Movie theatres as dead drop sites
Peter Fokes
is one case where the KGB agent enters the theater, and changes seats.
Maybe Oswald was just making his regular KGB drop of a list of
textbooks used in Dallas schools.... hehe
<quote on>
Yakovlev...was heading straight for the one movie theater in town that
showed Russian-language films. I noticed that it was featuring a
documentary about the Red Army's triumphant parade in Moscow after the
close of hostilities in Europe.
Yakovlev bought a ticket and went inside. After a few minutes we
followed and found seats several rows behind Yakovlev, in the middle
of the theater. The place was about one-quarter full. It seemed simple
to keep Yakovlev in view, those women in kerchiefs, those
battle-scarred tanks. A few minutes later I was startled to discover
that Yakovlev was gone. Hurriedly we looked around the darkened
theater and spotted the tell tale shock of hair in a seat nearer the
screen. He had just changed seats. I was relieved; at least we hadn't
lost him.
But the seat to which Yakovlev had moved seemed an odd choice --
well forward, and over to one side. It wasn't as good a place from
which to view the film as the first seat had been. I didn't take my
eyes off him during the remainder of the film. He didn't brush anyone,
didn't speak with anyone, and generally appeared to be doing nothing
of interest. When the film ended, Yakovlev left the theater and took a
subway to his apartment .....
Four years went by before I was able to know definitively what had
happened that night in 1946 at the movie theater. We in the FBI had
become more sophisticated and aggressive in counterintelligence, and
by 1950 began to make headway against the KGB. I was at the FBI
headquarters and was personally and very deeply involved in the
investigations that uncovered the atomic espionage of Klaus Fuchs,
Harry Gold and David Greenglass, because I was working with deciphered
KGB cables that allowed us to penetrate the enemy's secrets.
That summer of 1950, when we broke into the network of people
surrounding Julius Rosenberg, I finally came to fully understand
Yakovlev's actions in the movie theater. David Greenglass told the FBI
that his brother-in-law, Julius, had once confided that he used to
leave messages and material for his Soviet controller underneath one
particular seat in the theater in Manhatten that showed
Russian-language films. In the lingo of espionage, that night Yakovlev
had probably been emptying a dead drop.
We also found out that summer that Yakovlev had been the KGB
controller for both Harry Gold and for the Rosenbergs..... I look back
on that evening when I watched the film of the Red Army parading
through the streets of Moscow, and didn't fully understand how close I
was brushing to an important espionage transaction between the KGB
controller and one of his agents.
<quote off>
There is a reference to John Abt in this book. Maybe I'll post that
reference at a later date.
The FBI-KGB War: A Special Agent's Story
Robert J. Lamphere and Tom Shachtman
1986 p. 30-31
PF
James Olmstead
on the day Lee arrived in Moscow, Russel Langelle and Popov were arrested
at the bus stop just outside of the train station where
Lee was waiting for his "guide" to meet him. They
had used the bus stop for prior meetings.
For those that don't remember my mentions of Langelle....he was the head of
security at the Moscow
Embassy. He was held for several days then expelled
from the country. Popov was thrown live into a furnace.
jko
"Peter Fokes" <justplai...@toronto.hm> wrote in message
news:b4jfg1905r5udihg6...@4ax.com...
Peter Fokes
wrote:
>Pete: So are buses....Oswald got on and off a bus near the TSBD. In 1959
>on the day Lee arrived in Moscow, Russel Langelle and Popov were arrested
>at the bus stop just outside of the train station where
>Lee was waiting for his "guide" to meet him. They
>had used the bus stop for prior meetings.
>
>For those that don't remember my mentions of Langelle....he was the head of
>security at the Moscow
>Embassy. He was held for several days then expelled
>from the country. Popov was thrown live into a furnace.
>
>jko
Heave ho ...
"I hear they burn for murder. Well, they say it just takes a second to
die." (Lee Harvey Oswald)
Thanks for mentioning this odd coincidence.
PF
James Olmstead
The fact that Lee went to the one bus stop....got on a bus that he would
need
a transfer, when the bus behind that one went directly to his rooming house
always bothered me. Then after getting there he waits outside at that bus
stop
only a few minutes or seconds....long enough to pick up directions to go to
the
theater or elswhere. I do believe that bus he got on would have gone
closer
to Ruby's and several areas of interest near the Tippit killing site.
The fact that all patrons inside of the movie house were not questioned or
listed
in the records, has always supported the consideration of contacting
somebody
in the theater.
jko
"Peter Fokes" <justplai...@toronto.hm> wrote in message
news:nlblg1tvc1e3lst7f...@4ax.com...
Anthony Marsh
> Pete: I forgot the quote in relationship to Popov I have to remember that.
>
> The fact that Lee went to the one bus stop....got on a bus that he would
> need
> a transfer, when the bus behind that one went directly to his rooming house
> always bothered me. Then after getting there he waits outside at that bus
> stop
> only a few minutes or seconds....long enough to pick up directions to go to
> the
> theater or elswhere. I do believe that bus he got on would have gone
> closer
> to Ruby's and several areas of interest near the Tippit killing site.
>
Close, but you seem to be forgetting that Oswald abandoned the bus and
took a cab. He could have taken the cab to Ruby's apartment if that was
his destination.
--
Anthony Marsh
The Puzzle Palace http://www.boston.quik.com/amarsh
James Olmstead
nothing was said about the cab because it did not
pertain.
jko
"Anthony Marsh" <ama...@quik.com> wrote in message
news:ruFOe.6400$Fq2.6310@trndny03...
jwrush
"James Olmstead" <Thp...@onecom.com> wrote in message
news:4309...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
> Pete: So are buses....Oswald got on and off a bus near the TSBD.
So what instructions did Oswald get on the bus in Dallas? Something like
"Go catch a cab home. Shoot Tippit. Go see a movie. Shop for apartment."?
jwrush
> Pete: I forgot the quote in relationship to Popov I have to remember
> that.
>
> The fact that Lee went to the one bus stop....got on a bus that he would
> need
> a transfer, when the bus behind that one went directly to his rooming
> house
> always bothered me. Then after getting there he waits outside at that bus
> stop
> only a few minutes or seconds....long enough to pick up directions to go
> to the
> theater or elswhere. I do believe that bus he got on would have gone
> closer
> to Ruby's and several areas of interest near the Tippit killing site.
>
> The fact that all patrons inside of the movie house were not questioned or
> listed
> in the records, has always supported the consideration of contacting
> somebody
> in the theater.
Contacting somebody about what? This is movie script stuff. The guy was
fleeing the scene of the assassination he had just committed. Brewer heard
the assassin's description over the radio, saw Oswald hiding from the
police, and then followed him into the movie theater. Oswald was
approached by McDonald and then he tried to shoot McDonald. That's why he
was arrested. The cops were looking for just one guy, not a theater full
of guys.
James Olmstead
what was said or done on the bus or at the bus stop.
However I never claimed to have been there to be able
to provide evidence of what was said or done.
jko
"jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> wrote in message
news:430b...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
>
James Olmstead
over and over again, never
addressing the responses made.
For example....people entering the theater to eat
without the purchase of a ticket. That fact (at least
one patron at the time of arrest was there only to eat)
causes a great deal of problem for the shoe store
clerk. You however still hold that the clerk followed him
in because he did not buy a ticket. If the theater allowed patrons into the
concession area without
purchase of a ticket, Oswald's action was not grounds
for him to follow him into the theater. The ticket seller
would know this, the patrons would know this (including
Oswald if he went there on a regular basis).
The simple point is that this part of the story has alot
of conflicts that need to be addressed and resolved.
jko
"jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> wrote in message
Peter Fokes
<quote>
It was in the '30s that Hughes built the Texas Theater, the movie
house in the Oak Cliff section of Dallas in which Lee Harvey Oswald
was arrested in 1963. The closeness of both men to the CIA makes it
all but certain that the Texas Theater would have become a clandestine
meeting place for spies. Such use of movie theaters had long been a
staple of espionage tradecraft, and other Hughes properties were put
to similar use. Hughes owned the RKO movie studio from 1948 to 1955.
<quote off>
http://www.famoustexans.com/howardhughes.htm
PF
On 22 Aug 2005 10:34:04 -0400, "James Olmstead" <Thp...@onecom.com>
wrote:
>Pete: So are buses....Oswald got on and off a bus near the TSBD. In 1959
jwrush
> Your "movie script" is more like a broken record repeating the same line
> over and over again, never
> addressing the responses made.
>
> For example....people entering the theater to eat
> without the purchase of a ticket. That fact (at least
> one patron at the time of arrest was there only to eat)
> causes a great deal of problem for the shoe store
> clerk.
You're joking, right?
You however still hold that the clerk followed him
> in because he did not buy a ticket. If the theater allowed patrons into
> the concession area without
> purchase of a ticket, Oswald's action was not grounds
> for him to follow him into the theater.
Look, you don't tell Brewer what to do. You try to tell Brewer after the
fact what he is allowed and not allowed to do and what he is allowed to
think and not to think. I've never heard of anything so audacious. People in
a free non-communist country are allowed to think the way they want to
think. Brewer had several reasons to follow Oswald into the theater. You
always seem upset that Brewer's quick thinking led to Oswald's arrest, but
there is nothing you can do about that.
The ticket seller
> would know this, the patrons would know this (including
> Oswald if he went there on a regular basis).
>
> The simple point is that this part of the story has alot
> of conflicts that need to be addressed and resolved.
There are no conflicts at all. Everything about this has already been
addressed. Thanks to Brewer, the cops caught Oswald. You need to learn how
to live with this fact. You can't re-write history. You can't go back in
time and say, "Hey, Brewer, you can't follow Oswald into the theater."
James Olmstead
>
> "James Olmstead" <Thp...@onecom.com> wrote in message
> news:430c...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
>> Your "movie script" is more like a broken record repeating the same line
>> over and over again, never
>> addressing the responses made.
>>
>> For example....people entering the theater to eat
>> without the purchase of a ticket. That fact (at least
>> one patron at the time of arrest was there only to eat)
>> causes a great deal of problem for the shoe store
>> clerk.
>
> You're joking, right?
No...and it is noted that you avoid the issue of patrons
entering the theater without buying a ticket. The grounds
for concern by the clerk do not hold up on the issue of ticket
purchase.
>
> You however still hold that the clerk followed him
>> in because he did not buy a ticket. If the theater allowed patrons into
>> the concession area without
>> purchase of a ticket, Oswald's action was not grounds
>> for him to follow him into the theater.
>
> Look, you don't tell Brewer what to do.
Again you avoid the issue. I'm not telling Brewer what to do...that's
impossible
because the actions were in the past...it's history presented that needs to
be
examined. What about ticket purchase? Will you ever address that issue?
You try to tell Brewer after the
> fact what he is allowed and not allowed to do and what he is allowed to
> think and not to think.
Wrong, I'm trying to fully understand his actions not change them or
influence
what he thinks or does....it's call evaluation, looking at all the
considerations of
fact not just what one wants to look at or accept.
I've never heard of anything so audacious.
That's because it's a figment of your imagination....I'm not doing what you
present
that I'm doing. You are avoiding the topic by attacking the
messenger...common
practice by those wishing conflicts would just go away.
People in
> a free non-communist country are allowed to think the way they want to
> think. Brewer had several reasons to follow Oswald into the theater.
None of which hold up........
You
> always seem upset that Brewer's quick thinking led to Oswald's arrest, but
> there is nothing you can do about that.
I can't change historical record....but I can make the honest effort to
understand
what has been presented.
>
> The ticket seller
>> would know this, the patrons would know this (including
>> Oswald if he went there on a regular basis).
>>
>> The simple point is that this part of the story has alot
>> of conflicts that need to be addressed and resolved.
>
> There are no conflicts at all. Everything about this has already been
> addressed.
Not by you..........you still avoid the presented conflict the purchase of a
ticket to enter the theater.
Thanks to Brewer, the cops caught Oswald. You need to learn how
> to live with this fact.
I have lived with the fact....and still live with the considerations of
fact.
You can't re-write history. You can't go back in
> time and say, "Hey, Brewer, you can't follow Oswald into the theater."
I'm not trying to re-write history I'm trying understand what was written.
You should try it some time.
jko
>
>
>
jwrush
>
> "jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> wrote in message
> news:430d...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
>>
>> "James Olmstead" <Thp...@onecom.com> wrote in message
>> news:430c...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
>>> Your "movie script" is more like a broken record repeating the same line
>>> over and over again, never
>>> addressing the responses made.
>>>
>>> For example....people entering the theater to eat
>>> without the purchase of a ticket. That fact (at least
>>> one patron at the time of arrest was there only to eat)
>>> causes a great deal of problem for the shoe store
>>> clerk.
>>
>> You're joking, right?
>
> No...and it is noted that you avoid the issue of patrons
> entering the theater without buying a ticket. The grounds
> for concern by the clerk do not hold up on the issue of ticket
> purchase.
That's absurd. Brewer saw that Oswald didn't go in just to buy a hot dog and
come back out again. And ducking into the theater without buying a tick
wasn't the only reason he followed Oswald into the theater.
>
>>
>> You however still hold that the clerk followed him
>>> in because he did not buy a ticket. If the theater allowed patrons into
>>> the concession area without
>>> purchase of a ticket, Oswald's action was not grounds
>>> for him to follow him into the theater.
>>
>> Look, you don't tell Brewer what to do.
>
> Again you avoid the issue. I'm not telling Brewer what to do...that's
> impossible
> because the actions were in the past...it's history presented that needs
> to be
> examined. What about ticket purchase? Will you ever address that issue?
Sure, Oswald did not buy a hot dog and walk right out again. He went in and
got a seat.
>
> You try to tell Brewer after the
>> fact what he is allowed and not allowed to do and what he is allowed to
>> think and not to think.
>
> Wrong, I'm trying to fully understand his actions not change them or
> influence
> what he thinks or does....it's call evaluation, looking at all the
> considerations of
> fact not just what one wants to look at or accept.
We've been through this a hundred times before. He thought Oswald looked
suspicious and he thought Oswald looked like he was hiding in his store
lobby while police cars drove by with their sirens on. He thought Oswald fit
the description of the TSBD shooter he heard earlier on the radio. He
followed Oswald and saw him go into the theater without buying a ticket.
Oswald did not buy a hot dog and went in and sat down. Brewer thought he was
acting suspicious and hiding out so he asked the ticket lady to call police.
In the meantime police cars were dirving fast in the area with their sirens
going and Brewer thought Oswald might be the guy they were looking for in
both murders. He did the right thing. Oswald did the wrong thing by not
throwing his gun away, and by trying to kill McDonald.
In the meantime other people in the area were calling the police at that
same time with reports of suspicious people. Police were trying to track
them down too. The the others turned out not to be the killer. Oswald turned
out to be the killer.
>
> I've never heard of anything so audacious.
>
> That's because it's a figment of your imagination....I'm not doing what
> you present
> that I'm doing. You are avoiding the topic by attacking the messenger...
I'm attacking your message because it is absurd.
common
> practice by those wishing conflicts would just go away.
>
> People in
>> a free non-communist country are allowed to think the way they want to
>> think. Brewer had several reasons to follow Oswald into the theater.
>
> None of which hold up........
All of them "hold up". All of them "held up". All of them "hold up" today.
And Brewer was right.
>
> You
>> always seem upset that Brewer's quick thinking led to Oswald's arrest,
>> but there is nothing you can do about that.
>
> I can't change historical record....but I can make the honest effort to
> understand
> what has been presented.
Or you can whine over Oswald being sighted by Brewer and getting caught.
>
>>
>> The ticket seller
>>> would know this, the patrons would know this (including
>>> Oswald if he went there on a regular basis).
>>>
>>> The simple point is that this part of the story has alot
>>> of conflicts that need to be addressed and resolved.
>>
>> There are no conflicts at all. Everything about this has already been
>> addressed.
>
> Not by you..........you still avoid the presented conflict the purchase of
> a
> ticket to enter the theater.
No hot dog.
>
>
> Thanks to Brewer, the cops caught Oswald. You need to learn how
>> to live with this fact.
>
> I have lived with the fact....and still live with the considerations of
> fact.
>
> You can't re-write history. You can't go back in
>> time and say, "Hey, Brewer, you can't follow Oswald into the theater."
>
> I'm not trying to re-write history I'm trying understand what was written.
> You should try it some time.
No hot dog.
James Olmstead
>
> "James Olmstead" <Thp...@onecom.com> wrote in message
> news:430d...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
>>
>> "jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> wrote in message
>> news:430d...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
>>>
>>> "James Olmstead" <Thp...@onecom.com> wrote in message
>>> news:430c...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
>>>> Your "movie script" is more like a broken record repeating the same
>>>> line over and over again, never
>>>> addressing the responses made.
>>>>
>>>> For example....people entering the theater to eat
>>>> without the purchase of a ticket. That fact (at least
>>>> one patron at the time of arrest was there only to eat)
>>>> causes a great deal of problem for the shoe store
>>>> clerk.
>>>
>>> You're joking, right?
>>
>> No...and it is noted that you avoid the issue of patrons
>> entering the theater without buying a ticket. The grounds
>> for concern by the clerk do not hold up on the issue of ticket
>> purchase.
>
> That's absurd. Brewer saw that Oswald didn't go in just to buy a hot dog
> and come back out again.
Nobody has claimed that Oswald went in just to buy a hot dog...you miss the
entire point....anyone could just walk in and buy a hot dog without buying a
ticket.
And ducking into the theater without buying a tick
> wasn't the only reason he followed Oswald into the theater.
According to his affidavit the only other reasons were that he had on a
brown shirt
and looked scared. Brewer left the store as soon as Oswald left the lobby
for
those two reasons alone. Nothing else could have directly influenced his
actions.
Having a on a brown shirt had nothing to do with the assassination of JFK
miles away.
Looking scared requires knowledge of how he would normally look.
>
>>
>>>
>>> You however still hold that the clerk followed him
>>>> in because he did not buy a ticket. If the theater allowed patrons
>>>> into the concession area without
>>>> purchase of a ticket, Oswald's action was not grounds
>>>> for him to follow him into the theater.
>>>
>>> Look, you don't tell Brewer what to do.
>>
>> Again you avoid the issue. I'm not telling Brewer what to do...that's
>> impossible
>> because the actions were in the past...it's history presented that needs
>> to be
>> examined. What about ticket purchase? Will you ever address that issue?
>
> Sure, Oswald did not buy a hot dog and walk right out again. He went in
> and got a seat.
Not the consideration...once again you avoid the FACT that one could enter
without purchase of a ticket to the show.
However, accordingly Brewer, he and Butch first went to the exits to see if
he had
just "run through".
>
>>
>> You try to tell Brewer after the
>>> fact what he is allowed and not allowed to do and what he is allowed to
>>> think and not to think.
>>
>> Wrong, I'm trying to fully understand his actions not change them or
>> influence
>> what he thinks or does....it's call evaluation, looking at all the
>> considerations of
>> fact not just what one wants to look at or accept.
>
> We've been through this a hundred times before. He thought Oswald looked
> suspicious and he thought Oswald looked like he was hiding in his store
> lobby while police cars drove by with their sirens on.
Again you are adding to the story....Brewer does not say he was hiding in
his
store lobby in his 6 Dec 63 affidavit. Brewer states he looked "scared" not
suspicious. You prove this over and over again that you look selectively
and
then change things to indicate what you want them to indicate.
He thought Oswald fit
> the description of the TSBD shooter he heard earlier on the radio.
By wearing a brown shirt????????????????
He
> followed Oswald and saw him go into the theater without buying a ticket.
No he did not see him go in without buying a ticket....Brewer had to stop
and
ask the ticket seller......she did not know if Oswald was the last man she
sold
a ticket to.
> Oswald did not buy a hot dog and went in and sat down.
According to the concession worker......Lee had bought his refreshments
around
1:15
Brewer thought he was
> acting suspicious and hiding out so he asked the ticket lady to call
> police.
Brewer had no probable cause nor authority to act as he did. Nowhere in his
Dec 6th affidavit does Brewer state Oswald was acting suspicious.
> In the meantime police cars were dirving fast in the area with their
> sirens going and Brewer thought Oswald might be the guy they were looking
> for in both murders.
On what grounds?
He did the right thing. Oswald did the wrong thing by not
> throwing his gun away, and by trying to kill McDonald.
If Oswald attempted to kill McDonald why wasn't he charged in that attempt
of murder?
Did the DPD and Wade feel sorry for Oswald?
>
> In the meantime other people in the area were calling the police at that
> same time with reports of suspicious people.
There was alot of suspicious calls and actions........why didn't Tippit
respond to any?
Police were trying to track
> them down too.
Compare how many officers were sent to the library and then to the theater.
The the others turned out not to be the killer. Oswald turned
> out to be the killer.
In you position he is the killer, yet that was never established in any
court of law
at any time. You seem to love the Soviet system of justice over ours.
>
>>
>> I've never heard of anything so audacious.
>>
>> That's because it's a figment of your imagination....I'm not doing what
>> you present
>> that I'm doing. You are avoiding the topic by attacking the messenger...
>
> I'm attacking your message because it is absurd.
No you attack because you can not address the issues. Nobody addressed them
in the past so you have nothing to counter these types of conflicts.
>
> common
>> practice by those wishing conflicts would just go away.
>>
>> People in
>>> a free non-communist country are allowed to think the way they want to
>>> think. Brewer had several reasons to follow Oswald into the theater.
>>
>> None of which hold up........
>
> All of them "hold up". All of them "held up". All of them "hold up" today.
> And Brewer was right.
>
Again you seem to be supporting the Soviet view towards evidence...if it's
what
they want that's enough.....forget about the rest of the facts.
>>
>> You
>>> always seem upset that Brewer's quick thinking led to Oswald's arrest,
>>> but there is nothing you can do about that.
>>
>> I can't change historical record....but I can make the honest effort to
>> understand
>> what has been presented.
>
> Or you can whine over Oswald being sighted by Brewer and getting caught.
It's not a "whine"........it's presenting the considerations of due process
to make
a judgement.
jko
jwrush
Right. He went in without buying either a ticket or a hot dog.
BINGO!
>
> And ducking into the theater without buying a tick
>> wasn't the only reason he followed Oswald into the theater.
>
> According to his affidavit the only other reasons were that he had on a
> brown shirt
> and looked scared. Brewer left the store as soon as Oswald left the lobby
> for
> those two reasons alone. Nothing else could have directly influenced his
> actions.
Not so. For historians, ALL the witnesses' statements must be recorded for
history, including the interview Brewer gave to Wolper Pictures.
> Having a on a brown shirt had nothing to do with the assassination of JFK
> miles away.
> Looking scared requires knowledge of how he would normally look.
Don't forget, he looked suspicious, he seemed to be hiding from the police
cars riding by, and he fit the description of the TSBD shooter, plus he
didn't buy a ticket OR a hot dog.
>>>> You however still hold that the clerk followed him
>>>>> in because he did not buy a ticket. If the theater allowed patrons
>>>>> into the concession area without
>>>>> purchase of a ticket, Oswald's action was not grounds
>>>>> for him to follow him into the theater.
>>>>
>>>> Look, you don't tell Brewer what to do.
>>>
>>> Again you avoid the issue. I'm not telling Brewer what to do...that's
>>> impossible
>>> because the actions were in the past...it's history presented that needs
>>> to be
>>> examined. What about ticket purchase? Will you ever address that
>>> issue?
>>
>> Sure, Oswald did not buy a hot dog and walk right out again. He went in
>> and got a seat.
>
> Not the consideration...once again you avoid the FACT that one could enter
> without purchase of a ticket to the show.
The police and Brewer were NOT concerned about local people buying hot
dogs. This was not part of the case. Forget about the hot dogs.
>
> However, accordingly Brewer, he and Butch first went to the exits to see
> if he had
> just "run through".
>
>
>>
>>>
>>> You try to tell Brewer after the
>>>> fact what he is allowed and not allowed to do and what he is allowed to
>>>> think and not to think.
>>>
>>> Wrong, I'm trying to fully understand his actions not change them or
>>> influence
>>> what he thinks or does....it's call evaluation, looking at all the
>>> considerations of
>>> fact not just what one wants to look at or accept.
>>
>> We've been through this a hundred times before. He thought Oswald looked
>> suspicious and he thought Oswald looked like he was hiding in his store
>> lobby while police cars drove by with their sirens on.
>
> Again you are adding to the story....Brewer does not say he was hiding in
> his
> store lobby in his 6 Dec 63 affidavit.
He does in his Wolper Pictures interview. You want to overlook that, don't
you?
Quote from Wolper Pictures documentary, "Four Days in November", released
in theaters in 1964. Johnny Calvin Brewer speaking, as his picture is
shown on the screen while he is standing in the shoe store where he had
worked on 11/22/63:
"I was standin' behind the counter listen' to the radio, it was Friday. I
heard on the radio that officer Tippit had been shot. I heard sirens
comin' down Jefferson Street, and this man walked into the lobby of the
store there, matchin' the description that they'd given out on the radio.
A police car made a u-turn and went back down Jefferson, and this man
walked out, up toward the Texas Theater."
Brewer states he looked "scared" not
> suspicious. You prove this over and over again that you look selectively
> and
> then change things to indicate what you want them to indicate.
>
>
> He thought Oswald fit
>> the description of the TSBD shooter he heard earlier on the radio.
>
> By wearing a brown shirt????????????????
Ask Brewer. He turned out to be right. Hahahahahaha
>
>
> He
>> followed Oswald and saw him go into the theater without buying a ticket.
>
> No he did not see him go in without buying a ticket....Brewer had to stop
> and
> ask the ticket seller......she did not know if Oswald was the last man she
> sold
> a ticket to.
>
>> Oswald did not buy a hot dog and went in and sat down.
>
> According to the concession worker......Lee had bought his refreshments
> around
> 1:15
>
> Brewer thought he was
>> acting suspicious and hiding out so he asked the ticket lady to call
>> police.
>
> Brewer had no probable cause nor authority to act as he did.
Yes he did. Just as other people were calling police an reporting other
suspicious people in that same part of town.
Nowhere in his
> Dec 6th affidavit does Brewer state Oswald was acting suspicious.
Hey, Olmstead, give it up. You can't rewrite the past. Brewer caught him
and that's that.
>
>> In the meantime police cars were dirving fast in the area with their
>> sirens going and Brewer thought Oswald might be the guy they were looking
>> for in both murders.
>
> On what grounds?
Looked suspicious, hiding in the lobby, fit the TSBD suspect's
description, ducked in the theater without paying. And Brewer was right.
>
> He did the right thing. Oswald did the wrong thing by not
>> throwing his gun away, and by trying to kill McDonald.
>
>
> If Oswald attempted to kill McDonald why wasn't he charged in that attempt
> of murder?
No need to bother with such a trivial count, since he was charged in the
murder of Tippit and later JFK. They would have gased him before he had
time to go to trial on the McDonald case.
> Did the DPD and Wade feel sorry for Oswald?
They preferred the two murder charges. That was Texas, 1963.
>
>>
>> In the meantime other people in the area were calling the police at that
>> same time with reports of suspicious people.
>
> There was alot of suspicious calls and actions........why didn't Tippit
> respond to any?
The ones I'm talking about were in Oak Cliff, regarding the Tippit
shooting. Anyway, Tippit apparently did respond to the 12:45 suspect
description, and Oswald shot him
>
>
> Police were trying to track
>> them down too.
>
> Compare how many officers were sent to the library and then to the
> theater.
I don't have an officer count on the library, do you?
> The the others turned out not to be the killer. Oswald turned
>> out to be the killer.
>
> In you position he is the killer, yet that was never established in any
> court of law
> at any time.
He was shot before he went to trial.
>You seem to love the Soviet system of justice over ours.
Hahahahaha
>>
>>>
>>> I've never heard of anything so audacious.
>>>
>>> That's because it's a figment of your imagination....I'm not doing what
>>> you present
>>> that I'm doing. You are avoiding the topic by attacking the
>>> messenger...
>>
>> I'm attacking your message because it is absurd.
>
> No you attack because you can not address the issues.
Suspicious, hiding in lobby, fit TSBD description, no ticket, no hot dog,
put hands in air when McDonald approached, tried to kill McDonald.
BINGO!
Nobody addressed them
> in the past so you have nothing to counter these types of conflicts.
>
>
>>
>> common
>>> practice by those wishing conflicts would just go away.
>>>
>>> People in
>>>> a free non-communist country are allowed to think the way they want to
>>>> think. Brewer had several reasons to follow Oswald into the theater.
>>>
>>> None of which hold up........
>>
>> All of them "hold up". All of them "held up". All of them "hold up"
>> today. And Brewer was right.
>>
>
> Again you seem to be supporting the Soviet view towards evidence...if it's
> what
> they want that's enough.....forget about the rest of the facts.
The rest of the facts? Oh, Brennan saw him. His gun. Wife took pictures of
him and gun, tried to shoot Walker, told wife he tried to shoot walker,
talked to wife about shooting Nixon, tried to shoot McDonald, shot Tippit,
etc., etc. How many facts do you need?
>
>>>
>>> You
>>>> always seem upset that Brewer's quick thinking led to Oswald's arrest,
>>>> but there is nothing you can do about that.
>>>
>>> I can't change historical record....but I can make the honest effort to
>>> understand
>>> what has been presented.
>>
>> Or you can whine over Oswald being sighted by Brewer and getting caught.
>
> It's not a "whine"........it's presenting the considerations of due
> process to make
> a judgement.
Sounds like a typical ACLU whine to me.
>
>
> jko
>
Peter Fokes
> Wife took pictures of
>him and gun, ... told wife he tried to shoot walker,
>talked to wife about shooting Nixon,
Wife, wife, wife ....
Marina his worst nightmare, eh?
Yet she tried to hide a picture in her shoe!
Go figure.
PF
jwrush
Poor Marina, all she wanted was a washing machine.
tomnln
We also know that she was "Threatened with Deportation".
"Peter Fokes" <justplai...@toronto.hm> wrote in message
news:drusg15hjnc5odnss...@4ax.com...
tomnln
Both her daughters were American citizens so, they would have stayed in
this Country.
Marina later said she was "Manipulated".
"jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> wrote in message
news:430e...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
>
Peter Fokes
Ruth Paine had one, didn't she?
As a new immigrant from the Soviet Union, Marina certainly was
impressed by the availability of "material goods" in the USA.
Her pocket book though was very thin indeed while living with Oswald
and Ruth Paine. Her circumstances changed dramatically after the
assassination though.
But alas, we are straying from the topic of the thread.
PF
>
>
Martin Shackelford
Oswald had a ticket when he came in.
Martin
jwrush
That just goes to show that in our free country, the wife of a
Presidential assassin can finally get her washing machine and live a happy
life after her husband kills the country's leader. She couldn't have done
that in Russia or Cuba.
jwrush
"Martin Shackelford" <msh...@concentric.net> wrote in message
news:depe41$3...@dispatch.concentric.net...
> And besides, the concession stand attendant, Butch Burroughs, said Oswald
> had a ticket when he came in.
>
> Martin
"Mr. Ball. Later on the police came in your place?
Mr. Burroughs. Yes.
Mr. Ball. They asked you if you had seen a man come in there without a
ticket?
Mr. Burroughs. Yes.
Mr. Ball. What did you tell him?
Mr. Burroughs. I said, "I haven't seen him myself. He might have, but I
didn't see him when he came in. He must have sneaked in and run on
upstairs before I saw him.""
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/history/wc_period/warren_report/Butch_Burroughs.html
Martin Shackelford
Martin
Thp...@onecom.com
>>>> You're joking, right?
BINGO!
Wrong....there is no eyewitness that can claim Oswald did not buy a
ticket. Postal did not know if she shold him a ticket. The point which
you continue to miss is that one could enter the theater without being or
looking suspicious.
> And ducking into the theater without buying a tick
>> wasn't the only reason he followed Oswald into the theater.
> According to his affidavit the only other reasons were that he had on a
> brown shirt
> and looked scared. Brewer left the store as soon as Oswald left the lobby
> for
> those two reasons alone. Nothing else could have directly influenced his
> actions.
Not so. For historians, ALL the witnesses' statements must be recorded for
history, including the interview Brewer gave to Wolper Pictures.
Not so when there is conflict...one goes to the first recorded affidavits
that are legal documents. People add and substract to stories all the
time that's why we have offical documents to examine.
> Having a on a brown shirt had nothing to do with the assassination of JFK
> miles away.
> Looking scared requires knowledge of how he would normally look.
Don't forget, he looked suspicious, he seemed to be hiding from the police
cars riding by, and he fit the description of the TSBD shooter, plus he
didn't buy a ticket OR a hot dog.
This is where you try to re-write history....you change Brewers statement
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
>>>> You however still hold that the clerk followed him
>>>>> in because he did not buy a ticket. If the theater allowed patrons
>>>>> into the concession area without
>>>>> purchase of a ticket, Oswald's action was not grounds
>>>>> for him to follow him into the theater.
>>>> Look, you don't tell Brewer what to do.
>>> Again you avoid the issue. I'm not telling Brewer what to do...that's
>>> impossible
>>> because the actions were in the past...it's history presented that needs
>>> to be
>>> examined. What about ticket purchase? Will you ever address that
>>> issue?
>> Sure, Oswald did not buy a hot dog and walk right out again. He went in
>> and got a seat.
> Not the consideration...once again you avoid the FACT that one could enter
> without purchase of a ticket to the show.
The police and Brewer were NOT concerned about local people buying hot
dogs. This was not part of the case. Forget about the hot dogs.
You can't one needs to understand if Oswald's actions were suspicious as
you claim. Brewer said "scared" you re-write that .
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> However, accordingly Brewer, he and Butch first went to the exits to see
> if he had
> just "run through".
>>> You try to tell Brewer after the
>>>> fact what he is allowed and not allowed to do and what he is allowed to
>>>> think and not to think.
>>> Wrong, I'm trying to fully understand his actions not change them or
>>> influence
>>> what he thinks or does....it's call evaluation, looking at all the
>>> considerations of
>>> fact not just what one wants to look at or accept.
>> We've been through this a hundred times before. He thought Oswald looked
>> suspicious and he thought Oswald looked like he was hiding in his store
>> lobby while police cars drove by with their sirens on.
> Again you are adding to the story....Brewer does not say he was hiding in
> his
> store lobby in his 6 Dec 63 affidavit.
He does in his Wolper Pictures interview. You want to overlook that, don't
you?
No....I overlook your efforts to rewrite history. I use Brewer's 6 Dec
affidavit since it's offical...Wolper Pictures interview is just that a
"interview" with little legal standing.
Quote from Wolper Pictures documentary, "Four Days in November", released
in theaters in 1964. Johnny Calvin Brewer speaking, as his picture is
shown on the screen while he is standing in the shoe store where he had
worked on 11/22/63:
"I was standin' behind the counter listen' to the radio, it was Friday. I
heard on the radio that officer Tippit had been shot. I heard sirens
comin' down Jefferson Street, and this man walked into the lobby of the
store there, matchin' the description that they'd given out on the radio.
A police car made a u-turn and went back down Jefferson, and this man
walked out, up toward the Texas Theater."
What's missing from this interview that is removed from his offical
statement?
Brewer states he looked "scared" not
> suspicious. You prove this over and over again that you look selectively
> and
> then change things to indicate what you want them to indicate.
> He thought Oswald fit
>> the description of the TSBD shooter he heard earlier on the radio.
> By wearing a brown shirt????????????????
Ask Brewer. He turned out to be right. Hahahahahaha
It's not a question of being "right" on seeing Oswald wearing a brown
shirt.
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> He
>> followed Oswald and saw him go into the theater without buying a ticket.
> No he did not see him go in without buying a ticket....Brewer had to stop
> and
> ask the ticket seller......she did not know if Oswald was the last man she
> sold
> a ticket to.
>> Oswald did not buy a hot dog and went in and sat down.
> According to the concession worker......Lee had bought his refreshments
> around
> 1:15
NOTICED you want to forget about that....
> Brewer thought he was
>> acting suspicious and hiding out so he asked the ticket lady to call
>> police.
> Brewer had no probable cause nor authority to act as he did.
Yes he did. Just as other people were calling police an reporting other
suspicious people in that same part of town.
But according to Brewer Oswald was scared not suspicious....LBJ was
scared....JC and Jackie were scared that day.
Nowhere in his
> Dec 6th affidavit does Brewer state Oswald was acting suspicious.
Hey, Olmstead, give it up. You can't rewrite the past. Brewer caught him
and that's that.
You are the one trying to rewrite incidents....not me.
>> In the meantime police cars were dirving fast in the area with their
>> sirens going and Brewer thought Oswald might be the guy they were looking
>> for in both murders.
> On what grounds?
Looked suspicious, hiding in the lobby, fit the TSBD suspect's
description, ducked in the theater without paying. And Brewer was right.
None of the above are grounds that hold up.
> He did the right thing. Oswald did the wrong thing by not
>> throwing his gun away, and by trying to kill McDonald.
> If Oswald attempted to kill McDonald why wasn't he charged in that attempt
> of murder?
No need to bother with such a trivial count, since he was charged in the
murder of Tippit and later JFK. They would have gased him before he had
time to go to trial on the McDonald case.
I bet McDonald thinks his life was more then a trivial count....this is
where you take one incident that Oswald admits to (hitting an officer)
into attempted murder....which he was not even charged for. That's
rewriting history to present your view and your view only.
> Did the DPD and Wade feel sorry for Oswald?
They preferred the two murder charges. That was Texas, 1963.
Wrong.
>> In the meantime other people in the area were calling the police at that
>> same time with reports of suspicious people.
> There was alot of suspicious calls and actions........why didn't Tippit
> respond to any?
The ones I'm talking about were in Oak Cliff, regarding the Tippit
shooting. Anyway, Tippit apparently did respond to the 12:45 suspect
description, and Oswald shot him
Tippit did not respond to all the activity...that's the problem. The ones
in Oak Cliff were within several streets where he was parked
> Police were trying to track
>> them down too.
> Compare how many officers were sent to the library and then to the
> theater.
I don't have an officer count on the library, do you?
> The the others turned out not to be the killer. Oswald turned
>> out to be the killer.
> In you position he is the killer, yet that was never established in any
> court of law
> at any time.
He was shot before he went to trial.
It still can be proven he was the shooter if the evidence is properly
presented.
>You seem to love the Soviet system of justice over ours.
Hahahahaha
>>> I've never heard of anything so audacious.
>>> That's because it's a figment of your imagination....I'm not doing what
>>> you present
>>> that I'm doing. You are avoiding the topic by attacking the
>>> messenger...
>> I'm attacking your message because it is absurd.
> No you attack because you can not address the issues.
Suspicious, hiding in lobby, fit TSBD description, no ticket, no hot dog,
put hands in air when McDonald approached, tried to kill McDonald.
BINGO!
Bingo is right.... again you try to rewrite history..."tried to kill
McDonald"
As long as you continue to try to re-write history further exchanges are
pointless.
jko
Nobody addressed them
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> jko
Reply
14. Peter Fokes Aug 25, 10:18 pm show options
Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
From: Peter Fokes <justplainfoke...@toronto.hm> - Find messages by this
author
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 22:18:15 -0400
Local: Thurs, Aug 25 2005 10:18 pm
Subject: Re: Movie theatres as dead drop sites
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse
On 25 Aug 2005 22:10:21 -0400, "jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> wrote:
> Wife took pictures of
>him and gun, ... told wife he tried to shoot walker,
>talked to wife about shooting Nixon,
Wife, wife, wife ....
Marina his worst nightmare, eh?
Yet she tried to hide a picture in her shoe!
Go figure.
PF
Reply
15. jwrush Aug 26, 12:46 am show options
Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
From: "jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> - Find messages by this author
Date: 26 Aug 2005 00:46:13 -0400
Local: Fri, Aug 26 2005 12:46 am
Subject: Re: Movie theatres as dead drop sites
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse
"Peter Fokes" <justplainfoke...@toronto.hm> wrote in message
news:drusg15hjnc5odnss...@4ax.com...
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> On 25 Aug 2005 22:10:21 -0400, "jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> wrote:
>> Wife took pictures of
>>him and gun, ... told wife he tried to shoot walker,
>>talked to wife about shooting Nixon,
> Wife, wife, wife ....
> Marina his worst nightmare, eh?
> Yet she tried to hide a picture in her shoe!
> Go figure.
> PF
Poor Marina, all she wanted was a washing machine.
Reply
16. tomnln Aug 26, 10:29 pm show options
Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
From: "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> - Find messages by this author
Date: 26 Aug 2005 22:29:37 -0400
Local: Fri, Aug 26 2005 10:29 pm
Subject: Re: Movie theatres as dead drop sites
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse
Marina was Threatened with Deportation.
Both her daughters were American citizens so, they would have stayed in
this Country.
Marina later said she was "Manipulated".
"jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> wrote in message
news:430e...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> "Peter Fokes" <justplainfoke...@toronto.hm> wrote in message
> news:drusg15hjnc5odnss...@4ax.com...
>> On 25 Aug 2005 22:10:21 -0400, "jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> wrote:
>>> Wife took pictures of
>>>him and gun, ... told wife he tried to shoot walker,
>>>talked to wife about shooting Nixon,
>> Wife, wife, wife ....
>> Marina his worst nightmare, eh?
>> Yet she tried to hide a picture in her shoe!
>> Go figure.
>> PF
> Poor Marina, all she wanted was a washing machine.
Reply
17. Peter Fokes Aug 27, 12:47 am show options
Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
From: Peter Fokes <justplainfoke...@toronto.hm> - Find messages by this
author
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2005 00:47:06 -0400
Local: Sat, Aug 27 2005 12:47 am
Subject: Re: Movie theatres as dead drop sites
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse
On 26 Aug 2005 00:46:13 -0400, "jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> wrote:
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
>"Peter Fokes" <justplainfoke...@toronto.hm> wrote in message
>news:drusg15hjnc5odnss...@4ax.com...
>> On 25 Aug 2005 22:10:21 -0400, "jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> wrote:
>>> Wife took pictures of
>>>him and gun, ... told wife he tried to shoot walker,
>>>talked to wife about shooting Nixon,
>> Wife, wife, wife ....
>> Marina his worst nightmare, eh?
>> Yet she tried to hide a picture in her shoe!
>> Go figure.
>> PF
>Poor Marina, all she wanted was a washing machine.
Ruth Paine had one, didn't she?
As a new immigrant from the Soviet Union, Marina certainly was
impressed by the availability of "material goods" in the USA.
Her pocket book though was very thin indeed while living with Oswald
and Ruth Paine. Her circumstances changed dramatically after the
assassination though.
But alas, we are straying from the topic of the thread.
PF
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Reply
18. jwrush Aug 27, 10:46 pm show options
Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
From: "jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> - Find messages by this author
Date: 27 Aug 2005 22:46:38 -0400
Local: Sat, Aug 27 2005 10:46 pm
Subject: Re: Movie theatres as dead drop sites
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse
"Peter Fokes" <justplainfoke...@toronto.hm> wrote in message
news:rnrvg19ut0bt2qd51...@4ax.com...
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> On 26 Aug 2005 00:46:13 -0400, "jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> wrote:
>>"Peter Fokes" <justplainfoke...@toronto.hm> wrote in message
>>news:drusg15hjnc5odnss...@4ax.com...
>>> On 25 Aug 2005 22:10:21 -0400, "jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> wrote:
>>>> Wife took pictures of
>>>>him and gun, ... told wife he tried to shoot walker,
>>>>talked to wife about shooting Nixon,
>>> Wife, wife, wife ....
>>> Marina his worst nightmare, eh?
>>> Yet she tried to hide a picture in her shoe!
>>> Go figure.
>>> PF
>>Poor Marina, all she wanted was a washing machine.
> Ruth Paine had one, didn't she?
> As a new immigrant from the Soviet Union, Marina certainly was
> impressed by the availability of "material goods" in the USA.
> Her pocket book though was very thin indeed while living with Oswald
> and Ruth Paine. Her circumstances changed dramatically after the
> assassination though.
> But alas, we are straying from the topic of the thread.
> PF
That just goes to show that in our free country, the wife of a
Presidential assassin can finally get her washing machine and live a
happy
life after her husband kills the country's leader. She couldn't have
done
that in Russia or Cuba.
Reply
19. tomnln Aug 26, 12:51 am show options
Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
From: "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> - Find messages by this author
Date: 26 Aug 2005 00:51:36 -0400
Local: Fri, Aug 26 2005 12:51 am
Subject: Re: Movie theatres as dead drop sites
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse
Marina said she was "MANIPULATED".
We also know that she was "Threatened with Deportation".
"Peter Fokes" <justplainfoke...@toronto.hm> wrote in message
news:drusg15hjnc5odnss...@4ax.com...
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> On 25 Aug 2005 22:10:21 -0400, "jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> wrote:
>> Wife took pictures of
>>him and gun, ... told wife he tried to shoot walker,
>>talked to wife about shooting Nixon,
> Wife, wife, wife ....
> Marina his worst nightmare, eh?
> Yet she tried to hide a picture in her shoe!
> Go figure.
> PF
Reply
20. Martin Shackelford Aug 27, 8:02 am show options
Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
From: Martin Shackelford <msh...@concentric.net> - Find messages by
this author
Date: 27 Aug 2005 08:02:17 -0400
Local: Sat, Aug 27 2005 8:02 am
Subject: Re: Movie theatres as dead drop sites
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse
And besides, the concession stand attendant, Butch Burroughs, said
Oswald had a ticket when he came in.
Martin
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
jwrush wrote:
> "James Olmstead" <Thp...@onecom.com> wrote in message
> news:430d...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
>>"jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> wrote in message
>>news:430d...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
>>>"James Olmstead" <Thp...@onecom.com> wrote in message
>>>news:430c...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
>>>>Your "movie script" is more like a broken record repeating the same line
>>>>over and over again, never
>>>>addressing the responses made.
>>>>For example....people entering the theater to eat
>>>>without the purchase of a ticket. That fact (at least
>>>>one patron at the time of arrest was there only to eat)
>>>>causes a great deal of problem for the shoe store
>>>>clerk.
>>>You're joking, right?
>>No...and it is noted that you avoid the issue of patrons
>>entering the theater without buying a ticket. The grounds
>>for concern by the clerk do not hold up on the issue of ticket
>>purchase.
> That's absurd. Brewer saw that Oswald didn't go in just to buy a hot dog and
> come back out again. And ducking into the theater without buying a tick
> wasn't the only reason he followed Oswald into the theater.
>>>You however still hold that the clerk followed him
>>>>in because he did not buy a ticket. If the theater allowed patrons into
>>>>the concession area without
>>>>purchase of a ticket, Oswald's action was not grounds
>>>>for him to follow him into the theater.
>>>Look, you don't tell Brewer what to do.
>>Again you avoid the issue. I'm not telling Brewer what to do...that's
>>impossible
>>because the actions were in the past...it's history presented that needs
>>to be
>>examined. What about ticket purchase? Will you ever address that issue?
> Sure, Oswald did not buy a hot dog and walk right out again. He went in and
> got a seat.
>>You try to tell Brewer after the
>>>fact what he is allowed and not allowed to do and what he is allowed to
>>>think and not to think.
>>Wrong, I'm trying to fully understand his actions not change them or
>>influence
>>what he thinks or does....it's call evaluation, looking at all the
>>considerations of
>>fact not just what one wants to look at or accept.
> We've been through this a hundred times before. He thought Oswald looked
> suspicious and he thought Oswald looked like he was hiding in his store
> lobby while police cars drove by with their sirens on. He thought Oswald fit
> the description of the TSBD shooter he heard earlier on the radio. He
> followed Oswald and saw him go into the theater without buying a ticket.
> Oswald did not buy a hot dog and went in and sat down. Brewer thought he was
> acting suspicious and hiding out so he asked the ticket lady to call police.
> In the meantime police cars were dirving fast in the area with their sirens
> going and Brewer thought Oswald might be the guy they were looking for in
> both murders. He did the right thing. Oswald did the wrong thing by not
> throwing his gun away, and by trying to kill McDonald.
> In the meantime other people in the area were calling the police at that
> same time with reports of suspicious people. Police were trying to track
> them down too. The the others turned out not to be the killer. Oswald turned
> out to be the killer.
>>I've never heard of anything so audacious.
>>That's because it's a figment of your imagination....I'm not doing what
>>you present
>>that I'm doing. You are avoiding the topic by attacking the messenger...
> I'm attacking your message because it is absurd.
> common
>>practice by those wishing conflicts would just go away.
>>People in
>>>a free non-communist country are allowed to think the way they want to
>>>think. Brewer had several reasons to follow Oswald into the theater.
>>None of which hold up........
> All of them "hold up". All of them "held up". All of them "hold up" today.
> And Brewer was right.
>>You
>>>always seem upset that Brewer's quick thinking led to Oswald's arrest,
>>>but there is nothing you can do about that.
>>I can't change historical record....but I can make the honest effort to
>>understand
>>what has been presented.
> Or you can whine over Oswald being sighted by Brewer and getting caught.
>>>The ticket seller
>>>>would know this, the patrons would know this (including
>>>>Oswald if he went there on a regular basis).
>>>>The simple point is that this part of the story has alot
>>>>of conflicts that need to be addressed and resolved.
>>>There are no conflicts at all. Everything about this has already been
>>>addressed.
>>Not by you..........you still avoid the presented conflict the purchase of
>>a
>>ticket to enter the theater.
> No hot dog.
>>Thanks to Brewer, the cops caught Oswald. You need to learn how
>>>to live with this fact.
>>I have lived with the fact....and still live with the considerations of
>>fact.
>>You can't re-write history. You can't go back in
>>>time and say, "Hey, Brewer, you can't follow Oswald into the theater."
>>I'm not trying to re-write history I'm trying understand what was written.
>>You should try it some time.
> No hot dog.
Reply
« Start of topic « Older Messages 11 - 20 of 25 Newer » End
of topic »
©2005 Google
jwrush
>> news:depe41$3...@dispatch.concentric.net...
>>
>>>And besides, the concession stand attendant, Butch Burroughs, said Oswald
>>>had a ticket when he came in.
>>>
>>>Martin
>>
Rush replied:
>> "Mr. Ball. Later on the police came in your place?
>>
>> Mr. Burroughs. Yes.
>>
>> Mr. Ball. They asked you if you had seen a man come in there without a
>> ticket?
>>
>> Mr. Burroughs. Yes.
>>
>> Mr. Ball. What did you tell him?
>>
>> Mr. Burroughs. I said, "I haven't seen him myself. He might have, but I
>> didn't see him when he came in. He must have sneaked in and run on
>> upstairs before I saw him.""
>> http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/history/wc_period/warren_report/Butch_Burroughs.html
>
"Martin Shackelford" <msh...@concentric.net> wrote in message
news:derj77$3...@dispatch.concentric.net...
> Yep, that's one of the accounts he has given.
>
> Martin
But you specifically said, "And besides, the concession stand attendant,
Butch Burroughs, said Oswald had a ticket when he came in." You often post
your one-liners like that with no documentation. And people don't have
time to correct all your mistakes.
jwrush
<Thp...@onecom.com> wrote in message
news:1125269778.3...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>>> You're joking, right?
BINGO!
Brewer thought he went in without buying a ticket. The ticket lady didn't
notice. The ticket taker didn't get a ticket from him.
Martin Shackelford
when he came in--on "The Men Who Killed Kennedy."
Martin
Anthony Marsh
Well, there you go, folks. There's your proof. Oswald must have
assassinated the President because he did not buy a hot dog?
> Wrong....there is no eyewitness that can claim Oswald did not buy a
> ticket.
>
> Brewer thought he went in without buying a ticket. The ticket lady didn't
> notice. The ticket taker didn't get a ticket from him.
>
>
>
jwrush
> It wasn't a mistake. Burroughs is on film saying Oswald had a ticket when
> he came in--on "The Men Who Killed Kennedy."
>
> Martin
In his testimony he said he didn't see him come in or come in with a ticket.
tomnln
"jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> wrote in message
news:4339...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
curtj...@webtv.net
Ever consider he wasn't asked? He wasn't asked about him selling popcorn
before the feature film started at 1:20 P.M., where Oswald couldn't have
possibly covered the walk from the Tippit murder to the theater.
Oswald was in the theater and went up to the lobby as verified by James
Davis who was interviewed later, too.
Burroughs basically said the sneaking-in 'Oswald' later never passed by
him in the lobby and was seen going through the first set of doors but
prior to the Lobby doors and went upstairs to the lobby. That's where
Burroughs and Brewer went for a quick inspection.
After Oswald was arrested in the main part of the theater, it was
conveniently pushed under the rug that another man was detained from the
theater into an awaiting police car in the alley. That man's clothing
description matched what the witnesses to the Tippit murder and what the
police were looking for.
That too must be the reason when interviwed later broke down twice when
asked about Oswald purchasing a ticket.
Oswald was double crossed by the conspirators by having Tippit killed, so
they could do something totally stupid by unloading the cartridges after
the murder and acting suspicious and weird in the stores and on the
sidewalk leading to the theater.
Oswald looked like a typical theater-spy by going from seat to seat
sitting next to several people while there too.
Tippit was known to have known Ruby, and must have had a hand in
signalling or getting Oswald to the theater. He beeped his rooming house.
It would dovetail if the transfer was really found on Oswald's person
after his arrest. If he didn't use it, he didn't take the bus as bus
driver's take transfers.
Ruby was identified years later from one of the patrons as being in the
theater at the time of TSBD Oswald's arrest. He was too scared to talk to
the WC about it because of the supposed 'hit list' he had heard about.
Ruby lived a block or two from the Tippit murder scene and was identified
by Aquilla Clemons as one who looked like the one who murdered Tippit and
was there with another slimmer man, who when after the shooting took
place, took off in separate directions. All the witnesses stated that the
Tippit murder suspect came from the West, from the direction of Ruby's
apartment, not from the east, TSBD Oswald's rooming house.
Too bad Ruby didn't get his wish by going to Washington where he wanted to
spill the beans. Of course, the conspirators wouldn't want him to go and
they would later have to have him killed before he went to a second trial.
CJ
tomnln
JBC's back wound was Larger than his chest wound. The explanation for this
was that the bullet was "Tumbling".
All Original reports were that JBC suffered a Chest Wound.
Even at the beginning of Dan Rathers narration of the "Z" Film said JBC was
shot in the chest.
<curtj...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:1127858322.9...@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Anthony Marsh
> YES;
>
> JBC's back wound was Larger than his chest wound. The explanation for this
> was that the bullet was "Tumbling".
>
A little off topic, but Dr. Henry Lee had a case that he solved where
the wife was accused of murder because the back wound was very small and
the chest wound was very big. So the coroner concluded that she shot her
husband from behind. But Dr. Henry Lee examined it very carefully and
found gunpowder residue on the chest wound and by experimentation showed
that a close contact wound will blow out the skin around the entrance
wound making it look like an exit wound. So his consulting changed the
verdict to suicide and resulted in the release of the wife.
curtj...@webtv.net
in the past that the right armpit wound was slightly elongated, and was
small but made to look larger with some enlargment by the doctors. The
chest wound I recently read was pretty large, but don't have a source
for it.
CJ
Anthony Marsh
> YES;
>
> JBC's back wound was Larger than his chest wound. The explanation for this
> was that the bullet was "Tumbling".
>
No, I don't think so. I think the explanation is that the bullet blew out
5 inches of rib and it was secondary missiles which cause the typically
larger exit wound.
> All Original reports were that JBC suffered a Chest Wound.
>
I don't see how anyone can doubt that Connally had a chest wound.
> Even at the beginning of Dan Rathers narration of the "Z" Film said JBC was
> shot in the chest.
>
>
Great. That does not mean the entrance wound was in the chest.
Todd W. Vaughan
identified Jack Ruby?
curtj...@webtv.net
> Can you provide the source for the claim that Aquilla Clemons
> identified Jack Ruby?
No, I can't, but I tried even before you posted this. Don't know if my
eyes were playing tricks on me. The quotes I have Aquilla as saying
upon looking up, is that he was stocky and bushy haired, and I don't
think the hair could apply to Oswald or Ruby. I have been looking at
pictures online of William Seymour and Mac Wallace and they both have
some pretty thick hair. I think Wallace has more of a stocky body. If
I find it 'again' I will surely post that claim.
CJ