Is Bill Kelly Familiar With The Evidence In This Case?

16 views
Skip to first unread message

Bud

unread,
Jul 12, 2010, 11:19:12 PM7/12/10
to

On the Education Forum, Bill Kelly started a post entitled "More
Unanswered Lone Assassin Questions How`d He Do That?"


http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=16157&st=0&p=196746&fromsearch=1&#entry196746

"More Unanswered Questions If Oswald Did It"

"Things Oswald Must have Done If He Was The Assassin For Which There Is
No Evidence, Record or Witness"

Billy Kelly then goes on to provide a list of 15 things he feels
satisfies the criteria of being "unanswered". I was bored so I thought I`d
bring them here and attack his thinking on some of them.

First off, it`s hard to tell which concept he is going for, is he asking
how they were done by Oswald or is he asking for it to be shown Oswald did
these things?

Take #9, for instance, is he asking how Oswald shot from the Sixth Floor
Window (he pulled the trigger-duh!), or is he asking for support that
Oswald did (there was a witness-duh!).

#14 Get from 10th and Patton to the Texas Theater

There are witnesses to part of that journey, is he asking for someone
who went the whole way with Oswald?

Or is he asking "How`d He Do That?" If so, the answer is that Oswald
walked.

#3 Obtain the ammo and clip for the rifle and bullets for the pistol.

Is Bill Kelly actually saying there is no evidence that Oswald obtained
the bullets found on his person when he was arrested?

#1 Obtain the rifle/pistol from the Post Office, where someone must
have handed him the package(s) over the counter and created some receipt.

The picture of him holding both these items is evidence he received
them.

I`d assume the handgun came in a small enough package to fit inside the
P.O. box. And they don`t give receipts when you receive mail addressed to
your own P.O. box.

Bill Kelly

unread,
Jul 14, 2010, 12:37:45 AM7/14/10
to
On Jul 12, 8:19 pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>   On the Education Forum, Bill Kelly started a post entitled "More
> Unanswered Lone Assassin Questions How`d He Do That?"
>
> http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=16157&st=0&p=19...

>
>   "More Unanswered Questions If Oswald Did It"
>
>   "Things Oswald Must have Done If He Was The Assassin For Which There Is
> No Evidence, Record or Witness"
>
>   Billy Kelly then goes on to provide a list of 15 things he feels
> satisfies the criteria of being "unanswered". I was bored so I thought I`d
> bring them here and attack his thinking on some of them.
>

BK: Hey Bud, you don't have to hijack a thread there and bring it here and
attack it, you can join up and put a photo of yourself up on Ed Forum and
tell everybody who you are and then attack my thinking on some of them
there, but you won't, will ya? You like being under the protective
umbrella of John McAdams.

Well, Let's have it. Attack my thinking on some of the items I've listed
that you believe Oswald did but nobody actually saw him do, and there's no
documentary record or evidence of hm actually doing it.

>  First off, it`s hard to tell which concept he is going for, is he asking
> how they were done by Oswald or is he asking for it to be shown Oswald did
> these things?
>
>   Take #9, for instance,

BK: Wait a minute! What about 1 thru 8, you don't want to attack my
thinking on those?

is he asking how Oswald shot from the Sixth Floor
> Window (he pulled the trigger-duh!), or is he asking for support that
> Oswald did (there was a witness-duh!).

BK: Oh yea, who was that witness? Every witness who saw the man with a
rifle in the Sniper's Nest Window said that he wore a white shirt - and
one witness said the shooter had a pattern baldness on the top of his
head, not Oswald, who had no pattern baldness and wore a brown and blue
tint shirt, not white. So what witness are you talking about?

>
>   #14 Get from 10th and Patton to the Texas Theater
>
>   There are witnesses to part of that journey, is he asking for someone
> who went the whole way with Oswald?

BK: Oh yea, which part of the journey, form the time that he was last seen
staning by the bus stop on the corner by his rooming house - from there to
10th and Patton, over a half mile away, and nobody saw him walk there -
did he get a lift? The two guys who did see someone, someone walking
towards Jefferson, not away from it as Markham and others said that
Tippit's killer was walking, these two guys didn't report it because they
had warents out for unrelated offenses, so they didn't come forward. But
whoever they saw couldn't have Oswald because he was walking towards 10th
and Patton, not away from it as the WC says. So who are your witness for
Oswald getting from his rooming house to anywhere near 10th and Patton?

>
>   Or is he asking "How`d He Do That?" If so, the answer is that Oswald
> walked.
>

BK: Okay, try walking that distance, the same route, and see how many
people you cross paths with, sitting on their porchers, walking to their
cars, riding by, and then compare that number with the number of people
who saw Oswald walk from his rooming house to 10th and Patton. Let me know
what the difference is.

>   #3 Obtain the ammo and clip for the rifle and bullets for the pistol.
>
>    Is Bill Kelly actually saying there is no evidence that Oswald obtained
> the bullets found on his person when he was arrested?
>

BK: And you are accusing me in the title of this post that I'm not
familiar with the evidence? Give me a freakin' break, will ya?

There's no witneses or evidence, recipts or documents of any kind that
explain where the rifle sling (an Air Force side arm sling), ammo clip,
rifle bullets or pistol bullets from the pistol that killed Tippit or the
bullets in the pistol taken from Oswald or the bullets allegedly found in
Oswald's pockets hours after he was arrested and after he was searched a
few times. The rifle shells were traced to a block of bullets that were
sold to the USMC in 1948, even though the USMC didn't have a weapon that
could use them.

>    #1 Obtain the rifle/pistol from the Post Office, where someone must
> have handed him the package(s) over the counter and created some receipt.
>
>   The picture of him holding both these items is evidence he received
> them.

BK: That's not the ponit. The point is, that there should be a direct and
irrefutable chain of custody of the weapons fromt the time they are
shipped by US Mail to the the time they are used in a crime and discovered
and admitted into evidence. There's no evidence whatsoever that Oswald
picked up either the rifle or the pistol from the US Post Office, and
there should be recipts for Hidell, the alias used to order the rifle, to
be permitted to use that box, and for someone to actually pick up the
package. How could a Post Office employee who received a package
containing a four and half foot long rifle not remember placing a note in
the PO box (the rifle itself couldn't fit in the box), and hand it over
the counter to the man who would be accused of killing the President of
the USA with the same weapon a few blocks and a few months later? And
there not being any record of any such transaction?

>   I`d assume the handgun came in a small enough package to fit inside the
> P.O. box. And they don`t give receipts when you receive mail addressed to
> your own P.O. box.

BK: Well you assume wrong.

Any more objections or attacks to my thinking?

I'd appreciate it if you would set me straight and convince me Oswald
did it because he was nuts because then I could let the whole thing
rest and go fishing.

Bill Kelly

John McAdams

unread,
Jul 14, 2010, 10:55:27 AM7/14/10
to
On 14 Jul 2010 00:37:45 -0400, Bill Kelly <billk...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Jul 12, 8:19=A0pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>> =A0 On the Education Forum, Bill Kelly started a post entitled "More


>> Unanswered Lone Assassin Questions How`d He Do That?"
>>

>> http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=3D16157&st=3D0&p=3D19...


>>
>
>BK: Wait a minute! What about 1 thru 8, you don't want to attack my
>thinking on those?
>
>is he asking how Oswald shot from the Sixth Floor
>> Window (he pulled the trigger-duh!), or is he asking for support that
>> Oswald did (there was a witness-duh!).
>
>BK: Oh yea, who was that witness? Every witness who saw the man with a
>rifle in the Sniper's Nest Window said that he wore a white shirt - and
>one witness said the shooter had a pattern baldness on the top of his
>head, not Oswald, who had no pattern baldness and wore a brown and blue
>tint shirt, not white. So what witness are you talking about?
>
>>

You don't understand witness testimony very well, do you?

There is always variation among witnesses who all clearly saw the
*same* person.

>> =A0 #14 Get from 10th and Patton to the Texas Theater
>>
>> =A0 There are witnesses to part of that journey, is he asking for someone


>> who went the whole way with Oswald?
>
>BK: Oh yea, which part of the journey, form the time that he was last seen
>staning by the bus stop on the corner by his rooming house - from there to
>10th and Patton, over a half mile away, and nobody saw him walk there -
>did he get a lift? The two guys who did see someone, someone walking
>towards Jefferson, not away from it as Markham and others said that
>Tippit's killer was walking, these two guys didn't report it because they
>had warents out for unrelated offenses, so they didn't come forward. But
>whoever they saw couldn't have Oswald because he was walking towards 10th
>and Patton, not away from it as the WC says. So who are your witness for
>Oswald getting from his rooming house to anywhere near 10th and Patton?
>

But they all saw the shooter, regardless of which way they say him
walking.

Are you saying there were two people who had a confrontation with
Tippit, one who was walking in one direction, and another who was
walking in the other?

And why do you keep demanding witnesses when there is no reasonable
expectation there SHOULD BE witnesses? There were certainly witnesses
to Oswald shooting Tippit, and leaving the scene.

Why do you think there have to be witnesses to him getting to 10th and
Patton?


>>
>> =A0 Or is he asking "How`d He Do That?" If so, the answer is that Oswald


>> walked.
>>
>
>BK: Okay, try walking that distance, the same route, and see how many
>people you cross paths with, sitting on their porchers, walking to their
>cars, riding by, and then compare that number with the number of people
>who saw Oswald walk from his rooming house to 10th and Patton. Let me know
>what the difference is.
>

If you do it during the day (when most people are at work) and aren't
doing anything to attract suspicion, the answer it probably zero.

>> =A0 #3 Obtain the ammo and clip for the rifle and bullets for the pistol.
>>
>> =A0 =A0Is Bill Kelly actually saying there is no evidence that Oswald obt=


>ained
>> the bullets found on his person when he was arrested?
>>
>
>BK: And you are accusing me in the title of this post that I'm not
>familiar with the evidence? Give me a freakin' break, will ya?
>

He had bullets on his person.

Are you denying that?


>There's no witneses or evidence, recipts or documents of any kind that
>explain where the rifle sling (an Air Force side arm sling), ammo clip,
>rifle bullets or pistol bullets from the pistol that killed Tippit or the
>bullets in the pistol taken from Oswald or the bullets allegedly found in
>Oswald's pockets hours after he was arrested and after he was searched a
>few times. The rifle shells were traced to a block of bullets that were
>sold to the USMC in 1948, even though the USMC didn't have a weapon that
>could use them.
>

Without running this down, it sounds like a factoid, since the rounds
were WCC, and for sale in 1963, if memory serves.

>> =A0 =A0#1 Obtain the rifle/pistol from the Post Office, where someone mus=


>t
>> have handed him the package(s) over the counter and created some receipt.
>>

>> =A0 The picture of him holding both these items is evidence he received


>> them.
>
>BK: That's not the ponit. The point is, that there should be a direct and
>irrefutable chain of custody of the weapons fromt the time they are
>shipped by US Mail to the the time they are used in a crime and discovered
>and admitted into evidence. There's no evidence whatsoever that Oswald
>picked up either the rifle or the pistol from the US Post Office, and
>there should be recipts for Hidell, the alias used to order the rifle, to
>be permitted to use that box, and for someone to actually pick up the
>package. How could a Post Office employee who received a package
>containing a four and half foot long rifle not remember placing a note in
>the PO box (the rifle itself couldn't fit in the box), and hand it over
>the counter to the man who would be accused of killing the President of
>the USA with the same weapon a few blocks and a few months later? And
>there not being any record of any such transaction?
>

All you are doing is *positing* that this or that evidence should
exist, and then treating the lack of such evidence as sinister.

It was perfectly legal to buy a rifle by mail in 1963. Having one
arrive addressed to a P.O. box would not have been at all unusual.

Do you understand what it means to just *posit* things for which you
have no evidence?

You can easily destroy any criminal case if you are free to do that,
but in the real world of criminal justice you would not be taken
seriously.

.John


The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

Bud

unread,
Jul 14, 2010, 12:41:26 PM7/14/10
to
On Jul 14, 12:37 am, Bill Kelly <billkel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 12, 8:19 pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> >   On the Education Forum, Bill Kelly started a post entitled "More
> > Unanswered Lone Assassin Questions How`d He Do That?"
>
> >http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=16157&st=0&p=19...
>
> >   "More Unanswered Questions If Oswald Did It"
>
> >   "Things Oswald Must have Done If He Was The Assassin For Which There Is
> > No Evidence, Record or Witness"
>
> >   Billy Kelly then goes on to provide a list of 15 things he feels
> > satisfies the criteria of being "unanswered". I was bored so I thought I`d
> > bring them here and attack his thinking on some of them.
>
> BK: Hey Bud, you don't have to hijack a thread there and bring it here and
> attack it,

I know that Bill, I told you I was bored.

> you can join up and put a photo of yourself up on Ed Forum and
> tell everybody who you are and then attack my thinking on some of them
> there, but you won't, will ya?

I wouldn`t last there anyway, so why bother? They threw DVP out after 4
days, and it had a lot more to do with the ideas he was expressing than
the phony photo issue they used to oust him. Plenty of people have no
photo or unrecognizable photos there, and it wasn`t an issue until DVP
started embarrassing some of the retards there by actually bringing up the
evidence.

> You like being under the protective
> umbrella of John McAdams.

You seem to want to go where you can have Simkin`s protection. But we
can take our disputes to a neutral site like alt.conspiracy.jfk if you
like. You`ll like me a lot less there.

> Well, Let's have it.  Attack my thinking on some of the items I've listed
> that you believe Oswald did but nobody actually saw him do, and there's no
> documentary record or evidence of hm actually doing it.
>
> >  First off, it`s hard to tell which concept he is going for, is he asking
> > how they were done by Oswald or is he asking for it to be shown Oswald did
> > these things?
>
> >   Take #9, for instance,
>
> BK: Wait a minute! What about 1 thru 8, you don't want to attack my
> thinking on those?

I sure will, post them and I will address them. My computer skills are
such that I can`t capture the whole list to bring it here and address, so
I have to transcribe them. What I produced was the limit of my interest
versus my inherent laziness.

> is he asking how Oswald shot from the Sixth Floor
>
> > Window (he pulled the trigger-duh!), or is he asking for support that
> > Oswald did (there was a witness-duh!).
>
> BK: Oh yea, who was that witness?

You don`t know? See, this is why I asked in the header whether you
were familiar with the evidence in this case.

> Every witness who saw the man with a
> rifle in the Sniper's Nest Window said that he wore a white shirt -

Not true.

> and
> one witness said the shooter had a pattern baldness on the top of his
> head,

The witness below him looking up would see this?

Did the other people who saw the person mention baldness? Did he
lose his hair in between sightings?

> not Oswald, who had no pattern baldness and wore a brown and blue
> tint shirt, not white.

He was seen wearing his white t-shirt before the assassination, and
soon after it.

> So what witness are you talking about?

I see, what you mean by "no evidence", you mean no evidence Billy Kelly
accepts. But there is evidence, a witness did say he saw Oswald shooting
at Kennedy, and that fact doesn`t disappear just because you have problems
with it.

> >   #14 Get from 10th and Patton to the Texas Theater
>
> >   There are witnesses to part of that journey, is he asking for someone
> > who went the whole way with Oswald?
>
> BK: Oh yea, which part of the journey, form the time that he was last seen
> staning by the bus stop on the corner by his rooming house - from there to
> 10th and Patton, over a half mile away, and nobody saw him walk there -
> did he get a lift?

I see your problem, you have poor reading comprehension. The issue you
raised that I addressed specifies from 10th and Patton to the Texas
Theater, so why are you bring up portions of his travels that fall outside
of that?

> The two guys who did see someone, someone walking
> towards Jefferson, not away from it as Markham and others said that
> Tippit's killer was walking, these two guys didn't report it because they
> had warents out for unrelated offenses, so they didn't come forward. But
> whoever they saw couldn't have Oswald because he was walking towards 10th
> and Patton, not away from it as the WC says. So who are your witness for
> Oswald getting from his rooming house to anywhere near 10th and Patton?

What is all this blather? Your claim was that nobody saw Oswald travel
from 10th and Patton to the Texas Theater. People saw him leaving 10th and
Patton after killing a cop, and a shoe salesman saw him "walk up West
Jefferson towards the Texas theater". So the claim that nobody saw him
make this journey is false, although we don`t have witnesses to the whole
trip, and we don`t have anyone who was with him during the trip.


> >   Or is he asking "How`d He Do That?" If so, the answer is that Oswald
> > walked.
>
> BK: Okay, try walking that distance, the same route, and see how many
> people you cross paths with, sitting on their porchers, walking to their
> cars, riding by, and then compare that number with the number of people
> who saw Oswald walk from his rooming house to 10th and Patton. Let me know
> what the difference is.

I don`t pay much attention to the thousands of people I see during the
course of my day (unless they have big knockers), maybe others do. But
this has nothing to do with the issue you raised that I addressed. If your
ideas are valid, why the misdirection? I understand where you come from
your ideas don`t get scrutinized, but you`re not in Kansas any more.


> >   #3 Obtain the ammo and clip for the rifle and bullets for the pistol.
>
> >    Is Bill Kelly actually saying there is no evidence that Oswald obtained
> > the bullets found on his person when he was arrested?
>
> BK: And you are accusing me in the title of this post that I'm not
> familiar with the evidence? Give me a freakin' break, will ya?

No breaks, freakin' or otherwise.

> There's no witneses or evidence, recipts or documents of any kind that
> explain where the rifle sling (an Air Force side arm sling), ammo clip,
> rifle bullets or pistol bullets from the pistol that killed Tippit or the
> bullets in the pistol taken from Oswald or the bullets allegedly found in
> Oswald's pockets hours after he was arrested and after he was searched a
> few times. The rifle shells were traced to a block of bullets that were
> sold to the USMC in 1948, even though the USMC didn't have a weapon that
> could use them.

Blah, blah, blah. You are saying that having pistol bullets in his
possession when he was arrested is not evidence that he obtained them. I`m
just pointing it out what bad thinking this is.

Also, the rifle bullet found in his rifle is evidence he obtained it,
just like you would be responsible for item found in your car. You can say
the item isn`t yours, but being found in your car IS evidence that the
item is yours.

> >    #1 Obtain the rifle/pistol from the Post Office, where someone must
> > have handed him the package(s) over the counter and created some receipt.
>
> >   The picture of him holding both these items is evidence he received
> > them.
>
> BK: That's not the ponit.

It might not be your ponit, but it is evidence that indicates Oswald
obtained the rifle. Yet you claim there is no evidence.

> The point is, that there should be a direct and
> irrefutable chain of custody of the weapons fromt the time they are
> shipped by US Mail to the the time they are used in a crime and discovered
> and admitted into evidence.

This is just you saying stuff, you saying this should be or that
shouldn`t be is meaningless. You think we should know when Oswald decided
to kill Kennedy. I`m not interested in your unsupportable opinions, I`m
addressing this particular claim you made here, that there is no evidence
Oswald obtained the rifle. And there is plenty evidence that he did,
including photographic, and that he was seen murdering someone with it
from his workplace.

> There's no evidence whatsoever that Oswald
> picked up either the rifle or the pistol from the US Post Office,

Right, there is no photograph of Oswald being handed the rifle. But
there is evidence that he obtained it.

>and
> there should be recipts for Hidell, the alias used to order the rifle, to
> be permitted to use that box, and for someone to actually pick up the
> package.

The problem is that you are only SAYING these things MUST exist for
Oswald to pick up the rifle at the Post Office. You just aren`t showing
that they must.

> How could a Post Office employee who received a package
> containing a four and half foot long rifle not remember placing a note in
> the PO box (the rifle itself couldn't fit in the box), and hand it over
> the counter to the man who would be accused of killing the President of
> the USA with the same weapon a few blocks and a few months later?

Why do you think handing mail to a customer would be such a significant
event in a postal employee`s life that he must remember it months later?
Must the person still be working there, couldn`t have quit or been
transferred? Lack of information doesn`t enlighten, and your claims about
what must or must not occur are uncompelling.

> And
> there not being any record of any such transaction?

As I understand, they put a note in the box, you take the note to the
counter and they give you the item that didn`t fit in the PO box. It`s
pretty informal, the note validates that you have access to the PO box.


> >   I`d assume the handgun came in a small enough package to fit inside the
> > P.O. box. And they don`t give receipts when you receive mail addressed to
> > your own P.O. box.
>
> BK: Well you assume wrong.

You know that the handgun came in a package too big for Oswald`s PO
box?

> Any more objections or attacks to my thinking?

Keep expressing them, I`ll keep attacking them.

> I'd appreciate it if you would set me straight and convince me Oswald
> did it because he was nuts because then I could let the whole thing
> rest and go fishing.

I wouldn`t even if I could. That you embrace bad ideas is fine with me,
you can stay restless and fishless till the end of your days.

> Bill Kelly


Bill Kelly

unread,
Jul 15, 2010, 12:30:09 AM7/15/10
to
On Jul 14, 7:55 am, john.mcad...@marquette.edu (John McAdams) wrote:
> On 14 Jul 2010 00:37:45 -0400, Bill Kelly <billkel...@gmail.com>

> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Jul 12, 8:19=A0pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> >> =A0 On the Education Forum, Bill Kelly started a post entitled "More
> >> Unanswered Lone Assassin Questions How`d He Do That?"
>
> >>http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=3D16157&st=3D0&......

>
> >BK: Wait a minute! What about 1 thru 8, you don't want to attack my
> >thinking on those?
>
> >is he asking how Oswald shot from the Sixth Floor
> >> Window (he pulled the trigger-duh!), or is he asking for support that
> >> Oswald did (there was a witness-duh!).
>
> >BK: Oh yea, who was that witness? Every witness who saw the man with a
> >rifle in the Sniper's Nest Window said that he wore a white shirt - and
> >one witness said the shooter had a pattern baldness on the top of his
> >head, not Oswald, who had no pattern baldness and wore a brown and blue
> >tint shirt, not white. So what witness are you talking about?
>
> You don't understand witness testimony very well, do you?
>
> There is always variation among witnesses who all clearly saw the
> *same* person.

HI JOHN,

I DON'T MEAN TO SHOUT, I'M MORE LIKE TELEGRAPHING THE INFO SO I KNOW I
RESPONDED TO THIS AS I WAS ACCUSED OF PULLING A HARRIS AND NOT RECOGNIZING
ANSWERS ALREADY GIVEN.

YEA, I KNOW WITNESS TESTIMONY IS OFTEN WRONG, BUT IT'S THE ONLY THING WE
HAVE TO GO ON AND ALL WITNESS TESTIMONY CAN'T BE DISCARDED.

YEA, THE WITNESSES SAW THE SAME PERSON, A MAN WEARING A WHITE SHIRT AND
SHOOTING A GUN, ONE SAW A BALD SPOT. OSWALD HAD ON A BROWN SHIRT WITH BLUE
TINT, AND DIDN'T HAVE A BALD SPOT. NOT OSWALD.

> >> =A0 #14 Get from 10th and Patton to the Texas Theater
>
> >> =A0 There are witnesses to part of that journey, is he asking for someone
> >> who went the whole way with Oswald?

BK: WHO ARE THE WITNESSES WHO SAW OSWALD GET FROM THE CORNER BUS STOP
OUTSIDE HIS ROOMING HOUSE TO TENTH AND PATTON? ONLY THOSE TWO GUYS WHO SAW
A MAN WALKING TOWARDS TENTH AND PATTON, NOT IN THE DIRECTON MARKHAM WAS
WALKING OR TIPPIT DRIVING.

>
> >BK: Oh yea, which part of the journey, form the time that he was last seen
> >staning by the bus stop on the corner by his rooming house - from there to
> >10th and Patton, over a half mile away, and nobody saw him walk there -
> >did he get a lift? The two guys who did see someone, someone walking
> >towards Jefferson, not away from it as Markham and others said that
> >Tippit's killer was walking, these two guys didn't report it because they
> >had warents out for unrelated offenses, so they didn't come forward. But
> >whoever they saw couldn't have Oswald because he was walking towards 10th
> >and Patton, not away from it as the WC says. So who are your witness for
> >Oswald getting from his rooming house to anywhere near 10th and Patton?
>
> But they all saw the shooter, regardless of which way they say him
> walking.
>
> Are you saying there were two people who had a confrontation with
> Tippit, one who was walking in one direction, and another who was
> walking in the other?

SOMEBODY SAW TWO MEN WHO LEFT IN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS.

>
> And why do you keep demanding witnesses when there is no reasonable
> expectation there SHOULD BE witnesses? There were certainly witnesses
> to Oswald shooting Tippit, and leaving the scene.

YEA, THEY SAID HE HAD AN AUTOMATIC PISTOL. DISCARDED A JACKET THAT
COULDN'T BE ASSOCIATED WITH OSWALD. AND THE WITNESS WAS HIMSELF SHOT
SHORTLY THEREAFTER. WAS IT OSWALD?

>
> Why do you think there have to be witnesses to him getting to 10th and
> Patton?

I'M NOT DEMANDING ANYTHING. I'M ASKING WHY NO WINTESSES SAW HIM WALK
NEARLY A MILE ACROSS OAK CLIFF. I WOULD THINK SOMEONE WOULD HAVE SEEN
HIM.

>
>
> >> =A0 Or is he asking "How`d He Do That?" If so, the answer is that Oswald
> >> walked.
>
> >BK: Okay, try walking that distance, the same route, and see how many
> >people you cross paths with, sitting on their porchers, walking to their
> >cars, riding by, and then compare that number with the number of people
> >who saw Oswald walk from his rooming house to 10th and Patton. Let me know
> >what the difference is.
>
> If you do it during the day (when most people are at work) and aren't
> doing anything to attract suspicion, the answer it probably zero.

BUT MARKHAM WAS WALKING TO WORK, BENEVIDES WAS IN HIS TAXI, TATUM WAS
DRIVING AROUND AIMLESSLY, THE TWO GUYS WITH WARRENTS WERE ON THEIR PORCH.
PEOPLE LOOK OUT THERE WINDOW WHEN THEY SEE A STRANGER OR HEAR SOMETHING.
YET, NOBODY SAW HIM WALK THAT DISTANCE AT ALL? I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER,
I'M JUST ASKING.

>
> >> =A0 #3 Obtain the ammo and clip for the rifle and bullets for the pistol.
>
> >> =A0 =A0Is Bill Kelly actually saying there is no evidence that Oswald obt=
> >ained
> >> the bullets found on his person when he was arrested?

I'M NOT SAYING HE DIDN'T OBTAIN THEM, I'M SAYING THAT IF HE BOUGHT THEM,
HE DIDN'T BUY THEM INDIVIDUALLY, HE BOUGHT THEM IN A BOX, THE ONLY WAY YOU
CAN BUY THEM, AND HE BOUGHT THEM FROM SOMEBODY, WHO? AND WERE'S THE BOX?
SAME HOLDS FOR THE SLING, THE CLIP AND THE RIFLE BULLETS? WHERE'S THE REST
OF THEM? WHO HAS THE BOX THEY CAME IN. AND WHAT'S WITH THE SCUFF MARKS ON
THE BULLETS IN HIS POCKET, THAT SEEM TO INDICATE THEY WERE IN A HOLSTER?

>
> >BK: And you are accusing me in the title of this post that I'm not
> >familiar with the evidence? Give me a freakin' break, will ya?
>
> He had bullets on his person.
>
> Are you denying that?

NO, I'M ASKING WHERE THEY CAME FROM.

>
> >There's no witneses or evidence, recipts or documents of any kind that
> >explain where the rifle sling (an Air Force side arm sling), ammo clip,
> >rifle bullets or pistol bullets from the pistol that killed Tippit or the
> >bullets in the pistol taken from Oswald or the bullets allegedly found in
> >Oswald's pockets hours after he was arrested and after he was searched a
> >few times. The rifle shells were traced to a block of bullets that were
> >sold to the USMC in 1948, even though the USMC didn't have a weapon that
> >could use them.
>
> Without running this down, it sounds like a factoid, since the rounds
> were WCC, and for sale in 1963, if memory serves.

YEA, SOUNDS LIKE A FACTOID ALL RIGHT. YOU RESEARCH IT THEN AND GET
BACK TO ME ON WHERE THE INVESTIGATON INTO THE RIFLE SHELLS THAT THE WC
SAYS FIRED THE BULLETS THAT KILLED THE PRESIDENT CAME FROM. I SAY THEY
WERE TOLD THEY CAME FROM A BATCH THAT WAS SOLD TO THE USMC IN 1948.

>
> >> =A0 =A0#1 Obtain the rifle/pistol from the Post Office, where someone mus=
> >t
> >> have handed him the package(s) over the counter and created some receipt.
>
> >> =A0 The picture of him holding both these items is evidence he received
> >> them.
>
> >BK: That's not the ponit. The point is, that there should be a direct and
> >irrefutable chain of custody of the weapons fromt the time they are
> >shipped by US Mail to the the time they are used in a crime and discovered
> >and admitted into evidence. There's no evidence whatsoever that Oswald
> >picked up either the rifle or the pistol from the US Post Office, and
> >there should be recipts for Hidell, the alias used to order the rifle, to
> >be permitted to use that box, and for someone to actually pick up the
> >package. How could a Post Office employee who received a package
> >containing a four and half foot long rifle not remember placing a note in
> >the PO box (the rifle itself couldn't fit in the box), and hand it over
> >the counter to the man who would be accused of killing the President of
> >the USA with the same weapon a few blocks and a few months later? And
> >there not being any record of any such transaction?
>
> All you are doing is *positing* that this or that evidence should
> exist, and then treating the lack of such evidence as sinister.
>

WHAT I'M DOING IS LISTING ALL THE THINGS THAT THE ACCUSED ASSASSIN IS
ACCUSED OF HAVING DONE FOR WHICH THERE IS NO WITNESS, NO EVIDENCE OR
RECORD OF OSWALD HAVING DONE THOSE THINGS. YOU SAY THAT OSWALD HAD TO
HAVE DONE THEM. I'M JUST LISTING THEM.

> It was perfectly legal to buy a rifle by mail in 1963.  Having one
> arrive addressed to a P.O. box would not have been at all unusual.
>

NO, WHAT'S UNUSUAL IS THAT THE RIFLE SENT BY US MAIL WAS SENT TO A PO
BOX THAT WASN'T ENTITLED TO RECEIVE PACKAGES TO A.J. HIDEL. IT WAS IN
OSWALD'S REAL NAME.

> Do you understand what it means to just *posit* things for which you
> have no evidence?
>
> You can easily destroy any criminal case if you are free to do that,
> but in the real world of criminal justice you would not be taken
> seriously.
>
> .John

IN THE REAL WORLD OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, IT IS THE EVIDENCE, THE WITNESSES
AND THE DOCUMENTARY RECORDS THAT ARE TAKEN SERIOUSLY. I WOULDN'T EVEN BE
IN THE EQUATION.

AND JOHN, YOU'RE NOT EVEN GOING TO BOTHER ADDRESSING THE OTHER ITEMS ON
THE LIST, ONLY THE ONES THAT BORED BUD HAD THE COURAGE TO ADDRESS?

BILL KELLY

Bill Kelly

unread,
Jul 15, 2010, 12:31:48 AM7/15/10
to
On Jul 14, 9:41 am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> On Jul 14, 12:37 am, Bill Kelly <billkel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 12, 8:19 pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> > >   On the Education Forum, Bill Kelly started a post entitled "More
> > > Unanswered Lone Assassin Questions How`d He Do That?"
>
> > >http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=16157&st=0&p=19...
>
> > >   "More Unanswered Questions If Oswald Did It"
>
> > >   "Things Oswald Must have Done If He Was The Assassin For Which There Is
> > > No Evidence, Record or Witness"
>
> > >   Billy Kelly then goes on to provide a list of 15 things he feels
> > > satisfies the criteria of being "unanswered". I was bored so I thought I`d
> > > bring them here and attack his thinking on some of them.
>
> > BK: Hey Bud, you don't have to hijack a thread there and bring it here and
> > attack it,
>
>    I know that Bill, I told you I was bored.

HI BUD, I understand. I wish you were bored enough to comment on all
the items on the list.

>
> > you can join up and put a photo of yourself up on Ed Forum and
> > tell everybody who you are and then attack my thinking on some of them
> > there, but you won't, will ya?
>
>   I wouldn`t last there anyway, so why bother? They threw DVP out after 4
> days, and it had a lot more to do with the ideas he was expressing than
> the phony photo issue they used to oust him. Plenty of people have no
> photo or unrecognizable photos there, and it wasn`t an issue until DVP
> started embarrassing some of the retards there by actually bringing up the
> evidence.

Bud, that's all I am interested in too. Evidence. Lets talk about that.
All DVP wants to talk about is Wackey Conspiracy Theories, not evidence.

> > You like being under the protective
> > umbrella of John McAdams.
>
>   You seem to want to go where you can have Simkin`s protection. But we
> can take our disputes to a neutral site like alt.conspiracy.jfk if you
> like. You`ll like me a lot less there.

Bud, why do you say I don't like you? I'm grateful you had the guts to
even respond to my posts.

>
> > Well, Let's have it.  Attack my thinking on some of the items I've listed
> > that you believe Oswald did but nobody actually saw him do, and there's no
> > documentary record or evidence of hm actually doing it.
>
> > >  First off, it`s hard to tell which concept he is going for, is he asking
> > > how they were done by Oswald or is he asking for it to be shown Oswald did
> > > these things?

BK: Either on will do.

>
> > >   Take #9, for instance,
>
> > BK: Wait a minute! What about 1 thru 8, you don't want to attack my
> > thinking on those?
>
>   I sure will, post them and I will address them. My computer skills are
> such that I can`t capture the whole list to bring it here and address, so
> I have to transcribe them. What I produced was the limit of my interest
> versus my inherent laziness.
>
> > is he asking how Oswald shot from the Sixth Floor
>
> > > Window (he pulled the trigger-duh!), or is he asking for support that
> > > Oswald did (there was a witness-duh!).
>
> > BK: Oh yea, who was that witness?
>
>   You don`t know? See, this is why I asked in the header whether you
> were familiar with the evidence in this case.

BK: Yea, who was the witness that saw Oswald in the window with the
rifle. And don't say Brennen.

>
> > Every witness who saw the man with a
> > rifle in the Sniper's Nest Window said that he wore a white shirt -
>
>    Not true.

BK: Okay, then give me that witness and tell me what that witness said
about the color of the Sixth Floor Sniper's shirt?

> > and
> > one witness said the shooter had a pattern baldness on the top of his
> > head,
>
>   The witness below him looking up would see this?

BK: Amos said the man cocked his head while aiming the last shot.
Makes sense to me.

>
>   Did the other people who saw the person mention baldness? Did he
> lose his hair in between sightings?
>
> > not Oswald, who had no pattern baldness and wore a brown and blue
> > tint shirt, not white.
>
>    He was seen wearing his white t-shirt before the assassination, and
> soon after it.
>

BK: Oswald had on a brown shirt over a white tee shirt. The Sixth
Floor Sniper had on a white shirt with a white tee shirt under it.

> > So what witness are you talking about?
>
>    I see, what you mean by "no evidence", you mean no evidence Billy Kelly
> accepts. But there is evidence, a witness did say he saw Oswald shooting
> at Kennedy, and that fact doesn`t disappear just because you have problems
> with it.
>

BK: Who is the witness who said he saw Oswald shooting at Kennedy?

> > >   #14 Get from 10th and Patton to the Texas Theater
>
> > >   There are witnesses to part of that journey, is he asking for someone
> > > who went the whole way with Oswald?
>
> > BK: Oh yea, which part of the journey, form the time that he was last seen
> > staning by the bus stop on the corner by his rooming house - from there to
> > 10th and Patton, over a half mile away, and nobody saw him walk there -
> > did he get a lift?
>
>    I see your problem, you have poor reading comprehension. The issue you
> raised that I addressed specifies from 10th and Patton to the Texas
> Theater, so why are you bring up portions of his travels that fall outside
> of that?
>
> > The two guys who did see someone, someone walking
> > towards Jefferson, not away from it as Markham and others said that
> > Tippit's killer was walking, these two guys didn't report it because they
> > had warents out for unrelated offenses, so they didn't come forward. But
> > whoever they saw couldn't have Oswald because he was walking towards 10th
> > and Patton, not away from it as the WC says. So who are your witness for
> > Oswald getting from his rooming house to anywhere near 10th and Patton?
>
>   What is all this blather? Your claim was that nobody saw Oswald travel
> from 10th and Patton to the Texas Theater.

BK: No I say no one saw him travel from his rooming house to tenth and
Patton.

People saw him leaving 10th and
> Patton after killing a cop, and a shoe salesman saw him "walk up West
> Jefferson towards the Texas theater". So the claim that nobody saw him
> make this journey is false, although we don`t have witnesses to the whole
> trip, and we don`t have anyone who was with him during the trip.
>

BK There's also witnesses who saw Tippit's killer duck into the
Library and a church. Who was that if not Oswald?

BK: This isn't bad thinking. It's standard homicide investigation
techniques to determine where the bullets that kill someone come from,
and where the bullets found on a suspect were obtained.

>   Also, the rifle bullet found in his rifle is evidence he obtained it,
> just like you would be responsible for item found in your car. You can say
> the item isn`t yours, but being found in your car IS evidence that the
> item is yours.

BK: Yea, but did I buy the items in my car, or did John McAdams dump
all his trash in my car as well as my back yard?

>
> > >    #1 Obtain the rifle/pistol from the Post Office, where someone must
> > > have handed him the package(s) over the counter and created some receipt.
>
> > >   The picture of him holding both these items is evidence he received
> > > them.
>
> > BK: That's not the ponit.
>
>   It might not be your ponit, but it is evidence that indicates Oswald
> obtained the rifle. Yet you claim there is no evidence.

BK: I claim in my list of items that there is no evidence that Oswald
picked up the rifle and pistol packages at the Post Office, no
witness, no receipt, no evidence, no nothing.

>
> > The point is, that there should be a direct and
> > irrefutable chain of custody of the weapons fromt the time they are
> > shipped by US Mail to the the time they are used in a crime and discovered
> > and admitted into evidence.
>
>   This is just you saying stuff, you saying this should be or that
> shouldn`t be is meaningless. You think we should know when Oswald decided
> to kill Kennedy. I`m not interested in your unsupportable opinions, I`m
> addressing this particular claim you made here, that there is no evidence
> Oswald obtained the rifle. And there is plenty evidence that he did,
> including photographic, and that he was seen murdering someone with it
> from his workplace.

BK: Well, you can believe anything you want and know nothing.

> > There's no evidence whatsoever that Oswald
> > picked up either the rifle or the pistol from the US Post Office,
>
>   Right, there is no photograph of Oswald being handed the rifle. But
> there is evidence that he obtained it.
>
> >and
> > there should be recipts for Hidell, the alias used to order the rifle, to
> > be permitted to use that box, and for someone to actually pick up the
> > package.
>
>   The problem is that you are only SAYING these things MUST exist for
> Oswald to pick up the rifle at the Post Office. You just aren`t showing
> that they must.

BK: No, it is you, and the WC and John McAdams who is saying that Oswald
did all the things that I list for which there is no witness, record or
evidence. You are the one who blindly believes Oswald did those things,
because he must have if he killed the President.

>
> > How could a Post Office employee who received a package
> > containing a four and half foot long rifle not remember placing a note in
> > the PO box (the rifle itself couldn't fit in the box), and hand it over
> > the counter to the man who would be accused of killing the President of
> > the USA with the same weapon a few blocks and a few months later?
>
>    Why do you think handing mail to a customer would be such a significant
> event in a postal employee`s life that he must remember it months later?  
> Must the person still be working there, couldn`t have quit or been
> transferred? Lack of information doesn`t enlighten, and your claims about
> what must or must not occur are uncompelling.
>

BK: All I am saying is there is no witness, records, receipt or
evidence that Oswald actually picked up the rifle or pistol from the
Post Office.

> > And
> > there not being any record of any such transaction?
>
>   As I understand, they put a note in the box, you take the note to the
> counter and they give you the item that didn`t fit in the PO box. It`s
> pretty informal, the note validates that you have access to the PO box.
>

BK: But the package is addressed to Hidel, not Oswald. Hidell was not
listed as a person who could receive mail at that PO box, unlike the PO
box Oswald took out months later in New Orleans. So the mythical mail man
puts a note in Oswald's PO box telling him a package too big for the box
had arrived addressed to A J Hidel. Did Oswald have to show his Hidell ID
or his Oswald ID?

>
>
> > >   I`d assume the handgun came in a small enough package to fit inside the
>

> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


Bill Kelly

unread,
Jul 15, 2010, 12:37:14 AM7/15/10
to
On Jul 14, 9:41 am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> ...
>

OKAY, Here's the list again

More Unanswered Questions
If Oswald Did It

Things Oswald Must Have Done If He Was The Assassin
For Which There Is No Evidence, Record or Witness.

1) Obtain the rifle/pistol from the Post Office, where they were mailed to
someone not entitled to receive mail at the box – A.J. Hidell, and

someone must have handed him the package(s) over the counter and created

some receipt. No witness, no receipt.

2) Physically move the rifle from Dallas to New Orleans in April and back
again in September in Mrs. Paine’s station wagon and storing it in her
garage without her or her husband knowing it. Oswald had to do these
things without even being present at the scene so that is pretty amazing.

3) Obtain the ammo and clip for the rifle and bullets for the pistol. Did
he buy them? If so, where is the rest of the box and where’s the box
they came in? And who sold them to him?

4) Obtain the brown paper wrapping paper that was said to have concealed
the rifle when he brought it to the TSBD.

5) Disassemble the rifle at the Paines and reassemble the rifle at the
TSBD.

6) Build the wall of book boxes that set up the Sniper’s Lair in the
Sixth Floor window.

7) Hide the assembled rifle somewhere in the TSBD for the hours before the
assassination.

8) Get from the First Floor of the TSBD where he was last seen to the
Sixth Floor.

9) Shoot the rifle from the Sixth Floor Window.

10) Hide the rifle on the Sixth Floor and descend the steps to the Second
Floor in less than two minutes without being seen by Dougherty, who was
standing by the elevators, and two secretaries who descended the same
steps from the Fourth Floor at the same time.

11) Leave the TSBD after the assassination.

12) Change his shirt (did he change his shirt?)

13) Get from the bus stop at the corner outside his rooming house to 10th
and Patton.

14) Get from 10th and Patton to the Texas Theater (was that him? Or Get
from the rooming house to the Texas Theater.

15) Arrange for the motorcade to drive past his Sniper’s Lair during
lunch hour, the only one hour window of opportunity that he had to kill
the President. :

Bud

unread,
Jul 15, 2010, 12:17:54 PM7/15/10
to
On Jul 15, 12:31 am, Bill Kelly <billkel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 14, 9:41 am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 14, 12:37 am, Bill Kelly <billkel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 12, 8:19 pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> > > >   On the Education Forum, Bill Kelly started a post entitled "More
> > > > Unanswered Lone Assassin Questions How`d He Do That?"
>
> > > >http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=16157&st=0&p=19...
>
> > > >   "More Unanswered Questions If Oswald Did It"
>
> > > >   "Things Oswald Must have Done If He Was The Assassin For Which There Is
> > > > No Evidence, Record or Witness"
>
> > > >   Billy Kelly then goes on to provide a list of 15 things he feels
> > > > satisfies the criteria of being "unanswered". I was bored so I thought I`d
> > > > bring them here and attack his thinking on some of them.
>
> > > BK: Hey Bud, you don't have to hijack a thread there and bring it here and
> > > attack it,
>
> >    I know that Bill, I told you I was bored.
>
> HI BUD, I understand. I wish you were bored enough to comment on all
> the items on the list.

I didn`t have a problem with everything on your list. Like #5,
Oswald obviously did hide the rifle in the TSBD (although it didn`t
ned to be assembled hours prior to the assassination), but of course
there is no witness to this, had there been Kennedy might be alive
today.

> > > you can join up and put a photo of yourself up on Ed Forum and
> > > tell everybody who you are and then attack my thinking on some of them
> > > there, but you won't, will ya?
>
> >   I wouldn`t last there anyway, so why bother? They threw DVP out after 4
> > days, and it had a lot more to do with the ideas he was expressing than
> > the phony photo issue they used to oust him. Plenty of people have no
> > photo or unrecognizable photos there, and it wasn`t an issue until DVP
> > started embarrassing some of the retards there by actually bringing up the
> > evidence.
>
> Bud, that's all I am interested in too. Evidence. Lets talk about that.
> All DVP wants to talk about is Wackey Conspiracy Theories, not evidence.

DVP uses the evidence to show that conspiracy theories have no
merit.

> > > You like being under the protective
> > > umbrella of John McAdams.
>
> >   You seem to want to go where you can have Simkin`s protection. But we
> > can take our disputes to a neutral site like alt.conspiracy.jfk if you
> > like. You`ll like me a lot less there.
>
> Bud, why do you say I don't like you? I'm grateful you had the guts to
> even respond to my posts.
>
>
>
> > > Well, Let's have it.  Attack my thinking on some of the items I've listed
> > > that you believe Oswald did but nobody actually saw him do, and there's no
> > > documentary record or evidence of hm actually doing it.
>
> > > >  First off, it`s hard to tell which concept he is going for, is he asking
> > > > how they were done by Oswald or is he asking for it to be shown Oswald did
> > > > these things?
>
> BK: Either on will do.

It makes it more difficult to attack ideas when they aren`t clearly
presented. The "how`d he do that" aspect is obvious in most cases, it
isn`t like he grew wings and flew to the places he was seen.

> > > >   Take #9, for instance,
>
> > > BK: Wait a minute! What about 1 thru 8, you don't want to attack my
> > > thinking on those?
>
> >   I sure will, post them and I will address them. My computer skills are
> > such that I can`t capture the whole list to bring it here and address, so
> > I have to transcribe them. What I produced was the limit of my interest
> > versus my inherent laziness.
>
> > > is he asking how Oswald shot from the Sixth Floor
>
> > > > Window (he pulled the trigger-duh!), or is he asking for support that
> > > > Oswald did (there was a witness-duh!).
>
> > > BK: Oh yea, who was that witness?
>
> >   You don`t know? See, this is why I asked in the header whether you
> > were familiar with the evidence in this case.
>
> BK: Yea, who was the witness that saw Oswald in the window with the
> rifle. And don't say Brennen.

All the witnesses who saw someone on the 6th floor shortly before
the assassination saw Oswald. Only Brennan saw him well enough to make
an identification.

> > > Every witness who saw the man with a
> > > rifle in the Sniper's Nest Window said that he wore a white shirt -
>
> >    Not true.
>
> BK: Okay, then give me that witness and tell me what that witness said
> about the color of the Sixth Floor Sniper's shirt?

They didn`t all just say white. Some said "light".

> > > and
> > > one witness said the shooter had a pattern baldness on the top of his
> > > head,
>
> >   The witness below him looking up would see this?
>
> BK: Amos said the man cocked his head while aiming the last shot.
> Makes sense to me.

How far would he have to cock his head for a bald spot on the top of
the head to visible from below?

And this is justing getting away from the point. Finding one witness
who gives a detail that doesn`t fit a suspect doen`t mean it wasn`t
the suspect that was seen. If this was so, the best way to kill
someone would be to have as many people as possible see you do it, so
the inevitable discrepancies would lead to your acquittal. If all the
witnesses must be satisfied, the guy on the 6th floor would have to
have a bald spot, with a full head of hair that was both light and
dark.

> >   Did the other people who saw the person mention baldness? Did he
> > lose his hair in between sightings?
>
> > > not Oswald, who had no pattern baldness and wore a brown and blue
> > > tint shirt, not white.
>
> >    He was seen wearing his white t-shirt before the assassination, and
> > soon after it.
>
> BK: Oswald had on a brown shirt over a white tee shirt.

When he was shooting?

> The Sixth
> Floor Sniper had on a white shirt with a white tee shirt under it.

Which witness said he has a t-shirt on under his top shirt? At least
one witness said the shirt he saw the shooter wearing could have been
a t-shirt.

> > > So what witness are you talking about?
>
> >    I see, what you mean by "no evidence", you mean no evidence Billy Kelly
> > accepts. But there is evidence, a witness did say he saw Oswald shooting
> > at Kennedy, and that fact doesn`t disappear just because you have problems
> > with it.
>
> BK: Who is the witness who said he saw Oswald shooting at Kennedy?

I`m still surprised you don`t know this one. Brennan.

> > > >   #14 Get from 10th and Patton to the Texas Theater
>
> > > >   There are witnesses to part of that journey, is he asking for someone
> > > > who went the whole way with Oswald?
>
> > > BK: Oh yea, which part of the journey, form the time that he was last seen
> > > staning by the bus stop on the corner by his rooming house - from there to
> > > 10th and Patton, over a half mile away, and nobody saw him walk there -
> > > did he get a lift?
>
> >    I see your problem, you have poor reading comprehension. The issue you
> > raised that I addressed specifies from 10th and Patton to the Texas
> > Theater, so why are you bring up portions of his travels that fall outside
> > of that?
>
> > > The two guys who did see someone, someone walking
> > > towards Jefferson, not away from it as Markham and others said that
> > > Tippit's killer was walking, these two guys didn't report it because they
> > > had warents out for unrelated offenses, so they didn't come forward. But
> > > whoever they saw couldn't have Oswald because he was walking towards 10th
> > > and Patton, not away from it as the WC says. So who are your witness for
> > > Oswald getting from his rooming house to anywhere near 10th and Patton?
>
> >   What is all this blather? Your claim was that nobody saw Oswald travel
> > from 10th and Patton to the Texas Theater.
>
> BK: No I say no one saw him travel from his rooming house to tenth and
> Patton.

What does number 14 on your list say?

> People saw him leaving 10th and
>
> > Patton after killing a cop, and a shoe salesman saw him "walk up West
> > Jefferson towards the Texas theater". So the claim that nobody saw him
> > make this journey is false, although we don`t have witnesses to the whole
> > trip, and we don`t have anyone who was with him during the trip.
>
> BK There's also witnesses who saw Tippit's killer duck into the
> Library and a church. Who was that if not Oswald?

Somebody who was not Oswald.

Of course the investigation would try to determine where the bullets
were obtained. But "obtain" means "to come into possession of", and
having the bullets on his person is evidence that they came into his
possession.

> >   Also, the rifle bullet found in his rifle is evidence he obtained it,
> > just like you would be responsible for item found in your car. You can say
> > the item isn`t yours, but being found in your car IS evidence that the
> > item is yours.
>
> BK: Yea, but did I buy the items in my car, or did John McAdams dump
> all his trash in my car as well as my back yard?

Don`t you watch cops? they are always finding guns and drugs in
cars, and alway locking up the owner of the car.

And it isn`t likely someone else threw bullets into Oswald`s pocket.

> > > >    #1 Obtain the rifle/pistol from the Post Office, where someone must
> > > > have handed him the package(s) over the counter and created some receipt.
>
> > > >   The picture of him holding both these items is evidence he received
> > > > them.
>
> > > BK: That's not the ponit.
>
> >   It might not be your ponit, but it is evidence that indicates Oswald
> > obtained the rifle. Yet you claim there is no evidence.
>
> BK: I claim in my list of items that there is no evidence that Oswald
> picked up the rifle and pistol packages at the Post Office, no
> witness, no receipt, no evidence, no nothing.

But there is evidence he obtained the rifle. You claim there is
none. If the rifle was sent, and there was no evidence ever uncovered
that showed Oswald had possession of the rifle, than you might be
making a valid claim about there being no evidence that Oswald
obtained it. But there is evidence that he had it in his possession,
so your claim is false.

> > > The point is, that there should be a direct and
> > > irrefutable chain of custody of the weapons fromt the time they are
> > > shipped by US Mail to the the time they are used in a crime and discovered
> > > and admitted into evidence.
>
> >   This is just you saying stuff, you saying this should be or that
> > shouldn`t be is meaningless. You think we should know when Oswald decided
> > to kill Kennedy. I`m not interested in your unsupportable opinions, I`m
> > addressing this particular claim you made here, that there is no evidence
> > Oswald obtained the rifle. And there is plenty evidence that he did,
> > including photographic, and that he was seen murdering someone with it
> > from his workplace.
>
> BK: Well, you can believe anything you want and know nothing.

I know you are claiming certain things must be in evidence if
certain things happened, but you aren`t showing that the lack of such
things in evidence establishes they didn`t happen.

> > > There's no evidence whatsoever that Oswald
> > > picked up either the rifle or the pistol from the US Post Office,
>
> >   Right, there is no photograph of Oswald being handed the rifle. But
> > there is evidence that he obtained it.
>
> > >and
> > > there should be recipts for Hidell, the alias used to order the rifle, to
> > > be permitted to use that box, and for someone to actually pick up the
> > > package.
>
> >   The problem is that you are only SAYING these things MUST exist for
> > Oswald to pick up the rifle at the Post Office. You just aren`t showing
> > that they must.
>
> BK: No, it is you, and the WC and John McAdams who is saying that Oswald
> did all the things that I list for which there is no witness, record or
> evidence. You are the one who blindly believes Oswald did those things,
> because he must have if he killed the President.

But there is evidence he obtained the rifle, the bullets found on
him, ect. So who is the one who is blind?

> > > How could a Post Office employee who received a package
> > > containing a four and half foot long rifle not remember placing a note in
> > > the PO box (the rifle itself couldn't fit in the box), and hand it over
> > > the counter to the man who would be accused of killing the President of
> > > the USA with the same weapon a few blocks and a few months later?
>
> >    Why do you think handing mail to a customer would be such a significant
> > event in a postal employee`s life that he must remember it months later?  
> > Must the person still be working there, couldn`t have quit or been
> > transferred? Lack of information doesn`t enlighten, and your claims about
> > what must or must not occur are uncompelling.
>
> BK: All I am saying is there is no witness, records, receipt or
> evidence that Oswald actually picked up the rifle or pistol from the
> Post Office.

No, that isn`t all you are saying. When you say "obtained", you
extend ownership beyond the act of being handed the weapon. There
might not be evidence for that particular event, but there is other
evidence that he did obtain it.

> > > And
> > > there not being any record of any such transaction?
>
> >   As I understand, they put a note in the box, you take the note to the
> > counter and they give you the item that didn`t fit in the PO box. It`s
> > pretty informal, the note validates that you have access to the PO box.
>
> BK: But the package is addressed to Hidel, not Oswald. Hidell was not
> listed as a person who could receive mail at that PO box,

I thought that part of the form was missing.

> unlike the PO
> box Oswald took out months later in New Orleans. So the mythical mail man
> puts a note in Oswald's PO box telling him a package too big for the box
> had arrived addressed to A J Hidel. Did Oswald have to show his Hidell ID
> or his Oswald ID?

You don`t show ID. Having the note confirms you have access to the
PO box.

> > > >   I`d assume the handgun came in a small enough package to fit inside the

Bud

unread,
Jul 15, 2010, 2:34:00 PM7/15/10
to

Thanks for providing this, Bill.

> More Unanswered Questions
> If Oswald Did It
>
> Things Oswald Must Have Done If He Was The Assassin
> For Which There Is No Evidence, Record or Witness.
>
> 1) Obtain the rifle/pistol from the Post Office, where they were mailed to
> someone not entitled to receive mail at the box – A.J. Hidell, and
> someone must have handed him the package(s) over the counter and created
> some receipt. No witness, no receipt.

Addressed, there is evidence that he obtained these items.

> 2) Physically move the rifle from Dallas to New Orleans in April and back
> again in September in Mrs. Paine’s station wagon and storing it in her
> garage without her or her husband knowing it. Oswald had to do these
> things without even being present at the scene so that is pretty amazing.

His things were moved. The rifle was one of his things.

> 3) Obtain the ammo and clip for the rifle and bullets for the pistol. Did
> he buy them? If so, where is the rest of the box and where’s the box
> they came in? And who sold them to him?

Addressed, there is evidence he obtained bullets for the weapons he
used, not the least of which is the fact that he used them.

> 4) Obtain the brown paper wrapping paper that was said to have concealed
> the rifle when he brought it to the TSBD.

There is evidence the bag was in his possession, his prints were on
it. Perhaps you should rethink your use of the word "obtain".

> 5) Disassemble the rifle at the Paines and reassemble the rifle at the
> TSBD.

Assumes he kept the rifle assembled at the Paine`s.

> 6) Build the wall of book boxes that set up the Sniper’s Lair in the
> Sixth Floor window.

Not sure how much of this was his doing, the flooring guys were
moving boxes out of their way to work.

> 7) Hide the assembled rifle somewhere in the TSBD for the hours before the
> assassination.

It could have been assembled shortly before the assassination.

> 8) Get from the First Floor of the TSBD where he was last seen to the
> Sixth Floor.

Who saw him last?

> 9) Shoot the rifle from the Sixth Floor Window.

As pointed out, there is a witness to this.

> 10) Hide the rifle on the Sixth Floor and descend the steps to the Second
> Floor in less than two minutes without being seen by Dougherty, who was
> standing by the elevators, and two secretaries who descended the same
> steps from the Fourth Floor at the same time.

All your claims of knowledge of the times these things occurred are
false.

> 11)  Leave the TSBD after the assassination.

Him being arrested in the Texas Theater is evidence he left the
building after the assassination.

> 12)  Change his shirt (did he change his shirt?)

Probably not.

> 13)  Get from the bus stop at the corner outside his rooming house to 10th
> and Patton.

How did Oswald get from the boardinghouse to the bus stop?

> 14)  Get from 10th and Patton to the Texas Theater (was that him? Or Get
> from the rooming house to the Texas Theater.

Addressed, he was seen for parts of the journey.

> 15)  Arrange for the motorcade to drive past his Sniper’s Lair during
> lunch hour, the only one hour window of opportunity that he had to kill
> the President. :

I don`t think it mattered to Oswald whether he shot Kennedy
morning, noon or night.

Bud

unread,
Jul 15, 2010, 8:42:28 PM7/15/10
to
On Jul 15, 12:30 am, Bill Kelly <billkel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 14, 7:55 am, john.mcad...@marquette.edu (John McAdams) wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 14 Jul 2010 00:37:45 -0400, Bill Kelly <billkel...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > >On Jul 12, 8:19=A0pm,Bud<sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > >> =A0 On the Education Forum, Bill Kelly started a post entitled "More
> > >> Unanswered Lone Assassin Questions How`d He Do That?"
>
> > >>http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=3D16157&st=3D0&......
>
> > >BK: Wait a minute! What about 1 thru 8, you don't want to attack my
> > >thinking on those?
>
> > >is he asking how Oswald shot from the Sixth Floor
> > >> Window (he pulled the trigger-duh!), or is he asking for support that
> > >> Oswald did (there was a witness-duh!).
>
> > >BK: Oh yea, who was that witness? Every witness who saw the man with a
> > >rifle in the Sniper's Nest Window said that he wore a white shirt - and
> > >one witness said the shooter had a pattern baldness on the top of his
> > >head, not Oswald, who had no pattern baldness and wore a brown and blue
> > >tint shirt, not white. So what witness are you talking about?
>
> > You don't understand witness testimony very well, do you?
>
> > There is always variation among witnesses who all clearly saw the
> > *same* person.
>
> HI JOHN,
>
> I DON'T MEAN TO SHOUT, I'M MORE LIKE TELEGRAPHING THE INFO SO I KNOW I
> RESPONDED TO THIS AS I WAS ACCUSED OF PULLING A HARRIS AND NOT RECOGNIZING
> ANSWERS ALREADY GIVEN.
>
> YEA, I KNOW WITNESS TESTIMONY IS OFTEN WRONG, BUT IT'S THE ONLY THING WE
> HAVE TO GO ON

What an amazingly ignorant thing to say.

>AND ALL WITNESS TESTIMONY CAN'T BE DISCARDED.

Of course it can. all the casual observation of the medical personal can
be discarded when better information like the autopsy is in conflict with
it. If casual observations were good enough, autopsies wouldn`t be
necessary. Since the autopsy surely is the one that should provide
superior information concerning the wounds, why would witnesses at
Parkland trump it?

> YEA, THE WITNESSES SAW THE SAME PERSON, A MAN WEARING A WHITE SHIRT AND
> SHOOTING A GUN, ONE SAW A BALD SPOT. OSWALD HAD ON A BROWN SHIRT WITH BLUE
> TINT, AND DIDN'T HAVE A BALD SPOT. NOT OSWALD.

You really are unfamiliar with the evidence in this case. Edwards and
Fisher didn`t say the person they saw was shooting a gun. The witnesses
didn`t all say the shirt was white, some offered it as a possibility. One
witness mentioned a bald spot the other three did not see or mention.
Three witnesses said the saw Oswald wearing a white shirt inside the TSBD
the day of the assassination ( Norman, Reid and Brennan).

> > >> =A0 #14 Get from 10th and Patton to the Texas Theater
>
> > >> =A0 There are witnesses to part of that journey, is he asking for someone
> > >> who went the whole way with Oswald?
>
> BK: WHO ARE THE WITNESSES WHO SAW OSWALD GET FROM THE CORNER BUS STOP
> OUTSIDE HIS ROOMING HOUSE TO TENTH AND PATTON?

Who are the witnesses who saw Oswald go from the front door of the
boardinghouse to the curb? With no witnesses, you have no explanation for
how he got to the bus stop. I`d posit he walked rather that flew or
tunneled, but with no direct information I suppose a CTer could claim that
all three are equally possible.

>ONLY THOSE TWO GUYS WHO SAW
> A MAN WALKING TOWARDS TENTH AND PATTON, NOT IN THE DIRECTON MARKHAM WAS
> WALKING OR TIPPIT DRIVING.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > >BK: Oh yea, which part of the journey, form the time that he was last seen
> > >staning by the bus stop on the corner by his rooming house - from there to
> > >10th and Patton, over a half mile away, and nobody saw him walk there -
> > >did he get a lift? The two guys who did see someone, someone walking
> > >towards Jefferson, not away from it as Markham and others said that
> > >Tippit's killer was walking, these two guys didn't report it because they
> > >had warents out for unrelated offenses, so they didn't come forward. But
> > >whoever they saw couldn't have Oswald because he was walking towards 10th
> > >and Patton, not away from it as the WC says. So who are your witness for
> > >Oswald getting from his rooming house to anywhere near 10th and Patton?
>
> > But they all saw the shooter, regardless of which way they say him
> > walking.
>
> > Are you saying there were two people who had a confrontation with
> > Tippit, one who was walking in one direction, and another who was
> > walking in the other?
>
> SOMEBODY SAW TWO MEN WHO LEFT IN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS.

And a lot of people didn`t. If somebody did leave when the shooting
started that never surfaced, how is he more of a suspect than Oswald
seen on the seen shooting, or at the scene with a gun?

> > And why do you keep demanding witnesses when there is no reasonable
> > expectation there SHOULD BE witnesses? There were certainly witnesses
> > to Oswald shooting Tippit, and leaving the scene.
>
> YEA, THEY SAID HE HAD AN AUTOMATIC PISTOL.

"they", the witnesses who saw Oswald at the scene, did not say
Oswald had an automatic.

Had Tippit been killed by an automatic the shells would have been
found forward of Tippit`s car.

> DISCARDED A JACKET THAT
> COULDN'T BE ASSOCIATED WITH OSWALD.

Didn`t Marina identify it as Oswald`s?

> AND THE WITNESS WAS HIMSELF SHOT
> SHORTLY THEREAFTER. WAS IT OSWALD?

Was it Oswald who shot the witness? Probably not.

> > Why do you think there have to be witnesses to him getting to 10th and
> > Patton?
>
> I'M NOT DEMANDING ANYTHING. I'M ASKING WHY NO WINTESSES SAW HIM WALK
> NEARLY A MILE ACROSS OAK CLIFF. I WOULD THINK SOMEONE WOULD HAVE SEEN
> HIM.

Probably did. They have to see Oswald, and have a lasting impression of
that event. They must associate seeing this person with the murder. The
information must be conveyed to the authorities. Now all you have to do is
show that all of these requirements must occur if someone saw Oswald
walking in Oak Cliff. You saying these things must appear in evidence is
in direct conflict with the fact that they don`t. That Oswald was in Oak
Cliff is supported by people seeing him there, and him being arrested
there.

> > >> =A0 Or is he asking "How`d He Do That?" If so, the answer is that Oswald
> > >> walked.
>
> > >BK: Okay, try walking that distance, the same route, and see how many
> > >people you cross paths with, sitting on their porchers, walking to their
> > >cars, riding by, and then compare that number with the number of people
> > >who saw Oswald walk from his rooming house to 10th and Patton. Let me know
> > >what the difference is.
>
> > If you do it during the day (when most people are at work) and aren't
> > doing anything to attract suspicion, the answer it probably zero.
>
> BUT MARKHAM WAS WALKING TO WORK, BENEVIDES WAS IN HIS TAXI, TATUM WAS
> DRIVING AROUND AIMLESSLY, THE TWO GUYS WITH WARRENTS WERE ON THEIR PORCH.
> PEOPLE LOOK OUT THERE WINDOW WHEN THEY SEE A STRANGER OR HEAR SOMETHING.
> YET, NOBODY SAW HIM WALK THAT DISTANCE AT ALL? I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER,
> I'M JUST ASKING.

I was just out and passed dozens of strangers, I couldn`t tell you
much about any of them.

> > >> =A0 #3 Obtain the ammo and clip for the rifle and bullets for the pistol.
>
> > >> =A0 =A0Is Bill Kelly actually saying there is no evidence that Oswald obt=
> > >ained
> > >> the bullets found on his person when he was arrested?
>
> I'M NOT SAYING HE DIDN'T OBTAIN THEM,

Then you shouldn`t use the word "obtain" to convey your thought.
Convey means "to come into possession of", and there is evidence that
Oswald came into possession of bullets for his handgun. The fact that
he had bullets for his handgun on his person when he was arrested.

> I'M SAYING THAT IF HE BOUGHT THEM,
> HE DIDN'T BUY THEM INDIVIDUALLY,

You don`t know this.

>HE BOUGHT THEM IN A BOX, THE ONLY WAY YOU
> CAN BUY THEM,

Or this.

> AND HE BOUGHT THEM FROM SOMEBODY, WHO?

Don`t know. Should we throw out what is in evidence in favor of
what is not?

>AND WERE'S THE BOX?
> SAME HOLDS FOR THE SLING, THE CLIP AND THE RIFLE BULLETS? WHERE'S THE REST
> OF THEM? WHO HAS THE BOX THEY CAME IN. AND WHAT'S WITH THE SCUFF MARKS ON
> THE BULLETS IN HIS POCKET, THAT SEEM TO INDICATE THEY WERE IN A HOLSTER?

They couldn`t indicate they were once in a rusty gun?

> > >BK: And you are accusing me in the title of this post that I'm not
> > >familiar with the evidence? Give me a freakin' break, will ya?
>
> > He had bullets on his person.
>
> > Are you denying that?
>
> NO, I'M ASKING WHERE THEY CAME FROM.

Oswald`s pocket. Thats all you should really need to know.

> > >There's no witneses or evidence, recipts or documents of any kind that
> > >explain where the rifle sling (an Air Force side arm sling), ammo clip,
> > >rifle bullets or pistol bullets from the pistol that killed Tippit or the
> > >bullets in the pistol taken from Oswald or the bullets allegedly found in
> > >Oswald's pockets hours after he was arrested and after he was searched a
> > >few times. The rifle shells were traced to a block of bullets that were
> > >sold to the USMC in 1948, even though the USMC didn't have a weapon that
> > >could use them.
>
> > Without running this down, it sounds like a factoid, since the rounds
> > were WCC, and for sale in 1963, if memory serves.
>
> YEA, SOUNDS LIKE A FACTOID ALL RIGHT. YOU RESEARCH IT THEN AND GET
> BACK TO ME ON WHERE THE INVESTIGATON INTO THE RIFLE SHELLS THAT THE WC
> SAYS FIRED THE BULLETS THAT KILLED THE PRESIDENT CAME FROM. I SAY THEY
> WERE TOLD THEY CAME FROM A BATCH THAT WAS SOLD TO THE USMC IN 1948.

Klein`s was selling the bullets, they had them. What kind of market
is there for a rifle you can`t get bullets for?

> > >> =A0 =A0#1 Obtain the rifle/pistol from the Post Office, where someone mus=
> > >t
> > >> have handed him the package(s) over the counter and created some receipt.
>
> > >> =A0 The picture of him holding both these items is evidence he received
> > >> them.
>
> > >BK: That's not the ponit. The point is, that there should be a direct and
> > >irrefutable chain of custody of the weapons fromt the time they are
> > >shipped by US Mail to the the time they are used in a crime and discovered
> > >and admitted into evidence. There's no evidence whatsoever that Oswald
> > >picked up either the rifle or the pistol from the US Post Office, and
> > >there should be recipts for Hidell, the alias used to order the rifle, to
> > >be permitted to use that box, and for someone to actually pick up the
> > >package. How could a Post Office employee who received a package
> > >containing a four and half foot long rifle not remember placing a note in
> > >the PO box (the rifle itself couldn't fit in the box), and hand it over
> > >the counter to the man who would be accused of killing the President of
> > >the USA with the same weapon a few blocks and a few months later? And
> > >there not being any record of any such transaction?
>
> > All you are doing is *positing* that this or that evidence should
> > exist, and then treating the lack of such evidence as sinister.
>
> WHAT I'M DOING IS LISTING ALL THE THINGS THAT THE ACCUSED ASSASSIN IS
> ACCUSED OF HAVING DONE FOR WHICH THERE IS NO WITNESS, NO EVIDENCE OR
> RECORD OF OSWALD HAVING DONE THOSE THINGS. YOU SAY THAT OSWALD HAD TO
> HAVE DONE THEM. I'M JUST LISTING THEM.

And I`m showing the flaws of that list. There is evidence that
Oswald obtained the rifle, the bullets, there is evidence Oswald was
shooting from the 6th floor of the TSBD. These claims are false.

> > It was perfectly legal to buy a rifle by mail in 1963.  Having one
> > arrive addressed to a P.O. box would not have been at all unusual.
>
> NO, WHAT'S UNUSUAL IS THAT THE RIFLE SENT BY US MAIL WAS SENT TO A PO
> BOX THAT WASN'T ENTITLED TO RECEIVE PACKAGES TO A.J. HIDEL. IT WAS IN
> OSWALD'S REAL NAME.

Wasn`t it the part of the form that is missing that lists the people
entitled to receive mail at the PO box?

> > Do you understand what it means to just *posit* things for which you
> > have no evidence?
>
> > You can easily destroy any criminal case if you are free to do that,
> > but in the real world of criminal justice you would not be taken
> > seriously.
>
> > .John
>
> IN THE REAL WORLD OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, IT IS THE EVIDENCE, THE WITNESSES
> AND THE DOCUMENTARY RECORDS THAT ARE TAKEN SERIOUSLY.

These are the things that show Oswald`s guilt.

> I WOULDN'T EVEN BE
> IN THE EQUATION.
>
> AND JOHN, YOU'RE NOT EVEN GOING TO BOTHER ADDRESSING THE OTHER ITEMS ON
> THE LIST, ONLY THE ONES THAT BOREDBUDHAD THE COURAGE TO ADDRESS?

I think I addressed them all now that you produced them. I might
have passed on one or two.

> BILL KELLY


Bill Kelly

unread,
Jul 16, 2010, 11:01:13 PM7/16/10
to
> ...
>


So you don't accept the WC report that the bullet shells found at the
Sixth Floor Sniper's Nest weren't part of a batch sold to the USMC in 1948
and consider this a FACTOID?

Well then if you were familiar with the evidence in the case you would
know this, so it is you who is not familiar with the evidence in the case,
not me.

And you accept the backyard photos of Oswald with the rifle and pistol and
Commie publications as evidence that Oswald assumed possession of the
weapons he used to kill the President and Tippit but don't think it
necessary to follow the provenance of the evidence from the Post Office
box to the suspect?

Since he is seen in photos with the rifle and pistol, that's enough to
know that he got them, and it doesn't matter where the bullets came from
even though it was never established where they came from?

That's okay, and along with the other fifteen things that had to occur for
Oswald to have been the lone assassin, we can assume that he did them, and
connect the dots between them by just writing in Oswald's name - The Patsy
- so we connect the dots, but it's not really necessary to obtain any
evidence, record or witness that he done them, because we know he's guilty
in the first place.

Okay, as long as I know that's your attitude, I won't bother discussing
this further, but let it be established that it is not Bill Kelly who
isn't familiar with the evidence in the case, it's those who pencil in
Oswald's name even though we don't know for a fact that he was even there
at the time.

When Oswald was supposed to have mailed the money order for the rifle,
10:30 am March 12, 1962, he was at work at Jaggers/Chiles/Stoval, working
on the Sam Bloom account, the same Sam Bloom who engineered the motorcade
to come by the TSBD window at 12:30 pm on 11/22/63.

When Oswald is supposed to have picked up the rifle and pistol from the
Post Office on March 25, even though they were mailed to A.J. Hidel,
Oswald was working at J/C/S,

But of course those who want to believe that Oswald killed JFK alone also
want to believe that he took off from work on Sam Bloom's time and orderd
the weapon he used to kill the President and picked it up, even though
there' s no one or no record of him ever having done so.

I can be convinced to believe that Oswald did all the things he is accused
of doing, I just want to be shown how he did it, something those who are
convinced he is guilty, can't do.

BK

David Von Pein

unread,
Jul 17, 2010, 12:36:26 AM7/17/10
to

>>> "When Oswald is supposed to have picked up the rifle and pistol from
the Post Office on March 25, even though they were mailed to A.J. Hidel
[sic], Oswald was working at J/C/S." <<<

Once again, Bill Kelly is pretending to know exactly what day Oswald
picked up the rifle at the post office. I wonder why Bill is pretending to
know it was precisely March 25th?

That info is totally unknowable, of course. But Mr. Kelly wants to make
people believe that he's nailed it down to just March 25th and no other
possible date. And Bill is also trying to make it sound as if it's the
LNers who have somehow nailed it down to that precise date, which isn't
true at all.


Bill is also pretending to know that BOTH the rifle and pistol were picked
up the SAME DAY. That, too, is not known. Maybe Oswald picked up the rifle
on one day, and the revolver on another.

I wonder how Bill knows such unknowable things?

Anthony Marsh

unread,
Jul 17, 2010, 10:30:48 AM7/17/10
to

Do you mean the batch of WCC bullets made in 1954 as reported by the FBI?

http://the-puzzle-palace.com/WCC-CIA.gif

Bud

unread,
Jul 17, 2010, 10:35:37 AM7/17/10
to

Where did I say this, Bill?

> Well then if you were familiar with the evidence in the case you would
> know this, so it is you who is not familiar with the evidence in the case,
> not me.

I know the evidence well enough. If memory serves, the Western
Cartridge Company made 4 batches of a million bullets each. I`ve seen
it said that since the Marines had no weapons to fire this ammo that
it was a straw purchase made on behalf of the CIA for use in the Greek
civil war. I`ve seen the responses made by WCC to the inquiries of the
WC. None of this really matters since we know that the rifle was being
sold on the open market in the early sixties, and bullets were
available for this weapon on the open market in the early sixties. You
guys can imagine LBJ handed the bullets to Oswald himself, but you
can`t show a damned thing. Until you can show that Oswald MUST have
gotten the bullets from a particular source, and that source is some
branch of the U.S. government, you got nothing. Asking LNers to show
that he DIDN`T get the bullets from a governmental source only shows
how little support your ideas have.

> And you accept the backyard photos of Oswald with the rifle and pistol and
> Commie publications as evidence that Oswald assumed possession of the
> weapons he used to kill the President and Tippit but don't think it
> necessary to follow the provenance of the evidence from the Post Office
> box to the suspect?

If a person travels three blocks, and he is seen walking the first
block and the last by witnesses, why would I think he flew for the
block he wasn`t seen? There is a chain of evidence for Oswald ordering
and receiving the rifle. Your claim that there is no evidence that
Oswald obtained the rifle is false.

We have a witness who saw Oswald shoot Kennedy. You find reason to
disregard this witness. If we had the postal employee who handed
Oswald the rifle, and you didn`t want to believe him, you couldn`t
find reason to disregard him also ("How could the npostal emploee
remember one piece of mail from 6 monthes earlier, wouldn`t he have
handled 10,000 pieces of mail in the meantime?")? If we didn`t have
Brennan, you wouldn`t be demanding how nobody saw the shooter? You
disregard what is in evidence, and demand what is not. If something
like this isn`t in evidence by now, it`s likely it isn`t coming.
Should the WC have stood slack jawed at it`s absence for decades like
CTers seem content to do?

> Since he is seen in photos with the rifle and pistol, that's enough to
> know that he got them, and it doesn't matter where the bullets came from
> even though it was never established where they came from?

Correct. It was never established where OJ got the knife that he
stabbed his ex-wife with. But there is little doubt he stabbed his ex-
wife with a knife.

How do you think crimes are solved, do you think they need to have
all the information to determine what occurred? If I find a gun with
bullets in it, and nobody in the world knows I have it, is this a
"kill one person free" card, I can`t be convicted of any crime I
commit with it because it could never be determine where I got it
from?

These are just bad ideas, Bill, brought up to give CTers something
to cling to, to give them excuses not to accept the obvious truth.

> That's okay, and along with the other fifteen things that had to occur for
> Oswald to have been the lone assassin, we can assume that he did them,

You seem fine believing other people did them with no evidence.
Even when we have "before" and "after" evidence indicating it was
Oswald who must have performed these actions, and even when we know
Oswald could have done these things easier than anybody else on the
planet, you still want to believe other people did them.

>and
> connect the dots between them by just writing in Oswald's name - The Patsy

There is no "patsy" in this case, there is a murderer who claimed to
be one.

> - so we connect the dots, but it's not really necessary to obtain any
> evidence, record or witness that he done them, because we know he's guilty
> in the first place.

There are so many dots there is almost a straight line pointing to
Oswald. I`ve never seen a murder case with so much evidence indicating
who did it (except maybe when the murder is killed or caught on the
spot -- although we can see in the case of RFK that this isn`t even
considered foolproof by some). And CTers argue both that it is
suspicious when something is not in evidence, and that it is
suspicious that so much is in evidence.

> Okay, as long as I know that's your attitude, I won't bother discussing
> this further,

Well, that is your choice. As long as you are here and keep
expressing bad ideas, I will continue to point those bad ideas out.
And since it isn`t likely you can stop expressing bad ideas, I expect
you will soon stop posting here.

> but let it be established that it is not Bill Kelly who
> isn't familiar with the evidence in the case,

<snicker> Who established this? Certainly not Bill Kelly. And it
really isn`t a case where you are ignorant of the information, it`s
that you seem to have no aptitude for applying it.

> it's those who pencil in
> Oswald's name even though we don't know for a fact that he was even there
> at the time.

Right, he wasn`t in the TSBD shooting his rifle (which there is
evidence for), he was on the first floor waiting for a phone call
(which there is no evidence for). He wasn`t at 10th and Patton killing
a cop (which there is evidence for), he was at the Texas Theater
meeting with his handler (which there is no evidence for). How can
reality compete with the imagination of CTers?

> When Oswald was supposed to have mailed the money order for the rifle,
> 10:30 am March 12, 1962, he was at work at Jaggers/Chiles/Stoval, working
> on the Sam Bloom account, the same Sam Bloom who engineered the motorcade
> to come by the TSBD window at 12:30 pm on 11/22/63.

Can you show Sam Bloom "engineering" the motorcade to go past the
TSBD before 10:30 AM on March 12, 1962?

Was Bloom going to "engineer" it to go past Jaggers/Chiles?Stoval at
the time Oswald worked there?

Can you show that Oswald working at the TSBD is more than just the
happenstance that the evidence revealed it was?

And once more a CTer implicates someone (Bloom) in a murder plot
with nothing to show that he was plotting murder. Yet with Oswald,
even prints, photos, witnesses, ect is not considered enough.

> When Oswald is supposed to have picked up the rifle and pistol from the
> Post Office on March 25, even though they were mailed to A.J. Hidel,
> Oswald was working at J/C/S,

How do you know what day the rifle was picked up? Or the pistol,
which likely came on a different day than the rifle.

> But of course those who want to believe that Oswald killed JFK alone

I don`t want to believe Oswald acted alone. I just accept that it
has been shown he acted, and nobody has shown anyone acting in concert
with him.

>also
> want to believe that he took off from work on Sam Bloom's time and orderd
> the weapon he used to kill the President and picked it up, even though
> there' s no one or no record of him ever having done so.

Where do you get this precise time that Oswald must have done these
things?

> I can be convinced to believe that Oswald did all the things he is accused
> of doing, I just want to be shown how he did it, something those who are
> convinced he is guilty, can't do.

I can show he got the rifle, Bill, there is a photo of it in his
hands.

> BK


Jean Davison

unread,
Jul 17, 2010, 12:42:50 PM7/17/10
to jjdavi...@yahoo.com
> one witness said the shooter had a pattern baldness on the top of hishead, not Oswald, who had no pattern baldness and wore a brown and blue

> tint shirt, not white. So what witness are you talking about?
>

Going back to this for a minute, Bill, Euins didn't say the bald
spot was on the "top" of his head:

QUOTE:
Mr. SPECTER. How far back did the bald spot on his head go?
Mr. EUINS. I would say about right along in here.
Mr. SPECTER. Indicating about 2 1/2 inches above where you hairline
is. Is that about what you are saying?
Mr. EUINS. Yes, sir; right along in here.
UNQUOTE

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/euins.htm

Since he saw the sniper aiming down Elm St., Euins would've been
looking at the left side of the sniper's face. Oswald's hairline was
receding noticeably on that side.

Jean

Bill Kelly

unread,
Jul 18, 2010, 10:25:23 AM7/18/10
to


THANK YOU ANTHONY, I STAND CORRECTED. IT WAS 1954.

BK

Bill Kelly

unread,
Jul 21, 2010, 8:35:43 AM7/21/10
to
>                                               Jean- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Hello Jean,

I didn't notice any pattern baldness on Oswald, who kept a close cut.

That would be correct if the sniper was right handed. Some say the
sniper may have been left handed.

Billy Lovelady had a pattern baldness on the top of his head, though
he is accounted for at the time of the assassintion.

BK

Jean Davison

unread,
Jul 21, 2010, 4:09:56 PM7/21/10
to

Not sure why you say "pattern" baldness, Bill, since Euins didn't use
that term, but a receding hairline is a feature of pattern baldness, and
here's Oswald's receding hairline:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_rQye35885Ls/SxUKKrXUx9I/AAAAAAAAAT0/z-x4hfby9IU/s400/lee+harvey+oswald.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_YwYqFBoL3ZA/SsqFk4TfU0I/AAAAAAAAAHQ/Sr6ARPAhvpc/s400/LHO_LeftNeck.jpg

>
> That would be correct if the sniper was right handed. Some say the
> sniper may have been left handed.
>

Whether left- or right-handed, he'd be aiming down Elm St., so Euins
would've seen the left side of his face.

> Billy Lovelady had a pattern baldness on the top of his head, though
> he is accounted for at the time of the assassintion.

Again, Euins didn't say "top" of his head. (His testimony is
searchable with Control+F):

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/euins.htm

All I'm saying is that Euin's testimony is consistent with Oswald
being the shooter.
Jean

>
> BK- Hide quoted text -

Bud

unread,
Jul 21, 2010, 4:35:27 PM7/21/10
to

He had a high hair line.

> That would be correct if the sniper was right handed. Some say the
> sniper may have been left handed.

No, Oswald was right handed.

> Billy Lovelady had a pattern baldness on the top of his head, though
> he is accounted for at the time of the assassintion.

Oswald was accounted for during the assassination by Brennan.

> BK


Bill Kelly

unread,
Jul 22, 2010, 4:50:01 PM7/22/10
to

On Jul 17, 9:42 am, Jean Davison <jean.davis...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Jean- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Jean, far be it for me to quible with you over any fact in this case, but
I've been embarrased before, so here goes.

(Agreed this doesn't eleminate Oswald as the Sixth Floor Sniper), but I
don't think Euins is talking about a receeding hairline like Oswald's
here. The key word is "spot."

He repeatedly calls it a "bald spot," and a "spot," two and a half inches
above the hairline isn't receeding, it's a "spot." A bald spot.

While there's no mention of a bald spot in the original report, Euinis
tells Specter that's because the person typing his statement wrote that he
said the shooter was white when he was talking about having a bald white
spot.

He must repeat the word bald spot and white spot and spot a dozen times in
his short testimony, and it is the only thing that he can positively say
about the shooter, other than he had a rifle in his hands.

While we know where Lovelady was a the time of the assassination, here is
a good photo of his "bald spot," on the far right in Jerry Organ's
collage.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/oswald_doorway.htm

John McAdams links here http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/euins.htm
to CE-367 don't work, but here's one that does.

Report:

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=1133&relPageId=987

Testimony:

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=1133&relPageId=987

Mr. SPECTER. All right.
Now, when the third shot occurred, Amos, let me ask you again, where
were you looking then?
Mr. EUINS. I was still down here, looking up at the building.
Mr. SPECTER. What did you see in the building?
Mr. EUINS. I seen a bald spot on this man's head, trying to look out
the window. He had a bald spot on his head. I was looking at the bald
spot. I could see his hand, you know the rifle laying across in his
hand. And I could see his hand sticking out on the trigger part. And
after he got through, he just pulled it back in the window.
Mr. SPECTER. Did you see him pull it back in the window?
Mr. EUINS. Yes, sir.Mr. SPECTER. Do you know what the name of that
policeman was, who was in that position where you have marked C?
Mr. EUINS. No, sir. He was kind of an old policeman. I ran down and
got him. And he ran up here.
Mr. SPECTER. You mean--
Mr. EUINS. The Book Depository Building.
Then he called some more cars. They got all the way around the
building. And then after that, well, he seen another man. Another man
told him he seen a man run out the back.
Mr. SPECTER. Do you know who that man was who said somebody ran out
the back?
Mr. EUINS. No, sir. He was a construction man working back there.
205

Mr. SPECTER. Were you there when the man talked about somebody running
out the back?
Mr. EUINS. Yes, sir. He said the man had--he said he had kind of bald
spot on his head. And he said the man come back there.
Mr. SPECTER. Do you know what the name of the man was who told the
police that someone had run out the back?
Mr. EUINS. No, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Now, what kind of a look, if any, did you have at the man
who was there?
Mr. EUINS. All I got to see was the man with a spot in his head,
because he had his head something like this.
Mr. SPECTER. Indicating his face down, looking down the rifle?
Mr. EUINS. Yes, sir: and I could see the spot on his head.
Mr. SPECTER. How would you describe that man for us?
Mr. EUINS. I wouldn't know how to describe him, because all I could
see was the spot and his hand.
Mr. SPECTER. Could you tell whether he was a Negro gentleman or a
white man?
Mr. EUINS. No, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Couldn't even tell that? But you have described that he
had a bald--
Mr. EUINS. Spot in his head. Yes, sir; I could see the bald spot in
his head.
Mr. SPECTER. Now, could you tell what color hair he had?
Mr. EUINS. No, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Could you tell whether his hair was dark or light?
Mr. EUINS. No, sir.


Mr. SPECTER. How far back did the bald spot on his head go?
Mr. EUINS. I would say about right along in here.
Mr. SPECTER. Indicating about 2 1/2 inches above where you hairline
is. Is that about what you are saying?
Mr. EUINS. Yes, sir; right along in here.

Mr. SPECTER. Now, did you get a very good look at that man, Amos?
Mr. EUINS. No, sir; I did not.
Mr. SPECTER. Were you able to tell anything about the clothes he was
wearing?
Mr. EUINS: No, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. All right.
Let me ask you about a couple of specific things here, Amos.
In the statement you say here that he was a white man. By reading the
statement, does that refresh your memory as to whether he was a white
man or not?
Mr. EUINS. No, sir; I told the man that I could see a white spot on
his head, but I didn't actually say it was a white man. I said I
couldn't tell. But I saw a white spot in his head.
Mr. SPECTER. Your best recollection at this moment is you still don't
know whether he was a white man or a Negro? All you can say is that
you saw a white spot on his head?
Mr. EUINS. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Then, did you tell the people at the police station that
he was a white man, or did they make a mistake when they wrote that
down here?
Mr. EUINS. They must have made a mistake, because I told them I could
see a white spot on his head.

My big question after reading all this are: What was Specter asking
Euins about a man with a bald spot seen running out the back door? Was
there a man with a bald spot seen running out the back door? I must
have missed that.

Mr. SPECTER. Do you know who that man was who said somebody ran out
the back?
Mr. EUINS. No, sir. He was a construction man working back there.
Mr. SPECTER. Were you there when the man talked about somebody running
out the back?
Mr. EUINS. Yes, sir. He said the man had--he said he had kind of bald
spot on his head. And he said the man come back there.

Now that there's two men with bald spots, one shooting a rifle out the
Sixth Floor window and another running out the back door of the TSBD?

You can embarras me now Jean, I can take it.

Bill Kelly

Bud

unread,
Jul 22, 2010, 11:34:28 PM7/22/10
to

Could it be this is saw?

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_YwYqFBoL3ZA/SsqFk4TfU0I/AAAAAAAAAHQ/Sr6ARPAhvpc/s1600-h/LHO_LeftNeck.jpg

> While there's no mention of a bald spot in the original report, Euinis
> tells Specter that's because the person typing his statement wrote that he
> said the shooter was white when he was talking about having a bald white
> spot.
>
> He must repeat the word bald spot and white spot and spot a dozen times in
> his short testimony, and it is the only thing that he can positively say
> about the shooter, other than he had a rifle in his hands.
>
> While we know where Lovelady was a the time of the assassination, here is
> a good photo of his "bald spot," on the far right in Jerry Organ's
> collage.
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/oswald_doorway.htm
>

> John McAdams links herehttp://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/euins.htm


> to CE-367 don't work, but here's one that does.
>
> Report:
>

> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=113...
>
> Testimony:
>
> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=113...

Bill Kelly

unread,
Jul 23, 2010, 12:41:50 PM7/23/10
to
>    http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_YwYqFBoL3ZA/SsqFk4TfU0I/AAAAAAAAAHQ/Sr6ARPA...
> > Bill Kelly- Hide quoted text -
>

Yea, Bud,

I saw that, thanks to Jean pointing it out, and that's why I agree with
her that the "bald spot" does not eleminate LHO as the Sixth Floor Sniper.

Now what I'm trying to figure out is who the guy with the bald spot
Specter and Amos Euins are taking about leaving the back door of the TSBD,
and mentioning a cop and construction worker. Was the construction worker
Brennan and the cop W.E. Barnett and if not who was the bald spot guy
Specter and ALE were talking about?

Thanks,

BK


tomnln

unread,
Jul 23, 2010, 9:09:56 PM7/23/10
to
Euins' testimony>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/euins,%20amos.htm


"Bill Kelly" <billk...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:910aeda4-0fa0-47ad...@d8g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...

Jean Davison

unread,
Jul 24, 2010, 10:48:32 AM7/24/10
to

"Bill Kelly" <billk...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9ce4d946-0f01-41f9...@d17g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...

I'm glad we agree, Bill, and I see your point about "spot."
Euins' answer to "how far back" the bald spot went still sounds more like a
receding hairline to me, but I could be wrong.

One more comment at the end....

Could be, but there were a couple of witnesses facing the rear of
the building who swore that no one came running out.

>
> You can embarras me now Jean, I can take it.

No need to worry about that, Bill.
Jean


>
> Bill Kelly
>


Anthony Marsh

unread,
Jul 24, 2010, 3:57:45 PM7/24/10
to

There you go with your propaganda tricks again, trying to leave the false
impression that NO witnesses saw a man running out of the back of the
TSBD.

If you want to be a good little WC defender you need to get on the same
page with the other WC defenders and stop embarrassing them. Most of them
know the WC testimony about this and McAdams even has it on his own Web
site.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/worrell.htm

Mr. WORRELL - I was there approximately 3 minutes before I saw this man
come out the back door here.
Mr. SPECTER - All right. Now will you put a "Z" where you first saw the
man whom you have just described or mentioned?
Mr. WORRELL - It is here I am pretty sure, I am not positive.
(Witness marking.)
Mr. SPECTER - You are pretty sure - but you can't be positive - but you
are pretty sure?
Mr. WORRELL - Yes.
Mr. SPECTER - Okay. Now describe as best you can the man whom you have
testified you saw at point "Z."
Mr. WORRELL - Describe his appearance?
Mr. SPECTER - Yes. Start by telling us how tall he was, to the best of
your ability to recollect and estimate?
Mr. WORRELL - To the - it is going to be within 3 inches, 5-7 to 5-10.
Mr. SPECTER - What is your best estimate as to his weight?
Mr. WORRELL - 155 to 165.
Mr. SPECTER - What is your best estimate as to his height?
Mr. WORRELL - 5-7, 5-10.
Mr. SPECTER - Pardon me, your best estimate as to his age.
Mr. WORRELL - Well, the way he was running, I would say he was in his
late twenties or middle - I mean early thirties. Because he was fast
moving on.
Mr. SPECTER - Of what race was he?
Mr. WORRELL - White.
Mr. SPECTER - Can you describe the characteristics of his hair?
Mr. WORRELL - Black.
Mr. SPECTER - Did he have --
Mr. WORRELL - Well, I will say brunette.
Mr. SPECTER - Did he have a full head of hair, a partial head of hair,
or what?
Mr. WORRELL - Well, see, I didn't see his face, I just saw the back of
his head and it was full in back. I don't know what the front looked
like. But it was full in back.
Mr. SPECTER - What clothes did the man have on?
Mr. WORRELL - Dark, like a jacket like that.
Mr. SPECTER - Indicating a dark gray jacket?
Mr. WORRELL - No, no. It was a jacket like that.
Mr. SPECTER - A suit jacket?
Mr. WORRELL - Yes.
Mr. SPECTER - Or was it a sports jacket?
Mr. WORRELL - Sports jacket.
Mr. SPECTER - Did not have on matching coat and trousers?
Mr. WORRELL - No.
Mr. SPECTER - Was it dark in color or light?
Mr. WORRELL - It was dark in color. I don't know whether it was blue,
black, or brown, but it was dark, and he had light pants. And that is
all I can say on his clothes, except his coat was open and kind of
flapping back in the breeze when he was running.
Mr. SPECTER - Now, are there any other distinguishing characteristics
that you can describe about him?
Mr. WORRELL - Not a thing.
Mr. SPECTER - What did he --
Mr. WORRELL - He wasn't holding nothing when he was running. He was just
running.
Mr. SPECTER - What did you observe him do if, anything?
Mr. WORRELL - Well, when he ran out here, he ran along the side of the
Depository Building and then when he got --
Mr. SPECTER - Make a dotted line as to where he went, or take this black
pencil and make a line as to where he went.
(Witness marking.)
Mr. SPECTER - Where did you see him eventually go?
Mr. WORRELL - Well, he went on further.
Mr. SPECTER - Is that the last you saw of him?
Mr. WORRELL - Yes, sir.
Mr. SPECTER - And did something come between you and him so that your
vision was obstructed?
Mr. WORRELL - Yes, sir.
Mr. SPECTER - At the point you have just dotted out there?
Mr. WORRELL - Yes, sir.
Mr. SPECTER - What obstructed your view of him at that juncture or at
that point?
Mr. WORRELL - I can't really be sure, it was a building, but the type of
building, I don't know.
Mr. SPECTER - During the course of your seeing him, did you ever get a
view of his face?
Mr. WORRELL - Oh, no, no.

Now, for your next message you should demand that I back up my claims and
cite any witness who saw a man run out the back of the TSBD. And after
that your next tactic should be to call Worrell a liar like Jean Hill.
Let's see how many standard WC defender tricks you can use.

Bud

unread,
Jul 24, 2010, 6:13:35 PM7/24/10
to
On Jul 24, 3:57 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 7/24/2010 10:48 AM, Jean Davison wrote:
>
>
>
> > "Bill Kelly" <billkel...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=113...
>
> >> Testimony:
>
> >>http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=113...

Never tire of battling those strawmen, do you Tony? Assign a position
to someone, and attack that position, regardless of whether the person
expressed that opinion or not.

> If you want to be a good little WC defender you need to get on the same
> page with the other WC defenders and stop embarrassing them.

I think it`s safe to say that LNers would never be embarrassed to have
Jean represent their position. Nobody has more knowledge of the
assassination, or class.

>Most of them
> know the WC testimony about this and McAdams even has it on his own Web
> site.

<snicker> Are you really going to cite testimony of a witnesses saying
he saw a person run from the back of the TSBD in order to refute a
position Jean never took? Doesn`t anything embarrass you?

Lets see how many strawmen you can create. A lot easier than addressing
what people actually say, but is it as satisfying for you?

Jean Davison

unread,
Jul 26, 2010, 10:01:39 PM7/26/10
to

Thanks, Bud! I appreciate it.
Jean
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages