Mark Lane - (#144) - Huckster Continues Getting Spanked!

[Ben Holmes]

In the previous paragraphs, Mark Lane showed that Hoover was wrong
that the condition of the rifle could not be determined for the time
of the assassination.

"Finally, as to the 'expertness' of Oswald with a rifle. The Report
noted that Oswald fired a rifle for score twice while in the Marine
Corps.

'... Oswald was tested in December of 1956, and obtained a score of
212, which was 2 points above the minimum for qualifications as a
'sharpshooter' in a scale of marksman—sharpshooter—expert. In May of
1959, on another range, Oswald scored 191, which was 1 point over the
minimum for ranking as a 'marksman.''

Oswald's latter effort constitutes the last known evaluation of his
proficiency with a rifle; it shows that he just qualified for the
Marine Corps' lowest degree. The Commission admitted that on this
showing Oswald was a poor shot.

'Based on the general Marine Corps ratings, Lt. Col. A. G. Folsom, Jr,
head, Records Branch, Personnel Department, Headquarters U.S. Marine
Corps, evaluated the sharpshooter qualification as a 'fairly good
shot' and a low marksman rating as a 'rather poor shot'.'

The Commission called on Marine Corps Major Eugene D. Andersen, who
explained that the former and slightly higher score was authentic,
while the latter score was somehow misleading. Major Anderson
testified that the higher score was achieved on a day that 'appears to
be according to the record book to have been an ideal day under firing
conditions'.

Q. When you say the record book you meant Commission Exhibit No. 239
that you referred to?

Anderson: Yes.

The 'record book', published by the Commission as Commission Exhibit
239, does not indicate the firing conditions, however, and says
nothing about the hour of firing or the amount of daylight or the
weather, except for revealing that an adjustment to the sight was
necessary because of the wind.

Of the day Oswald fired and achieved the lower score, Major Anderson
said, 'It might well have been a bad day for firing the rifle — windy,
rainy, dark.' Although the Commission adopted and published the
major's speculation as to what the weather 'might well have been',
there was no need for imprecision on this point. Whenever weather is a
factor in a court case in the United States, the records of the United
States Weather Bureau are subpoenaed and presented as a matter of
course. The second time that Oswald fired for score, as Major Anderson
testified, was at a Marine base near Los Angeles on May 6, 1959. The
Weather Bureau records show that the day was not 'windy, rainy, dark';
it was sunny and bright and no rain fell, there was a slight breeze
and the temperature ranged from 72° to 79°.

Major Anderson also suggested that there was 'some possibility' that
the almost new M-1 rifle used by Oswald in the test 'might not have
been as good a rifle' on the second occasion as on the first. He 'may
well have carried this rifle for quite some' time, and it got banged
around in normal usage,' Major Anderson said. The M-1 was perhaps the
sturdiest and most accurate military rifle ever developed. It was
recently manufactured for and issued to the American armed forces. By
adopting Major Anderson's speculation, the Commission caused the M-1
to suffer by comparison with a Mannlicher-Carcano designed in the last
century, manufactured more than 25 years ago and selling for $12-78
retail and for $3.00 per rifle when purchased in batches of 25 or
more.

What do we know about Oswald's proficiency with a rifle? That he was a
relatively poor shot and betrayed a dislike of weapons to a Marine
Corps friend. What is more, if he fired the Mannlicher-Carcano, he
used a weapon universally condemned as inaccurate and slow, fitted
with a sight that could not be accurately aligned and loaded with old
and unreliable ammunition."

Mark Lane is demonstrating why Hoover was wrong in his assertion that
"the expertness of the shooter ... can [not] be determined for the
time of the assassination". While it's theoretically possible that
completely unknown to anyone else, Oswald received additional training
and spent time improving his skill in shooting, it's rather unlikely
that any such thing happened. I note that Mark Lane didn't bother to
label the Warren Commission liars for the way they deceptively
provided speculation in place of easily determined fact.

Any kooks want to defend the inability of the Warren Commission to
acquire the actual weather records from the U.S. weather bureau?

[Ben Holmes]

Huckster has certainly read this by now, but absolutely REFUSES to
respond, because there literally ISN"T anything he can say that
wouldn't be instantly recognizable as a lie or a logical fallacy.

Yet he knows he can't EVER be caught agreeing with Mark Lane.

So he's stuck demonstrating his cowardice... yet again.

[Hank Sienzant]

Argument from silence logical fallacy.

Ben to delete this and call me names.

[Ben Holmes]

It's not "calling names" to list the English word that describes your
behavior.

You're a coward - you have now REPEATEDLY refused to address this
post.