The Dead-Letter Package

[Richard Smith]

Of course what really drives your opposition to my hypothesis as to why Mr Oswald might send this heavy brown paper bag to himself at a fake address is that such would require Mr Oswald to have foreknowledge of the motorcade route well before your cherished bedtime story says he had

And you just keep repeating that, in your very inexpert opinion, a random hoaxer could have known to write the name and address in a way that even you have to admit looks like Mr Oswald's handwriting. Care to explain how your imaginary random hoaxer would have known to do this?

 

How would it show foreknowledge of the motorcade route? 

[Alan Ford]

How would it show foreknowledge of the motorcade route?

~Grin~

Odd that you should ask, Mr Smith. Why, only a few short days ago you had no difficulty in seeing the linkage------------you criticized my hypothesis on the basis that Mr Oswald would not have had enough foreknowledge of the motorcade route to make the experiment with the Nixie parcel viable:

If he learns on Monday or Tuesday that JFK is passing the building, then there would be a remote possibility he considered mailing the bag there instead of transporting it himself but there would be no guarantee that it would arrive by Friday.  And why do a test run to a different address with so little time?

As I have several times gently pointed out, this is the real reason you have tried (unconvincingly) to write the Nixie parcel off as a random hoax: evidence of nefarious intent on Mr Oswald's part is fine, but only so long as the timing does not threaten the Lone Nut scenario.

A Mr Oswald sending himself a heavy brown paper bag, but doing so in a way that suggests game-playing with the postal authorities, would suggest a Mr Oswald making plans for something clandestine that would involve the use of a heavy brown paper bag. That this would require more lead-in time than you are comfortable with is a problem for you, not me.

By the way, you dodged my question about how a random hoaxer could have known to write the name and address in a way that even you have to admit looks like Mr Oswald's handwriting. Still trying to figure this little conundrum out, eh?

 

[Richard Smith]

~Grin~

Odd that you should ask, Mr Smith. Why, only a few short days ago you had no difficulty in seeing the linkage------------you criticized my hypothesis on the basis that Mr Oswald would not have had enough foreknowledge of the motorcade route to make the experiment with the Nixie parcel viable:

As I have several times gently pointed out, this is the real reason you have tried (unconvincingly) to write the Nixie parcel off as a random hoax: evidence of nefarious intent on Mr Oswald's part is fine, but only so long as the timing does not threaten the Lone Nut scenario.

A Mr Oswald sending himself a heavy brown paper bag, but doing so in a way that suggests game-playing with the postal authorities, would suggest a Mr Oswald making plans for something clandestine that would involve the use of a heavy brown paper bag. That this would require more lead-in time than you are comfortable with is a problem for you, not me.

By the way, you dodged my question about how a random hoaxer could have known to write the name and address in a way that even you have to admit looks like Mr Oswald's handwriting. Still trying to figure this little conundrum out, eh?

 

Try to focus instead of rambling on.  Here is the question again:  How would this package show foreknowledge of the motorcade route?

[Jerry Freeman]

You mean like that map of DP they found at Ozzie's pad, dad?

A map that has an 'X' marking the TSBD? He did that when he went to find a job there.
If you can produce a link showing this map I would like to see it.

[Alan Ford]

Try to focus instead of rambling on.  Here is the question again:  How would this package show foreknowledge of the motorcade route?

~Grin~

Asks the man who dismissed my hypothesis on the basis that it would show too much foreknowledge of the motorcade route

Still no explanation of how a random hoaxer could have known to write the name and address in a way that even you have to admit looks like Mr Oswald's handwriting? Your inability to focus on this is noted, Mr Smith! 

[Richard Smith]

~Grin~

Asks the man who dismissed my hypothesis on the basis that it would show too much foreknowledge of the motorcade route

Still no explanation of how a random hoaxer could have known to write the name and address in a way that even you have to admit looks like Mr Oswald's handwriting? Your inability to focus on this is noted, Mr Smith! 

You have stated repeatedly that this package demonstrates that Oswald had foreknowledge of the motorcade.  Could you just explain why instead of dancing around like a circus monkey?  The date on the package is indecipherable.  So how does it shed any light on when it was mailed?  As I've said repeatedly, I'm not sure whether Oswald sent the package or not.  I can't think of any logical reason for him to address a package to a nonexistent address and your explanation makes no sense as usual.  If there is no logical reason for him to have done so, that lends itself to another explanation like a hoax.  I'm not a handwriting expert.  I assume that you are not either.  The handwriting does look similar but some people have similar looking handwriting.  Again, I'm not ruling out that this is Oswald's handwriting but in the case of the forms linking Oswald to the rifle etc we have been told repeatedly by CTers that handwriting analysis is not an exact science even when conducted by an expert.  But here suddenly we are told this looks - to a non-expert - like Oswald's handwriting and thus it must be so.  When was the first example of Oswald's signature offered to the public?  I don't know the answer.  Do you?  It seems like an important issue if you are claiming no one had an opportunity to write his name in a similar way.

[Alan Ford]

You have stated repeatedly that this package demonstrates that Oswald had foreknowledge of the motorcade.

~Grin~

Again you are trying to row back on your own stated objection to my hypothesis: that the window between Mr Oswald's learning that the motorcade would pass in front of the building he worked at and the time needed to execute such a game with the postal authorities would have been too tight. Why are you now objecting to your own objection, Mr Smith? Is it because your objection fades away once we DON'T assume we know when Mr Oswald learned of the motorcade route? Hm?

Could you just explain why instead of dancing around like a circus monkey?  The date on the package is indecipherable.  So how does it shed any light on when it was mailed?  As I've said repeatedly, I'm not sure whether Oswald sent the package or not.  I can't think of any logical reason for him to address a package to a nonexistent address and your explanation makes no sense as usual.  If there is no logical reason for him to have done so, that lends itself to another explanation like a hoax.  I'm not a handwriting expert.  I assume that you are not either.  The handwriting does look similar but some people have similar looking handwriting.

The handwriting doesn't look similar, it looks uncannily similar------------have you actually placed the writing on the package next to authenticated samples of Mr Oswald's writing? I suggest you take a break from your usual 'Nothing to see here' routine and do so

Your freak coincidence theory just doesn't wash. You are a private citizen. A heinous crime has been committed, and one man has been singled out for this crime. The story has been all over the news. OK. Without having privileged access to files, without having internet, without having a clue how the man writes, you mail a package to this man in handwriting that just so happens to look awfully like his. What are the odds of your getting this right? Very slim indeed! There are many, many different styles of handwriting.

Again, I'm not ruling out that this is Oswald's handwriting but in the case of the forms linking Oswald to the rifle etc we have been told repeatedly by CTers that handwriting analysis is not an exact science even when conducted by an expert.  But here suddenly we are told this looks - to a non-expert - like Oswald's handwriting and thus it must be so.  When was the first example of Oswald's signature offered to the public?  I don't know the answer.  Do you?

No, but common sense says that IF no sample of Mr Oswald's signature was offered to the public in time for a hoaxer to imitate his signature, then we have a high probability that Mr Oswald mailed a heavy brown paper bag to himself at a fake address not long before the assassination. Your fluke coincidence theory would be a very, very last resort. And yet here you are, putting it forward as your first explanatory port of call. All because you don't like the time implications!

It seems like an important issue if you are claiming no one had an opportunity to write his name in a similar way.

I have not said that. I have said that only someone who has seen a sample or samples of his handwriting could have written his name AND the address in such a remarkably similar way. And even then we would be left with a hoax OR a frame-up attempt that makes absolutely no sense (at least that anyone has ever been able to discern). My hypothesis, by contrast, would finally make sense of the enduring riddle posed by the Nixie parcel: Mr Oswald was doing a non-dangerous dry run to test if the postal authorities had him under surveillance