Buell Wesley Frazier

[John Mytton]

why didn't you address the Elephant in the room

What Elephant would that be?

why on Earth would Oswald take "curtain rods" in a long package to work and then simply leave them behind?

He probably didn't. I don't know what was in the bag and neither do you. Frazier said that he carried the bag between the cup of his hand and under his armpit. That's not an estimate. It's an observation!

You can speculate all you want,  but a dismanteld MC rifle could not fit between the cup of Oswald's hand and under his armpit.

And don't forget that his rooming house's room had curtain rods, so think hard and try to explain this massive dilemma, Good Luck!

There is no dilemma. All there is, is you speculating based on the mere fact that Frazier said Oswald told him about collecting curtain rods.

...based on the mere fact that Frazier said Oswald told him about collecting curtain rods.

Sorry Martin you've got it all wrong, not only did Oswald tell Frazier that he was going to Irving to collect "curtain rods" but Oswald told Frazier very specifically that on the back seat of Frazier's car were those very same "curtain rods". So I'll ask again what happened to the curtain rods and why didn't Oswald take them with him?

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

That's all very nice but irrelevant, why didn't you address the Elephant in the room, why on Earth would Oswald take "curtain rods" in a long package to work and then simply leave them behind? And don't forget that his rooming house's room had curtain rods, so think hard and try to explain this massive dilemma, Good Luck!

JohnM

Again, in the real world, there is no dilemma. It only exists in your imagination.

What makes you think that there actually were curtain rods in that bag?

Just because Oswald used it as an excuse to explain his trip to Irving instead of telling a 19 year old co-worker about his marital problems?

Your self serving speculation is pathetic.

All this BS;

I propose a theory that explains it all, hear me out.
Oswald made a special trip to Irving on a Thursday so he could retrieve his rifle, a rifle that was missing form the Paine garage on the Friday afternoon.
Oswald wrapped the rifle in brown paper that came from the Depository so the rifle sack could be easily smuggled into his work and wouldn't be so conspicuous.
Oswald left the paper sack and the rifle on the 6th floor and got the heck out of there as quickly as possible.
See Michael, no mental gymnastics required, a straight forward assassination explains ALL the evidence and also explains ALL of Oswald's actions.

is more than likely based on a white lie Oswald told Frazier to explain why he went to Irving.

Why don't you provide actual evidence that there was indeed a rifle, belonging to Oswald, in Ruth Paine's garage on 11/21/63?

If you do that, we may have something to talk about....... so, where is that evidence?

[John Mytton]

Again, in the real world, there is no dilemma. It only exists in your imagination.

What makes you think that there actually were curtain rods in that bag?

Just because Oswald used it as an excuse to explain his trip to Irving instead of telling a 19 year old co-worker about his marital problems?

Your self serving speculation is pathetic.

All this BS;

is more than likely based on a white lie Oswald told Frazier to explain why he went to Irving.

Why don't you provide actual evidence that there was indeed a rifle, belonging to Oswald, in Ruth Paine's garage on 11/21/63?

If you do that, we may have something to talk about....... so, where is that evidence?

C'mon Martin, this is weak sauce, it's well established that Oswald was having marital problems because for a start he wasn't living with Marina, DUH!
And their latest tiff happened on the previous Monday, so Oswald had Tuesday and Wednesday to rectify their marriage but instead of waiting till the weekend where he would have 2 full days to fully explain himself, he chose Thursday, the precise night before the President arrived. Some coincidence?

But anyway, you keep running from the fact that Oswald took a large package to work and instead of answering my simple questions, you keep deflecting because let's face it, you're stumped!

JohnM

[Jack Nessan]

It has been corrected.

 It was a little too obvious to not have been just an oversight.

[Jack Nessan]

How is he bent over? - if the package is shorter - he holds in the manner she had seen.
How does a shorter package restrict the way he held it, if he can reach both portions
One hand near the top -  the other for support at the bottom. I seriously don't understand your point.

It is certainly is NO proof the package is longer than about 2 feet.

MC--"One hand near the top -  the other for support at the bottom. I seriously don't understand your point."

This is also obvious. If the almost touches the ground and his left hand is near the bottom, LHO has to be bent over to be holding.

Oswald is 5 feet 9 inches----69 inches tall, LHO waist would be approximately 29 inches

The bag is 27 inches. 

Oswald right hand is several inches below the top. Left hand near the bottom.

Linnie Mae stated the bag almost touched the ground. That would make LHO’s right hand below 6 inches + below his waist and his left hand near the ground. He would have to be bent at the waist to carry the package with the bottom close the ground along with his left hand.

Mrs. RANDLE. He was carrying a package in a sort of a heavy brown bag, heavier than a grocery bag it looked to me. It was about, if I might measure, about this long, I suppose, and he carried it in his right hand, had the top sort of folded down and had a grip like this, and the bottom, he carried it this way, you know, and it almost touched the ground as he carried it.


Mr. BALL. And he was grabbing it with his right hand at the top of the package and the package almost touched the ground?

Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir.
 

[Jack Nessan]

I'm aware that facts don't worry you too much, so how would you have noticed? Carry on. ROFL.

John Myton is working overtime to educate you on the facts but it does not appear to be taking. If you decide to actually contribute something to the discussion instead of this nonsense that would be great.
 

[Michael Capasse]

The bag is 27 inches. 

The rifle broken down is 34.8 inches long,  About 40 inches assembled.
So, whatever Frazier saw was obviously not the rifle.

How does this prove what LMR saw was any longer?