The Magic Bullet

[Gary Craig]

~snip~

[Andrew Mason]

How do you know that?

He did not have an apartment and the room he was renting on N. Beckley already had curtains and blinds. Why do you think he needed curtain rods?

Mary Bledsoe had nothing to do with the Beckley St house.

Sorry. Earlene Roberts or Gladys Johnson would have had to have given permission.  Bledsoe was his previous landlady. 

What makes you think his visit was urgent, or that curtain rods were his primary motivation to go to Irving that night?

Buell Frazier's testimony at 2H222:

"and I said, ?Why are you going home today?? And he says, ?I am going home to get some curtain rods.? He said, ?You know, put in an apartment.?
He wanted to hang up some curtains and I said, ?Very well.? And I never thought more about it ...

The "urgency" is evident from the fact that went to Irving on a Thursday night.  He was normally going to go to Irving for the weekend.  He needed them for Friday, rather than Monday.  And he would not be in his room on the weekend as he would be in Irving.  Again, why? This, along with all the other evidence, tends to support the conclusion that he went to Irving to get his gun. 

How do you know what he took with him when he left?

Mary Bledsoe saw Oswald on the bus, minutes after the assassination, and did not mention that he was carrying anything. She described his shirt with a hole in the elbow. But she missed the curtain rod package, it appears.  The taxi driver, Wm. Whaley, also never mentioned him carrying anything, nor did Earlene Roberts who was at home when Oswald arrived. Funny that.

That doesn't necessarily mean he was lying.  But even if he was, that doesn't somehow prove there was a rifle in the bag.  Particularly when the bag wasn't long enough to hold the alleged murder weapon.

That was my original point.  He was carrying a longish package in which he lied about its contents and you cling to the discrepancy of a few inches from what Buell Frazier estimated to be its length, even though he admitted he didn't pay much attention to it.

I think you skipped "fifth".  In any case, there's no evidence that the C2766 rifle was ever in the Paine garage.  And very little evidence to suggest that C2766 was even his gun.

Marina's evidence is not evidence? The blanket fibres are not evidence? The backyard photos are not evidence? The paper trail to and from Klein's is not evidence? The "A.J.Hidell" identity card found on Oswald is not evidence?

How could you possibly know that?

That's begging the question.  You don't know he ever brought a gun to work.  You're just assuming he did.

It is a reasonable inference from the evidence that we have. An assumption is a fact that is accepted as being true without proof.  An inference is a conclusion of fact that is based on indirect proof: ie. evidence and a logical thought process. You seem to be confusing the two concepts.

False premises lead to false conclusions.

There are no premises. Just reasoning based on evidence.

[John Iacoletti]

He did not have an apartment and the room he was renting on N. Beckley already had curtains and blinds. Why do you think he needed curtain rods?

I don't know if he needed them or not.  Maybe he just wanted new ones.  Maybe the ones that were there were broken and the story about a news reporter breaking them was contrived to explain an inconvenient photo.

Sorry. Earlene Roberts or Gladys Johnson would have had to have given permission.

Why would they have "had to have given permission"?  Have you seen the lease?

The "urgency" is evident from the fact that went to Irving on a Thursday night.  He was normally going to go to Irving for the weekend.  He needed them for Friday, rather than Monday.  And he would not be in his room on the weekend as he would be in Irving.  Again, why?

I don't see how that makes anything "urgent".

This, along with all the other evidence, tends to support the conclusion that he went to Irving to get his gun.

No it doesn't.  You're assuming that he went to Irving to get his gun and then interpreting his actions under that light.  There's no evidence that he ever got a gun.

Mary Bledsoe saw Oswald on the bus, minutes after the assassination, and did not mention that he was carrying anything.

Does that mean he couldn't have been carrying anything?  Does that mean he couldn't have taken something with him when he left and dropped it somewhere else, given it to somebody, left it at the bus station, or any number of other possibilities?

That was my original point.  He was carrying a longish package in which he lied about its contents and you cling to the discrepancy of a few inches from what Buell Frazier estimated to be its length, even though he admitted he didn't pay much attention to it.

How do you know he lied about the contents when you don't know what the contents were or even exactly what he said about it?  The answer is, you don't.

Marina's evidence is not evidence?

Marina saw a part of a wooden stock that she took to be a rifle rolled up in a blanket in early October.  How is that evidence that the C2766 rifle was in the Paine's garage on 11/21-22?

The blanket fibres are not evidence?

Evidence of what?  3 fibers that couldn't be tied to any specific blanket?

The backyard photos are not evidence?

Evidence of what.  That Oswald was holding a rifle that may or may not have been C2766 in a photo taken in March or April?

The paper trail to and from Klein's is not evidence?

Evidence of what?  That unscientific handwriting analysis of 2 block letters on a photo of a microfilm copy of a 2-inch order coupon was claimed to have been written by Oswald?

The "A.J.Hidell" identity card found on Oswald is not evidence?

Evidence of what?  That an ID card that nobody ever mentioned in any report or interview prior to Oswald's death suddenly turned up in the evidence stream?

It is a reasonable inference from the evidence that we have. An assumption is a fact that is accepted as being true without proof.  An inference is a conclusion of fact that is based on indirect proof: ie. evidence and a logical thought process. You seem to be confusing the two concepts.

No, you are confusing the two concepts as everything you're claiming to be evidence doesn't actually support your claim that "his gun was taken to the TSBD from the Paine's garage".  You're accepting that as true without proof.

[Martin Weidmann]

27 inches in length eh? And Oswald had one end of that cupped in his right hand and the other end tucked under his right armpit?    Assuming that you can find signed copies of transcripts of their testimonies then at best what you've got there is different length. Your claim is that the bag was of different size, different length, different paper.

Vincent Drain reported that Det. Lewis stated that Frazier said.....

SA James Anderton said what?

Bardwell Odum and Gibbon McNeely reported that Frazier stated that....

Sorry but you fail by your own standard.

The real question is; did he fail by your standard? The documents shown to you are the same kind as those you have relied upon since the first post I've read from you on this forum and probably even longer.

Could it possibly be that you are now questioning and/or disbelieving documents the veracity of which you have been defending for years?

[Bill Chapman]

I don't know if he needed them or not.  Maybe he just wanted new ones.  Maybe

I don't see how that makes anything "urgent"

No it doesn't.  You're assuming that he went to Irving to get his gun and then interpreting his actions under that light.  There's no evidence that he ever got a gun.

Does that mean he couldn't have been carrying anything?  Does that mean he couldn't have taken something with him when he left and dropped it somewhere else, given it to somebody, left it at the bus station, or any number of other possibilities?

How do you know he lied about the contents when you don't know what the contents were or even exactly what he said about it?  The answer is, you don't.

Marina saw a part of a wooden stock that she took to be a rifle rolled up in a blanket in early October.  How is that evidence that the C2766 rifle was in the Paine's garage on 11/21-22?

Evidence of what?  3 fibers that couldn't be tied to any specific blanket?

Evidence of what.  That Oswald was holding a rifle that may or may not have been C2766 in a photo taken in March or April?

Evidence of what?  That unscientific handwriting analysis of 2 block letters on a photo of a microfilm copy of a 2-inch order coupon was claimed to have been written by Oswald?

Evidence of what?  That an ID card that nobody ever mentioned in any report or interview prior to Oswald's death suddenly turned up in the evidence stream?

No, you are confusing the two concepts as everything you're claiming to be evidence doesn't actually support your claim that "his gun was taken to the TSBD from the Paine's garage".  You're accepting that as true without proof.

According to Ruth Paine, Oswald had always called to ask her permission to visit.

Not this time.

That was the smart move: don't risk being turned down. Make sure to be in position to plead with the 'trouble & strife' for reconciliation. And maybe rifle through his stuff and see if there might be something, a tool of some sort maybe... that he could use to accommodate any activity he may or may not have planned for the next day.

Like hanging curtain rods, for example.

[John Iacoletti]

According to Ruth Paine, Oswald had always called to ask her permission to visit.

Not this time.

Is this supposed to be evidence of murder too?

And maybe rifle through his stuff and see if there might be something, a tool of some sort maybe... that he could use to accommodate any activity he may or may not have planned for the next day.

Too bad you have no evidence of him "rifling through his stuff" while he was there.

[Tim Nickerson]

The real question is; did he fail by your standard? The documents shown to you are the same kind as those you have relied upon since the first post I've read from you on this forum and probably even longer.

Could it possibly be that you are now questioning and/or disbelieving documents the veracity of which you have been defending for years?

I don't know if I should feel insulted by you , annoyed at you, or just feel sorry for you.  How could the gist of my response to Iacoletti possibly have escaped you?