The Curtain Rod Debacle

[Gil Jesus]

https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1614/curtain-rod-debacle

[John Corbett]

On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 10:38:59 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
> https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1614/curtain-rod-debacle

Still waiting for someone to explain why Oswald needed to make a special trip to Irving on
Thursday night to get curtain rods when he could just as easily picked him up on his
regular weekend visit to the Paine's house. Why the urgency? What did he need to get
on Thursday night that couldn't wait for the weekend? Hmmm! That's a head scratcher.

Unless someone can come up with a plausible answer for that, the whole question about
whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods is moot.

[Scrum Drum]

On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 10:38:59 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

Gil is trying to change the subject because he couldn't answer my Truly evidence that proved he wasn't the "superintendent" who stopped "Oswald" in the Lobby...

[Gil Jesus]

On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 10:45:39 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
> Still waiting for someone to explain why Oswald needed to make a special trip to Irving on
> Thursday night to get curtain rods when he could just as easily picked him up on his
> regular weekend visit to the Paine's house. Why the urgency? What did he need to get
> on Thursday night that couldn't wait for the weekend? Hmmm! That's a head scratcher.
>
> Unless someone can come up with a plausible answer for that, the whole question about
> whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods is moot.

Read Marina Oswald's testimony, although I know you won't.

[robert johnson]

You gotta ask whether that simplistic sack of shit called Brian Doyle does any reading at all.

[John Corbett]

Isn't it amazing how the conspiracy hobbyists always expect LNs to find the support for
their arguments. It's called burden shifting. They do this when they know they can't back
up what they claim.

[Gil Jesus]

On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 1:29:30 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
> Isn't it amazing how the conspiracy hobbyists always expect LNs to find the support for
> their arguments. It's called burden shifting. They do this when they know they can't back
> up what they claim.

Isn't it amazing how LNers refuse to cite the very evidence the claim to support ?
Isn't it amazing how LNers consider Oswald guilty and expect WC critics to prove Oswald innocent ?
Isn't it amazing how they won't even look at the testimony ?
Nobody's shifting any burden here.

You asked a question, I told you where to find the answer.
That's has nothing to do with knowing, "they can't back up what they claim."
I didn't claim anything, I just told you where to look.
You want answers ? Go look like I do.
Don't expect me to do your homework.
If your lazy ass won't look, that's your problem.

And BTW John, as usual, another faux pas on your part:
the length of the "paper gunsack" was not 40 inches as you stated in another thread, it was 38 inches.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=946#relPageId=157&search=%2238_inches%22

This is what happens when you don't do your own research, you don't know the evidence and you don't know the facts.

[David Von Pein]

On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 10:45:39 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:

> Still waiting for someone to explain why Oswald needed to make a special trip to Irving on Thursday night to get curtain rods when he could just as easily picked him up on his regular weekend visit to the Paine's house.

Yes. And there's also this angle that nobody ever talks about....

Lee Oswald told Buell Frazier on Thursday morning (Nov. 21) that the curtain rods he wanted to get at Ruth Paine's house were rods that were going to support some curtains that Marina had apparently made for Lee.

So, with the above information in mind, I now ask:

Why on Earth would LHO have *any desire* to put up new curtains (and rods) in a room that we know he had every intention of vacating very soon thereafter? Makes no sense.

Plus: What happened to those curtains that Lee said Marina made for him? Where did those go?

More on Lee Oswald's "curtain rods" lie here:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/curtain-rods.html

[David Von Pein]

Also See:

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-clRnURH4S0I/WIa7Wh64z5I/AAAAAAABLUo/lDcJL-FbZBkmYe2ikyPs_vmu20BcU63hgCLcB/s3000-h/RH-Excerpts-Regarding-Curtain-Rods.png

[John Corbett]

Bottom line is that there are many reasons to doubt Oswald's curtain rod story and no reasons
to believe it.

[recip...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 9:38:59 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:

> https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1614/curtain-rod-debacle

The Allen Grant photo, taken before ether the FWST or Gene Daniels
photos, shows that the curtain rods were in place, undamaged, and
intact on the afternoon of the 22nd. That is, the Grant photo shows
that there was no need for Oswald to bring curtain rods to his room
to fix anything. Period. This photo has already been brought up and
linked to in the other curtain rods threads. How did you miss it?

Oswald tried to woo back Marina from their estrangement by
promising that he would bring his fracturing family back together in
an apartment that he would rent. She was cold to the idea. But the
apartment would be something that would happen in the future. There
would be no way to know at that point whether the supposed future
apartment would need curtains or curtain rods. There is no evidence
that Oswald had rented an apartment, or that he was even active
looking to rent one at the time.

Those two factors remove any need for LHO to be carting around curtain
rods on the 22nd.

[gjjma...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 10:38:59 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
> https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1614/curtain-rod-debacle

https://gil-jesus.com/the-curtain-rod-debacle/

[Hank Sienzant]

Fringe reset. One of the shortest o record. You ignored all the points in opposition and reposted the link. Do you expect us to repost all the points in opposition once more, so you can ignore them again?

[Gil Jesus]

On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 2:40:47 PM UTC-4, recip...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 9:38:59 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
>
> > https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1614/curtain-rod-debacle
> The Allen Grant photo, taken before ether the FWST or Gene Daniels
> photos, shows that the curtain rods were in place, undamaged, and
> intact on the afternoon of the 22nd. That is, the Grant photo shows
> that there was no need for Oswald to bring curtain rods to his room
> to fix anything. Period. This photo has already been brought up and
> linked to in the other curtain rods threads. How did you miss it?

Wrong again, Jerry.

How did you miss that the Grant photo showed the curtain rods on the far window to be damaged ?

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/OswaldRoom_1963.jpg

They're actually seem to be hanging lower than in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram photo.

[John Corbett]

On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:03:48 AM UTC-4, gjjma...@gmail.com wrote:

The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods. The key question is why
he needed to make a special trip to Irving on Thursday evening if it was for curtain rods. Why
not just pick up the curtain rods on his regular weekend visit? The fact that Oswald made a
special trip on Thursday night indicates it was for something he needed on FRIDAY.

Another key question is why the bag Oswald carried into the TSBD on Friday morning would
have been opened up in the TSBD and what happened to the curtain rods that Oswald claimed
were in that bag?

The question of whether Oswald needed curtain rods is secondary to the above questions which
need answers for Oswald's curtain rod story to be plausible.

[Steven Galbraith]

Well, yes and no. If it can be shown that he didn't need curtain rods - the rods in his room were fine - then that demolishes the defense that he did indeed need them. Then the Oswald defense attorneys have to come up with a new argument for the need for that trip. But they can: he was embarrassed to tell Frazier he needed to see Marina so he made an excuse to do so. So his "I need curtain rods" story was just a cover story for Frazier for the ride.
But then again: what was in the bag? His lunch? Rods? Well, if he didn't need rods then it was his lunch? But Frazier said Oswald told him *for the first time he rode with him* that he was going to buy his lunch, that he didn't bring one. So the bag didn't have curtain rods - that was a story he made - and it didn't have his lunch.
What was in it? At this point the Oswald defense attorneys pound the table and yell, "The CIA and JFK was going to end the Cold War and Hoover and Vietnam!!"

[Gil Jesus]

On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:26:01 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:

> The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods. The key question is why
> he needed to make a special trip to Irving on Thursday evening if it was for curtain rods. Why
> not just pick up the curtain rods on his regular weekend visit? The fact that Oswald made a
> special trip on Thursday night indicates it was for something he needed on FRIDAY.

Bullshit John.
He had had a fight with his wife the weekend before over his using an alias to rent the room on North Beckley.
A nosy 19-year old kid named Frazier asked him why he was going to Irving on Thursday.
Given what happened and the reason why, what would you have said to Frazier ?

Would you have told him about your private marital woes ?
Would you have told him how you were using aliases and renting post office boxes to avoid harrassment by the FBI ?
Would you have told him your life story ? How you were stationed at a CIA base in Japan ?
Give me a break, will ya ?

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 07:45:37 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 10:38:59?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>> https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1614/curtain-rod-debacle
>

>Still waiting for someone to explain why Oswald needed to make a special trip ...

You're lying again.

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 10:29:28 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 10:50:34?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

>> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 10:45:39?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
>>> Still waiting for someone to explain why Oswald needed to make a special trip to Irving on
>>> Thursday night to get curtain rods when he could just as easily picked him up on his
>>> regular weekend visit to the Paine's house. Why the urgency? What did he need to get
>>> on Thursday night that couldn't wait for the weekend? Hmmm! That's a head scratcher.
>>>
>>> Unless someone can come up with a plausible answer for that, the whole question about
>>> whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods is moot.
>> Read Marina Oswald's testimony, although I know you won't.
>
>Isn't it amazing how the conspiracy hobbyists always expect LNs to find the support for
>their arguments. It's called burden shifting. They do this when they know they can't back
>up what they claim.

Forcing believers to confront the evidence is a sysyphean task.

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 11:25:38 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 1:54:42?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

Is that what you believe?

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 11:06:42 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

Believers just LOVE speculation. It's one of the pillars to their
faith.

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 11:40:45 -0700 (PDT), "recip...@gmail.com"
<recip...@gmail.com> wrote:

Speculation piled on top of speculation.

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 06:26:00 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:03:48?AM UTC-4, gjjma...@gmail.com wrote:

>> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 10:38:59?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>> > https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1614/curtain-rod-debacle
>> https://gil-jesus.com/the-curtain-rod-debacle/
>
>The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods.

This was, in the past, a key argument of believers.

It no longer works...

>The key question is why he needed to make a special trip

There you go, lying again Corbutt.

>to Irving on Thursday evening if it was for curtain rods. Why
>not just pick up the curtain rods on his regular weekend visit? The fact that Oswald made a
>special trip on Thursday night indicates it was for something he needed on FRIDAY.

Speculation isn't evidence. Never has been, never will be.

>Another key question is why the bag Oswald carried into the TSBD on Friday morning would
>have been opened up in the TSBD and what happened to the curtain rods that Oswald claimed
>were in that bag?

Will Huckster name this logical fallacy? I know Corbutt won't.

>The question of whether Oswald needed curtain rods is secondary to the above questions which
>need answers for Oswald's curtain rod story to be plausible.

The only criteria for plausibility for believers is whether or not the
WCR said it.

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 06:49:12 -0700 (PDT), Steven Galbraith
<stevemg...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Well, yes and no. If it can be shown that he didn't need curtain rods - the rods in his room were fine - then that demolishes the defense that he did indeed need them. Then the Oswald defense attorneys have to come up with a new argument for the need for that trip. But they can: he was embarrassed to tell Frazier he needed to see Marina so he made an excuse to do so. So his "I need curtain rods" story was just a cover story for Frazier for the ride.
>But then again: what was in the bag? His lunch? Rods? Well, if he didn't need rods then it was his lunch? But Frazier said Oswald told him *for the first time he rode with him* that he was going to buy his lunch, that he didn't bring one. So the bag didn't have curtain rods - that was a story he made - and it didn't have his lunch.
>What was in it? At this point the Oswald defense attorneys pound the table and yell, "The CIA and JFK was going to end the Cold War and Hoover and Vietnam!!"

Of course, Steven is so sure of himself that he can't be bothered to
debate those who can show how STUPID his arguments are.

You'll notice that Huckster doesn't chime in, so I'll quote Huckster:

"Curiously, you posted no evidence. no citations, no documents, no
testimony, no exhibits, no witness videos.

Only comments. We gain nothing from the above.

Which makes who exactly the fool?"

[Gil Jesus]

On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:49:15 AM UTC-4, Steven Galbraith wrote:
> Well, yes and no. If it can be shown that he didn't need curtain rods - the rods in his room were fine - then that demolishes the defense that he did indeed need them. Then the Oswald defense attorneys have to come up with a new argument for the need for that trip. But they can: he was embarrassed to tell Frazier he needed to see Marina so he made an excuse to do so. So his "I need curtain rods" story was just a cover story for Frazier for the ride.
> But then again: what was in the bag? His lunch? Rods? Well, if he didn't need rods then it was his lunch? But Frazier said Oswald told him *for the first time he rode with him* that he was going to buy his lunch, that he didn't bring one. So the bag didn't have curtain rods - that was a story he made - and it didn't have his lunch.
> What was in it? At this point the Oswald defense attorneys pound the table and yell, "The CIA and JFK was going to end the Cold War and Hoover and Vietnam!!"

Dear Professor DumDum:

The Grant photo shows the same damage to the curtain rods in Oswald's room as the Fort-Worth telegram photo shows, albeit from another angle.

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/OswaldRoom_1963.jpg

My four hours on line for today is over. Have a nice day.

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 06:52:04 -0700 (PDT), Gil Jesus
<gjjma...@gmail.com> wrote:

Common sense isn't something believers have. If it's not in their
bible, they don't accept it.

[Hank Sienzant]

On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:55:48 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 06:26:00 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
> <geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:03:48?AM UTC-4, gjjma...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 10:38:59?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
> >> > https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1614/curtain-rod-debacle
> >> https://gil-jesus.com/the-curtain-rod-debacle/
> >
> >The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods.
> This was, in the past, a key argument of believers.

This was a key argument of the original critics… that Oswald’s room needed curtain rods. As we saw, Gil Jesus even repeats that claim in the link provided here:

https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1615/curtain-rod-debacle?page=1&scrollTo=1716

Are you claiming those critics were wrong to claim his room needed curtain rods in the past?
Are you claiming Gil Jesus is wrong to so assert at the link above?

>
> It no longer works...
> >The key question is why he needed to make a special trip
> There you go, lying again Corbutt.

No, why go on Thursday instead of Friday to get curtain rods he didn’t need as a excuse to make a special trip he didn’t need to make?

If he goes on Friday, he needs no special explanation to explain a Thursday trip.

[Hank Sienzant]

On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:52:05 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:26:01 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
> > The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods. The key question is why
> > he needed to make a special trip to Irving on Thursday evening if it was for curtain rods. Why
> > not just pick up the curtain rods on his regular weekend visit? The fact that Oswald made a
> > special trip on Thursday night indicates it was for something he needed on FRIDAY.
> Bullshit John.
> He had had a fight with his wife the weekend before over his using an alias to rent the room on North Beckley.
> A nosy 19-year old kid named Frazier asked him why he was going to Irving on Thursday.

Why was he, Gil? What was he going to accomplish on Thursday that he couldn’t accomplish on Friday?
If he goes on Friday, Frazier understands it’s Oswald’s normal weekend visit, right?
And no questions get asked?
But Frazier does ask, because this Thursday trip is out of the norm, isn’t it, and that “nosy 19-year old kid named Frazier asked him why” doesn’t he?
Your speculation is Oswald didn’t want to talk about his marital woes, so he made up the curtain rod story. But why then the urgency to go on Thursday, Gil?

> Given what happened and the reason why, what would you have said to Frazier ?
>
> Would you have told him about your private marital woes ?
> Would you have told him how you were using aliases and renting post office boxes to avoid harrassment by the FBI ?
> Would you have told him your life story ? How you were stationed at a CIA base in Japan ?
> Give me a break, will ya ?

Why did Oswald make a special trip to the Paine’s on Thursday, Gil?

[John Corbett]

On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:52:05 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:26:01 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
> > The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods. The key question is why
> > he needed to make a special trip to Irving on Thursday evening if it was for curtain rods. Why
> > not just pick up the curtain rods on his regular weekend visit? The fact that Oswald made a
> > special trip on Thursday night indicates it was for something he needed on FRIDAY.
> Bullshit John.
> He had had a fight with his wife the weekend before over his using an alias to rent the room on North Beckley.
> A nosy 19-year old kid named Frazier asked him why he was going to Irving on Thursday.
> Given what happened and the reason why, what would you have said to Frazier ?

I'd have probably made up some bullshit story like I needed to pick up some curtain rods.

>
> Would you have told him about your private marital woes ?
> Would you have told him how you were using aliases and renting post office boxes to avoid harrassment by the FBI ?
> Would you have told him your life story ? How you were stationed at a CIA base in Japan ?
> Give me a break, will ya ?

That's why you go with a bullshit story.

[John Corbett]

It is duly noted you offered no explanation.

[John Corbett]

You guys don't present evidence. You point to some document, claim the evidence is
somewhere in the document, and expect the LNs to find it. If you are aware of the
evidence to support your claims, the burden is on you to present it yourself, not expect
others to go on a scavenger hunt to find it.

[John Corbett]

Once again, Benny has no rebuttal to the points made so he just labels them logical
fallacies and ignores them. How many times have we seen this movie.

[Hank Sienzant]

Hilarious. The Grant photo shows the rod appears straight.

Regardless, both photos show the curtain rod is fully functional, and there are Venetian blinds for privacy as well. So why did Oswald need curtain rods?

You appear to be arguing Oswald’s room needed curtain rods, but you’re also arguing Oswald made up the curtain rod story entirely.

Please explain.

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 07:41:06 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:52:05?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:26:01?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
>>> The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods. The key question is why
>>> he needed to make a special trip to Irving on Thursday evening if it was for curtain rods. Why
>>> not just pick up the curtain rods on his regular weekend visit? The fact that Oswald made a
>>> special trip on Thursday night indicates it was for something he needed on FRIDAY.
>> Bullshit John.
>> He had had a fight with his wife the weekend before over his using an alias to rent the room on North Beckley.
>> A nosy 19-year old kid named Frazier asked him why he was going to Irving on Thursday.
>

> But why then the urgency to go on Thursday, Gil?

Why the speculation that there was any "urgency" to go Thursday,
Huckster? Could it be that you're assuming something here?

>> Given what happened and the reason why, what would you have said to Frazier ?
>>
>> Would you have told him about your private marital woes ?
>> Would you have told him how you were using aliases and renting post office boxes to avoid harrassment by the FBI ?
>> Would you have told him your life story ? How you were stationed at a CIA base in Japan ?
>> Give me a break, will ya ?
>
>Why did Oswald make a special trip to the Paine’s on Thursday, Gil?

Why do you presume it's a "special" trip, Huckster?

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 07:24:25 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:55:48?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 06:26:00 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
>> <geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:03:48?AM UTC-4, gjjma...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 10:38:59?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>>>>> https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1614/curtain-rod-debacle
>>>> https://gil-jesus.com/the-curtain-rod-debacle/
>>>
>>>The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods.
>> This was, in the past, a key argument of believers.
>
> This was a key argument of the original critics… that Oswald’s room
> needed curtain rods. As we saw, Gil Jesus even repeats that claim in\
> the link provided here:

This was a key argument of original believers that has been proven
false.

Own it.

Critics have been proven right, and believers wrong...

>> It no longer works...
>>>The key question is why he needed to make a special trip
>> There you go, lying again Corbutt.
>

>No, why go on Thursday instead of Friday...


Why not read a newpaper and tell us.

Did you read the newspaper today?

[Hank Sienzant]

On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:55:48 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:

> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 06:26:00 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
> <geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:03:48?AM UTC-4, gjjma...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 10:38:59?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
> >> > https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1614/curtain-rod-debacle
> >> https://gil-jesus.com/the-curtain-rod-debacle/
> >
> >The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods.
> This was, in the past, a key argument of believers.
>
> It no longer works...
> >The key question is why he needed to make a special trip
> There you go, lying again Corbutt.

If it wasn’t a special trip, why did Frazier inquire as to the nature / reason for the trip?

Did he do this for every trip?

Frazier himself claimed the fact it was a Thursday, and not the normal Friday, raised the question of why this trip in his mind:
== quote ==
Mr. BALL - Now, there was the one date that Oswald came to you and asked you to drive him back to Irving, it was not a Friday, was it?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; it wasn't.
Mr. BALL - It was on a Thursday.
Mr. FRAZIER - Right.
Mr. BALL - Was that the 21st of November?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - Well, tell us about that.
Mr. FRAZIER - Well, I say, we were standing like I said at the four-headed table about half as large as this, not, quite half as large, but anyway I was standing there getting the orders in and he said, "Could I ride home with you this afternoon?"
And I said, "Sure. You know, like I told you, you can go home with me any time you want to, like I say anytime you want to go see your wife that is all right with me."
So automatically I knew it wasn't Friday, I come to think it wasn't Friday and I said, "Why are you going home today?"
And he says, "I am going home to get some curtain rods." He said, "You know, put in an apartment."
He wanted to hang up some curtains and I said, "Very well." And I never thought more about it and I had some invoices in my hands for some orders and I walked on off and started filling the orders.
== unquote ==

[Hank Sienzant]

On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 11:49:51 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 07:41:06 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
> <hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:52:05?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
> >> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:26:01?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
> >>> The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods. The key question is why
> >>> he needed to make a special trip to Irving on Thursday evening if it was for curtain rods. Why
> >>> not just pick up the curtain rods on his regular weekend visit? The fact that Oswald made a
> >>> special trip on Thursday night indicates it was for something he needed on FRIDAY.
> >> Bullshit John.
> >> He had had a fight with his wife the weekend before over his using an alias to rent the room on North Beckley.
> >> A nosy 19-year old kid named Frazier asked him why he was going to Irving on Thursday.
> >
> > But why then the urgency to go on Thursday, Gil?
> Why the speculation that there was any "urgency" to go Thursday,
> Huckster? Could it be that you're assuming something here?

He could have waited a day and gone on his normal Friday. He made special arrangements to go a day early, seeking Frazier out on Thursday morning and inquiring about a ride on Thursday evening. That speaks to some urgency to go a day earlier than normal.

> >> Given what happened and the reason why, what would you have said to Frazier ?
> >>
> >> Would you have told him about your private marital woes ?
> >> Would you have told him how you were using aliases and renting post office boxes to avoid harrassment by the FBI ?
> >> Would you have told him your life story ? How you were stationed at a CIA base in Japan ?
> >> Give me a break, will ya ?
> >
> >Why did Oswald make a special trip to the Paine’s on Thursday, Gil?
> Why do you presume it's a "special" trip, Huckster?

Frazier defined it that way. He said he knew it wasn’t the normal Friday trip, so he asked the reason.
== quote ==

Mr. FRAZIER - Well, I say, we were standing like I said at the four-headed table about half as large as this, not, quite half as large, but anyway I was standing there getting the orders in and he said, "Could I ride home with you this afternoon?"
And I said, "Sure. You know, like I told you, you can go home with me any time you want to, like I say anytime you want to go see your wife that is all right with me."
So automatically I knew it wasn't Friday, I come to think it wasn't Friday and I said, "Why are you going home today?"
And he says, "I am going home to get some curtain rods." He said, "You know, put in an apartment."
He wanted to hang up some curtains and I said, "Very well." And I never thought more about it and I had some invoices in my hands for some orders and I walked on off and started filling the orders.
== unquote ==

Suggestion: You can always call Frazier a co-conspirator.

[Gil Jesus]

You people REALLY don't read the tesimony, do you ?

Mr. RANKIN. Did your husband give a reason for coming home Thursday ?
Mrs. OSWALD. He said he was lonely because he hadn't come the preceding weekend and he wanted to make his peace with me. ( 1 H 65 )

The guy has an argument with his wife on Sunday, he calls her on Monday and she hangs up on him. So he doesn't come out to Irving on the weekend of Nov 15-17.
And he shows up unexpectedly on the following Thursday, hoping she's cooled off by then.
If she hasn't, he can get a ride back to Dallas on Friday with Frazier and stay there the weekend.
If he goes to Irving on Friday, and she's still pissed off at him , he has no ride back to Dallas.

Geez, can't you people figure it out for yourselves ?

[Steven Galbraith]

It's called pounding the table and waving your hands. Again, they think they are all defense attorneys - Oswald as Dreyfus - that they want to exonerate from "the government" and the evil war mongers who wanted war but JFK was stopping.
Start from there: Oswald as innocent waif, JFK as enemy of the war state, the war state needing to eliminate him; and then weave or reverse engineer a conspiracy from there.

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 10:32:53 -0700 (PDT), Gil Jesus
<gjjma...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 10:41:07?AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:52:05?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

Too much common sense...

[Hank Sienzant]

On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 11:52:00 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 07:24:25 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
> <hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
> >On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:55:48?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> >> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 06:26:00 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
> >> <geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:03:48?AM UTC-4, gjjma...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 10:38:59?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
> >>>>> https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1614/curtain-rod-debacle
> >>>> https://gil-jesus.com/the-curtain-rod-debacle/
> >>>
> >>>The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods.
> >> This was, in the past, a key argument of believers.
> >
> > This was a key argument of the original critics… that Oswald’s room
> > needed curtain rods. As we saw, Gil Jesus even repeats that claim in\
> > the link provided here:
> This was a key argument of original believers that has been proven
> false.

The “Oswald’s room needed curtain rods” assertion was by critics of the Commission’s report.

>
> Own it.
>
> Critics have been proven right, and believers wrong...

By presuming / speculating Oswald lied to Frazier about the reason for the trip?

> >> It no longer works...
> >>>The key question is why he needed to make a special trip
> >> There you go, lying again Corbutt.

Frazier thought it was out of the ordinary enough to inquire as to the purpose.
Even Gil admits Frazier asked this question.

> >
> >No, why go on Thursday instead of Friday...
>
>
> Why not read a newpaper and tell us.

Non sequitur.

>
> Did you read the newspaper today?

Another non sequitur.

[Hank Sienzant]

So he gave one reason to Frazier (curtain rods), another to Marina (attempt to patch things up), and yet a third to police in his interrogation sessions (the weekend upcoming was a kids’ birthday party and he didn’t want to be around for that).

In actuality, he missed the preceding weekend because that’s when the kids’ birthday party was. So we know he was lying about at least two, if not all three.

If his true purpose was to patch things up with his wife, why didn’t he explain that to the police, and why’d he lie in custody about the reason for the Thursday trip?

>
> The guy has an argument with his wife on Sunday, he calls her on Monday and she hangs up on him. So he doesn't come out to Irving on the weekend of Nov 15-17.

What was the argument about, Gil?

> And he shows up unexpectedly on the following Thursday, hoping she's cooled off by then.
> If she hasn't, he can get a ride back to Dallas on Friday with Frazier and stay there the weekend.
> If he goes to Irving on Friday, and she's still pissed off at him , he has no ride back to Dallas.
>
> Geez, can't you people figure it out for yourselves ?

Buses run on weekends in Dallas, Gil.

[Hank Sienzant]

You people REALLY don't read the testimony, do you ?

She tried to reach him (with Ruth Paine’s help) on Sunday, but failed because he was living under an alias. They asked for Mr. Oswald but was told there was no such person living there).

The argument started on Monday.when she asked why he gave her a number he could not be reached at.

> he calls her on Monday and she hangs up on him. So he doesn't come out to Irving on the weekend of Nov 15-17.
> And he shows up unexpectedly on the following Thursday, hoping she's cooled off by then.

According to who? Oswald himself never said that. Again, he gave three different excuses for the Thursday trip, none of which was he’s “hoping she's cooled off by then”.

> If she hasn't, he can get a ride back to Dallas on Friday with Frazier and stay there the weekend.
> If he goes to Irving on Friday, and she's still pissed off at him , he has no ride back to Dallas.
>

Curiously, his rifle was able to get a ride to the Depository that Friday morning.

> Geez, can't you people figure it out for yourselves ?

We did a long time ago. You guys are still trying to find workable excuses for everything Oswald said and did.

[Charles Schuyler]

On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 10:52:00 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 07:24:25 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
> <hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
> >On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:55:48?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> >> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 06:26:00 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
> >> <geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:03:48?AM UTC-4, gjjma...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 10:38:59?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
> >>>>> https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1614/curtain-rod-debacle
> >>>> https://gil-jesus.com/the-curtain-rod-debacle/
> >>>
> >>>The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods.
> >> This was, in the past, a key argument of believers.
> >
> > This was a key argument of the original critics… that Oswald’s room
> > needed curtain rods. As we saw, Gil Jesus even repeats that claim in\
> > the link provided here:

> This was a key argument of original believers that has been proven
> false.
>
> Own it.

Weird. Aren't you the guy who says the paper bag held Oswald's lunch?

Why are you right and why is Gil wrong?

You said that Oswald brought his lunch to work in the infamous bag. You said that here:

From the Benny Tracker series:

91.) On February 26th 2019 at the 'Steve's A Moron...' thread, Ben--in response to a question about what Oswald had in the long bag he carried to work that morning--has finally settled on an answer. See below:

Question: "And one ancillary question: Do you think he brought curtain rods with him to work that day? What was in the bag he carried?"

Ben: "His lunch."

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/CDHACkb1uXI/m/zBw5aM1ABwAJ


Squirm out of that one, little fella.

[John Corbett]

So you acknowledge he wasn't going to get curtain rods.

So then the question is, what did he have in that long bag he brought to work on Friday?

[recip...@gmail.com]

On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 8:25:54 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 2:40:47 PM UTC-4, recip...@gmail.com wrote:

> > On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 9:38:59 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
> >
> > > https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1614/curtain-rod-debacle

> > The Allen Grant photo, taken before ether the FWST or Gene Daniels
> > photos, shows that the curtain rods were in place, undamaged, and
> > intact on the afternoon of the 22nd. That is, the Grant photo shows
> > that there was no need for Oswald to bring curtain rods to his room
> > to fix anything. Period. This photo has already been brought up and
> > linked to in the other curtain rods threads. How did you miss it?

> Wrong again, Jerry.
>
> How did you miss that the Grant photo showed the curtain rods on the far window to be damaged ?
>
> https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/OswaldRoom_1963.jpg
>
> They're actually seem to be hanging lower than in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram photo.

The Grant photo shows that the curtain rod was straight and
undamaged, especially in the area where it was bent and twisted
in the later photos. So thank you for that, I guess. And maybe
invest in a good eye exam.

[Steven Galbraith]

Oswald had a lot of guests to his place so he wanted it to be just right. As if he would care about this?
I'm waiting for the claim that the bag contained both the curtain rods *and* his lunch. Should be arriving soon......
Any explanation that doesn't have Oswald as a participant - you can say he was used or manipulated or directed, fine - has to go to extremes like this curtain rod story. It's absurd and illogical on multi levels. The evidence simply doesn't withstand the slightest critical scrutiny. But defending Oswald at all costs leads one to promoting such nonsense.

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 08:09:26 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

If you refuse to read the cite, that's *YOUR* problem.

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 08:06:05 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

It is duly noted that you lied again.

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 08:22:29 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:55:52?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:49:15?AM UTC-4, Steven Galbraith wrote:
>>> Well, yes and no. If it can be shown that he didn't need curtain rods - the rods in his room were fine - then that demolishes the defense that he did indeed need them. Then the Oswald defense attorneys have to come up with a new argument for the need for that trip. But they can: he was embarrassed to tell Frazier he needed to see Marina so he made an excuse to do so. So his "I need curtain rods" story was just a cover story for Frazier for the ride.
>>> But then again: what was in the bag? His lunch? Rods? Well, if he didn't need rods then it was his lunch? But Frazier said Oswald told him *for the first time he rode with him* that he was going to buy his lunch, that he didn't bring one. So the bag didn't have curtain rods - that was a story he made - and it didn't have his lunch.
>>> What was in it? At this point the Oswald defense attorneys pound the table and yell, "The CIA and JFK was going to end the Cold War and Hoover and Vietnam!!"
>> Dear Professor DumDum:
>>
>> The Grant photo shows the same damage to the curtain rods in Oswald's room as the Fort-Worth telegram photo shows, albeit from another angle.
>
>Hilarious. The Grant photo shows the rod appears straight.
>
>Regardless, both photos show the curtain rod is fully functional, and there are Venetian blinds for privacy as well. So why did Oswald need curtain rods?
>
>You appear to be arguing Oswald’s room needed curtain rods, but you’re also arguing Oswald made up the curtain rod story entirely.
>
>Please explain.

No.

No explanation will satisfy you. You deny facts CLEARLY quoted, and
simply turn a blind eye.

It is a FACT that curtain rods were repaired/replaced the weekend of
the assassination.

And no matter what you do - the evidence is clear.

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 09:46:55 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 11:49:51?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 07:41:06 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
>> <hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:52:05?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:26:01?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
>>>>> The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods. The key question is why
>>>>> he needed to make a special trip to Irving on Thursday evening if it was for curtain rods. Why
>>>>> not just pick up the curtain rods on his regular weekend visit? The fact that Oswald made a
>>>>> special trip on Thursday night indicates it was for something he needed on FRIDAY.
>>>> Bullshit John.
>>>> He had had a fight with his wife the weekend before over his using an alias to rent the room on North Beckley.
>>>> A nosy 19-year old kid named Frazier asked him why he was going to Irving on Thursday.
>>>
>>> But why then the urgency to go on Thursday, Gil?
>>
>> Why the speculation that there was any "urgency" to go Thursday,
>> Huckster? Could it be that you're assuming something here?
>

>He could have ...


Didn't need to read any further.

Speculation isn't evidence.

>>>> Given what happened and the reason why, what would you have said to Frazier ?
>>>>
>>>> Would you have told him about your private marital woes ?
>>>> Would you have told him how you were using aliases and renting post office boxes to avoid harrassment by the FBI ?
>>>> Would you have told him your life story ? How you were stationed at a CIA base in Japan ?
>>>> Give me a break, will ya ?
>>>
>>>Why did Oswald make a special trip to the Paine’s on Thursday, Gil?
>> Why do you presume it's a "special" trip, Huckster?
>
>Frazier defined it that way.

Frazier can say anything he wants... his OPINION is not evidence that
Oswald is the sole assassin of JFK.

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 07:48:54 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:52:05?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:26:01?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
>>> The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods. The key question is why
>>> he needed to make a special trip to Irving on Thursday evening if it was for curtain rods. Why
>>> not just pick up the curtain rods on his regular weekend visit? The fact that Oswald made a
>>> special trip on Thursday night indicates it was for something he needed on FRIDAY.
>> Bullshit John.
>> He had had a fight with his wife the weekend before over his using an alias to rent the room on North Beckley.
>> A nosy 19-year old kid named Frazier asked him why he was going to Irving on Thursday.
>> Given what happened and the reason why, what would you have said to Frazier ?
>
> I'd have probably made up some bullshit story like I needed to pick
> up some curtain rods.

Or he could have said what *HE* said he said.

Ever consider that possibility?

>> Would you have told him about your private marital woes ?
>> Would you have told him how you were using aliases and renting post office boxes to avoid harrassment by the FBI ?
>> Would you have told him your life story ? How you were stationed at a CIA base in Japan ?
>> Give me a break, will ya ?
>
>That's why you go with a bullshit story.

Evidence isn't "bullshit." Neither is common sense.

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 08:10:59 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:55:48?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 06:26:00 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
>> <geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:03:48?AM UTC-4, gjjma...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 10:38:59?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>>>>> https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1614/curtain-rod-debacle
>>>> https://gil-jesus.com/the-curtain-rod-debacle/
>>>
>>>The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods.
>> This was, in the past, a key argument of believers.
>>
>> It no longer works...
>>>The key question is why he needed to make a special trip
>> There you go, lying again Corbutt.
>>>to Irving on Thursday evening if it was for curtain rods. Why
>>>not just pick up the curtain rods on his regular weekend visit? The fact that Oswald made a
>>>special trip on Thursday night indicates it was for something he needed on FRIDAY.
>> Speculation isn't evidence. Never has been, never will be.
>>>Another key question is why the bag Oswald carried into the TSBD on Friday morning would
>>>have been opened up in the TSBD and what happened to the curtain rods that Oswald claimed
>>>were in that bag?
>> Will Huckster name this logical fallacy? I know Corbutt won't.

And he hasn't.

Indeed, he snipped out the question...

>>>The question of whether Oswald needed curtain rods is secondary to the above questions which
>>>need answers for Oswald's curtain rod story to be plausible.
>>
>> The only criteria for plausibility for believers is whether or not the
>> WCR said it.
>
>Once again, Benny has no rebuttal to the points made so he just labels them logical
>fallacies and ignores them. How many times have we seen this movie.

The story is ALREADY plausible. What are the odds that photographers
would take photos of the curtain rods being fixed/repaired/replaced if
no work needed to be done?

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 09:40:04 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:55:48?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 06:26:00 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
>> <geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:03:48?AM UTC-4, gjjma...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 10:38:59?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>>>>> https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1614/curtain-rod-debacle
>>>> https://gil-jesus.com/the-curtain-rod-debacle/
>>>
>>>The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods.
>> This was, in the past, a key argument of believers.
>>
>> It no longer works...
>>>The key question is why he needed to make a special trip
>> There you go, lying again Corbutt.
>

>If it wasn’t a special trip...

Tut tut tut... speculation isn't evidence. Your OPINION isn't
evidence.

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 11:10:51 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 11:52:00?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 07:24:25 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
>> <hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:55:48?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 06:26:00 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
>>>> <geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:03:48?AM UTC-4, gjjma...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 10:38:59?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>>>>>>> https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1614/curtain-rod-debacle
>>>>>> https://gil-jesus.com/the-curtain-rod-debacle/
>>>>>
>>>>>The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods.
>>>> This was, in the past, a key argument of believers.
>>>
>>> This was a key argument of the original critics… that Oswald’s room
>>> needed curtain rods. As we saw, Gil Jesus even repeats that claim in\
>>> the link provided here:
>> This was a key argument of original believers that has been proven
>> false.
>
>The “Oswald’s room needed curtain rods” assertion was by critics of the Commission’s report.

The 'Oswald's room needed no curtain rods because they weren't
allowed' and 'no curtain rods were found' assertions were by believers
of the Warren Commission Report. Made before the evidence came to
light.

As quoted...

>> Own it.
>>
>> Critics have been proven right, and believers wrong...
>

>By presuming / speculating...


About non-existent curtain rods and lying about the room he rented.

>>>> It no longer works...
>>>>>The key question is why he needed to make a special trip
>>>> There you go, lying again Corbutt.
>
>Frazier thought it was out of the ordinary enough to inquire as to the purpose.
>Even Gil admits Frazier asked this question.

You say this as if it means something...

Yet you PROVABLY don't believe Gil.

>>>No, why go on Thursday instead of Friday...
>>
>> Why not read a newpaper and tell us.
>
>Non sequitur.

Only because you've not read Reclaiming History.

>> Did you read the newspaper today?
>
>Another non sequitur.

Your failure to understand simply shows your ignorance.

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 10:35:58 -0700 (PDT), Steven Galbraith
<stevemg...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 11:22:30?AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:55:52?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:49:15?AM UTC-4, Steven Galbraith wrote:
>>>> Well, yes and no. If it can be shown that he didn't need curtain rods - the rods in his room were fine - then that demolishes the defense that he did indeed need them. Then the Oswald defense attorneys have to come up with a new argument for the need for that trip. But they can: he was embarrassed to tell Frazier he needed to see Marina so he made an excuse to do so. So his "I need curtain rods" story was just a cover story for Frazier for the ride.
>>>> But then again: what was in the bag? His lunch? Rods? Well, if he didn't need rods then it was his lunch? But Frazier said Oswald told him *for the first time he rode with him* that he was going to buy his lunch, that he didn't bring one. So the bag didn't have curtain rods - that was a story he made - and it didn't have his lunch.
>>>> What was in it? At this point the Oswald defense attorneys pound the table and yell, "The CIA and JFK was going to end the Cold War and Hoover and Vietnam!!"
>>> Dear Professor DumDum:
>>>
>>> The Grant photo shows the same damage to the curtain rods in Oswald's room as the Fort-Worth telegram photo shows, albeit from another angle.
>> Hilarious. The Grant photo shows the rod appears straight.
>>
>> Regardless, both photos show the curtain rod is fully functional, and there are Venetian blinds for privacy as well. So why did Oswald need curtain rods?
>>
>> You appear to be arguing Oswald’s room needed curtain rods, but you’re also arguing Oswald made up the curtain rod story entirely.
>>
>> Please explain.
>>>
>>> https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/OswaldRoom_1963.jpg
>>>
>>> My four hours on line for today is over. Have a nice day.
>
>It's called pounding the table and waving your hands.

Says the coward who cannot debate...

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 11:22:13 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 1:32:55?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 10:41:07?AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:52:05?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

>>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:26:01?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
>>>>> The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods. The key question is why
>>>>> he needed to make a special trip to Irving on Thursday evening if it was for curtain rods. Why
>>>>> not just pick up the curtain rods on his regular weekend visit? The fact that Oswald made a
>>>>> special trip on Thursday night indicates it was for something he needed on FRIDAY.
>>>> Bullshit John.
>>>> He had had a fight with his wife the weekend before over his using an alias to rent the room on North Beckley.
>>>> A nosy 19-year old kid named Frazier asked him why he was going to Irving on Thursday.
>>> Why was he, Gil? What was he going to accomplish on Thursday that he couldn’t accomplish on Friday?
>>> If he goes on Friday, Frazier understands it’s Oswald’s normal weekend visit, right?
>>> And no questions get asked?
>>> But Frazier does ask, because this Thursday trip is out of the norm, isn’t it, and that “nosy 19-year old kid named Frazier asked him why” doesn’t he?
>>> Your speculation is Oswald didn’t want to talk about his marital woes, so he made up the curtain rod story. But why then the urgency to go on Thursday, Gil?
>>>> Given what happened and the reason why, what would you have said to Frazier ?
>>>>
>>>> Would you have told him about your private marital woes ?
>>>> Would you have told him how you were using aliases and renting post office boxes to avoid harrassment by the FBI ?
>>>> Would you have told him your life story ? How you were stationed at a CIA base in Japan ?
>>>> Give me a break, will ya ?
>>> Why did Oswald make a special trip to the Paine’s on Thursday, Gil?
>> You people REALLY don't read the tesimony, do you ?
>>
>> Mr. RANKIN. Did your husband give a reason for coming home Thursday ?
>> Mrs. OSWALD. He said he was lonely because he hadn't come the preceding weekend and he wanted to make his peace with me. ( 1 H 65 )
>>

>> The guy has an argument with his wife on Sunday, he calls her on Monday and she hangs up on him. So he doesn't come out to Irving on the weekend of Nov 15-17.
>>

>> And he shows up unexpectedly on the following Thursday, hoping she's cooled off by then.
>> If she hasn't, he can get a ride back to Dallas on Friday with Frazier and stay there the weekend.
>> If he goes to Irving on Friday, and she's still pissed off at him , he has no ride back to Dallas.
>>
>> Geez, can't you people figure it out for yourselves ?

Well, we know that Huckster can't...

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 12:11:21 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 1:32:55?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 10:41:07?AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:52:05?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

>>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:26:01?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
>>>>> The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods. The key question is why
>>>>> he needed to make a special trip to Irving on Thursday evening if it was for curtain rods. Why
>>>>> not just pick up the curtain rods on his regular weekend visit? The fact that Oswald made a
>>>>> special trip on Thursday night indicates it was for something he needed on FRIDAY.
>>>> Bullshit John.
>>>> He had had a fight with his wife the weekend before over his using an alias to rent the room on North Beckley.
>>>> A nosy 19-year old kid named Frazier asked him why he was going to Irving on Thursday.
>>> Why was he, Gil? What was he going to accomplish on Thursday that he couldn’t accomplish on Friday?
>>> If he goes on Friday, Frazier understands it’s Oswald’s normal weekend visit, right?
>>> And no questions get asked?
>>> But Frazier does ask, because this Thursday trip is out of the norm, isn’t it, and that “nosy 19-year old kid named Frazier asked him why” doesn’t he?
>>> Your speculation is Oswald didn’t want to talk about his marital woes, so he made up the curtain rod story. But why then the urgency to go on Thursday, Gil?
>>>> Given what happened and the reason why, what would you have said to Frazier ?
>>>>
>>>> Would you have told him about your private marital woes ?
>>>> Would you have told him how you were using aliases and renting post office boxes to avoid harrassment by the FBI ?
>>>> Would you have told him your life story ? How you were stationed at a CIA base in Japan ?
>>>> Give me a break, will ya ?
>>> Why did Oswald make a special trip to the Paine’s on Thursday, Gil?
>> You people REALLY don't read the tesimony, do you ?
>>
>> Mr. RANKIN. Did your husband give a reason for coming home Thursday ?
>> Mrs. OSWALD. He said he was lonely because he hadn't come the preceding weekend and he wanted to make his peace with me. ( 1 H 65 )
>>
>> The guy has an argument with his wife on Sunday,
>
>You people REALLY don't read the testimony, do you ?

This is indeed what Gill asked.

>> he calls her on Monday and she hangs up on him. So he doesn't come out to Irving on the weekend of Nov 15-17.
>> And he shows up unexpectedly on the following Thursday, hoping she's cooled off by then.
>
>According to who?

That mythical "common sense" that believers believe in.

Except when it comes to the evidence.

>> If she hasn't, he can get a ride back to Dallas on Friday with Frazier and stay there the weekend.
>> If he goes to Irving on Friday, and she's still pissed off at him , he has no ride back to Dallas.
>>
>
>Curiously, his rifle was able to get a ride to the Depository that Friday morning.

Can you name this logical fallacy? Or will you lie again?

>> Geez, can't you people figure it out for yourselves ?
>

>We did a long time ago...


Sadly, you failed.

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 14:47:02 -0700 (PDT), Charles Schuyler
<ch...@reducedfeemortgage.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 10:52:00?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 07:24:25 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
>> <hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:55:48?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 06:26:00 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
>>>> <geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:03:48?AM UTC-4, gjjma...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 10:38:59?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>>>>>>> https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1614/curtain-rod-debacle
>>>>>> https://gil-jesus.com/the-curtain-rod-debacle/
>>>>>
>>>>>The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods.
>>>> This was, in the past, a key argument of believers.
>>>
>>> This was a key argument of the original critics… that Oswald’s room
>>> needed curtain rods. As we saw, Gil Jesus even repeats that claim in
>>> the link provided here:
>
>> This was a key argument of original believers that has been proven
>> false.
>>
>> Own it.
>
>Weird. Aren't you the guy who says the paper bag held Oswald's lunch?

I think it did.

However, this changes NOT AT ALL the fact that believers argued for a
long time that no curtain rods were found... and that the room Oswald
rented didn't allow them.

Own it!

>Why are you right and why is Gil wrong?

Gil isn't wrong... I've seen nothing he's posted that is not supported
by evidence.


>You said that Oswald brought his lunch to work...


Yep, that's probably what the bag contained.

>> Critics have been proven right, and believers wrong...

Notice that Chuckles stays COMPLETELY SILENT regarding past efforts by
believers to assert that no curtain rods were found.

Or than none were needed.

>>>> It no longer works...
>>>>>The key question is why he needed to make a special trip
>>>>
>>>> There you go, lying again Corbutt.
>>>
>>>No, why go on Thursday instead of Friday...
>>
>> Why not read a newpaper and tell us.
>>
>> Did you read the newspaper today?

Chuckles refuses to say... probably afraid that he'll reveal his
illiteracy...

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 16:26:49 -0700 (PDT), "recip...@gmail.com"
<recip...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 8:25:54?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
>> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 2:40:47?PM UTC-4, recip...@gmail.com wrote:

>>> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 9:38:59?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
>>>
>>>> https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1614/curtain-rod-debacle
>>> The Allen Grant photo, taken before ether the FWST or Gene Daniels
>>> photos, shows that the curtain rods were in place, undamaged, and
>>> intact on the afternoon of the 22nd. That is, the Grant photo shows
>>> that there was no need for Oswald to bring curtain rods to his room
>>> to fix anything. Period. This photo has already been brought up and
>>> linked to in the other curtain rods threads. How did you miss it?
>> Wrong again, Jerry.
>>
>> How did you miss that the Grant photo showed the curtain rods on the far window to be damaged ?
>>
>> https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/OswaldRoom_1963.jpg
>>
>> They're actually seem to be hanging lower than in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram photo.
>
>The Grant photo shows that the curtain rod was straight and
>undamaged, especially in the area where it was bent and twisted
>in the later photos. So thank you for that, I guess. And maybe
>invest in a good eye exam.

Is that what you think?

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 16:34:43 -0700 (PDT), Steven Galbraith
<stevemg...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 7:26:51?PM UTC-4, recip...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 8:25:54?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
>>> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 2:40:47?PM UTC-4, recip...@gmail.com wrote:

>>>> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 9:38:59?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1614/curtain-rod-debacle
>>>> The Allen Grant photo, taken before ether the FWST or Gene Daniels
>>>> photos, shows that the curtain rods were in place, undamaged, and
>>>> intact on the afternoon of the 22nd. That is, the Grant photo shows
>>>> that there was no need for Oswald to bring curtain rods to his room
>>>> to fix anything. Period. This photo has already been brought up and
>>>> linked to in the other curtain rods threads. How did you miss it?
>>> Wrong again, Jerry.
>>>
>>> How did you miss that the Grant photo showed the curtain rods on the far window to be damaged ?
>>>
>>> https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/OswaldRoom_1963.jpg
>>>
>>> They're actually seem to be hanging lower than in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram photo.
>>
>> The Grant photo shows that the curtain rod was straight and
>> undamaged, especially in the area where it was bent and twisted
>> in the later photos. So thank you for that, I guess. And maybe
>> invest in a good eye exam.
>
> Oswald had a lot of guests to his place so he wanted it to be just
> right. As if he would care about this?

Can you name this logical fallacy?

> I'm waiting for the claim that the bag contained both the curtain
> rods *and* his lunch. Should be arriving soon......

Can you name *this* logical fallacy?

> Any explanation that doesn't have Oswald as a participant - you can
> say he was used or manipulated or directed, fine - has to go to
> extremes like this curtain rod story. It's absurd and illogical on
> multi levels. The evidence simply doesn't withstand the slightest
> critical scrutiny. But defending Oswald at all costs leads one to
> promoting such nonsense.

And a third one!!! You're three for three!

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 16:13:08 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 1:32:55?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 10:41:07?AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:52:05?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:

What did *he* say was in it? Do you even know?

[Charles Schuyler]

How does this tie in with your claim that he brought his lunch to work in the much discussed brown bag? You made that claim here:

From the Benny Tracker series:

91.) On February 26th 2019 at the 'Steve's A Moron...' thread, Ben--in response to a question about what Oswald had in the long bag he carried to work that morning--has finally settled on an answer. See below:

Question: "And one ancillary question: Do you think he brought curtain rods with him to work that day? What was in the bag he carried?"

Ben: "His lunch."

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/CDHACkb1uXI/m/zBw5aM1ABwAJ


>

[Charles Schuyler]

So you're doubling down. What kind of lunch do you speculate Oswald carried in the bag that morning? Frazier testified to the length of the bag and how Oswald carried it towards the TSBD. Does that fit in with any known lunch he would've put together in the Paine's cramped kitchen that morning? Two feet long, approximately 5-6" wide, and as examined later, this bag was constructed of paper consistent in make up with type of the paper employees used to wrap and protect and ship merchandise at the TSBD. I know everything is bigger in Texas, but that's one heck of a sandwich.

And didn't Frazier testify that Oswald told him he was going to buy his lunch that day?

To summarize, you think Gil--in your opinion, a top notch, independent JFK researcher--is most likely honestly wrong about curtain rods being in the bag.

You think Oswald lied or misspoke, or that Frazier misremembered, lied (whatever) about being told by Oswald that his trip with Frazier on Thursday was to get curtain rods.

Ditto Friday morning. Frazier lied, misremembered (whatever) when he claims he asked Oswald what was in the bag he'd placed in the backseat of Frazier's car, and Oswald said something to the effect of, "Curtain rods. Remember I told you?"

Ditto Frazier's testimony to the WC when he reported that Oswald told him he was going to buy his lunch that day.

Why all the lies, Ben?

> >> Critics have been proven right, and believers wrong...
> Notice that Chuckles stays COMPLETELY SILENT regarding past efforts by
> believers to assert that no curtain rods were found.

Moving the goalposts, little fella. The argument per Fish Part Messiah is that there were curtain rods in the brown bag we're discussing. You claim it was most likely his lunch. You were definitive about it here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/CDHACkb1uXI/m/zBw5aM1ABwAJ

>
> Or than none were needed.
> >>>> It no longer works...
> >>>>>The key question is why he needed to make a special trip
> >>>>
> >>>> There you go, lying again Corbutt.
> >>>
> >>>No, why go on Thursday instead of Friday...
> >>
> >> Why not read a newpaper and tell us.
> >>
> >> Did you read the newspaper today?
> Chuckles refuses to say... probably afraid that he'll reveal his
> illiteracy...
> >>>>>to Irving on Thursday evening if it was for curtain rods. Why
> >>>>>not just pick up the curtain rods on his regular weekend visit? The fact that Oswald made a
> >>>>>special trip on Thursday night indicates it was for something he needed on FRIDAY.
> >>>> Speculation isn't evidence. Never has been, never will be.
> >>>>>Another key question is why the bag Oswald carried into the TSBD on Friday morning would
> >>>>>have been opened up in the TSBD and what happened to the curtain rods that Oswald claimed
> >>>>>were in that bag?
> >>>> Will Huckster name this logical fallacy? I know Corbutt won't.
> >>>>>The question of whether Oswald needed curtain rods is secondary to the above questions which
> >>>>>need answers for Oswald's curtain rod story to be plausible.
> >>>> The only criteria for plausibility for believers is whether or not the
> >>>> WCR said it.

Here's a little tip for you, little fella, since you're getting crushed into the concrete like a bug under a boot.

Quit while you're behind.

You and Fish Part are both making different claims, and neither claim compatible with each other nor to what was testified to. You can't both be right, and it is material to the question as to what happened in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63.

Different captains on different ships on different oceans traveling in different directions carrying different cargo to different ports, yet all pretending to be part of the same convoy: Team Oswald.

Toot! Toot!

Hilarious!

[Sky Throne 19efppp]

One thing we know was not in the 2-foot package was the Mannlicher-Carcano, which was too long to fit inside.

[Charles Schuyler]

Yet the rifle was recovered in the TSBD, and it is a ballistic match to the expended shells on the 6th floor and the bullet and larger fragments recovered as part of the crime investigation.

How did it get there, and who fired it?

One explanation is that Frazier had no reason to pay strict attention to the length of the bag and was off a little bit. Frazier's sister saw Oswald with the bag Friday morning and calculated the bag length to be around 27", and the largest component of the disassembled rifle--per the investigation--was less than 35". Pretty close.

Or maybe, as Ben claims, there was a two-foot long lunch of some sort in the bag.

[Sky Throne 19efppp]

Naturally, when the witnesses say what you like, then they are correct. And when they say what you don't like, then they are mistaken. That is Nutter Logic. Your murder weapon was not in the 2-foot package. If you were honest, then you would have to deal with that. But you are not honest, so the witnesses were "mistaken."

[Charles Schuyler]

Okay, no rifle in the bag. How did it get into the TSBD? You're claiming a conspiracy killed JFK, so let's hear your explanation. What was in the bag? Are you a part of Team Fish Part? (Curtain rods.) Team Yellow Pants? (Lunch.)

Or do you have a fresh and exciting new theory for explaining the mysterious 2' long bag and why Oswald traveled to the Paine's house via Frazier on the 21st? Let's hear it.

[Bud]

Who measured the bag Oswald carried in?

[Bud]

You have to consider all the information, and then apply reasoning to it. Leaves conspiracy folks out in the cold.

[Hank Sienzant]

Exactly Right.

I’ve made the point in the past, would it suffice if the FBI only estimated the length of the component parts of the weapon, and estimated the length of the longest piece at 27 inches, would that then be sufficient to establish the rifle was within the bag?

They are using estimates to exclude the weapon from the bag based on the actual measured length of the largest component of the weapon, and that’s exactly like comparing apples to oranges.

[John Corbett]

The criteria for believing or rejecting what a witness has said is not whether one likes or
dislikes what they have said but whether what they say can be corroborated or refuted by
the other available evidence. In this case, we have two witnesses who estimated the length of
a bag they had seen sometime earlier and had no reason to pay much attention to it. There
estimates were not done at the time they saw the bag but from memory when they were asked
about the length of considerably later. We had a bag found on the 6th floor which as actually
measured and was confirmed to have been carried by Oswald by the prints on the bottom of
the bag. The bag measured longer than either witness had estimated. Which is the more
compelling evidence as to the length of the bag?

> That is Nutter Logic.

No, that is your read herring. The sensible approach is to accept the measured length of the bag
over the estimates.

> Your murder weapon was not in the 2-foot package. If you were honest, then you would have to deal with that. But you are not honest, so the witnesses were "mistaken."

A witness' belated estimate of the length of the bag does not establish its length. This gives us
one more example of how bad conspiracy hobbyists are at weighing evidence. They think the
estimates of the length of the bag are more reliable than a measurement.

[Hank Sienzant]

Oswald’s room didn’t need curtain rods, both sets of photos from 11/22/63 establish there were curtains already up, and Venetian blinds in addition.

In custody, Oswald denied the curtain rod story in its entirety, contradicting what he separately told Frazier and Marina about the purpose of the Thursday trip.

You can’t explain how the various arguments against a rifle being within the long sack make any sense, so you decline to offer any explanation, pretending you don’t need to as I will reject reasonable explanations.

Your failure to offer a reasonable explanation is duly noted. It’s your failure to offer one, not my failure to accept the reasonable explanation you failed to offer. You don’t have one.

[Hank Sienzant]

And I’ve already established that you took at least one of those quotes out of context, as the preceding sentence referenced the Depository, so, in context, the poster was talking about curtain rods found at the TSBD. None were found there, yet you posted an out-of-context quote and pretended it was arguing for something it wasn’t.

That’s something you need to own.

> >> Own it.
> >>
> >> Critics have been proven right, and believers wrong...
> >
> >By presuming / speculating...
>
>
> About non-existent curtain rods and lying about the room he rented.

Make up your mind. If they are non-existent, then Oswald did not bring curtain rods to the Depository. And photos of curtain rods found in police archives don’t do anything to establish his innocence. It’s all mis-direction by critics and has been for nearly six decades.

It also means Oswald brought something else within that sack estimated at over two feet long. And his weapon was found in the building less than an hour after the shooting.

Critics failure to understand how the evidence fits together (or their pretense to fail to understand) is on them.

> >>>> It no longer works...
> >>>>>The key question is why he needed to make a special trip
> >>>> There you go, lying again Corbutt.
> >
> >Frazier thought it was out of the ordinary enough to inquire as to the purpose.
> >Even Gil admits Frazier asked this question.
> You say this as if it means something...
>
> Yet you PROVABLY don't believe Gil.

I believe Frazier and Frazier thought it was out of the ordinary enough to inquire as to the purpose.
You provably don’t accept Frazier’s questioning of Oswald’s need to go on a Thursday as establishing the trip was outside the norm.

> >>>No, why go on Thursday instead of Friday...
> >>
> >> Why not read a newpaper and tell us.
> >
> >Non sequitur.
> Only because you've not read Reclaiming History.
> >> Did you read the newspaper today?
> >
> >Another non sequitur.
> Your failure to understand simply shows your ignorance.

Enlighten me, or punt.

I expect you’ll punt.

[Hank Sienzant]

Curiously, you respond to my post, but deleted everything I wrote, and avoided even attempting to rebut anything I wrote.

[Hank Sienzant]

And I asked of Gil, pointing out Gil’s error in claiming Lee Oswald’s argument with Marina started Sunday. It didn’t, as Marina didn’t talk to Lee on Sunday.

> >> he calls her on Monday and she hangs up on him. So he doesn't come out to Irving on the weekend of Nov 15-17.
> >> And he shows up unexpectedly on the following Thursday, hoping she's cooled off by then.
> >
> >According to who?
> That mythical "common sense" that believers believe in.

No, according to Gil’s suppositions about Oswald’s motivations.

>
> Except when it comes to the evidence.

You never cite the evidence. You give vague and oblique references to it, and when asked to cite it,you decline, claiming there is no need, as everyone knows it already.

> >> If she hasn't, he can get a ride back to Dallas on Friday with Frazier and stay there the weekend.
> >> If he goes to Irving on Friday, and she's still pissed off at him , he has no ride back to Dallas.
> >>
> >
> >Curiously, his rifle was able to get a ride to the Depository that Friday morning.
> Can you name this logical fallacy? Or will you lie again?

Oswald’s rifle was found in the TSBD shortly after the assassination. The evidence indicates it was transported there in Frazier’s car on Friday morning, with Oswald claiming they were curtain rods to Frazier, and claiming it was his lunch to the police.

> >> Geez, can't you people figure it out for yourselves ?
> >
> >We did a long time ago...
>
>
> Sadly, you failed.

Hilarious!

Yet critics are the ones who haven’t yet agreed on what was in the bag they universally accept Oswald took to the Depository, nor can they provide any evidence indicating how Oswald’s rifle wound up at the TSBD.

[recip...@gmail.com]

That's what the photo shows.

[Hank Sienzant]

On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 10:48:25 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 09:46:55 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
> <hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
> >On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 11:49:51?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:

> >> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 07:41:06 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
> >> <hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:52:05?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
> >>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:26:01?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
> >>>>> The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods. The key question is why
> >>>>> he needed to make a special trip to Irving on Thursday evening if it was for curtain rods. Why
> >>>>> not just pick up the curtain rods on his regular weekend visit? The fact that Oswald made a
> >>>>> special trip on Thursday night indicates it was for something he needed on FRIDAY.
> >>>> Bullshit John.
> >>>> He had had a fight with his wife the weekend before over his using an alias to rent the room on North Beckley.
> >>>> A nosy 19-year old kid named Frazier asked him why he was going to Irving on Thursday.
> >>>

> >>> But why then the urgency to go on Thursday, Gil?
> >>

> >> Why the speculation that there was any "urgency" to go Thursday,
> >> Huckster? Could it be that you're assuming something here?
> >
> >He could have ...
>
>
> Didn't need to read any further.
>
> Speculation isn't evidence.

I didn’t speculate. I pointed out a fact that explains the use of the word “urgency”:
“He could have waited a day and gone on his normal Friday. He made special arrangements to go a day early, seeking Frazier out on Thursday morning and inquiring about a ride on Thursday evening. That speaks to some urgency to go a day earlier than normal.”

True to form, you ignored the fact, quoted incompletely and out of context, and pretended there was any speculation involved.

> >>>> Given what happened and the reason why, what would you have said to Frazier ?
> >>>>
> >>>> Would you have told him about your private marital woes ?
> >>>> Would you have told him how you were using aliases and renting post office boxes to avoid harrassment by the FBI ?
> >>>> Would you have told him your life story ? How you were stationed at a CIA base in Japan ?
> >>>> Give me a break, will ya ?
> >>>
> >>>Why did Oswald make a special trip to the Paine’s on Thursday, Gil?

> >> Why do you presume it's a "special" trip, Huckster?
> >
> >Frazier defined it that way.
> Frazier can say anything he wants... his OPINION is not evidence that
> Oswald is the sole assassin of JFK.

And that’s called the Moving the Goalposts LOGICAL FALLACY.

Your question here was whether it’s a “special” trip: “Why do you presume it's a ‘special’ trip, Huckster?”

I answered that. Frazier, who frequently gave Oswald rides home on Fridays, thought the trip on Thursday was out of the norm. Enough so, that he questioned Oswald about the purpose of the trip, a purpose that you admit Oswald lied about to Frazier (Oswald said curtain rods, you claim Oswald brought only his lunch). His questioning of Oswald establishes it was special enough to inquire about.

Stuck, you pretend the question was whether Oswald was the sole assassin of JFK.

As always, you painted yourself into a corner.

[Sky Throne 19efppp]

The best evidence I know of for how the rifle got into the TSBD is the account of Ralph Yates who said that on Wednesday, November 20 Oswald got out of his truck at the TSBD carrying a package of "curtain rods" which was long enough to hold a fully assembled Mannlicher-Carcano. If you don't like Yates, then there are other possibilities, of course, but that seems to be the best explanation. As for the Frazier Bag, if it is real, then it might have had a short gun in it. Evidence which I'm sure you have heard about implies a shot from behind the picket fence. A witness with a good but distant view, JC Price, saw a young man running away from that area to behind the TSBD carrying something just after the shots. Apparently Price thought it might have been a hat. Perhaps it was actually the bag in which the gun had been carried. This man ran to behind the TSBD, and could easily have beat everybody else to the 2nd floor. And it could have been curtain rods. SA Howlett did find some somewhere and had Lt. check them for prints. And The WC did pretend to find these same curtain rods in Ruth Paine's garage, after they had already been submitted to Lt. Day. Perhaps Oswald had another reason for going to Irving. We don't know everything, do we?

[recip...@gmail.com]

Yates' story is just too good to be true to be taken at face value. His "Oswald"
has a rifle-length package that is claimed to be curtain rods. "Oswald" then
asks Yates if he knew of the Carousel Club and Jack Ruby. Topping that,
"Oswald" proceeds to show Yates a photo of himself holding the rifle, before
asking Yates about the possibility of someone shooting the President with
a rifle from the upper floors of a building. Of course, "Oswald" then asks of
Yates knows the route of the motorcade.'

It's almost like the interviews of people who knew John David Stutz after JDS
assassinated Buckwheat in '81:

"Did you know John David Stutz?"

"I did. He was a rally great guy. Always nice to everyone, worked hard, helped
people out. Great guy"

"Do you think that he killed Buckwheat?"

"Ohh yeahhh. That's all he talked about! I'd ask him, 'John, why do you work
so hard?' and he'd say 'I'm gonna save up my money to buy a gun to kill
Buckwheat!'"

[Hank Sienzant]

Gil thinks Oswald transported curtain rods to the TSBD, Ben thinks Oswald took only his lunch, and Sky Throne is apparently agnostic on the issue.

The only thing they agree on here is there was no rifle in the bag — the one thing the evidence indicates was in the bag.

[Hank Sienzant]

Yeah, because we all know how great people are at estimating dimensions and how estimates overrule actual measurements, thereby eliminating the rifle from the bag.

> As for the Frazier Bag, if it is real, then it might have had a short gun in it.

Or a longer gun that was disassembled and put into the bag that was estimated as shorter than its actual length.

[Sky Throne 19efppp]

So, Nutter Logic demands that witnesses be dismissed who give accounts which actually fit the facts, whereas impossible stories, like a rifle fitting into a 2-foot package must be true. I see.

[recip...@gmail.com]

A lot of those really good stories that "fit the facts" do so because the facts
were force-fit into the narrative after-the-fact after the facts became widely,
publicly known. In this case, "Oswald" does everything he can to telegraph
that he was going to shoot the President two days before he did it. Doesn't
exactly seem like something an aspiring Presidential assassin would
volunteer to a random stranger he'd just met, now does it.

Anyway, Yates said he dropped Oswald off at the TSBD at 10:30AM on the
20th. Is it a fact that Oswald was that late that morning? it would be a fact
that is hard to work around, unless you're really, really into the stereo Oswald
theory

[Sky Throne 19efppp]

"A lot of stories are not true, so this particular one which I do not like is less likely to be true than the impossible one which I do like." What a marvel is this Nutter Logic! The Yates story is that he picked up Oswald in Oak Cliff at 10:30, and at 10:00 he had been seen at the Dobbs House, also in Oak Cliff. How did Yates know that Oswald had been seen in Oak Cliff just before he gave him a ride? Did Buckwheat tell him? Nobody at the TSBD was ever asked about Oswald being late on the 20th, but no record indicates that he was. Whereas, Yates and Mary Adda Dowling both saw him away from the TSBD on that morning. Evidence trumps lack of evidence.

[Gil Jesus]

On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 6:10:08 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
> And I asked of Gil, pointing out Gil’s error in claiming Lee Oswald’s argument with Marina started Sunday. It didn’t, as Marina didn’t talk to Lee on Sunday.

Wrong again, Hanky Panky. You either don't read the testimony or don't understand it.

On the weekend before the assassination, Nov 15-17, Oswald didn't go to Irving.
When he called fo permission to come, Marina told him not to come that weekend because "perhaps it is not convenient for Ruth" if he showed up every week.
Marina called his rooming house on SUNDAY of that weekend ( the 17th ) but she couldn't reach him because he used the O.H.Lee name.
Apparently, HE HAPPENED TO CALL HER ON SUNDAY because she testified, "this is when he had a quarrel over the "fictitious name".

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/WC_Vol1_63-osw-argument.gif

Oswald called her "several times" on Monday the 18th, ( assuming he wanted permission to come the next weekend of the 22-24 )
but she wouldn't give that permission because she was still pissed off and she ended up hanging up on him. After that, he didn't call again.
When he showed up Thursday evening unannounced, Marina testified he that he told her, "he was lonely that he hadn't come the preceding ( Nov 15-17 ) weekend

and he wanted to make his peace with me."

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/WC_Vol1_65-osw-argument.gif

I don't know how much clearer that can be as to the reason WHY he showed up on Thursday.
Like I said, if she told him to screw, he had a ride back to Dallas on Friday morning. Something he would not have had on Friday evening.
If she forgave him, he scored an extra day with his family.

There's also Wesley Frazier's testimony that while Marina had told Oswald not to come the weekend of Nov. 15-17, Oswald lied to Wesley Frazier that the
reason why he wasn't going to Irving that weekend was because he was "working on his license and he was going to take a driving test" .

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/WC_Vol2_217-driving-license-frazier.gif

So Oswald was not shy about lying to nosey little boy Frazier why he was and was not going to Irving.

I don't understand how much clearer that can be.

[Bud]

So if Oswald did intend to assassinate Kennedy one of the thing she would need to accomplish would be to go to where his rifle is kept (on an unusual day), retrieve it and secretly get it into his workplace. So the evidence is he did go to where the rifle was kept (on an unusual day) and did leave with a long, paper covered object which he took to his workplace. Oswald is always so obliging to the needs of the invisible conspiracy.

[Charles Schuyler]

On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 4:16:11 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 6:10:08 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
> > And I asked of Gil, pointing out Gil’s error in claiming Lee Oswald’s argument with Marina started Sunday. It didn’t, as Marina didn’t talk to Lee on Sunday.
> Wrong again, Hanky Panky. You either don't read the testimony or don't understand it.
>
> On the weekend before the assassination, Nov 15-17, Oswald didn't go to Irving.
> When he called fo permission to come, Marina told him not to come that weekend because "perhaps it is not convenient for Ruth" if he showed up every week.
> Marina called his rooming house on SUNDAY of that weekend ( the 17th ) but she couldn't reach him because he used the O.H.Lee name.
> Apparently, HE HAPPENED TO CALL HER ON SUNDAY because she testified, "this is when he had a quarrel over the "fictitious name".

How did they have a conversation on Sunday if she couldn't reach him?

>
> https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/WC_Vol1_63-osw-argument.gif
>
> Oswald called her "several times" on Monday the 18th, ( assuming he wanted permission to come the next weekend of the 22-24 )
> but she wouldn't give that permission because she was still pissed off and she ended up hanging up on him. After that, he didn't call again.
> When he showed up Thursday evening unannounced, Marina testified he that he told her, "he was lonely that he hadn't come the preceding ( Nov 15-17 ) weekend
> and he wanted to make his peace with me."
> https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/WC_Vol1_65-osw-argument.gif
>
> I don't know how much clearer that can be as to the reason WHY he showed up on Thursday.

He showed up with the intention of asking his wife for forgiveness and promising her a better future, and depending on how that final conversation went, he planned on wrapping his rifle in the bag he'd constructed from material he'd pilfered from his job and sneaking it into his place of employment, hoping to put a bullet in JFK's head by firing it out a window at his workplace at lunch time.

> Like I said, if she told him to screw, he had a ride back to Dallas on Friday morning. Something he would not have had on Friday evening.
> If she forgave him, he scored an extra day with his family.
>
> There's also Wesley Frazier's testimony that while Marina had told Oswald not to come the weekend of Nov. 15-17, Oswald lied to Wesley Frazier that the
> reason why he wasn't going to Irving that weekend was because he was "working on his license and he was going to take a driving test" .
>
> https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/WC_Vol2_217-driving-license-frazier.gif
>
> So Oswald was not shy about lying to nosey little boy Frazier why he was and was not going to Irving.
>
> I don't understand how much clearer that can be.

Perhaps he went there on Thursday to make a huge-ass sandwich. Your fellow co-cultist Ben says it was a lunch of some sort--not curtain rods--in the infamous bag we are discussing.

Team Oswald really needs to get its act together Sixty years of this stuff, and you guys can't even agree on whether it was curtain rods or a extremely large lunch of some sort. Frazier says the bag was two feet long, 5" to 6" wide or so, and his sister thought the bag was perhaps 27" long. If it was a sub sandwich, it was a U-Boat. If it was a couple of curtain rods, it's doubtful they would've been bundled at all. Just toss 'em in the back seat, perhaps with a little tape or a piece of string knotted around the rods to keep them together.

Here's an idea: Maybe Oswald's disassembled RIFLE was in the bag and Oswald LIED about it. Maybe the guesstimate about the length of the bag was off a little bit.

[Ben Holmes]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 08:39:20 -0700 (PDT), Charles Schuyler
<ch...@reducedfeemortgage.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 9:48:19?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:

>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 08:22:29 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
>> <hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:55:52?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:49:15?AM UTC-4, Steven Galbraith wrote:
>>>>> Well, yes and no. If it can be shown that he didn't need curtain rods - the rods in his room were fine - then that demolishes the defense that he did indeed need them. Then the Oswald defense attorneys have to come up with a new argument for the need for that trip. But they can: he was embarrassed to tell Frazier he needed to see Marina so he made an excuse to do so. So his "I need curtain rods" story was just a cover story for Frazier for the ride.
>>>>> But then again: what was in the bag? His lunch? Rods? Well, if he didn't need rods then it was his lunch? But Frazier said Oswald told him *for the first time he rode with him* that he was going to buy his lunch, that he didn't bring one. So the bag didn't have curtain rods - that was a story he made - and it didn't have his lunch.
>>>>> What was in it? At this point the Oswald defense attorneys pound the table and yell, "The CIA and JFK was going to end the Cold War and Hoover and Vietnam!!"
>>>> Dear Professor DumDum:
>>>>
>>>> The Grant photo shows the same damage to the curtain rods in Oswald's room as the Fort-Worth telegram photo shows, albeit from another angle.
>>>
>>>Hilarious. The Grant photo shows the rod appears straight.
>>>
>>>Regardless, both photos show the curtain rod is fully functional, and there are Venetian blinds for privacy as well. So why did Oswald need curtain rods?
>>>
>>>You appear to be arguing Oswald’s room needed curtain rods, but you’re also arguing Oswald made up the curtain rod story entirely.
>>>
>>>Please explain.
>> No.
>>
>> No explanation will satisfy you. You deny facts CLEARLY quoted, and
>> simply turn a blind eye.
>>
>> It is a FACT that curtain rods were repaired/replaced the weekend of
>> the assassination.
>

> How does this tie in with your claim that he brought his lunch to
> work in the much discussed brown bag? You made that claim here:


What's the contradiction? HOW DOES THE **PROVEN FACT** THAT THE
CURTAIN RODS WERE REPAIRED/REPLACED ON THAT WEEKEND HAVE ANYTHING AT
ALL TO DO WITH OSWALD'S LUNCH??

STOP ASKING QUESTIONS AND START ANSWERING THEM!

You're such a coward, Chuckles.

>> And no matter what you do - the evidence is clear.

>>>> https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/OswaldRoom_1963.jpg
>>>>
>>>> My four hours on line for today is over. Have a nice day.

[Ben Holmes]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 09:23:51 -0700 (PDT), Charles Schuyler
<ch...@reducedfeemortgage.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 9:48:47?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 14:47:02 -0700 (PDT), Charles Schuyler
>> <ch...@reducedfeemortgage.com> wrote:
>>>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 10:52:00?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:

>>>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 07:24:25 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
>>>> <hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:55:48?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 06:26:00 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
>>>>>> <geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:03:48?AM UTC-4, gjjma...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Saturday, April 15, 2023 at 10:38:59?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>>>>>>>>> https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1614/curtain-rod-debacle
>>>>>>>> https://gil-jesus.com/the-curtain-rod-debacle/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods.
>>>>>> This was, in the past, a key argument of believers.
>>>>>
>>>>> This was a key argument of the original critics… that Oswald’s room
>>>>> needed curtain rods. As we saw, Gil Jesus even repeats that claim in
>>>>> the link provided here:
>>>
>>>> This was a key argument of original believers that has been proven
>>>> false.
>>>>
>>>> Own it.
>>>
>>>Weird. Aren't you the guy who says the paper bag held Oswald's lunch?
>>
>> I think it did.
>>
>> However, this changes NOT AT ALL the fact that believers argued for a
>> long time that no curtain rods were found... and that the room Oswald
>> rented didn't allow them.
>>
>> Own it!

Notice that Chuckles had nothing to say here?

>>>Why are you right and why is Gil wrong?
>>
>> Gil isn't wrong... I've seen nothing he's posted that is not supported
>> by evidence.
>>
>>>You said that Oswald brought his lunch to work...
>>
>> Yep, that's probably what the bag contained.
>
>So you're doubling down.

Nothing's changed. Are you whining because I'm not contradicting what
I've stated in the past?

Why are you crying, Chuckles?

Why not just go to your safe place, and chill out?

> What kind of lunch do you speculate Oswald carried in the bag that
> morning?

This is what believers do... speculate. I don't need to speculate,
I've read the evidence & testimonies... so I *KNOW* what Oswald said
was in his lunch bag. Do you?

Why don't *YOU* know?

> Frazier testified to the length of the bag and how Oswald carried
> it towards the TSBD.

Which facts eliminate the possibility of it containing a rifle. Don't
you just HATE that?

> Does that fit in with any known lunch he would've put together in the
> Paine's cramped kitchen that morning?

Of course.

> Two feet long, approximately 5-6" wide, and as examined later, this
> bag was constructed of paper consistent in make up with type of the
> paper employees used to wrap and protect and ship merchandise at the
> TSBD. I know everything is bigger in Texas, but that's one heck of a
> sandwich.

Nah, this is simply a logical fallacy on your part. Can you name it?


> And didn't Frazier testify that Oswald told him he was going to buy
> his lunch that day?


Even Frazier was smart enough not to try to claim that Oswald was
bringing in TWO bags... so one had to disappear.

Can you cite ANYTHING about Oswald buying a lunch? Do you know what
evidence there is? List it. Let's examine it.


>To summarize...


If you cannot quote me, then you shouldn't be trying to summarize
anything, because you INVARIABLY lie.

> You think Oswald lied or misspoke, or that Frazier misremembered,
> lied (whatever) about being told by Oswald that his trip with Frazier
> on Thursday was to get curtain rods.

Are you honest enough to publicly acknowledge that there are
contradictions in the evidence? Probably not....

>Why all the lies, Ben?

Who, in this case, had his rifle confiscated, and was subjected to a
lie detector test?

>>>> Critics have been proven right, and believers wrong...
>>
>> Notice that Chuckles stays COMPLETELY SILENT regarding past efforts by
>> believers to assert that no curtain rods were found.
>

>Moving the goalposts, little fella...


Lying again, little fella.

>> Or than none were needed.
>>>>>> It no longer works...
>>>>>>>The key question is why he needed to make a special trip
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There you go, lying again Corbutt.
>>>>>
>>>>>No, why go on Thursday instead of Friday...
>>>>
>>>> Why not read a newpaper and tell us.
>>>>
>>>> Did you read the newspaper today?
>> Chuckles refuses to say... probably afraid that he'll reveal his
>> illiteracy...

And Chuckles ran from the question AGAIN!!!

What a coward he is! Always asking questions, and TERRIFIED of
answering any...

>>>>>>>to Irving on Thursday evening if it was for curtain rods. Why
>>>>>>>not just pick up the curtain rods on his regular weekend visit? The fact that Oswald made a
>>>>>>>special trip on Thursday night indicates it was for something he needed on FRIDAY.
>>>>>> Speculation isn't evidence. Never has been, never will be.
>>>>>>>Another key question is why the bag Oswald carried into the TSBD on Friday morning would
>>>>>>>have been opened up in the TSBD and what happened to the curtain rods that Oswald claimed
>>>>>>>were in that bag?
>>>>>> Will Huckster name this logical fallacy? I know Corbutt won't.
>>>>>>>The question of whether Oswald needed curtain rods is secondary to the above questions which
>>>>>>>need answers for Oswald's curtain rod story to be plausible.
>>>>>> The only criteria for plausibility for believers is whether or not the
>>>>>> WCR said it.

Logical fallacies deleted.

[Ben Holmes]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 14:36:31 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 10:48:19?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 08:22:29 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
>> <hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:55:52?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:49:15?AM UTC-4, Steven Galbraith wrote:
>>>>> Well, yes and no. If it can be shown that he didn't need curtain rods - the rods in his room were fine - then that demolishes the defense that he did indeed need them. Then the Oswald defense attorneys have to come up with a new argument for the need for that trip. But they can: he was embarrassed to tell Frazier he needed to see Marina so he made an excuse to do so. So his "I need curtain rods" story was just a cover story for Frazier for the ride.
>>>>> But then again: what was in the bag? His lunch? Rods? Well, if he didn't need rods then it was his lunch? But Frazier said Oswald told him *for the first time he rode with him* that he was going to buy his lunch, that he didn't bring one. So the bag didn't have curtain rods - that was a story he made - and it didn't have his lunch.
>>>>> What was in it? At this point the Oswald defense attorneys pound the table and yell, "The CIA and JFK was going to end the Cold War and Hoover and Vietnam!!"
>>>> Dear Professor DumDum:
>>>>
>>>> The Grant photo shows the same damage to the curtain rods in Oswald's room as the Fort-Worth telegram photo shows, albeit from another angle.
>>>
>>>Hilarious. The Grant photo shows the rod appears straight.
>>>
>>>Regardless, both photos show the curtain rod is fully functional, and there are Venetian blinds for privacy as well. So why did Oswald need curtain rods?
>>>
>>>You appear to be arguing Oswald’s room needed curtain rods, but you’re also arguing Oswald made up the curtain rod story entirely.
>>>
>>>Please explain.
>> No.
>>
>> No explanation will satisfy you. You deny facts CLEARLY quoted, and
>> simply turn a blind eye.
>>
>> It is a FACT that curtain rods were repaired/replaced the weekend of
>> the assassination.
>>
>> And no matter what you do - the evidence is clear.
>

>Oswald’s room didn’t need curtain rods...


Speculation on your part isn't evidence. An eyewitness able to
testify to functioning curtain rods from 11/21 would be needed.

You don't have that.

What you *DO* have is the cowardice to not acknowledge that believers
USED to argue that not only were no curtain rods found, but none were
even allowed in Oswald's room.

Something that *NO* believer is now willing to claim...

[Ben Holmes]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 15:24:03 -0700 (PDT), "recip...@gmail.com"
<recip...@gmail.com> wrote:

Non-answer deleted. If you're too afraid to answer, then simply
don't.

[Ben Holmes]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 15:28:45 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 10:48:25?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 09:46:55 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
>> <hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 11:49:51?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 07:41:06 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
>>>> <hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:52:05?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>>>>>> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 9:26:01?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
>>>>>>> The key question is not whether Oswald's room needed curtain rods. The key question is why
>>>>>>> he needed to make a special trip to Irving on Thursday evening if it was for curtain rods. Why
>>>>>>> not just pick up the curtain rods on his regular weekend visit? The fact that Oswald made a
>>>>>>> special trip on Thursday night indicates it was for something he needed on FRIDAY.
>>>>>> Bullshit John.
>>>>>> He had had a fight with his wife the weekend before over his using an alias to rent the room on North Beckley.
>>>>>> A nosy 19-year old kid named Frazier asked him why he was going to Irving on Thursday.
>>>>>
>>>>> But why then the urgency to go on Thursday, Gil?
>>>>
>>>> Why the speculation that there was any "urgency" to go Thursday,
>>>> Huckster? Could it be that you're assuming something here?
>>>
>>>He could have ...
>>
>>
>> Didn't need to read any further.
>>
>> Speculation isn't evidence.
>

>I didn’t speculate...


"He could have..." is not the beginnings of anything other than
speculation.

Both "He did..." and "He didn't.." can refer to facts, but "He could
have" is only speculation.

>>>>>> Given what happened and the reason why, what would you have said to Frazier ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would you have told him about your private marital woes ?
>>>>>> Would you have told him how you were using aliases and renting post office boxes to avoid harrassment by the FBI ?
>>>>>> Would you have told him your life story ? How you were stationed at a CIA base in Japan ?
>>>>>> Give me a break, will ya ?
>>>>>
>>>>>Why did Oswald make a special trip to the Paine’s on Thursday, Gil?
>>>> Why do you presume it's a "special" trip, Huckster?
>>>
>>>Frazier defined it that way.
>>
>> Frazier can say anything he wants... his OPINION is not evidence that
>> Oswald is the sole assassin of JFK.
>

>And that’s called the Moving the Goalposts...


THEY WERE **YOUR** GOALPOSTS.

You're a liar to suggest that Oswald is bound by anything that Frazier
said.

And you're now crying as I point it out.

There was no "special" trip - and you have ZERO evidence that it was
"special" in any way.

[Ben Holmes]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 14:57:41 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:

>Curiously...

We know that Huckster can't.

[Ben Holmes]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 15:10:06 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:

>And I asked ...


Who cares?

Gil Jesus just spanked all you believers...

Own it.

>>>> he calls her on Monday and she hangs up on him. So he doesn't come out to Irving on the weekend of Nov 15-17.
>>>> And he shows up unexpectedly on the following Thursday, hoping she's cooled off by then.
>>>
>>>According to who?
>>
>> That mythical "common sense" that believers believe in.
>

>No...


Yes.

>> Except when it comes to the evidence.
>
>You never cite the evidence.

Telling whoppers like that is what will convince everyone that you're
simply a liar, Huckster.

>>>> If she hasn't, he can get a ride back to Dallas on Friday with Frazier and stay there the weekend.
>>>> If he goes to Irving on Friday, and she's still pissed off at him , he has no ride back to Dallas.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Curiously, his rifle was able to get a ride to the Depository that Friday morning.
>> Can you name this logical fallacy? Or will you lie again?
>

>Oswald’s rifle ...


Tut tut tut... another empty and unsupported claim.

>>>> Geez, can't you people figure it out for yourselves ?
>>>
>>>We did a long time ago...
>>
>> Sadly, you failed.
>
>Hilarious!

You laugh at your failures? How sad...

[Ben Holmes]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 14:55:38 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:

>And I’ve already established ...


You've established nothing. All you're doing is lying by insisting
that no believer ever argued that no curtain rods had ever been found,
or that they were even allowed in Oswald's rental.

>>>> Own it.
>>>>
>>>> Critics have been proven right, and believers wrong...
>>>
>>>By presuming / speculating...
>>
>> About non-existent curtain rods and lying about the room he rented.

Logical fallacies deleted.

>>>>>> It no longer works...
>>>>>>>The key question is why he needed to make a special trip
>>>>>> There you go, lying again Corbutt.
>>>
>>>Frazier thought it was out of the ordinary enough to inquire as to the purpose.
>>>Even Gil admits Frazier asked this question.
>>
>> You say this as if it means something...
>>
>> Yet you PROVABLY don't believe Gil.
>

>I believe Frazier...


You prove me right.

>>>>>No, why go on Thursday instead of Friday...
>>>>
>>>> Why not read a newpaper and tell us.
>>>
>>>Non sequitur.
>>
>> Only because you've not read Reclaiming History.
>>
>>>> Did you read the newspaper today?
>>>
>>>Another non sequitur.
>>
>> Your failure to understand simply shows your ignorance.
>
>Enlighten me, or punt.
>
>I expect you’ll punt.

Actually, it's a topic I've already discussed, and will be reposted
this Thursday.

So again, you're proven a liar. And TERRIFIED of answering the
question...

[Ben Holmes]

On Wed, 19 Apr 2023 05:18:15 -0700 (PDT), Charles Schuyler
<ch...@reducedfeemortgage.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 4:16:11?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:

>> On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 6:10:08?PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
>> > And I asked of Gil, pointing out Gil’s error in claiming Lee Oswald’s argument with Marina started Sunday. It didn’t, as Marina didn’t talk to Lee on Sunday.
>> Wrong again, Hanky Panky. You either don't read the testimony or don't understand it.
>>
>> On the weekend before the assassination, Nov 15-17, Oswald didn't go to Irving.
>> When he called fo permission to come, Marina told him not to come that weekend because "perhaps it is not convenient for Ruth" if he showed up every week.
>> Marina called his rooming house on SUNDAY of that weekend ( the 17th ) but she couldn't reach him because he used the O.H.Lee name.
>> Apparently, HE HAPPENED TO CALL HER ON SUNDAY because she testified, "this is when he had a quarrel over the "fictitious name".
>
>How did they have a conversation on Sunday if she couldn't reach him?

You're provably a real moron, aren't you? SHE couldn't call him, HE
called her.

What part didn't you understand?

>> https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/WC_Vol1_63-osw-argument.gif
>>
>> Oswald called her "several times" on Monday the 18th, ( assuming he wanted permission to come the next weekend of the 22-24 )
>> but she wouldn't give that permission because she was still pissed off and she ended up hanging up on him. After that, he didn't call again.
>> When he showed up Thursday evening unannounced, Marina testified he that he told her, "he was lonely that he hadn't come the preceding ( Nov 15-17 ) weekend
>> and he wanted to make his peace with me."
>> https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/WC_Vol1_65-osw-argument.gif
>>
>> I don't know how much clearer that can be as to the reason WHY he showed up on Thursday.
>

>He showed up with the intention of asking his wife for forgiveness and promising her a better future...


Logical fallacy deleted.

>> Like I said, if she told him to screw, he had a ride back to Dallas on Friday morning. Something he would not have had on Friday evening.
>> If she forgave him, he scored an extra day with his family.
>>
>> There's also Wesley Frazier's testimony that while Marina had told Oswald not to come the weekend of Nov. 15-17, Oswald lied to Wesley Frazier that the
>> reason why he wasn't going to Irving that weekend was because he was "working on his license and he was going to take a driving test" .
>>
>> https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/WC_Vol2_217-driving-license-frazier.gif
>>
>> So Oswald was not shy about lying to nosey little boy Frazier why he was and was not going to Irving.
>>
>> I don't understand how much clearer that can be.
>
> Perhaps he went there on Thursday to make a huge-ass sandwich. Your
> fellow co-cultist Ben says it was a lunch of some sort--not curtain
> rods--in the infamous bag we are discussing.

Chuckles admitted to me in an email that he's been molesting his
grandmother.

I'll produce the email when Chuckles quotes me saying the above...

> Team Oswald really needs to get its act together Sixty years of this
> stuff, and you guys can't even agree on whether it was curtain rods or
> a extremely large lunch of some sort. Frazier says the bag was two
> feet long, 5" to 6" wide or so, and his sister thought the bag was
> perhaps 27" long. If it was a sub sandwich, it was a U-Boat. If it was
> a couple of curtain rods, it's doubtful they would've been bundled at
> all. Just toss 'em in the back seat, perhaps with a little tape or a
> piece of string knotted around the rods to keep them together.

Can you cite for your claim that lunchbags can only be the size of the
lunch? No? So you're simply lying again...

> Here's an idea: Maybe Oswald's disassembled RIFLE was in the bag and
> Oswald LIED about it. Maybe the guesstimate about the length of the
> bag was off a little bit.

Here's an idea: maybe you should rely on the evidence and not
speculation.

[Ben Holmes]

On Wed, 19 Apr 2023 00:50:23 -0700 (PDT), Gil Jesus
<gjjma...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 10:41:01?PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
>> Or a longer gun that was disassembled and put into the bag that was estimated as shorter than its actual length.
>

>That's a pretty big error. From 2 feet to almost 3 1/2 feet ? .....that's almost double the length !!!!
>I doubt any two people's estimation could be THAT far off and, at the same time, so precise with each other.
>
>BTW, did the FBI find any evidence that the "bag" contained a rifle ?
>
>https://gil-jesus.com/the-bag-job/


Ouch! Spanking Huckster with actual evidence!!! What a concept! :)