THE SHIPPING RECORDS IN EVIDENCE ARE NOT THE SHIPPING RECORDS FOR THE DEPOSITORY RIFLE
Gil Jesus
backward and claimed that it was a part of a shipment of 100 rifles
weighing 750 lbs. that was sent to Klein's from Crescent Firearms in
February, 1963.
But that shipment was a shipment of 36" rifles.
In researching for her excellent article on the Oswald rifle, JFK
assassination researcher Martha Moyer checked on wooden shipping
containers used in transporting weapons, and found that all the
containers weighed between 16 and 20 pounds. The 36-inch weapon
allegedly ordered by "Hidell" was advertised as weighing 5 1/2
pounds.
The total weight of 100 such weapons would be 550 pounds. Added to the
weight range of ten wooden shipping containers the result would be a
total of between 710 and 750 pounds.
The delivery receipt from Lifschultz Fast Freight listed the freight
as 10 crates/cartons of guns/rifles and listed the weight at 750 lbs.
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0359a.htm
Had the shipment been of the 40" rifles, at 7 lbs. each, the total
weight including 160-200 lbs. for the crates would have been in the
860-900 lb. range.
Instead, the 750 lbs. gross weight is entirely consistent of shipment
of 10 crates at 20 lbs each ( 200 ) and 100 rifles at 5.5 lbs. each
( 550 )
In other words, the shipment received by Klein's in February, 1963 was
indeed a shipment of 36-inch weapons and did NOT include the 40.2 inch
rifle that was removed from the TSBD.
Raymond
> The FBI traced the sale of the 40" C2766 rifle found in the TSBD
> backward and claimed that it was a part of a shipment of 100 rifles
> weighing 750 lbs. that was sent to Klein's from Crescent Firearms in
> February, 1963.
>
> But that shipment was a shipment of 36" rifles.
>
> In researching for her excellent article on the Oswald rifle, JFK
> assassination researcher Martha Moyer checked on wooden shipping
> containers used in transporting weapons, and found that all the
> containers weighed between 16 and 20 pounds. The 36-inch weapon
> allegedly ordered by "Hidell" was advertised as weighing 5 1/2
> pounds.
>
> The total weight of 100 such weapons would be 550 pounds. Added to the
> weight range of ten wooden shipping containers the result would be a
> total of between 710 and 750 pounds.
>
> The delivery receipt from Lifschultz Fast Freight listed the freight
> as 10 crates/cartons of guns/rifles and listed the weight at 750 lbs.
>
>
> Had the shipment been of the 40" rifles, at 7 lbs. each, the total
> weight including 160-200 lbs. for the crates would have been in the
> 860-900 lb. range.
>
> Instead, the 750 lbs. gross weight is entirely consistent of shipment
> of 10 crates at 20 lbs each ( 200 ) and 100 rifles at 5.5 lbs. each
> ( 550 )
>
> In other words, the shipment received by Klein's in February, 1963 was
> indeed a shipment of 36-inch weapons and did NOT include the 40.2 inch
> rifle that was removed from the TSBD.
>
> http://www.jfklancer.com/pdf/moyer.pdf
When Did Oswald Order the Rifle?
Index Vol. 5 No. 6 September-October, 1998- PROBE MAGAZINE
There have long been problems with how the rifle allegedly used in the
assassination of President Kennedy came to be linked with Oswald.
Raymond Gallagher shows us, astonishingly and with documentation, that
the rifle was shipped before Oswald had ordered it. How could that
be?
Index Vol. 5 No. 6 September-October, 1998- PROBE MAGAZINE
Copies of these back issues can be ordered from The Last Hurrah
Bookstore.
Today, due to people like Raymond Gallagher, (Probe Vol. 5 No. 6, p.
10) and especially John Armstrong, we can show that it is highly
doubtful that Oswald ever ordered that rifle. Evidence from the
official records suggests that the sixth floor rifle was not the rifle
delivered to Lee Oswald in March of 1963
Raymond Gallagher, new to PROBE, delves into the unique sales history
of Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano. How did the bank deposit Oswald's
money order for the weapon before Oswald wrote it ?
Louis Feldsott of Crescent Arms told the FBI that C 2766 was sold to
Klein's on June 18,1962, yet Waldman , at Klein's, did not order the
rifles until January 24, 1963. (SEE Waldman Testimony Warren
Commission Hearings: Vol. VII - Page 362 )
To my knowledge, no one has explained the difference. But there is an
even further discrepancy. Waldman testified that Klein's received
Oswald's money order of $21.45 on March 13, 1963 and it was deposited,
along with other money orders and checks, into a company account at
the First National Bank of Chicago. Waldman testified to the
Commission attorney David Belin that the postmark date of the money
order leaving Dallas was March 12 ( WC Vol,7, p. 366.) Waldman
further
testified that the deposit was made on the 13th. and it was part of a
total deposit of $13,827.98.
( Belin did not ask him to explain how, before the advent of
computers, an order could be shipped 700 miles, received, processed
and deposited in 24 hours) But yet, the bank deposit slip, the extra
copy provided by the bank at the time of the transfer, reads FEBRUARY
15, 1963, not March 13 th.This is about one month before Oswald sent
the coupon for the rifle by air mail to Chicago . ( See Waldman
Exhibit no. 10 p. 706 ) Of course, if the February date is correct,
and there is no reason to doubt it, then C 2766 could not be the
correct serial number on the rifle in the so-called back yard
photographs.
See deposit slip deposited with The First National Bank of Chicago
Date 2/15/63
Total deposit: $13,827.98 deposit made by Klein's Sporting Goods
Inc.
( 50 91144 ) 4540 W. MADISON ST. CHGO 24 ILL
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0...
SEE Feldsott Affadavit The following affidavit was executed by Louis
Feldsott on July 23. 1964.
PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
ON THE ASSASSINATION OF AFFIDAVIT
PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY
STATE OF NEW YORK,
Country of Rockland, ss:
I, Louis Feldsott, being duly sworn say:
1. I am the President of Crescent Firearms, Inc., 2 West 37th
Street, New York 18, New York.
2. On November 22, 1963, the F.B.I. contacted me and asked if
Crescent Firearms, Inc., had any records concerning .the sale of an
Italian made 6.5 m/m rifle with the serial number C 2766.
3. I was able to find a record of the sale of this rifle which
indicated that the weapon had been sold to Kleins' Sporting Goods,
Inc.,Chicago, Illinois on June 18, 1962. I conveyed this information
to the F.B.I. during the evening of November 22, 1963.
4. Further records involving the purchase, sale, and transportation
of the weapon have been turned over to the F.B.I.
Signed the 23d day of July 1964.
(S) Louis Feldsott,
LOUIS FELDSOTT.
Waldman:
Mr. Waldman.
Yes; on the same form we show a record of the receipt of the rifles
in question, specifically this extreme right-hand column which is
filled in, indicating that on February 22, delivery was made to us by
Lifschultz Trucking Co. I might explain the difference in the two
dates here.
Mr. Belin.
Go ahead.
Mr. Waldman.
The February 21 date is the date in which the merchandise came to our
premises whereas the date of February 22, is the date in which they
were officially received by our receiving department.
This is a delivery receipt from the Lifschultz Fast Freight covering
10 cases of guns delivered to Klein's on February 21, 1963, from
Crescent Firearms.
As indicated on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7.
Now, we CANNOT SPECIFICALLY SAY when this money order was deposited,
but on our deposit of March 13, 1963, we show AN ITEM of $21.45, as
indicated on the Xerox copy of our deposit slip marked, or identified
by--as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 10.
Mr. Belin.
And I have just marked as a document what you are reading from, which
appears to be a deposit with the First National Bank of Chicago by
your company; is that correct?
Mr. Waldman.
That's correct.
Mr. Belin.
And on that deposit, ONE OF THE ITEMS is $21.45, out of a total
deposit that day of $13,827.98; is that correct?
Mr. Waldman.
That's correct.
However, the date on that deposit slip was 2/15/63
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0...
THE RIFLE
The Fourth Decade, Volume 7, Issue 3
Current Section: The Rifle, by R.F. Gallagher
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=487...
THE SECOND CARCANO
Raymond
> .
> THE RIFLE
> The Fourth Decade, Volume 7, Issue 3
> Current Section: The Rifle, by R.F. Gallagher
>
>
> THE SECOND CARCANO
>
> http://jfkresearch.freehomepage.com/c2766.html- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Gil Jesus
There's a second issue raised by this documentation and that is that
there was a 40.2" rifle removed from the TSBD with serial number C2766
and that there was another, a 36" rifle with the same C2766 serial
number that was a part of that February '63 shipment of 100 36" rifles
to Klein's.
Waldman Exhibit 4 is a control list of the 36" rifles in that Feb. '63
shipment and their serial numbers.
Look at line 836 :
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0362b.htm
That pretty much destroys the BS story that no two 6.5 rifles had the
same serial number. There was one 36" and one 40.2".
That's at least two.
David Von Pein
>>> "Waldman Exhibit 4 is a control list of the 36" rifles in that Feb. '63 shipment and their serial numbers. Look at line 836. That pretty much destroys the BS story that no two 6.5 rifles had the same serial number. There was one 36" and one 40.2". That's at least two." <<<
Only a total idiot could not figure this out.
But Gil Jesus wants desperately to believe that EVERY single gun in
the February 1963 shipment to Klein's HAD TO BE a 36-inch rifle. But
such an assumption is nonsense in view of Line 836 in Waldman Exhibit
No. 4, plus Line 3 of the document on the left-hand side of Waldman
Exhibit No. 3.
Both of those Waldman exhibits (No. 3 and No. 4) indicate that the
rifle that Klein's ultimately ended up shipping to Oswald/"Hidell" on
3/20/63 (Serial No. C2766) was included as a part of that February '63
shipment of rifles from Crescent Firearms to Klein's Sporting Goods:
WALDMAN EXHIBIT NO. 3:
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0361b.htm
WALDMAN EXHIBIT NO. 4:
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0362b.htm
And since we know that C2766 is a 40-inch gun, it means that at least
one 40-inch Carcano made its way into that Klein's shipment of 100
rifles in February of '63.
And, to date, there hasn't been a single person on the planet who has
been able to prove that there was more than one Mannlicher-Carcano
rifle with the serial number of C2766 on it.
In fact, as far as I am aware, there hasn't been a single person on
this planet who has come up with two MC rifles that have the same
serial number--PERIOD--whether it be C2766 or ANY other serial number.
And that's very likely because there are no two MC rifles with the
exact same serial number affixed to them. Hence the reason to stamp
products with SERIAL NUMBERS in the first place -- to make them UNIQUE
and DIFFERENT from one another for IDENTIFICATION purposes (as
indicated by the literal definition of the term "Serial Number"; see
the two definitions below).
============================================
SERIAL NUMBER (Merriam-Webster definition) -- "A number indicating
place in a series and used as a means of identification."
http://Merriam-Webster.com/dictionary/serial%20number
SERIAL NUMBER (Wikipedia) -- "...A unique number assigned for
identification which varies from its successor or predecessor by a
fixed discrete integer value."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_number
============================================
Bud
> backward and claimed that it was a part of a shipment of 100 rifles
> weighing 750 lbs. that was sent to Klein's from Crescent Firearms in
> February, 1963.
>
> But that shipment was a shipment of 36" rifles.
>
> In researching for her excellent article on the Oswald rifle, JFK
> assassination researcher Martha Moyer checked on wooden shipping
> containers used in transporting weapons, and found that all the
> containers weighed between 16 and 20 pounds. The 36-inch weapon
> allegedly ordered by "Hidell" was advertised as weighing 5 1/2
> pounds.
>
> The total weight of 100 such weapons would be 550 pounds. Added to the
> weight range of ten wooden shipping containers the result would be a
> total of between 710 and 750 pounds.
>
> The delivery receipt from Lifschultz Fast Freight listed the freight
> as 10 crates/cartons of guns/rifles and listed the weight at 750 lbs.
>
>
> Had the shipment been of the 40" rifles, at 7 lbs. each, the total
> weight including 160-200 lbs. for the crates would have been in the
> 860-900 lb. range.
>
> Instead, the 750 lbs. gross weight is entirely consistent of shipment
> of 10 crates at 20 lbs each ( 200 ) and 100 rifles at 5.5 lbs. each
> ( 550 )
What happens to this conjecture when you actually do some research
and find out that the 36" rifle weighs over six and a half pounds?
Gil Jesus
> >>> "Waldman Exhibit 4 is a control list of the 36" rifles in that Feb. '63 shipment and their serial numbers. Look at line 836. That pretty much destroys the BS story that no two 6.5 rifles had the same serial number. There was one 36" and one 40.2". That's at least two." <<<
>
> Only a total idiot could not figure this out.
>
> But Gil Jesus wants desperately to believe that EVERY single gun in
> the February 1963 shipment to Klein's HAD TO BE a 36-inch rifle.
> But
> such an assumption is nonsense in view of Line 836 in Waldman Exhibit
> No. 4, plus Line 3 of the document on the left-hand side of Waldman
> Exhibit No. 3.
>
> Both of those Waldman exhibits (No. 3 and No. 4) indicate that the
> rifle that Klein's ultimately ended up shipping to Oswald/"Hidell" on
> 3/20/63 (Serial No. C2766) was included as a part of that February '63
> shipment of rifles from Crescent Firearms to Klein's Sporting Goods:
>
> WALDMAN EXHIBIT NO. 3:http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol...
>
> WALDMAN EXHIBIT NO. 4:http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol...
You just implied that there was at least one 40.2 inch rifle in that
shipment. And where do those documents indicate that C2766 was 40.2
inches ?
> And since we know that C2766 is a 40-inch gun, it means that at least
> one 40-inch Carcano made its way into that Klein's shipment of 100
> rifles in February of '63.
There ya go with the circular reasoning again. There's no evidence
that at least one of those rifles was 40 inches. All you've given us
is an opinion, as usual. By weight, the documentation indicates that
the shipment was of 36" rifles. Now, show us the evidence you have
that the shipping crates contained a mixed bag of rifles. Show us the
combination of 100 40.2 & 36 inches rifle that add up to 550 lbs.
> And, to date, there hasn't been a single person on the planet who has
> been able to prove that there was more than one Mannlicher-Carcano
> rifle with the serial number of C2766 on it.
I guess you never read Lattimer's book either.
http://i45.tinypic.com/2hmingh.jpg
> In fact, as far as I am aware, there hasn't been a single person on
> this planet who has come up with two MC rifles that have the same
> serial number--PERIOD--whether it be C2766 or ANY other serial number.
http://i45.tinypic.com/2hmingh.jpg
> And that's very likely because there are no two MC rifles with the
> exact same serial number affixed to them.
Right, there was at least three. There was Lattimer's rifle with the
serial number C2766, there was a C2766 rifle in the shipment of 100
36" rifles, and there was a C2766 40-inch rifle.
Now there's three with the same serial number.
You're doing good.
Gil Jesus
> What happens to this conjecture when you actually do some research
> and find out that the 36" rifle weighs over six and a half pounds?
Conjecture ? I'm going by the documentation in YOUR evidence....ya
know, the evidence you support ? There's no conjecture there. Care to
tell us how 100 -- 6 1/2 lb rifles get shipped with a total gross
weight of 750 lbs. ? Care to show us the 10 wooden rifle crates from
that shipment that had to have weighed 10 lbs. each ?
bigdog
Giltardo and Raymond are having quite a competition to see who will be
the winner of the prestigous 2010 Stupidest Fuck on the Planet award.
It looks like this contest will go right down to the wire..
Ben Holmes
Gil Jesus says...
>
>On Jul 27, 8:45=A0pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >>> "Waldman Exhibit 4 is a control list of the 36" rifles in that Feb. '=
>63 shipment and their serial numbers. Look at line 836. That pretty much de=
>stroys the BS story that no two 6.5 rifles had the same serial number. Ther=
>e was one 36" and one 40.2". That's at least two." <<<
>>
>> Only a total idiot could not figure this out.
>>
>> But Gil Jesus wants desperately to believe that EVERY single gun in
>> the February 1963 shipment to Klein's HAD TO BE a 36-inch rifle.
>
>> But
>> such an assumption is nonsense in view of Line 836 in Waldman Exhibit
>> No. 4, plus Line 3 of the document on the left-hand side of Waldman
>> Exhibit No. 3.
>>
>> Both of those Waldman exhibits (No. 3 and No. 4) indicate that the
>> rifle that Klein's ultimately ended up shipping to Oswald/"Hidell" on
>> 3/20/63 (Serial No. C2766) was included as a part of that February '63
>> shipment of rifles from Crescent Firearms to Klein's Sporting Goods:
>>
>s/wh21/html/WH_Vol...
>>
>> WALDMAN EXHIBIT NO. 4:http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvol=
DVP's level of reasoning is: "We know Oswald was the lone assassin because Lee
Harvey Oswald shot the President. We know Oswald shot the President because he
was the lone assassin."
The actual evidence means nothing to the trolls...
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Holmes
Learn to Make Money with a Website - http://www.burningknife.com
Bud
> On Jul 27, 8:45 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > >>> "Waldman Exhibit 4 is a control list of the 36" rifles in that Feb. '63 shipment and their serial numbers. Look at line 836. That pretty much destroys the BS story that no two 6.5 rifles had the same serial number. There was one 36" and one 40.2". That's at least two." <<<
>
> > Only a total idiot could not figure this out.
>
> > But Gil Jesus wants desperately to believe that EVERY single gun in
> > the February 1963 shipment to Klein's HAD TO BE a 36-inch rifle.
> > But
> > such an assumption is nonsense in view of Line 836 in Waldman Exhibit
> > No. 4, plus Line 3 of the document on the left-hand side of Waldman
> > Exhibit No. 3.
>
> > Both of those Waldman exhibits (No. 3 and No. 4) indicate that the
> > rifle that Klein's ultimately ended up shipping to Oswald/"Hidell" on
> > 3/20/63 (Serial No. C2766) was included as a part of that February '63
> > shipment of rifles from Crescent Firearms to Klein's Sporting Goods:
>
> > WALDMAN EXHIBIT NO. 3:http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol...
>
> > WALDMAN EXHIBIT NO. 4:http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol...
>
> You just implied that there was at least one 40.2 inch rifle in that
> shipment. And where do those documents indicate that C2766 was 40.2
> inches ?
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0358b.htm
> > And since we know that C2766 is a 40-inch gun, it means that at least
> > one 40-inch Carcano made its way into that Klein's shipment of 100
> > rifles in February of '63.
>
> There ya go with the circular reasoning again. There's no evidence
> that at least one of those rifles was 40 inches. All you've given us
> is an opinion, as usual. By weight, the documentation indicates that
> the shipment was of 36" rifles.
You don`t even know how much the 36" rifle weighs, retard, so how
can you claim to be extrapolating?
>Now, show us the evidence you have
> that the shipping crates contained a mixed bag of rifles. Show us the
> combination of 100 40.2 & 36 inches rifle that add up to 550 lbs.
You are the one claiming you have something to show. You`re just
failing as usual, is all.
> > And, to date, there hasn't been a single person on the planet who has
> > been able to prove that there was more than one Mannlicher-Carcano
> > rifle with the serial number of C2766 on it.
>
> I guess you never read Lattimer's book either.
You`ve seen Lattimer`s rifle, retard?
> http://i45.tinypic.com/2hmingh.jpg
>
> > In fact, as far as I am aware, there hasn't been a single person on
> > this planet who has come up with two MC rifles that have the same
> > serial number--PERIOD--whether it be C2766 or ANY other serial number.
>
> http://i45.tinypic.com/2hmingh.jpg
>
> > And that's very likely because there are no two MC rifles with the
> > exact same serial number affixed to them.
>
> Right, there was at least three. There was Lattimer's rifle with the
> serial number C2766, there was a C2766 rifle in the shipment of 100
> 36" rifles, and there was a C2766 40-inch rifle.
You think with 360,000 possible combinations of a four digit number
preceded by a letter that Klein`s paltry stock could produce two?
> Now there's three with the same serial number.
Show them, retard.
> You're doing good.
Bud
> On Jul 27, 9:19 pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> > What happens to this conjecture when you actually do some research
> > and find out that the 36" rifle weighs over six and a half pounds?
>
> Conjecture ?
Yah retard, pure conjecture. What did the box that Klein`s used to
ship the rifles weigh, retard? What does a 36" carcano weigh, retard?
> I'm going by the documentation in YOUR evidence....ya
> know, the evidence you support ?
Are you are stupid enough to think that it is established fact that
the 36" carcano weighs 5.5 pounds just because the Klein`s ad says
so?
Did the WC say the 36" rifle weighs 5.5 pounds, retard?
>There's no conjecture there.
It`s all that is there.
> Care to
> tell us how 100 -- 6 1/2 lb rifles get shipped with a total gross
> weight of 750 lbs. ? Care to show us the 10 wooden rifle crates from
> that shipment that had to have weighed 10 lbs. each ?
I don`t have to show anything. I was just pointing out that you had
the basics wrong. How can your conclusions be correct when you have no
idea what a 36" carcano weighs?
Bud
> In article <60ab0b50-deb5-4902-99f8-c56ca5387...@5g2000yqz.googlegroups.com>,
We know Oswald ordered and received a 40" rifle because that is
what the evidence shows. How many ninjas and backflips are needed for
the retard version of what is in evidence?
David Von Pein
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/f46542f2997ecdbb
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/20c50014a35e25e9
>>> "I guess you never read Lattimer's book either. http://i45.tinypic.com/2hmingh.jpg " <<<
Yes, I have. (It's a very good book too.)
http://Kennedy-And-Lincoln.blogspot.com
But apparently Gil Jesus must have missed this 2004 conversation
between John Canal and Dr. John K. Lattimer:
[Quoting John Canal, who in turn quotes Dr. Lattimer:]
"I can't recall who asked me to check with Dr. Lattimer re. the
notation in his book that the serial # of the Mannlicher-Carcano he
used for his tests was C-2766 (the same ser# as the Mannlicher-Carcano
found in the TSBD), but I asked him about it and today I received a
letter from him with the answer. It's simple. It was a error...."..the
book was printed before we noticed the error and it was too late to
correct it." "
[Quote Off.]
Source Link:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/637657ce54aca476
---------------------
To repeat:
Nobody on the planet (to my knowledge) has ever come up with another
MC 91/38 rifle with the serial number C2766 on it.
BTW, Gil, what makes you think that every single gun in the February
1963 shipment of 100 rifles that was sent from Crescent Firearms to
Klein's Sporting Goods had to be a 36-inch gun?
Where on this Lifschultz Fast Freight shipping invoice below (Waldman
Exhibit #2) does it say anything about only "36-inch" Carcanos being
contained within this 750-pound shipment of 100 rifles?
The only thing the Lifschultz document says under "Number of packages
and description" is this -- "10 CR OR CS GUNS OR RIFLES".
WALDMAN EXHIBIT NO. 2:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0359a.htm
David Von Pein
>>> "You think with 360,000 possible combinations of a four digit number preceded by a letter that Klein`s paltry stock could produce two?" <<<
It's probably way more than 360,000 possible combinations, Bud.
Because there are many of the Carcanos that have a TWO-letter prefix,
not just a one-letter prefix (as illustrated below in Waldman #4).
And on top of that, many of the guns in just this one particular
February '63 shipment have just a THREE-number suffix (vs. four
numbers), e.g., AD112, K622, and BX961.
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0362a.htm
I haven't done the math, but the total number of possible combinations
must be very high indeed.
aeffects
sitdown Dudster, you're going to hurt yourself....
aeffects
there you go AGAIN.... shithead! What happened, Justme1952 stop giving
you a little, heh? ROTFLMFAO!
Gil Jesus
> sitdown Dudster, you're going to hurt yourself....
He's never said if that 6.5 lb. weight included the bayonet or not.
The advertisement indicated that the rifles were sold WITHOUT
bayonets.
I suggest that the weight of 5.5 lbs without the bayonet is accurate.
We're still waiting for them to produce the evidence that the shipment
included different length rifles, rather than all the same size.
So far, all we've gotten is their "explanations" and notvery good ones
at that.
We're waiting for their EVIDENCE and we're probably going to be
waiting a long while.
timstter
> Ray:
>
> There's a second issue raised by this documentation and that is that
> there was a 40.2" rifle removed from the TSBD with serial number C2766
> and that there was another, a 36" rifle with the same C2766 serial
> number that was a part of that February '63 shipment of 100 36" rifles
> to Klein's.
>
> Waldman Exhibit 4 is a control list of the 36" rifles in that Feb. '63
> shipment and their serial numbers.
>
> Look at line 836 :
>
>
> That pretty much destroys the BS story that no two 6.5 rifles had the
> same serial number. There was one 36" and one 40.2".
>
> That's at least two.
Gil, no one in their right mind is going to accept that nitpicking
nonsense like this outweighs the fact that Oswald is shown holding the
same rifle that was taken out of the TSBD that bears the serial number
C2766.
The VERY SAME numbered rifle that was sent to his PO Box.
Your weights and measures nonsense hardly outweighs the fact that
C2766 has Oswald's fingerprints all over it as well, LOL!
Has JFK-CT research now descended to refutation of the bleeding
obvious, like no one saw Oswald pick up his rifle @ the PO so he must
never have got it, no one remembers Oswald crossing the Mexican border
so he must never have crossed it, etc etc?
Must play well on Black Ops radio, Gil. When is your next appearance?
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
timstter
LOL! What STUPID reasoning by Gil.
Gil, it's quite clear from the paperwork that the rifle shipped to
Oswald was numbered C2766.
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0364a.htm
The rifle he is holding in the backyard photos is the same rifle that
was recovered from the TSBD after the shooting.
That rifle is 40.2 inches long and has a serial number of C2766.
That rifle also has his fingerprints on it.
Ya got nowhere to go, rummaging pathetically around in the shipping
crates trying to weigh stuff Verm, LOL!
Informative Regards,
Bud
> On Jul 29, 2:43 pm, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > sitdown Dudster, you're going to hurt yourself....
>
> He's never said if that 6.5 lb. weight included the bayonet or not.
You still don`t know? It took me seconds to come of with the
information, get on it you crackerjack researcher you.
> The advertisement indicated that the rifles were sold WITHOUT
> bayonets.
>
> I suggest that the weight of 5.5 lbs without the bayonet is accurate.
I suggest you are retarded.
> We're still waiting for them to produce the evidence that the shipment
> included different length rifles, rather than all the same size.
Who said it was different length rifles? The paperwork indicates the
whole shipment of a hundred rifles were the 40" model.
Interesting that Oswald got a superior weapon, had he got the rifle
in the ad, he might have missed.
> So far, all we've gotten is their "explanations" and notvery good ones
> at that.
>
> We're waiting for their EVIDENCE and we're probably going to be
> waiting a long while.
Look at who posted the original idea. retard. It`s up to you to
support your ideas. You are failing, as usual.
David Von Pein
>>> "Who said it was different length rifles? The paperwork indicates the whole shipment of a hundred rifles were the 40" model." <<<
I think Bud is absolutely correct (based on the combination of the two
documents linked below -- Waldman Exhibit No. 1 and Waldman Exhibit
No. 5):
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0358b.htm
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0363a.htm
In Waldman #1, it says that there's a change in the pricing of the MC
rifles that Crescent Firearms will be shipping to Klein's starting on
4/13/62, with the price increasing by $1.00 per rifle (from $7.50 per
gun to $8.50), with the higher-priced rifle being the exact type of
gun shipped to Oswald/Hidell -- the M91/38 model.
And Waldman #5 says the total price for the 100 rifles in the February
'63 shipment from Crescent to Klein's is $850.00 -- which quite
obviously indicates that that entire shipment of 100 rifles consisted
of the M91/38 model, the exact model that we know Klein's sent to
Oswald in March '63.
However, there is a 36-inch variant of the 91/38 rifle, in addition to
the 40-inch version that Klein's shipped to Oswald. So whether or not
every single gun in the Feb. '63 shipment was a 40-inch model cannot
be definitely determined by just looking at Waldman Exhibit #1 alone.
But we certainly know that Rifle C2766 was a 40-inch gun, and we also
know from additional paperwork that C2766 was included in that Feb.
'63 shipment.
WEIGHTS OF THE CARCANO MODELS:
http://personal.stevens.edu/~gliberat/carcano/models.html
I found the above information regarding the weights of various
Mannlicher-Carcano rifles. And according to the chart on the webpage
linked above, there is no Carcano rifle that weighs less than 6 lbs, 6
ozs.
Based also on information gleaned from the above-linked chart, the 750-
pound weight of the shipment of 100 guns that was received by Klein's
in Feb. '63 seems to be just about right too, because each M91/38
rifle weighs about 7 pounds.
7 lbs. x 100 guns = 700 pounds.
Add in the weight of the packaging materials, etc., and the figure of
750 total pounds as seen in the Lifschultz Fast Freight shipping
receipt (Waldman Ex. #2) seems about right for 100 of the 40-inch MC
rifles.
Bud
> >>> "Who said it was different length rifles? The paperwork indicates the whole shipment of a hundred rifles were the 40" model." <<<
>
> I think Bud is absolutely correct (based on the combination of the two
> documents linked below -- Waldman Exhibit No. 1 and Waldman Exhibit
> No. 5):
>
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0...
>
> In Waldman #1, it says that there's a change in the pricing of the MC
> rifles that Crescent Firearms will be shipping to Klein's starting on
> 4/13/62, with the price increasing by $1.00 per rifle (from $7.50 per
> gun to $8.50), with the higher-priced rifle being the exact type of
> gun shipped to Oswald/Hidell -- the M91/38 model.
>
> And Waldman #5 says the total price for the 100 rifles in the February
> '63 shipment from Crescent to Klein's is $850.00 -- which quite
> obviously indicates that that entire shipment of 100 rifles consisted
> of the M91/38 model, the exact model that we know Klein's sent to
> Oswald in March '63.
>
> However, there is a 36-inch variant of the 91/38 rifle, in addition to
> the 40-inch version that Klein's shipped to Oswald. So whether or not
> every single gun in the Feb. '63 shipment was a 40-inch model cannot
> be definitely determined by just looking at Waldman Exhibit #1 alone.
>
> But we certainly know that Rifle C2766 was a 40-inch gun, and we also
> know from additional paperwork that C2766 was included in that Feb.
> '63 shipment.
>
> WEIGHTS OF THE CARCANO MODELS:
>
> http://personal.stevens.edu/~gliberat/carcano/models.html
>
> I found the above information regarding the weights of various
> Mannlicher-Carcano rifles.
I found that the day Gil posted his nonsense. I didn`t want to
produce it and do his research for him.
> And according to the chart on the webpage
> linked above, there is no Carcano rifle that weighs less than 6 lbs, 6
> ozs.
>
> Based also on information gleaned from the above-linked chart, the 750-
> pound weight of the shipment of 100 guns that was received by Klein's
> in Feb. '63 seems to be just about right too, because each M91/38
> rifle weighs about 7 pounds.
>
> 7 lbs. x 100 guns = 700 pounds.
Problem with that is that Oswald had the Fucile Corto, listed at 7
pounds, 7 ounces (convert the overall length from 101.8 cm to 40.1
inches). A hundred of this rifle would weigh 743.75 pounds, leaving
little room for shipping material. I knew this 3-4 days ago also. I
was trying to coax Gil into some actual research, but he wasn`t
biting.
> Add in the weight of the packaging materials, etc., and the figure of
> 750 total pounds as seen in the Lifschultz Fast Freight shipping
> receipt (Waldman Ex. #2) seems about right for 100 of the 40-inch MC
> rifles.
There are only five ways that I can see the 100 40" rifles falling
under 750 pounds.
One, I have the wrong model rifle, or my math is faulty.
Two, the Carcano site has the wrong weight.
Three, the rifles were shipped in canvas bags.
Four, Lifschultz didn`t charge for shipping boxes.
Five, someone was kicking back the guy who weighed the freight to
undersize the load.
David Von Pein
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0359a.htm
I think the Lifschultz weight of 750 pounds might very well be an
"estimated" weight. It's certainly a nice rounded-off type of number
anyway.
There's also the possibility that the 100 rifles in the Feb. '63
shipment contained a mixture of different types of 91/38 Carcano
rifles. One of the types of 91/38s weighs only 6 lbs., 6 ozs., and yet
another version weighs 7.0 lbs.
I'll also offer up this testimony from Klein's Vice President William
Waldman:
DAVID W. BELIN -- "Your receiving department checks each order to see
that the physical contents match the stated shipment on the invoice;
is that correct?"
WILLIAM J. WALDMAN -- "They don't necessarily see that they match,
because they frequently do not match, but they determine actually how
much was received by us."
curtjester1
> >>> "Waldman Exhibit 4 is a control list of the 36" rifles in that Feb. '63 shipment and their serial numbers. Look at line 836. That pretty much destroys the BS story that no two 6.5 rifles had the same serial number. There was one 36" and one 40.2". That's at least two." <<<
>
> Only a total idiot could not figure this out.
>
> But Gil Jesus wants desperately to believe that EVERY single gun in
> the February 1963 shipment to Klein's HAD TO BE a 36-inch rifle. But
> such an assumption is nonsense in view of Line 836 in Waldman Exhibit
> No. 4, plus Line 3 of the document on the left-hand side of Waldman
> Exhibit No. 3.
>
> Both of those Waldman exhibits (No. 3 and No. 4) indicate that the
> rifle that Klein's ultimately ended up shipping to Oswald/"Hidell" on
> 3/20/63 (Serial No. C2766) was included as a part of that February '63
> shipment of rifles from Crescent Firearms to Klein's Sporting Goods:
>
only did "36 inches!! Then the Klein's people who worked on the
rifles said the same thing! It's called Teddy Ballgame.
> WALDMAN EXHIBIT NO. 3:http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol...
>
> WALDMAN EXHIBIT NO. 4:http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol...
>
> And since we know that C2766 is a 40-inch gun, it means that at least
> one 40-inch Carcano made its way into that Klein's shipment of 100
> rifles in February of '63.
>
Hahahahaha...reading isn't their strongsuit, is it Gil? (Read my two
posts on that earlier).
CJ
> And, to date, there hasn't been a single person on the planet who has
> been able to prove that there was more than one Mannlicher-Carcano
> rifle with the serial number of C2766 on it.
>
> In fact, as far as I am aware, there hasn't been a single person on
> this planet who has come up with two MC rifles that have the same
> serial number--PERIOD--whether it be C2766 or ANY other serial number.
>
> And that's very likely because there are no two MC rifles with the
> exact same serial number affixed to them. Hence the reason to stamp
> products with SERIAL NUMBERS in the first place -- to make them UNIQUE
> and DIFFERENT from one another for IDENTIFICATION purposes (as
> indicated by the literal definition of the term "Serial Number"; see
> the two definitions below).
>
> ============================================
>
> SERIAL NUMBER (Merriam-Webster definition) -- "A number indicating
> place in a series and used as a means of identification."
>
> http://Merriam-Webster.com/dictionary/serial%20number
>
> SERIAL NUMBER (Wikipedia) -- "...A unique number assigned for
> identification which varies from its successor or predecessor by a
> fixed discrete integer value."
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_number
>
> ============================================