A Little Bit About Lee Oswald's Movements After He Assassinated JFK
David Von Pein
President Kennedy:
Walt
This review is inaccurate on a couple of critical points. VP says
that recreations showed that Oswald could have reached the lunchroom
6,5 seconds ahead of Officer Baker. In his opening paragraph VP says
that Officer Baker started his trek after the LAST shoot was fired.
Baker said he started his trek after the sound of the FIRST shot so six
seconds has to be deducted from the elapsed time. When six seconds are
deducted from the elapsed time, if Oswald had been the murderer he and
Baker would have arrived at the lunchroom at exactly the same time.
Further proof that VP doesn't know what he's talking about is the FACT
that book depository supervisor Roy Truly was leading Officer Baker
through the building to show him the way to the roof where Baker
thought the shots had come from. Since Truly was leading Officer Baker
by several seconds, If Oswald had been descending the stairs he would
have had to have passed Truly on the stairs. Truly did not pass a
descending Oswald.
Walt
David Von Pein
Further proof that Walt-Kook WANTS a conspiracy....no matter
what....and no matter how he must skew the evidence....and no matter
how thin he must split the already thinnest of hairs.
Here's what Roy Truly said:
Mr. TRULY -- This officer was right behind me and coming up the
stairway. By the time I reached the second floor, the officer was a
little further behind me than he was on the first floor, I assume--I
know.
Mr. BELIN -- Was he a few feet behind you then?
Mr. TRULY -- He was a few feet. It is hard for me to tell. I ran right
on around to my left, started to continue on up the stairway to the
third floor, and on up.
~~~~~~~
To Walt, "a few feet" must equate to "several seconds".
How long does it take a hurrying man to travel "a few feet", Mr. Kook?
There's also this from Marrion Baker.......
Mr. BAKER -- Before I revved up this motorcycle, I heard the, you know,
the two extra shots, the three shots.
~~~~~~~
Therefore, quite obviously, Baker had not even dismounted his cycle
until AFTER all three gunshots had been fired. In fact, Baker says ALL
three shots had occurred BEFORE he even "revved up" his motorcycle (to
quickly get to the Elm & Houston corner).
Therefore, why Walt The Kook insists that Baker was off his cycle and
running after the FIRST shot is anybody's guess. He (the CT-Kook named
Walt) obviously will do ANYTHING necessary to remove the noose from
around a double-murderer's neck....I guess that's a good enough reason
for a rabid conspiracy kook to mangle every single piece of evidence he
gets his hands on, though. Right, Walt?
Walt
David Von Pein wrote:
> >>> "Since Truly was leading Officer Baker by several seconds..." <<<
>
> Further proof that Walt-Kook WANTS a conspiracy....no matter
> what....and no matter how he must skew the evidence....and no matter
> how thin he must split the already thinnest of hairs.
>
> Here's what Roy Truly said:
>
> Mr. TRULY -- This officer was right behind me and coming up the
> stairway. By the time I reached the second floor, the officer was a
> little further behind me than he was on the first floor, I assume--I
> know.
> Mr. BELIN -- Was he a few feet behind you then?
> Mr. TRULY -- He was a few feet. It is hard for me to tell. I ran right
> on around to my left, started to continue on up the stairway to the
> third floor, and on up.
>
> ~~~~~~~
>
> To Walt, "a few feet" must equate to "several seconds".
>
> How long does it take a hurrying man to travel "a few feet", Mr. Kook?
Wiggle and squirm you spineless bottom crawler.....it will do you no
good because you opened yer mouth and hooked yourself.... Regardless of
the exact number of seconds that Truly was ahead of Baker, the FACT
remains he did precede him. And by your own chronolgy Truly would have
had to seen Oswald as he climbed the stairs.
You claim that Oswald reached the lunchroom six seconds before Baker
arrived. Since Truly was ahead of Baker by several seconds if Oswald
had been running down the stairs toward the lunchroom Truly would
surely have seen him ....But you claim that Oswald WALKED from the
sixth floor to the lunchroom, and that makes it even more obvious that
Truly would have had to have seen Oswald.
I believe the reason that Baker looked around and spotted Oswald in the
lunch room as he (Baker) reached the second floor was because he had
lost sight of Truly, who had rounded the corner and was on his way to
the third floor. As he was looking to see which way Truly had gone he
spotted Lee Oswald through the small window in the lunchroom door.
Oswald had heard Truly run by and was curious about the running feet,
he looked out through that little window, and had just turned around
when Baker reached the second floor.
>
> There's also this from Marrion Baker.......
>
> Mr. BAKER -- Before I revved up this motorcycle, I heard the, you know,
> the two extra shots, the three shots.
>
> ~~~~~~~
>
> Therefore, quite obviously, Baker had not even dismounted his cycle
> until AFTER all three gunshots had been fired. In fact, Baker says ALL
> three shots had occurred BEFORE he even "revved up" his motorcycle (to
> quickly get to the Elm & Houston corner).
>
> Therefore, why Walt The Kook insists that Baker was off his cycle and
> running after the FIRST shot is anybody's guess. He (the CT-Kook named
> Walt) obviously will do ANYTHING necessary to remove the noose from
> around a double-murderer's neck....I guess that's a good enough reason
> for a rabid conspiracy kook to mangle every single piece of evidence he
> gets his hands on, though. Right, Walt?
Read Baker's affidavit....He said he looked up after the FIRST shot and
noticed pigeons bursting from behind the Hertz sign on top of the TSBD
and thought that was where the gunman was, so he immediately sped up
his motorcycle and ran into the TSBD. There are photos showing him
doing exactly that.
Walt
David Von Pein
My chronology doesn't require Truly to have seen Oswald. Oswald
probably ducked off the stairway just a matter of seconds before Truly
appeared on Floor #2.
But for some stupid reason, you seem to think Truly was "several
seconds" ahead of Baker (vs. "a few feet", per Truly himself). Go
figure.
>>> "You claim that Oswald reached the lunchroom six seconds before Baker arrived." <<<
Those are the estimates provided by the 4 WC re-creations, yes. And
those re-creations perfectly align with what the WC says Oswald
probably did after shooting JFK. Perfectly. Only a kook wouldn't be
able to see how these re-creations "line up" nicely.
I guess, per CTers, it's just another "coincidence" that the WC (and
Baker himself) were able to re-create something that CTers say was
utterly impossible, huh? Just like the Discovery Channel re-created the
general path of the SBT, even though THAT too is considered an absolute
IMPOSSIBILITY per CT-Kookatics. Go figure.
>>> "Since Truly was ahead of Baker by several seconds..." <<<
Just like the "35-year-old, 175-pound" assassin, I see that Walt-Kook
will continue to spout his obviously-overstated "several seconds" with
respect to this particular argument as well....in order to make the gap
wider for his CT purposes. Go figure.
(Jesus, what a kook.)
>>> "But you claim that Oswald WALKED from the sixth floor to the lunchroom..." <<<
I never once said that Oswald positively "walked" to the 2nd Floor. He
could have run part of the way. I said that John Howlett, the SS Agent
who did the re-creations of Oswald's probable movements, performed his
re-constructions at two different "walking" paces, yes. But that
doesn't mean that Oswald "walked" it. Maybe he did run. Who can know?
No one can. But the point is -- even if LHO had only WALKED to the 2nd
Floor, it was still a doable journey in order to arrive on the 2nd
Floor approx. 6 to 7 seconds before Baker/Truly.
>>> "He {Marrion Baker} said he looked up after the FIRST shot and noticed pigeons bursting from behind the Hertz sign on top of the TSBD and thought that was where the gunman was, so he immediately sped up his motorcycle and ran into the TSBD." <<<
And the WC testimony I mentioned above says:
Mr. BAKER -- Before I revved up this motorcycle, I heard the, you know,
the two extra shots, the three shots.
The Wiegman Film shows Baker just after he dismounted his cycle, which
equates to ________? (Fill in blank re. this unknown....because sans
sound on Wiegman's film, we can't tell if the shooting is completely
over when we see Baker....but it's certainly close. Plus there are
Baker's own words, when he said that all three shots had already
occurred by the time he dismounted his cycle.)
David Von Pein
LOL.
Looks like Walt-Kook needs to bone up some more on Baker's affidavit --
because, as anyone can easily see, Baker NEVER, EVER ONCE mentioned
"pigeons", or "looking up after the FIRST shot", or "immediately sped
up {my} motorcycle" within any part of his short 11/22/63 affidavit.
Evidently, Walt ASSUMES that Baker said all of those things in his
"Affidavit" ... but Baker never said a one of them.
Let's look.....
"Just as I approached Elm Street and Houston I heard three shots. I
realized those shots were rifle shots and I began to try to figure out
where they came from. I decided the shots had come from the building on
the northwest corner of Elm and Houston. This building is used by the
Board of Education for book storage. I jumped off my motor and ran
inside the building. As I entered the door I saw several people
standing around. I asked these people where the stairs were. A man
stepped forward and stated he was the building manager and that he
would show me where the stairs were." -- Via 11/22/63 Affidavit of
Marrion L. Baker
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
~~~~~
Is there ANYTHING that a CT-Kook can get right? LOL. Geez, what a kook!
A single paragraph of text (i.e., Officer Baker's affidavit) has been
totally skewed and misrepresented by a kook named Walt. And just WHY do
you suppose that is? (Go figure.)
Walt
David Von Pein wrote:
> >>> "And by your own chronolgy [sic], Truly would have had to seen Oswald as he climbed the stairs." <<<
>
> My chronology doesn't require Truly to have seen Oswald. Oswald
> probably ducked off the stairway just a matter of seconds before Truly
> appeared on Floor #2.
It doesn't ???.... You said Oswald arrived in the lunchroom just SIX
ticks of the clock ahead of Baker.
The Warren Commission said that Roy Truly led Baker up the stairs. In
other words Baker was a few seconds ( 5 to 10 seconds seems reasonable)
behind Roy Truly. If Oswald had descended the stairs and arrived at
the lunchroom six seconds before Baker ( as you said) then it's
reasonable to assume that Oswald would have just reached the bottom of
the stairs just as Roy Truly was about to start his climb to the third
floor. It would have taken Oswald a few seconds to cross the floor
between the stairway and the lunchroom. The lunchroom door had a
pnuematic door closer which closed it slowly, and Baker said the door
was closed and he saw Oswald through the window in the door. We'll say
it would have taken 5 seconds for Oswald to cross the floor, and 10 to
15 seconds for the door to close. allowing for these very reasonable
time estimates Oswald would have been about twenty seconds from
reaching the lunchroom when Truly reached the second floor. In other
words Oswald would have been descending the stairway above the third
floor when Truly reached the second floor. They would have had to pass
one another on the stairway.
Walt
David Von Pein
It's Oswald's rifle on the 6th Floor, his shells in the window, he's
IDed in the window, his prints are all over the SN, he leaves the
building 3 minutes after the shooting, he shoots Tippit, and on and on
and on....
But somehow Oz is the LAST person suspected by many CTers.
Go figure.
Also -- Oswald probably was running a portion of the way to the 2nd
Floor. But, once again, the Howlett re-creations prove the important
point of Oswald's trip to the lunchroom being far from impossible, as
many CTers seem to think.
Also -- Would you care to explain your multiple errors re. Marrion
Baker's affidavit, which has none of the things in it you said were in
there? Or would you prefer your own version...instead of what the
affidavit actually says?
lazu...@webtv.net
Walt
David Von Pein wrote:
> Anything to get Saint Oswald off...right?
>
> It's Oswald's rifle on the 6th Floor, his shells in the window, he's
> IDed in the window, his prints are all over the SN, he leaves the
> building 3 minutes after the shooting, he shoots Tippit, and on and on
> and on....
Wiggle, and squirm, little worm.....try to slither away if you can,
you've got yourself hooked.....
Everytime I shove facts up yer nose you attempt to change the subject.
My Grandpa taught me a wise man will keep his mouth shut when he
doesn't know anything about the subject being discussed. By keeping his
mouth shut, and his ears open, he may learn something, and become
smarter in the process. Too bad you never had a grandpa that taught you
this simple lesson......Indeed it's a shame that you never had a
grandpa that admitted that you were his offspring.
Walt
but somehow Oz is the LAST person suspected by many CTers.
David Von Pein
You are positively one of the most useless, despicable, and
hypocritical CT-Kooks I have ever encountered in all my born days. And
-- incredibly -- you actually wear that badge like it's something to be
PROUD of.
I totally destroyed your argument re. Marrion Baker.....even linking
the affidavit that you completely misrepresented (probably on purpose,
due to the obvious fact you're a despicable CT-Kook of the First
Order), and you have the gall to come back into this same thread
telling ME I don't know what I'm talking about?!
That's just.....classic KL (Kook Logic)!
BTW, care to retract your crap about Baker's affidavit?
Didn't think so.
Too bad your Grandpa's message didn't get through to his kooky
grandson. Of course, he probably had no idea that you'd grow up (?) to
be a Conspiracy Kook and would say stupid shit on a daily basis for the
rest of your adult (?) life. Right?
tomnln
That makes Baker a LIAR.
http://whokilledjfk.net/altgens.htm
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1159572194....@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> Anything to get Saint Oswald off...right?
>
tomnln
With Official Records.
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1159582599.1...@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
aeffects
well hello *kook* Von Pain *kook*, how the hell *kook* are you? I see
*kook* you've renewed *kook* a bad habit of *kook* yours. Can't quite
get through a sentence *kook* without *kook* saying KOOK, you really
should see a *kook* doctor about your *kook* problem before it gets
*kook* out of hand.
Before we get to *kook* assassination related *kook* evidence *kook*
get your damn *kook* KOOK problem fixed, will *kook* ya? Reading you
inane *kook* posts is bad *kook* enough without all your *kook*
references.
Get up to speed will ya *kook*, lurkers *kook* are on to what your up
to VonPain
David Von Pein
Tough. Live with it. The "kook" references are here to stay. Nothing
says "CTer" like the K-word. Nuttin'.
And I don't give a damn whether you're having a hard time reading my
posts or not.
Kook.
tomnln
"aeffects" <aeff...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1159588068....@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Walt
David Von Pein wrote:
> >>> "Every time I shove facts up yer nose you attempt to change the subject. My Grandpa taught me a wise man will keep his mouth shut when he doesn't know anything about the subject being discussed." <<<
>
> You are positively one of the most useless, despicable, and
> hypocritical CT-Kooks I have ever encountered in all my born days. And
> -- incredibly -- you actually wear that badge like it's something to be
> PROUD of.
>
> I totally destroyed your argument re. Marrion Baker.....even linking
> the affidavit that you completely misrepresented (probably on purpose,
> due to the obvious fact you're a despicable CT-Kook of the First
> Order), and you have the gall to come back into this same thread
> telling ME I don't know what I'm talking about?!
>
> That's just.....classic KL (Kook Logic)!
>
> BTW, care to retract your crap about Baker's affidavit?
I totally destroyed your argument re. Marrion Baker.....even linking
the affidavit that you completely misrepresented.
The Affidavit that you provided the link to is NOT the Baker affidavit
I was referring to ....I know that you're aware that Baker gave several
affidavits. ( It doesn't surprise me that you would link to one that
you selected)
Baker said he looked up at the sound of the FIRST shot and noticed the
startled pigeons bursting into flight from behind the Hertz sign on top
of the TSBD. He immediately sped up his motorcycle and RAN into the
TSBD.
You said it that the re-enactment of Baker's movements took 82.5
seconds, but that was timed from the sound of the LAST shot, so six
seconds has to be subtracted from your 82.5 seconds which yeilds a fact
that Baker reached the lunchroom in 76.5 seconds. Oswald was in the
lunchroom with a coke in his hand, with the door closed, when Baker
arrived.
The W.C. determined that it would have taken Oswald ( if he had been
the sniper) about 78 seconds just to reach the lunchroom. ( He would
have had to open the door to the lunchroom which had a pnuematic closer
on it that caused it to close SLOWLY. ) So about 15 seconds needs to
be added to the W.C. estimate of 78 seconds. Which means that the door
would have closed about ten seconds AFTER Bakers arrival..... Baker
said the door was closed. Therefore Oswald was not the sniper.
Walt
didn't think so.
David Von Pein
I see two Marrion Baker affidavits listed here (11/22/63 and 8/11/64);
neither of which offers up the "pigeon" and "after the first shot" data
you seem to require......
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/wit.htm
How many more do you see?
>>> "Baker said the door was closed. Therefore Oswald was not the sniper." <<<
And just think....a "door" has proved Oswald's innocence. The fact that
a door was deemed "closed" is a good enough reason to make a kook named
Walt declare Oswald innocent of shooting President Kennedy.
Great logic there. Let's ignore all of that OTHER evidence against Mr.
Oswald, and stick by that door with the automatic closing mechanism on
it to prove Oswald's innocence.
Kooky indeed.
Oops....looks like Walt needs to re-think the "closed door" thing after
all. Because we have this WC testimony from Marrion Baker, in which he
comments on the status of the vestibule door......
M.L. BAKER -- "I can't say whether he {Oswald} had gone on through that
door or not. All I did was catch a glance at him, and evidently he
was--this door might have been, you know, closing and almost shut at
that time."
Walt
Thank you.... You've just stepped in it again. You said that Oswald
could have reached the lunchroom in 78 seconds.
And since the door was either shut or "almost shut at that time"
Oswald would have had to reach the lunchroom about 15 or 20 seconds
PRIOR to Bakers arrival. If it took Oswald 78 seconds to reach the
lunchroom and 15 seconds for the door to close then it's elementary
that Oswald would have had to descended from the fake "sniper's nest"
to the lunchroom in 63 seconds. The Warren Commission said that he
would have needed 78 seconds to reach the Lunchroom, and if it took 15
seconds for the door to close then that means the door closed 93
seconds after the LAST shot and Baker would have had been there
watching it close.....because you said it took Baker 82.5 seconds to
reach the lunchroom after the LAST shot.
Walt
David Von Pein
And this must mean that Walt The Super-Sleuth has "timed" the
door-closing mechanism on the lunchroom vestibule door, correct? He
knows it takes that door "15 to 20 seconds" to fully close. Right?
LOL. It must have been a door made by the "Snail-Pace Door Co. Inc.".
Twenty seconds for a door to close, even via an auto door-closing
device is unGodly slow. Try counting One-Mississippi...Two Miss... and
see for yourself. No door is likely to take that long to fully shut.
But even if it took 60 seconds to fully close...Walt's still a kook by
attempting to micro-manage the exact events of Oswald's and Baker's
post-12:30 movements on 11/22/63 -- movements that shall forever remain
guesswork to a substantial extent. There's no way around this
"guesswork" re. Oswald's movements, and to some degree Baker's as well.
But the Best Evidence is that Oswald did descend those back stairs
after the shooting and ended up meeting Baker in the vestibule area
just seconds after he (LHO) arrived on the 2nd Floor.
It's also quite likely (common-sense-wise here) that Oswald didn't take
the time to FULLY OPEN the vestibule door. Why would he? Who opens a
door to its full extent before entering a room...EVER? Very unlikely
occurrence. Therefore, Oswald might very well have only opened that
door far enough to allow him to slip inside it quickly.
Meaning: the door would not have had nearly as far to "close", since it
probably wasn't opened ALL THE WAY by Oswald in the first place. Five
to eight seconds...tops (IMO, based on a certain amount of CS&L being
employed re. this total guesswork).
CT fools like Walt, however, will do ANYTHING necessary to deviate from
the "Oswald Did It" path. Even if they have to micro-manage the case
right down to counting the number of seconds it takes a door to close
(which, of course, was never "timed" by anyone as far as I am aware;
but Walt seems to be an expert in this field of door-closers....so I
guess he just expects everyone to take his word for anything he says).
Nutty, huh?
Indeed.
Walt
David Von Pein wrote:
> >>> "And since the door was either shut or "almost shut at that time", Oswald would have had to reach the lunchroom about 15 or 20 seconds PRIOR to Baker's arrival." <<<
>
> And this must mean that Walt The Super-Sleuth has "timed" the
> door-closing mechanism on the lunchroom vestibule door, correct? He
> knows it takes that door "15 to 20 seconds" to fully close. Right?
>
> LOL. It must have been a door made by the "Snail-Pace Door Co. Inc.".
> Twenty seconds for a door to close, even via an auto door-closing
> device is unGodly slow. Try counting One-Mississippi...Two Miss... and
> see for yourself. No door is likely to take that long to fully shut.
>
> But even if it took 60 seconds to fully close...Walt's still a kook by
> attempting to micro-manage the exact events of Oswald's and Baker's
> post-12:30 movements on 11/22/63 -- movements that shall forever remain
> guesswork to a substantial extent. There's no way around this
> "guesswork" re. Oswald's movements, and to some degree Baker's as well.
> But the Best Evidence is that Oswald did descend those back stairs
> after the shooting and ended up meeting Baker in the vestibule area
> just seconds after he (LHO) arrived on the 2nd Floor.
Talk about Nutty..... Read carefully what you wrote in a single
paragraph......
But even if it took 60 seconds to fully close...Walt's still a kook by
attempting to micro-manage the exact events of Oswald's and Baker's
post-12:30 movements on 11/22/63 -- movements that shall forever remain
guesswork to a substantial extent. There's no way around this
"guesswork" re. Oswald's movements, and to some degree Baker's as well.
In this sentence you say.....Quote "movements that shall forever
remain
guesswork"....unquote. You know and acknowledge that Lee's movements
are nothing but "guesswork" but, in the very next sentence you
say.....Quote..." But the Best Evidence is that Oswald did descend
those back stairs".... Unquote.
In one breath you acknowledge that there is no solid evidence that
Oswald descended those stairs after the shooting, but in the very next
breath you say there is evidence that Oswald descended those stairs.
Nutty, huh?
Walt
tomnln
Baker is a Proven Liar.
http://whokilledjfk.net/altgens.htm
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1159748561.2...@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>>>> "The affidavit that you provided the link to is NOT the Baker affidavit
>>>> I was referring to. I know that you're aware that Baker gave several
>>>> affidavits." <<<
>
> I see two listed here (11/22/63 and 8/11/64):
>
> http://jfkassassination.net/russ/wit.htm
>
> How many more do you see?
>
>>>> "Baker said the door was closed. Therefore Oswald was not the sniper."
>>>> <<<
>
David Von Pein
Yes. Exactly. So?
The "Best Evidence" (by far) is that Oswald did descend those stairs
after being on the 6th Floor at 12:30 while shooting the President.
Some guesswork is (inevitably) involved in trying to piece together
Oswald's movements (since Lee wasn't nice enough to tell Capt. Fritz,
et al, his step-by-step activities on 11/22).
>>> "In one breath you acknowledge that there is no solid evidence that Oswald descended those stairs after the shooting, but in the very next breath you say there is evidence that Oswald descended those stairs." <<<
There's solid evidence that Oswald was firing a gun on the sixth floor
at 12:30....and there's no question that Oswald was in the 2nd-Floor
lunchroom at approx. 12:31:30. It doesn't take a genius to do the math
here, does it?
The exact number of steps it took for Lee to get from floors 6 to 2 is
unknown, and the exact number of seconds it took him to do it will
forever be guesswork as well. But the best guess is that he DID perform
his trip from Floor #6 to Floor #2 in the allotted timeframe.
And then there are the other little things to consider too. Things like
--- Oswald's prints all over the joint up on the 6th Floor; Oswald's
very own rifle on that same floor (and those three spent hulls); and
that pesky paper bag with LHO's prints on it in the EXACT places on the
bag which confirm Wes Frazier's account of how Oswald carried the bag
into the building (a bag that CT-Kooks say never existed, of course; I
can't wait to see how Vince Bugliosi handles the "Paper Bag" thing;
that'll be fun to see him debunk the popular "The Bag Was Never In The
Nest" crap).
That's an abundant amount of "Oswald Was Up Here On The Sixth Floor
Shooting A Gun" evidence to fake, isn't it?
To believe all of that stuff was conveniently "arranged" by
conspirators is to believe in some really kooky shit. But, then again,
CTers are accustomed to believing kooky shit, aren't they? Comes as
natural as breathing to them.
Walt
David Von Pein wrote:
> >>> "You know and acknowledge that Lee's movements are nothing but "guesswork" but, in the very next sentence you say...."But the Best Evidence is that Oswald did descend those back stairs"." <<<
>
>
> Yes. Exactly. So?
>
> The "Best Evidence" (by far) is that Oswald did descend those stairs
> after being on the 6th Floor at 12:30 while shooting the President.
>
> Some guesswork is (inevitably) involved in trying to piece together
> Oswald's movements (since Lee wasn't nice enough to tell Capt. Fritz,
> et al, his step-by-step activities on 11/22).
>
>
> >>> "In one breath you acknowledge that there is no solid evidence that Oswald descended those stairs after the shooting, but in the very next breath you say there is evidence that Oswald descended those stairs." <<<
>
>
> There's solid evidence that Oswald was firing a gun on the sixth floor
> at 12:30....and there's no question that Oswald was in the 2nd-Floor
> lunchroom at approx. 12:31:30. It doesn't take a genius to do the math
> here, does it?
There's solid evidence that Oswald was firing a gun on the sixth floor
at 12:30..
Oh Really??.... What is that "solid evidence"??
> The exact number of steps it took for Lee to get from floors 6 to 2 is
> unknown, and the exact number of seconds it took him to do it will
> forever be guesswork as well. But the best guess, guess, guess, guess is that he DID perform
> his trip from Floor #6 to Floor #2 in the allotted timeframe.
>
> And then there are the other little things to consider too. Things like
> --- Oswald's prints all over the joint up on the 6th Floor;
He worked there .....remember.
Oswald's very own rifle on that same floor
There is no PROOF that it was his rifle. In fact the rifle he was
photographed holding in CE 133A is NOT the rifle that was found in the
TSBD.
(and those three spent hulls); and
Those spent shells were planted in the S.N. "smoker's nook"......
> that pesky paper bag with LHO's prints on it in the EXACT places on the
> bag which confirm Wes Frazier's account of how Oswald carried the bag
> into the building (a bag that CT-Kooks say never existed, of course; I
> can't wait to see how Vince Bugliosi handles the "Paper Bag" thing;
> that'll be fun to see him debunk the popular "The Bag Was Never In The
> Nest" crap).
The paper bag was a phantom .......there is no proof it ever was in the
SN, or it belonged to Oswald....
The police described the bag as "tapered" and "shaped like a guncase"
to conjure up a mental image in the publics mind to bolster their tale
that Lee carried the 40 inch rifle in the 34 inch bag. Photo's of the
bag indicate it was not tapered, or shaped like a guncase......The
creases indicate it was used to wrap books that measured 9'X12".
>
> That's an abundant amount of "Oswald Was Up Here On The Sixth Floor
> Shooting A Gun" evidence to fake, isn't it?
Get real...pull yer head out.
>
> To believe all of that stuff was conveniently "arranged" by
> conspirators is to believe in some really kooky shit.
If they were going to frame Oswald, They knew they had to have a rifle
similar to the one he was phtographed with, and some spent shells from
that rifle.
They forgot that they would have to have a container that Oswald could
have used to carry the rifle into the building. When the question
arose..."How did he get the rifle into the building?"...they were
forced to improvise, and grabbed a book wrapper, and claimed that was
how he'd smuggled the gun into the building.
Walt
curtj...@webtv.net
> >>> "And by your own chronolgy [sic], Truly would have had to seen Oswald as he climbed the stairs." <<<
>
> My chronology doesn't require Truly to have seen Oswald. Oswald
> probably ducked off the stairway just a matter of seconds before Truly
> appeared on Floor #2.
>
on the sixth floor going through a bunch of boxes to get out of a SN
that nobody could have shot out of with only a partial only window
open. Time is needed to plant the hulls that were found all in a row.
Time is needed to go to the opposite spot in the building and go
through boxes, then move them to place a rifle underneath. Oh don't
forget to wipe the rifle off, and then one has to go down some stairs
that already have people in them from the fourth floor.
Also, Truly would have had to see the door closing in the lunchroom if
Oswald had just preceded 'going in'. It was a slow closing door. Of
course coming up from the bottom floor and coming into the lunchroom
via the corridor from the offices on the second floor would have not
entered your mind either.
> But for some stupid reason, you seem to think Truly was "several
> seconds" ahead of Baker (vs. "a few feet", per Truly himself). Go
> figure.
>
>
> >>> "You claim that Oswald reached the lunchroom six seconds before Baker arrived." <<<
>
>
> Those are the estimates provided by the 4 WC re-creations, yes. And
> those re-creations perfectly align with what the WC says Oswald
> probably did after shooting JFK. Perfectly. Only a kook wouldn't be
> able to see how these re-creations "line up" nicely.
>
And those recreations were there to buy more time for Truly and Baker.
All accounts were that they were running and it would have never taken
them that long to get there. The only hold up was a brief stop at an
elevator.
> I guess, per CTers, it's just another "coincidence" that the WC (and
> Baker himself) were able to re-create something that CTers say was
> utterly impossible, huh? Just like the Discovery Channel re-created the
> general path of the SBT, even though THAT too is considered an absolute
> IMPOSSIBILITY per CT-Kookatics. Go figure.
>
Yeah, but when all the doctors say there was more lead left in Connally
than what was gone from the magic bullet (around 1% of weight of
bullet), then we knew that that was a verifiable piece of crap.
>
> >>> "Since Truly was ahead of Baker by several seconds..." <<<
>
> Just like the "35-year-old, 175-pound" assassin, I see that Walt-Kook
> will continue to spout his obviously-overstated "several seconds" with
> respect to this particular argument as well....in order to make the gap
> wider for his CT purposes. Go figure.
>
> (Jesus, what a kook.)
>
But it definitely wasn't Oswald. The clothing didn't match, and the
only open window was at the other end for any shooting, the Southwest,
not SE.
>
> >>> "But you claim that Oswald WALKED from the sixth floor to the lunchroom..." <<<
>
> I never once said that Oswald positively "walked" to the 2nd Floor. He
> could have run part of the way. I said that John Howlett, the SS Agent
> who did the re-creations of Oswald's probable movements, performed his
> re-constructions at two different "walking" paces, yes. But that
> doesn't mean that Oswald "walked" it. Maybe he did run. Who can know?
> No one can. But the point is -- even if LHO had only WALKED to the 2nd
> Floor, it was still a doable journey in order to arrive on the 2nd
> Floor approx. 6 to 7 seconds before Baker/Truly.
>
Stiles and Adams had to be in the stairwell before any sniper could
have done all the tasks he or they needed to do before they could have
left and gone down.
aeffects
don't worry there champ we haven't forgot about your undying support
for daBug, his multiple tomes, tomes that will get published years from
now, MAYBE!
And you have the gall to speak about KOOK'S? roflmfao!
>
> Kook.
David Von Pein
wonders never cease?
And yes, my support for DaBug is undying indeed. Don't you wish the CT
side had someone as respectable and knowledgeable as Mr. VB to attempt
to prop up the non-existent CT case (instead of having to rely on
Groden, Lane, Garrison, Stone, Marrs, and (lol) Jim "Everything's A
Conspiracy" Fetzer for the front-line support of JFK CTism)?
That roster of kooks should be enough to sway people from the CT side
without batting an eyelid.
And yet The Healy-man has the 'nads to utter this to me......
"And you have the gall to speak about KOOK'S [sic]? roflmfao!" --
AEffects (aka Mr. Kook); 10/02/2006 AD
Hi-lar-i-ous!
~~~~~~~~
"Someone has got to debunk these absurd conspiracy theories." --
Vincent T. Bugliosi
"I'm 95% sure he {Oswald} acted alone; and if you threw 85% of the
evidence out the window there would still be enough to prove his guilt
beyond a reasonable doubt." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Walt
Hey, Peanut Brain..... Don't scramble away too fast, tred carefully,
because you've just stepped in it again.
even if LHO had only WALKED to the 2nd Floor, it was still a doable
journey in order to arrive on the 2nd
Floor approx. 6 to 7 seconds before Baker/Truly.
You're makin stuff up ...... Anybody who knows the facts knows that
the W.C. depicted Oswald as running as fast as he could to get away
from the scene.( To make him appear to be a fleeing assassin.) They
certainly never depicted him as WALKING from the 6th floor to the 2nd
floor....How utterly ridiculous.
In an earlier post in this thread you said that Baker arrived on the
2nd floor 6 seconds after Oswald arrived at the second floor lunchroom.
We both know that Truly was ahead of Baker in the trek to the roof of
the TSBD. So if Baker arrived just 6 seconds before Oswald then Truly
who was 6 seconds ahead of Baker would have met Oswald either on the
stairs or in the vestibule outside of the lunchroom. I know you'll
attempt to make some assinine excuse to cover yer embarrassed ass but
anybody who knows the facts will see through your B.S.
Walt
Walt
David Von Pein wrote:
> What a surprise! An additional say-nothing post from Mr. Effects! Will
> wonders never cease?
>
> And yes, my support for DaBug is undying indeed. Don't you wish the CT
> side had someone as respectable and knowledgeable as Mr. VB to attempt
> to prop up the non-existent CT case (instead of having to rely on
> Groden, Lane, Garrison, Stone, Marrs, and (lol) Jim "Everything's A
> Conspiracy" Fetzer for the front-line support of JFK CTism)?
>
> That roster of kooks should be enough to sway people from the CT side
> without batting an eyelid.
>
> And yet The Healy-man has the 'nads to utter this to me......
>
> "And you have the gall to speak about KOOK'S [sic]? roflmfao!" --
> AEffects (aka Mr. Kook); 10/02/2006 AD
>
> Hi-lar-i-ous!
>
> ~~~~~~~~
>
> "Someone has got to debunk these absurd conspiracy theories." --
> Vincent T. Bugliosi
>
> "I'm 95% sure he {Oswald} acted alone; and if you threw 85% of the
> evidence out the window there would still be enough to prove his guilt
> beyond a reasonable doubt." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
What a novel idea!!....... Destroy most of the evidence ( 85%) and use
just small fraction ( 15) of the evidence to convict someone.
Ahhh....Come to think of it it's not such a novel idea at that..... In
the old days ( Pre 2000) in Texas and Louisiana they convicted men with
ZERO evidence. In some cases they executed a man for a crime simply
because his skin was black, so I'm not surprised that da Bug would want
to throw out 85% of the evidence.
Walt
>
> www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/discussions/start-thread.html/ref=cm_rdp_dp/002-0824397-5815226?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1422005305&store=yourstore&reviewID=R32LB4VQKDFUQE&iid=1422005305&displayType=ReviewDetail
>
> www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/discussions/start-thread.html/ref=cm_rdp_dp/002-0824397-5815226?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B000F6Q4KO&store=yourstore&reviewID=R1ZT6UEZEK777R&iid=B000F6Q4KO&displayType=ReviewDetail
>
> www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/discussions/start-thread.html/ref=cm_rdp_dp/002-0824397-5815226?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0812693663&store=yourstore&reviewID=R50F3YZWYPBOB&iid=0812693663&displayType=ReviewDetail
Walt
Hey, Peanut Brain..... Don't scramble away too fast, tred carefully,
because you've just stepped in it again.
even if LHO had only WALKED to the 2nd Floor, it was still a doable
journey in order to arrive on the 2nd
Floor approx. 6 to 7 seconds before Baker/Truly.
You're makin stuff up ...... Anybody who knows the facts knows that
the W.C. depicted Oswald as running as fast as he could to get away
from the scene.( To make him appear to be a fleeing assassin.) They
certainly never depicted him as WALKING from the 6th floor to the 2nd
floor....How utterly ridiculous.
In an earlier post in this thread you said that Baker arrived on the
2nd floor 6 seconds after Oswald arrived at the second floor lunchroom.
We both know that Truly was ahead of Baker in the trek to the roof of
the TSBD. So if Baker arrived just 6 seconds before Oswald then Truly
who was 6 seconds ahead of Baker would have met Oswald either on the
stairs or in the vestibule outside of the lunchroom. I know you'll
attempt to make some assinine excuse to cover yer embarrassed ass but
anybody who knows the facts will see through your B.S.
Walt
> >
David Von Pein
And Walt thinks he's gonna tell me the "facts" re. this matter.
That's a friggin' laugh!
Walt is the one "makin' stuff up". The WC re-created Oswald's movements
(using SS Special Agent John Howlett)....and BOTH re-creations were
done at a "walking" pace....not "running as fast as he could", as Walt
seems to think.
Let's have a look.....
"{SS Agent} Howlett walked down the stairway to the second-floor
landing and entered the lunchroom. The first test, run at normal
walking pace, required 1 minutes, 18 seconds; the second test, at a
"fast walk", took 1 minute, 14 seconds." -- WCR; Page #152
Walt thinks the WC is full of shit here...correct Walt-Kook? They're
just lying through their teeth, right, when they said "normal walking
pace" and "fast walk"?
Of course, there's also the fact that CBS-TV did a re-creation of LHO's
movements too (in 1967), and it's on film....with a man walking (fairly
slowly) from the SN to the 2nd Floor. And it was done in approx. the
same amount of time as Howlett's 1964 re-constructions (possibly
slightly longer, because the guy for CBS wasn't hurrying whatsoever,
and Oswald undoubtedly was).
Can this kook named Walt bury himself any deeper than he's already
buried in CT shit? Doubtful.
David Von Pein
LOL. Boy, what a bunch of goofball Patsy-Framers you've got there.
They go to the ADVANCED trouble of faking photos of Oswald, placing
"imposter Oswalds" all over the place, and God-knows what else to frame
their dupe prior to 11/22 -- but then when the big day arrives -- they
"forgot" about the paper bag. And they evidently "forgot" to plant the
right rifle too. (Because how does planting a Mauser help out the Patsy
plot?)
And just think -- people like Walt actually BUY into this nonsense.
Reprise.....
>>> "They {the goofy plotters with I.Q.s of 5 each} were forced to improvise, and grabbed a book wrapper, and claimed that was how he'd smuggled the gun into the building." <<<
And it just so happened that Oswald DID take a bulky paper bag into
work that very same day. How convenient for the idiot plotters that
Oswald was willing to frame himself in this manner.
Beaver Cleaver could have mapped out a "Patsy" plot better than the way
Walt says it occurred.
Well, as they say....one's born every minute I guess.
Walt
chuck schuyler wrote:
> Walt:
>
> The adjectives used to describe how Oswald left the TSBD are less
> important than the fact that he DID LEAVE the building shortly after
> shots were fired. It does show a consciousness of guilt, regardless as
> to whether you feel he was totally innocent, a shooter part of a plot,
> or a lone gunman.
Simply because Oswald left the TSBD after the shooting doesn't show a
consciousness of guilt. I'll agree that it does raise the question of
why he left, because his departing at that time seems contrary to human
nature. I believe he had good reason to leave, though I don't know
what it was. Because you are so heavily biased you can only believe
that he left because he was the gunman who shot JFK. I'm certain he
was NOT one of the gunmen, and therefore I have more latitude in
looking for other explanations.
He told Fritz that he left because he heard there wasn't going to be
anymore work that afternoon and he decided to take in a movie. I
don't believe he was as interested in seeing the movie as he was in
meeting "someone" in the theater. I speculate that he had a
prearranged plan with Hosty to meet in the Texas theater in the event
of a crisis that required that they meet..... He could also have called
a girlfriend, and told her that he would meet her at the theater.
There were reports of a pregnant woman in the theater that afternoon,
and Oswald sat beside her for awhile. I find the reports of a pregnant
woman in the theater verrrrry interesssting, because it would be an
unusual woman who would rather sit in a theater watching war movies
than spending the afternoon shopping.
Oswald moved several times from seat to seat in the theater, which
indicates he was looking for someone. It may have been his girlfriend,
the pregnant woman, that he was seeking to bid her goodbye, because he
thought he was on his way to Cuba.
Whatever his reason for leaving the TSBD.... it was not necessarily an
admision of guilt as you believe....
The truth is we simply don't know WHY he left the TSBD.
Walt
Walt
David Von Pein wrote:
> >>> "They forgot that they would have to have a container that Oswald could have used to carry the rifle into the building. When the question arose..."How did he get the rifle into the building?"...they were forced to improvise, and grabbed a book wrapper, and claimed that was how he'd smuggled the gun into the building." <<<
>
> LOL. Boy, what a bunch of goofball Patsy-Framers you've got there.
>
> They go to the ADVANCED trouble of faking photos of Oswald, placing
> "imposter Oswalds" all over the place, and God-knows what else to frame
> their dupe prior to 11/22 -- but then when the big day arrives -- they
> "forgot" about the paper bag. And they evidently "forgot" to plant the
> right rifle too. (Because how does planting a Mauser help out the Patsy
> plot?)
Who said anything about a Mauser??
The rifle in Oswald's hands in CE 133A is a Mannlicher Carcano, model
91/38, short rifle, with the dual sling swivel sling mounts. ( the
sling could be mounted either on the side or the bottom of the rifle)
The rifle that was found in the TSBD was a Mannlicher Carcano, model
91/38, short rifle, with the single sling mount. ( the sling could only
be mounted on the side of the rifle)
>
> And just think -- people like Walt actually BUY into this nonsense.
>
> Reprise.....
>
> >>> "They {the goofy plotters with I.Q.s of 5 each} were forced to improvise, and grabbed a book wrapper, and claimed that was how he'd smuggled the gun into the building." <<<
They had planned on murdering Oswald in the TSBD .....They never
planned on having to provide evidence to cover every detail. If
Oswald had been murdered as planned, it would have been an open and
shut case. The evidence would have pointed to his guilt. His rifle
was found in the building, spent shells were found behind the window he
fired from, and he had been killed while trying to escape. .... Case
Closed
Oswald threw a monkey wrench into the plot by not being on the sixth
floor to be murdered right after JFK was killed.
>
> And it just so happened that Oswald DID take a bulky paper bag into
> work that very same day. How convenient for the idiot plotters that
> Oswald was willing to frame himself in this manner.
If you'll check the records you'll find that on the afternoon of 11 /
22 / 63, they learned from Linnie Mae Randle, that Oswald carried a big
paper sack that morning. With in minutes of the discovery of the rifle
the question was raised..."How did the sniper get the rifle into the
building?". ( That question lingered in the newspapers for a couple of
days ) They were in quandry until Oswald was arrested, and they heard
from Randle that Oswald had carried a big paper sack. ( later It was
demonstrated that the sack Oswald carried was to small to contain a
rifle, so they modified their story to say that Oswald had disassembled
his rifle so it would fit into the bag.) Randles statement provided
them with an explanation, but they had already taken many photos of the
so called sniper's nest and NONE of them showed a paper bag.
>
> Beaver Cleaver could have mapped out a "Patsy" plot better than the way
> Walt says it occurred.
I'll say..... The fact that you can't see the truth and are to damned
dumb to open your eyes puts "The Beav " head and shouders above you in
intelligence..
Walt
David Von Pein
Oh, come now, my good CT man -- you know darn well you believe that a
Mauser was found on the 6th Floor by the DPD. That's a theory that a
person like you simply could NOT resist (even if you tried).
And if a Mauser was the actual rifle discovered in the
Depository....where were the brains of the Patsy-Framers that allowed
such a stupid mistake to occur (after all, Oswald didn't own a Mauser)?
Didn't the plotters think it even MATTERED what type of gun they
"planted" to frame their lone Patsy?
>>> "They had planned on murdering Oswald in the TSBD." <<<
But "they" blew that plan too, huh? Why couldn't these bums get
anything right?
>>> "The evidence would have pointed to his {Oswald's} guilt." <<<
And all of it does....even without your made-up "Let's Frame LHO" plot.
>>> "Oswald threw a monkey wrench into the plot by not being on the sixth
floor to be murdered right after JFK was killed." <<<
Shame on Lee for not cooperating still MORE with the plot to frame him
for murder, huh?
And, again, what kind of boobs were these plotters? They need LHO on
the Death Floor at 12:30; so why don't they keep an eye on him and MAKE
SURE he was on that floor? How are they going to assure they can frame
this guy if he's not even at the exact scene of the crime (i.e., the
6th Floor)?
"They" somehow got him to take a bulky bag into work that day. And
"they" somehow got Lee to act like a very guilty person just after
12:30 too (even though he never killed a soul, per many CTers). But
"they" couldn't get him to the 6th Floor when he was needed there most.
It must have been a plot arranged by "Abbott & Costello Plotters, Inc."
evidently.
>>> "The fact that you can't see the truth, and are to damned dumb to open your eyes, puts "The Beav " head and shouders above you in intelligence." <<<
And the fact that you're willing to totally ignore all of the
Oswald-Did-This evidence (as you choose to believe it was tainted all
the way down the line with no proof of such activity whatsoever) puts a
hunk of ear wax in the "More Intelligent Than Walt" category.
David Von Pein
I doubted Walt could sink any lower into "Let's Make Up Some
Theories"-land, but he has, via the "pregnant woman" theory. And Walt
even knows this woman's shopping habits as well. And he evidently knows
that this unknown woman wasn't really fond of Van Heflin war films. She
really should have been more interested in shopping on 11/22; but went
to the theater anyway to meet Oswald. (Did she name the baby "Lee
Harvey", btw?)
LOL.
Anthony Marsh
> David Von Pein wrote:
>>>>> "They forgot that they would have to have a container that Oswald could have used to carry the rifle into the building. When the question arose..."How did he get the rifle into the building?"...they were forced to improvise, and grabbed a book wrapper, and claimed that was how he'd smuggled the gun into the building." <<<
>> LOL. Boy, what a bunch of goofball Patsy-Framers you've got there.
>>
>> They go to the ADVANCED trouble of faking photos of Oswald, placing
>> "imposter Oswalds" all over the place, and God-knows what else to frame
>> their dupe prior to 11/22 -- but then when the big day arrives -- they
>> "forgot" about the paper bag. And they evidently "forgot" to plant the
>> right rifle too. (Because how does planting a Mauser help out the Patsy
>> plot?)
>
> Who said anything about a Mauser??
> The rifle in Oswald's hands in CE 133A is a Mannlicher Carcano, model
> 91/38, short rifle, with the dual sling swivel sling mounts. ( the
> sling could be mounted either on the side or the bottom of the rifle)
I don't follow your point about dual sling swivel mounts. Are you
talking about a different model Mannlicher? Oswald's rifle had the sling
mount on the side, not on the butt.
Walt
David Von Pein wrote:
> >>> "Who said anything about a Mauser?" <<<
>
> Oh, come now, my good CT man -- you know darn well you believe that a
> Mauser was found on the 6th Floor by the DPD. That's a theory that a
> person like you simply could NOT resist (even if you tried).
Get this straight asshole.... You don't tell me what I believe, and
then point out what any moron would know... that the rifle photographed
being taken out from the cavern of boxes is a Mannlicher Carcano, model
91/38, short rifle.
Walt
David Von Pein
That's right...I forgot. Sorry.
There's no telling what an asshole like Walt-Kook is gonna believe. His
beliefs change like the drifting tides. One day a Mauser...the next a
Carcano....the next day, a bean shooter. Who can tell what a kook will
think next?
(BTW -- Any luck finding -- and posting -- that third Marrion L. Baker
affidavit yet? I'd enjoy seeing it. Or would you rather pull a "Ben",
and just pretend you know what you're talking about?)
Walt
Anthony Marsh wrote:
> Walt wrote:
> > David Von Pein wrote:
> >>>>> "They forgot that they would have to have a container that Oswald could have used to carry the rifle into the building. When the question arose..."How did he get the rifle into the building?"...they were forced to improvise, and grabbed a book wrapper, and claimed that was how he'd smuggled the gun into the building." <<<
> >> LOL. Boy, what a bunch of goofball Patsy-Framers you've got there.
> >>
> >> They go to the ADVANCED trouble of faking photos of Oswald, placing
> >> "imposter Oswalds" all over the place, and God-knows what else to frame
> >> their dupe prior to 11/22 -- but then when the big day arrives -- they
> >> "forgot" about the paper bag. And they evidently "forgot" to plant the
> >> right rifle too. (Because how does planting a Mauser help out the Patsy
> >> plot?)
> >
> > Who said anything about a Mauser??
> > The rifle in Oswald's hands in CE 133A is a Mannlicher Carcano, model
> > 91/38, short rifle, with the dual sling swivel sling mounts. ( the
> > sling could be mounted either on the side or the bottom of the rifle)
>
> I don't follow your point about dual sling swivel mounts. Are you
> talking about a different model Mannlicher? Oswald's rifle had the sling
> mount on the side, not on the butt.
Oswald never owned a rifle..... The TSBD rifle had the sling mounted on
the side.
Tony, The model 91/38 Mannlicher Carcano, short rifle was produced with
two differen types of sling mounts.
The majority of then were made with the sling mounts on the left side
of the rifle. ( The European armies used the "slings" only as carrying
straps) With the strap mounted on the left side the bolt handle stuck
out away from the soldiers back, and didn't poke him in the back when
he was carrying it on his back. A minority of the Model 91/38 short
rifles were manufactured with a strap mount that allowed the strap to
be mounted eithe on the left side or on the bottom. This is the dual
sling mount version. The rifle that Osawld is holdingin CE 133A is the
rare dual sling mount version. The rifle that was found in the TSBD is
the common single sling mount version.
IF IF IF Oswald owned a Mannlicher Carcano short rifle it was the dual
sling version ( at least the rifle he is holding in CE 133A is the dual
sling version. ( I'm not convinced it was his rifle.....He had
POSSESSION of a rifle for a while ...BUT I believe the rifle actually
belonged to George De Morhenschildt.) The dual sling version is what's
shown in CE 133A... And the Klein sporting goods ad that the rifle was
ordered from shows a dual sling version of the Model 91/38.
Walt
David Von Pein
If LHO never owned a rifle, answer these 2 inquiries:
1.) Why did Oswald (in his own hand) order one from Klein's?
2.) And why did Oswald pay $21.45 for a rifle in early 1963?
Did he buy it as a gift for his friend George D.?
The "Anybody But Oswald" crap gets more ludicrous each and every day.
bail...@gmail.com
You CT's astound me. You waste your time in areas that will NEVER be
resolved at the expense of understanding who Lee Harvey Oswald was. I
honestly believe if JFK and God came down from Heaven and announced
"there was NO conspiracy", CT's would respond "wow, this is bigger than
we thought". 43 years have passed and the CT community cannot even
come TOGETHER on any piece of their "so called "evidence. Mind you,
evidence to a CT is conjecture, speculation and innuendo. Not long
ago, I had the opportunity to speak with Robert Oswald. I was curious
about his conversation with Lee at the DPD on 11/23. He spent what he
estimates to me about 10 minutes with his brother. Robert told me he
looked deeply into Lee's eyes. Lee saw this and responded "brother,
there's nothing there".
How did Robert interpet this. Quite simply. Lee Harvey Oswald and
nobody else assassinated John Kennedy. Any evidence to the contrary
has remained a mystery for 43 years.
Walt
David Von Pein wrote:
> >>> "Oswald never owned a rifle." <<<
>
> If LHO never owned a rifle, answer these 2 inquiries:
>
> 1.) Why did Oswald (in his own hand) order one from Klein's?
Who said it was Oswald's handwriting on the order blank? Have you
actually looked at that Order blank? The "handwriting" is a PRINTED
scribbled mess ... It looks like some right handed person, used their
left hand, and a stubby pencil, to fill out that order blank.
>
> 2.) And why did Oswald pay $21.45 for a rifle in early 1963?
Huh?.... What is the question? I don't believe Oswald bought a
rifle in "early 63"
>
> Did he buy it as a gift for his friend George D.?
George De M, Mike Paine, and Lee Oswald worked together to cook up a
scheme that was designed to trick Castro's agents into believing Lee
Oswald was a rabid communist revolutionary. The back yard photo (CE
133A) reveals a blatently amateurish attempt at creating a photo that
says " Hey look at me, I'm a rabid communist revolutionary well armed
and ready to fight for the revolution". It would have fooled agent
worth his cloak or dagger, but it sure worked to fool some of the
gullible American public, like Von Pein.
Walt
Walt
Beetle Bailey
Anthony Marsh
No you don't. You just want to ridicule anyone who believes in
conspiracy in order to protect the conspirators.
Anthony Marsh
> Anthony Marsh wrote:
>> Walt wrote:
>>> David Von Pein wrote:
>>>>>>> "They forgot that they would have to have a container that Oswald could have used to carry the rifle into the building. When the question arose..."How did he get the rifle into the building?"...they were forced to improvise, and grabbed a book wrapper, and claimed that was how he'd smuggled the gun into the building." <<<
>>>> LOL. Boy, what a bunch of goofball Patsy-Framers you've got there.
>>>>
>>>> They go to the ADVANCED trouble of faking photos of Oswald, placing
>>>> "imposter Oswalds" all over the place, and God-knows what else to frame
>>>> their dupe prior to 11/22 -- but then when the big day arrives -- they
>>>> "forgot" about the paper bag. And they evidently "forgot" to plant the
>>>> right rifle too. (Because how does planting a Mauser help out the Patsy
>>>> plot?)
>>> Who said anything about a Mauser??
>>> The rifle in Oswald's hands in CE 133A is a Mannlicher Carcano, model
>>> 91/38, short rifle, with the dual sling swivel sling mounts. ( the
>>> sling could be mounted either on the side or the bottom of the rifle)
>> I don't follow your point about dual sling swivel mounts. Are you
>> talking about a different model Mannlicher? Oswald's rifle had the sling
>> mount on the side, not on the butt.
>
> Oswald never owned a rifle..... The TSBD rifle had the sling mounted on
> the side.
>
>
> Tony, The model 91/38 Mannlicher Carcano, short rifle was produced with
> two differen types of sling mounts.
This is what I wanted to hear you say. So your theory really is that the
rifle Oswald is holding in the backyard photos is a different type.
Wrong. It is exactly the same model. Further, it is exactly the same
rifle as found in the TSBD. The HSCA analyzed the wear marks and proved
that fact.
> The majority of then were made with the sling mounts on the left side
> of the rifle. ( The European armies used the "slings" only as carrying
> straps) With the strap mounted on the left side the bolt handle stuck
> out away from the soldiers back, and didn't poke him in the back when
> he was carrying it on his back. A minority of the Model 91/38 short
> rifles were manufactured with a strap mount that allowed the strap to
> be mounted eithe on the left side or on the bottom. This is the dual
> sling mount version. The rifle that Osawld is holdingin CE 133A is the
> rare dual sling mount version. The rifle that was found in the TSBD is
> the common single sling mount version.
>
Show me this version of the Mannlicher Carcano 91/38 with what you call
dual sling mounts. Talk is cheap. Anyone can make up a story. Show me
such a rifle.
> IF IF IF Oswald owned a Mannlicher Carcano short rifle it was the dual
> sling version ( at least the rifle he is holding in CE 133A is the dual
> sling version. ( I'm not convinced it was his rifle.....He had
> POSSESSION of a rifle for a while ...BUT I believe the rifle actually
> belonged to George De Morhenschildt.) The dual sling version is what's
> shown in CE 133A... And the Klein sporting goods ad that the rifle was
> ordered from shows a dual sling version of the Model 91/38.
>
The Klein's ad was for the carbine, not the short rifle that Oswald bought.
Walt
chuck schuyler wrote:
> Walt:
>
> Look, Walt...facts are stubborn things. It's his rifle. His pistol.
> Palmprints. We have a letter written to his wife regarding the attempt
> on Walker. This was a 'lone-gunman' attempt from a concealed
> location-sounds pretty close to 11-22-63, doesn't it?
>
> Brother Robert confronted Lee at the jail after his arrest. Robert
> said, "Lee, they've got a rifle they say is yours found in the TSBD and
> they've got witnesses saying you killed the policeman...what in Sam
> Hill is going on?" Robert looked Lee in the eyes. Lee was quiet for a
> moment and said, "Brother, you won't find anything there."
>
> No comment like..."Look, Robert...I know this looks bad, but believe
> me, there's much more to it. Keep the faith, help me contact a good
> attorney, and I promise to you, mom, Marina and everybody, that you'll
> get the complete story, but I just can't talk about the details I know
> right now."
>
> Think about it, Walt...CT'ers have a rebuttal to EVERYTHING about the
> case. Can it all be wrong? Every detail?
>
> Stick to just the facts. Ignore feelings. Ignore hunches. Ignore
> emotions. Ignore other things going on in the world in 1963.
Good advice.... Listen to it.
There are FACTS in the Warren Report.... But all of them are
interpreted for the reader.
Look at the facts and interpret them for yourself.
>
> The FACTS show three shots. 84 percent of EARWITNESSES heard only three
> shots. The fifth floor earwitnesses heard three shots one floor above
> them. Oswald's rifle, palmprints, spent shells (and no, they weren't
> arranged in a straight line) and boxes stacked in a way to hide someone
> at the corner window were found on that 6th floor.
>
> The FACTS show JFK was hit by two bullets from above and behind. One
> blew his brains out and one entered and exited JFK and JBC.
>
> The FACTS show that the secretive LHO purchased his rifle and pistol
> under the alias Hidell. Marina took the photos in the backyard of
> him...his head WAS NOT pasted on later. He lied to the police about
> that, and about owning the weapons. Who was later arrested with an ID
> card with the name Hidell on it?
>
> There is so much more.
>
> I was a CT'er once, Walt. I believed it all. I read High Treason in the
> late 80's early 90's and it actually started CHANGING MY MIND in the
> other direction. IMO, High Treason was so over the top, that I remember
> critically thinking this through for the first time. I started reading
> the other side of the story. I visited Dealey Plaza. I remember
> thinking that it seemed much smaller. How ridiculous, I thought, to
> hide people on that exposed little knoll (and it is exposed, no matter
> what CT'ers say...it's near a major over/underpass, a railroad yard,
> the little pergola, etc. and snipers would've well expected crowds to
> be gathered in their line of fire...a lousy spot to pre-position
> somebody).
Most knowledgeable people believe Dealey Plaza was an IDEAL site for an
ambush...
>
> Let's admit that the idea that elements of the CIA, Mob, etc. would all
> work together to kill JFK and then be able to get ordinary autopsy
> doctors, the press, the entire US government and so on to buy into it
> is silly. The world doesn't work that way, Walt. The evidence shows
> Oswald shot JFK, JBC and JDT that afternoon.
I agree that entire organizations like the CIA, FBI, or the Mafia were
cooked up the plot to murder JFK...... But individuals in those
organizations definitely were involved. Who murdered Caesar?.... Do you
think that simply because a man is a member of the, DPD, CIA, FBI, or
mob, that he can't also be a member of the KKK?
>
> When it dawned on me that Oswald did it alone, I actually chuckled to
> myself. I honestly felt like a teenager that still believes in the
> Easter Bunny...just a few years too late, if you know what I mean.
Yes, I'll bet it was a real relief to stop thinking for yourself, and
lay down and let the "experts" tell you a bedtime story.
>
> Think of your own life and your personal relationships. Aren't most of
> your friends pretty honest? Don't most of your co-workers try and do a
> good job at work? Aren't most of the people you run into on a daily
> basis just normal, decent people trying to do a fair job mowing lawns,
> approving mortgage loans, delivering mail, writing speeding tickets,
> waiting on tables, etc?
>
> Why is it then, that all of the cops, WC lawyers, autopsy doctors, etc.
> all are so crooked?
"Patriotism" can work wonders.... When a person believes they are
saving the nation from a nuclear holocaust they can be very easily
persuaded to "go along with the President" and allow him, and his
secret army ( the CIA) to handle it. They nation was gripped by icy
fear when JFK was murdered. We had been scared to death of a nuclear
war with Russia just a year before JFK was murdered. When the early
reports said that Oswald was part of a band of communists in an
international communist conspiracy, people shuddered at the thought of
having to confront Mother Russia over the murder of our President. Most
of the Warren Commission members weren't crooks, they were just going
along with the program (conspiracy) and they were too gutless to fight
J.E. Hoover, and LBJ.
Where is that one decent person ready to come
> forward with irrefutable evidence of a conspiracy?
There have been many who have revealed evidence of the conspiracy, They
are always attacked by the government and discredited as "kooks" One
example that comes to mind is the case of Geneva White. She was the
widow of Roscoe White who had been a cop on the DPD at the time JFK was
murdered. He gave her a photograph that shows that the DPD withheld
evidence from investigators. ( It's a good thing that Roscoe stole a
copy of one of the backyard photos because if he had turned it over to
FBI investigators it probably would have been destroyed) The DPD had
that photo that Roscoe got a copy of, but they never revealed it to the
Warren Commission. If that doesn't show that the DPD was conspiring to
thwart the investigation....what does it show?
Chuck,You simply don't have the guts to face the facts
Walt
Mind you, I'm not
> looking for the whole story, here. Just one person with some
> unimpeachable piece of evidence that makes it clear-nothing foggy about
> it-that there was a conspiracy on 11-22-63. The WC. The HSCA. The
> Rockefeller and Ramsey reports. All lies? All part of the MEGAPLOT?
aeffects
you say the word lower when it comes to theory's and theses? roflmao.
This the same VonPain that has pinned all his Lone Neuter hopes on one
Vince Bugliosi? A book he's (or his publisher) woe to publish... talk
about "wet dream[s]".... truck on, wisher?
> LOL.
Walt
chuck schuyler wrote:
> Walt:
>
> The rifle found in the TSBD and the rifle in the backyard photos is the
> same rifle. Here is the relevant testimony from the HSCA that Tony
> Marsh alluded to:
>
> Of equal significance, a detailed scientific photographic analysis was
> conducted by the panel to determine whether the rifle held by Oswald in
> the backyard photographs was, in fact, the rifle stored at the National
> Archives. The panel found a unique identifying mark present on the
> weapon in the Archives that correlated with a mark visible on the rifle
> in the Oswald backyard photographs, as well as on the alleged
> assassination rifle as it appeared in photographs taken after the
> assassination in 1963.(103) Because this mark was considered to be a
> unique random pattern (ie., caused by wear and tear through use), it
> was considered sufficient to warrant the making of a positive
> identification.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> It's the same rifle, Walt. And Marina took the backyard photos.
How many times do I have to tell you.... IGNORE the "experts" and use
your own God given brain. The rifle that was found in the TSBD is NOT
the same rifle seen in Oswald's hands in CE 133A.
Marina said she took ONE back yard photo ....But reluctantly demured
that she "could" have taken two, when she was shown the two photos side
by side, and she could see that they were different. In an effort to
keep from being deported without her kids, she desperately looked for a
plausible explanation of how she could have taken two photos. She
said she probably snapped the shutter twice. ( She was unaware that
snapping the shutter twice would have produced a double exposure.) How
do you think she would have reacted if they had shown her all THREE
B.Y. photos??
Walt
lazu...@webtv.net
complicated that invariably-Cter's and Ln'ers are going to be wrong on
certain aspects.
David Von Pein
Of course I've looked at the Klein's order form. And of course it's Lee
Harvey Oswald's handwriting. That was proven by the WC experts in that
field. But (of course) a kook like Walt just totally disregards and
tosses in the trash the WC experts...because Walt NEEDS a conspiracy
like he needs air to breathe. So, viola....the handwriting is (per
Walt-Kook) a "scribbled mess".
It's actually no such mess at all. Every word and number is easily
readable. In fact, I can tell immediately, by taking just a quick look
at the writing style, that this (below) was written by Lee H.
Oswald......
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0331a.htm
>>> "George De M, Mike Paine, and Lee Oswald worked together to cook up a scheme that was designed to trick Castro's agents into believing Lee Oswald was a rabid communist revolutionary." <<<
Nothing like pulling theories out of the deep blue sky, huh?
Where oh WHERE do you get some of the shit you espouse on a regular
basis? You've obviously just made it up out of whole cloth.
You've sure got monster-style gonads anyway -- gotta give you that much
Walt. And you don't mind in the least looking like a Grade-A fool by
continuing to spout unprovable shit that in no way is supported by a
lick of the official evidence in the case. Hope that makes you proud,
Mr. Kook.
David Von Pein
And God forbid anybody should actually pay any attention to any
"experts" in these fields being discussed (e.g., ballistics,
fingerprint analysis, handwriting experts, Army medical experts who
endorse both the SBT and the "head shot from behind", etc.).
Rue the day when a rabid CTer deems an "Official Government Expert" to
actually be trustworthy and honest and above-board...right Walt-Nut?
EVERY "expert" who examined the Kennedy murder and the Tippit murder is
not to be trusted. They were ALL a bunch of worthless bums, only
desiring to falsify as much of the evidence as possible to frame an
innocent Golden Boy named Lee. Right?
I need an aspirin. This kook has me all keyed up now.
Chuck, Steve, Bud, or some other LNer with some common sense -- have
you guys got any Bayer you can spare?
Walt
chuck schuyler wrote:
> Walt wrote:
> >
> > How many times do I have to tell you.... IGNORE the "experts" and use
> > your own God given brain. The rifle that was found in the TSBD is NOT
> > the same rifle seen in Oswald's hands in CE 133A.
> >
> > Marina said she took ONE back yard photo ....But reluctantly demured
> > that she "could" have taken two, when she was shown the two photos side
> > by side, and she could see that they were different. In an effort to
> > keep from being deported without her kids, she desperately looked for a
> > plausible explanation of how she could have taken two photos. She
> > said she probably snapped the shutter twice. ( She was unaware that
> > snapping the shutter twice would have produced a double exposure.) How
> > do you think she would have reacted if they had shown her all THREE
> > B.Y. photos??
> >
> > Walt
>
> photos she took?
>
> Where is you body of work showing that the rifles in the B.Y. photos
> and TSBD are different? I'm really interested in knowing.
What the hell's wrong with yer head that you can't use it?? Why do you
need "experts" to tell you what to believe? The body yer looking for
is just below yer neck.
Walt
David Von Pein
Gee, what a surprise! Another say-nothing thread-crapping post by Mr.
H. How 'bout that now?!
And I haven't "pinned all my hopes" on Vincent B.'s "Final Verdict",
you stupid goofball from CT-ville. Vince doesn't need to publish his
book at all. Do you think I'll suddenly start ignoring all of the
evidence which undeniably tells the world that Lee Harvey Oswald was a
double-killer in '63 if VB's book never surfaces? Is that what you
think?
When it finally does come out, VB's book WILL be the new JFK Bible,
yes. I truly believe that 100%. But even if it never comes out,
Oswald's status as a guilty murderer won't change one bit. Why would
it?
I'd be disappointed if "Final Verdict" never surfaced, yes. But it
wouldn't change a thing re. Oswald's LN status. VB's book will serve to
solidify even further the already-solid case surrounding Oswald's lone
guilt. And VB will be driving in a few well-placed nails into many
conspiracy theories along the way (deservedly so, of course). And we'll
get the usual 6 to 10 "Why Didn't I Think Of That?" moments from VB's
work too (as per the norm in one of his publications).
>From Vince to you............
"No one has produced one piece of evidence to support a conspiracy
theory. And the thing about a conspiracy is, you can't keep it secret.
More than 25,000 interviews have been conducted by the FBI, the Warren
Commission, and independent investigators. No one has come up with one
piece of solid evidence {to support a conspiracy theory}. Just theories
and motives." -- Vincent Bugliosi
~~~~~~
"If there's one thing I take pride in, it's that I never, ever make a
charge without supporting it. You might not agree with me, but I
invariably offer an enormous amount of support for my position." --
Vincent Bugliosi
David Von Pein
Anyone with any common sense can figure out that if Marina took ONE of
the photos, she obviously had to have taken ALL of them (whether there
were 2, 3, 4, or 44).
Why would plotters want to fake additional copies of something that
ALREADY EXISTED? Only a rabid CTer would think that that occurred.
And then there's this from Marina's own mouth.....
"I was very nervous that day when I took the pictures. I can't remember
how many I took, but I know I took them and that is what is important.
It would be easier if I said I never took them, but that is not the
truth." -- Page 106; "Case Closed" by Gerald Posner
Backyard Photo common sense.....
Walt
David Von Pein wrote:
> >>> "Who said it was Oswald's handwriting on the order blank? Have you actually looked at that Order blank? The "handwriting" is a PRINTED scribbled mess." <<<
>
> Of course I've looked at the Klein's order form. And of course it's Lee
> Harvey Oswald's handwriting. That was proven by the WC experts in that
> field. But (of course) a kook like Walt just totally disregards and
> tosses in the trash the WC experts...because Walt NEEDS a conspiracy
> like he needs air to breathe. So, viola....the handwriting is (per
> Walt-Kook) a "scribbled mess".
>
> It's actually no such mess at all. Every word and number is easily
> readable. In fact, I can tell immediately, by taking just a quick look
> at the writing style, that this (below) was written by Lee H.
> Oswald......
I agree the example of the order blank that you linked to is much
clearer than the copy in the Warren Report. The CURSIVE on the envelope
"might" be Oswald's, I was referring to the PRINTING on the order
blank, and even a hand writing expert can't pass a positive judgment on
PRINTING. But even if the money order was made out by Oswald and the
envelope addressed by Oswald...it does NOT mean the rifle was his. I
believe the rifle actually belonged to George De M. He gave Oswald the
money to order it and he loaned it to Oswald to stage the attempt to
kill General Walker. De Morhenschildt never passed up an opportunity to
make an easy buck, as can be seen by his copyright note and the sketch
of his little dog on the back of CE 133A. He knrw that the back yard
photo CE 133A might someday be worth selling. So he placed a copyright
on the print and destroyed the negative.
If Oswald had been successful in infiltrating into Cuba and then made
history that rifle would have been a valuble item for George De M.
Walt
Walt
David Von Pein wrote:
> >>> "I'll bet it was a real relief to stop thinking for yourself, and lay down and let the "experts" tell you a bedtime story." <<<
>
> And God forbid anybody should actually pay any attention to any
> "experts" in these fields being discussed (e.g., ballistics,
> fingerprint analysis, handwriting experts, Army medical experts who
> endorse both the SBT and the "head shot from behind", etc.).
>
> Rue the day when a rabid CTer deems an "Official Government Expert" to
> actually be trustworthy and honest and above-board...right Walt-Nut?
>
> EVERY "expert" who examined the Kennedy murder and the Tippit murder is
> not to be trusted. They were ALL a bunch of worthless bums, only
> desiring to falsify as much of the evidence as possible to frame an
> innocent Golden Boy named Lee. Right?
WRONG!! They were selected by the slimey lawyers of the Warren
Commission because the lawyers knew who Hoover had by the short hair,
and would therefore give the "expert opinion" they wanted on the
record.
Walt
David Von Pein
Dead wrong. You have no idea what you're talking about Walt. Are YOU a
handwriting expert?
Experts in this field most certainly CAN and have established printing
to be from specific individuals....as was the case with Oswald and his
printing.
Read pages 569 and 570 of the Warren Report. It verifies the writing
and printing were positively Oswald's on the Klein's documents. If
you've seen LHO's writing on anything before, you can easily discern
that Oswald printed the "A. Hidell" and "Dallas, Texas" on the Klein's
form.
WR Pages 569 and 570.....
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0297a.htm
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0297b.htm
Oswald's use of a combination of capital and lower-case lettering is
one big tip-off that aided the WC's experts. In "Texas", for example,
Oswald uses only lower case lettering on the letter "e". This trait is
duplicated on other Oswald-written documents examined by the WC. Take a
look for comparison (and note the lower-case "e" lettering on each
item).....
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0331a.htm
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0353b.htm
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0335b.htm
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0331b.htm
Walt
David Von Pein wrote:
> >>> "Even a handwriting expert can't pass a positive judgment on PRINTING." <<<
>
> Dead wrong. You have no idea what you're talking about Walt. Are YOU a
> handwriting expert?
>
> Experts in this field most certainly CAN and have established printing
> to be from specific individuals....as was the case with Oswald and his
> printing.
expert say that printing on a ransom note can NOT be positively used to
identify the person who wrote the note. But regardless .... If the
hand writing was Oswald's ( which is still open to debate) it does not
prove he owned the rifle.... and there is no proof that he ever
received the rifle.
Walt
bail...@gmail.com
Walt wrote:
> David Von Pein wrote:
> >
> > I see two Marrion Baker affidavits listed here (11/22/63 and 8/11/64);
> > neither of which offers up the "pigeon" and "after the first shot" data
> > you seem to require......
> >
> > http://jfkassassination.net/russ/wit.htm
> >
> > How many more do you see?
> >
> > >>> "Baker said the door was closed. Therefore Oswald was not the sniper." <<<
> >
> > And just think....a "door" has proved Oswald's innocence. The fact that
> > a door was deemed "closed" is a good enough reason to make a kook named
> > Walt declare Oswald innocent of shooting President Kennedy.
> >
> > Great logic there. Let's ignore all of that OTHER evidence against Mr.
> > Oswald, and stick by that door with the automatic closing mechanism on
> > it to prove Oswald's innocence.
> >
> > Kooky indeed.
> >
> > Oops....looks like Walt needs to re-think the "closed door" thing after
> > all. Because we have this WC testimony from Marrion Baker, in which he
> > comments on the status of the vestibule door......
> >
> > M.L. BAKER -- "I can't say whether he {Oswald} had gone on through that
> > door or not. All I did was catch a glance at him, and evidently he
> > was--this door might have been, you know, closing and almost shut at
> > that time."
>
> Thank you.... You've just stepped in it again. You said that Oswald
> could have reached the lunchroom in 78 seconds.
> And since the door was either shut or "almost shut at that time"
> Oswald would have had to reach the lunchroom about 15 or 20 seconds
> PRIOR to Bakers arrival. If it took Oswald 78 seconds to reach the
> lunchroom and 15 seconds for the door to close then it's elementary
> that Oswald would have had to descended from the fake "sniper's nest"
> to the lunchroom in 63 seconds. The Warren Commission said that he
> would have needed 78 seconds to reach the Lunchroom, and if it took 15
> seconds for the door to close then that means the door closed 93
> seconds after the LAST shot and Baker would have had been there
> watching it close.....because you said it took Baker 82.5 seconds to
> reach the lunchroom after the LAST shot.
>
> Walt
I am candily amazed at what I'm reading here. The question is: Is
there ANY proof on earth Oswald could have traversed in the stairway in
the necessary time? No, there is not. However, since we know that LHO
shot and killed JFK at 12:30 PM, we can say with 99% certainty that he
DID indeed traverse the stairs in the necessary time. This is a matter
of using the scientific menthod to reach a determination. In addition,
since we already know Tomnln has very little knowledge of the
assassination, to continue debating him on relevant material is
foolish. It's similar to arguing with a child.
David Von Pein
certain Mr. Walt too. His theories get more outlandish by the day it
seems.
Oswald orders rifle.
We KNOW it's Oswald's writing on the order form AND the money order.
Oswald PAYS for rifle with his own funds. (The WC detailed LHO's
finances almost down to the penny from June 1962 to 11/22/63, inc. the
$21.45 he shelled out for the MC rifle.)
Oswald is photographed with rifle.
Marina Oswald sees Lee with the rifle (obviously, since she took the
multiple backyard photos).
Oswald's fingerprints are on the rifle on 11/22/63.
Klein's verified that Rifle #C2766 was shipped to P.O. Box 2915;
Dallas, Texas; USA on March 20th, 1963 (just 11 days prior to the
Backyard Photo session). Box 2915, of course, was Oswald's P.O. box.
A rolled-up blanket with the imprint of a rifle is in the Paine garage
on 11/22/63.
And yet, after adding up the obvious via the above wealth of
information -- we have this stellar observation from Mr. Walt....
"It does not prove he owned the rifle...and there is no proof that he
ever received the rifle."
~~~~~~~
Am I talking to the wall here? Or just a CT "child"?
Either way, Walt's lack of common sense is hanging out for all to see.
aeffects
David Von Pein wrote:
> >>> "This {is} the same {Mr. D.R. Von Pein} that has pinned all his Lone Neuter hopes on one Vince Bugliosi..." <<<
>
> Gee, what a surprise! Another say-nothing thread-crapping post by Mr.
> H. How 'bout that now?!
>
> And I haven't "pinned all my hopes" on Vincent B.'s "Final Verdict",
bullshit.... roflmfao, who are YOU trying to kid?
> you stupid goofball from CT-ville. Vince doesn't need to publish his
> book at all. Do you think I'll suddenly start ignoring all of the
> evidence which undeniably tells the world that Lee Harvey Oswald was a
> double-killer in '63 if VB's book never surfaces? Is that what you
> think?
>
> When it finally does come out, VB's book WILL be the new JFK Bible,
> yes. I truly believe that 100%. But even if it never comes out,
> Oswald's status as a guilty murderer won't change one bit. Why would
> it?
bible? herasay you speak, child... what's a lone neuter like yourself
speaking this way for?
> I'd be disappointed if "Final Verdict" never surfaced, yes. But it
> wouldn't change a thing re. Oswald's LN status. VB's book will serve to
> solidify even further the already-solid case surrounding Oswald's lone
> guilt. And VB will be driving in a few well-placed nails into many
> conspiracy theories along the way (deservedly so, of course).
gott'a teach the guy what a hammer is first. He's been so busy writing
his opus for the ast 15 years you think he found a apron with nail
pouches yet?
And we'll
> get the usual 6 to 10 "Why Didn't I Think Of That?" moments from VB's
> work too (as per the norm in one of his publications).
nope, he's old news, 30 years too late -- keep right on dream'in...
Bugliosi these day's is pigeonholed and confined to sensationalistic TV
about three rungs below GERALDO and his crowd, perhaps those two should
get together, maybe do a JFK related interview show from Al Capones old
Chicago hideaway.... How does that sound?
> >From Vince to you............
>
> "No one has produced one piece of evidence to support a conspiracy
> theory. And the thing about a conspiracy is, you can't keep it secret.
> More than 25,000 interviews have been conducted by the FBI, the Warren
> Commission, and independent investigators. No one has come up with one
> piece of solid evidence {to support a conspiracy theory}. Just theories
> and motives." -- Vincent Bugliosi
Motives have put more than one or two on death row, forget tangible
evidence...as a prosecutor you ought to know that Counselor! Shame,
shame on you!
Walt
Nonsense.... Quit acting like a know -it-all and go do some actual
reasearch.
I SPECIFICALLY said the rifle found in the TSBD was a Mannlicher
Carcano, model 91/38, short rifle.
I SPECIFICALLY said the rifle in Oswald's hands in CE 133A is a
Mannlicher Carcano, model 91/38,short rifle.
The two rifles are EXACTLY the same make and model.....the only
difference is the TSBD rifle is equipped with a sling mount that allows
the sling to be mounted on the left side of the rifle. While a dual
sling version that allows the sling to be mounted either on the left
side, or the bottom, is what is shown in Oswald's hands in CE 133A.
The majority of then were made with the sling mounts on the left side
> > of the rifle. ( The European armies used the "slings" only as carrying
> > straps) With the strap mounted on the left side the bolt handle stuck
> > out away from the soldiers back, and didn't poke him in the back when
> > he was carrying it on his back. A minority of the Model 91/38 short
> > rifles were manufactured with a strap mount that allowed the strap to
> > be mounted eithe on the left side or on the bottom. This is the dual
> > sling mount version. The rifle that Osawld is holdingin CE 133A is the
> > rare dual sling mount version. The rifle that was found in the TSBD is
> > the common single sling mount version.
> >
>
> Show me this version of the Mannlicher Carcano 91/38 with what you call
> dual sling mounts. Talk is cheap. Anyone can make up a story. Show me
> such a rifle.
Screw you, you arrogant know-it-all, I'm not showing you anything.
Just go to the library and do some HONEST research for a change.
>
> > IF IF IF Oswald owned a Mannlicher Carcano short rifle it was the dual
> > sling version ( at least the rifle he is holding in CE 133A is the dual
> > sling version. ( I'm not convinced it was his rifle.....He had
> > POSSESSION of a rifle for a while ...BUT I believe the rifle actually
> > belonged to George De Morhenschildt.) The dual sling version is what's
> > shown in CE 133A... And the Klein sporting goods ad that the rifle was
> > ordered from shows a dual sling version of the Model 91/38.
> >
>
> The Klein's ad was for the carbine, not the short rifle that Oswald bought.
>
I have one of the Guns and Ammo magazines from which the rifle was
ordered and that Kleins ad clearly displays a Mannlicher Carcano, model
91/38, short rifle, with a dual sling mount capability.
Don't tell me it was ordered from the American Rifleman magazine....
The coupon ( order blank) number is proof that the rifle was ordered
from an ad in Guns and Ammo magazine.
Walt
David Von Pein
Does anybody have the slightest idea what this kook is babbling about
here? I sure don't. But as long as the kook who wrote it knows, I guess
he's happy.
>>> "Motives have put more than one or two on death row, forget tangible evidence...as a prosecutor you ought to know that Counselor! Shame, shame on you!" <<<
Forget tangible evidence?? LOL.
Yeah, let's just "FORGET" all of those Oswald bullets, fragments,
shells, and that rifle with his prints (and the bag, the Tippit murder,
Oz's lies, and on & on) -- and instead we'll rely on Jimmy Hoffa's
motive to want to do away with the Kennedy boys...or Trafficante's
motive...or Castro's.
Let's let Oswald go and, instead, hang those other guys who have MORE
OF A MOTIVE (despite a lack of "It Was Hoffa" or "It Was Trafficante"
physical evidence).
That's what the U.S. courts need more of -- less physical evidence and
more conjecture being used to solve crimes. Right?
Kooky.
But, there's a problem with the "Let's Only Use Motive" approach ---
i.e., per CTers, there were so MANY people and organizations who hated
John F. Kennedy in 1963 -- who do we go after? They couldn't possibly
have ALL been "in" on the plot, could they?
Maybe that should be the next Oliver Stone theory/movie -- akin to the
1966 feature film "Batman--The Movie". Remember that one? The Batman
flick which had all of the "evil villains" working and plotting
together to "take over the world" (as Simon Bar Sinister is wont to
say)?
Perhaps that IS what happened in Dallas --- Roselli, Giancana, Hoffa,
Trafficante, Khrushchev, and Castro (and maybe Joe DiMaggio too, who
perhaps was blaming JFK for Marilyn Monroe's death the previous August)
all got together, along with the CIA, the MIC, the SS, and the FBI of
course, to eliminate President Kennedy.
Can you imagine that powwow?
They all had a "motive", so (per some people) they must all be guilty
one way or another.
Fuck the "physical evidence". Let's just go for "motive", and to hell
with where the actual bullets lead.
Great idea. If you're a CT-Kook.
Walt
David Von Pein wrote:
> I agree, Bailey. And it's very close to that "child" point with a
> certain Mr. Walt too. His theories get more outlandish by the day it
> seems.
>
> Oswald orders rifle.
Possibly.... But we don't know for sure if he ordered it. It was
ordered by A. Hidell
>
> We KNOW it's Oswald's writing on the order form AND the money order.
I agree the hand writing could be Oswald's.... But that doesn't prove
he ordered it for himself or paid fot it with his money.
>
> Oswald PAYS for rifle with his own funds. (The WC detailed LHO's
> finances almost down to the penny from June 1962 to 11/22/63, inc. the
> $21.45 he shelled out for the MC rifle.)
This is a bold faced lie.
>
> Oswald is photographed with rifle.
Nonsense.... The rifle in Oswald's hands is NOT the same rifle that was
found in the TSBD.
>
> Marina Oswald sees Lee with the rifle
Marina couldn't tell the difference between a rifle and a shotgun....
She saw lee with "A"
rifle.... but that rifle was NOT the rifle found in the TSBD.
(obviously, since she took the multiple backyard photos).
She initally said she took ONE photo....when the W.C. lawyer showed her
another different but similar photo she was surprised and puzzled about
hoe there could be two B.Y. photos because she thought she had only
taken one. But she was willing to try to explain the second photo by
saying she might have inadvertantly pressed the shutter twice. ( which
would have produced a double exposure) Years later a THIRD back yard
photo surfaced....Maybe she pressed the shutter THREE times???
>
> Oswald's fingerprints are on the rifle on 11/22/63.
This is a bold face lie.... No identifiable finger prints were found on
the rifle.
>
> Klein's verified that Rifle #C2766 was shipped to P.O. Box 2915;
> Dallas, Texas; USA on March 20th, 1963 (just 11 days prior to the
> Backyard Photo session). Box 2915, of course, was Oswald's P.O. box.
True....But there is no record of who received the rifle.
>
> A rolled-up blanket with the imprint of a rifle is in the Paine garage
> on 11/22/63.
Good point..... If Oswald had removed the rifle there would have been
no reason for him to carefully remove the rifle from the blanket, in a
manner that left the blanket looking like the rifle was still in it.
On the other hand, if someone wanted Oswald to think the rifle was
still there by a quick glance in the garage, they would carefully have
removed the rifle while leaving the blanket as undisturbed as possible.
>
> And yet, after adding up the obvious via the above wealth of
> information -- we have this stellar observation from Mr. Walt....
>
> "It does not prove he owned the rifle...and there is no proof that he
> ever received the rifle."
That's correct.... None of the points you raise PROVE that Oswald owned
a rifle.
As I've said many times I believe the rifle Oswald was photographed
with in CE 133A belonged to George De M.
>
> ~~~~~~~
>
> Am I talking to the wall here? Or just a CT "child"?
>
> Either way, Walt's lack of common sense is hanging out for all to see.
The above post doesn't reflect on my common sense as much as it
spotlights your gullibility.
Walt
David Von Pein
More likely, though, I think the above post proves that you, Walter,
simply refuse to face the Occam's Razor FACT that Lee Harvey Oswald
owned rifle #C2766 and used it on Gen. Walker in April and on President
Kennedy in November. That's what the above post proves.
But I do appreciate your restraint in the insults department in your
last couple of posts to me (after I did, indeed, use some on you). That
is appreciated indeed. Perhaps the lack of invective from you re. the
matter of Oswald's obvious ownership of C2766 indicates a slight lack
of confidence in your wholly-unsupportable position. No?
tomnln
http://whokilledjfk.net/Evid%20Tamp.htm
The authorities DID.
<lazu...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:7566-4522...@storefull-3234.bay.webtv.net...
tomnln
What proof can you provide?
http://whokilledjfk.net/Evid%20Tamp.htm
"chuck schuyler" <chu...@am-mtg.com> wrote in message
news:1159908314....@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> The case is as complicated as you want to make it. If everything is
> forged, planted, conspiratorial, etc. then it is a very complicated
> case.
>
> If you believe as I do that a warped, wife-beating commie-punk squeezed
> off three shots in 8.3 seconds and later killed a cop, then it's not
> that complicated.
>
tomnln
Why don't you try argueing with the FOUR (4) different Official
accounts from Officer Baker?
Proving he Lied a minimum of 3 times.
Being as well read as you ARE, you know about all 4 don't you???
Well Barnum & Bailey DO YOU???
<bail...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1159921326.9...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
Walt
David Von Pein wrote:
> >>> "The above post doesn't reflect on my common sense as much as it spotlights your gullibility." <<<
>
> More likely, though, I think the above post proves that you, Walter,
> simply refuse to face the Occam's Razor FACT that Lee Harvey Oswald
> owned rifle #C2766 and used it on Gen. Walker in April and on President
> Kennedy in November. That's what the above post proves.
Ya know if you would actually READ what I post, perhaps you wouldn't
make such an ass outta yerself.
I've never denied that Oswald put a bullet through General Walker's
window. He didn't "USE IT ON GEN. WALKER" as you wrote. That implies
that Walker was shot and we both know that's a lie. The bullet
through Walker's window was nothing but a "STAGED ATTEMPT" that was
intended to make it appear that the "communist revolutionary who was
armed and ready to fight for the revolution" in the B.Y. photo had
tried to kill one of Castro's most vocal foes.
> But I do appreciate your restraint in the insults department in your
> last couple of posts to me (after I did, indeed, use some on you). That
> is appreciated indeed.
Empty Insults both me not at all. I do become angry when some asshole
credits me with words, or ideas that are not mine. I believe there are
some CT's who have got ideas, and theories, that are even crazier than
the Warren Report. So when you accredit to me some idea like ...A
secret service man accidentally shot JFK... I irritates me.
Perhaps the lack of invective from you re. the
> matter of Oswald's obvious ownership of C2766 indicates a slight lack
> of confidence in your wholly-unsupportable position. No?
Don't misinterpret the lack of invective as a lack of confidence that
I' m not 100% certain that The Warren Report is the worlds most bizarre
work of fiction. I KNOW that Oswald didn't shoot JFK from that SE
corner window. If I wasn't 100% certain, I wouldn't waste my time
posting in this vermin infected place.
Walt
Walt
chuck schuyler wrote:
> Walt wrote:
>
> > window. He didn't "USE IT ON GEN. WALKER" as you wrote. That implies
> > that Walker was shot and we both know that's a lie. The bullet
> > through Walker's window was nothing but a "STAGED ATTEMPT" that was
> > intended to make it appear that the "communist revolutionary who was
> > armed and ready to fight for the revolution" in the B.Y. photo had
> > tried to kill one of Castro's most vocal foes.
>
>
> What is your source work or proof that this attempt was merely a STAGED
> attempt? Oswald told his wife that he tried to kill him. Shouldn't we
> just take it at face value? You admit he fired a bullet at Walker. Why
> the extra levels of complexity to a straight-forward event that you
> admit occurred?
When you've studied the case as I have then you can see behind the
scenes portrayed by LBJ's Warren Commission. Lee did NOT confide in
Marina. His natural aversion to confiding in others, was honed in his
intelligence training. It's obvious that he didn't confide in Marina
because he lived apart from her at times, and didn't reveal what he was
doing.
He lied when he told Marina that he had tried to kill Walker, because
the heat was still on from the shooting, and he hoped the cops would
track him down. If that had happened and he had told Marina that it was
all a hoax, he would have ruined any chance of infiltrating Cuba. (
which is why he was brought back from the USSR.)
>
> I also asked you for the work you are referring to that indicates a
> difference in the MC rifle in the B.Y. photos and the rifle recovered
> at the TSBD. The HSCA actually went to great lengths to satisfy the
> conspiracists that thought the rifles were switched or different. I
> posted a little bit of the pertinent findings earlier. What body of
> work can you refer me to that refutes the HSCA findings? I haven't
> heard any CT'er really dispute this issue since the 1970's.
>
> Thanks.
Don't thank me, because I'm not going to spell it out for you. If
you're to damned lazy to do your own reseach you deserve to remain the
gullible fool that you are. You're willing to swallow anything as long
as an "expert" says it's true. If you find the difference between the
TSBD rifle, and the rifle in Oswald's hands in CE 133A , then it will
be your discovery and you can argue with yourself.
Walt
Walt
chuck schuyler wrote:
> Walt wrote:
> >
> > When you've studied the case as I have then you can see behind the
> > scenes portrayed by LBJ's Warren Commission. Lee did NOT confide in
> > Marina. His natural aversion to confiding in others, was honed in his
> > intelligence training. It's obvious that he didn't confide in Marina
> > because he lived apart from her at times, and didn't reveal what he was
> > doing.
> > He lied when he told Marina that he had tried to kill Walker, because
> > the heat was still on from the shooting, and he hoped the cops would
> > track him down. If that had happened and he had told Marina that it was
> > all a hoax, he would have ruined any chance of infiltrating Cuba. (
> > which is why he was brought back from the USSR.)
>
> later found by the FBI explaining exactly what to do if he was
> arrested, etc.
It's a waste of time discussing the case with you.... You are so
ignorant of the FACTS,....... I might as well be discussing the case
with my dog.
Lee Did NOT "write a letter to her" He left her a "laundry list" (
written in Russian) of things to do in the event he was killed in the
Walker incident. That list wasn't "FOUND " by the FBI Marina GAVE it
to them.
Oswald wrote the note in a fashion that he knew would alarm Marina when
she discovered it in plain sight on the bed. He mentioned that he
might be killed...which certainly would alarm 99% of all wives. Marina
did not speak english, and she was worried that if the baby got sick
she wouldn't know how to get help. Lee told her in the event of ANY
emergency that she should call Ruth Paine. He calculated that when he
didn't come home, and Marina found the alarming note, she would call
Ruth Paine who would call the police and suggest that there might be a
connection between Oswald's abscence and the shooting at the Walker
residence. The manhunt for the Castro lovin commie who tried to shoot
Gen Walker. Oswald, the fugitive, would have fled to Cuba where he
could spy on events inside Cuba.
Read Gen Walker's testimony....He just sat there in plain sight like a
sittin duck behind his desk. When the bullet hit the window frame he
thought some neighbor kids had thrown a firecracker and went to the
window and stood there looking out into the night. He was an easy
target both before the first shot and while standing in front of the
window. If Oswald had intended to kill him, all he had to do was
reload and fire again.
Marina has often commented that the Walker incident was
> one of the prime reasons she was anxious to leave Dallas for New
> Orleans. She thought it may calm Lee down a little bit. Perhaps you
> overlooked that bit of evidence in your examination of the case.
It's not I that doesn't know the evidence....
Walt
>
> Your theory is that LHO tried to fire a bullet AT Walker in a staged
> attempt to kill him that just happened to nick the window frame and
> deflect a fraction of an inch from Walker as he was doing his taxes. I
> believe I've read that Walker was actually slightly injured by
> fragments of the bullet or plaster or such from the bullet strike. Why
> not just put a threatening letter in his mailbox if there was no real
> meaning behind firing the bullet at him?
>
> Are you admitting that you have no evidence to support your theory? Why
> should I believe you as opposed to all of the hard evidence?
>
>
> >
> > Don't thank me, because I'm not going to spell it out for you. If
> > you're to damned lazy to do your own research you deserve to remain the
> > gullible fool that you are. You're willing to swallow anything as long
> > as an "expert" says it's true. If you find the difference between the
> > TSBD rifle, and the rifle in Oswald's hands in CE 133A , then it will
> > be your discovery and you can argue with yourself.
>
> No need to get testy with me. I've been polite and respectful of your
> position.
>
> I admit that I'm not a "JFK assassination researcher", and nor do I
> want to be. I've mentioned that I was once the hardcore CT'er you are
> right now. I feel foolish that I ever believed in a conspiracy...at
> least the MEGAPLOT conspiracy believed by so many.
>
> I feel it was natural and normal to believe in the days following
> 11-22-63, and again after Ruby killed Oswald, that there was something
> extra here. But an examination of the evidence always points right back
> to LHO.
>
> So I'm back to the word "feelings" again. A dangerous word when dealing
> with evidence in a crime. It's not a matter of swallowing a story or
> what my feelings are. It's a matter of bullets, firearms and palm
> prints.
>
> Get rid of hunches, feelings, thoughts, opinions and connections. Walt,
> there is just no EVIDENCE for what you are espousing. None.
>
> Just curious, Walt, but do you believe in a conspiracy in the 9-11
> events?
David Von Pein
Yeah. Good idea. At least your pooch is more likely to accept your
fairy tales re. LHO as "facts"....something nobody who walks upright on
two legs who has looked at the case is likely to ever do.
Walt has placed "cloak & dagger" crap around every single piece of
evidence in the case, and around every movement made by Oswald. And why
has he done this? Quite simply, to keep the notion of conspiracy alive
in his mind (where no "conspiracy" need exist at all).
Chuck, as usual, is correct -- WHY complicate a
relatively-uncomplicated case with unprovable stuff that's not the
slightest bit required to solve the case (including the Walker shooting
and Tippit's murder)?
Walt is certainly not an "Occam's" fan, that's a certainty. Walt would
prefer to muddy the fairly-clean waters by ADDING stuff that doesn't
need to be added to resolve this case.
Yes, Walt, take your theories to the "dogs" .... that's where they
belong anyway.
Anthony Marsh
Show me another example of such a Mannlicher-Carcano.
>
> The majority of then were made with the sling mounts on the left side
>>> of the rifle. ( The European armies used the "slings" only as carrying
>>> straps) With the strap mounted on the left side the bolt handle stuck
>>> out away from the soldiers back, and didn't poke him in the back when
>>> he was carrying it on his back. A minority of the Model 91/38 short
>>> rifles were manufactured with a strap mount that allowed the strap to
>>> be mounted eithe on the left side or on the bottom. This is the dual
>>> sling mount version. The rifle that Osawld is holdingin CE 133A is the
>>> rare dual sling mount version. The rifle that was found in the TSBD is
>>> the common single sling mount version.
>>>
>> Show me this version of the Mannlicher Carcano 91/38 with what you call
>> dual sling mounts. Talk is cheap. Anyone can make up a story. Show me
>> such a rifle.
>
> Screw you, you arrogant know-it-all, I'm not showing you anything.
> Just go to the library and do some HONEST research for a change.
>
More nonsense. No such variation exists.
>
>>> IF IF IF Oswald owned a Mannlicher Carcano short rifle it was the dual
>>> sling version ( at least the rifle he is holding in CE 133A is the dual
>>> sling version. ( I'm not convinced it was his rifle.....He had
>>> POSSESSION of a rifle for a while ...BUT I believe the rifle actually
>>> belonged to George De Morhenschildt.) The dual sling version is what's
>>> shown in CE 133A... And the Klein sporting goods ad that the rifle was
>>> ordered from shows a dual sling version of the Model 91/38.
>>>
>> The Klein's ad was for the carbine, not the short rifle that Oswald bought.
>>
> I have one of the Guns and Ammo magazines from which the rifle was
> ordered and that Kleins ad clearly displays a Mannlicher Carcano, model
> 91/38, short rifle, with a dual sling mount capability.
Nonsense. Scan it and upload it. The Klein's ad advertised and showed a
carbine.
> Don't tell me it was ordered from the American Rifleman magazine....
> The coupon ( order blank) number is proof that the rifle was ordered
> from an ad in Guns and Ammo magazine.
>
Show me the ad in Guns and Ammo. I had the ads from the original
American Rifleman magazines.
Walt
Screw you....You asshole. You claim people don't know what they are
talking about but you are the ignorant fool.
What is the tracking number on the orderblank in the American rifleman?
What is the tracking number on the orderblank with A.Hidell's name on
it?
Anthony Marsh
You keep making up nonsense from your imagination and you can't back it
up with facts.