Why are the CT's so obsessed with disproving the innocent Bus and Cab rides?

[Walt Cakebread]

You must have missed my earlier post, let me repost it here.

The line of argument that we can just dismiss an eyewitness because of a clothing discrepancy is absurd, from the time we are babies we first learn to recognise faces, like our mothers and fathers and as we continue to age when we first see someone we look at their face to gauge, attractiveness, emotion, etc, as they say, you make a good first impression by smiling and what a person is wearing comes a distant second, our fashion choices don't define who we are.

For example I went shopping at the local corner shop yesterday and I definitely know who served me and if I had to, I could say without reservation that that person was the one who packaged my bread and milk but if I had to recall their clothes then I simply couldn't because I had no reason to remember, much like Whaley who only remembered Oswald's bracelet because he made similar jewellery and seeing Oswald's shiny bracelet was of interest, but otherwise Oswald was just another customer.

In the following image is shown the man wearing BLACK who in and around Port Arthur killed 35 people and many eyewitnesses were face to face with this mass murderer and positively identified him and later this same man admitted to the crime.



These eyewitnesses all positively identified the same man and understandably have differing memories on the clothing colour but if we use the same criteria of throwing out eyewitnesses because of a silly colour discrepancy then we'd still have a mass murderer on the loose. And this highlights the problem with rabid JFKA CT's, outside this single case, they have no real life experience!

Name of Witness: DUTTON Christian Names: James David       brown jacket
Name of Witness: KINGSTON Christian Names: Ian Gregory     green jacket
Name of Witness: BEEKMAN Christian Names: Michael Dean     ski type jacket, blue, orange and a few other colours on it
Name of Witness: WILLIAMS Christian Names: Colin Sydney    3/4 length jacket, dark in appearance
Name of Witness: WILLIAMS Christian Names: Iris Emelia     He had on a jacket of some description.
Name of Witness: SARGENT Christian Names: Michael Robert   blue jacket
Name of Witness: RIVIERE Christian Names: John Michael     “High length’ black jacket
Name of Witness: OLSON Christian Names: MARY LEE           I think was green
Name of Witness: LEVER Cristian Names: Coralee Helen       dark jacket
Name of Witness: NASH Christian Names: Carolyn Louise      khaki green jacket or parker type jacket
Name of Witness: BALASKO Christian Names: James            black jacket
Name of Witness: McKENNA Christian Names: Rebecca Kate     ski type jacket which was zipped all the way up. it was either navy, blue or grey.

JohnM

All of the above is irrelevant, Johnny...... Because the fact remains ...Whaley clearly told Mr Ball that his passenger was wearing a BLUE JACKET and BLUE trousers.

There are two characteristics of the man's clothing that Whaley described that do NOT fit the clothes that Lee Oswald was wearing.   Lee was NOT  wearing a JACKET , he was wearing a dark brown shirt, and his trousers were dark grey.    The man was sitting next to Whaley on the passenger  side of the seat, so Whaley would definitely have gott a good look at the color of the man's trousers....and he told Mr Ball the man's trousers were BLUE.

Mr. BALL. Did you notice how he was dressed?

  Mr. WHALEY. Yes, sir. I didn’t pay much attention to it right then. But it
     all came back when I really found out who I had. He was dressed in just
     ordinary work clothes. It wasn’t khaki pants but they were khaki material,
     blue faded blue color, like a blue uniform made in khaki. Then he had on a
     brown shirt with a little silverlike stripe on it and he had on some kind
     of jacket, I didn’t notice very close but I think it was a work jacket that
     almost matched the pants.

And as I recall when Whaley viewed the line up he did NOT identify Lee Oswald from looking at his face....I believe whaley said something like , It was easy to ID Oswald, because he was raising hell because he was forced to attend the line up while wearing a Tee shirt and the others in the line up were wearing jackets.     Since I know that you are a bit slow, Johnny, I'll repeat ....Whaley did NOT ID Lee at the line up by loking at his face.

[Walt Cakebread]

Once the bus transfer was in evidence there was no way out of Plan A, so they had to throw in Plan B (Whaley) after the bus ride.

The WC had to suck it up and move on no matter how ludicrous their timeline looked.

 

Hi Otto...    (isn't that Sarge's dog's name in the Beetle Bailey comic)    Just jabbin ya bit.... 

I'm not 100% convinced that Lee was on Cecil Mc Watter's bus or in a CITY cab...... But that's the tale we've been handed and it does seem that Lee told the interrogators that he had boarded a bus but then left it after getting a transfer ( As an aside.... Spies are taught to obtain some irrefutable proof that verifies their whereabouts at a particular time. ....and  bus transfer would certainly be a good item to verify a person's location at a particular time.)     Someone could have slipped Lee that transfer under the guise of providing him with an alibi ( to cover up the fact that he had been transported to Oakcliff by a private vehicle. )    You may recall that Roger Craig  swore that he saw a man who looked like Lee Oswald run down the slope on the north side of Elm street and climb into a light colored Rambler station wagon with a luggage rack on the roof.

The US government had contracts with American Motors to produce vehicles for the US government.   AMC produced thousands of light colored ( usually light green) Ramblers for Uncle Sam.   

This idea has nagged me for years.....  Maybe Roger Craig was right.....

 

[Dan O'meara]

Once the bus transfer was in evidence there was no way out of Plan A, so they had to throw in Plan B (Whaley) after the bus ride.

The WC had to suck it up and move on no matter how ludicrous their timeline looked.

 

The WC timeline is guesswork.
They don't know how quickly Oswald was moving or how long he was on the bus for etc.
They're just guessing.
Whaley is also guessing when he fills in the times on his manifest. One look at the times he fills in tells you that.
All the times end in a 5 or a 0 and many of them are done in 15 minutes blocks no matter how long the trip took.
This is all there in his manifest.
Do you believe those times are accurate? (of course you do)

So now you've invented the BusCab Hoax and are touting it as if its a real thing. Yet you don't have to prove anything about it.
But who invented the Hoax?
How many people are involved in it?
How did they choose McWatters and Whaley?
What about Whaley's superiors?
What about the old lady who tried to get in the cab? Couldn't she be traced?
What about the witnesses on the bus? Are they in on it?

But here's the one question you should answer if you're going to answer any about your invention -

Why create the BusCab Hoax in the first place?

[Walt Cakebread]

The WC timeline is guesswork.
They don't know how quickly Oswald was moving or how long he was on the bus for etc.
They're just guessing.
Whaley is also guessing when he fills in the times on his manifest. One look at the times he fills in tells you that.
All the times end in a 5 or a 0 and many of them are done in 15 minutes blocks no matter how long the trip took.
This is all there in his manifest.
Do you believe those times are accurate? (of course you do)

So now you've invented the BusCab Hoax and are touting it as if its a real thing. Yet you don't have to prove anything about it.
But who invented the Hoax?
How many people are involved in it?
How did they choose McWatters and Whaley?
What about Whaley's superiors?
What about the old lady who tried to get in the cab? Couldn't she be traced?
What about the witnesses on the bus? Are they in on it?

But here's the one question you should answer if you're going to answer any about your invention -

Why create the BusCab Hoax in the first place?

Why create the BusCab Hoax in the first place?

Let's pretend....  That Lee thought that he was participating in a hoax that was intended to make it appear that he had fired at JFK.    Let's say that the conspirators who were playing him for a sucker told him that they would have a Light colored Rambler Station wagon ready to pick him up and whisk him away from the scene of the ATTEMPTED assassination.    And if you believe Roger Craig,  that's exactly what happened....

The conspirators certainly would not have wanted to be connected to their patsy, Lee Oswald, and witnesses with cameras could easily have recorded Lee's departure in that US government Rambler Station Wagon ....Thus they would have been prepared to provide an alternate means for the patsy to have left the scene.     And the patsy would have played along with that ruse......

I have a question that has bugged me for years....   Roger Craig said that he heard a sharp loud whistle just before the young man ran down the slope and jumped into the light colored Rambler.

My Question:...    Was Lee in the habit of whistling to get someone's attention.   Many men ( and some women) are very good at producing a shrill blast when they want to get somebody's attention.....  Was Lee Oswald one of those people?

[Walt Cakebread]

You didn't mention Whaley was describing the man's clothes from a block away.

Mr. WHALEY. No, sir, there was no one at the Greyhound stand and when I unloaded at the door I just pulled up about 30 feet to the stand and stopped and then I wanted a package of cigarettes, I was out so I started to get out and I saw this passenger coming so I waited for him.
Mr. BALL. He was coming down the street?
Mr. WHALEY. He was walking down the street.
Mr. BALL. What street was he walking down?
Mr. WHALEY. Lamar.
Mr. BALL. Would that mean he was walking south on Lamar?
Mr. WHALEY. He was walking south on Lamar from Commerce when I saw him.
Mr. BALL. That would be on which side of the street?
Mr. WHALEY. The west side of the street.
Mr. BALL. South on Lamar?
Mr. WHALEY. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Did you notice how he was dressed?
Mr. WHALEY. Yes, sir. I didn't pay much attention to it right then. But it all came back when I really found out who I had. He was dressed in just ordinary work clothes. It wasn't khaki pants but they were khaki material, blue faded blue color, like a blue uniform made in khaki. Then he had on a brown shirt with a little silverlike stripe on it and he had on some kind of jacket, I didn't notice very close but I think it was a work jacket that almost matched the pants.
He, his shirt was open three buttons down here. He had on a T-shirt. You know, the shirt was open three buttons down there.
Now it's important what Whaley saw about the man's clothing when he was near him: "Yes, sir; he had on a bracelet of some type on his left arm. It looked like an identification bracelet. Just shiny, you know, how you see anything shiny, an unusual watchband or something shiny, you notice things like that." and ...



Mr. BALL. I have some clothing here. Commission Exhibit No. 150, does that look like the shirt?
Mr. WHALEY. That is the shirt, sir, it has my initials on it.
Mr. BALL. In other words, this is the shirt the man had on?
Mr. WHALEY. Yes, sir; that is the same one the FBI man had me identify.
Mr. BALL. This is the shirt the man had on who took your car at Lamar and Jackson?
Mr. WHALEY. As near as I can recollect as I told him. I said that is the shirt he had on because it had a kind of little stripe in it, light-colored stripe. I noticed that.

Mr. WHALEY. I am not sure about the pants. I wouldn't be sure of the shirt if it hadn't had that light stripe in it. I just noticed that.


Mr. BALL. Here is Commission No. 162 which is a gray jacket with zipper.
Mr. WHALEY. I thank that is the jacket he had on when he rode with me in the cab.
Mr. BALL. Look something like it?
And here is Commission Exhibit No. 163, does this look like anything he had on?
Mr. WHALEY. He had this one on or the other one.

Whaley seems pretty unsure on that point. Remember his earlier comments didn't include the "jacket". Here he seems to be calling the shirt a "jacket":

Mr. WHALEY. That jacket now it might have been clean, but the jacket he had on looked more the color, you know like a uniform set, but he had this coat here on over that other jacket, I am sure, sir.

You didn't mention Whaley was describing the man's clothes from a block away.

Yer right I didn't mention that Whaley was describing the man's clothing from a block away.    And the reason I didn't is because that argument is totally absurd....    At least it is to an intelligent and rational person....  Can you tell me how Whaley would have known that the man wanted to hire his cab when the man was a block away and merely walking along the sidewalk??   Perhaps the guy had cell phone and phoned Whaley??   

[Richard Smith]

Why create the BusCab Hoax in the first place?

Let's pretend....  That Lee thought that he was participating in a hoax that was intended to make it appear that he had fired at JFK.    Let's say that the conspirators who were playing him for a sucker told him that they would have a Light colored Rambler Station wagon ready to pick him up and whisk him away from the scene of the ATTEMPTED assassination.    And if you believe Roger Craig,  that's exactly what happened....

The conspirators certainly would not have wanted to be connected to their patsy, Lee Oswald, and witnesses with cameras could easily have recorded Lee's departure in that US government Rambler Station Wagon ....Thus they would have been prepared to provide an alternate means for the patsy to have left the scene.     And the patsy would have played along with that ruse......

I have a question that has bugged me for years....   Roger Craig said that he heard a sharp loud whistle just before the young man ran down the slope and jumped into the light colored Rambler.

My Question:...    Was Lee in the habit of whistling to get someone's attention.   Many men ( and some women) are very good at producing a shrill blast when they want to get somebody's attention.....  Was Lee Oswald one of those people?

I know that I'll regret asking this question, but why would the conspirators who are trying to frame Oswald for the crime provide him with a get away car to escape the crime scene?  And thus, risk being seen by someone (in fact that is exactly what you are claiming) and then have the added difficulty of planning an elaborate bus AND cab ride story to cover this inexplicable decision with all that entails (i.e. somehow knowing which bus and cab was in the area and convincing all the random folks on the bus not to blow the story and on and on).  Faking the bus and cab ride is very silly and risky for no apparent purpose.  Particularly for someone trying to frame Oswald rather than assist him.

[Dan O'meara]

I know that I'll regret asking this question, but why would the conspirators who are trying to frame Oswald for the crime provide him with a get away car to escape the crime scene?  And thus, risk being seen by someone (in fact that is exactly what you are claiming) and then have the added difficulty of planning an elaborate bus AND cab ride story to cover this inexplicable decision with all that entails (i.e. somehow knowing which bus and cab was in the area and convincing all the random folks on the bus not to blow the story and on and on).  Faking the bus and cab ride is very silly and risky for no apparent purpose.  Particularly for someone trying to frame Oswald rather than assist him.

And if Whaley is part of the BusCab Hoax why is he giving information that contradicts the timeline the hoaxers are trying to establish?
Hasn't he been coached what to say?