In your mind, the way evidence works is that a "package large enough to carry a rifle" (whatever that means) cannot carry a lunch? Must be some weird lunch bag legislation in Dallas that I'm unaware of. How many of these people said that the bag they saw wasn't a lunch?If you think "long bag" is even circumstantial evidence of a rifle, then you're the one who doesn't understand evidence.
I can get coffee for half that at Sergio's. Cuban coffee at that not that muddy water served at that overhyped and overpriced joint.
How many times has this been discussed and you still don't get it. Just because Oswald had a bag in the parking lot doesn't mean he carried a bag into the TSBD. In fact, the only witness to him entering the TSBD said that he was not.
If he's truly guilty? Do you seriously have any doubts that Oswald shot JFK, JBC and Tippit?
Just because Oswald had a bag in the parking lot doesn't mean he carried a bag into the TSBD. In fact, the only witness to him entering the TSBD said that he was not>>> Just because JackD didn't see Oswald carrying a bag, doesn't mean that he wasn't
It doesn't take much to run afoul of the orthodoxy...
Thank you, Mr Navarro! Now!The visit by the WC (accompanied by Agent Howlett) to the Paine home, during which two curtain rods belonging to Ms Ruth Paine were inspected and taken away, did not take place until March 23.Would you agree with the statement that March 15 came before March 23?If so, how do you explain the fact that----in your own words----"The SS requested the DPD to fingerprint the curtain rods on 3/15/1964"?
