry gun").
David Von Pein
>>> "DavidVP is suffering shock and trauma after reading mark Lane's scathing review of daBugliosi's "cinderblock". .... I suspect ole Davey is questioning his allegiances these days." <<<
Not a chance. Why in the world would you think that? Because of
something Mark Lane wrote about VB? El-Oh-El time.
That would be like being upset and concerned that the LN scenario was
in danger of being debunked when some crackhead theorizes that
Zapruder wasn't really on his pedestal at all in Dealey Plaza. (And
who would be concerned over a ludicrous notion like that?)
Besides, I was an "LNer" long, long before VB's book ever surfaced.
VB's comprehensive tome merely drives the stake of truth and reality
ever deeper into the vampire known as "CTism". ;)
BTW, I thought I was Reitzes? Why did you call me "DavidVP" above?
I like being Reitzes. Can't I be Mr. Reitzes today, Healy? Pretty
please! I'll buy your next package of syringes for you if you'll
oblige me!
Walt
Ok...so a rifle was found on the sixth floor.... Ya got on point
correct.
>
> 2.) An EMPTY paper bag was found on the sixth floor (right under the
> same window from where bullet shells were also found and from where a
> gunman was seen firing a RIFLE out that window).
What PROOF can you present that a brown paper wrapper "SHAPED LIKE A
GUNCASE" was actually found "(right under the same window from where
bullet shells were also found)"
So far ya got one point correct.......
>
> In short, that empty bag was just perfect to serve as a "gun case" for
> the assassination weapon. And obviously the authorities thought the
> very same thing on 11/22 after seeing the bag (which is why Lt. Carl
> Day wrote these words right on the bag: "Found next to the sixth floor
> window gun fired from. May have been used to carry gun").
SPECULATION!!...and unsubstantiated by the facts... FBI labs found not
a scintilla of evidence that the brown paper book wrapper had ever
held any rifle or that it had been out in the rain that day.