JFK Assassination Forum

Oswald said he was the secretary of the NO FPCC chapter in his August '63 radio debate:

SLATTER: How many people do you have in your committee here in New Orleans?
OSWALD: I cannot reveal that as Secretary of the Fair Play for Cuba committee.

So that fact was known before the assassination. But it's still hard for me to see how an Oswald double would have known the other details that only the real Oswald would have known and then told both the Cubans and Soviets. He showed his marriage license to the Soviets, talked about what he did there. Was that well known? The "Oswald was impersonated" story falls apart when you drill down further. And I think the alleged impersonation on the phone calls don't add up either. I know conspiracists see the all powerful CIA behind everything, that they had/have near absolute power, but they must recognize some limits to what they could do?

Nechiporenko gave this account on what Oswald told them over the two days (note the "stories and documents" part):


As to the material: Boris Yeltsin gave some KGB/Soviet files about Oswald to Clinton back in 1995 or so but the Russians are still withholding many more. Like the surveillance of Oswald in Minsk, et cetera. This report by Semichastny and the reports by Nechiporenko to Moscow about the visits would be interesting to see what they said.

Yuri Nosenko was the KGB officer who defected shortly after the assassination and said he was the case officer for Oswald. He told the HSCA this:



He said that he ordered that Oswald not be given a visa. He also said that after the assassination he asked for and was given Oswald's file. It was quite large. It seems to me that if the KGB had told Moscow that Oswald had been impersonated in Mexico City, that a double was sent, that Nosenko would have read that and told the HSCA. In other words, the Nechiporenko claims that it was Oswald were not made up, he originally said it was a impostor before he wrote his book.

At this point this is sort of like bombing the rubble; the rubble being the "it was a double" claim. How much more evidence do we need? The supporters have Azcue saying it wasn't Oswald and Duran saying the man had blonde hair and was only a few inches taller than she was. Okay. That's on one side and this other evidence is on the other side. Weighing all of that simply doesn't indicate it was an impersonation.

Thanks, that radio debate information answers the main question that remained in my mind regarding the “secretary position.” However, I remain skeptical that the Soviets would have gotten that information from the radio debate. And, unless the news media immediately disseminated that information in the immediate aftermath of the assassination, the Soviets couldn’t have gotten it through the news media in time for a 11/23/63 memo. The more likely source seems to me to be when LHO was begging for a visa and providing documentation (marriage license, etc) of his claims. So at least to me it is still evidence that LHO was there, just not as conclusive (on its own) as I first thought. I agree with you, if all the evidence is considered, the conclusion seems to be that LHO was there in Mexico City as reported.

You have time to type another rant but can't answer a very simple question?  Why would anyone plant evidence to place Oswald on the bus?  How can you suggest the bus transfer was planted but then claim you are not suggesting a conspiracy?  If Oswald left in a car, wouldn't that confirm a conspiracy?  It wasn't his car.  Why would anyone be picking him up in the middle of the day except to aid in his escape?  It's an interesting psychological insight to watch you struggle so mightily against accepting the consequences of your own claims having validity.

You have time to type another rant but can't answer a very simple question?

Looking in the mirror? In recent months you have been asked numerous questions in connection with all sorts of wild claims you made and you haven't been able to answer one of them. Instead, you've ran away saying you don't want to talk to me anymore but then respond to my comments by pretending to respond to a comment of another user. You're truly pathetic.

Why would anyone plant evidence to place Oswald on the bus?

That's actually a good question. Perhaps the simple answer is that at some point in time during the "investigation" they needed to explain how (the long dead) Oswald made his way to the roominghouse as several witnesses had said he (or somebody looking like him) has been picked up by a rambler. With Bledsoe's "identification" of a hole in Oswald's shirt (the one he wasn't wearing on the bus) perhaps it was just convinient to place Oswald on the bus near the TSBD.

If you want to claim that the bus transfer was actually authentic and did belong to Oswald, you need to produce a chain of evidence for it. But, as with so many other pieces of evidence, no such chain exists. So, I'll ask again, when was the bus transfer being found on Oswald first reported and where is the document showing it was placed in the evidence locker prior to Oswald's death?

How can you suggest the bus transfer was planted but then claim you are not suggesting a conspiracy?

If the bus transfer was planted it was off course done as part of a conspiracy. That's obvious.

If Oswald left in a car, wouldn't that confirm a conspiracy? 

Yes indeed... and that may well have been the reason for the bus transfer.

Thank you for providing a possible answer to your own question.   

Re: 40' width is the roadway for traffic. Really, Andrew. This is 101 stuff. "The width of each concrete roadway through the Plaza is 40 feet." (CE 877) Houston Street (and Elm and Main where they begin eastward of Houston) are wider, at 60' width per Google Apps.

That is a document prepared by the FBI and it is not clear where the FBI person who wrote that got their information. They look like asphalt roadways.  I note that BBN in its HSCA report stated that Elm St. was “about 40 feet wide” which sounds like they didn’t measure it. .

Sounds like a typo. The Hum-3D model has a width of 78.6". Without a 1961 Continental in front of me, I can't tell you what that 76.8" (if accurate) measurement refers to (the width of the rear bumper only?). If someone could, please let me know.

I can't travel back in time and set up laser scanners to give you a figure in inches. Would you agree that JFK's line-of-travel was not in the center of the middle lane, as you tried to con people into believing?

 
So let’s assume you are right and the lanes are 13’4” or 160 inches wide.  If the lane makers are 4 inches wide then the middle is 78 inches right of the right edge of the left lane marker.

If the left edge of the car is 10 inches right of the right edge of the lane markers, then the right side of the car is 76.8” farther right or 86.8” left of the right edge of the left lane marker or 8.8 inches right of the centre of the lane.

So the question is: how far is JFK’s midline left of the car right side?  I would suggest that JFK’s ribs were four inches left of the inside wall of the car and that the right edge of the car was a further 6 inches from that wall. If you add 8 inches from his ribs to his spine, this puts his midline 18 inches from the right edge of the car or 86.8-18=68.8” right of the lane marker and 9.2” left of the centre of the lane.

If the lanes are 12’ wide, the middle is 70 inches right of the right edge of the left lane marker, JFK would be 1.2 inches left of the centre.

So, yes, I admit that JFK is left of the centre line by 1.2 to 9.2 inches depending on the lane width. If the car is actually 78.6” wide as you suggest, then JFK’s midline would be between .6 inches right and 7.4 inches left of the midline.

I wasn't referring to the lampposts. What do you make of how far removed the rounded curb and north end of the reflecting pool are relative to the Itek Map? Are you going to continue to use that map?

All I need is a surveyed map with an accurate scale.  I could agree to google maps if you can establish that there was no change in road width since 1963. According to Google maps the measured width is 11.8 m (38.7 feet).

The more that I consider that Semichastny specified, in his memo dated 11/23/63, that LHO cited his “position” as secretary of a pro-Cuban organization…. , the more it becomes obvious that this should be considered strong evidence that LHO himself was indeed there in Mexico City petitioning the Cubans and Soviets as reported. How else could Semichastny have known on 11/23/63 about LHO’s claimed “position” as secretary? I know it was in the news media very early on that LHO was associated with the fair play for Cuba Committee. I could be mistaken, but I really don’t believe that the information regarding his claimed position as secretary became publicly known until much later in the investigation. If this is correct, it appears to me that the only way Semichastny could have know this would have been from the earlier reports from their embassy in Mexico City. Evidence indicates that LHO created this “position” and the related membership card while he was in New Orleans a short while before the trip to Mexico City. I know his association with the FPCC was news while he was in New Orleans. But was his “position as secretary” a part of the news in New Orleans? I do not remember that it was, but I could be wrong.

Oswald said he was the secretary of the NO FPCC chapter in his August '63 radio debate:

SLATTER: How many people do you have in your committee here in New Orleans?
OSWALD: I cannot reveal that as Secretary of the Fair Play for Cuba committee.

So that fact was known before the assassination. But it's still hard for me to see how an Oswald double would have known the other details that only the real Oswald would have known and then told both the Cubans and Soviets. He showed his marriage license to the Soviets, talked about what he did there. Was that well known? The "Oswald was impersonated" story falls apart when you drill down further. And I think the alleged impersonation on the phone calls don't add up either. I know conspiracists see the all powerful CIA behind everything, that they had/have near absolute power, but they must recognize some limits to what they could do?

Nechiporenko gave this account on what Oswald told them over the two days (note the "stories and documents" part):


As to the material: Boris Yeltsin gave some KGB/Soviet files about Oswald to Clinton back in 1995 or so but the Russians are still withholding many more. Like the surveillance of Oswald in Minsk, et cetera. This report by Semichastny and the reports by Nechiporenko to Moscow about the visits would be interesting to see what they said.

Yuri Nosenko was the KGB officer who defected shortly after the assassination and said he was the case officer for Oswald. He told the HSCA this:



He said that he ordered that Oswald not be given a visa. He also said that after the assassination he asked for and was given Oswald's file. It was quite large. It seems to me that if the KGB had told Moscow that Oswald had been impersonated in Mexico City, that a double was sent, that Nosenko would have read that and told the HSCA. In other words, the Nechiporenko claims that it was Oswald were not made up, he originally said it was a impostor before he wrote his book.

At this point this is sort of like bombing the rubble; the rubble being the "it was a double" claim. How much more evidence do we need? The supporters have Azcue saying it wasn't Oswald and Duran saying the man had blonde hair and was only a few inches taller than she was. Okay. That's on one side and this other evidence is on the other side. Weighing all of that simply doesn't indicate it was an impersonation.

I'm sorry, I don't have time for your nonsense - I stated my case with documentation to back it up.
U can spend the rest of the day making what you think a fantasy conspirator would do, of course could never be proven.
Up to you, that means nothing to me.  These facts remain:

Lee was "completely searched" at the time of his arrest.
There were no bullets or bus transfer found on his person.

4 people saw a man leave DP in a car.  2 of them said it looked like Lee Oswald.
When the suspect was asked about this, he did not deny it.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I'll go one step further

The WC was already aware what was expected of them as early as January 1964:
https://jfk.boards.net/post/7711

You have time to type another rant but can't answer a very simple question?  Why would anyone plant evidence to place Oswald on the bus?  How can you suggest the bus transfer was planted but then claim you are not suggesting a conspiracy?  If Oswald left in a car, wouldn't that confirm a conspiracy?  It wasn't his car.  Why would anyone be picking him up in the middle of the day except to aid in his escape?  It's an interesting psychological insight to watch you struggle so mightily against accepting the consequences of your own claims having validity.