Buell Wesley Frazier

[Walt Cakebread]

No point in responding to Mytton's crap.

When he starts like that, you've already won the argument and, although he most likely will never admit it, he knows it nevertheless. That's good enough for me!

No point in responding to Mytton's crap.

You're right....  Knowledgeable CT's recognize Mytton for the disinformation cretin that he is.....   But many feel that they have to expose Mytton's BS so others wont be deceived by it.   

[Rick Plant]

If Buell Frazier was going to lie about the bag's existence, wouldn't he at least state that the bag was long enough to contain the rifle?  Why introduce a bag into the folklore but state that it was not long enough?

Silly conspirators.

So, are you saying that Frazier isn't capable of making up a false story? Frazier claimed he was standing with Sarah Stanton, but Sarah Stanton never even mentioned Frazier in her FBI testimony.

Lee Harvey Oswald himself denied that the bag contained curtain rods on two separate occasions. So, Harvey is refuting Frazier's story of the bag containing curtain rods.

Captain Will Fritz interrogated Oswald. According to Fritz's account: “He said he didn’t have any kind of a package but his lunch. He said he had his lunch and that is all he had. He said, ‘No. I didn’t carry anything but my lunch."

So, Oswald said he only had his lunch when he was interrogated by Fritz.

Also, Oswald denied Frazier's story a second time when Harry Holmes a postal inspector and FBI informer questioned Oswald about Frazier's story of a long package that he claimed Oswald had in the car.

Harry Holmes : "Asked him if he brought a sack out when he got in the car with this young fellow that hauled him and he said, “Yes.”

“What was in the sack?”

Oswald: “Well, my lunch.”

“What size sack did you have?”

He said, “Oh, I don’t know what size sack. You don’t always get a sack that fits your sandwiches. It might be a big sack.”

Holmes: “Was it a long sack?”

Oswald: “Well, it could have been.”

Holmes: “What did you do with it?”

Oswald: “Carried it in my lap.”

Holmes: “You didn’t put it over in the back seat?”

“No.” He said he wouldn’t have done that.

“Well, someone said the fellow that hauled you said you had a long package which you said was curtain rods you were taking to somebody at work and you laid it over on the back seat.”

He said, “Well, they was just mistaken. That must have been some other time he picked me up.”

That’s all he said about it.

So, that's twice Oswald was questioned about a curtain rods and he denied it twice. If the bag did contain curtain rods, Oswald wouldn't deny it on two separate occasions when being interrogated. 
 

[Anthony Clayden]

So, are you saying that Frazier isn't capable of making up a false story? Frazier claimed he was standing with Sarah Stanton, but Sarah Stanton never even mentioned Frazier in her FBI testimony.

Lee Harvey Oswald himself denied that the bag contained curtain rods on two separate occasions. So, Harvey is refuting Frazier's story of the bag containing curtain rods.

Captain Will Fritz interrogated Oswald. According to Fritz's account: “He said he didn’t have any kind of a package but his lunch. He said he had his lunch and that is all he had. He said, ‘No. I didn’t carry anything but my lunch."

So, Oswald said he only had his lunch when he was interrogated by Fritz.

Also, Oswald denied Frazier's story a second time when Harry Holmes a postal inspector and FBI informer questioned Oswald about Frazier's story of a long package that he claimed Oswald had in the car.

Harry Holmes : "Asked him if he brought a sack out when he got in the car with this young fellow that hauled him and he said, “Yes.”

“What was in the sack?”

Oswald: “Well, my lunch.”

“What size sack did you have?”

He said, “Oh, I don’t know what size sack. You don’t always get a sack that fits your sandwiches. It might be a big sack.”

Holmes: “Was it a long sack?”

Oswald: “Well, it could have been.”

Holmes: “What did you do with it?”

Oswald: “Carried it in my lap.”

Holmes: “You didn’t put it over in the back seat?”

“No.” He said he wouldn’t have done that.

“Well, someone said the fellow that hauled you said you had a long package which you said was curtain rods you were taking to somebody at work and you laid it over on the back seat.”

He said, “Well, they was just mistaken. That must have been some other time he picked me up.”

That’s all he said about it.

So, that's twice Oswald was questioned about a curtain rods and he denied it twice. If the bag did contain curtain rods, Oswald wouldn't deny it on two separate occasions when being interrogated.

If the bag had the gun in it, why did Oswald wait for Buell to finish with the car, before proceeding into the building? Surely you would want to get into the building and hide the gun ASAP?

[Walt Cakebread]

If the bag had the gun in it, why did Oswald wait for Buell to finish with the car, before proceeding into the building? Surely you would want to get into the building and hide the gun ASAP?

On page one Martin posted.....

A memo from James Anderton to SAC Dallas, dated 11/29/63, reveals the desperation of Lt. Day after Frazier failed to identify the heavy bag found at the TSBD. Anderton writes;

"Lt. Day states that he and other officers have surmised that Oswald, by dismantling the rifle, could have placed it in the thick brown sack folder over, and then placed the entire package in the flimsy paper sack"

The obvious question is why Day was so desperate to explain the discrepancy between the heavy bag allegedly found on the 6th floor of the TSBD and the flimsy bag Frazier had seen that he would come up with this theory. Even more so, if he really had found Oswald's prints on the heavy bag and the MC rifle......

[Robert Doane]

if he did he would compromise his Russia false defector work...

Yes, and jeopardize the lives of other agents who were still "out in the cold".....

That's what I thought after reading Michael Paine's comments in his manuscript about Lee, when he stated what he felt about the assumptions people had about Lee being a government or federal agent. I read the manuscript about a month ago in Sean DeGrilla's book Malcontent. I believe it's the first publication of the manuscript, I don't know/haven't seen if Paine's writing is online, so out of respect to author's new work I wont copy it here.

[Walt Cakebread]

That's what I thought after reading Michael Paine's comments in his manuscript about Lee, when he stated what he felt about the assumptions people had about Lee being a government or federal agent. I read the manuscript about a month ago in Sean DeGrilla's book Malcontent. I believe it's the first publication of the manuscript, I don't know/haven't seen if Paine's writing is online, so out of respect to author's new work I wont copy it here.

Robert, Can you flesh that out a bit?....  What did Michael Paine say about Lee Oswald, with respect to Lee being a agent of the US government?

There's no doubt in my mind that Lee was sent to Russia by the US government.   The Russians had recruited Lee while he was a Marine on a secret U-2 base in Japan.  The CIA knew that the Russians were enticing Lee Oswald, and they contacted the Marines and encouraged Lee to play along with the Russians.  They even sent Lee to  foreign language school where he learned to understand and speak Russian.
 

[Robert Doane]

Robert, Can you flesh that out a bit?....  What did Michael Paine say about Lee Oswald, with respect to Lee being a agent of the US government?

There's no doubt in my mind that Lee was sent to Russia by the US government.   The Russians had recruited Lee while he was a Marine on a secret U-2 base in Japan.  The CIA knew that the Russians were enticing Lee Oswald, and they contacted the Marines and encouraged Lee to play along with the Russians.  They even sent Lee to  foreign language school where he learned to understand and speak Russian.

Michael Paine wrote in the 2013 manuscript that if in fact Lee Oswald was associated CIA or FBI it would only be because that would be in Lee's view a way to infiltrate the Government.

Both Paine and Oswald attended left and right wing events, I just think that statement is being deceptive/protective.

The book is a great read, and has its position of course, not too many writings on the topic waver back and forth.


Walt, I've read so much on Oswald but can no longer find this reference, I've looked online: a claim that part of Oswald's intelligence training he was observed walking sidewalks backward. Not that I believe that claim, I don't know if that was in a book or online if anyone knows.