JFK Assassination Forum

General Discussion & Debate => General Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Jerry Freeman on August 26, 2018, 07:53:24 PM

Title: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 26, 2018, 07:53:24 PM
The Warren Commission sharks.. desperate to suggest Oswald was a violent and dangerous person declared that Lee Harvey Oswald was the perpetrator in the shooting of Gen Walker based on testimony from Marina and George D'M...photos and a map conveniently found w/ other incriminating evidence also a 'farewell note' of some sort was found.
Marina and George did not see Oswald shoot Walker. [Walker was shot though not badly injured][/b]

(http://harveyandlee.net/Temp/Walker_Report.jpg)
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Richard Smith on August 26, 2018, 10:10:25 PM
Oswald confessed to his wife even before the Walker attempt was known to the public.  How and why would he do that if he was not the shooter?  There was no apparent need to link Oswald to the Walker attempt.   Standing alone there was plenty of evidence to link Oswald to the JFK assassination.  And he was already dead before this came to light.  Any conspiracy plot to frame him for the JFK assassination would not need to link him to other crimes.  Lots of risks for no real gain in the JFK conspiracy context.   
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 26, 2018, 10:50:17 PM
Oswald confessed to his wife..
And she reported it when? Unless you were there and heard this confession yourself.
She lied constantly...it's evident.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jon Banks on August 27, 2018, 12:32:11 AM
Oswald confessed to his wife even before the Walker attempt was known to the public. 

"Allegedly"
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Richard Smith on August 27, 2018, 02:05:46 PM
"Allegedly"

No, not allegedly.  It's part of her testimony.  Oswald also had recon photos of Walker's home and gave Marina instructions on what to do if he was arrested or killed.  It's a slam dunk.  But if you believe that this was all made up, then why?  By the time Oswald became associated with the Walker attempt, he was already dead, there would be no trial, and the authorities were satisfied with his guilt as the JFK assassin.  Why would the conspirators need to link him to yet another crime?  Risky and unnecessary at that point.   And how do they get Marina to make up this story?  If she was under some type of duress, then that no longer applies as she now freely expresses doubts as to Oswald's guilt.  Why doesn't she clear this up as well?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Mytton on August 27, 2018, 02:15:36 PM
No, not allegedly.  It's part of her testimony.  Oswald also had recon photos of Walker's home and gave Marina instructions on what to do if he was arrested or killed.  It's a slam dunk.  But if you believe that this was all made up, then why?  By the time Oswald became associated with the Walker attempt, he was already dead, there would be no trial, and the authorities were satisfied with his guilt as the JFK assassin.  Why would the conspirators need to link him to yet another crime?  Risky and unnecessary at that point.   And how do they get Marina to make up this story?  If she was under some type of duress, then that no longer applies as she now freely expresses doubts as to Oswald's guilt.  Why doesn't she clear this up as well?

Nice summation, I'll only add that the recon photos were determined to be taken shortly before Walker was shot and Oswald had a map marked with Walkers address.

JohnM
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 27, 2018, 06:07:28 PM
Statements above were conceded [for the sake of argument] in the opening post.
Perhaps it was not thoroughly read and the police report was not scrutinized if read at all.
Yeah..perhaps [allegedly] a map was found.... Why if this deed [as proposed] had been attempted...would it be it kept? The same with the alleged photographs.
Trying to make sense out of the senseless again?
The shallowness of of some peoples skepticism belies their purpose.
Once again...every attempt possible was made to establish Oswald as a homicidal maniac.
A steel jacket bullet was pulled out of Walker's wall and there could be no connection made with CE2766 [or whatever that rifle was called] Go back up and read that police report.....
Two cars were seen driving away right after the shots. One driver was seen stashing something into the floorboard before he drove off. 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Richard Rubio on August 27, 2018, 06:12:42 PM
 If one ever reads up on General Walker, apparently, he went to New Mexico Military Institute in Roswell, NM.

His role in the Ole Miss demonstrations in the early '60s I disagree with but I guess, he enforced the law for Ike on integration in Little Rock in the 1950s. Interesting figure.

All in his wikipedia bio... except the extent of those riots in MS,  it appears to have been major unrest. He was on the cover of TIME (or LIFE or Newsweek, I forget which).
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jon Banks on August 27, 2018, 07:01:30 PM
If one ever reads up on General Walker, apparently, he went to New Mexico Military Institute in Roswell, NM.

His role in the Ole Miss demonstrations in the early '60s I disagree with but I guess, he enforced the law for Ike on integration in Little Rock in the 1950s. Interesting figure.

All in his wikipedia bio... except the extent of those riots in MS,  it appears to have been major unrest. He was on the cover of TIME (or LIFE or Newsweek, I forget which).

Walker was staunchly pro-Segregation and Oswald was staunchly pro-Civil Rights.

So there?s definitely a motive and perhaps Oswald voiced negative opinions about Walker to Marina and George DM. But there?s not enough evidence to say Beyond a Reasonable Doubt that Oswald shot Walker. Too many holes in the evidence...
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Richard Smith on August 27, 2018, 07:03:59 PM
Statements above were conceded [for the sake of argument] in the opening post.
Perhaps it was not thoroughly read and the police report was not scrutinized if read at all.
Yeah..perhaps [allegedly] a map was found.... Why if this deed [as proposed] had been attempted...would it be it kept? The same with the alleged photographs.
Trying to make sense out of the senseless again?
The shallowness of of some peoples skepticism belies their purpose.
Once again...every attempt possible was made to establish Oswald as a homicidal maniac.
A steel jacket bullet was pulled out of Walker's wall and there could be no connection made with CE2766 [or whatever that rifle was called] Go back up and read that police report.....
Two cars were seen driving away right after the shots. One driver was seen stashing something into the floorboard before he drove off.

What you are basically arguing is that the evidence against Oswald is so overwhelming that he must be innocent.  Criminals do dumb things.  Oswald did apparently destroy some documents relating to the Walker attempt.  Marina explains in her testimony why some were kept.   In terms of the cars, remember the DC sniper case?  The police were asking people to look for a white van.  This in the age of security cameras.  No white van was involved.  Just a mix up by witnesses.  Cars may have been seen driving away and witnesses erroneously connected them to the Walker attempt.  Again, there is no apparent need to "establish Oswald as a homicidal maniac" to link him to the JFK assassination in a conspiracy narrative.  Assassins, mass shooter often have no prior violent history.   The risks of linking Oswald to the Walker shooting far surpassed any gains from a conspiracy perspective.   After his death, with the authorities satisfied of his guilt in the JFK assassination there would have been no need to falsely link him to Walker.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 27, 2018, 07:23:59 PM
Oswald confessed to his wife even before the Walker attempt was known to the public.  How and why would he do that if he was not the shooter?  There was no apparent need to link Oswald to the Walker attempt.   Standing alone there was plenty of evidence to link Oswald to the JFK assassination.  And he was already dead before this came to light.  Any conspiracy plot to frame him for the JFK assassination would not need to link him to other crimes.  Lots of risks for no real gain in the JFK conspiracy context.   

What's your evidence for this alleged confession? Most likey it is just Marina Oswald's word. There is NO supporting evidence for the claim that LHO fired at EAW. NONE.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 27, 2018, 07:26:07 PM
Nice summation, I'll only add that the recon photos were determined to be taken shortly before Walker was shot and Oswald had a map marked with Walkers address.

JohnM

He also had EAW's phone number in his notebook. Why?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 27, 2018, 07:47:53 PM
What you are basically arguing.. Criminals do dumb things.
    Marina explains in her testimony why some were kept. 
 DC sniper case? 
I am not arguing anything [I believe you are though]... I only posted a report for the forum and proposed an alternative.
"Criminals do dumb things". ...a rhetorical statement that is immaterial.
   " Marina explains" [to the gullible maybe]...Marina lied....She even **admitted that she was lying.
Lee took his rifle out to the airport to practice. Please.
"DC sniper"... irrelevant.....do better than that.

**
Quote
Mr. RANKIN. Did you learn at any time that he had been practicing with the rifle?
Mrs. OSWALD. I think that he went once or twice. I didn't actually see him take the rifle, but I knew that he was practicing.
Mr. RANKIN. Could you give us a little help on how you knew?
Mrs. OSWALD. He told me. And he would mention that in passing---it isn't
as if he said, "Well, today I am going"---it wasn't as if he said, "Well, today I am going to take the rifle and go and practice."
But he would say, "Well, today I will take the rifle along for practice."
Therefore, I don't know whether he took it from the house or whether perhaps he even kept the rifle somewhere outside. There was a little square, sort of a little courtyard where he might have kept it.
When you asked me about the rifle, I said that Lee didn't have a rifle, but he also had a gun, a revolver.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you know where he practiced with the rifle?
Mrs. OSWALD. I don't know where. I don't know the name of the place where this took place. But I think it was somewhere out of town. It seems to me a place called Lopfield.
Mr. RANKIN. Would that be at the airport---Love Field?
Mrs. OSWALD. Love Field.
Mr. RANKIN. So you think he was practicing out in the open and not at a rifle range?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
How [in the name of all that's holy] could anybody have believed this woman's "testimony"?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 27, 2018, 07:59:09 PM
He also had EAW's phone number in his notebook. Why?

Unless you can supply information that proves something sinister regarding Oswald having the number (according to you), my take would be that he intended to call and make sure that Walker was home, and up, just before heading over.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Howard Gee on August 27, 2018, 08:00:52 PM
Nice summation, I'll only add that the recon photos were determined to be taken shortly before Walker was shot and Oswald had a map marked with Walkers address.

JohnM

Those conspirators certainly were brilliant !

Planting a photo of Walker's residence taken months before the assassination.

Not to mention planting the similar order forms for the rifle, and the backyard photos and negatives.

Obviously, the frame up of Oswald began months before it was even known JFK would be visiting Dallas.

And the added touch of forging the note to Marina ?  Genius !

Imagine the glee of the evidence planting conspirators as they introduced these items into the Paine residence.

Just goes to show you, when you couple sheer genius with the ability to look into the future even the most impossible frame up becomes possible.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 27, 2018, 08:27:16 PM
Statements above were conceded [for the sake of argument] in the opening post.
Perhaps it was not thoroughly read and the police report was not scrutinized if read at all.
Yeah..perhaps [allegedly] a map was found.... Why if this deed [as proposed] had been attempted...would it be it kept? The same with the alleged photographs.
Trying to make sense out of the senseless again?
The shallowness of of some peoples skepticism belies their purpose.
Once again...every attempt possible was made to establish Oswald as a homicidal maniac.
A steel jacket bullet was pulled out of Walker's wall and there could be no connection made with CE2766 [or whatever that rifle was called] Go back up and read that police report.....
Two cars were seen driving away right after the shots. One driver was seen stashing something into the floorboard before he drove off.

Cite that
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 27, 2018, 08:30:30 PM
...to make sure that Walker was home, and up, just before heading over.
Made a leisurely [7 or 8 mile] stroll at right shoulder arms? Maybe he took a cab? Then why need a map?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 27, 2018, 11:38:01 PM
Unless you can supply information that proves something sinister regarding Oswald having the number (according to you), my take would be that he intended to call and make sure that Walker was home, and up, just before heading over.

When you have to constantly misrepresent what was said you show your true intentions. I never used the word "suspicious" as you infer. I simply stated a FACT and asked why LHO would have EAW's telephone number in his notebook. Well?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 27, 2018, 11:54:38 PM
When you have to constantly misrepresent what was said you show your true intentions. I never used the word "suspicious" as you infer. I simply stated a FACT and asked why LHO would have EAW's telephone number in his notebook. Well?

You asked why Oswald would have Walker's number, and I offered up a reasonable possibility.

Well?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 28, 2018, 12:35:08 AM
Cite that
Cite what? About the bullet? Did you read that police report in the lead post? Did you even know about that report?
Here it is.....
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1189.0.html
Note that the part about the bullet is highlighted in yellow :)
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 28, 2018, 01:00:06 AM
He also had EAW's phone number in his notebook. Why?
I was wondering...how did information arrive as I cannot find anything about it?
Was that in the Warren Report? Was it in the phantom torn out page in the address book [that mysteriously disappeared]?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 28, 2018, 02:50:07 AM
You asked why Oswald would have Walker's number, and I offered up a reasonable possibility.

Well?

There is nothing "reasonable" about your possibility. In fact, it is quite laughable.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 28, 2018, 02:52:33 AM
I was wondering...how did information arrive as I cannot find anything about it?
Was that in the Warren Report? Was it in the phantom torn out page in the address book [that mysteriously disappeared]?

It is in LHO's notebook which is part of the twenty-six volumes of evidence. I covered this in several posts of my series, but...
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 28, 2018, 03:27:00 AM
I covered this in several posts of my series, but...
It got erased?
Found this...   https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337590/m1/
The notebook had codes in it according to research....   https://www.amazon.com/Oswald-Code-Secrets-Oswalds-Address/dp/1490463674#reader_1490463674
A book by a fellow named Weberman.
Wait for the preview to load.
The Oswald notebook should actually be a separate thread in itself.
Of course the nutters will declare the notes as the ravings of a lunatic ::)
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Mytton on August 28, 2018, 03:31:06 AM
There is nothing "reasonable" about your possibility. In fact, it is quite laughable.

As usual you asked for speculation that only a seance can confirm one way or another, then worryingly you think you get to decide what is fact and fiction, now that is truly laughable.

JohnM
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 28, 2018, 03:41:15 AM
   The risks of linking Oswald to the Walker shooting far surpassed any gains from a conspiracy perspective.   After his death, with the authorities satisfied of his guilt in the JFK assassination there would have been no need to falsely link him to Walker.
So you indeed admit the accusation was false?  ::)  No?
Then answer this.... why did they do it anyway?
Quote
....the Commission has concluded that Lee Harvey Oswald attempted to
take the life of Maj. Gen. Edwin A. Walker (Resigned, U.S. Army)
on April 10, 1963.  The finding that Lee Harvey Oswald attempted
to murder a public figure in April 1963 was considered of
probative value in this investigation...
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/walker.txt
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Mytton on August 28, 2018, 04:08:37 AM
A steel jacket bullet was pulled out of Walker's wall

MR. EISENBERG -- "Can you think of any reason why someone might have called this [CE573] a steel-jacketed bullet?"
MR. FRAZIER -- "No, sir; except that some individuals commonly refer to rifle bullets as steel-jacketed bullets, when they actually in fact just have a copper-alloy jacket."


Btw in 2 assassination attempts in Dallas in 1963 the shooter used FMJ bullets, bullets that were designed to be safer.

JohnM
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jon Banks on August 28, 2018, 05:41:13 AM
MR. EISENBERG -- "Can you think of any reason why someone might have called this [CE573] a steel-jacketed bullet?"
MR. FRAZIER -- "No, sir; except that some individuals commonly refer to rifle bullets as steel-jacketed bullets, when they actually in fact just have a copper-alloy jacket."


Btw in 2 assassination attempts in Dallas in 1963 the shooter used FMJ bullets, bullets that were designed to be safer.

JohnM

The Ballistics evidence is far from conclusive in the Walker investigation:

The Washington Post and Times Herald reported the Dallas Police had conducted ballistics tests linking Oswald's weapon to the Walker case on February 19, 1964. Yet the media was unaware the FBI had taken custody of the JFK bullet fragments before the DPD could undertake such testing. The FBI noted this and contacted Jessie Curry the Chief of Dallas Police. Curry who was repeatedly quoted to support the articles claims informed the FBI he "gave no such information to the paper...Chief Curry further advised the Dallas Police Department made no 'ballistics test' of this material."

The Federal Bureau of Investigation conducted a series of test to discover if the bullets from each shooting matched. The results of Bureau laboratory tests state "...the bullet recovered from the attempted shooting of General Walker was different from the lead alloy of a large bullet fragment recovered from the car in which President Kennedy was shot."

Dallas City County Laboratory investigator Floyd Alexander states he "...was only able to ascertain the types of guns from which the bullet could have been fired but that this was speculation on his part. He explained this was due to the fact he did not have any weapon with which to make a comparison. Alexander stated he subsequently...had been unable to definitely determine the type of gun that fired the bullet...as there was nothing on which to base a written report other than the above speculation."

The House Select Committee on Assassinations' firearms panel did not match Oswald's weapon to the Walker bullet, it found that it was similar as previous officials had. This does not exclude other weapons from having fired the bullet, it merely confines the projectile to similar types of weapons. Officials state the bullet "probably" was the type Oswald's rifle used, not definitively. Thousands of other weapons in the United States used this type of bullet as well.


https://www.tpaak.com/walker-allegations/
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Gary Craig on August 28, 2018, 06:07:02 AM
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/walker2.jpg)

(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/walker1.jpg)

(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/steeljacket.jpg)

(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/jfkpotos.jpg)
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 28, 2018, 06:32:48 AM
Made a leisurely [7 or 8 mile] stroll at right shoulder arms? Maybe he took a cab? Then why need a map?

Where did I say anything about a map? I'm addressing why Oswald might have wanted Walker's phone number. Try to keep up.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 28, 2018, 07:04:36 AM
There is nothing "reasonable" about your possibility. In fact, it is quite laughable.

You have not told us why it's laughable to you. Tell us a more efficient way to find out if Walker was home that night, if not by calling his number?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 28, 2018, 07:25:30 AM
No, not allegedly.  It's part of her testimony.

So was his alleged outing to go visit Nixon.  :D

Quote
Oswald also had recon photos of Walker's home and gave Marina instructions on what to do if he was arrested or killed.

You mean the unsigned, undated note in Russian that doesn?t mention Walker?

Maybe it?s the steel-jacketed bullet the police found at Walker?s house...
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 28, 2018, 07:27:27 AM
Nice summation, I'll only add that the recon photos were determined to be taken shortly before Walker was shot and Oswald had a map marked with Walkers address.

And the evidence that Oswald took these photos or marked this map?

<crickets>
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 28, 2018, 07:31:44 AM
After his death, with the authorities satisfied of his guilt in the JFK assassination there would have been no need to falsely link him to Walker.

They used this allegation to try to make a case for Oswald being prone to an act of murder.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Mytton on August 28, 2018, 07:32:36 AM
And the evidence that Oswald took these photos or marked this map?

<crickets>

The same camera that took the Walker photos also took the backyard photos and Oswald family snaps.

Nothing to see here!

JohnM
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 28, 2018, 07:34:55 AM
Those conspirators certainly were brilliant !

Planting a photo of Walker's residence taken months before the assassination.

Not to mention planting the similar order forms for the rifle, and the backyard photos and negatives.

Aren?t you the guy who was just claiming that LNs don?t make up conspirators?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 28, 2018, 07:39:11 AM
The same camera that took the Walker photos also took the backyard photos and Oswald family snaps.

Great ? arrest the camera.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 28, 2018, 07:41:56 AM
MR. EISENBERG -- "Can you think of any reason why someone might have called this [CE573] a steel-jacketed bullet?"
MR. FRAZIER -- "No, sir; except that some individuals commonly refer to rifle bullets as steel-jacketed bullets, when they actually in fact just have a copper-alloy jacket."


That?s truly one for the ?lame excuses? file. Who are these individuals who commonly do that?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 28, 2018, 07:44:02 AM
Cite what? About the bullet? Did you read that police report in the lead post? Did you even know about that report?
Here it is.....
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1189.0.html
Note that the part about the bullet is highlighted in yellow :)

You?ll have to forgive Chapman, Rob. He doesn?t know anything about the case. He just knows who probably did it.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Mytton on August 28, 2018, 07:51:00 AM
Great ? arrest the camera.

Sorry but that doesn't work for me, it was Oswald's camera that took the Walker photos and the Walker photos were found in Oswald's possessions. But I guess this is just on the long long list of manipulated or planted evidence. Whatever it takes...

JohnM
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 28, 2018, 08:13:01 AM
Sorry but that doesn't work for me, it was Oswald's camera that took the Walker photos and the Walker photos were found in Oswald's possessions.

Too bad the camera wasn?t.

But define ?Oswald?s possessions?. Anything in the Paine garage that seemed incriminating?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Mytton on August 28, 2018, 08:21:21 AM
Too bad the camera wasn?t.

But define ?Oswald?s possessions?. Anything in the Paine garage that seemed incriminating?

Sorry John but where does all that go? The reality you're faced with is a camera that was proven to have taken Oswald personal photos also took the Walker photos and the walker photos which were found in Oswald's possessions can be dated to within days.

JohnM
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Richard Smith on August 28, 2018, 02:07:52 PM
That's correct. LNers don't make up conspirators.

Of course the fact that I was obviously being sarcastic about the brilliant conspirators went right over your bald lid.

Tell me genius, how do you suppose the photo of the Walker residence happened to be found in the Paine residence ?

How on earth does a photo of the Walker residence taken months earlier using Saint Patsy's camera wind up in the Paine residence ?

Yeah, I know...maybe Ruth borrowed the camera and took the photo...and besides, the photo doesn't prove anything about who took the shot at Walker....strawman.....burden of proof....yada yada yada.

Same old tired ridiculous Iacoletti canned troll crapola.

I love to watch you squirm, so take a crack at explaining how the Walker photo wound up in the Paine residence.

Careful or John I. might recreate this event using a video game to help visualize what happened.  Or invoke his reoccurring argument that the evidence is always suspect but no one is implying there was a conspiracy.  An implicit concession to the weakness of the contrarian CTer position.  Trying to eat his cake and have it too.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 28, 2018, 03:55:04 PM
Sorry John but where does all that go? The reality you're faced with is a camera that was proven to have taken Oswald personal photos also took the Walker photos and the walker photos which were found in Oswald's possessions can be dated to within days.

So no answer as to how you determined these photos were Oswald's possessions?

And a camera that that just turned up 3 months later?  I guess that camera wasn't "found in Oswald's possessions".  Huh?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 28, 2018, 04:04:10 PM
Careful or John I. might recreate this event using a video game to help visualize what happened.

You mean like Dale Myers did?

Quote
  Or invoke his reoccurring argument that the evidence is always suspect but no one is implying there was a conspiracy.

Careful, "Richard" might be making up crap about what other people say again.

What exactly do you think this photo is evidence of?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 28, 2018, 04:16:31 PM
It got erased?
Found this...   https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337590/m1/
The notebook had codes in it according to research....   https://www.amazon.com/Oswald-Code-Secrets-Oswalds-Address/dp/1490463674#reader_1490463674
A book by a fellow named Weberman.
Wait for the preview to load.
The Oswald notebook should actually be a separate thread in itself.
Of course the nutters will declare the notes as the ravings of a lunatic ::)

This same notebook had Hosty's phone number and JEH's secretary's phone number as well.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 28, 2018, 04:18:33 PM
...might recreate this event using a video game to help visualize what happened.   
And every historical event mentioned in this forum ...awesome idea!
I have not seen the Dale Myers video game.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 28, 2018, 04:18:49 PM
As usual you asked for speculation that only a seance can confirm one way or another, then worryingly you think you get to decide what is fact and fiction, now that is truly laughable.

JohnM

What is laughable is thinking that LHO, or anyone, would call a person before they shot at them.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 28, 2018, 04:22:03 PM
You have not told us why it's laughable to you. Tell us a more efficient way to find out if Walker was home that night, if not by calling his number?

Then you can prove your claim with phone records, right?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 28, 2018, 04:23:51 PM
The same camera that took the Walker photos also took the backyard photos and Oswald family snaps.

Nothing to see here!

JohnM

And your evidence is? The WCR is NOT evidence either.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 28, 2018, 04:31:25 PM
Sorry John but where does all that go? The reality you're faced with is a camera that was proven to have taken Oswald personal photos also took the Walker photos and the walker photos which were found in Oswald's possessions can be dated to within days.

JohnM

If you actually knew the evidence then you would realize that it was never proven that LHO ever owned or used the camera in question.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 28, 2018, 04:46:58 PM
And every historical event mentioned in this forum ...awesome idea!
I have not seen the Dale Myers video game.

It's featured in "JFK: Inside the Target Car".
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 28, 2018, 05:38:49 PM
Great ? arrest the camera.

The little camera that could. Probably.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 28, 2018, 06:47:28 PM
Tell us a more efficient way to find out if Walker was home that night, if not by calling his number?
Quote
Hello General...listen, I'd like to come over and shoot you...will you be up for awhile?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Howard Gee on August 28, 2018, 07:41:07 PM
So when you make up conspirators in order to be sarcastic, you are somehow "not making up conspirators".


That's correct,

I don't actually believe there were conspirators.

I'm using sarcasm and being facetious in a satirical post that, not surprisingly, flew right over your glistening dome. (Chapman knew it would  Thumb1:)

I notice you didn't respond to my question....

How do you suppose the Walker photo wound up in the Paine residence ?

Take a crack at it, genius.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 28, 2018, 08:38:23 PM
(http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo3/exhibits/ce5.jpg)

A photograph allegedly found at the Paine house allegedly taken by Oswald with his alleged camera.
It was identified by the General as his house but an unfamiliar car.
On record is the fact that the FBI took all the confiscated materials from the Paine house back to Washington on the very day of the assassination. In the following days, the materials were returned to Dallas. The returned materials reportedly exceeded the amount of materials that were taken.
So, there was no cop that sifted through stuff at the Paine's and found the picture and immediately recognized it as Gen Walker's residence [an impression that seems to be generated]
The Warren Commission decided [based on no evidence whatsoever] that Oswald for some reason tore the license plate number out of the picture ::)
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 28, 2018, 11:51:50 PM
Then you can prove your claim with phone records, right?

Show us where I claimed that Oswald actually went ahead and made a call to Walker.

I only suggested that calling ahead would be the most efficient way to make sure Walker would be home that night.

Phone records? I'd use a phone booth.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Howard Gee on August 29, 2018, 02:29:48 AM
But you talk about what you think these conspirators do more than people who actually believe in conspirators.   :D

No idea.  What exactly do you think that proves, genius?

You have no idea how the Walker photo wound up in the Paine residence ?

I do.

It was taken by Saint Patsy.

Now, why would your client be photographing the Walker residence ?

There must have been a reason.

Out of all the homes in Dallas, by some miraculous coincidence a photo of the Walker residence is found in the Paine residence where your hero stores things (like his rifle, C2766).

Kinda puts a huge dent in the Saint Patsy was framed for the Walker shooting narrative, doesn't it ?

Corroborates and lends credence to what the note to Marina was about and your client admitting to her that he was the Walker shooter.

So of course you conveniently have 'no idea' how the photo came to be in the Paine residence because you desperately want to continue the absurd charade that the photo might have been planted in a frame up.

Remarkably similar to you having 'no idea' what rifle Saint Patsy is holding in the backyard photos.

I think you have a good idea how the Walker photo wound up in the Paine residence. I think you have a good idea what rifle Saint Patsy is holding in the BY photos too.

You're so transparent I can read my mail through you.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 29, 2018, 03:11:38 AM
Show us where I claimed that Oswald actually went ahead and made a call to Walker.

I only suggested that calling ahead would be the most efficient way to make sure Walker would be home that night.

Phone records? I'd use a phone booth.

You suggested that he would call ahead, therefore, you have to support this otherwise your suggestion is worthless.

Then we are back to the original question of -- why did LHO have EAW's telephone number in his notebook?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 29, 2018, 05:08:29 AM
What is laughable is thinking that LHO, or anyone, would call a person before they shot at them.

 ::)

Where did I say Oswald should actually talk to him? Just wait for Walker to pick up, then just hang up.

Duh.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 29, 2018, 05:41:41 AM
You suggested that he would call ahead, therefore, you have to support this otherwise your suggestion is worthless.

Then we are back to the original question of -- why did LHO have EAW's telephone number in his notebook?

Again, where did I suggest that Oswald would call ahead.
Common sense supports my suggestion

Just call, and hang up as soon as Walker answers
Bingo! He's home!

Duh
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Richard Smith on August 29, 2018, 07:14:56 PM
And every historical event mentioned in this forum ...awesome idea!
I have not seen the Dale Myers video game.

Some of John I's potential research.  I have to admit in watching this it reminded me of Caprio's claim that the motorcade should have been going 44 MPH or some similar nonsense:

Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 29, 2018, 08:20:16 PM
::)

Where did I say Oswald should actually talk to him? Just wait for Walker to pick up, then just hang up.

Duh.

EAW had aides. How do you know that he would answer the phone himself?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 29, 2018, 08:23:52 PM
Again, where did I suggest that Oswald would call ahead.
Common sense supports my suggestion

Just call, and hang up as soon as Walker answers
Bingo! He's home!

Duh

You are contradicting yourself in this post. "Duh" indeed. You have no way of showing that LHO ever did call EAW so it is a naked assertion. Furthermore, depending on when and where LHO would have allegedly called from EAW could have left by the time LHO got to his home.

No, this is not a good reason for LHO to have EAW's telephone number in his notebook.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 29, 2018, 08:26:55 PM
Some of John I's potential research.  I have to admit in watching this it reminded me of Caprio's claim that the motorcade should have been going 44 MPH or some similar nonsense:


Nonsense? You have me confused with your convoluted posts. The speed of 44 m.p.h. was normal for a motorcade of this type to enhance safety.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 29, 2018, 09:07:26 PM
You have no idea how the Walker photo wound up in the Paine residence ?

I do.

It was taken by Saint Patsy.

Now, why would your client be photographing the Walker residence ?

There must have been a reason.

Sorry, I must have missed the part where you demonstrated that Oswald took that photo.

Quote
Out of all the homes in Dallas, by some miraculous coincidence a photo of the Walker residence is found in the Paine residence where your hero stores things (like his rifle, C2766).

Sorry, I must have missed the part where you demonstrated that Oswald stored C2766 at the Paine residence.

Quote
Kinda puts a huge dent in the Saint Patsy was framed for the Walker shooting narrative, doesn't it ?

Not in the slightest.

Quote
So of course you conveniently have 'no idea' how the photo came to be in the Paine residence because you desperately want to continue the absurd charade that the photo might have been planted in a frame up.

One of us makes up ideas that he can't demonstrate are actually true, and the other one of us says that in the absence of evidence, "I don't know" is the most rational answer.

Hey, I can ask irrelevant, unanswerable questions too, and pretend like it means something!

Who do you suppose ripped out the license plate in the photo of Walker's house that you think wound up at the Paine residence?  And why?

Who do you suppose the two men who sped away from the Walker scene in a 1950 Ford were?

Quote
Remarkably similar to you having 'no idea' what rifle Saint Patsy is holding in the backyard photos.

Remarkably similar to you saying that it must be C2766 in the backyard photos, because......well because I'm bald I guess.

Quote
I think you have a good idea how the Walker photo wound up in the Paine residence.

How do you know the Walker photo wound up in the Paine residence?  How do you know it was Oswald's?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 29, 2018, 09:09:21 PM
Some of John I's potential research.  I have to admit in watching this it reminded me of Caprio's claim that the motorcade should have been going 44 MPH or some similar nonsense:

How is that my research?  Do you think I made that video?

Or is this yet another "Richard Smith" lie?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Richard Smith on August 29, 2018, 11:57:50 PM
Nonsense? You have me confused with your convoluted posts. The speed of 44 m.p.h. was normal for a motorcade of this type to enhance safety.

Doesn't that scientific research tool cited by John I. convince you of the dangers of driving too fast?  Put it to the test.  Go to Dallas and take the corner of Houston and Elm at 44 mph.  Note that this video is clearly satirical.  John has previously cited this video game as a useful source for studying the assassination.  John and Caprio lacking any sense of humor whatsoever don't get it.   Cool, "bro"? 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 30, 2018, 01:46:52 AM
Doesn't that scientific research tool cited by John I. convince you of the dangers of driving too fast?  Put it to the test.  Go to Dallas and take the corner of Houston and Elm at 44 mph.  Note that this video is clearly satirical.  John has previously cited this video game as a useful source for studying the assassination.  John and Caprio lacking any sense of humor whatsoever don't get it.   Cool, "bro"?

LOL! You think that 44 m.p.h. is "too fast?" LOL!

Then he mentions one of the two turns that should NOT have been permitted in the first place! LOL! The motorcade could have, and should have, come straight down Elm Street to avoid the need for any turns. IF Main Street was needed then the motorcade could have stayed on it and connected to the Stemmons Freeway past the Triple Underpass.

Cool story bro, but as usual you are totally clueless about the evidence.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jon Banks on August 30, 2018, 01:53:51 AM
Please keep insisting that the photo of the Walker home might have been planted and please keep insisting that the rifle in the BY photos might not be C2766 - and we'll keep laughing at your inability to rationally examine the evidence and come to any logical conclusions.

One of these years, you might have a better answer to 'how did the Walker photo wind up in the Paine residence ?' and 'what rifle is Saint Patsy holding in the BY photos ?' than 'I HAVE NO IDEA'.

Almost as amusing as Caprio having no idea why a limo slows when making a sharp turn or what year Benavides died.
 
And while your baldness has nothing to do with the assassination, I'm gonna keep laughing at that too.

No idea. No hair.

The photos of Walker's home doesn't prove Oswald shot at Walker.

At best, it suggests he was interested in Walker which is corroborated by other evidence.

I have little problem with the idea that LHO should've been a Suspect in the Walker shooting but the totality of the evidence falls short of us being able to say he likely did it...
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 30, 2018, 01:54:03 AM
Even the WC's own expert witness would NOT say that the rifle depicted in CE 133-A and CE 133-B is the same one found on the sixth floor of the TSBD.

****************************************************

The Warren Commission (WC), and the WC defenders on this board, claimed/claim that the rifle seen in the BackYard Photographs (BYPs) is the SAME ONE found in the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD).  What do they base this on?  I don't know.  For IF they actually read their own evidence they would see NO IDENTIFICATION was ever made by Lyndal Shaneyfelt of the FBI laboratories!

****************************************

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Shaneyfelt, based upon Exhibit 133A, upon your reproductions of Exhibit 133A, consisting of the Exhibits Nos. 746 A through E; and upon your photograph of the rifle, Exhibit 747, and your simulation of 133A, Exhibit 748---have you formed an opinion concerning whether Exhibit 139, the rifle used in the assassination, is the same or similar to the rifle pictured in Exhibit 133A?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I have.

Mr. EISENBERG. Can you give us that opinion?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I compared the actual rifle with the photograph, Exhibit 133A, and with the photographs that I prepared from Exhibit 133A, as well as the other simulated photograph and the photograph of the rifle, attempting to establish whether or not it could be determined whether it was or was not the same.

I found it to be the same general configuration. All appearances were the same. I found no differences. **I did not find any really specific peculiarities on which I could base a positive identification to the exclusion of all other rifles of the same general configuration.**

I did find one notch in the stock at this point that appears very faintly in the photograph, **but it is not sufficient to warrant positive identification.**

So how could the WC, and by extension present day WC defenders, make this claim when the FBI EXPERT would NOT? Why are they DISPUTING their OWN EXPERT too?

We again see that the actual evidence sinks the WC's conclusion.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Howard Gee on August 30, 2018, 02:32:12 AM
The photos of Walker's home doesn't prove Oswald shot at Walker.

At best, it suggests he was interested in Walker which is corroborated by other evidence.

I have little problem with the idea that LHO should've been a Suspect in the Walker shooting but the totality of the evidence falls short of us being able to say he likely did it...

I agree the photo in isolation doesn't prove Oswald shot at Walker.

Completely disagree with 'the totality of the evidence falls short of us being able to say he likely did it'.

I think the photo, the note to Marina, and the confession to Marina is more than sufficient to say 'he likely did it'.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jon Banks on August 30, 2018, 02:52:50 AM
I agree the photo in isolation doesn't prove Oswald shot at Walker.

Completely disagree with 'the totality of the evidence falls short of us being able to say he likely did it'.

I think the photo, the note to Marina, and the confession to Marina is more than sufficient to say 'he likely did it'.

The unsigned and undated Note to Marina that doesn't even mention Walker is worthless as evidence

The confession to Marina isn't worthless but it should not be taken to heart in the absence of corroborating evidence. Like for example, did she tell anyone about it before her husband was killed? Did she keep a diary? Her word alone isn't enough given her credibility problems.

The other problem I have is no one seems to be able to explain how Oswald traveled across town and back with a rifle without being noticed. There's also conflicting stories between Marina and George DM about whether he came home with the rifle the same night or if he buried it near Walker's house and picked it up a few days later. 

Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Howard Gee on August 30, 2018, 03:16:16 AM
The unsigned and undated Note to Marina that doesn't even mention Walker is worthless as evidence

The confession to Marina isn't worthless but it should not be taken to heart in the absence of corroborating evidence. Like for example, did she tell anyone about it before her husband was killed? Did she keep a diary. Her word alone isn't enough given her credibility problems.

The other problem I have is no one seems to be able to explain how Oswald traveled across town and back with a rifle without being noticed. There's also conflicting stories between Marina and George DM about whether he came home with the rifle the same night or if he buried it near Walker's house and picked it up a few days later.

The unsigned, undated note is evidence Saint Patsy was worried about being arrested for some act, no ? That is, unless you think the note is a forgery, written by someone else, or composed after the Walker shooting.

Yeah, it's possible Marina's story regarding the confession is fabricated but as you say, it's not worthless.

As far as how Saint Patsy got across town with a rifle without being noticed, could have been done a million ways. A passenger sitting on a bus with a rolled up blanket on his lap, for example.

As I said earlier, I think there's more than sufficient evidence to say 'he likely did it'.

Photo, note, admission to wife, works for me.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 30, 2018, 03:18:20 AM
He also had EAW's phone number in his notebook.
What page is that on?
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/pdf/WH16_CE_18.pdf
Anyone?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jon Banks on August 30, 2018, 03:29:10 AM
The unsigned, undated note is evidence Saint Patsy was worried about being arrested for some act, no ? That is, unless you think the note is a forgery, written by someone else, or composed after the Walker shooting.

Yeah, it's possible Marina's story regarding the confession is fabricated but as you say, it's not worthless.

As far as how Saint Patsy got across town with a rifle without being noticed, could have been done a million ways. A passenger sitting on a bus with a rolled up blanket on his lap, for example.

As I said earlier, I think there's more than sufficient evidence to say 'he likely did it'.

Photo, note, admission to wife, works for me.

Oswald had a motive for sure but so did millions of others.

Edwin Walker was a hated man in 1963 because of his pro-Segregation activism.

Like I said, I have no problem with saying Oswald should be a Suspect. I just think the evidence falls far short of proof.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 30, 2018, 03:55:58 AM
Oswald...allegedly shot JFK...allegedly took one at Walker.
Those two proposed targets were men that were [politically speaking] diametrically opposed.
Walker strongly disliked Kennedy [putting it mildly] ::)
That in itself would make these actions perceptively intangible.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on August 30, 2018, 04:31:10 AM
LOL! You think that 44 m.p.h. is "too fast?" LOL!

Then he mentions one of the two turns that should NOT have been permitted in the first place! LOL! The motorcade could have, and should have, come straight down Elm Street to avoid the need for any turns. IF Main Street was needed then the motorcade could have stayed on it and connected to the Stemmons Freeway past the Triple Underpass.

Cool story bro, but as usual you are totally clueless about the evidence.

The Main/Elm/Commerce/35E intersection is specifically designed to discourage anyone on Main from trying to get onto the ramp to 35E. That's for safety: people aren't going to be turning from Main across Elm to get on 35. For the limo to go from Main to the ramp, the the limo would have to execute a u-turn onto Elm Eastbound, then immediately execute another u-turn to get onto the ramp. The limo would have to slow to a crawl to make that happen.....if it could execute the maneuver at all without resorting to 2- or 3-point turns. Long wheelbase vehicles aren't known for their cornering agility.  If people would just look at a map, or an aerial photo they'd see why a Main-to-35E path doesn't work.

I've always wondered where the 44mph thing came from. I figure it started either with Garrison or Prouty, who claimed that it was some Secret Service requirement. The thing is, in 30 years, I've never seen anyone cough up any documentation whatsoever showing that it really was a requirement at the time (and, yes, I've asked).

Google Maps closeup of the intersection in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1....

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.7782332,-96.8105081,94m/data=!3m1!1e3
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Mytton on August 30, 2018, 04:31:59 AM
LOL! You think that 44 m.p.h. is "too fast?" LOL!

OMG, if the vehicles were going 44mph in the following image, they'd end up playing skittles.

(https://www.radionz.co.nz/assets/news/129028/eight_col_president-john-kennedy-403376_960_720.jpg?1508283198)

JohnM
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 30, 2018, 09:39:16 AM
You are contradicting yourself in this post. "Duh" indeed. You have no way of showing that LHO ever did call EAW so it is a naked assertion. Furthermore, depending on when and where LHO would have allegedly called from EAW could have left by the time LHO got to his home.

No, this is not a good reason for LHO to have EAW's telephone number in his notebook.

I don't see any CTers supporting you in this...

Try to think rationally. Oswald might have gone over a number of times before he finally found Walker at home. But I still maintain that calling the number would be the best option.

Go ahead and tell us a better one. 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Richard Smith on August 30, 2018, 01:47:34 PM
LOL! You think that 44 m.p.h. is "too fast?" LOL!

Then he mentions one of the two turns that should NOT have been permitted in the first place! LOL! The motorcade could have, and should have, come straight down Elm Street to avoid the need for any turns. IF Main Street was needed then the motorcade could have stayed on it and connected to the Stemmons Freeway past the Triple Underpass.

Cool story bro, but as usual you are totally clueless about the evidence.

Hopeless.  Imagine people lining up on crowded streets in an American city to see the president and the motorcade sweeping past at those speeds like the Indy 500.   I've said it before but Caprio can't be for real.   He seems to be baiting absurd discussions to see how long they can be extended. 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 30, 2018, 02:04:14 PM
I agree the photo in isolation doesn't prove Oswald shot at Walker.

Completely disagree with 'the totality of the evidence falls short of us being able to say he likely did it'.

I think the photo, the note to Marina, and the confession to Marina is more than sufficient to say 'he likely did it'.

Only to someone who ignores the evidence. The photo and the alleged note do not make it likely that LHO shot at EAW.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 30, 2018, 02:06:55 PM
The unsigned, undated note is evidence Saint Patsy was worried about being arrested for some act, no ? That is, unless you think the note is a forgery, written by someone else, or composed after the Walker shooting.

Yeah, it's possible Marina's story regarding the confession is fabricated but as you say, it's not worthless.

As far as how Saint Patsy got across town with a rifle without being noticed, could have been done a million ways. A passenger sitting on a bus with a rolled up blanket on his lap, for example.

As I said earlier, I think there's more than sufficient evidence to say 'he likely did it'.

Photo, note, admission to wife, works for me.

And yet, you claim that he planned to kill JFK without leaving a note for Marina Oswald. Go figure.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 30, 2018, 02:48:55 PM
Quote
  He also had EAW's phone number in his notebook.

What page is that on? From the Warren Report------
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/pdf/WH16_CE_18.pdf
Anyone? Anybody at all........................

   

 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 30, 2018, 03:00:38 PM
Hopeless.  Imagine people lining up on crowded streets in an American city to see the president and the motorcade sweeping past at those speeds like the Indy 500.   I've said it before but Caprio can't be for real.   He seems to be baiting absurd discussions to see how long they can be extended.

I wouldn't want to see the state of the limousine interior and wear on the bodies after taking the 44-mph 90?-turn onto Main, the 70?-turn onto Industrial, and the screeching-tire halt in front of the Trade Mart.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 30, 2018, 03:02:39 PM
The Main/Elm/Commerce/35E intersection is specifically designed to discourage anyone on Main from trying to get onto the ramp to 35E. That's for safety: people aren't going to be turning from Main across Elm to get on 35. For the limo to go from Main to the ramp, the the limo would have to execute a u-turn onto Elm Eastbound, then immediately execute another u-turn to get onto the ramp. The limo would have to slow to a crawl to make that happen.....if it could execute the maneuver at all without resorting to 2- or 3-point turns. Long wheelbase vehicles aren't known for their cornering agility.  If people would just look at a map, or an aerial photo they'd see why a Main-to-35E path doesn't work.

I've always wondered where the 44mph thing came from. I figure it started either with Garrison or Prouty, who claimed that it was some Secret Service requirement. The thing is, in 30 years, I've never seen anyone cough up any documentation whatsoever showing that it really was a requirement at the time (and, yes, I've asked).

Google Maps closeup of the intersection in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1....

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.7782332,-96.8105081,94m/data=!3m1!1e3

So the group that didn't punish anyone for violating rules wouldn't let non-believers of the official theory copy their manual. Say it isn't so.

You can mock Fletcher Prouty all you want, but he was the Air Force's CIA liason and worked on numerous presidential trips in regards to security. What are your qualifications?

There was NO need for those turns. End of story.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 30, 2018, 03:07:27 PM
OMG, if the vehicles were going 44mph in the following image, they'd end up playing skittles.

(https://www.radionz.co.nz/assets/news/129028/eight_col_president-john-kennedy-403376_960_720.jpg?1508283198)

JohnM

You are just looking for a chance to mock. Obviously there are times where you have to go slower. The odd thing is the fact that JFK was an easier target coming down Main Street where the motorcade had to go slower, but in DP the motorcade could have accelerated but that is where he got shot. Go figure.

Hint: It was due to triangulation of fire, thinner crowds and two very unnecessary turns.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 30, 2018, 03:11:01 PM
I don't see any CTers supporting you in this...

Try to think rationally. Oswald might have gone over a number of times before he finally found Walker at home. But I still maintain that calling the number would be the best option.

Go ahead and tell us a better one.

The truth is the truth if only one person supports it. You LNers are the ones that need support. Your unsupported opinion is duly noted.

It is just as likely and rational to think he had some other reason for having EAW's telephone number in his notebook.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 30, 2018, 03:13:53 PM
Hopeless.  Imagine people lining up on crowded streets in an American city to see the president and the motorcade sweeping past at those speeds like the Indy 500.   I've said it before but Caprio can't be for real.   He seems to be baiting absurd discussions to see how long they can be extended.

Strawman. We were originally discussing the lack of need for the two turns. Today no one can see the president as they are riding in a covered armoured car.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 30, 2018, 03:15:18 PM

What page is that on? From the Warren Report------
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/pdf/WH16_CE_18.pdf
Anyone? Anybody at all........................

   

I don't remember off hand, but it is there as even the WC admitted this.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Howard Gee on August 30, 2018, 03:16:16 PM
Hopeless.  Imagine people lining up on crowded streets in an American city to see the president and the motorcade sweeping past at those speeds like the Indy 500.   I've said it before but Caprio can't be for real.   He seems to be baiting absurd discussions to see how long they can be extended.

I'd rather try explaining to a rabbit why we only see one side of the moon than attempt having a rational conversation with Carpio.

Carpio is what happens when you combine a double digit IQ with a second grade writing level and the common sense of a bag of rocks.

What year did Benavides die ?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 30, 2018, 03:17:33 PM
I wouldn't want to see the state of the limousine interior and wear on the bodies after taking the 44-mph 90?-turn onto Main, the 70?-turn onto Industrial, and the screeching-tire halt in front of the Trade Mart.

When the LNers cannot deal with the true topic they jump on an ancillary one like it is a lifeline. Not one LNer can logically explain why those two turns were needed.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 30, 2018, 03:19:12 PM
I'd rather try explaining to a rabbit why we only see one side of the moon than attempt having a rational conversation with Carpio.

Carpio is what happens when you combine a double digit IQ with a second grade writing level and the common sense of a bag of rocks.

What year did Benavides die ?

Why were the two turns needed?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Richard Smith on August 30, 2018, 03:23:54 PM
The unsigned and undated Note to Marina that doesn't even mention Walker is worthless as evidence

The confession to Marina isn't worthless but it should not be taken to heart in the absence of corroborating evidence. Like for example, did she tell anyone about it before her husband was killed? Did she keep a diary? Her word alone isn't enough given her credibility problems.

The other problem I have is no one seems to be able to explain how Oswald traveled across town and back with a rifle without being noticed. There's also conflicting stories between Marina and George DM about whether he came home with the rifle the same night or if he buried it near Walker's house and picked it up a few days later.

The note was found by Marina on the night of the Walker attempt.  It explains to her what to do in the event that he is arrested or killed.  Now what exactly would Oswald have been up to that might have led him to be arrested or killed that night?  It was wasn't his typing class.  The note is highly incriminating in that context.  But if you are entertaining the idea that it was faked to link Oswald to the Walker shooting, then why wouldn't the conspirators have done exactly what you suggest and make it more explicit:  "Dear Marina, I'm off to kill the fascist Gen. Walker.  Don't wait up.  Love, Lee Harvey Oswald."  This one is a slam dunk.   Oswald confessed, he wrote a note explaining to Marina what she do if he were arrested or killed, he had recon materials of Walker's home, no alibi for that night, and no other suspect has ever been identified in over fifty years.  It's a compelling case.  The baseless suggestion that Marina is lying for some unknown reason, won't set the record straight, the note was forged or Oswald inexplicably expected to die or be arrested for some unknown reason is just going down the rabbit hole.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jon Banks on August 30, 2018, 04:44:28 PM
The note was found by Marina on the night of the Walker attempt.  It explains to her what to do in the event that he is arrested or killed.  Now what exactly would Oswald have been up to that might have led him to be arrested or killed that night?  It was wasn't his typing class.  The note is highly incriminating in that context.  But if you are entertaining the idea that it was faked to link Oswald to the Walker shooting, then why wouldn't the conspirators have done exactly what you suggest and make it more explicit:  "Dear Marina, I'm off to kill the fascist Gen. Walker.  Don't wait up.  Love, Lee Harvey Oswald."  This one is a slam dunk.   Oswald confessed, he wrote a note explaining to Marina what she do if he were arrested or killed, he had recon materials of Walker's home, no alibi for that night, and no other suspect has ever been identified in over fifty years.  It's a compelling case.  The baseless suggestion that Marina is lying for some unknown reason, won't set the record straight, the note was forged or Oswald inexplicably expected to die or be arrested for some unknown reason is just going down the rabbit hole.

Marina Oswald had terrible memory in her testimonies over important details like Dates, descriptions of events, descriptions of the rifle, descriptions of the bathroom door she allegedly held shut so Lee wouldn?t shoot Nixon, Lee?s camera used for the Backyard Photos, etc.. She either lied constantly or had a terrible memory.

I take with a grain of salt her testimony about the Unsigned and Undated letter.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Steve M. Galbraith on August 30, 2018, 05:56:59 PM
Marina Oswald had terrible memory in her testimonies over important details like Dates, descriptions of events, descriptions of the rifle, descriptions of the bathroom door she allegedly held shut so Lee wouldn?t shoot Nixon, Lee?s camera used for the Backyard Photos, etc.. She either lied constantly or had a terrible memory.

I take with a grain of salt her testimony about the Unsigned and Undated letter.

The letter exists. It's in his handwriting - as determined by handwriting experts.

No one is relying solely on her account. We examine the other evidence - physical and circumstantial - and decide whether her claims have merit.

Give us an innocent explanation for that letter? And the photos? I'm not trying to put the onus on you; those of us who think he tried to shoot Walker have to make the case. But give us an alternative explanation for the physical - yes, it's circumstantial - evidence.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 30, 2018, 06:37:12 PM
The confession to Marina isn't worthless but it should not be taken to heart in the absence of corroborating evidence. Like for example, did she tell anyone about it before her husband was killed? Did she keep a diary? Her word alone isn't enough given her credibility problems.

Marina said a lot of things.

Marina Oswald Porter's Statements of a Contradictory Nature (http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/compoundobject/collection/po-arm/id/45606)
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 30, 2018, 06:46:38 PM

What page is that on? From the Warren Report------
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/pdf/WH16_CE_18.pdf
Anyone? Anybody at all........................

   

Page 3, top left.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Richard Smith on August 30, 2018, 07:46:46 PM
Marina Oswald had terrible memory in her testimonies over important details like Dates, descriptions of events, descriptions of the rifle, descriptions of the bathroom door she allegedly held shut so Lee wouldn?t shoot Nixon, Lee?s camera used for the Backyard Photos, etc.. She either lied constantly or had a terrible memory.

I take with a grain of salt her testimony about the Unsigned and Undated letter.

Apples and oranges. It's one thing to say that you can't remember exact details like date of a photo taken months earlier and another that your husband confessed to trying to shoot someone.  Can you see how a witness might be fuzzy on certain specific details but not on an event like this confessing to attempted murder on the very night that someone tried to kill Walker?  The totality of circumstances and evidence lends itself to a conclusion that Oswald attempted to kill Walker.  But if not, give us a plausible counter-explanation for the note.  Why did Oswald have cause to believe that he might be killed or arrested that night?  Why did he have pictures of Walker's home?  Why would Marina make up this story?  Why would the conspirators need to go to the considerable risk and trouble of linking Oswald to the Walker attempt after Oswald was already dead and there would be no trial and the authorities were satisfied that he was the JFK assassin?   It doesn't add up in a conspiracy narrative.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 30, 2018, 08:50:11 PM
The totality of circumstances and evidence lends itself to a conclusion that Oswald attempted to kill Walker.

Except for that pesky steel-jacketed bullet...

"Marina said so" isn't particularly compelling.  Marina said a lot of things.

Marina Oswald Porter's Statements of a Contradictory Nature (http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/compoundobject/collection/po-arm/id/45606)

Quote
  But if not, give us a plausible counter-explanation for the note.

"My assumptions are automatically correct until you prove me wrong".
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 30, 2018, 08:58:47 PM
Ugh.  Marina confirmed that she had never heard of LBJ before the assassination.  As a result she had no idea that LBJ was the VP until after the assassination.  She knew Nixon as the VP.   Nixon was a well-known figure who had visited the USSR.  Marina specifically states that in her testimony.

"I believe what Marina says, except when I don't believe what Marina says."

Mrs. OSWALD. The FBI suggested that possibly I was confused between Johnson and Nixon but there is no question that in this incident it was a question of Mr. Nixon. I remember distinctly the name Nixon because I read from the presidential elections that there was a choice between President Kennedy and Mr. Nixon.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 30, 2018, 09:29:22 PM
"I believe what Marina says, except when I don't believe what Marina says."

Mrs. OSWALD. The FBI suggested that possibly I was confused between Johnson and Nixon but there is no question that in this incident it was a question of Mr. Nixon. I remember distinctly the name Nixon because I read from the presidential elections that there was a choice between President Kennedy and Mr. Nixon.

The Walker incident was a HOAX.....  It was intended to appear as though LHO had tried to kill one of Castro's most vocal foes with the idea that Castro would allow the American secret agent, Lee H Oswald safe sancctuary in Cuba. The "evidence" left behind  ( Rifle under the brush,  Back Yard photos, maps of Walker's neighborhood, photos of Walker's house  ) was deliberate and intended to lead to the culprit who had fled to Cuba.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jon Banks on August 30, 2018, 09:31:28 PM
"I believe what Marina says, except when I don't believe what Marina says."

Mrs. OSWALD. The FBI suggested that possibly I was confused between Johnson and Nixon but there is no question that in this incident it was a question of Mr. Nixon. I remember distinctly the name Nixon because I read from the presidential elections that there was a choice between President Kennedy and Mr. Nixon.

 :D
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 31, 2018, 02:16:51 AM
Walker's Ph. #?
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/pdf/WH16_CE_18.pdf
Page 3, top left.
OK...It's there and there it is.
I would have thought the producers of the Warren Report exhibits would have super-pointed that out.
Well oops there.
I noticed it right above '600 Baliey' [sic] which could be 600 Bailey Ft Worth Tx which is presently a Chase Bank.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 31, 2018, 02:31:20 AM
Except for that pesky steel-jacketed bullet...

"Marina said so" isn't particularly compelling.  Marina said a lot of things.

Marina Oswald Porter's Statements of a Contradictory Nature (http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/compoundobject/collection/po-arm/id/45606)

"My assumptions are automatically correct until you prove me wrong".

"Except for that pesky steel-jacketed bullet"...

That couldn't possibly be a simple error by a sleepy, sloppy,  cop typing the report, and calling a METAL jacket a steel jacket,.... could it?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on August 31, 2018, 03:24:26 AM
So the group that didn't punish anyone for violating rules wouldn't let non-believers of the official theory copy their manual. Say it isn't so.
In other words, no one can provide any support for the 44mph claim. I've asked repeatedly, and no one has ever been able to substantiate it.

You can mock Fletcher Prouty all you want, but he was the Air Force's CIA liason and worked on numerous presidential trips in regards to security. What are your qualifications?
He was also a crack investigator for the Church of Scientology who "found" that L Ron Hubbard was a super-secret double-nought agent for the ONI in WWII. He first achieved public notice by claiming that Alex Butterfield (who oversaw the installation of the soon-to-be infamous taping system in the Nixon White House) was a CIA plant. He associated with Neo-Nazi sympathizer Willis Carto and Carto's Liberty Lobby.

He was AF liaison with the CIA, not the Secret Service, and IIRC, no one has ever been able to substantiate his claim that he'd been involved in Presidential security, or explain what his role would have been, or show that he would have been exposed to the rules and standards that he claimed to be familiar with.
AFAIK, no one has ever been able to independently corroborate Prouty's claims about Presidential motorcade security.

There was NO need for those turns. End of story.

The motorcade moved at parade speed, about 15mph. At that speed, those turns would have done little to slow the limo down, even with its extra length. That is, the point you're trying to make isn't really much of a point. Anyway, if reducing the President's vulnerability was the priority, they wouldn't have gone to downtown in the first place; they would have gone from Love Field to Mockingbird to Harry Hines, thence the Trade Mart, avoiding the extra trip downtown altogether.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 31, 2018, 03:33:21 AM

He was also a crack investigator for the Church of Scientology who "found" that L Ron Hubbard was a super-secret double-nought agent for the ONI in WWII. He first achieved public notice by claiming that Alex Butterfield (who oversaw the installation of the soon-to-be infamous taping system in the Nixon White House) was a CIA plant. He associated with Neo-Nazi sympathizer Willis Carto and Carto's Liberty Lobby.


I think quite a few CTs are on the right.

Quote

He was AF liaison with the CIA, not the Secret Service, and IIRC, no one has ever been able to substantiate his claim that he'd been involved in Presidential security, or explain what his role would have been, or show that he would have been exposed to the rules and standards that he claimed to be familiar with.
AFAIK, no one has ever been able to independently corroborate Prouty's claims about Presidential motorcade security.


Remember Cyril Wecht and the Alien Autopsy? Jim Garrison? Some well-known CTs are 911-Truthers.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 31, 2018, 04:08:17 AM
In other words, no one can provide any support for the 44mph claim. I've asked repeatedly, and no one has ever been able to substantiate it.
He was also a crack investigator for the Church of Scientology who "found" that L Ron Hubbard was a super-secret double-nought agent for the ONI in WWII. He first achieved public notice by claiming that Alex Butterfield (who oversaw the installation of the soon-to-be infamous taping system in the Nixon White House) was a CIA plant. He associated with Neo-Nazi sympathizer Willis Carto and Carto's Liberty Lobby.

He was AF liaison with the CIA, not the Secret Service, and IIRC, no one has ever been able to substantiate his claim that he'd been involved in Presidential security, or explain what his role would have been, or show that he would have been exposed to the rules and standards that he claimed to be familiar with.
AFAIK, no one has ever been able to independently corroborate Prouty's claims about Presidential motorcade security.

The motorcade moved at parade speed, about 15mph. At that speed, those turns would have done little to slow the limo down, even with its extra length. That is, the point you're trying to make isn't really much of a point. Anyway, if reducing the President's vulnerability was the priority, they wouldn't have gone to downtown in the first place; they would have gone from Love Field to Mockingbird to Harry Hines, thence the Trade Mart, avoiding the extra trip downtown altogether.

Cite for your claim of 15 m.p.h. being "parade speed."
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 31, 2018, 04:14:15 AM
Quote
any support for the 44mph claim
.......(http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/Smileys/default2/Off_Topic.gif)
Guys Guys- go start a silly motorcade speed thread!!
This is  the General Walker thread.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on August 31, 2018, 05:48:54 AM
I think quite a few CTs are on the right.
Oh, mon oui, monsieur! Mary Ferrell comes to mind. But some are farther right than others. Carto and his bunch could really get out there. Like Instiute of Historical Review out there.


Remember Cyril Wecht and the Alien Autopsy? Jim Garrison? Some well-known CTs are 911-Truthers.

Wecht's association with the Alien Autopsy thing was purely business, I suspect. His part was to get asked if the "film" showed accepted autopsy procedures, and say "yes." That was about it. Prouty flitted around the LL for a number of years.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on August 31, 2018, 06:18:07 AM
Cite for your claim of 15 m.p.h. being "parade speed."

From Greer:

"After we left the airport, we drove several miles at speeds ranging from 15 to 30 miles per hour depending on the crowds. When we reached the business section of Dallas the crowds were very large and the motorcycle Police along side the President's automobile had a hard time keeping the people back.

"When we came to a point where the crowd had thinned out, there was a right turn for about half a block and then a left turn. At this point, I would say the President's automobile was traveling about 12 to 15 miles per hour."

The "business section of Dallas" where the limo had to slow down was, of course, Downtown.   
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 31, 2018, 06:29:00 AM
In other words, no one can provide any support for the 44mph claim. I've asked repeatedly, and no one has ever been able to substantiate it.
He was also a crack investigator for the Church of Scientology who "found" that L Ron Hubbard was a super-secret double-nought agent for the ONI in WWII. He first achieved public notice by claiming that Alex Butterfield (who oversaw the installation of the soon-to-be infamous taping system in the Nixon White House) was a CIA plant. He associated with Neo-Nazi sympathizer Willis Carto and Carto's Liberty Lobby.

He was AF liaison with the CIA, not the Secret Service, and IIRC, no one has ever been able to substantiate his claim that he'd been involved in Presidential security, or explain what his role would have been, or show that he would have been exposed to the rules and standards that he claimed to be familiar with.
AFAIK, no one has ever been able to independently corroborate Prouty's claims about Presidential motorcade security.

The motorcade moved at parade speed, about 15mph. At that speed, those turns would have done little to slow the limo down, even with its extra length. That is, the point you're trying to make isn't really much of a point. Anyway, if reducing the President's vulnerability was the priority, they wouldn't have gone to downtown in the first place; they would have gone from Love Field to Mockingbird to Harry Hines, thence the Trade Mart, avoiding the extra trip downtown altogether.

In a way, Kennedy was the master of his own destruction, since he insisted on a motorcade against the wishes of Connally and others.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on August 31, 2018, 06:39:28 AM
In a way, Kennedy was the master of his own destruction, since he insisted on a motorcade against the wishes of Connally and others.

No more so than someone who wants to walk to the mailbox and is killed by an errant car.  To be a politician in a democracy, you have to present yourself to the public, and that carries certain inherent risks.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Richard Smith on August 31, 2018, 02:41:08 PM
:D

So John believes Marina had total recall here but otherwise claims her memory is faulty.  Notice he doesn't even attempt to explain why Marina would say this.  Is she making up the entire incident?  If so, why since she must know it would be unlikely that Nixon would be in Dallas on some random date and, thus, it could easily be verified that this didn't happen.  It doesn't make sense as a fabrication if you give it more than two seconds of thought.  So what is a plausible explanation?  Maybe that she simply confused Nixon for LBJ because they were both VPs.  That connects all dots in story - time, place, and newspaper accounts line up.  John doesn't even try to make any counter explanation.  He selectively takes a piece of testimony and then leaves a gaping void of logic unaddressed. 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Steve M. Galbraith on August 31, 2018, 03:11:11 PM
I think quite a few CTs are on the right.

Remember Cyril Wecht and the Alien Autopsy? Jim Garrison? Some well-known CTs are 911-Truthers.

Sure, the CTers transcend the left/right divide but it seems to me the main conspiracy advocates - the most famous or noted - have been people on the left: Oliver Stone, Mark Lane, David Lifton, Sylvia Meagher. We can add lesser figures like: Peter Dale Scott, Bill Simpich, Jefferson Morley, Jim DiEugenio. It's these people who have been the driving force behind the cause.

Yes, the big exception is Garrison who described himself as a conservative/libertarian. But if you listen to him on American foreign policy he sounded no different than any garden variety anti-American leftist.

There's this odd synthesis between the hard left and hard right where they support one another on this issue: Stone used Prouty and Garrison, Garrison used an anti-American Marxist Italian newspaper, Lane was published in the Liberty Lobby publication (a leftwing Jew and an anti-semitic far right organization). There's some very weird political bed mates, people and groups who would normally be calling each other fascists and communists and other names.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 31, 2018, 03:28:48 PM
Sure, the CTers transcend the left/right divide but it seems to me the main conspiracy advocates have been people on the left: Oliver Stone, Mark Lane, David Lifton, Sylvia Meagher. We can add lesser figures like: Peter Dale Scott, Bill Simpich, Jefferson Morley, Jim DiEugenio.

There's this odd synthesis between the hard left and hard right where they support one another on this issue: Stone used Prouty, Garrison used an anti-American Marxist Italian newspaper, Lane was published in the Liberty Lobby publications.

There's this odd synthesis between the hard left and hard right where they support one another on this issue:

Have you considered the possibility that these folks may be intellectually honest?     They are intelligent enough to leave political bias aside in their quest for truth......
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jon Banks on August 31, 2018, 03:40:14 PM
Sure, the CTers transcend the left/right divide but it seems to me the main conspiracy advocates have been people on the left: Oliver Stone, Mark Lane, David Lifton, Sylvia Meagher. We can add lesser figures like: Peter Dale Scott, Bill Simpich, Jefferson Morley, Jim DiEugenio.

There's this odd synthesis between the hard left and hard right where they support one another on this issue: Stone used Prouty, Garrison used an anti-American Marxist Italian newspaper, Lane was published in the Liberty Lobby publications.

Unscientific observation but most of the first generation JFK skeptics were Liberals. Since the 1990s, the Rightwing seems to have more Skeptics and Conspiracy Theorists. The biggest rightwing CT?er is now Donald Trump.

Mainstream/Establishment Liberals who work for CBS, the NY Times and other traditional Media have always supported and defended the Lone Assassin narrative.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 31, 2018, 04:32:29 PM
Much of the early critical work that received a wide following was from the left. But at the same time--the mid-1960s--there were theories published in right-wing journals, as well.

I would argue that the "Saturday Evening Post" and "Argosy" were fairly right-wing, and they published many conspiracy articles over time. The "Post" published Josiah Thompson's article (based on exempts from his book) in late-1967. Epstein was considered a responsible critic. Which side of the left/right spectrum does Thompson and Epstein fall?

What about Sylvan Fox, whose book "The Unanswered Questions about the Kennedy Assassination", was widely-distributed?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Steve M. Galbraith on August 31, 2018, 05:14:43 PM
Unscientific observation but most of the first generation JFK skeptics were Liberals. Since the 1990s, the Rightwing seems to have more Skeptics and Conspiracy Theorists. The biggest rightwing CT?er is now Donald Trump.

Mainstream/Establishment Liberals who work for CBS, the NY Times and other traditional Media have always supported and defended the Lone Assassin narrative.

I said left not liberal. And also the most noted figures not ordinary people.

The main figures - the most vocal or noted people - have been people on the left: Lane, Oliver Stone, David Lifton. Garrison is the odd one here since he called himself a conservative/libertarian. Lane and Stone are leftwingers not liberals.

What conservative/right JFK conspiracy is there today? Ventura? I'm not sure you can place him on the political spectrum. He's neither right or left.

Your point about the news media is spot on; I think the criticism from the CTer side that they were too believing of the WC report is pretty accurate. The 1960s coverage by the media was too pro-government; Vietnam and Watergate changed that.

With the risk of sounding like I'm defending the man, Donald Trump has stated that he believes Oswald alone killed JFK. Sure, he smeared Cruz's father but that's how he operates. He'll say anything to attack his opponents; most of which I don't think he believes. The man has no ethical standards whatsoever.

As to conspiracy belief today: the rise of conspiracy belief, it seems to me, comes out of the extreme partisanship of the time. Bot the left and right embrace all kinds of conspiracy thinking if they can use it to attack the other side. It's all mud slinging now; no sense of decency at all.

The best example of this is the collusion theory: the left believes Trump conspired to Putin to affect the election; the right believes Trump is a victim of a "deep state" conspiracy that is out to destroy him. Both side don't care at all about promoting the theories without much evidence.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jon Banks on August 31, 2018, 05:48:09 PM
I said left not liberal. And also the most noted figures not ordinary people.

The main figures - the most vocal or noted people - have been people on the left: Lane, Oliver Stone, David Lifton. Garrison is the odd one here since he called himself a conservative/libertarian. Lane and Stone are leftwingers not liberals.

What conservative/right JFK conspiracy is there today? Ventura? I'm not sure you can place him on the political spectrum. He's neither right or left.

With the risk of sounding like I'm defending the man, Donald Trump has stated that he believes Oswald alone killed JFK. Sure, he smeared Cruz's father but that's how he operates. He'll say anything to attack his opponents; most of which I don't think he believes. The man has no ethical standards whatsoever.

As to conspiracy belief today: the rise of conspiracy belief, it seems to me, comes out of the extreme partisanship of the time. Bot the left and right embrace all kinds of conspiracy thinking if they can use it to attack the other side. It's all mud slinging now; no sense of decency at all.

The best example of this is the collusion theory: the left believes Trump conspired to Putin to affect the election; the right believes Trump is a victim of a "deep state" conspiracy that is out to destroy him. Both side don't care at all about promoting the theories without much evidence.

I don?t see any distinction between ?Leftist? and ?Liberal?. Sometimes I use the qualification ?Establishment? or ?Mainstream? when referring to people who aren?t Far-Left leaning.

Jim Marrs, Roger Stone, Jerome Corsi, and Ron Paul are a few of the well known Rightwing JFK assassination skeptics. I?m sure there are more and broadly speaking, Rightwingers in general are dabbling more in Conspiracy Theories today than the Left.

Trump used the Obama Birth Certificate conspiracy to transition from his Entertainment career to political commentary. Lots of Trump supporters believe the QAnon Conspiracy Theory. Alex Jones has a huge rightwing following. Fox News promotes any Conspiracy Theory involving the Clintons.

The Trump-Russia Conspiracy Theory is accepted by Mainstream Liberals and the Intelligence Community because both have agendas.

Liberals want to Impeach Trump.

The Intelligence Community doesn?t want Trump to end Sanctions against Russia or withdraw from NATO. The Deep State isn?t anti-Trump, they?re anti- ?Change?. They don?t want the post-WWII global order to end...
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Steve M. Galbraith on August 31, 2018, 05:52:47 PM
Much of the early critical work that received a wide following was from the left. But at the same time--the mid-1960s--there were theories published in right-wing journals, as well.

I would argue that the "Saturday Evening Post" and "Argosy" were fairly right-wing, and they published many conspiracy articles over time. The "Post" published Josiah Thompson's article (based on exempts from his book) in late-1967. Epstein was considered a responsible critic. Which side of the left/right spectrum does Thompson and Epstein fall?

What about Sylvan Fox, whose book "The Unanswered Questions about the Kennedy Assassination", was widely-distributed?

True, but Lane - to me - stands alone. The man spent decades going on college campuses where he poisoned the minds of an entire generation of young people with his nonsense. Just an awful, awful man.

I would distinguish between a person who thinks there was a conspiracy versus those who promote a specific one. Epstein and Thompson are in this category; both were unknowns at the time, right? That is, young men with no discernible political background (Epstein was a graduate student at Cornell). And as you know, Epstein went from being a conspiracy believer to a lone assassin advocate.

As I said, the CTer crowd crosses the left/right divide. There are people on both sides who think there was a conspiracy. It's funny, I've never seen a poll that breaks down this question along the left/right category. That would be interesting.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jon Banks on August 31, 2018, 06:11:16 PM
True, but Lane - to me - stands alone. The man spent decades going on college campuses where he poisoned the minds of an entire generation of young people with his nonsense. Just an awful, awful man.

I would distinguish between a person who thinks there was a conspiracy versus those who promote a specific one. Epstein and Thompson are in this category; both were unknowns at the time, right? That is, young men with no discernible political background (Epstein was a graduate student at Cornell). And as you know, Epstein went from being a conspiracy believer to a lone assassin advocate.

As I said, the CTer crowd crosses the left/right divide. There are people on both sides who think there was a conspiracy. It's funny, I've never seen a poll that breaks down this question along the left/right category. That would be interesting.

The Kennedy Assassination is arguably the only major Conspiracy Theory today that unites Left and Right.

Most modern conspiracy theories are endorsed by one Political side or another. Very few today are non-partisan.

Speaking for myself, I?m a Left-leaning guy who rejects most Conspiracy Theories. I keep an open mind about the Kennedy Assassination because there are just too many unanswered questions and coincidences. Plus humans throughout history have conspired secretly in groups to do bad things.

I think where politics plays a role is each individual?s views of the government and the traditional news media.

If you?re a person who believes the government and news media are dishonest about certain events, then you?re probably more likely to believe in some Conspiracy Theories.

If you for the most part don?t think the government and the news media lie about certain events then you?re probably less likely to believe in Conspiracy Theories.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 31, 2018, 07:38:22 PM
True, but Lane - to me - stands alone. The man spent decades going on college campuses where he poisoned the minds of an entire generation of young people with his nonsense. Just an awful, awful man.

I would distinguish between a person who thinks there was a conspiracy versus those who promote a specific one.


Regarding the last sentence, where would Lane fall?


If you?re a person who believes the government and news media are dishonest about certain events, then you?re probably more likely to believe in some Conspiracy Theories.
 

Lane's follow-up to "Rush to Judgment" was the better-written and more-detailed "Citizen's Dissent" which indicted much of the mass-media and peer-reviewed journals. Shame Lane's 1968 book didn't get the attention that RtJ got, but there was a lot going on during that god-awful year 50 years ago, and a WCR critic's complain-list didn't merit much concern.

Even when the mass-media, as Dell did with Weisberg, gets onboard, it soon falls apart because of the critic's paranoia. Lifton had his "Best Evidence" wound-alteration theory completed and wouldn't pass it on to the HSCA to investigate when he had the chance. Whether he did it because he didn't trust them (his claim) or he wanted to increase his book sales or whatever, we'll never know for sure. But this is an example of a critic himself manipulating events and later claiming the "officials" had no interest.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jon Banks on August 31, 2018, 07:50:29 PM
Regarding the last sentence, where would Lane fall?

Lane's follow-up to "Rush to Judgment" was the better-written and more-detailed "Citizen's Dissent" which indicted much of the mass-media and peer-reviewed journals. Shame Lane's 1968 book didn't get the attention that RtJ got, but there was a lot going on during that god-awful year 50 years ago, and a WCR critic's complain-list didn't merit much concern.

Even when the mass-media, as Dell did with Weisberg, gets onboard, it soon falls apart because of the critic's paranoia. Lifton had his "Best Evidence" wound-alteration theory completed and wouldn't pass it on to the HSCA to investigate when he had the chance. Whether he did it because he didn't trust them (his claim) or he wanted to increase his book sales or whatever, we'll never know for sure. But this is an example of a critic himself manipulating events and later claiming the "officials" had no interest.

I personally prefer to read books of the ?Skeptics? rather than ?Conspiracy Theorists?. It?s better to say ?I don?t know who did it? than to promote theories that easily fall apart.

I think there are lots of valid criticisms of the Warren Report which were overlooked by the MSM which for the most part has always endorsed the same narrative...
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 31, 2018, 08:04:17 PM
I personally prefer to read books of the ?Skeptics? rather than ?Conspiracy Theorists?. It?s better to say ?I don?t know who did it? than to promote theories that easily fall apart.

I think there are lots of valid criticisms of the Warren Report which were overlooked by the MSM which for the most part has always endorsed the same narrative...

How 'bout you take some of the unbridled skepticism you have for the MSM and WCR, and apply it to the JFK CTs.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 31, 2018, 08:12:45 PM
  The biggest rightwing CT?er is now Donald Trump.

Mainstream/Establishment Liberals who work for CBS, the NY Times and other traditional Media have always supported and defended the Lone Assassin narrative.
Trump believes that Oswald was the killer [as far as I know]. His view on conspiracy???? Not sure ::)
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jon Banks on August 31, 2018, 08:22:00 PM
How 'bout you take some of the unbridled skepticism you have for the MSM and WCR, and apply it to the JFK CTs.

Did you miss the part where I said I prefer not to read Conspiracy Theory books?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 31, 2018, 08:29:22 PM
Did you miss the part where I said I prefer not to read Conspiracy Theory books?

Seems you've read quite a few. Would seem it's LN books and websites you're avoiding.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jon Banks on August 31, 2018, 08:58:11 PM
Seems you've read quite a few. Would seem it's LN books and websites you're avoiding.

I love the John McAdams site and I?ve read portions of Reclaiming History but not the entire book
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mike Orr on August 31, 2018, 09:02:36 PM
Gen. Walker would have been shot and killed if they wanted him dead . They ( whoever they are or were ) just used the missing kill shot on Walker to tie LHO into the mix early on before they were to Patsy -up LHO to take the fall . LHO was calm during his last hours because he knew he was innocent before Ruby was told to turn out the lights on Oswald and of course make it official from J. Edgar Hoover that this Lone Nut ,  A Russian sympathizer was to blame for killing JFK and JD Tippit ! Case closed ! Not so fast there J. Edgar . Humes and Ford seem to have moved some wounds around that makes this closed case , OPEN back up ! Surely , 26 volumes of Horse sheet will help make up the minds of so many non-believers and really point the finger at LHO ! Our own rogues ! 9/11 !!!!!
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 31, 2018, 09:52:04 PM
So John believes Marina had total recall here but otherwise claims her memory is faulty.

Wrong.  I don't trust anything Marina says to be reliable.  You on the other hand believe her selectively when it suits your conclusion.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 31, 2018, 10:00:36 PM
That couldn't possibly be a simple error by a sleepy, sloppy,  cop typing the report, and calling a METAL jacket a steel jacket,.... could it?

That's always the go-to excuse for inconvenient evidence -- they were mistaken.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 31, 2018, 11:17:13 PM
That's always the go-to excuse for inconvenient evidence -- they were mistaken.

That's always the go-to excuse for inconvenient evidence -- they were mistaken.

You didn't answer the question....

That couldn't possibly be a simple error by a sleepy, sloppy,  cop typing the report, and calling a METAL jacket a steel jacket,.... could it?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 31, 2018, 11:30:28 PM
That couldn't possibly be a simple error by a sleepy, sloppy,  cop typing the report, and calling a METAL jacket a steel jacket,.... could it?

Anything's possible.  Do you have any evidence that a sleepy, sloppy, cop meant copper jacket?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 01, 2018, 01:41:14 AM
From Greer:

"After we left the airport, we drove several miles at speeds ranging from 15 to 30 miles per hour depending on the crowds. When we reached the business section of Dallas the crowds were very large and the motorcycle Police along side the President's automobile had a hard time keeping the people back.

"When we came to a point where the crowd had thinned out, there was a right turn for about half a block and then a left turn. At this point, I would say the President's automobile was traveling about 12 to 15 miles per hour."

The "business section of Dallas" where the limo had to slow down was, of course, Downtown.

That's not a cite showing that this was protocol as you claimed.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 01, 2018, 04:23:50 AM
That's not a cite showing that this was protocol as you claimed.

You read to much into what I said. I didn't say it was protocol. I said it was "parade speed," that is, the speed of a parade. To wit: slow. 15mph answered the old Match Game chorus "how slow was it?" and was based on Greer talking about the trip into downtown Dallas, as well as film of other JFK motorcades, like this one from the Hawaii visit:


Or his visits to Berlin and Ireland:


They didn't go that fast, especially when the crowds got big.


Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 01, 2018, 08:58:19 PM
You read to much into what I said. I didn't say it was protocol. I said it was "parade speed," that is, the speed of a parade. To wit: slow. 15mph answered the old Match Game chorus "how slow was it?" and was based on Greer talking about the trip into downtown Dallas, as well as film of other JFK motorcades, like this one from the Hawaii visit:


Or his visits to Berlin and Ireland:


They didn't go that fast, especially when the crowds got big.

I am not reading anything into it. Your claim of 15 m.p.h. has not been supported, thus, it carries no weight. If Pouty's claim of 44 m.p.h. is nixed when he did this kind of work for years then yours is certainly nixed.

The m.p.h. thing is a distraction from the main point--the two turns were NOT needed.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 02, 2018, 01:56:04 AM
I am not reading anything into it.
Oh, yes you did. I only wrote, "parade speed," and attached the value of 15mph, which is what Greer testified to and is supported by film of other motorcades. You decided that I musta meant some kind of "protocol." And then you demanded proof of a "protocol" that I never claimed.
 
Your claim of 15 m.p.h. has not been supported, thus, it carries no weight. If Pouty's claim of 44 m.p.h. is nixed when he did this kind of work for years then yours is certainly nixed.

Again, ~15mph (I'll put in a tilde to clairify this time) is the speed attested to by Greer and supported by film of other motorcades. The important part is that it's so slow that the turns wouldn't in themselves significantly affect the limos speed, if they slowed it down at all.

The m.p.h. thing is a distraction from the main point--the two turns were NOT needed.
The whole trip downtown wasn't needed, either. As I've said elsewhere, if the priority was to minimize the President's exposure, they would have avoided the CBD and taken Westbound Mockingbird to Hairy Heiney and thence directly to the Trade Mart.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Michael O'Brian on September 02, 2018, 02:04:30 AM
The Warren Commission sharks.. desperate to suggest Oswald was a violent and dangerous person declared that Lee Harvey Oswald was the perpetrator in the shooting of Gen Walker based on testimony from Marina and George D'M...photos and a map conveniently found w/ other incriminating evidence also a 'farewell note' of some sort was found.
Marina and George did not see Oswald shoot Walker. [Walker was shot though not badly injured][/b]

(http://harveyandlee.net/Temp/Walker_Report.jpg)

Make no mistake Walker was involved in J.F.K's death and this staged shooting out at his house was designed to make him look like a victim in it all, his alibi of being in the sky on the 22.11.63 was also manufactured to make him look innocent.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 02, 2018, 02:41:47 AM
[...]
A steel jacket bullet was pulled out of Walker's wall and there could be no connection made with CE2766 [or whatever that rifle was called] Go back up and read that police report.....
[...]
Meant to ask this before, just for giggles: how do you tell a steel-jacketed bullet from a copper-jacketed one? Yes, it's kind of a  trick question.

Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 02, 2018, 02:53:25 AM
Oh, yes you did. I only wrote, "parade speed," and attached the value of 15mph, which is what Greer testified to and is supported by film of other motorcades. You decided that I musta meant some kind of "protocol." And then you demanded proof of a "protocol" that I never claimed.
 
Again, ~15mph (I'll put in a tilde to clairify this time) is the speed attested to by Greer and supported by film of other motorcades. The important part is that it's so slow that the turns wouldn't in themselves significantly affect the limos speed, if they slowed it down at all.
The whole trip downtown wasn't needed, either. As I've said elsewhere, if the priority was to minimize the President's exposure, they would have avoided the CBD and taken Westbound Mockingbird to Hairy Heiney and thence directly to the Trade Mart.

What Greer testified to doesn't mean that this is correct. Greer should have accelerated upon hearing the first shot, but he didn't. Greer should NOT have slowed to either a near stop or a stop, but he did. He is hardly a reliable source for this topic.

Stop trying to take attention from the fact that those two turns were NOT needed and were only added to make the killing of JFK much easier. LHO could not add the UNNECESSARY turns.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 02, 2018, 03:02:28 AM
Meant to ask this before, just for giggles: how do you tell a steel-jacketed bullet from a copper-jacketed one? Yes, it's kind of a  trick question.

Wow, so you think trained police investigators and a former general cannot tell the difference? 🤔
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 02, 2018, 03:52:23 AM
...how do you tell a steel-jacketed bullet from a copper-jacketed one? Yes, it's kind of a  trick question.
Yeah..why not ask the cop that made the report?
Quote
Walker was involved in J.F.K's death and this staged shooting out at his house was designed to make him look like a victim in it all
Walker did hate Kennedy. That shooting was perhaps unrelated to a JFK assassination plot unless somehow it was necessary for any other patsy [as well as Oswald] to be implicated...then perhaps that guy would have been charged with the Walker shooting.
There was probably a list of communists from all over Dallas to choose from...just have them in the right place.
 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 02, 2018, 03:56:33 AM

The whole trip downtown wasn't needed, either. As I've said elsewhere, if the priority was to minimize the President's exposure, they would have avoided the CBD and taken Westbound Mockingbird to Hairy Heiney and thence directly to the Trade Mart.
An assassination attempt would have ultimately still happened at some time and place.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Steve Howsley on September 02, 2018, 03:57:25 AM
... those two turns were NOT needed and were only added to make the killing of JFK much easier.

To quote an often repeated two-word phrase of yours ....

prove it
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 02, 2018, 04:11:46 AM
Wow, so you think trained police investigators and a former general cannot tell the difference?

Not what I asked. I asked how you, "trained police investigators" or General Walker, can tell a steel jacketed bull[et] from a copper jacketed one?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 02, 2018, 04:34:16 AM
What Greer testified to doesn't mean that this is correct. Greer should have accelerated upon hearing the first shot, but he didn't. Greer should NOT have slowed to either a near stop or a stop, but he did. He is hardly a reliable source for this topic.
Greer drove the limo. He is the direct source for how fast it was driven, and there is enough film of it being driven slowly down the street in other motorcades to back him up.

Stop trying to take attention from the fact that those two turns were NOT needed and were only added to make the killing of JFK much easier. LHO could not add the UNNECESSARY turns.
You haven't proven that. If anything, you've demonstrated how much your thinking works backwards.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 02, 2018, 05:40:14 AM
Even Walker knew..............
Quote
Mr. LIEBELER. But I want to know.
General WALKER. That suggests a possible relationship. I think the fact that Rubenstein shot Oswald suggests plenty. I am convinced he couldn't have shot him except for one basic reason, and maybe many others, but to keep him quiet. That is what shooting people does. I think the whole city of Dallas is very interested. I would be interested in the information on a Professor Wolf, William T. Wolf.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 02, 2018, 05:41:39 AM
Greer drove the limo. 
(http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/Smileys/default2/Off_Topic.gif)
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 02, 2018, 06:08:15 AM
Apparently someone did have a real beef with General Walker.
Co-testifying with Walker was General Clyde Watts
Quote
General WATTS. He truly professes to feeling very friendly to General Walker. I have never confronted him with the fact that the investigators have a tape recording that he was anxious to get a shot at Walker for $5,000, but I am still suspicious that Duff knows something that he hasn't told.
General WALKER. It is certainly true, to further my counsel statement, that Duff certainly lived in the area of night clubs and beer joints and so forth, and he could still know something and not be involved himself.
General WATTS. Yes.
Ignoring this, the Commission goons still relied on the Marina yarn and various scraps of drivel and pegged Oswald with some senseless shooting.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 02, 2018, 08:06:16 PM
Anything's possible.  Do you have any evidence that a sleepy, sloppy, cop meant copper jacket?

FYI.....The 6.5 FMJ projectile is NOT copper jacketed.....The Italian bullet is a white colored metal that looks like steel, but it is a soft, malleable, non magnetic metal.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 02, 2018, 08:21:54 PM
An assassination attempt would have ultimately still happened at some time and place.

An assassination attempt had been plotted for JFK's visit to Chicago but was foiled by Abraham Bolden and the Secret Service.

J.Edgar Hoover knew about the Chicago plot and refused to help in stopping the plot.....
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 02, 2018, 08:48:44 PM
FYI.....The 6.5 FMJ projectile is NOT copper jacketed.....The Italian bullet is a white colored metal that looks like steel, but it is a soft, malleable, non magnetic metal.

The bullets in the SMI rounds come in a number pf "colors" depending on when and where the bullet was produced.

"Ball 'Cartucce a pallottola' or 'Cartuccia a palla ordinaria'
    Round nose, full metal jacket bullet with lead core, jacket materials include copper-nickle, gilding metal, copper-nickle plated steel and gilding metal plated steel."

(from a copy of Alex Eichner's old site at http://personal.stevens.edu/~gliberat/carcano/ammo/history.html)

The silvery-looking jackets aren't steel but cupronickel, FYI
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Ross Lidell on September 02, 2018, 10:42:17 PM
Much of the early critical work that received a wide following was from the left. But at the same time--the mid-1960s--there were theories published in right-wing journals, as well.

I would argue that the "Saturday Evening Post" and "Argosy" were fairly right-wing, and they published many conspiracy articles over time. The "Post" published Josiah Thompson's article (based on exempts from his book) in late-1967. Epstein was considered a responsible critic. Which side of the left/right spectrum does Thompson and Epstein fall?

What about Sylvan Fox, whose book "The Unanswered Questions about the Kennedy Assassination", was widely-distributed?

Jerry: I'm a great admirer of your visual work (autopsy) displayed on this forum. Insightful and accurate in my opinion. Therefore, I must correct the error: based on "exempts". It should be: based on "excerpts".

The journals mentioned (SEP etc) published stories about the JFK Assassination because they would appeal to curious reader's minds. The conspiracy articles were promoted due to routine business decisions.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Organ on September 02, 2018, 10:59:54 PM
Jerry: I'm a great admirer of your visual work (autopsy) displayed on this forum. Insightful and accurate in my opinion. Therefore, I must correct the error: based on "exempts" should be: based on "excerpts".


Thanks, Ross. I don't mind having typos corrected. I have a desktop (for SketchUp and games), but often-times I'm typing on a Samsung Plus netbook with a Chiclet keyboard. While trying to follow something on TV!

I imagine others here have similar technical challenges.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Ross Lidell on September 02, 2018, 11:15:47 PM
Thanks, Ross. I don't mind having typos corrected. I have a desktop (for SketchUp and games), but often-times I'm typing on a Samsung Plus netbook with a Chiclet keyboard. While trying to follow something on TV!

I imagine others here have similar technical challenges.

Jerry: This is off-topic. Anybody ever tell you that you look like "Frank Cannon"? Some people say I look like JFK... in profile.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Organ on September 03, 2018, 01:16:13 AM
Jerry: This is off-topic. Anybody ever tell you that you look like "Frank Cannon"? Some people say I look like JFK... in profile.

Yes, I look like Cannon, just much older and not as handsome. I also get the Seinfeld guy "George".

I got some "Cannon" DVDs on-hold at the library. I'm just finishing the last season of "The Streets of San Francisco" with Richard Hatch, who played Malden's partner that year. I like him better than the Michael Douglas character of the show's past seasons. Don't get me wrong, Michael Douglas is great (to me) in most of his movies and that Liberace role.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 03, 2018, 05:15:42 PM
To quote an often repeated two-word phrase of yours ....

prove it

Already did. This is why there will never be any true dialogue as most, if not all, of the LNers never read what is posted unless it states, "LHO IS GUILTY. "
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 03, 2018, 05:16:46 PM
Not what I asked. I asked how you, "trained police investigators" or General Walker, can tell a steel jacketed bull[et] from a copper jacketed one?

Their training and experience? Duh.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 03, 2018, 05:21:26 PM
Greer drove the limo. He is the direct source for how fast it was driven, and there is enough film of it being driven slowly down the street in other motorcades to back him up.
You haven't proven that. If anything, you've demonstrated how much your thinking works backwards.

You're playing a game. How fast he was driving on November 22 does NOT mean or prove what the stated speed was supposed to be in the SS manual. In fact, Greer's actions or inactions are one of the big reasons that the assassination was successful.

You haven't proven anything. Prouty's knowledge in this area was much greater than yours.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 03, 2018, 05:25:29 PM
The following speaks to Fritz's statement about steel v copper FMJ ammo identification

What is steel-jacketed ammo?
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/what-is-steel-jacketed-ammo.31351/

[EXCERPT]

Steel-jacketed ammo is ammunition in which the bullet (not the case) has a steel covering; some manufacturers (usually military) use steel because it's cheaper than gilding metal (the copper alloy used on most jacketed ammo). If you've got a magnet and/or a hacksaw, it's usually fairly simple to tell if your ammo has a steel jacket. Looks alone can fool you, because they do make copper-washed steel-jacketed ammo, which just has a thin coppper coating on the steel jacket.

If a magnet sticks to the point of the bullet, the bullet will either have a steel jacket or a steel core (or possibly both), and if you cut through the bullet with a hacksaw, you'll be able to see if there's anything besides lead in the core. HTH.
SDC, Jul 15, 2003 #2
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 03, 2018, 06:20:04 PM
There is NO chain of custody for CE 573. None. It couldn't even be tied to CE 139 for goodness sake.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 03, 2018, 08:27:15 PM
There is NO chain of custody for CE 573. None. It couldn't even be tied to CE 139 for goodness sake.

Are you responding to me? If so, why have you not addressed my research regarding the copper v steel identification issue raised by Fritz (a trained experienced detective)? Rob Caprio, the not-so-artful dodger.

'It couldn't even be tied to CE 139'
>>> Are you sure the W bullet was completely dismissed, or was it was it placed in the 'could not be dismissed' category. Pretty sure the latter is the more accurate determination.

Firearm Factoids
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/firearms_hsca.htm

[EXCERPT]

14. Regarding the bullet fired at General Walker, the FBI was unable to identify it with the rifle found on the sixth floor of the depository due to its mutilated condition, (46) although it had the same physical characteristics as the bullet of the cartridge found in the chamber of the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle and other Mannlicher-Carcano ammunition.(47)
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 03, 2018, 10:20:54 PM
Their traing and experience? Duh.
You don't know, do you? I mean, if you were to see a bullet lying in the grass, how would you tell if it were steel jacketed or copper jacketed?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 03, 2018, 10:40:22 PM
You're playing a game. How fast he was driving on November 22 does NOT mean or prove what the stated speed was supposed to be in the SS manual. In fact, Greer's actions or inactions are one of the big reasons that the assassination was successful.

You haven't proven anything. Prouty's knowledge in this area was much greater than yours.

I'm not the one playing games. The guy playing games is the one trying to push the erroneous notion that I said that there was some "stated speed" in "the SS maunual." I have noted that Greer said the motorcade ran through Dallas at 15mph once the crowds built up.  I've also noted that film of other of JFK motorcades where the limo is moving quite slowly, maybe 15mph, maybe even slower. Anyone who remembers TV news in the 1980's might remember film of the Presidential limo driving through Washington DC with SS agents jogging alongside. 15mph happens to be a 15-minute mile. I seriously doubt the agents keeping up with The Gipper were making that kind of time in trenchcoats and Brooks Brothers' suits.

Now, your evidence for a 44mph minimum speed is....? Your evidence that Prouty knew any more about Presidential protection is.....?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 03, 2018, 10:51:19 PM
Are you responding to me? If so, why have you not addressed my research regarding the copper v steel identification issue raised by Fritz (a trained experienced detective)? Rob Caprio, the not-so-artful dodger.

'It couldn't even be tied to CE 139'
>>> Are you sure the W bullet was completely dismissed, or was it was it placed in the 'could not be dismissed' category. Pretty sure the latter is the more accurate determination.

Firearm Factoids
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/firearms_hsca.htm

[EXCERPT]

14. Regarding the bullet fired at General Walker, the FBI was unable to identify it with the rifle found on the sixth floor of the depository due to its mutilated condition, (46) although it had the same physical characteristics as the bullet of the cartridge found in the chamber of the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle and other Mannlicher-Carcano ammunition.(47)

What a big ego you have. I wasn't responding to you. None of your comments alter what I wrote. CE 573 is worthless for the WC's claim, and of course yours.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 03, 2018, 10:59:55 PM
You don't know, do you? I mean, if you were to see a bullet lying in the grass, how would you tell if it were steel jacketed or copper jacketed?

Nice try, but trained police officers and crime scene investigators sure can tell the difference. Why do you LNers make this about the other poster instead of the evidence?

I am sure they would pick it up and look at it. EAW is on record saying that CE 573 was NOT the bullet that he saw and held on April 10, 1963.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 03, 2018, 11:08:49 PM
I'm not the one playing games. The guy playing games is the one trying to push the erroneous notion that I said that there was some "stated speed" in "the SS maunual." I have noted that Greer said the motorcade ran through Dallas at 15mph once the crowds built up.  I've also noted that film of other of JFK motorcades where the limo is moving quite slowly, maybe 15mph, maybe even slower. Anyone who remembers TV news in the 1980's might remember film of the Presidential limo driving through Washington DC with SS agents jogging alongside. 15mph happens to be a 15-minute mile. I seriously doubt the agents keeping up with The Gipper were making that kind of time in trenchcoats and Brooks Brothers' suits.

Now, your evidence for a 44mph minimum speed is....? Your evidence that Prouty knew any more about Presidential protection is.....?

First of all, the 44 m.p.h. speed was brought up by someone else in this thread. Your lookalike brought it up and you dumped it on me. Secondly, it is a moot point since the two turns were added to make sure that JFK didn't travel down Main Street at a faster rate of speed.

The unnecessary two turns are the issue, but of course you don't want to tackle that issue.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Steve Howsley on September 03, 2018, 11:47:03 PM
... believe me I already proved it....

That's the problem, I don't believe you.

Your actual words earlier

"... those two turns were NOT needed and were only added to make the killing of JFK much easier. "

This is not about 'turns' but it is about the suggestion that there was a plot to kill JFK. I said "prove it" and you say you did. That is pure, unadulterated BS.

Going by the responses in another thread there is overwhelming support for the decision to close your account resulting in your steaming piles of crap disappearing. I have had verification from someone in another place that you did steal someone's identity online. You are someone with zero credibility.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 04, 2018, 01:04:23 AM
Nice try, but trained police officers and crime scene investigators sure can tell the difference. Why do you LNers make this about the other poster instead of the evidence?

I am sure they would pick it up and look at it. EAW is on record saying that CE 573 was NOT the bullet that he saw and held on April 10, 1963.

You're sure, eh? And when did Walker claim that CE573 wasn't the bullet that was fired at him? If it's what I think it is, it isn't what you think it is.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 04, 2018, 01:38:04 AM
That's the problem, I don't believe you.

Your actual words earlier

"... those two turns were NOT needed and were only added to make the killing of JFK much easier. "

This is not about 'turns' but it is about the suggestion that there was a plot to kill JFK. I said "prove it" and you say you did. That is pure, unadulterated BS.

Going by the responses in another thread there is overwhelming support for the decision to close your account resulting in your steaming piles of crap disappearing. I have had verification from someone in another place that you did steal someone's identity online. You are someone with zero credibility.

Whenever Caprio stands still, the methane gas wafting up from his mountain of  BS: punches a giant hole in the ozone layer.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 04, 2018, 01:49:14 AM
First of all, the 44 m.p.h. speed was brought up by someone else in this thread. Your lookalike brought it up and you dumped it on me. Secondly, it is a moot point since the two turns were added to make sure that JFK didn't travel down Main Street at a faster rate of speed.

The unnecessary two turns are the issue, but of course you don't want to tackle that issue.
So far, all you've managed is to claim that Elm must have been as wide as Main because a schematic map of West downtown Dallas shows it that way. However, the same schematic shows that the on-ramps to Stemmons are as wide as Stemmons istelf, and that Main and Elm are both wider than either side of Stemmons. It's not a reliable indicator of how wide the streets were.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 04, 2018, 03:05:25 AM
You're sure, eh? And when did Walker claim that CE573 wasn't the bullet that was fired at him? If it's what I think it is, it isn't what you think it is.

So you really don't have a clue about the evidence. Got it.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 04, 2018, 03:07:31 AM
So far, all you've managed is to claim that Elm must have been as wide as Main because a schematic map of West downtown Dallas shows it that way. However, the same schematic shows that the on-ramps to Stemmons are as wide as Stemmons istelf, and that Main and Elm are both wider than either side of Stemmons. It's not a reliable indicator of how wide the streets were.

It was the WC's map. Are you saying that the WC would use an inaccurate map as evidence?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 04, 2018, 03:29:19 AM
It was the WC's map. Are you saying that the WC would use an inaccurate map as evidence?
I'll bet it's perfectly accurate when used for it's intended purpose. Off-label use, however, is not guaranteed. An electrical schematic is good for figuring out how a circuit works, but it may not be a good guide for finding a resistor on a complex circuit board.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 04, 2018, 03:12:05 PM
I'll bet it's perfectly accurate when used for it's intended purpose. Off-label use, however, is not guaranteed. An electrical schematic is good for figuring out how a circuit works, but it may not be a good guide for finding a resistor on a complex circuit board.

"Off-label." Good one. 😃  The WC's map shows that Elm Street was just as wide as Main Street and connected directly to Stemmons Freeway. Those two turns were NOT needed. End of story.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 04, 2018, 11:25:40 PM
(http://iacoletti.org/jfk/walker-bullet-telegram.png)
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 05, 2018, 12:16:12 AM
(http://iacoletti.org/jfk/walker-bullet-telegram.png)

Actually, I was thinking of the letter he wrote where he goes into more detail. However, just based on the telegram, how did Walker know the "bullet before your committee" wasn't the one he remembered seeing in 1963?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 05, 2018, 03:37:22 AM
"Off-label." Good one. 😃  The WC's map shows that Elm Street was just as wide as Main Street and connected directly to Stemmons Freeway. Those two turns were NOT needed. End of story.

Here is CE2113:

(http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/pages/WH_Vol24_0281a.gif)

In it, The entrance/exit ramps on Stemmons are as wide as the through carriageways, and the Stemmons carriageways are significantly narrower than Elm, Main and Commerce. BTW, the Stemmons carriageways were originally built to be 5 lanes wide, see the following:

(http://www.texasfreeway.com/dallas/historic/photos/images/i35e_stemmons_9_17_1960.jpg)

For that matter Austin and Market are significantly narrower than Houston and Lamar, not that CE2113 knows that.

CE2113 is just not a to-scale representation of the West End. It's simply foolish to rely on it as if it were.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 05, 2018, 04:03:41 AM
Here is CE2113:
(http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/Smileys/default2/Off_Topic.gif) What does that  have to do with Walker?


 
 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 05, 2018, 10:48:06 PM
Here is CE2113:

(http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/pages/WH_Vol24_0281a.gif)

In it, The entrance/exit ramps on Stemmons are as wide as the through carriageways, and the Stemmons carriageways are significantly narrower than Elm, Main and Commerce. BTW, the Stemmons carriageways were originally built to be 5 lanes wide, see the following:

(http://www.texasfreeway.com/dallas/historic/photos/images/i35e_stemmons_9_17_1960.jpg)

For that matter Austin and Market are significantly narrower than Houston and Lamar, not that CE2113 knows that.

CE2113 is just not a to-scale representation of the West End. It's simply foolish to rely on it as if it were.

You just keep changing the focus. Anything to avoid discussing the unnecessary two turns.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 05, 2018, 10:52:31 PM
(http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/Smileys/default2/Off_Topic.gif) What does that  have to do with Walker?

They couldn't deal with the EAW subject so they changed the topic, but of course they can't deal with that topic either. No surprise really since they have no supporting evidence on their side.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 06, 2018, 01:01:18 AM
You just keep changing the focus. Anything to avoid discussing the unnecessary two turns.

You're the guy who used CE2113 to argue that Elm was as wide as Main, therefore there was no reason to use Main rather than Elm. I just pointed out that your key piece of evidence isn't what you think it is or present it to be, and therefore your argument falls on its face. Your only response is to pretend I changed the subject, then repeat your now-baseless assertion in hopes no one notices you're standing buck-naked in the middle of the royal procession.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 06, 2018, 01:25:16 AM
(http://iacoletti.org/jfk/walker-bullet-telegram.png)
Actually, I was thinking of the letter he wrote where he goes into more detail. However, just based on the telegram, how did Walker know the "bullet before your committee" wasn't the one he remembered seeing in 1963?

So, John, afraid to answer my question?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 06, 2018, 02:00:13 AM
  how did Walker know the "bullet before your committee" wasn't the one he remembered seeing in 1963? So, John, afraid to answer my question?
Could it be a stupid question?..The general saw a picture of the bullet the Commission vermin produced as the one police found at his house and he knew it wasn't because he had like eyes and a memory ::)

 
 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 06, 2018, 02:02:28 AM
Could it be a stupid question?..The general saw a picture of the bullet the Commission vermin produced as the one police found at his house and he knew it wasn't because he had like eyes and a memory ::)
Commission or Committee? We're talking about the HSCA. When would he have seen such a photo? For that matter, where does he say it was a photo?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 06, 2018, 02:29:02 AM
Commission or Committee? We're talking about the HSCA. When would he have seen such a photo? For that matter, where does he say it was a photo?
Entered as CE 573 I don't know what you are talking about...do you?
From the DVP pages...
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/18625-ce-573-walker-bullet-not-the-real-bullet/
From the Warren Report..
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pdf/WH17_CE_573.pdf
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 06, 2018, 02:56:08 AM
Entered as CE 573 I don't know what you are talking about...do you?
From the DVP pages...
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/18625-ce-573-walker-bullet-not-the-real-bullet/
From the Warren Report..
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pdf/WH17_CE_573.pdf

I'm talking about the bullet Walker wrote to the Attorney General about in 1979:

"The bullet used and pictured on the TV by US Senate G.Robert Blakey Committee on Assassinations is a ridiculous substitute for a bullet completely mutilated by such obstruction, baring no resemblance to any unfired bullet in shape or form"

As far as I know, the HSCA never showed CE573 or a photo of it during the HSCA Hearings. Its not listed in the HSCA exhibits, either. So what was Walker talking about? BTW, notice the phrase "US Senate G.Robert Blakey Committee on Assassinations" (that's really how it appears in the letter), and think about what that would mean as to the functionality of Walker's mind at the time.  Also, notice the reference to "any unfired bullet in shape or form." Why would he bring that up, unless he saw CE399 and thought it was supposed to be CE573?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 06, 2018, 03:22:43 AM
You're the guy who used CE2113 to argue that Elm was as wide as Main, therefore there was no reason to use Main rather than Elm. I just pointed out that your key piece of evidence isn't what you think it is or present it to be, and therefore your argument falls on its face. Your only response is to pretend I changed the subject, then repeat your now-baseless assertion in hopes no one notices you're standing buck-naked in the middle of the royal procession.

You haven't "proven" anything.  The map and events speak for themselves. Elm Street should have been used.

It is quite laughable that you think that you have proven otherwise.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 06, 2018, 03:24:33 AM
Commission or Committee? We're talking about the HSCA. When would he have seen such a photo? For that matter, where does he say it was a photo?

I believe he said that he saw it on television.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 06, 2018, 03:46:23 AM
  Why would he bring that up, unless he saw CE399 and thought it was supposed to be CE573?
He saw the 30.06 that was dug out of his wall.
Also the cops that dug out that bullet were never called to identify anything.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 06, 2018, 05:26:54 AM
I believe he said that he saw it on television.
Yes he did. "By US Senate G.Robert Blakey Committee on Assassinations," as he calls it. The HSCA hearings were televised. Those hearings were also recorded as transcripts and published as the first five volumes of the HSCA hearings and exhibits. So, where did anyone show CE573 and/or a picture thereof during those hearings? A couple of oldtimers have said that it wasn't shown during the hearings. I've searched, but I haven't been find anything in the hearings that indicates that they publicly showed it or a photo of it. I can't find it in the list of HSCA hearings exhibits either.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 06, 2018, 05:35:55 AM
He saw the 30.06 that was dug out of his wall.
Also the cops that dug out that bullet were never called to identify anything.
In his 1979 letter, Walker described it as "a bullet completely mutilated." How would Walker (or anyone else) determine that "a bullet completely mutilated" was .30 caliber, much less .a 30-06. BTW, remember that ".30-06" specifies a cartridge, and not necessarily a bullet.  How would anyone be able to just look at the mangled metal that Walker describes and say "oh, this is from a .30-06" and not from (say) a .308 or 7.62x54 Nagant or .303 Enfield or .300 savage or .300 Winchester Magnum or .30-40 Krag?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 06, 2018, 02:18:33 PM
Quote
The bullet was also described as a 30.06.
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/18625-ce-573-walker-bullet-not-the-real-bullet/?tab=comments#comment-243351

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS2AlxjYcTNjTY6F5DQclr56rjR0xTVROb0VWGDPxFqjHawl3Pesw)
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 06, 2018, 04:31:52 PM
So, John, afraid to answer my question?

Why so combative?  How should I know, though?  Ask Walker.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 06, 2018, 04:33:53 PM
As far as I know, the HSCA never showed CE573 or a photo of it during the HSCA Hearings.

As far as you know?  Did you attend the hearings?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 06, 2018, 04:36:15 PM
In his 1979 letter, Walker described it as "a bullet completely mutilated." How would Walker (or anyone else) determine that "a bullet completely mutilated" was .30 caliber, much less .a 30-06.

That's a good question.  Also, how could anyone else determine that "a bullet completely mutilated" was a steel jacketed 6.5mm Mannlicher Carcano bullet?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 06, 2018, 07:35:09 PM
The bullets in the SMI rounds come in a number pf "colors" depending on when and where the bullet was produced.

"Ball 'Cartucce a pallottola' or 'Cartuccia a palla ordinaria'
    Round nose, full metal jacket bullet with lead core, jacket materials include copper-nickle, gilding metal, copper-nickle plated steel and gilding metal plated steel."

(from a copy of Alex Eichner's old site at http://personal.stevens.edu/~gliberat/carcano/ammo/history.html)

The silvery-looking jackets aren't steel but cupronickel, FYI

The silvery-looking jackets aren't steel but cupronickel, FYI

T.Y.  I am aware of the fact....  The point is ...The 6.5mm bullets of Italian manufacture were "silvery-looking" like steel...
If the bullet that was fired through Walker's window was in fact a 6.5mm bullet from a carcano there is a 99.8 probability that it was "silvery looking"    If it was copper colored it was manufactured for the CIA......
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 06, 2018, 07:46:47 PM
For anyone who believes that CE 573 was the bullet fired at EAW please post the evidence for the chain of custody for it.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 06, 2018, 09:33:32 PM
For anyone who believes that CE 573 was the bullet fired at EAW please post the evidence for the chain of custody for it.
Officer C said he turned it over to Officer B who gave it to Detective D.
Det D said that B and C gave it to A.
There are are real names but it will take the time later ;)
Found it....
Quote
Officer B.G. NORVELL found the bullet. . . and it was given to Det. B.G. BROWN, Crime Laboratory Division .

Over a year later, on May 28, 1964, Detective DON MCELROY advised he found the bullet and turned it over to Officer BROWN .

On the same date, Officer BROWN stated he obtained the bullet from officer NORVELL.

Officer TUCKER, on June 2, 1964, and former Officer NORVELL, on June 3, 1964, both stated NORVELL found the bullet and he, in turn, gave it to McELROY, who said he would take it or give it to the Dallas Police Department Crime Laboratory.

So Norvell says he found the bullet and gave it to Brown. McElroy says he found the bullet and gave it to Brown. Then, a few days later, Norvell changes his mind and says that although he found the bullet, he gave it to McElroy. This version is backed by his partner, Tucker. But Brown is already on record as saying he received the bullet from Norvell.
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2015/05/19/judyth-baker-lee-harvey-oswald-did-not-shoot-at-general-walker/
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 06, 2018, 09:46:18 PM
Officer C said he turned it over to Officer B who gave it to Detective D.
Det D said that B and C gave it to A.
There are are real names but it will take the time later ;)
Found it....https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2015/05/19/judyth-baker-lee-harvey-oswald-did-not-shoot-at-general-walker/

I already know that there is none, but I was hoping that one LNer would at least try.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 06, 2018, 11:30:15 PM
I already know that there is none, but I was hoping that one LNer would at least try.

They generally think that if anybody rattles off a list of names that's good enough.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Mytton on September 06, 2018, 11:36:42 PM
Yes he did. "By US Senate G.Robert Blakey Committee on Assassinations," as he calls it. The HSCA hearings were televised. Those hearings were also recorded as transcripts and published as the first five volumes of the HSCA hearings and exhibits. So, where did anyone show CE573 and/or a picture thereof during those hearings? A couple of oldtimers have said that it wasn't shown during the hearings. I've searched, but I haven't been find anything in the hearings that indicates that they publicly showed it or a photo of it. I can't find it in the list of HSCA hearings exhibits either.

You're right CE573 wasn't a HSCA exhibit.

JohnM
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 07, 2018, 12:36:55 AM
As far as you know?  Did you attend the hearings?

Didn't have to. They were televised and videotaped. There used to be guys who'd sell you the whole thing on VHS, and I'll bet you can find the bulk of the hearings (and maybe everything) if you look long enough on Youtube. You don't have to do that, though. The hearings were also transcribed and printed as the first five volumes of the HSCA set. You can search those if you wish. I've never found where they showed CE573 (also "walker bullet," etc) or a photo of it.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 07, 2018, 12:59:43 AM
They generally think that if anybody rattles off a list of names that's good enough.

Pretty much. 👍
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 07, 2018, 01:18:32 AM
Yes he did. "By US Senate G.Robert Blakey Committee on Assassinations," as he calls it. The HSCA hearings were televised. Those hearings were also recorded as transcripts and published as the first five volumes of the HSCA hearings and exhibits. So, where did anyone show CE573 and/or a picture thereof during those hearings? A couple of oldtimers have said that it wasn't shown during the hearings. I've searched, but I haven't been find anything in the hearings that indicates that they publicly showed it or a photo of it. I can't find it in the list of HSCA hearings exhibits either.

So you think EAW was lying? He surely saw CE 573 during the life of the WC and he said that it was NOT the bullet he saw and held on the evening of April 10, 1963.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 07, 2018, 01:22:19 AM
That's a good question.  Also, how could anyone else determine that "a bullet completely mutilated" was a steel jacketed 6.5mm Mannlicher Carcano bullet?

"Mr. FRAZIER - I was unable to reach a conclusion as to whether or not it had been fired from this rifle. The conclusion went slightly further than that, in that we determined that the general rifling characteristics of the rifle 139 are of the same type as those found on the bullet, Exhibit 573, and, further, on this basis, that the bullet could have been fired from the rifle on the basis of its land and groove impressions. And, second, that all of the remaining physical characteristics of this bullet, 573, are the same as Western 6.5 mm. Mannlicher-Carcano bullets of the type normally loaded in ammunition made for this rifle, 139. However, the mutilation of the nose of the bullet has eliminated the length characteristics, and it cannot be definitely stated that Exhibit 573 is in fact a Western Cartridge Co. product, but all of the remaining characteristics of base shape, distance from the base to the cannelure, the width of the cannelure, and the overall appearance, coloration, and so forth, are similar to Western ammunition."
[...]
Mr. EISENBERG - Can you describe the general rifling characteristics which you referred to?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes. They consist of impressions from four lands and grooves. The bullet is mutilated on a portion of its surface. However, it can be determined that there were four land impressions and four groove impressions originally on this bullet.
The width of the land impression is 7/100ths of an inch, that is 0.07 inch--whereas the width of the groove impression is 0.13 inch, or 13/100ths of an inch.
The bullet is flattened so that it was not possible to measure its diameter. However, by adding the land width to the groove width, and multiplying by the number of lands and grooves, you can determine the circumference of the bullet and mathematically determine its diameter, which in this case corresponds to 6.5 mm. ammunition, or approximately .267 inch.
Mr. EISENBERG - What was the direction of the twist?
Mr. FRAZIER - To the right."

So, working backwards from the circumference at the (relatively undisturbed) base the bullet was originally .267" across, within expectations of what you'd see for a WCC 6.5mm Carcano (.268")  bullet in that condition. It has 4 sets of lands and groove in a right twist, like a Carcano.  Rifling rate appears to be Carcano-consistent:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/TIN59nj-vbI/AAAAAAAAFQI/orGtgLLWo-E/s1600/CE573+&+CE399+Comparison.jpg

So, nothing that unequivocally screams "I AM A WCC 6.5MM CARCANO BULLET TO THE EXCLUSION OF ALL OTHER RIFLES," but all measurable parameters are consistent with a WCC 6.5mm Carcano round.

So:
"Mr. EISENBERG - But you do conclude that this was fired from a Mannlicher-Carcano 91/38, or a rifle with similar barrel characteristics?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir."

If you can find a ballistics expert who can look at the data and differ, please fell free...

Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 07, 2018, 01:23:26 AM
In his 1979 letter, Walker described it as "a bullet completely mutilated." How would Walker (or anyone else) determine that "a bullet completely mutilated" was .30 caliber, much less .a 30-06. BTW, remember that ".30-06" specifies a cartridge, and not necessarily a bullet.  How would anyone be able to just look at the mangled metal that Walker describes and say "oh, this is from a .30-06" and not from (say) a .308 or 7.62x54 Nagant or .303 Enfield or .300 savage or .300 Winchester Magnum or .30-40 Krag?

Your point is moot since CE 573 is NOT completely mutilated.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 07, 2018, 01:24:12 AM
The silvery-looking jackets aren't steel but cupronickel, FYI

T.Y.  I am aware of the fact....  The point is ...The 6.5mm bullets of Italian manufacture were "silvery-looking" like steel...
If the bullet that was fired through Walker's window was in fact a 6.5mm bullet from a carcano there is a 99.8 probability that it was "silvery looking"    If it was copper colored it was manufactured for the CIA......

Some of the Italian ammunition. Re-read the ref I posted:

""Ball 'Cartucce a pallottola' or 'Cartuccia a palla ordinaria'
    Round nose, full metal jacket bullet with lead core, jacket materials include copper-nickle, gilding metal, copper-nickle plated steel and gilding metal plated steel.""
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 07, 2018, 01:27:55 AM
Your point is moot since CE 573 is NOT completely mutilated.
Show me exactly what Walker would consider "completely mutilated" and what he would not consider "completely mutilated," with examples.  CE573 looks pretty damned mutilated to me. BTW, what do you think he was looking at in the televised HSCA hearings that he thought CE573 was?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 07, 2018, 01:28:08 AM
Didn't have to. They were televised and videotaped. There used to be guys who'd sell you the whole thing on VHS, and I'll bet you can find the bulk of the hearings (and maybe everything) if you look long enough on Youtube. You don't have to do that, though. The hearings were also transcribed and printed as the first five volumes of the HSCA set. You can search those if you wish. I've never found where they showed CE573 (also "walker bullet," etc) or a photo of it.

So you are claiming that EAW never saw CE 573?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 07, 2018, 01:30:53 AM
Show me exactly what Walker would consider "completely mutilated" and what he would not consider "completely mutilated," with examples.  CE573 looks pretty damned mutilated to me. BTW, what do you think he was looking at in the televised HSCA hearings that he thought CE573 was?

Your spin won't work. EAW saw and held the bullet found on the evening of April 10, 1963, and he most assuredly saw CE 573 at some point and said they were NOT the same. End of story.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 07, 2018, 02:05:29 AM
So you are claiming that EAW never saw CE 573?

I'm saying that he couldn't have seen CE573 on the televised HSCA hearings  ("The bullet used and pictured on the TV by US Senate G. Robert Blakey
Committee on Assassinations") as his letter to the Attorney General claimed. Given that he uses "any unfired bullet in shape or form" as a reference in the same letter, I'd say he saw CE399 and assumed it was the letter fired at him. By t1979, he was a perverted, 70-old geezer who'd been groping random people around White Rock Lake (and had been twice arrested for it), so he likely wasn't particularly straight in the head by then.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 07, 2018, 02:14:11 AM
Your spin won't work. EAW saw and held the bullet found on the evening of April 10, 1963, and he most assuredly saw CE 573 at some point and said they were NOT the same. End of story.
Here's what I asked you:
"Show me exactly what Walker would consider 'completely mutilated' and what he would not consider 'completely mutilated,' with examples.  CE573 looks pretty damned mutilated to me. BTW, what do you think he was looking at in the televised HSCA hearings that he thought CE573 was?"

1.) How is asking a couple of questions "spin," Kemo Sabe? Or did they turn into spin the second you ran out of answers?
2.) Walker specifically states that he saw it on TV, and by "US Senate G.Robert Blakey Committee on Assassinations" he has to mean the HSCA hearings. But they never showed CE573 or a photo of it.
3.) Answer the questions, grasshopper.

Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 07, 2018, 02:24:27 AM
  The hearings were also transcribed and printed as the first five volumes of the HSCA set. 
HistoryMatters does the entire set on line-----
 It should all be available on DVD by now but I haven't seen it.
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/contents/hsca/contents_hsca_vols.htm
 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 07, 2018, 02:29:22 AM
You're the guy who used CE2113 to argue that Elm was as wide as Main, therefore there was no reason to use Main rather than Elm. I just pointed out that your key piece of evidence isn't what you think it is or present it to be, and therefore your argument falls on its face. Your only response is to pretend I changed the subject, then repeat your now-baseless assertion in hopes no one notices you're standing buck-naked in the middle of the royal procession.
You haven't "proven" anything.  The map and events speak for themselves. Elm Street should have been used.

It is quite laughable that you think that you have proven otherwise.
Oh, but I did, grasshopper.
Let me bring back CE2113.
(https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/pdf/WH24_CE_2113.pdf)
Notice that Elm, Main, and Commerce (in fact, most of the streets in the old CDB) are shown as being wider that either the North- and South-bound carriageways of I-35E, and the Stemmons carriageways are shown as no wider than their entry/exit ramps. None of that was true. That's how we know that the map is a schematic rather than a to-scale representation of downtown streets. If you can't trust it to show that 35E was wider than Elm, Main, or Commerce, then you can't rely on it to claim Elm was as wide as Main.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 07, 2018, 02:31:18 AM
HistoryMatters does the entire set on line-----
 It should all be available on DVD by now but I haven't seen it.
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/contents/hsca/contents_hsca_vols.htm
HM has the whole thing. Mcadams site has a text version that's easier to search:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/hsc.htm

Use both; each is useful in its own way.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 07, 2018, 03:09:52 AM
Why so combative?  How should I know, though?  Ask Walker.

I feel feistier some days than others. What can I say?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 07, 2018, 06:40:44 PM
Didn't have to. They were televised and videotaped. There used to be guys who'd sell you the whole thing on VHS, and I'll bet you can find the bulk of the hearings (and maybe everything) if you look long enough on Youtube. You don't have to do that, though. The hearings were also transcribed and printed as the first five volumes of the HSCA set. You can search those if you wish. I've never found where they showed CE573 (also "walker bullet," etc) or a photo of it.

Do they make any mention of showing any bullet?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 07, 2018, 06:42:38 PM
If you can find a ballistics expert who can look at the data and differ, please fell free...

There's no need to differ.  Inconclusive is inconclusive.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 07, 2018, 06:46:01 PM
I'm saying that he couldn't have seen CE573 on the televised HSCA hearings  ("The bullet used and pictured on the TV by US Senate G. Robert Blakey
Committee on Assassinations") as his letter to the Attorney General claimed. Given that he uses "any unfired bullet in shape or form" as a reference in the same letter, I'd say he saw CE399 and assumed it was the letter fired at him.

That's a fine speculation, but is there any evidence to support it?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 07, 2018, 06:47:29 PM
HistoryMatters does the entire set on line-----
 It should all be available on DVD by now but I haven't seen it.
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/contents/hsca/contents_hsca_vols.htm

Do we know whether or not these are complete transcripts of all the hearings that occurred, and exactly what was televised?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 07, 2018, 06:53:57 PM
Do we know whether or not these are complete transcripts..
Most likely. I audio recorded a lot of the stuff on 1/4" two track reel to reel and still have them.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Ray Mitcham on September 07, 2018, 07:08:21 PM
You haven't "proven" anything.  The map and events speak for themselves. Elm Street should have been used.

It is quite laughable that you think that you have proven otherwise.

Oh, but I did, grasshopper.
Let me bring back CE2113.
(https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/pdf/WH24_CE_2113.pdf)
Notice that Elm, Main, and Commerce (in fact, most of the streets in the old CDB) are shown as being wider that either the North- and South-bound carriageways of I-35E, and the Stemmons carriageways are shown as no wider than their entry/exit ramps. None of that was true. That's how we know that the map is a schematic rather than a to-scale representation of downtown streets. If you can't trust it to show that 35E was wider than Elm, Main, or Commerce, then you can't rely on it to claim Elm was as wide as Main.

Here's a photo of Dallas taken in the 50s. Seems Elm St and Main St are of similar widths, but to my eye, Elm Street looking wider.
(https://s19.postimg.cc/4sbm3gtwv/Main_Street_Dallas.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/4sbm3gtwv/)
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 08, 2018, 01:57:44 AM
I'm saying that he couldn't have seen CE573 on the televised HSCA hearings  ("The bullet used and pictured on the TV by US Senate G. Robert Blakey
Committee on Assassinations") as his letter to the Attorney General claimed. Given that he uses "any unfired bullet in shape or form" as a reference in the same letter, I'd say he saw CE399 and assumed it was the letter fired at him. By t1979, he was a perverted, 70-old geezer who'd been groping random people around White Rock Lake (and had been twice arrested for it), so he likely wasn't particularly straight in the head by then.

So you are calling him a liar. Prove it. He was a retired general so he certainly knew steel-jacketed ammunition from copper-jacketed ammunition.

In case you missed it, there is NO chain of custody for CE 573 so it is worthless as evidence.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 08, 2018, 02:16:12 AM
You haven't "proven" anything.  The map and events speak for themselves. Elm Street should have been used.

It is quite laughable that you think that you have proven otherwise.

Oh, but I did, grasshopper.
Let me bring back CE2113.
(https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/pdf/WH24_CE_2113.pdf)
Notice that Elm, Main, and Commerce (in fact, most of the streets in the old CDB) are shown as being wider that either the North- and South-bound carriageways of I-35E, and the Stemmons carriageways are shown as no wider than their entry/exit ramps. None of that was true. That's how we know that the map is a schematic rather than a to-scale representation of downtown streets. If you can't trust it to show that 35E was wider than Elm, Main, or Commerce, then you can't rely on it to claim Elm was as wide as Main.

<yawn> The fact that they used two unnecessary turns to get onto Elm Street makes your whole claim moot. They used Elm to get onto Stemmons Freeway so they should have simply turned onto Elm Street and NOT Main Street.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Organ on September 08, 2018, 04:29:30 AM
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-NuZyvXVSMm4/UpFDMvvePqI/AAAAAAAAD1M/l5kJ4uL2RKA/s1600/Dealey+Plaza-Circa+1950s.jpg)

In Dealey Plaza, Commerce, Elm and Main were all designed the same width and originally had four lanes which allowed two-way traffic.

I believe the construction of the Stemmons Freeway caused Elm to be reconfigured for three lanes going one-way.

(https://www.jfk.org/wp-content/uploads/JFK-57-10-of-38.jpg)

Commerce was made one-way but kept its four lanes. Main retained two-way traffic.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 08, 2018, 05:55:23 PM
Do they make any mention of showing any bullet?

I know they showed photos of CE399 multiple times, during testimony by Baden, Wecht and Sturdivan.

However

I have been able to find where a photo of CE573 was shown in the HSCA hearings. It was displayed as exhibit F-107 during the firearms panel testimony.
Walker could indeed be referring to that.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 08, 2018, 06:07:21 PM
Here's a photo of Dallas taken in the 50s. Seems Elm St and Main St are of similar widths, but to my eye, Elm Street looking wider.
(https://s19.postimg.cc/4sbm3gtwv/Main_Street_Dallas.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/4sbm3gtwv/)

It kinda does, but that's because there's angled parking on main at the old county courthouse, and parallel parking along Elm (which has two way traffic in this photo). The angled parking on Main seems to be gone by '63, and Elm was converted to a one-way street. By then, Elm was three lanes of through traffic, and Main was four.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 08, 2018, 06:17:09 PM
<yawn> The fact that they used two unnecessary turns to get onto Elm Street makes your whole claim moot. They used Elm to get onto Stemmons Freeway so they should have simply turned onto Elm Street and NOT Main Street.

As someone else has already noted, bringing the motorcade down Elm still would have run it right past the TSBD, and given how slow the motorcade was moving through downtown, the direct Elm route was not going to be much faster, and maybe not any faster than the what happened on the Main-Elm route.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 08, 2018, 09:35:41 PM
Here's a photo of Dallas taken in the 50s. Seems Elm St and Main St are of similar widths, but to my eye, Elm Street looking wider.
(https://s19.postimg.cc/4sbm3gtwv/Main_Street_Dallas.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/4sbm3gtwv/)

On this one taken in '63, Main looks wider than Elm, but Commerce looks even wider. That may just be due to the angle it was taken.

(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-BATVtpoU9q0/WV-pEeXwzVI/AAAAAAABMTM/t3a7J997i0ULRJmkO35IWl4_owro2sZMgCLcBGAs/s800/Dealey-Plaza-Dallas-Texas-Circa-Early-1960s.jpg)

Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 09, 2018, 01:54:15 AM
So you are calling him a liar. Prove it. He was a retired general so he certainly knew steel-jacketed ammunition from copper-jacketed ammunition.

In case you missed it, there is NO chain of custody for CE 573 so it is worthless as evidence.
Not so much a liar as simply messed up in the head; that is to say a deranged old man who's obsessed with Commies and groping people in public parks. And what training do Generals have that makes them experts at determining the construction of spent ammunition?

BTW,  how can you say there is NO chain of custody. Are you sure that one absolutely does not exist? Or have you (or more likely the sources you crib from) simply not put forth the effort?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Ray Mitcham on September 09, 2018, 04:18:22 PM
Not so much a liar as simply messed up in the head; that is to say a deranged old man who's obsessed with Commies and groping people in public parks. And what training do Generals have that makes them experts at determining the construction of spent ammunition?

BTW,  how can you say there is NO chain of custody. Are you sure that one absolutely does not exist? Or have you (or more likely the sources you crib from) simply not put forth the effort?

Rob would have a very hard job trying to prove a negative. Perhaps you would like to try to prove there is.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 09, 2018, 04:56:30 PM
Rob would have a very hard job trying to prove a negative. Perhaps you would like to try to prove there is.
Perhaps Rob is the guy who asserted that negative in the first place, "there is NO chain of custody for CE 573 so it is worthless as evidence."

Perhaps Rob is rather famous around here for ranting and complaining when he thinks other posters don't support assertions (even when they do).

Perhaps Rob should be held to his own standards.

Perhaps you agree.

Perhaps.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 09, 2018, 05:29:12 PM
The problem for you Tanto is I just saw your response. I am not the one who needs to answer anything as you are the one claiming that CE 573 is relevant to the shooting of EAW, but you haven't produced anything to show that it was.

EAW's observation was that CE 573 was NOT the bullet that he saw and HELD on April 10, 1963, and since it has NO chain of custody that is believable. As usual you are focusing on the wrong thing.

'Tanto'

LOL
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 09, 2018, 06:37:41 PM
As someone else has already noted, bringing the motorcade down Elm still would have run it right past the TSBD, and given how slow the motorcade was moving through downtown, the direct Elm route was not going to be much faster, and maybe not any faster than the what happened on the Main-Elm route.

There would have been NO turns. Upon entering DP the motorcade could have picked up speed.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 09, 2018, 06:41:24 PM
Not so much a liar as simply messed up in the head; that is to say a deranged old man who's obsessed with Commies and groping people in public parks. And what training do Generals have that makes them experts at determining the construction of spent ammunition?

BTW,  how can you say there is NO chain of custody. Are you sure that one absolutely does not exist? Or have you (or more likely the sources you crib from) simply not put forth the effort?

None of that shows that he couldn't tell a steel-jacketed bullet from a copper-jacketed bullet.

I did an indepth post in my series on it, but of course it is gone. There was NO chain of custody for it.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 09, 2018, 07:01:00 PM
There would have been NO turns. Upon entering DP the motorcade could have picked up speed.

"Could have."

The limo could have picked up speed after the turn, too, so that's and excuse, not
a reason.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 09, 2018, 07:11:11 PM
Mitch Todd: "And what training do Generals have that makes them experts at determining the construction of spent ammunition?"

None of that shows that he couldn't tell a steel-jacketed bullet from a copper-jacketed bullet.
You haven't shown that he could have, or would have been able to, For that matter, how would he have have been able to tell it was a .30-06?

I seem to recall trying to hold you to an explanation of how one could tell that a bullet  was steel jacketed. You hemmed and hawwed and talked around an answer. I figure an even better question is, how do one tell a bullet is a .30-06 just from the (mangled) bullet alone. Your ensuing gyrations might be entertaining.

I did an indepth post in my series on it, but of course it is gone. There was NO chain of custody for it.
Then it shouldn't be too all that hard to to answer my question, now that you've studied it.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 09, 2018, 07:17:33 PM
Nice try. I DID support my assertion, but the whining and crying by the LNers had it removed. There is NO chain of custody for CE 573. Since you support the official claim, why not support it?
So, when pressed, you're simply going to claim that Duncan ate your homework?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 09, 2018, 08:57:57 PM
So, when pressed, you're simply going to claim that Duncan ate your homework?

Wait a minute... Caprio told us he saved all his posts, in fact bragged about at the top of every OP... , along with repeating Duncan's suggestion that everyone follow his lead.

 ???
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 10, 2018, 01:07:37 AM
"Could have."

The limo could have picked up speed after the turn, too, so that's and excuse, not
a reason.

The turns were an excuse for why the motorcade didn't speed up. Without the turns there would have been no excuse.

Why don't you support the WC's claim and show why the two turns were necessary?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 10, 2018, 01:12:25 AM
You haven't shown that he could have, or would have been able to, For that matter, how would he have have been able to tell it was a .30-06?

I seem to recall trying to hold you to an explanation of how one could tell that a bullet  was steel jacketed. You hemmed and hawwed and talked around an answer. I figure an even better question is, how do one tell a bullet is a .30-06 just from the (mangled) bullet alone. Your ensuing gyrations might be entertaining.
Then it shouldn't be too all that hard to to answer my question, now that you've studied it.

EAW said that CE 573 was NOT the bullet that he saw and held on the evening of April 10, 1963. I am not aware of him saying that it was a 30.06 bullet that he saw and held. I think that *you* invented that.

There is NO chain of custody for CE 573 and that is why you won't support the official claim.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 10, 2018, 01:13:55 AM
So, when pressed, you're simply going to claim that Duncan ate your homework?

That is what happened. Why don't you support the WC's claim? What are you afraid of?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 10, 2018, 01:17:11 AM
Wait a minute... Caprio told us he saved all his posts, in fact bragged about at the top of every OP... , along with repeating Duncan's suggestion that everyone follow his lead.

 ???

I can repost it and it will show that there is no chain of custody. You guys support the WC's claim and say that it is correct. So why not support it? What are you afraid of?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 10, 2018, 04:14:42 AM
I can repost it and it will show that there is no chain of custody. You guys support the WC's claim and say that it is correct. So why not support it? What are you afraid of?

You lot put way too much emphasis on evidence chain of custody

To wit:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/vince-bugliosi-on-ce399.html

'I believe that 95 percent of the physical evidence in this case would be admissible. I can tell you from personal experience that excluding evidence at a trial because the chain of custody is weak is rare, certainly the exception rather than the rule. The typical situation where the chain is not particularly strong is for the trial judge to nevertheless admit the evidence, ruling that the weakness of the chain goes only to "the weight of the evidence [i.e., how much weight or credence the jury will give it], not its admissibility"." --- Vincent Bugliosi
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 10, 2018, 05:03:34 AM
That is what happened. Why don't you support the WC's claim? What are you afraid of?
You're the guy who made the assertion that there is NO chain of possession. You're also the guy who's notoriously enamored of pitching a such a fuss if you think that someone else isn't backing up their assertions. I'm asking you to live up to your own rules.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 10, 2018, 01:45:49 PM
You lot put way too much emphasis on evidence chain of custody

To wit:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/vince-bugliosi-on-ce399.html

'I believe that 95 percent of the physical evidence in this case would be admissible. I can tell you from personal experience that excluding evidence at a trial because the chain of custody is weak is rare, certainly the exception rather than the rule. The typical situation where the chain is not particularly strong is for the trial judge to nevertheless admit the evidence, ruling that the weakness of the chain goes only to "the weight of the evidence [i.e., how much weight or credence the jury will give it], not its admissibility"." --- Vincent Bugliosi

So you offer opinion instead of evidence. No surprise there. It is clear that you cannot support the WC's claim.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 10, 2018, 01:49:34 PM
You're the guy who made the assertion that there is NO chain of possession. You're also the guy who's notoriously enamored of pitching a such a fuss if you think that someone else isn't backing up their assertions. I'm asking you to live up to your own rules.

The WC made the claim that there was a chain of custody in 1964! You support this claim. It is clear that you CANNOT support it with evidence though. No surprise there since neither could the WC.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 10, 2018, 06:47:01 PM
I know they showed photos of CE399 multiple times, during testimony by Baden, Wecht and Sturdivan.

However

I have been able to find where a photo of CE573 was shown in the HSCA hearings. It was displayed as exhibit F-107 during the firearms panel testimony.
Walker could indeed be referring to that.

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 10, 2018, 06:59:07 PM
You lot put way too much emphasis on evidence chain of custody

To wit:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/vince-bugliosi-on-ce399.html

'I believe that 95 percent of the physical evidence in this case would be admissible. I can tell you from personal experience that excluding evidence at a trial because the chain of custody is weak is rare, certainly the exception rather than the rule. The typical situation where the chain is not particularly strong is for the trial judge to nevertheless admit the evidence, ruling that the weakness of the chain goes only to "the weight of the evidence [i.e., how much weight or credence the jury will give it], not its admissibility"." --- Vincent Bugliosi

I don't believe Rob is making any argument about its admissibility.  Since there will never be a trial, that's irrelevant.  What Rob is arguing is that without a proper documented chain of custody, there's no way to have any confidence that CE 573 was pulled from Walker's wall or had anything to do with the events of April 10.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 10, 2018, 07:44:48 PM
You lot put way too much emphasis on evidence chain of custody

To wit:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/vince-bugliosi-on-ce399.html

'I believe that 95 percent of the physical evidence in this case would be admissible. I can tell you from personal experience that excluding evidence at a trial because the chain of custody is weak is rare, certainly the exception rather than the rule. The typical situation where the chain is not particularly strong is for the trial judge to nevertheless admit the evidence, ruling that the weakness of the chain goes only to "the weight of the evidence [i.e., how much weight or credence the jury will give it], not its admissibility"." --- Vincent Bugliosi
He could have just as well stated that 110% of the Phys Evid would have been admissible.
I mean the one sided argument prevails ad nauseum.
So why even have a chain of custody anywhere then? [if too much emphasis is placed on it]
Assuming CE 399 was indeed fired from C2766 [the pronouncement 'Oswald's rifle' is a core gross accusation that was not proven in court] it could not have been proven with any degree of accuracy when it was fired from that rifle. Chain of custody of the Walker bullet remains non-existent.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 10, 2018, 09:37:21 PM
I don't believe Rob is making any argument about its admissibility.  Since there will never be a trial, that's irrelevant.  What Rob is arguing is that without a proper documented chain of custody, there's no way to have any confidence that CE 573 was pulled from Walker's wall or had anything to do with the events of April 10.

Exactly John, but he can't support the WC's claim so he makes it about something else.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 11, 2018, 01:33:48 AM
In her HSCA appearance, Marina Porter testified that Lee would play like he was shooting his rifle.
I guess this was deemed as practice enough.
This is a new story from her Warren testimony. She told investigators at first that she knew nothing about a rifle.
'He would put his rifle under his raincoat' [never produced in evidence] and 'ride the bus like that to where ever he practiced shooting'. [Give me a break]
She saw him 'cleaning his rifle once a week' [cleaning oil and rods etc. were never found or produced in evidence]
Marina also testified that Lee [upon coming home that night] told her 'he tried to shoot Walker'... how then could it have been known at that time that he had failed the attempt?
She did not tell the police about the Walker incident 'out of loyalty' and 'because she didn't speak English'.
If you haven't ever researched it...start reading this fairy tale at page 233 [of the site pages] 229 of the Vol page here----
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol2/html/HSCA_Vol2_0117a.htm
 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 11, 2018, 04:05:27 AM
The WC made the claim that there was a chain of custody in 1964! You support this claim. It is clear that you CANNOT support it with evidence though. No surprise there since neither could the WC.
You got it, the WC did. They've already said their peace, and you can take it up against them if you so desire.  But this isn't about a specific claim the WC made, it's about a specific claim that you made. You made that claim, and claimed you proved it, but refuse to back up your assertions.  I wouldn't have all that big of a deal with it, except you have such a habit of whining about everyone else not supporting their claims. Sauce for the goose, Rob
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 11, 2018, 04:12:19 AM
I don't believe Rob is making any argument about its admissibility.  Since there will never be a trial, that's irrelevant.  What Rob is arguing is that without a proper documented chain of custody, there's no way to have any confidence that CE 573 was pulled from Walker's wall or had anything to do with the events of April 10.
I figure if that were really true, Rob would have already said that when he replied to Chapman.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 11, 2018, 04:45:43 AM
The turns were an excuse for why the motorcade didn't speed up. Without the turns there would have been no excuse.

Why don't you support the WC's claim and show why the two turns were necessary?
Who said that "he turns were an excuse for why the motorcade didn't speed up?" I mean, other than you?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 11, 2018, 03:30:40 PM
You got it, the WC did. They've already said their peace, and you can take it up against them if you so desire.  But this isn't about a specific claim the WC made, it's about a specific claim that you made. You made that claim, and claimed you proved it, but refuse to back up your assertions.  I wouldn't have all that big of a deal with it, except you have such a habit of whining about everyone else not supporting their claims. Sauce for the goose, Rob

What a lame response. It has everything to do with the WC's claim that YOU support. Why can't you show that CE 573 is relevant as claimed?

This is a classic example of shifting the burden that LNers employ constantly to cover for the fact that they have NO supporting evidence for the WC's claims they support wholeheartedly.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 11, 2018, 03:33:13 PM
I figure if that were really true, Rob would have already said that when he replied to Chapman.

So you can show that CE 573 is relevant in the EAW shooting?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 11, 2018, 03:35:13 PM
Who said that "he turns were an excuse for why the motorcade didn't speed up?" I mean, other than you?

Where have you been? That has been the excuse for LNers for a long time. You are still having trouble showing that those two turns were necessary, aren't you?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 12, 2018, 12:06:55 AM
Where have you been? That has been the excuse for LNers for a long time. You are still having trouble showing that those two turns were necessary, aren't you?

Rob, Can't you see that Lee was involved in the Walker hoax?     How much evidence do you need to convince you that the Walker incident was nothing but a hoax....And Lee Oswald was involved...
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 12, 2018, 12:09:04 AM
Rob, Can't you see that Lee was involved in the Walker hoax?     How much evidence do you need to convince you that the Walker incident was nothing but a hoax....And Lee Oswald was involved...

How about any whatsoever?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 12, 2018, 12:59:27 AM
Where have you been? That has been the excuse for LNers for a long time. You are still having trouble showing that those two turns were necessary, aren't you?
Where have we been? Well, we've been here all along! Waiting, (with baited breath, even!) for you to reveal how "the turns were an excuse for why the motorcade didn't speed up?"  How fast would have the limousine been going had it continued on Elm? Or do you really not know?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 12, 2018, 01:03:23 AM
So you can show that CE 573 is relevant in the EAW shooting?
You're the guy who's been asserting that there's "NO chain of custody for it." That's a very specific claim. And the burden of proof for it is your burden.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 12, 2018, 01:04:22 AM
What a lame response. It has everything to do with the WC's claim that YOU support. Why can't you show that CE 573 is relevant as claimed?

This is a classic example of shifting the burden that LNers employ constantly to cover for the fact that they have NO supporting evidence for the WC's claims they support wholeheartedly.
Did I ever say that CE 573 "was relevant"?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 12, 2018, 01:14:08 AM
What a lame response. It has everything to do with the WC's claim that YOU support. Why can't you show that CE 573 is relevant as claimed?

This is a classic example of shifting the burden that LNers employ constantly to cover for the fact that they have NO supporting evidence for the WC's claims they support wholeheartedly.
You are the guy who claimed that there is "NO [you like to capitalize that for some reason] chain of possession for CE573." Not just, "the chain of possession is weak" or "the chain of possession is muddled" or "the chain of possession has gaps" or anything but, "there is NO chain of possession." Again, that's a very specific, direct, and unambiguous assertion. It's your assertion, so it's up to you to present a supporting case for it. It's pretty funny that you constantly try to shift the burden onto others, and when they point out that you're responsible for your assertions, you complain that the are trying to shift the burden on you. Well, that's where the burden should lie in this case. You. 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 12, 2018, 02:13:05 AM
So you offer opinion instead of evidence. No surprise there. It is clear that you cannot support the WC's claim.

So you dodge the relatively rare usage of 'chain of evidence' at trial. No surprise there. The opinion I quoted pretty much renders moot the never-ending story you lot cling to regarding chain of evidence. 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 12, 2018, 02:27:40 AM
Rob, Can't you see that Lee was involved in the Walker hoax?     How much evidence do you need to convince you that the Walker incident was nothing but a hoax....And Lee Oswald was involved...

Walt, there is NO evidence showing that LHO was involved in the EAW shooting. It doesn't matter if it was a hoax or not. The evidence is the evidence.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 12, 2018, 02:31:49 AM
Where have we been? Well, we've been here all along! Waiting, (with baited breath, even!) for you to reveal how "the turns were an excuse for why the motorcade didn't speed up?"  How fast would have the limousine been going had it continued on Elm? Or do you really not know?

Shifting the burden again. There were TWO viable options that did NOT require those two drastic turns. Your beloved WC claimed in 1964 that the turns were needed, but like almost all their claims they failed to support it.

It is apparent that you cannot support their claim either.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 12, 2018, 02:35:08 AM
I don't believe Rob is making any argument about its admissibility.  Since there will never be a trial, that's irrelevant.  What Rob is arguing is that without a proper documented chain of custody, there's no way to have any confidence that CE 573 was pulled from Walker's wall or had anything to do with the events of April 10.

Since there will never be a trial, by default forums such as this become courts of public opinion. At least that's what you and buddies act like... what with your constant demanding instant proof of murder on single things that we don't claim to be proof of murder on their own.

I contend that Bugliosi's statement re chain of evidence is valid in the court of public opinion.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 12, 2018, 02:37:52 AM
You're the guy who's been asserting that there's "NO chain of custody for it." That's a very specific claim. And the burden of proof for it is your burden.

You are now the new resident game player. Chain of custody is part of showing that CE 573 was used in the EAW shooting. The WC claimed that it was in 1964, but FAILED to support it with evidence.

It is clear that you are incapable of supporting any of their claims. So why do you support them again?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 12, 2018, 02:40:23 AM
Did I ever say that CE 573 "was relevant"?

Well, we are making progress then. You agree that LHO did not shoot at EAW. 👍
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 12, 2018, 02:43:54 AM
You are the guy who claimed that there is "NO [you like to capitalize that for some reason] chain of possession for CE573." Not just, "the chain of possession is weak" or "the chain of possession is muddled" or "the chain of possession has gaps" or anything but, "there is NO chain of possession." Again, that's a very specific, direct, and unambiguous assertion. It's your assertion, so it's up to you to present a supporting case for it. It's pretty funny that you constantly try to shift the burden onto others, and when they point out that you're responsible for your assertions, you complain that the are trying to shift the burden on you. Well, that's where the burden should lie in this case. You.

Wrong as usual. The WC made a claim in 1964, but the evidence that they provided does NOT support it. Me pointing this out is NOT a new claim by me. Stop playing games.

Why do you support a theory with NO supporting evidence?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 12, 2018, 02:46:03 AM
So you dodge the relatively rare usage of 'chain of evidence' at trial. No surprise there. The opinion I quoted pretty much renders moot the never-ending story you lot cling to regarding chain of evidence.

Opinion is not evidence. Where's your evidence for showing the chain of custody for CE 573?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 12, 2018, 02:11:07 PM
Well, we are making progress then. You agree that LHO did not shoot at EAW. 👍

" LHO did not shoot at EAW."

I believe that's true....  I doubt that walker was in the room at the time.....  But Lee did fire the bullet through the window.

Both Walker and Lee wanted the publicity of the hoax....  but for different reasons.

Walker wanted the incident blamed on "communists" who the Kennedy's were allowing to "run free" ( as Walker said) and Lee wanted the publicity of attempting to shoot one of Castro's most avowed foes.

Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 12, 2018, 05:30:15 PM
Since there will never be a trial, by default forums such as this become courts of public opinion. At least that's what you and buddies act like... what with your constant demanding instant proof of murder on single things that we don't claim to be proof of murder on their own.

Be honest, Bill.  You have never presented anything that would be proof of murder even in the collective.  So this is just an equivocation.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 12, 2018, 05:31:54 PM
" LHO did not shoot at EAW."

I believe that's true....  I doubt that walker was in the room at the time.....  But Lee did fire the bullet through the window.


All it takes to change my mind is evidence.  Not another fanciful Cakebread story.  Evidence.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 12, 2018, 08:09:06 PM
All it takes to change my mind is evidence.  Not another fanciful Cakebread story.  Evidence.

There's a lot of evidence to support that idea....You're just lacking the ability to understand that evidence.

(A) The Back Yard photo  (singuar , CE 133A) shows a amateur's  attempt at deceiving the viewer into believing the man in the photo is a Communist revolutionary , but the photo is a ridiculous charade......Like a carnival photo of the subject sticking his head through a hole in a painting that makes the subject appear to be a convict in prison stripes.

(B) That photo was in a blue notebook, (false dossier,) that Lee had prepared for the police to find in his apartment after they found the easily traceable rifle that he left behind,... the trail of which lead to his PO box.

(C ) The note of instructions that he had left behind for "Marina" ( actually for the police) ....

(D) The photo of Walker's house and the area surrounding his house and maps of the area that were in the false dossier.

(E) Marina's story that Lee had told her that he had taken a shot at Walker......  Marina could only repeat what Lee had told her about trying to shoot Walker...She had no way of knowing that is was all a hoax.

(F) George Demorenschildt Blurting out ( for Marina's ears) " Lee. how could you have missed?"

(G) George De Morhenschildt telling a woman whom he knew was an FBI informant that "Lee Oswald was the scoundrel who had tried to shoot General Walker"

   A,B,C,D,E,F,G.......Open your eyes and see.......
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 12, 2018, 08:19:56 PM
All it takes to change my mind is evidence.  Not another fanciful Cakebread story.  Evidence.

I should change your mind?....   Impossible.....
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 12, 2018, 08:37:47 PM
There's a lot of evidence to support that idea....You're just lacking the ability to understand that evidence.

(A) The Back Yard photo  (singuar , CE 133A) shows a amateur's  attempt at deceiving the viewer into believing the man in the photo is a Communist revolutionary , but the photo is a ridiculous charade......Like a carnival photo of the subject sticking his head through a hole in a painting that makes the subject appear to be a convict in prison stripes.

That's not evidence, it's just a claim.

Quote
(B) That photo was in a blue notebook, (false dossier,) that Lee had prepared for the police to find in his apartment after they found the easily traceable rifle that he left behind,... the trail of which lead to his PO box.

That's not evidence, it's just a claim.

Quote
(C ) The note of instructions that he had left behind for "Marina" ( actually for the police) ....

The unsigned and undated note in Russian that doesn't mention Walker and that Oswald may or may not have written tells you nothing about your alleged "hoax".

Quote
(D) The photo of Walker's house and the area surrounding his house and maps of the area that were in the false dossier.

"False dossier" is a claim, not evidence.

Quote
(E) Marina's story that Lee had told her that he had taken a shot at Walker......  Marina could only repeat what Lee had told her about trying to shoot Walker...She had no way of knowing that is was all a hoax.

So how is this evidence of a hoax?

Quote
(F) George Demorenschildt Blurting out ( for Marina's ears) " Lee. how could you have missed?"

Again, how is this evidence of a hoax?

Quote
(G) George De Morhenschildt telling a woman whom he knew was an FBI informant that "Lee Oswald was the scoundrel who had tried to shoot General Walker"

Again, how is this evidence of a hoax?

Quote
   A,B,C,D,E,F,G.......Open your eyes and see.......

So we have another fanciful Cakebread story and no evidence for it.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 12, 2018, 11:21:40 PM
" LHO did not shoot at EAW."

I believe that's true....  I doubt that walker was in the room at the time.....  But Lee did fire the bullet through the window.

Both Walker and Lee wanted the publicity of the hoax....  but for different reasons.

Walker wanted the incident blamed on "communists" who the Kennedy's were allowing to "run free" ( as Walker said) and Lee wanted the publicity of attempting to shoot one of Castro's most avowed foes.

IF LHO fired the shot at EAW then he didn't use CE 139 or CE 573. What would he have used then? And who was he with as the only witness saw multiple men.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 12, 2018, 11:29:28 PM
That's not evidence, it's just a claim.

That's not evidence, it's just a claim.

The unsigned and undated note in Russian that doesn't mention Walker and that Oswald may or may not have written tells you nothing about your alleged "hoax".

"False dossier" is a claim, not evidence.

So how is this evidence of a hoax?

Again, how is this evidence of a hoax?

Again, how is this evidence of a hoax?

So we have another fanciful Cakebread story and no evidence for it.

This is why I have said that he is really a LNer. He thinks the same way. If he really is a CTer then he is even more dangerous as he totally ignores the evidence all the while claiming that he believes in a conspiracy.

I have been on boards with Walt for 11 years and I have NEVER seen him cite one piece of evidence. Not one.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 13, 2018, 12:24:01 AM
IF LHO fired the shot at EAW then he didn't use CE 139 or CE 573. What would he have used then? And who was he with as the only witness saw multiple men.

IF LHO fired the shot at EAW then he didn't use CE 139 or CE 573.

Do you have a reading comprehension problem?......  I said that Lee did NOT fire AT AT  Walker....He merely fired a bullet through the window....and I seriously doubt that Walker was in that room at the time.   

And he DID use the Carcano ( C2766) ...and he left it near the scene in hope that the police would find it and trace it to him.    Then the newspapers would have reported that Lee Harvey Oswald had tried to kill one of Castro's most vocal foes.....
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Ross Lidell on September 13, 2018, 12:38:43 AM
IF LHO fired the shot at EAW then he didn't use CE 139 or CE 573.

Do you have a reading comprehension problem?......  I said that Lee did NOT fire AT AT  Walker....He merely fired a bullet through the window....and I seriously doubt that Walker was in that room at the time.   

And he DID use the Carcano ( C2766) ...and he left it near the scene in hope that the police would find it and trace it to him.    Then the newspapers would have reported that Lee Harvey Oswald had tried to kill one of Castro's most vocal foes.....

Major General Edwin Walker claimed that he was in the room at the time the shot was fired through the window of his study. Your assertion--"...and I seriously doubt that Walker was in that room at the time."--is ridiculous.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 13, 2018, 12:45:25 AM
Major General Edwin Walker claimed that he was in the room at the time the shot was fired through the window of his study. Your assertion--"...and I seriously doubt that Walker was in that room at the time."--is ridiculous.

FYI...Walker was NOT an honorable man...  Among other character flaws....He was a notorious liar.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Ross Lidell on September 13, 2018, 01:06:45 AM
FYI...Walker was NOT an honorable man...  Among other character flaws....He was a notorious liar.

Your claim that Major General Edwin Walker "was a notorious liar" is your unsubstantiated opinion. Even if Walker was "a liar": that does not preclude him telling the truth on some occasions.

The "so and so's word cannot be trusted " maneuver is an escape mechanism when a debater has been intellectually cornered.... like now.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mike Orr on September 13, 2018, 02:13:32 AM
I don't think LHO told his wife anything . Would you tell your wife ( who he was not living with ) that you were going to shoot at someone and tell her who he was going to shoot at ? Walker said the bullet he was shown later was not the bullet that was found the day of the "shot that missed" ! Ruth Paine seems to be an enabler in this whole scenario of the JFK assassination . I don't see how anyone could trust the words that came out of her mouth.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 13, 2018, 02:26:34 AM
Shifting the burden again. There were TWO viable options that did NOT require those two drastic turns. Your beloved WC claimed in 1964 that the turns were needed, but like almost all their claims they failed to support it.

It is apparent that you cannot support their claim either.
The crux of your notion of a superior route down Elm is that the limousine would have traveled faster through Dealey Plaza. Therefore, you have to show that the only limit to the speed of the limo was the two turns. You have yet to do so. Furthermore, you assume that the primary, if not sole, criteria for route selection was to facilitate the speed of the limo. You have yet to substantiate that as well.

I'll note in passing that Alvarez plotted the speed of the limousine in "A Physicist Examines the Zapruder Film" and found that it runs at a constant speed of about 12 mph between frame 160 and the beginning of the deceleration that begins just before the last shot. If the last turn unduly slowed the limousine, then there'd be marked acceleration as Greer strove to get the car up to speed.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 13, 2018, 02:34:46 AM
Mitch Todd: You're the guy who's been asserting that there's "NO chain of custody for it." That's a very specific claim. And the burden of proof for it is your burden.

You are now the new resident game player. Chain of custody is part of showing that CE 573 was used in the EAW shooting. The WC claimed that it was in 1964, but FAILED to support it with evidence.

It is clear that you are incapable of supporting any of their claims. So why do you support them again?
Read again what I said. You've made a very specific claim, and saying that there is no chain of custody is different that saying that there is an insufficient one. It is up to you to show that there is no chain of custody. Otherwise, you're just some jerk spewing hot air. 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 13, 2018, 02:36:41 AM
Well, we are making progress then. You agree that LHO did not shoot at EAW. 👍
I never said that, either.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 13, 2018, 05:02:21 AM
IF LHO fired the shot at EAW then he didn't use CE 139 or CE 573.

Do you have a reading comprehension problem?......  I said that Lee did NOT fire AT AT  Walker....He merely fired a bullet through the window....and I seriously doubt that Walker was in that room at the time.   

And he DID use the Carcano ( C2766) ...and he left it near the scene in hope that the police would find it and trace it to him.    Then the newspapers would have reported that Lee Harvey Oswald had tried to kill one of Castro's most vocal foes.....

Semantics. If he fired a shot he didn't use CE 139 or CE 573, so what did he use? Who was he with? Answer the questions.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 13, 2018, 05:07:00 AM
The crux of your notion of a superior route down Elm is that the limousine would have traveled faster through Dealey Plaza. Therefore, you have to show that the only limit to the speed of the limo was the two turns. You have yet to do so. Furthermore, you assume that the primary, if not sole, criteria for route selection was to facilitate the speed of the limo. You have yet to substantiate that as well.

I'll note in passing that Alvarez plotted the speed of the limousine in "A Physicist Examines the Zapruder Film" and found that it runs at a constant speed of about 12 mph between frame 160 and the beginning of the deceleration that begins just before the last shot. If the last turn unduly slowed the limousine, then there'd be marked acceleration as Greer strove to get the car up to speed.

Your still avoiding the two turns. Explain why they were needed.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 13, 2018, 05:10:49 AM
Read again what I said. You've made a very specific claim, and saying that there is no chain of custody is different that saying that there is an insufficient one. It is up to you to show that there is no chain of custody. Otherwise, you're just some jerk spewing hot air.

Is English your second language? It must be as I have explained this already. The WC made a claim in 1964, but FAILED to support it. I am simply POINTING this out. I am NOT making a claim.

I can see why you are trying to ignore this fact. Why do you support a theory that has no supporting evidence?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 13, 2018, 05:12:15 AM
I never said that, either.

Since you agreed that CE 573 was irrelevant then what was fired at EAW?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 13, 2018, 07:00:50 AM
Mitch Todd: "The crux of your notion of a superior route down Elm is that the limousine would have traveled faster through Dealey Plaza. Therefore, you have to show that the only limit to the speed of the limo was the two turns. You have yet to do so. Furthermore, you assume that the primary, if not sole, criteria for route selection was to facilitate the speed of the limo. You have yet to substantiate that as well.

"I'll note in passing that Alvarez plotted the speed of the limousine in "A Physicist Examines the Zapruder Film" and found that it runs at a constant speed of about 12 mph between frame 160 and the beginning of the deceleration that begins just before the last shot. If the last turn unduly slowed the limousine, then there'd be marked acceleration as Greer strove to get the car up to speed.
"

Your still avoiding the two turns. Explain why they were needed.
The route that was chosen is simply a fact of history. The various rationales, policies, arguments, the whos, hows, and whys were aired out years ago in the various official investigations. You don't need me to explain them, if you've done your homework.  That being said, if you want to argue about it, you need to produce a good supporting arguments for your conclusions. So far, you've never gotten further than saying that you think that a straight-Elm route would allow the limousine go faster than the Main-Houston-Elm route. But you've never shown that any of the organizers, up to and including the President himself, had the proverbial need for speed, or that they would have taken the Elm route faster than the Main-Houston-Elm one. It has already noted that, were high security that important, they would have skipped downtown altogether and done the Mockingbird-Harry Hines run. You've been shown via news film that motorcades in other cities ran slowly. After all, in politics, visibility is an incalculable asset, and it's hard to be visible if you're zooming by at 60mph. You've been pointed to Greer's testimony that the limo slowed down to 15mph once it got to the crowds downtown. I've even shown you via Alvarez that the limo ran at a steady 12mph from Z160 until Greer let off the gas. Given that evidence, there's little room to argue that the Elm-direct route would have resulted in a faster limousine.

Which is why you ignore all that, try to turn the argument around, and have everyone else rehash what was committed to the page decades ago. You're MO is well known, and you really aren't that clever about it, at that.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 13, 2018, 07:01:52 AM
Since you agreed that CE 573 was irrelevant then what was fired at EAW?
I didn't say that, either, either.  You need to stop reading things into what I said, and stop to think once in a while.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 13, 2018, 01:53:42 PM
I don't think LHO told his wife anything . Would you tell your wife ( who he was not living with ) that you were going to shoot at someone and tell her who he was going to shoot at ? Walker said the bullet he was shown later was not the bullet that was found the day of the "shot that missed" ! Ruth Paine seems to be an enabler in this whole scenario of the JFK assassination . I don't see how anyone could trust the words that came out of her mouth.

"Would you tell your wife ( who he was not living with ) that you were going to shoot at someone and tell her who he was going to shoot at ?"

You should learn the basics BEFORE you open your mouth and embarrass yourself...

Lee And Marina were living together at 214 Neeley Street at the time of the Walker hoax...And He didn't tell her he was going to shoot at Walker....He told he after he fired a bullet through Walker's window that he had tried to shoot Walker....He told her that because that's what he wanted her to believe , and she could tell the police when they came looking for him after they had traced the rifle to him.    He had planned for the police to find all of the "evidence" in his false dossier and the newspapers would publish the tale about a Castro supporter attempting to shoot General Walker.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 13, 2018, 03:07:01 PM
The route that was chosen is simply a fact of history. The various rationales, policies, arguments, the whos, hows, and whys were aired out years ago in the various official investigations. You don't need me to explain them, if you've done your homework.  That being said, if you want to argue about it, you need to produce a good supporting arguments for your conclusions. So far, you've never gotten further than saying that you think that a straight-Elm route would allow the limousine go faster than the Main-Houston-Elm route. But you've never shown that any of the organizers, up to and including the President himself, had the proverbial need for speed, or that they would have taken the Elm route faster than the Main-Houston-Elm one. It has already noted that, were high security that important, they would have skipped downtown altogether and done the Mockingbird-Harry Hines run. You've been shown via news film that motorcades in other cities ran slowly. After all, in politics, visibility is an incalculable asset, and it's hard to be visible if you're zooming by at 60mph. You've been pointed to Greer's testimony that the limo slowed down to 15mph once it got to the crowds downtown. I've even shown you via Alvarez that the limo ran at a steady 12mph from Z160 until Greer let off the gas. Given that evidence, there's little room to argue that the Elm-direct route would have resulted in a faster limousine.

Which is why you ignore all that, try to turn the argument around, and have everyone else rehash what was committed to the page decades ago. You're MO is well known, and you really aren't that clever about it, at that.

Like his twin he uses a ton of verbiage, but doesn't explain why the two turns were needed when there were two other viable options. No surprise there.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 13, 2018, 03:09:05 PM
I didn't say that, either, either.  You need to stop reading things into what I said, and stop to think once in a while.

Then explain why CE 573 isn't relevant.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 13, 2018, 06:08:54 PM
I don't think LHO told his wife anything . Would you tell your wife ( who he was not living with ) that you were going to shoot at someone and tell her who he was going to shoot at ?

Well, the story is that he told her afterwards.  And they were living together at the time.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 13, 2018, 06:16:34 PM
Lee And Marina were living together at 214 Neeley Street at the time of the Walker hoax...And He didn't tell her he was going to shoot at Walker....He told he after he fired a bullet through Walker's window that he had tried to shoot Walker....He told her that because that's what he wanted her to believe , and tell the police when they came looking for him after they had traced the rifle to him.    He had planned for the police to find all of the "evidence" in his false dossier and the newspapers would publish the tale about a Castro supporter attempting to shoot General Walker.

If that was his plan, then why didn't they?

And in your fantasy story, what were Lee's plans after being imprisoned for attempted murder?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 13, 2018, 07:01:26 PM
If that was his plan, then why didn't they?

And in your fantasy story, what were Lee's plans after being imprisoned for attempted murder?


He told her that because that's what he wanted her to believe , and tell the police when they came looking for him after they had traced the rifle to him.    He had planned for the police to find all of the "evidence" in his false dossier and the newspapers would publish the tale about a Castro supporter attempting to shoot General Walker.


If that was his plan, then why didn't they?

Two reasons....The police smelled something fishy ( Walker had a reputation for being a loon) so they didn't go looking for the gun.....

Marina fell asleep and didn't find the alarming note until just before Lee returned so she didn't call Ruth Paine as Lee and George had anticipated she would.    Consequently the whole plot unraveled....though George attempted to rejuninate the plot when he told an FBI informant that Lee was the scoundrel who had tried to shoot Walker....He then left Dallas so as to be out of the country if attempted murder charges were filed.....

And in your fantasy story, what were Lee's plans after being imprisoned for attempted murder?

The plan was that he would NOT be apprehended and arrested.....   He and George had planned for him to flee to Cuba through Mexico  (recall that he had tried to set up a visit to Cuba in September, when he visited the Mexico City Cuban Embassy) But he knew that there was a possibility that he might be apprehended,  as he told Marina in the "alarming note" that he left for her to find.....

But he reasoned that his "employer" would come to his legal aid and bail him out of the clutches of the police and he'd be whisked out of the country and granted asylum in Cuba.

PS... Yes, I know the September visit to Mexico was five months after the Walker hoax but I'm pointing out the same basic plot was being  used in the hoax"attempt" to shoot JFK, that Lee was involved in at Walker's house in April..
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 15, 2018, 07:21:46 PM
If that was his plan, then why didn't they?

And in your fantasy story, what were Lee's plans after being imprisoned for attempted murder?

I believe that one of the detectives traced the bullet from the window sash to the point it hit the wall and then tracked the path of the bullet back to the fence and then declared... " Mr Walker, he could not have missed you", ( if you were sitting in that chair as you've told us)    ( blue italics are mine )
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 16, 2018, 07:24:12 PM
Then explain why CE 573 isn't relevant.
Again, I didn't say that. You're trying to force your own baggage on what I said without actually thinking about what I wrote.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 16, 2018, 08:09:27 PM
Mitch Todd: The route that was chosen is simply a fact of history. The various rationales, policies, arguments, the whos, hows, and whys were aired out years ago in the various official investigations. You don't need me to explain them, if you've done your homework.  That being said, if you want to argue about it, you need to produce a good supporting arguments for your conclusions. So far, you've never gotten further than saying that you think that a straight-Elm route would allow the limousine go faster than the Main-Houston-Elm route. But you've never shown that any of the organizers, up to and including the President himself, had the proverbial need for speed, or that they would have taken the Elm route faster than the Main-Houston-Elm one. It has already noted that, were high security that important, they would have skipped downtown altogether and done the Mockingbird-Harry Hines run. You've been shown via news film that motorcades in other cities ran slowly. After all, in politics, visibility is an incalculable asset, and it's hard to be visible if you're zooming by at 60mph. You've been pointed to Greer's testimony that the limo slowed down to 15mph once it got to the crowds downtown. I've even shown you via Alvarez that the limo ran at a steady 12mph from Z160 until Greer let off the gas. Given that evidence, there's little room to argue that the Elm-direct route would have resulted in a faster limousine.

Which is why you ignore all that, try to turn the argument around, and have everyone else rehash what was committed to the page decades ago. You're MO is well known, and you really aren't that clever about it, at that.


Like his twin he uses a ton of verbiage, but doesn't explain why the two turns were needed when there were two other viable options. No surprise there.
You have yet to make a case that the straight-down-Elm really was a better path. Being "viable" doesn't cut it; you have to show that it would be clearly superior. Clearly superior, that is, on the basis of 1963 political considerations rather than what you'd like to think. 

I've already noted  that "there's little room to argue that the Elm-direct route would have resulted in a faster limousine," and I've provided the evidence for this. You can't deal with any of it, so you ignore it.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mike Orr on September 16, 2018, 08:19:46 PM
Walt , I have not been scolded like that since the 3rd grade . Thanks for bringing those facts up to me . I should know better .
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 16, 2018, 08:26:22 PM
Again, I didn't say that. You're trying to force your own baggage on what I said without actually thinking about what I wrote.

You asked me if you had ever said that CE 573 was relevant. I can't remember and I have been trying to get you to say what you mean to no avail.

Spit it out. Is CE 573 relevant to you or not?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 16, 2018, 08:33:00 PM
You have yet to make a case that the straight-down-Elm really was a better path. Being "viable" doesn't cut it; you have to show that it would be clearly superior. Clearly superior, that is, on the basis of 1963 political considerations rather than what you'd like to think. 

I've already noted  that "there's little room to argue that the Elm-direct route would have resulted in a faster limousine," and I've provided the evidence for this. You can't deal with any of it, so you ignore it.

Why wouldn't it be a better path? It connected directly to the Stemmons Freeway.

You are the new game player on here as Brown has taken a hiatus. The WC claimed in 1964.that Main Street was better and that the two turns were needed, but they FAILED to support these claims.

Now, in 2018, you are trying to get me to disprove their claims when they NEVER supported them let alone proved them. It won't work. Elm Street was as wide as Main Street and connected directly to Stemmons Freeway, thus, it was the better option. Live with it.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 16, 2018, 08:35:56 PM
Walt , I have not been scolded like that since the 3rd grade . Thanks for bringing those facts up to me . I should know better .

Just beware Mike as "facts" and Walt don't go together. He believes the nonsense that the WC gave us, but with a twist. It was all a hoax supposedly.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 16, 2018, 10:00:31 PM
Main Street was better and that the two turns were needed, but they FAILED to support these claims.
RC...as much as I hate to, I must agree with the hyenas on this one. In the history of Dallas, every parade that the city has ever had, came up or down down Main St. That is why they call it 'Main St' it is the main street of the city.
The Cotton Bowl parade...up Main...the Shriner's parade...the Veterans Day Parade...Main St.
The turn was perfect for the gunmen and BINGO.
 
 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 16, 2018, 11:02:09 PM
Walt , I have not been scolded like that since the 3rd grade . Thanks for bringing those facts up to me . I should know better .

How refreshing it is!....   To learn that there are some men of character like you, in the group, Mike.   Sorry for being so brash....   

This case is not at all complicated.   It's very obvious who was responsible for the murder, but very few have the balls to face the facts.   Nobody wants to admit that they've been played for a sucker and open their eyes to the truth.

Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 16, 2018, 11:44:19 PM
Just beware Mike as "facts" and Walt don't go together. He believes the nonsense that the WC gave us, but with a twist. It was all a hoax supposedly.

Unfortunately Robbie....You can't accept facts if those facts clash with some idea that you belive in, regardless how unreasonable that idea may be.   Example....   For years you've  believed Roger Craig's nonsense about the rifle being a mauser....   

To be candid and honest....There WAS a mauser introduced into the evidence stream... But it sure as hell was not the rifle that had been planted by carefully hiding it beneath heavy pallets of books near the stairway on the sixth floor.

I don't know what the conspirators were attempting to do when they had Seymour Weitzman examine a 7.65 Mauser and then describe it in detail for that FBI report.  Perhaps they were doing nothing more than trying to save face because they had told reporters that the rifle they found was a 7.65 Mauser and their egos, like yours, would not permit them to admit they had made a mistake.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 17, 2018, 01:30:11 AM
RC...as much as I hate to, I must agree with the hyenas on this one. In the history of Dallas, every parade that the city has ever had, came up or down down Main St. That is why they call it 'Main St' it is the main street of the city.
The Cotton Bowl parade...up Main...the Shriner's parade...the Veterans Day Parade...Main St.
The turn was perfect for the gunmen and BINGO.
 

That is irrelevant. They could have done whatever they wanted IF safety was their top priority. For instance, if they used Main Street then they could have accessed the Stemmons Freeway from it. They had two viable options that did NOT include those two turns. They weren't needed and dangerous.

Their inclusion shows that there was a conspiracy at work.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 17, 2018, 01:36:50 AM
Unfortunately Robbie....You can't accept facts if those facts clash with some idea that you belive in, regardless how unreasonable that idea may be.   Example....   For years you've  believed Roger Craig's nonsense about the rifle being a mauser....   

To be candid and honest....There WAS a mauser introduced into the evidence stream... But it sure as hell was not the rifle that had been planted by carefully hiding it beneath heavy pallets of books near the stairway on the sixth floor.

I don't know what the conspirators were attempting to do when they had Seymour Weitzman examine a 7.65 Mauser and then describe it in detail for that FBI report.  Perhaps they were doing nothing more than trying to save face because they had told reporters that the rifle they found was a 7.65 Mauser and their egos, like yours, would not permit them to admit they had made a mistake.

Wally doesn't speak of facts though. No Wally endorses the WC's unsupported claims and on occasion makes up his own crazy scenario of what happened.

Can you show that CE 573 was involved? Then can you show that it was fired from CE 139? Most likely not as I asked you to do this pages ago and you 🏃‍♂️from doing so.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 17, 2018, 02:05:03 AM
Wally doesn't speak of facts though. No Wally endorses the WC's unsupported claims and on occasion makes up his own crazy scenario of what happened.

Can you show that CE 573 was involved? Then can you show that it was fired from CE 139? Most likely not as I asked you to do this pages ago and you 🏃‍♂️from doing so.

Refusing to play your stupid games is not running away......    And I don't recall discussing CE 573 with you.  Personally...I believe that CE 573 IS the bullet that was fired through Walker's window....and it sure as hell is NOT a 30 caliber bullet as would have been fired from a 30.06.   
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 17, 2018, 01:56:46 PM
Refusing to play your stupid games is not running away......    And I don't recall discussing CE 573 with you.  Personally...I believe that CE 573 IS the bullet that was fired through Walker's window....and it sure as hell is NOT a 30 caliber bullet as would have been fired from a 30.06.

Copout. No LNer can ever support the WC's claims, but that doesn't stop them from supporting these claims. This should be found odd by any honest person.

Wally can't support his claims. Nothing new there.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 17, 2018, 02:58:01 PM
Copout. No LNer can ever support the WC's claims, but that doesn't stop them from supporting these claims. This should be found odd by any honest person.

Wally can't support his claims. Nothing new there.

Dear intellectually challenged....Please present your proof that the bullet ( CE 573) is NOT the bullet that was recovered at the Walker residence on the night of April 10, 1963.   As I recall the DPD patrolman ( Norvell?) who actually found the bullet in Walker's house identified CE 573 as the bullet that he picked up.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 17, 2018, 04:39:20 PM
Dear intellectually challenged....Please present your proof that the bullet ( CE 573) is NOT the bullet that was recovered at the Walker residence on the night of April 10, 1963.   As I recall the DPD patrolman ( Norvell?) who actually found the bullet in Walker's house identified CE 573 as the bullet that he picked up.

Typical LNer shifting of the burden. He can't show that CE 573 was the bullet, but he keeps on insisting that it was the bullet.

Quote Norvell saying this.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 17, 2018, 05:27:39 PM
Typical LNer shifting of the burden. He can't show that CE 573 was the bullet, but he keeps on insisting that it was the bullet.

Quote Norvell saying this.


Pssst...  Mr Intellectually Challenged....   Your only attempt at refuting the evidence is to claim it's all a lie and the evidence is fake.  ( The Back Yard photo, the photo of Walker's house, and photos of the vicinity of Walker's house, the alarming note, etc)   While my position USES the evidence in a scenario that is rational and logical ......
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Gary Craig on September 17, 2018, 05:37:30 PM
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/hmat-wcvols-03_0001_04462.jpg)

(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/walker2.jpg)

(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/walker1.jpg)
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 17, 2018, 05:53:59 PM
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/hmat-wcvols-03_0001_04462.jpg)

(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/walker2.jpg)

(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/walker1.jpg)

You may recall that Walker telephoned a newspaper editor in Germany about 18 hours after the murder of JFK, and told the editor (who was a personal friend of EAW) that Lee Oswald was the culprit who had tried to kill him in April.

This incident reveals that Walker was involved in the plot to murder JFK and he was desperate to pile as much derogatory "evidence" as possible on the accused patsy, Lee Harrrrrvey Ossssswald ( Hisss  Boooooo)

Walker was a key conspirator .....and you apparently believe he was an honest man of sterling character, and you believe everything he said.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Gary Craig on September 17, 2018, 06:53:43 PM
You may recall that Walker telephoned a newspaper editor in Germany about 18 hours after the murder of JFK, and told the editor (who was a personal friend of EAW) that Lee Oswald was the culprit who had tried to kill him in April.

This incident reveals that Walker was involved in the plot to murder JFK and he was desperate to pile as much derogatory "evidence" as possible on the accused patsy, Lee Harrrrrvey Ossssswald ( Hisss  Boooooo)

Walker was a key conspirator .....and you apparently believe he was an honest man of sterling character, and you believe everything he said.

 ::)

(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/19631129_Deutsche_NZ.jpg)

-----------------------

(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/PageImage2-1.jpg)
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 17, 2018, 07:09:52 PM
::)

(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/19631129_Deutsche_NZ.jpg)

-----------------------

(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/PageImage2-1.jpg)

Please note that on November 29 the Editor of the German paper thought that Lee Oswald had been seized by the police but Robert Kennedy had intervened and curtailed any investigation.

(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/19631129_Deutsche_NZ.jpg)

Any reasonably intelligent person can see that this is a lie and an invention of the loony General Edwin A Walker. ( who hated the Kennedy's)

Based on the fact that Walker was a damned liar, Who would believe anything the man said???
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 17, 2018, 09:58:30 PM

Pssst...  Mr Intellectually Challenged....   Your only attempt at refuting the evidence is to claim it's all a lie and the evidence is fake.  ( The Back Yard photo, the photo of Walker's house, and photos of the vicinity of Walker's house, the alarming note, etc)   While my position USES the evidence in a scenario that is rational and logical ......

This is right out of the LNer manual. Quote me saying that those pieces of evidence are fake. Go ahead. Of course you won't because you are lying. Nothing new there.

What evidence do you use? You seem to totally ignore the evidence to me.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 17, 2018, 10:07:41 PM
Nothing is funnier than Wally mentioning a "reasonably intelligent person" over and over like he would know one. He misrepresents the evidence all the time. But that is what LNers do.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mike Orr on September 17, 2018, 11:05:14 PM
It looked like there were many observations of the Walker bullet that was seen by Walker and then the bullet that was supposed to have been used that was seen by Walker and they were not the same hunk of lead . Is someone calling Gen. Walker a liar or was it another case of mistaken identity? Ford moved the back wound up to the base of the neck . The blown out back of the head on JFK turned into the top of the head and right side of the head being blown out . The frontal neck wound turns into a grisly exit wound that CE 399 exits and then tears a path of destruction through John Connally only to come out as a found stretcher bullet that looked like "not much" had happened to it to cause all those wounds . A shallow back entry wound that becomes the 1st wound of entry for CE 399 which turned a very "Magical bullet" . A mauser that becomes a Mannlicher Carcano . Then you have LHO in the breakroom relaxing after he was said to have made the shots that took out JFK . Who in the hell would not believe this story ?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Gary Craig on September 18, 2018, 01:01:52 AM
You may recall that Walker telephoned a newspaper editor in Germany about 18 hours after the murder of JFK, and told the editor (who was a personal friend of EAW) that Lee Oswald was the culprit who had tried to kill him in April.

This incident reveals that Walker was involved in the plot to murder JFK and he was desperate to pile as much derogatory "evidence" as possible on the accused patsy, Lee Harrrrrvey Ossssswald ( Hisss  Boooooo)

Walker was a key conspirator .....and you apparently believe he was an honest man of sterling character, and you believe everything he said.

"You may recall that Walker telephoned a newspaper editor in Germany about 18 hours after the murder of JFK, and told the editor (who was a personal friend of EAW) that Lee Oswald was the culprit who had tried to kill him in April."

I don't recall that. But if you would post the relevant information/evidence I would be interested in looking.

"This incident reveals that Walker was involved in the plot to murder JFK and he was desperate to pile as much derogatory "evidence" as possible on the accused patsy"

If that's the case, why would he challenge the authenticity of the bullet in evidence linking LHO and the TSBD Carcano to the alleged attempt on his life?

"Walker was a key conspirator .....and you apparently believe he was an honest man of sterling character, and you believe everything he said."

I didn't convey any type of judgment regarding Walker's character.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Gary Craig on September 18, 2018, 01:23:55 AM
Please note that on November 29 the Editor of the German paper thought that Lee Oswald had been seized by the police but Robert Kennedy had intervened and curtailed any investigation.

Any reasonably intelligent person can see that this is a lie and an invention of the loony General Edwin A Walker. ( who hated the Kennedy's)

Based on the fact that Walker was a damned liar, Who would believe anything the man said???

"Please note that on November 29 the Editor of the German paper thought that Lee Oswald had been seized by the police but Robert Kennedy had intervened and curtailed any investigation."

It doesn't say the editor thought that. It says as it was reported to them.

"Any reasonably intelligent person can see that this is a lie and an invention of the loony General Edwin A Walker. ( who hated the Kennedy's)"

No, any reasonably intelligent person would want to see/read the relevant information/proof linking the
origination of the story to Walker. Smells like disinfo to me. Reporters were asking Dallas LE, in the hallways of the building LHO was held, if there was a connection between the attempt on Walker and JFK's murder.
 
"Based on the fact that Walker was a damned liar, Who would believe anything the man said???"

Sounds like you've made your mind up.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 18, 2018, 02:53:57 AM
"Please note that on November 29 the Editor of the German paper thought that Lee Oswald had been seized by the police but Robert Kennedy had intervened and curtailed any investigation."

It doesn't say the editor thought that. It says as it was reported to them.
 


"Any reasonably intelligent person can see that this is a lie and an invention of the loony General Edwin A Walker. ( who hated the Kennedy's)"

No, any reasonably intelligent person would want to see/read the relevant information/proof linking the
origination of the story to Walker. Smells like disinfo to me. Reporters were asking Dallas LE, in the hallways of the building LHO was held, if there was a connection between the attempt on Walker and JFK's murder.
 
"Based on the fact that Walker was a damned liar, Who would believe anything the man said???"

Sounds like you've made your mind up.

It doesn't say the editor thought that. It says as it was reported to them.

Mere semantics.... The fact is; Walker told the editor that Oswald had fired a bullet through his window ...

Of course I've reached a conclusion....Walker said that he didn't know who had fired a bullet through his window but just 18 hours after JFK was murdered Walker was on the phone telling the editor that it was Oswald who had fired the bullet through his window.

Sounds like you've made your mind up.

Of course I've made up my mind....This isn't very difficult to understand....( unless a person lacks the guts and brains to face reality.)
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Gary Craig on September 19, 2018, 04:01:14 PM
"On April 10, 1963, a sniper fired at General Edwin Walker, a right wing leader in Dallas, as he sat at his
desk in his home. The bullet missed his head by about an inch.
In 1964, a commission headed by Chief Justice Earl Warren to investigate the assassination of President
John F. Kennedy in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963, identified the assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, as the same man who had fired at General Walker.
The Warren Commission, relying on testimony from Oswald's widow, Marina, said Oswald tried to kill the general because he was "an extremist," and it cited the incident as evidence of Oswald's capacity for violence."



April 11, 1963 - General Edwin Walker interviewed after shooting incident
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Gary Craig on September 19, 2018, 04:05:17 PM
"In the days after President Kennedy's murder, Chief Curry was constantly making himself
available to the press in the corridors of Dallas City Hall. And the various newsmen were
more than happy to interview Curry for as long as he wanted to stay in front of the cameras
and microphones."


At 6:10 Curry is asked if the Walker shooting is connected.

Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 19, 2018, 07:01:45 PM
"You may recall that Walker telephoned a newspaper editor in Germany about 18 hours after the murder of JFK, and told the editor (who was a personal friend of EAW) that Lee Oswald was the culprit who had tried to kill him in April."

I don't recall that. But if you would post the relevant information/evidence I would be interested in looking.

"This incident reveals that Walker was involved in the plot to murder JFK and he was desperate to pile as much derogatory "evidence" as possible on the accused patsy"

If that's the case, why would he challenge the authenticity of the bullet in evidence linking LHO and the TSBD Carcano to the alleged attempt on his life?

"Walker was a key conspirator .....and you apparently believe he was an honest man of sterling character, and you believe everything he said."

I didn't convey any type of judgment regarding Walker's character.

I don't recall that. But if you would post the relevant information/evidence I would be interested in looking.

I'm sorry Mr Craig.....I mistakenly assumed that I was dealing with a person who knew the basic facts..... Apparently you are not well versed in the case.

If that's the case, why would he challenge the authenticity of the bullet in evidence linking LHO and the TSBD Carcano to the alleged attempt on his life?

Apparently you are unaware that you are referring to two widely separated conversations.....

On Saturday 11 / 23 /63 Walker was in a panic.....   He thought that the noose was closing around his neck because LHO had not been killed and he was in the hands of the police who were revealing that they had a very weak case against Lee Oswald and they were suggesting had he accomplices .......

At THAT moment in history (11/23/63) Walker wanted to bolster the case against LHO  .....  Later he wanted to discredit the information which up until then he had pretended he had no knowledge of.  ( He claimed that he didn't know who had fired the bullet through his window) yet here he was less than 20 hours after the murder of JFK, telling a newspaper editor that it was Oswald who had tried to kill him.

Later by claiming the bullet was not the bullet that the police had recovered in his house, I believe that he thought that he could confuse the issue....    At least that's the way I see it....But it's hard to determine what Walker was thinking because he was a real mental case.

Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 19, 2018, 07:17:21 PM
"On April 10, 1963, a sniper fired at General Edwin Walker, a right wing leader in Dallas, as he sat at his
desk in his home. The bullet missed his head by about an inch.
In 1964, a commission headed by Chief Justice Earl Warren to investigate the assassination of President
John F. Kennedy in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963, identified the assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, as the same man who had fired at General Walker.
The Warren Commission, relying on testimony from Oswald's widow, Marina, said Oswald tried to kill the general because he was "an extremist," and it cited the incident as evidence of Oswald's capacity for violence."



April 11, 1963 - General Edwin Walker interviewed after shooting incident

You don't believe the incident was a hoax and a publicity stunt to draw attention to Walker???

LISTEN to the looney Bastroid.....


Here he is using the event to attack JFK and his administration .....   This was Walker's motive behind the hoax....

Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 20, 2018, 04:35:14 AM
Why wouldn't it be a better path? It connected directly to the Stemmons Freeway.

You are the new game player on here as Brown has taken a hiatus. The WC claimed in 1964.that Main Street was better and that the two turns were needed, but they FAILED to support these claims.

Now, in 2018, you are trying to get me to disprove their claims when they NEVER supported them let alone proved them. It won't work. Elm Street was as wide as Main Street and connected directly to Stemmons Freeway, thus, it was the better option. Live with it.
I'm trying to get you to show that the straight-through-Elm route was superior to Main, and to do so in the terms of someone planning a route according to the political considerations of 1963. That is the only acceptable standard of proof.  I'm sure that minimizing the number of turns would not have been high on the agenda, contra your own expectations. Otherwise, the motorcade would have turned right on Mockingbird, left on Harry Hines, and taken the shortest, fastest, and most direct route to the Trade Mart.

They weren't that concerned about turns. The motorcade route through downtown Ft Worth had it's own superfluous turnery, especially where the route bends on three quick, successive elbows: from Main right to Weatherford, Weatherford left to Commerce, and Commerce left to Belknap. They could have just gone down Commerce from the Hotel Texas (this would have also avoided a left and right just after departing the hotel) to Belknap. Or they could have turned left from Main to Weatrherford and made it to Jacksboro highway just as easily as they would have on Belknap.  But they didn't; counting turns just wasn't important. Especially at the low speeds the limo ran among the downtown throngs.

(https://www.archives.gov/files/publications/prologue/images/jfk-fort-worth-motorcade-map.jpg)
 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 20, 2018, 04:42:18 AM
I'm trying to get you to show that the straight-through-Elm route was superior to Main, and to do so in the terms of someone planning a route according to the political considerations of 1963. That is the only acceptable standard of proof.  I'm sure that minimizing the number of turns would not have been high on the agenda, contra your own expectations. Otherwise, the motorcade would have turned right on Mockingbird, left on Harry Hines, and taken the shortest, fastest, and most direct route to the Trade Mart.

They weren't that concerned about turns. The motorcade route through downtown Ft Worth had it's own superfluous turnery, especially where the route bends on three quick, successive elbows: from Main right to Weatherford, Weatherford left to Commerce, and Commerce left to Belknap. They could have just gone down Commerce from the Hotel Texas (this would have also avoided a left and right just after departing the hotel) to Belknap. Or they could have turned left from Main to Weatrherford and made it to Jacksboro highway just as easily as they would have on Belknap.  But they didn't; counting turns just wasn't important. Especially at the low speeds the limo ran among the downtown throngs.

(https://www.archives.gov/files/publications/prologue/images/jfk-fort-worth-motorcade-map.jpg)

Your trying to shift the burden. It won't work. The WC claimed in 1964 that Main Street had advantages over streets like Elm, but utterly failed to support this claim. You have also failed to support it.

Those two turns were NOT needed. End of story.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 21, 2018, 08:47:13 PM
Copout. No LNer can ever support the WC's claims, but that doesn't stop them from supporting these claims. This should be found odd by any honest person.

Wally can't support his claims. Nothing new there.

Roger Craig never saw a mauser in the TSBD that afternoon, Rob.....

Any man can make mistakes, but only an idiot persists in his error.....Cicero
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Ross Lidell on September 21, 2018, 11:02:12 PM
It looked like there were many observations of the Walker bullet that was seen by Walker and then the bullet that was supposed to have been used that was seen by Walker and they were not the same hunk of lead . Is someone calling Gen. Walker a liar or was it another case of mistaken identity? Ford moved the back wound up to the base of the neck . The blown out back of the head on JFK turned into the top of the head and right side of the head being blown out . The frontal neck wound turns into a grisly exit wound that CE 399 exits and then tears a path of destruction through John Connally only to come out as a found stretcher bullet that looked like "not much" had happened to it to cause all those wounds . A shallow back entry wound that becomes the 1st wound of entry for CE 399 which turned a very "Magical bullet" . A mauser that becomes a Mannlicher Carcano . Then you have LHO in the breakroom relaxing after he was said to have made the shots that took out JFK . Who in the hell would not believe this story ?

Then you have LHO in the breakroom relaxing after he was said to have made the shots that took out JFK.

Lee Oswald was NOT "relaxing" in any "breakroom".

1.) When he was on the 2nd floor "landing": Officer Baker got a glimpse of a man moving behind the window in the self-closing door to the vestibule. He went through that door and encountered Oswald moving away from him. He commanded Oswald to come back to where he (Baker) was standing.

2.) Oswald was not holding a Coke in his hand. He was not sitting drinking a Coke (relaxing) at the table in the "breakroom".

Who in the hell would not believe this story ?

Me.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 21, 2018, 11:21:56 PM
"Please note that on November 29 the Editor of the German paper thought that Lee Oswald had been seized by the police but Robert Kennedy had intervened and curtailed any investigation."

It doesn't say the editor thought that. It says as it was reported to them.

"Any reasonably intelligent person can see that this is a lie and an invention of the loony General Edwin A Walker. ( who hated the Kennedy's)"

No, any reasonably intelligent person would want to see/read the relevant information/proof linking the
origination of the story to Walker. Smells like disinfo to me. Reporters were asking Dallas LE, in the hallways of the building LHO was held, if there was a connection between the attempt on Walker and JFK's murder.
 
"Based on the fact that Walker was a damned liar, Who would believe anything the man said???"

Sounds like you've made your mind up.

Yes, he has... It appears he's an LNer and a CTer... easy to accomplish in 'Anything-Goes' WallyWorld.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 21, 2018, 11:30:27 PM
Then you have LHO in the breakroom relaxing after he was said to have made the shots that took out JFK.

Lee Oswald was NOT "relaxing" in any "breakroom".

1.) When he was on the 2nd floor "landing": Officer Baker got a glimpse of a man moving behind the window in the self-closing door to the vestibule. He went through that door and encountered Oswald moving away from him. He commanded Oswald to come back to where he (Baker) was standing.

2.) Oswald was not holding a Coke in his hand. He was not sitting drinking a Coke (relaxing) at the table in the "breakroom".

Who in the hell would not believe this story ?

Me.

You believe it because you lack the brains to see that your version doesn't square with the tale that Baker and Truly told....
And you lack the guts to challenge LBJ's official version of the coup d e'tat...

Baker said that he was at the top of the steps not ON THE SECOND FLOOR LANDING...and he caught a glimpse of movement in the lunchroom...( Probably Truly's reflection on the window glass)

He commanded Oswald to come back to where he (Baker) was standing.


What a ridiculous idea!!....Baker was not more than eight feet away from Lee Oswald ....He didn't need to "call out"and command Lee to come to him....( Baker did call out to the man on an upper floor who was trying to evade being seen and walking away from the stairwell)   And then after suspecting something.....simply dismiss Lee without one word being spoken by Lee ......

He was not sitting drinking a Coke (relaxing) at the table in the "breakroom".

Well Roy Truly told a reporter for US News and World Report that Lee was sitting at a table and drinking a coke.....
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Ross Lidell on September 21, 2018, 11:35:05 PM
You believe it because you lack the brains to see that your version doesn't square with the tale that Baker and Truly told....
And you lack the guts to challenge LBJ's official version of the coup d e'tat...

Baker said that he was at the top of the steps not ON THE SECOND FLOOR LANDING...and he caught a glimpse of movement in the lunchroom...( Probably Truly's reflection on the window glass)

He commanded Oswald to come back to where he (Baker) was standing.


Probably!!! Truly's refection on the window glass: Do you have any proof for that?

What a ridiculous idea!!....Baker was not more than eight feet away from Lee Oswald ....He didn't need to "call out"and command Lee to come to him....( Baker did call out to the man on an upper floor who was trying to evade being seen and walking away from the stairwell)   And then after suspecting something.....simply dismiss Lee without one word being spoken by Lee ......

He was not sitting drinking a Coke (relaxing) at the table in the "breakroom".

Well Roy Truly told a reporter for US News and World Report that Lee was sitting at a table and drinking a coke.....

You're skating on thin ice Walt. Personal insults are not permitted on this forum.
It also indicates that you are irritated by my honest and accurate statements that cannot be disputed without invoking absurd theories.

Probably!!! Truly's refection on the window glass.

Do you have any proof for that? What a ridiculous attempt to defend your silly post. Probably? The moon's "probably" make of Swiss cheese.

And then after suspecting something.....simply dismiss Lee without one word being spoken by Lee ......

Baker dismissed Oswald because Truly vouched for him.

Well Roy Truly told a reporter for US News and World Report that Lee was sitting at a table and drinking a coke.....

Regarding the Coke issue: Baker trumps Truly.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 21, 2018, 11:56:49 PM
Edwin didn't seem too concerned ;-)

For all anyone knows, Walker was still feeling the stress of almost being killed. That can be easily masked.

Would-be leaders, and (Generals) need to appear unflappable and strong under pressure. It seems that Walker accomplished that. And used that opportunity to spew out his righty propaganda.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 22, 2018, 12:14:11 AM
Yes, he has... It appears he's an LNer and a CTer... easy to accomplish in 'Anything-Goes' WallyWorld.

I believe what you're attempting to say is:.....  Walt thinks for himself outside the box...

And you're right....  I don't disagree with everything a person says simply because he supports LBJ's cover up committee's decree..( which is a rubber stamp of JE Hoover's decree) Nor do I agree with everything a person says simply because he says he's a CT....
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 22, 2018, 12:36:03 AM
I believe what you're attempting to say is:.....  Walt thinks for himself outside the box...

No, I'm not trying to say that.

And the only evidence of 'outside-the-box' is you moving the boxes ( so-to-speak) from SE corner to the SW corner.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 22, 2018, 02:18:08 AM
Roger Craig never saw a mauser in the TSBD that afternoon, Rob.....

Any man can make mistakes, but only an idiot persists in his error.....Cicero

And you know this how? I know that I'll regret that I asked.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Mytton on September 22, 2018, 02:34:30 AM
Your trying to shift the burden. It won't work. The WC claimed in 1964 that Main Street had advantages over streets like Elm, but utterly failed to support this claim. You have also failed to support it.

Those two turns were NOT needed. End of story.

You keep making claims that you never support?

Why don't you post evidence?

JohnM
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 22, 2018, 03:02:35 AM
And you know this how? I know that I'll regret that I asked.

Photos of the rifle....It's a Carcano....   You'll have to extract your head to see......
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 22, 2018, 07:22:29 AM
Your trying to shift the burden. It won't work. The WC claimed in 1964 that Main Street had advantages over streets like Elm, but utterly failed to support this claim. You have also failed to support it.

Those two turns were NOT needed. End of story.
The extra turns in Ft Worth weren't absolutely required, either. But there they happened all the same. Therefore, the Rob Caprio-devised standard of minimizing turns wasn't used in planning Presidential motorcades. They had their own standards, based primarily on the realities of 1963 politics, and not on some invented latter-day Caprian notion of proper protocol.

Anyway, you are the guy claiming that the straight-up-your-Elm-bub route was so superior that the Main-Houston-Elm router should not have been used. It is up to you to prove it. And you have to prove it to the standards of the day and place, not whatever you invent to suit yourself. You simply haven't done that, and it's your burden, kid.
 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 22, 2018, 07:24:07 PM
You keep making claims that you never support?

Why don't you post evidence?

JohnM

I have NOT made a claim. Pointing out that the WC failed to support their claim is not a new claim by me. It is simply a fact.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 22, 2018, 07:26:15 PM
Photos of the rifle....It's a Carcano....   You'll have to extract your head to see......

And that proves that there was no Mauser too how? Talk about having your head buried.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 22, 2018, 07:27:12 PM
The extra turns in Ft Worth weren't absolutely required, either. But there they happened all the same. Therefore, the Rob Caprio-devised standard of minimizing turns wasn't used in planning Presidential motorcades. They had their own standards, based primarily on the realities of 1963 politics, and not on some invented latter-day Caprian notion of proper protocol.

Anyway, you are the guy claiming that the straight-up-your-Elm-bub route was so superior that the Main-Houston-Elm router should not have been used. It is up to you to prove it. And you have to prove it to the standards of the day and place, not whatever you invent to suit yourself. You simply haven't done that, and it's your burden, kid.

So you still can't support their claim. Got it.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mitch Todd on September 22, 2018, 08:23:59 PM
The extra turns in Ft Worth weren't absolutely required, either. But there they happened all the same. Therefore, the Rob Caprio-devised standard of minimizing turns wasn't used in planning Presidential motorcades. They had their own standards, based primarily on the realities of 1963 politics, and not on some invented latter-day Caprian notion of proper protocol.

Anyway, you are the guy claiming that the straight-up-your-Elm-bub route was so superior that the Main-Houston-Elm router should not have been used. It is up to you to prove it. And you have to prove it to the standards of the day and place, not whatever you invent to suit yourself. You simply haven't done that, and it's your burden, kid.
So you still can't support their claim. Got it.
You're the one who claims that your route is so much better that the only reason They would have used it is to make it easier to shoot JFK. It's up to you to prove that. Anything else is BS on your part.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 22, 2018, 09:54:57 PM
And that proves that there was no Mauser too how? Talk about having your head buried.

Duh..... I said..."Roger Craig never saw a mauser in the TSBD that afternoon, Rob....".

But perhaps you can prove that statement isn't true.....All you have to do is document that Roger Craig saw and examined a rifle that...quote...." had 7.65 Mauser stamped right there on the barrel"

IOW...   Show me WHEN Roger Craig would have seen and examined such a gun....We know from Craig's own words that it couldn't have been prior to the discovery of the Carcano.   ( Commonsense dictates that if they had found a rifle prior to finding the Carcano they wouldn't have continued searching  for a rifle)

And we have film that shows Roger Craig in the background as Day and Fritz examine the Carcano.    Since Roger Craig most certainly believed that they had found the weapon at that time he wouldn't have continued searching....And He himself said that he left the building shortly after the discovery of the rifle which photos reveal is a Carcano.

Now knock off the BS ..... Either prove that there was a Mauser found in the TSBD and Roger Craig was close enough to that Mauser that he could read the stamping on the rifle...OR be honest for once, and admit you are WRONG......
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 24, 2018, 09:01:00 PM
( Commonsense dictates that if they had found a rifle prior to finding the Carcano they wouldn't have continued searching  for a rifle)

Why?  Did they somehow know that only one weapon was involved?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 24, 2018, 09:56:24 PM
Why?  Did they somehow know that only one weapon was involved?

When they found the spent shells Clairvoyant Captain Will Fritz told the police officers to search the sixth floor because the rifle "had to be there somewhere" ( How did he know that???)  The men searched the sixth floor and did not find the rifle....Captain Fritz told them to spread out and keep looking because that rifle "Had to be there" ... So when the 6.5 Carcano was found well hidden beneath heavy pallets of books the search was over.....

Is this too difficult for you to comprehend??
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 24, 2018, 11:07:08 PM
How does any of that indicate that only one weapon was involved?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 25, 2018, 12:35:43 AM
Why?  Did they somehow know that only one weapon was involved?

Did they somehow know that only one weapon was involved?


Show me one single instance where anybody suggested that there was more than one gunman in the TSBD at the time they were searching ....   
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 25, 2018, 05:33:44 PM
Did they somehow know that only one weapon was involved?


Show me one single instance where anybody suggested that there was more than one gunman in the TSBD at the time they were searching ....

How would they have known anything about it, one way or the other, at the time they were searching?  It's not like they interviewed all the Dealey Plaza witnesses first...
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 25, 2018, 06:45:06 PM
How would they have known anything about it, one way or the other, at the time they were searching?  It's not like they interviewed all the Dealey Plaza witnesses first...

I've never heard of anybody suggesting that there was more than one gunman and one gun in the TSBD at the time of the Coup d e'tat.      And the police had been lead to believe that there was a single gunman in the building because Howard Brennan told them he saw a LONE (single) gunman standing and aiming a hunting rifle out of a sixth floor window... Likewise Arnold Rowland told the cops that he'd seen a LONE man with a HUNTING rifle behind a sixth floor window and Amos Euins told them he saw a "pipe like thing" sticking out of a sixth floor window. 

There isn't a single report of anybody seeing more than one gunman and one rifle in the TSBD at the time of the coup d e'tat.    So there would have been no reason to search for another rifle after they found the Mannlicher Carcano....
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 25, 2018, 07:29:03 PM
I've never heard of anybody suggesting that there was more than one gunman and one gun in the TSBD at the time of the Coup d e'tat.      And the police had been lead to believe that there was a single gunman in the building because Howard Brennan told them he saw a LONE (single) gunman standing and aiming a hunting rifle out of a sixth floor window... Likewise Arnold Rowland told the cops that he'd seen a LONE man with a HUNTING rifle behind a sixth floor window and Amos Euins told them he saw a "pipe like thing" sticking out of a sixth floor window. 

How do you know what Brennan, Rowland, and Euins told the cops before they searched the building?  And even so, how would that have ruled out another possible shooter at that time?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 25, 2018, 07:42:35 PM
How do you know what Brennan, Rowland, and Euins told the cops before they searched the building?  And even so, how would that have ruled out another possible shooter at that time?

On what ?are you basing the idea that there was more than one gunman and one gun in the TSBD at the time of the shooting?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 25, 2018, 07:46:00 PM
On what ?are you basing the idea that there was more than one gunman and one gun in the TSBD at the time of the shooting?

I'm saying that at the time the police searched the building, they had no way of knowing that they could just stop looking for a weapon after finding one rifle.  What kind of crime scene investigation would that be?  If they had found another weapon would they have just ignored it because "there was only one shooter"?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 25, 2018, 07:46:45 PM
I've never heard of anybody suggesting that there was more than one gunman and one gun in the TSBD at the time of the Coup d e'tat.      And the police had been lead to believe that there was a single gunman in the building because Howard Brennan told them he saw a LONE (single) gunman standing and aiming a hunting rifle out of a sixth floor window... Likewise Arnold Rowland told the cops that he'd seen a LONE man with a HUNTING rifle behind a sixth floor window and Amos Euins told them he saw a "pipe like thing" sticking out of a sixth floor window. 

There isn't a single report of anybody seeing more than one gunman and one rifle in the TSBD at the time of the coup d e'tat.    So there would have been no reason to search for another rifle after they found the Mannlicher Carcano....

'coup d e'tat'
LOL

It's 'coup d'?tat'
Oh... and there wasn't one.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 25, 2018, 08:23:48 PM
I'm saying that at the time the police searched the building, they had no way of knowing that they could just stop looking for a weapon after finding one rifle.  What kind of crime scene investigation would that be?  If they had found another weapon would they have just ignored it because "there was only one shooter"?

No they wouldn't

You're way too paranoid
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 25, 2018, 09:52:36 PM
No they wouldn't

You're way too paranoid

...and if you had been paying attention, you'd realize that that was my point.  Walt claimed, "Commonsense dictates that if they had found a rifle prior to finding the Carcano they wouldn't have continued searching for a rifle".
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 25, 2018, 10:06:29 PM
So you still can't support their claim. Got it.

You're the one who claims that your route is so much better that the only reason They would have used it is to make it easier to shoot JFK. It's up to you to prove that. Anything else is BS on your part.

BS on my part? You support UNSUPPORTED claims and try to shift the burden to others who point this out.

Why do you support a theory that has NO supporting evidence?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 25, 2018, 10:08:39 PM
Duh..... I said..."Roger Craig never saw a mauser in the TSBD that afternoon, Rob....".

But perhaps you can prove that statement isn't true.....All you have to do is document that Roger Craig saw and examined a rifle that...quote...." had 7.65 Mauser stamped right there on the barrel"

IOW...   Show me WHEN Roger Craig would have seen and examined such a gun....We know from Craig's own words that it couldn't have been prior to the discovery of the Carcano.   ( Commonsense dictates that if they had found a rifle prior to finding the Carcano they wouldn't have continued searching  for a rifle)

And we have film that shows Roger Craig in the background as Day and Fritz examine the Carcano.    Since Roger Craig most certainly believed that they had found the weapon at that time he wouldn't have continued searching....And He himself said that he left the building shortly after the discovery of the rifle which photos reveal is a Carcano.

Now knock off the BS ..... Either prove that there was a Mauser found in the TSBD and Roger Craig was close enough to that Mauser that he could read the stamping on the rifle...OR be honest for once, and admit you are WRONG......

The evidence that has been posted numerous times for you proves that you are a liar. Plain and simple. End of story.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 25, 2018, 10:11:07 PM
On what ?are you basing the idea that there was more than one gunman and one gun in the TSBD at the time of the shooting?

Wally the LNer strikes again.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 25, 2018, 10:13:59 PM
No they wouldn't

You're way too paranoid

So stating crime scene procedures is being paranoid? LOL. You LNers are priceless. I guess every police force in the country is paranoid then according to *you*.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 25, 2018, 11:17:40 PM
Wally the LNer strikes again.

I merely asked....On what ?are you basing the idea that there was more than one gunman and one gun in the TSBD at the time of the shooting?

Surely, there must be a basis for thinking that there was more than one gunman and more than one rifle in the TSBD that afternoon.    What is the basis for believing that?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 25, 2018, 11:25:57 PM
The evidence that has been posted numerous times for you proves that you are a liar. Plain and simple. End of story.

So the evidence proves that I'm a liar ...Does it?? Then present that evidence......
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 26, 2018, 03:39:28 AM
I merely asked....On what ?are you basing the idea that there was more than one gunman and one gun in the TSBD at the time of the shooting?

Surely, there must be a basis for thinking that there was more than one gunman and more than one rifle in the TSBD that afternoon.    What is the basis for believing that?

It has been cited for you ad nauseam over the years. Why don't you support your WC's claim that there was only one shooter and one gun in the TSBD?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 26, 2018, 03:41:29 AM
So the evidence proves that I'm a liar ...Does it?? Then present that evidence......

Why waste more time? It has been cited tons of times for you, but you keep on lying about it.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Mike Orr on September 26, 2018, 12:33:33 PM
The shot at Walker was to help the setup of LHO . Actually when you think about it , the shot on Walker failed to hit him so that would have been possible for a shot by (Maggies Drawers) LHO as of course was the case in the shot that missed the whole limo and made a ricochet off James Tague cheek . LHO was not a firearms expert . If Carlos Hathcock said he couldn't make the shot then LHO would not have even been close , plus it's kind of hard to blow the back of JFK's head off and be shooting from behind . The evidence is overpowering in Oswald not even firing a weapon that day , much less hitting anything.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 26, 2018, 02:04:13 PM
It has been cited for you ad nauseam over the years. Why don't you support your WC's claim that there was only one shooter and one gun in the TSBD?


Why don't you support your WC's claim that there was only one shooter and one gun in the TSBD?


Robbie Dear....  I'm sure it will be a shock to you  to read that I don't believe there were any shots fired from the TSBD.  I've stated that opinion many many times, but I'll Say it again for your benefit....  THERE WERE NO SHOTS FIRED FROM THE TSBD !   

Howard Brennan is the only person who claimed that he saw a man standing and AIMING ( NOT FIRING)   a rifle from a TSBD window at the time of the coup d e'tat.   

And Brennan's DESCRIPTION of that action does NOT fit the SE corner window ...because Brennan DESCRIBED an action ( The man was standing and aiming the hi powered (ie; hunting ) rifle , ) that would have required the window to be completely open, not half open as the window at the SE corner was.

Based on eye witness accounts...I believe that there most certainly WAS a HUNTING rifle with a large scope on the sixth floor of the TSBD at the time of the murder...  and there was a thirty something year old, 175 pound  man, who was dressed in light colored khaki clothing  there on the sixth floor. 

I suspect that the man was a deputy sheriff who took it upon himself to station himself at a place overlooking the parade route.  (He was ignorant of the hoax plot that had been planned which was the planting of the shells and the carcano that was intended to  support the claim that LHO had fired AT AT the President)

I believe, What Brennan saw was the Deputy in the action using the scope on the rifle to scan the crowd below ....

Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 26, 2018, 02:11:45 PM
Why waste more time? It has been cited tons of times for you, but you keep on lying about it.

Robbie, You call me a liar.....  A liar is a person who KNOWS the truth, about some event, but deliberately states something that is totally contrary to the truth.

You apparently believe that a person who has a opinion that contradicts and destroys your opinion is a liar......not because the person is in fact lying,  but because that person challenges you .....

I'm not the only person here who recognizes that you're a nut, Rob........
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 26, 2018, 05:16:44 PM
So why then are you so averse to the idea that there could have been more than one weapon in the TSBD?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 26, 2018, 05:54:58 PM
So why then are you so averse to the idea that there could have been more than one weapon in the TSBD?

I'm not averse to the idea..... But there simply isn't a shred of evidence to support that idea.    The evidence indicates that there was only the Mannlicher Carcano found.... 

However both Arnold Rowland and Howard Brennan did report seeing a man holding a HUNTING rifle, so I guess that could be evidence of a rifle other than the Carcano being on the sixth floor.  HOWEVER....That rifle was never found and it most certainly was NOT examined by Roger Craig....And I doubt that the hunting rifle was ever fired from the TSBD....and of course the Carcano was hidden beneath the pallets of books and it was never fired that day.     
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 26, 2018, 06:02:33 PM
I'm not averse to the idea..... But there simply isn't a shred of evidence to support that idea.    The evidence indicates that there was only the Mannlicher Carcano found....

Except for that pesky 7.65 Mauser that Boone, Weitzman, and Craig reported...
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 26, 2018, 06:10:08 PM
Except for that pesky 7.65 Mauser that Boone, Weitzman, and Craig reported...

They never reported finding a 7.65 mauser..... They saw a tiny bit of the butt of the carcano down in a darkened cave of boxes and thought that it looked like a mauser.....  Actually, Only Weitzman ventured the idea that the carcano was a 7.65 mauser  I suspect he saw the magazine /  trigger guard of the carcano and related that to the only rifle that he was familiar with ...the 7.65 mauser.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 26, 2018, 06:20:29 PM
(http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/boone.gif)
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Steve Logan on September 26, 2018, 08:05:56 PM
Captain Fritz picked up the rifle...
Fritz picked up the shells.
Day picked up the rifle.
Handed it to Fritz.
It wasn't a Mauser.
It's on film.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Steve Logan on September 26, 2018, 08:52:15 PM
I forgot.

DP crime scene preservation.

That wasn't on film was it?
Only after it was contaminated.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Steve Logan on September 26, 2018, 09:09:30 PM
Right, so who knows what else happened until Alyea arrived.
I guess it's a mystery.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 27, 2018, 01:42:11 AM
(http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/boone.gif)

The rifle APPEARED  to be a 7.65 mauser...IOW.... Weitzman could as well have said... "The rifle looked like a 7.65 mauser   
 to me, But I never examined it there in the building....and later I learned that the rifle was NOT a 7.65 mauser, and I corrected my mistake..
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 27, 2018, 03:57:24 AM
Robbie, You call me a liar.....  A liar is a person who KNOWS the truth, about some event, but deliberately states something that is totally contrary to the truth.

You apparently believe that a person who has a opinion that contradicts and destroys your opinion is a liar......not because the person is in fact lying,  but because that person challenges you .....

I'm not the only person here who recognizes that you're a nut, Rob........

Wally, your opinion flies in the face of the evidence. That is a trait of a LNer.

Insulting others who point out that your opinion flies in the face of the evidence is also a trait of a LNer.

Wally, just admit the truth already -- you're a LNer.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 27, 2018, 04:01:09 AM
Except for that pesky 7.65 Mauser that Boone, Weitzman, and Craig reported...

And the 7.65 shell that was found. And the CIA memo that mentioned a Mauser. And Wade saying that it was a Mauser at his late night November 22, 1963, press conference.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 27, 2018, 04:05:32 AM
The rifle APPEARED  to be a 7.65 mauser...IOW.... Weitzman could as well have said... "The rifle looked like a 7.65 mauser   
 to me, But I never examined it there in the building....and later I learned that the rifle was NOT a 7.65 mauser, and I corrected my mistake..

Wally is still ignoring the evidence. Cite a report that says it was a 6.5 Carcano.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 27, 2018, 04:06:24 AM
What we know.

All the identifiable bullet fragments in the Limo were exclusively linked to Oswald's rifle.
Oswald's rifle was found on the 6th floor.
Oswald's rifle was exclusively linked to the 3 shells in the sniper's nest.
Oswald's prints were on boxes in the sniper's nest including the one of the two Rolling Reaer boxes which were moved over 40 feet and were angled down Elm street along with Oswald's prints which were orientated the same way.
Oswald's prints were on the rifle.
Oswald's arrest shirt fibers matched 3 of the fibers on Oswald's rifle.
Oswald left the building immediately.
Oswald caught buses and cabs in his desperate flight get out of Dallas.
Oswald kills a cop.
When arrested Oswald wants to kill more cops.

And this is just quickly off the top of my head, and in response in court or an upcoming Iacoletti list, you people by necessity would be reduced to saying that each and every piece of this evidence was somehow faked, manufactured or misrepresented but as the lists get longer the involvement of conspirators and their helpers gets proportionally higher.

The most similar situation you guys would face would be OJ. The OJ team knew to defend the indefensible you have to shift focus from the accused to the accuser and in the shadow of Rodney King that was a winning formula. This might make an interesting thread, how exactly in court would the CT's here defend the indefensible?

JohnM

Nary a cite in sight.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 27, 2018, 09:25:58 PM
What we know.

Completely misrepresented.

Quote
All the identifiable bullet fragments in the Limo were exclusively linked to Oswald's rifle.
Oswald's rifle was found on the 6th floor.
Oswald's rifle was exclusively linked to the 3 shells in the sniper's nest.

"Oswald's rifle".  LOL.  And actually "All the identifiable bullet fragments in the Limo" is a misrepresentation of two bullet fragments which can't be proven to have come from the limo.

Quote
Oswald's prints were on boxes in the sniper's nest including the one of the two Rolling Reaer boxes which were moved over 40 feet and were angled down Elm street along with Oswald's prints which were orientated the same way.

How far certain boxes were moved is pure speculation, and it's not at all remarkable that a guy whose job was getting books out of boxes would have left prints on boxes.

Quote
Oswald's prints were on the rifle.

No, the prints in the trigger guard area were useless for identification purposes and a single partial palmprint turned up a week later on an index card.

Quote
Oswald's arrest shirt fibers matched 3 of the fibers on Oswald's rifle.

But couldn't be exclusively identified as coming from any specific shirt.

Quote
Oswald left the building immediately.

Speculation.  And define "immediately".

Quote
Oswald caught buses and cabs in his desperate flight get out of Dallas.

Speculation and assumption, not evidence.

Quote
Oswald kills a cop.

Unproven.

Quote
When arrested Oswald wants to kill more cops.

Speculation and assumption, not evidence.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 27, 2018, 09:42:47 PM
Completely misrepresented.

"Oswald's rifle".  LOL.  And actually "All the identifiable bullet fragments in the Limo" is a misrepresentation of two bullet fragments which can't be proven to have come from the limo.

How far certain boxes were moved is pure speculation, and it's not at all remarkable that a guy whose job was getting books out of boxes would have left prints on boxes.

No, the prints in the trigger guard area were useless for identification purposes and a single partial palmprint turned up a week later on an index card.

But couldn't be exclusively identified as coming from any specific shirt.

Speculation.  And define "immediately".

Speculation and assumption, not evidence.

Unproven.

Speculation and assumption, not evidence.

All the identifiable bullet fragments in the Limo" is a misrepresentation of two bullet fragments which can't be proven to have come from the limo.

All of the identifiable fragments??   Those two bullet fragments COULD NOT have been traced to any particular rifle.....J.Edgar Hoover himself told LBJ that the fragments were worthless for tracing to a particular rifle.   

LBJ wanted something solid that they could connect to the carcano...and Lee Oswald, but Hoover told him the fragments were weak evidence, because it's impossible to match fragments to a specific rifle barrel.

a single partial palmprint turned up a week later on an index card.


The palm print did not turn up a week later.....It was listed on the evidence list of the stuff that was turned over to the FBI  at midnight 11 / 22 / 63 .....  It was examined by the FBI lab on 11 /23/63 and reported to be useless for identification purposes.....

Common sense would reveal to any reasonably intelligent person that a man's palm print could not be deposited on a round surface whose diameter is that of a AA pen light battery..... 5/8"....  Which is the diameter of the carcano barrel near the fore grip.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Organ on September 27, 2018, 10:19:00 PM
Common sense would reveal to any reasonably intelligent person that a man's palm print could not be deposited on a round surface whose diameter is that of a AA pen light battery..... 5/8"....  Which is the diameter of the carcano barrel near the fore grip.

(http://i64.tinypic.com/ouusdd.jpg)

This is not meant to prove Oswald's palmprint was on the barrel. Only to demonstrate that physically it's possible to deposit a print from a part of the palm onto a Carcano barrel.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 27, 2018, 11:05:25 PM
(http://i64.tinypic.com/ouusdd.jpg)

This is not meant to prove Oswald's palmprint was on the barrel. Only to demonstrate that physically it's possible to deposit a print from a part of the palm onto a Carcano barrel.

Duh....The CIRCUMFERENCE  is equal to Pi times the DIAMETER....  Only about 1/4 of the CIRCUMFERENCE is available to come in contact with a person's palm....  AND any print that would be deposited would be useless because the folds of the skin would break up any print deposited..

Oh, I nearly forgot....The slot at the right hand side of the photo ( CE 639) measures 5mm ( about 1/4 inch) on a model 91 / 38 carcano....   So it can be used to scale the print .....
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Organ on September 27, 2018, 11:38:44 PM
Duh....The CIRCUMFERENCE  is equal to Pi times the DIAMETER....  Only about 1/4 of the CIRCUMFERENCE is available to come in contact with a person's palm.... 

(https://public.snapon.com/R_RRD/Objects_lg/images/SOEXL707B.jpg)
No one would be able to use a wrench.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 28, 2018, 12:07:57 AM
All of the identifiable fragments??   Those two bullet fragments COULD NOT have been traced to any particular rifle.....J.Edgar Hoover himself told LBJ that the fragments were worthless for tracing to a particular rifle. 

Robert Frazier identified them by lining up the marks "in his mind".
 
Quote
The palm print did not turn up a week later.....It was listed on the evidence list of the stuff that was turned over to the FBI  at midnight 11 / 22 / 63 .....  It was examined by the FBI lab on 11 /23/63 and reported to be useless for identification purposes.....

As you keep claiming by presenting an undated evidence list.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Mytton on September 28, 2018, 12:33:00 AM
Robert Frazier identified them by lining up the marks "in his mind".

Robert Frazier gave his expert opinion and the defence has an equal responsibility to have the expert examine the evidence and render their opinion, the evidence still exists what are you waiting for?

JohnM
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 28, 2018, 01:35:03 AM
(https://public.snapon.com/R_RRD/Objects_lg/images/SOEXL707B.jpg)
No one would be able to use a wrench.

Someone should use a wrench on your head.....and tighten up the loose screws.  ( Or a monkey wrench for tightening your nuts )



The heads of bolts, ( and the nuts) are measured ACROSS the flats of the head of the bolt.....IOW a  bolt with a 3/4" head is designed so that the 3/4 inch wrench fits the flats of the bolt head.

But ....What the hell do wrenches have to do with the diameter of a carcano barrel??

(https://public.snapon.com/R_RRD/Objects_lg/images/SOEXL707B.jpg)

But since you broached the subject...If you were to use the open end of the 11/16" (.687")  wrench it would fit loosely around the carcano barrel .....If you use a metric open end wrench you'll find that the 16mm wrench will fit nicely around the barrel.  And if you were to use that same 16mm wrench around a AA penlight battery you'll find that the battery is nearly the same size as the barrel of a carcano at the foregrip. 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Mytton on September 28, 2018, 02:41:31 AM
Someone should use a wrench on your head.....and tighten up the loose screws.  ( Or a monkey wrench for tightening your nuts )



The heads of bolts, ( and the nuts) are measured ACROSS the flats of the head of the bolt.....IOW a  bolt with a 3/4" head is designed so that the 3/4 inch wrench fits the flats of the bolt head.

But ....What the hell do wrenches have to do with the diameter of a carcano barrel??

(https://public.snapon.com/R_RRD/Objects_lg/images/SOEXL707B.jpg)

But since you broached the subject...If you were to use the open end of the 11/16" (.687")  wrench it would fit loosely around the carcano barrel .....If you use a metric open end wrench you'll find that the 16mm wrench will fit nicely around the barrel.  And if you were to use that same 16mm wrench around a AA penlight battery you'll find that the battery is nearly the same size as the barrel of a carcano at the foregrip.

Hey Walt you keep making this claim, how about you get a piece of Carcano sized pipe, cover it in ink, grab it then take a photo of your hand and show us how little or how much contact you make, K?

JohnM
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 28, 2018, 03:22:54 AM
Robert Frazier gave his expert opinion and the defence has an equal responsibility to have the expert examine the evidence and render their opinion, the evidence still exists what are you waiting for?

JohnM

Why wasn't this done in 1964?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Mytton on September 28, 2018, 03:37:57 AM
Robert Frazier identified them by lining up the marks "in his mind".

Mr. MCDONALD. And you took the fragment, is it labeled CE-567, and microscopically compared it with the test-fired bullet from the FBI that was fired out of 139?
Mr. NEWQUIST. That is correct.
Mr. McDONALD. And what was the result of your examination?
Mr. NEWQUIST. From mine and the panel's comparison, of these two exhibits, it is our opinion, they had been fired from the same firearm.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/firearm.htm

JohnM
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 28, 2018, 03:48:21 AM
Mr. MCDONALD. And you took the fragment, is it labeled CE-567, and microscopically compared it with the test-fired bullet from the FBI that was fired out of 139?
Mr. NEWQUIST. That is correct.
Mr. McDONALD. And what was the result of your examination?
Mr. NEWQUIST. From mine and the panel's comparison, of these two exhibits, it is our opinion, they had been fired from the same firearm.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/firearm.htm

JohnM

But still no expert opinion from someone representing LHO's interests. 🤔
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 28, 2018, 04:46:39 AM
Hey Walt you keep making this claim, how about you get a piece of Carcano sized pipe, cover it in ink, grab it then take a photo of your hand and show us how little or how much contact you make, K?

JohnM

Sounds like a good way for you to LEARN....that an adult male could not wrap his palm around a rifle barrel that is the diameter of a AA pen Light battery, and deposit an identifiable print.....    However, You have reversed the situation....the idea would to be ink the palm and grab a AA pen light battery or any cylinder that is close to 16 mm in diameter.....and see how much of a identifiable print you would deposit on that cylinder.....

Since I own many Carcanos I can affirm the fact that an identifiable palm print could not be deposited on the barrel...

If you've got the guts...post a good copy of CE 639 that shows the so called "palm Print" then we'll discuss the idea with the print right there ......
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Mytton on September 28, 2018, 04:50:48 AM
Sounds like a good way for you to LEARN....that an adult male could not wrap his palm around a rifle barrel that is the diameter of a AA pen Light battery, and deposit an identifiable print.....    However, You have reversed the situation....the idea would to be ink the palm and grab a AA pen light battery or any cylinder that is close to 16 mm in diameter.....and see how much of a identifiable print you would deposit on that cylinder.....

Since I own many Carcanos I can affirm the fact that an identifiable palm print could not be deposited on the barrel...

Yeah one way or another all roads lead to Rome, you have an actual Carcano, cool, how about you do your experiment and present your results?

JohnM
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Mytton on September 28, 2018, 05:00:19 AM
But still no expert opinion from someone representing LHO's interests. 🤔

The HSCA was a neutral investigation who erroneously discovered and presented evidence of a conspiracy, had their firearms panel examine the same fragments as Frazier and they all agreed that the same fragments were fired from Oswald's rifle. The evidence still exists and these experts would be aware that there reputation was on the line because at any time in the future anyone good or evil could examine this evidence, so what could all these men from across two decades be possibly hiding and why?

JohnM
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 28, 2018, 01:35:27 PM
Yeah one way or another all roads lead to Rome, you have an actual Carcano, cool, how about you do your experiment and present your results?

JohnM

Huh??....  You don't accept my finding ...and yet you want me to conduct a stupid experiment, the results of which you'd reject.     

Since you apparently lack the guts to post CE 639....Perhaps some one will accommodate me in posting a good cleat copy of CE 639 ( The so called "palm Print" has another exhibit number also-- CE 637? )   Once we have that exhibit to view I'll point out the obvious which you'd like to ignore.

Do you know what Commission  ............  No. 637 is?

Mr. DAY. This is the trace of palmprint I lifted off of the barrel of the gun  ............ ," and also "11/22/63" written on it in my writing off the underside gun barrel near the end of foregrip, ............ 

This establishes that Detective Day inscribed and dated the exhibit CE 637.....
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 28, 2018, 03:45:04 PM
(http://i64.tinypic.com/ouusdd.jpg)

This is not meant to prove Oswald's palmprint was on the barrel. Only to demonstrate that physically it's possible to deposit a print from a part of the palm onto a Carcano barrel.

The only part of the palm that has useful prints is the heel of the palm...and the heel would not contact a rifle barrel that is the diameter of a AA pen light battery.   

And further more Lt Day wrote ....Off undersidee of gun barrell"   

That means he was referring to no more than 1/4  of the circumference of the barrel (2.045") ... which means that the bottom of the barrel that Day referred to was about 1/2 inch wide. ( 1/4 of 2 inches.)  Anyway you slice it a man could not deposit an identifiable palm print on a 1/2 inch strip of that round gun barrel.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 28, 2018, 04:03:51 PM
Wally is still ignoring the evidence. Cite a report that says it was a 6.5 Carcano.

There are dozens of photos that clearly show the rifle is a model 91 /38 Mannlicher Carcano.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 28, 2018, 04:45:14 PM
Mr. MCDONALD. And you took the fragment, is it labeled CE-567, and microscopically compared it with the test-fired bullet from the FBI that was fired out of 139?
Mr. NEWQUIST. That is correct.
Mr. McDONALD. And what was the result of your examination?
Mr. NEWQUIST. From mine and the panel's comparison, of these two exhibits, it is our opinion, they had been fired from the same firearm.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/firearm.htm

"(142) The panel also compared CE 567 with bullets it test-fired in the CE 139 rifle. The panel was unable to identify its tests with CE 567. The panel attributed this to changes in the bore caused by repeated firing of the rifle by the FBI and the Infantry weapons Evaluation Branch of the U.S. Army to test its accuracy, (76) as well as deterioration of the surfaces because the rifle had not been properly cleaned, lubricated, and maintained. For the same reasons, the panel was unable to identify its test-fired bullets with those of the FBI. The panel's test-fired bullets also could not be identified with each other, probably as a consequence of the poor condition of the barrel."
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 29, 2018, 12:48:06 AM
'probably as a consequence of the poor condition of the barrel'

Why you shouldn't clean your rifle bore before a hunt
https://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/game-changers/why-you-shouldn?t-clean-your-rifle-bore-hunt
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 29, 2018, 02:00:41 AM
The HSCA was a neutral investigation who erroneously discovered and presented evidence of a conspiracy, had their firearms panel examine the same fragments as Frazier and they all agreed that the same fragments were fired from Oswald's rifle. The evidence still exists and these experts would be aware that there reputation was on the line because at any time in the future anyone good or evil could examine this evidence, so what could all these men from across two decades be possibly hiding and why?

JohnM

A neutral investigation? LOL. It may have started out that way, but it sure didn't stay that way for long. Expert witness testimony is nothing but OPINION when it isn't supported by corroborating evidence. The WC had NONE and the HSCA had NONE.

LHO was entitled to have his own expert witnesses, but that never happened.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 29, 2018, 02:07:54 AM
There are dozens of photos that clearly show the rifle is a model 91 /38 Mannlicher Carcano.

So you can't cite a report, huh?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 29, 2018, 01:25:16 PM
So you can't cite a report, huh?

Pssst Robbie... Have you ever heard the old axiom.....  "A single picture is worth a thousand words."  ?

Well if one picture is worth a thousand words.... and there are dozens of photos that show the rifle and PROVE that it was a model 91/38 Mannlicher Carcano, why would you want a written report??    Clearly you are irrational.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Organ on September 29, 2018, 03:44:53 PM
The only part of the palm that has useful prints is the heel of the palm...and the heel would not contact a rifle barrel that is the diameter of a AA pen light battery.   

There's a case where a palmprint partial was obtained from a .38 Special cartridge, which is considerably smaller than the Carcano rifle barrel (roughly 3/8" vs. 5/8").

(https://ai2-s2-public.s3.amazonaws.com/figures/2017-08-08/6a36501d450016db514686c5ab65d7bc14dc0b34/5-Figure2-1.png)  (https://ai2-s2-public.s3.amazonaws.com/figures/2017-08-08/6a36501d450016db514686c5ab65d7bc14dc0b34/7-Figure4-1.png)  (https://ai2-s2-public.s3.amazonaws.com/figures/2017-08-08/6a36501d450016db514686c5ab65d7bc14dc0b34/7-Figure5-1.png)

The print in the study came from the "interdigital region" of the palm, not the area of the palm circled in CE 638.

"Detection and Identification of a Latent Palmprint on a Cartridge" by Michelle E. Waldron and Adrianne Walls, Published 2017 ( Link (https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Detection-and-Identification-of-a-Latent-Palmprint-Waldron-Walls/6a36501d450016db514686c5ab65d7bc14dc0b34) )

Quote
And further more Lt Day wrote ....Off undersidee of gun barrell"   

That means he was referring to no more than 1/4  of the circumference of the barrel (2.045") ... which means that the bottom of the barrel that Day referred to was about 1/2 inch wide. ( 1/4 of 2 inches.)  Anyway you slice it a man could not deposit an identifiable palm print on a 1/2 inch strip of that round gun barrel.

Day could have meant the bulk of the print was on the "underside." What's he going to do? Write "underside of the barrel, with about 30% more on the right side of the barrel and about 20% more on the left side of the barrel"?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Organ on September 29, 2018, 03:56:00 PM
LHO was entitled to have his own expert witnesses, but that never happened.

Well, with people like you (and Wecht, Fetzer, Cinque, Prudhomme, Groden, Waldon and Marsh) as "expert witnesses", we see how that turned out.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Howard Gee on September 29, 2018, 05:17:17 PM
which means that the bottom of the barrel that Day referred to was about 1/2 inch wide. ( 1/4 of 2 inches.)

Nope. If the barrel is two inches wide, the top and bottom sides are both two inches wide. What makes you think the underside of the barrel is narrower than the top side ?

Were the bottom sides of the Red Rings narrower than the top sides ?   :D

More 'bottom of the barrel' nonsense from Walt. Get your head out !
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 29, 2018, 07:02:42 PM
Have you ever heard the old axiom.....  "A single picture is worth a thousand words."  ?
This is from the Gil Jesus blog page....[Note the red circles]
(http://www.whokilledjfk.net/from_my_friend_gil_jesus_files/image006.jpg)
Photo in the HSCA Report. Where is the sling/mounts? [On the other side?]
 https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=95#relPageId=449&tab=page
 
Quote
ATTEMPTED MURDER OF GENERAL WALKER
The WC tried to link Oswald and Mannlicher Carcano C2766 to the attempted murder of General Edwin Walker on April 10th 1963. In 1978 the HSCA commissioned Neutron activation tests on the remnants of the bullet CE 573 fired at Walker. The tests were conducted by Dr Vincent P. Guinn who testified that CE573 was "rather characteristic of WCC Mannlicher-Carcano bullet ." This language was typical of that used throughout the WC and HSCA investigations and tends to mislead rather than inform. There was no such thing as a "Mannlicher Carcano bullet". What Dr Guinn should have said was "a 6.5MM WCC bullet that was suitable for a range of weapons including a Mannlicher Carcano 6.5MM."
 
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mauser_reports.htm
 So much for the 'experts'.
 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 29, 2018, 07:40:13 PM
There's a case where a palmprint partial was obtained from a .38 Special cartridge, which is considerably smaller than the Carcano rifle barrel (roughly 3/8" vs. 5/8").

(https://ai2-s2-public.s3.amazonaws.com/figures/2017-08-08/6a36501d450016db514686c5ab65d7bc14dc0b34/5-Figure2-1.png)  (https://ai2-s2-public.s3.amazonaws.com/figures/2017-08-08/6a36501d450016db514686c5ab65d7bc14dc0b34/7-Figure4-1.png)  (https://ai2-s2-public.s3.amazonaws.com/figures/2017-08-08/6a36501d450016db514686c5ab65d7bc14dc0b34/7-Figure5-1.png)

The print in the study came from the "interdigital region" of the palm, not the area of the palm circled in CE 638.

"Detection and Identification of a Latent Palmprint on a Cartridge" by Michelle E. Waldron and Adrianne Walls, Published 2017 ( Link (https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Detection-and-Identification-of-a-Latent-Palmprint-Waldron-Walls/6a36501d450016db514686c5ab65d7bc14dc0b34) )

Day could have meant the bulk of the print was on the "underside." What's he going to do? Write "underside of the barrel, with about 30% more on the right side of the barrel and about 20% more on the left side of the barrel"?


First things first.... Thank you, for replying with and an intelligent debate......   I sincerely appreciate your engaging the discussion with your views.   Now if only you could admit that the photo of the so called "palm print" clearly shows that the photo is NOT of the bottom of the steel rifle barrel.    The slot at the right hand side clearly reveals that the so called palm prinr was lifted from the WOODEN foregrip of a model 91 /38 Mannlicher Carcano.   

And... as you have acknowledged in saying....Day could have meant the bulk of the print was on the "underside." What's he going to do? Write "underside of the barrel, with about 30% more on the right side of the barrel and about 20% more on the left side of the barrel"?

There is a right SIDE, a left SIDE, a TOP . and a BOTTOM of the barrel ...and each constitutes 1/4 of the circumference, and in the case of the carcano barrel that BOTTOM quarter that Day wrote about is about 1/2 inch across .... if Day was referring to the metal barrel....(But he wasn't referring to the METAL barrel at the time he inscribed the 3 X 5 card, he was referring to the WOODEN forgrip) 

If a man grabbed that barrel why would only a 1/2 inch of his palm  come in contact with the metal barrel?   
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 29, 2018, 09:33:25 PM
This is from the Gil Jesus blog page....[Note the red circles]
(http://www.whokilledjfk.net/from_my_friend_gil_jesus_files/image006.jpg)
Photo in the HSCA Report. Where is the sling/mounts? [On the other side?]
 https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=95#relPageId=449&tab=page
   
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mauser_reports.htm
 So much for the 'experts'.

Jerry if you visit Gil Jesus blog....  take a look at his position on the so called palm print.... Several years ago Gil improved upon my presentation that shows that the imaginary "palm print was actually lifted from the WOODEN foregrip of a model 91/38 Mannlicher Carcano.   Gil did a fine job of showing the bayonet slot that is cut into the wooden forefrip. and that bayonet slot can be seen on the right hand side of the photo of the alleged "palm Print" ( CE 639 ).
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 30, 2018, 12:09:35 AM
There's a case where a palmprint partial was obtained from a .38 Special cartridge
Who loads pistol ammo with the palm of their hand?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Steve Howsley on September 30, 2018, 12:54:35 AM
Who loads pistol ammo with the palm of their hand?

No one would think that obviously.

If however you have two or more in a pocket grabbing them in one go would require an action not dissimilar to grabbing a few coins from a pocket. That's when a partial palm print could result.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 30, 2018, 01:37:18 AM
  take a look at his position on the so called palm print ....alleged "palm Print" ( CE 639 ).
Have a glance at CE 640
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1134#relPageId=318&tab=page
That's about as clear as something that may have been flushed down the toilet this morning!  :D

Strange that in his letter, Hoover tells Rankin that no statements concerning the palmprint had been made to the press. Why not? Henry Wade had no problem lying to the press about non-existant fingerprints being found on the rifle on 11/23/63!
CE 2584 - Letter dated July 27, 1964, from FBI to Commission concerning palmprint taken from assassination rifle (CD 1308).
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1141#relPageId=887&tab=page
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 30, 2018, 01:40:33 AM
No one would think that obviously.

If however you have two or more in a pocket grabbing them in one go would require an action not dissimilar to grabbing a few coins from a pocket. That's when a partial palm print could result.
I might suppose so...if your hand is the size of a tic-tac :D
Fingerprint guys are good....but not that good.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Steve Howsley on September 30, 2018, 01:46:36 AM
I might suppose so...if your hand is the size of a tic-tac :D
Fingerprint guys are good....but not that good.

So you think the print is of a complete adult palm? Weird.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 30, 2018, 01:53:51 AM
I might suppose so...if your hand is the size of a tic-tac :D
Fingerprint guys are good....but not that good.

It does seem highly unlikely that a palm print of an adult man could be deposited on a .38 caliber shell casing....
little Organ ( the one between his ears) posted that just to draw the debate away from the smudge that the "experts" called  "the right palm print of Lee Harrrrrrvey Osssssswald "
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 30, 2018, 10:19:08 PM
Pssst Robbie... Have you ever heard the old axiom.....  "A single picture is worth a thousand words."  ?

Well if one picture is worth a thousand words.... and there are dozens of photos that show the rifle and PROVE that it was a model 91/38 Mannlicher Carcano, why would you want a written report??    Clearly you are irrational.

Psst....Those photos show a Carcano, but so what? That doesn't preclude another rifle from being found also. You are playing games

You can't cite any report. You know it and I know it.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 30, 2018, 10:21:09 PM
Well, with people like you (and Wecht, Fetzer, Cinque, Prudhomme, Groden, Waldon and Marsh) as "expert witnesses", we see how that turned out.

It's not surprising that you couldn't care less about Constitutional rights since you live in Canada.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on October 01, 2018, 01:50:54 AM
Psst....Those photos show a Carcano, but so what? That doesn't preclude another rifle from being found also. You are playing games

You can't cite any report. You know it and I know it.

On page 40, Sept 27,  reply #392      Robbie wrote:

Wally is still ignoring the evidence. Cite a report that says it was a 6.5 Carcano.

But now Robbie acknowledges that the rifle that was found buried beneath the pallets of books was a model 91/38 Mannlicher  Carcano.

Robbie wrote:...Those photos show a Carcano, but so what?

So you do know the rifle was a carcano.....(because your eyes told you that)   So why do you need a report?   Just gouge your lying eyes out .....
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Richard Rubio on October 01, 2018, 04:06:21 AM
Those conspirators certainly were brilliant !

Planting a photo of Walker's residence taken months before the assassination.

Not to mention planting the similar order forms for the rifle, and the backyard photos and negatives.

Obviously, the frame up of Oswald began months before it was even known JFK would be visiting Dallas.

And the added touch of forging the note to Marina ?  Genius !

Imagine the glee of the evidence planting conspirators as they introduced these items into the Paine residence.

Just goes to show you, when you couple sheer genius with the ability to look into the future even the most impossible frame up becomes possible.

Excellent point.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on October 01, 2018, 04:13:00 PM
Nope. If the barrel is two inches wide, the top and bottom sides are both two inches wide. What makes you think the underside of the barrel is narrower than the top side ?

Were the bottom sides of the Red Rings narrower than the top sides ?   :D

More 'bottom of the barrel' nonsense from Walt. Get your head out !

Nope. If the barrel is two inches wide, the top and bottom sides are both two inches wide. What makes you think the underside of the barrel is narrower than the top side ?

Duh....  Howie , I said the CIRCUMFERENCE of the barrel was about two inches ...  That barrel had a bottom , a top, and a right side and a left side ....  Day wrote that the print was on the BOTTOM of the barrel ...and that bottom of the barrel was 1/4 of the total CIRCUMFERENCE .....Perhaps you can ask an elementary school kid to solve your problem of ...What is 1/4 of 2?........
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on October 01, 2018, 10:19:27 PM
Excellent point.

That just the usual "vast conspiracy" strawman.  How do you know any of those things were in the Paine garage "months before it was even known JFK would be visiting Dallas"?  Or ever at all?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on February 02, 2019, 04:13:22 AM
It sure seems as a matter of extraordinary accomplishment that Lee Oswald [if he wasn't a native student] wrote in the Cyrillic far better than he did in his/our own native Latin alphabet. How do you suppose that was?
For example here is a link to the Warren Report pages of his notebook/address book..... https://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/pdf/WH16_CE_18.pdf   
Below is page one and two of the heralded "Walker note" that Lee allegedly wrote Marina before allegedly vanishing to pop a cap into a general [for no reason at all] Take a good look at this penmanship. No sloppyness, markovers, or scratchouts, at all! [well not on page one anyway. Did Oswald write it? If so--he appeared quite accomplished. If he didn't---- it appears quite fishy.

 (http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/walkernote1.jpg)   (https://i0.wp.com/mcadams.posc.mu.edu/walkernote2.jpg)

1. This is the key to the mailbox which is located in the main
post office in the city on Ervay Street. This is the same street
where the drugstore, in which you always waited is located. You
will find the mailbox in the post office which is located 4
blocks from the drugstore on that street. I paid for the box
last month so don?t worry about it.
 2. Send the information as to what has happened to me to the
Embassy and include newspaper clippings (should there be anything
about me in the newspapers). I believe that the Embassy will
come quickly to your assistance on learning everything.
3. I paid the house rent on the 2d so don?t worry about it.
 4. Recently I also paid for water and gas.
 5. The money from work will possibly be coming. The money will
be sent to our post office box. Go to the bank and cash the
check.
6. You can either throw out or give my clothing, etc. away. Do
not keep these. However, I prefer that you hold on to my
personal papers (military, civil, etc.).
 7. Certain of my documents are in the small blue valise.
8. The address book can be found on my table in the study should
need same.
 9. We have friends here. The Red Cross also will help you [Red
Cross in English].
 10. I left you as much money as I could, $60 on the second of
the month. You and the baby [apparently] can live for another 2
months using $10 per week.
11. If I am alive and taken prisoner, the city jail is located
at the end of the bridge through which we always passed on going
to the city (right in the beginning of the city after crossing
the bridge).
   
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 02, 2019, 05:17:09 PM
It sure seems as a matter of extraordinary accomplishment that Lee Oswald [if he wasn't a native student] wrote in the Cyrillic far better than he did in his/our own native Latin alphabet. How do you suppose that was?
For example here is a link to the Warren Report pages of his notebook/address book..... https://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/pdf/WH16_CE_18.pdf   
Below is page one and two of the heralded "Walker note" that Lee allegedly wrote Marina before allegedly vanishing to pop a cap into a general [for no reason at all] Take a good look at this penmanship. No sloppyness, markovers, or scratchouts, at all! [well not on page one anyway. Did Oswald write it? If so--he appeared quite accomplished. If he didn't---- it appears quite fishy.

 (http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/walkernote1.jpg)   (https://i0.wp.com/mcadams.posc.mu.edu/walkernote2.jpg)

1. This is the key to the mailbox which is located in the main
post office in the city on Ervay Street. This is the same street
where the drugstore, in which you always waited is located. You
will find the mailbox in the post office which is located 4
blocks from the drugstore on that street. I paid for the box
last month so don?t worry about it.
 2. Send the information as to what has happened to me to the
Embassy and include newspaper clippings (should there be anything
about me in the newspapers). I believe that the Embassy will
come quickly to your assistance on learning everything.
3. I paid the house rent on the 2d so don?t worry about it.
 4. Recently I also paid for water and gas.
 5. The money from work will possibly be coming. The money will
be sent to our post office box. Go to the bank and cash the
check.
6. You can either throw out or give my clothing, etc. away. Do
not keep these. However, I prefer that you hold on to my
personal papers (military, civil, etc.).
 7. Certain of my documents are in the small blue valise.
8. The address book can be found on my table in the study should
need same.
 9. We have friends here. The Red Cross also will help you [Red
Cross in English].
 10. I left you as much money as I could, $60 on the second of
the month. You and the baby [apparently] can live for another 2
months using $10 per week.
11. If I am alive and taken prisoner, the city jail is located
at the end of the bridge through which we always passed on going
to the city (right in the beginning of the city after crossing
the bridge).
 

Item number 9.... 

9. We have friends here. The Red Cross also will help you [Red
Cross in English].


Lee wrote something in parenthesis after the words "Red Cross"......Looks like..... no- ah2uckeid  ?  What does that mean?

Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on February 02, 2019, 09:26:46 PM
Item number 9....  Lee wrote something in parenthesis after the words "Red Cross"
The words actually do mean like it was translated  "The Red Cross will help you (Red Cross in English)" The words he endeavored to write was (на английском) pronounced something like --na angleski which means 'in English'.
It seems that he couldn't spell any better in Russian really. I may have been overstating that he was 'accomplished' or 'proficient' however I am myself terrible at typing and can't really spell that well either [in any language] except Spanish is a bit easier.
#11 The city jail was in the center of town. The jail he mentioned was really the county jail.
It seems that he did indeed write those notes despite it's vague meaning. According to the Warren Report as we know, he went gunning for Walker..missed..got back home and it was like nothing ever happened. I wonder who translated those notes?
 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 02, 2019, 11:07:27 PM
The words actually do mean like it was translated  "The Red Cross will help you (Red Cross in English)" The words he endeavored to write was (на английском) pronounced something like --na angleski which means 'in English'.
It seems that he couldn't spell any better in Russian really. I may have been overstating that he was 'accomplished' or 'proficient' however I am myself terrible at typing and can't really spell that well either [in any language] except Spanish is a bit easier.
#11 The city jail was in the center of town. The jail he mentioned was really the county jail.
It seems that he did indeed write those notes despite it's vague meaning. According to the Warren Report as we know, he went gunning for Walker..missed..got back home and it was like nothing ever happened. I wonder who translated those notes?
 

Thanks Jerry......  Since the words RED CROSS were written in English.....I wonder why Lee felt he had to add that note.  Surely Marina would have known what the words RED CROSS meant....
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 03, 2019, 04:31:41 PM
The words actually do mean like it was translated  "The Red Cross will help you (Red Cross in English)" The words he endeavored to write was (на английском) pronounced something like --na angleski which means 'in English'.
It seems that he couldn't spell any better in Russian really. I may have been overstating that he was 'accomplished' or 'proficient' however I am myself terrible at typing and can't really spell that well either [in any language] except Spanish is a bit easier.
#11 The city jail was in the center of town. The jail he mentioned was really the county jail.
It seems that he did indeed write those notes despite it's vague meaning. According to the Warren Report as we know, he went gunning for Walker..missed..got back home and it was like nothing ever happened. I wonder who translated those notes?
 

It seems that he did indeed write those notes despite it's vague meaning. According to the Warren Report as we know, he went gunning for Walker..missed..got back home and it was like nothing ever happened.

It's not that simple, Jerry....   Yes,Lee did write those notes, And he left the blue note book in his "study" where he calculated it would be found by the police after they went to his apartment searching for the culprit who had fired the bullet through Walker's window. Walker had told them that he was sitting in the room and someone tried to kill him...  But that was Walker's story....There's no proof that he was even in the room at the time. 
The blue note book contained a Back Yard photo, showing Lee holding the rifle, photos of Walker's house and the neighboring vicinity around Walker's house. Maps and bus schedules for that vicinity.   All information that made it appear that Lee had carefully planned the attack on Walker..... But .....BUT...IF He had worked so diligently and planned so carefully....Would he have fired only one shot??   If Lee had intended to kill Walker...he had ample time , because Walker himself said that he simply sat there wondering what had happened.... So If that is true and Lee intended to Kill Walker he could have fire a couple more rounds....

The Walker incident was nothing but a hoax.....  It was designed to make it look like a turn coat Marine and a Castro lovin commie had tried to kill one of Castro's most vocal foes.   

In a new book that was published just a few months ago, there is a bit of information about Walker.   HL Hunt ( Millionaire President of Hunt Oil Co.) and Walker were good friends...   Not long before the murder of JFK, Hunt, and his right hand man John Curington, went to Walkers home to visit with General Walker.   During the visit Walker mentioned the name Oswald ( The book doesn't say if the name "Oswald" was spoken more than once)  Curington doesn't reveal the context of the conversation, but I'd guess that the conversation was about the bullet hole in the window....and Who had fired the shot.     You may recall that Walker told the WC that he had never heard of Oswald prior to the assassination of JFK....   But Curington said Walker indicated that Walker was aware of Oswald BEFORE the murder of John Kennedy.

Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 03, 2019, 07:22:16 PM
Thanks Jerry......  Since the words RED CROSS were written in English.....I wonder why Lee felt he had to add that note.  Surely Marina would have known what the words RED CROSS meant....

The point being....  Did Lee want to be sure that Marina understood that she should look to the US chapter of "Red Cross" and NOT the "Red Cross of the USSR??.... 

Did the US Red Cross have ties to the CIA or State Department ....and did they hold secret records of Lee Oswald's employment??   
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on February 03, 2019, 07:56:04 PM
Quote
It seems that he did indeed write those notes despite it's vague meaning. According to the Warren Report as we know, he went gunning for Walker..missed..got back home and it was like nothing ever happened.
That was as stated-- 'according to the Report'. On the police statement [see opening post]...Walker was hit by something in the arm .....a bullet fragment, sliver of wood, or a piece of glass perhaps... but dismissed any medical attention.
 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 03, 2019, 08:51:50 PM
That was as stated-- 'according to the Report'. On the police statement [see opening post]...Walker was hit by something in the arm .....a bullet fragment, sliver of wood, or a piece of glass perhaps... but dismissed any medical attention.
 

Walker was hit by something in the arm .....a bullet fragment,? sliver of wood,? or a piece of glass ? perhaps... but dismissed any medical attention.

WHO ...I ASK... WHO, Verified that Walker had been hit by SOMETHING??[/u ]   Walker put on a show for the reporters who showed up at his house after the loud bang in the dark that Walker claimed was the sound of the gunshot of the commie assassin who had tried to kill him.   He also told reporters that it was the Kennedy's fault because they were allowing commies to run loose. (Sounds like Adolph)  ( a photo taken at the time shows Walker relaxed and smiling after the alleged attack to kill him.

Apparently Walker had a small superficial wound on his arm...which he probably inflicted himself to convince the reporters that he'd nearly been killed....

A little blood can be very convincing....  Remember Lee's "attempted suicide" in Moscow?   Nothing but a superficial wrist wound and a capsule of red dye in water in a bathtub...  But it fooled the Russians.....
 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on March 05, 2019, 04:38:57 PM
It sure seems as a matter of extraordinary accomplishment that Lee Oswald [if he wasn't a native student] wrote in the Cyrillic far better than he did in his/our own native Latin alphabet. How do you suppose that was?
For example here is a link to the Warren Report pages of his notebook/address book..... https://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/pdf/WH16_CE_18.pdf   
Below is page one and two of the heralded "Walker note" that Lee allegedly wrote Marina before allegedly vanishing to pop a cap into a general [for no reason at all] Take a good look at this penmanship. No sloppyness, markovers, or scratchouts, at all! [well not on page one anyway. Did Oswald write it? If so--he appeared quite accomplished. If he didn't---- it appears quite fishy.

 (http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/walkernote1.jpg)   (https://i0.wp.com/mcadams.posc.mu.edu/walkernote2.jpg)

1. This is the key to the mailbox which is located in the main
post office in the city on Ervay Street. This is the same street
where the drugstore, in which you always waited is located. You
will find the mailbox in the post office which is located 4
blocks from the drugstore on that street. I paid for the box
last month so don?t worry about it.
 2. Send the information as to what has happened to me to the
Embassy and include newspaper clippings (should there be anything
about me in the newspapers). I believe that the Embassy will
come quickly to your assistance on learning everything.
3. I paid the house rent on the 2d so don?t worry about it.
 4. Recently I also paid for water and gas.
 5. The money from work will possibly be coming. The money will
be sent to our post office box. Go to the bank and cash the
check.
6. You can either throw out or give my clothing, etc. away. Do
not keep these. However, I prefer that you hold on to my
personal papers (military, civil, etc.).
 7. Certain of my documents are in the small blue valise.
8. The address book can be found on my table in the study should
need same.
 9. We have friends here. The Red Cross also will help you [Red
Cross in English].
 10. I left you as much money as I could, $60 on the second of
the month. You and the baby [apparently] can live for another 2
months using $10 per week.
11. If I am alive and taken prisoner, the city jail is located
at the end of the bridge through which we always passed on going
to the city (right in the beginning of the city after crossing
the bridge).
 

Below is page one and two of the heralded "Walker note"

Is that a date that is written at the upper right hand corner of page one?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Michael O'Brian on March 05, 2019, 07:59:44 PM
The Warren Commission sharks.. desperate to suggest Oswald was a violent and dangerous person declared that Lee Harvey Oswald was the perpetrator in the shooting of Gen Walker based on testimony from Marina and George D'M...photos and a map conveniently found w/ other incriminating evidence also a 'farewell note' of some sort was found.
Marina and George did not see Oswald shoot Walker. [Walker was shot though not badly injured][/b]

(http://harveyandlee.net/Temp/Walker_Report.jpg)
Walker was his own target, he set this who shot at me through the window scene up, and it was all part of the plot to frame Oswald, to make J.F.K's killing seem more realistically to have been by L.H.O

Just like how the gay general took to he skies on 22.11.63 it gave him an alibi!!!! Well it wasn't me, I was on a flight and the same S.O.B tried to kill me too, and even in a similar fashion, high powered rifle through the window, the West one.


In reality the mad racist queer had one of his sniper x army buddies pull the trigger on both occasions
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on March 05, 2019, 09:30:32 PM
Walker was his own target, he set this who shot at me through the window scene up, and it was all part of the plot to frame Oswald, to make J.F.K's killing seem more realistically to have been by L.H.O

Just like how the gay general took to he skies on 22.11.63 it gave him an alibi!!!! Well it wasn't me, I was on a flight and the same S.O.B tried to kill me too, and even in a similar fashion, high powered rifle through the window, the West one.


In reality the mad racist queer had one of his sniper x army buddies pull the trigger on both occasions

Walker was his own target, he set this who shot at me through the window scene up, and it was all part of the plot to frame Oswald, to make J.F.K's killing seem more realistically to have been by L.H.O

Whoa horse.... racin down a hill, and Yer gonna get the wagon on top of you.....  Nobody in their right mind would believe that Walker was actively plotting to kill JFK 9 months before the event.   

I agree ....Walker had set up the hoax.   But it had nothing to do with the assassination of JFK.....  He thought that Lee could be presented as a communist revolutionary who supported Fidel Castro.....  And he thought that Lee might be goofy enough to try to shoot Castro, if they could get Lee into Cuba.

In reality the mad racist queer had one of his sniper x army buddies pull the trigger on both occasions

You might be right.....But I don't believe Walker was at the apex..... But he was definitely one of the conspirators.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Michael O'Brian on March 05, 2019, 10:48:25 PM

  Nobody in their right mind would believe that Walker was actively plotting to kill JFK 9 months before the event.   


Well R.F.K had the headcase committed back in 1962 he sure had plenty of motive.

The issue that led to General Walker's resignation began in April 1961 when Overseas Weekly, a privately owned newspaper circulated among members of the armed forces overseas, accused the general of using an Army information program to subject his troops to "a propaganda barrage" that extolled the John Birch Society. General Walker was then commanding the 24th Infantry Division, based in West Germany.

The newspaper also reported that the general had publicly asserted that former President Harry S. Truman, Eleanor Roosevelt and former Secretary of State Dean Acheson were "definitely pink."

The report attracted widespread attention, and President Kennedy ordered an investigation into the matter. The general was relieved of his command while the inquiry was conducted.

In June 1961, the Army said the investigation showed that the general's information program was "not attributable to any program of the John Birch Society." But it admonished the general "for taking injudicious actions and for making derogatory public statements about prominent Americans."

He resigned on Nov. 2, 1961, contending that he "must be free from the power of little men who, in the name of my country, punish loyal service to it."

By resigning rather than retiring, he passed up retirement pay that at the time would have amounted to $12,000 a year. To accept retirement benefits, he said, "would be a compromise with my principles."
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on March 05, 2019, 10:54:55 PM
Well R.F.K had the headcase committed back in 1962 he sure had plenty of motive

Yes...I'm not denying Walker's motive.... JFK had sacked him and relieved him of his command in Germany, and RFK had put him in a psycho ward....There's no doubt that he hated the Kennedy's ...but he wasn't actively  plotting to kill them way back in April....
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Michael O'Brian on March 05, 2019, 10:57:34 PM
Yes...I'm not denying Walker's motive.... JFK had sacked him and relieved him of his command in Germany, and RFK had put him in a psycho ward....There's no doubt that he hated the Kennedy's ...but he wasn't actively  plotting to kill them way back in April....

Why would he not, the motive was set in train as far back as November 1961 when he left the military

Anyone who does not rank this nut as being the top plotter in both of these cases is not in touch with reality.

I say we dig the mother fucker up from the grave and hang his bones up at some Texan landmark for all to spit on
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Andrew Mason on March 05, 2019, 11:51:57 PM
Walker was his own target, he set this who shot at me through the window scene up, and it was all part of the plot to frame Oswald, to make J.F.K's killing seem more realistically to have been by L.H.O

Whoa horse.... racin down a hill, and Yer gonna get the wagon on top of you.....  Nobody in their right mind would believe that Walker was actively plotting to kill JFK 9 months before the event.   

I agree ....Walker had set up the hoax.   But it had nothing to do with the assassination of JFK.....  He thought that Lee could be presented as a communist revolutionary who supported Fidel Castro.....  And he thought that Lee might be goofy enough to try to shoot Castro, if they could get Lee into Cuba.

In reality the mad racist queer had one of his sniper x army buddies pull the trigger on both occasions

You might be right.....But I don't believe Walker was at the apex..... But he was definitely one of the conspirators.
While you are imagining Walker setting up this "hoax" tell us how he got Oswald to admit to Marina about trying to assassinate him in April 1963.    Or, if you don't believe he did admit it, how did he get Marina to tell the FBI and WC that Oswald admitted it to her?  And why did arrange to have a bullet dug out of his wall that was at least consistent with having been fired by Oswald's gun?  Who did he get to fire the bullet through his window?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on March 05, 2019, 11:54:19 PM
While you are imagining Walker setting up this "hoax" tell us how he got Oswald to admit to Marina about trying to assassinate him in April 1963.    Or, if you don't believe he did admit it, how did he get Marina to tell the FBI and WC that Oswald admitted it to her?  And why did arrange to have a bullet dug out of his wall that was at least consistent with having been fired by Oswald's gun?  Who did he get to fire the bullet through his window?

No.....I'm not going to tell you..... I'm tired of repeating myself..... I've posted that information dozens of times
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on March 06, 2019, 04:16:18 PM
While you are imagining Walker setting up this "hoax" tell us how he got Oswald to admit to Marina about trying to assassinate him in April 1963.

Marina said a lot of things.  She said Lee was going to go take a look at Nixon when Nixon wasn't even in town.

Quote
   Or, if you don't believe he did admit it, how did he get Marina to tell the FBI and WC that Oswald admitted it to her?  And why did arrange to have a bullet dug out of his wall that was at least consistent with having been fired by Oswald's gun?  Who did he get to fire the bullet through his window?

"at least consistent with".  LOL.  Steel-jacketed?

"Oswald's gun".  LOL.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on March 06, 2019, 10:21:12 PM
While you are imagining Walker setting up this "hoax" tell us how he got Oswald to admit to Marina about trying to assassinate him in April 1963.    Or, if you don't believe he did admit it, how did he get Marina to tell the FBI and WC that Oswald admitted it to her?  And why did arrange to have a bullet dug out of his wall that was at least consistent with having been fired by Oswald's gun?  Who did he get to fire the bullet through his window?

tell us how he got Oswald to admit to Marina about trying to assassinate him in April 1963.

Andy.....Ask Iacoletti for the number....  And have him post it.    Then if you have more questions....I'll try to answer them.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on March 09, 2019, 07:29:21 PM
While you are imagining Walker setting up this "hoax" tell us how he got Oswald to admit to Marina about trying to assassinate him in April 1963.    Or, if you don't believe he did admit it, how did he get Marina to tell the FBI and WC that Oswald admitted it to her?  And why did arrange to have a bullet dug out of his wall that was at least consistent with having been fired by Oswald's gun?  Who did he get to fire the bullet through his window?

While you are imagining Walker setting up this "hoax" tell us how he got Oswald to admit to Marina about trying to assassinate him in April 1963. 

Lee DID tell Marina that he had taken a shot at Walker.....(I wish I knew PRECISELY his words ....) Because that's what he wanted her to tell the police when they came calling.   He thought that by leaving the easily traceable carcano near Walker's house where it could be easily found, they would trace the rifle to him.   He also had planned for the police to find the phony dossier with the BY photo and photos of Walker's house .....He thought that the BY photo would be published in the newspapers and Castro's agents would see it and believe that he was in fact a Castro supporter, and allow him refuge in Cuba.

Bottom line....  Lee told Marina what he wanted her to repeat.... because that's the way spies do things....  and she thought that he was telling her the truth.   

  why did arrange to have a bullet dug out of his wall that was at least consistent with having been fired by Oswald's gun?

The bullet wasn't dug out of the wall....It was found lying on a stack of John Birch / Minute man literature that Walker had stored in his living room....
The fact that the bullet was found there strongly suggests that it was planted there....because if the bullet had enough energy to emerge from the plastered wall, it would not have stopped suddenly six inches after emerging from that wall.  IOW.... that bullet was a precursor of CE 399.....In that it was intended to be traceable to the Carcano in Lee's possession.


 Who did he get to fire the bullet through his window?

It was the dumb, naive, young patriotic, Herb Philbrick emulator .... Lee ( The Patsy ) Oswald.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Michael O'Brian on March 10, 2019, 04:13:13 PM
 


B

It was the dumb, naive, young patriotic, Herb Philbrick emulator .... Lee ( The Patsy ) Oswald.

Oswald did not shoot at anyone in Dallas, the chap was all over the place trying to provide for his family, and also doing good for mankind with his socialist work.
Walker the queer set that shooting up at his house to provide himself with some sort of alibi  as a victim, it was to be almost identical to the J.F.K shooting to try link both to the same person. Ie through a window high powered rifle.
Point to note the shot that went from the Dal Tex into the TSBD and back out onto Elm, was very similar to the shot that got fired in Walkers window, the sniper had the exact same ark of fire, through the window frames
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on March 10, 2019, 05:50:17 PM
Oswald did not shoot at anyone in Dallas, the chap was all over the place trying to provide for his family.
Walker the queer set that shooting up at his house to provide himself with some sort of alibi  as a victim, it was to be almost identical to the J.F.K shooting to try link both to the same person. Ie through a window high powered rifle

Pay attention, and knock off the obscenities .....  I DID NOT  say, or imply that Lee tried to shoot Walker.   I said that he fired a bullet through Walker's window, and I doubt that Walker was in that room at the time.   It was simply a Hoax and Walker was part of it....  The hoax was intended to make it appear as if Lee Oswald, a commie and a Castro Sympathizer, had tried to kill Castro's foe....
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Michael O'Brian on March 10, 2019, 05:55:00 PM
Pay attention, and knock off the obscenities .....  I DID NOT  say, or imply that Lee tried to shoot Walker.   I said that he fired a bullet through Walker's window, and I doubt that Walker was in that room at the time.   It was simply a Hoax and Walker was part of it....  The hoax was intended to make it appear as if Lee Oswald, a commie and a Castro Sympathizer, had tried to kill Castro's foe....

I agree it was a hoax, but Lee had nothing to do with it at all, and yes it was designed to make Walker look like a victim.
It was also good practice for the shooter (Walkers military buddie) because it was a very similar scenario to the shot, that got fired from the Dal Tex into the TSBD and out onto Elm from the alleged S.N, the ark of fire to both targets was exactly the same fired in through both window frames. 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on March 10, 2019, 06:03:47 PM
I agree it was a hoax, but Lee had nothing to do with it at all, it was designed to make Walker look like a victim and it was also good practice for the shooter because it was a very similar scenario to the shot, that got fired from the Dal Tex into the TSBD and out onto Elm the ark of fire to both targets was exactly the same out through both window frames.

If Lee had nothing to do with the hoax.... Then explain why he created the phony dossier which had photos of Walker's house and the area around Walker's house, plus maps of the area and bus schedules.... and most important a Back Yard photo....which portrayed him as a well armed commie revolutionary ( which he wasn't, but the photo was like a carnival gag photo.)

And if you can explain that phony dossier...Then explain why he told Marina that he'd taken a shot at Walker....  And Why ..George De Morenschildt. asked him...  ( with a wink) Lee, How could you miss?     
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on March 10, 2019, 06:46:47 PM
Don't believe any of that so called evidence, Marina was brainwashed to the hilt, they drove the woman to insanity.
Both shots through window frames were fired by the same guy, but it was not Lee


Mr O,  You haven't tried to explain any of the problems I presented , and asked you to explain....  You can't dismiss it by saying it was all a lie....

If Lee had nothing to do with the hoax.... Then explain why he created the phony dossier which had photos of Walker's house and the area around Walker's house, plus maps of the area and bus schedules.... and most important a Back Yard photo....which portrayed him as a well armed commie revolutionary ( which he wasn't, but the photo was like a carnival gag photo.)

And if you can explain that phony dossier...Then explain why he told Marina that he'd taken a shot at Walker....  And Why ..George De Morenschildt. asked him...  ( with a wink) Lee, How could you miss?   
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Richard Smith on June 18, 2019, 07:34:50 PM
     It's not unusual for those of us laboring part of our lives without remuneration or thanks in this field to gain courage and encouragement in the face of painful adversity by the occasional hat tip or the example of others who suffered the shame and berating that awaits, and to be sure it isn't just painful to be shunned for a view that isn't accepted it can be painful when someone you respect begs out.  Sadly for me, my views have caused enough pain to Duncan that he banned me for a long, long time.  I wasn't idle.  My beliefs are well known, I keep finding corroboration and I wonder how it can be ignored, such as this example from 1962, a book about Oswald Mosley with Gen. Edwin Walker's name on the dust jacket.   Just look down at the bottom.  I'm arguing for indexology as a function of the plotters.

(https://i.ibb.co/SBZss5q/fase.jpg)

I have a feeling I'm going to regret this but corroboration of what?  Walker's name is mentioned in relation to a blurb on right-wing extremism.  He was a well-known right wing extremist (just ask Oswald who tried to kill him for that reason).  So what?
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Denis Pointing on June 18, 2019, 11:55:21 PM
      I don't see why you'd regret it, unless you just mean having to adjust your awareness to a different approach.   I am referring to corroboration of my belief that there is an Index at work, which derives from the overall framework of the hit:  a Texas Schoolbook.   Kennedy wasn't planning to be murdered, unlike King, who was much more immediately aware of that prospect, he didn't leave much indication of what his life's meaning would be; surely Johnson wasn't what he had in mind.  The killers, I sense, had this outcome chockful of their ideas.  We are forced either to accept oblivion about JFK, adopt what they conveyed or admit our own negligence in picking up the torch they grabbed from his grasp.  The sad fact is that magazine society and general interest publishers simply eulogized him into the dustbin, clap clap for Johnny style.

       However when you look at the index that develops, Oswald, for example, being a signifier for Oswald Mosley begins to make sense in terms of the very direct association that Walker, who threatened JFK, had with him.   Turning the tables on JFK, Walker made up a story about Oswald shooting at him, and framed a patsy, getting JFK killed and making himself a hero all in one twist.  It's the twist that is so telltale.

         

Mac, Walker never claimed LHO took a shot at him. To state "Walker made up a story about Oswald shooting at him, and framed a patsy" is simply not true. Even if Walker had made such a claim how would that have made him a "hero"? Your post is not only incorrect, it makes absolutely no sense.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Denis Pointing on June 19, 2019, 12:14:57 AM
      By being the victim of the nut of the Kennedy assassination Walker managed, somehow, to restore his legitimacy as a political entity, sir.   That's the man Oswald tried to kill before he killed JFK sort of puts them on an even kilter.  It would be like me saying the people who tortured me killed John Lennon, right?  Sort of elevates me, playing all big, as they say in Pittsburgh.   Walker seems to me, not to contradict you, but very party to the little put on.  By the ways, what became of the license plate on the car outside his house?  LMW28IF?

I don't accept that 'explanation' for one second. Never mind, we can agree to differ. Now, can you please address your completely incorrect claim that "Walker made up a story about Oswald shooting at him" I repeat, that simply is not true. Walker never claimed LHO took a shot at him. Where did you get that?

Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Denis Pointing on June 19, 2019, 12:37:15 AM
     Yes, I assume that you mean in cross-checking the fact you would find that Gen. Walker reported being shot at and that Marina claimed Lee confessed to doing it.   Walker, in that scenario, would be disappointed, angry and surprised to learn that it had been Oswald and relieved to learn that such a man was gone and the world was now safe.   I'm simply accusing Walker of ventriloquism, Denis.  Once I read who he was, that he threatened Kennedy, and that the patsy was all perfectly manufactured and paraded so that Walker was voila way above suspicion, a victim himself no less, I concluded that Walker indirectly set up Oswald as having shot at him, too.  I hope the clarification allows you to see the process I used to arrive at that narrative despite what you probably legitimately feel is research-related weakness.

I like 'facts' in statements to be accurate, that's all, mate. Just coz I like yer doesn't mean I'm gonna let yer get away with Jack s***. lol  Thumb1:

PS Mac, you're getting confused. The license plate number LMW28IF you asked about is the number on the white VW Beetle in the background of The Beatles Abbey RD album.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Ray Mitcham on June 19, 2019, 09:05:12 AM
I like 'facts' in statements to be accurate, that's all, mate. Just coz I like yer doesn't mean I'm gonna let yer get away with Jack s***. lol  Thumb1:

PS Mac, you're getting confused. The license plate number LMW28IF you asked about is the number on the white VW Beetle in the background of The Beatles Abbey RD album.

The licence plate number is "LMW 28 1F" not "IF".

Sorry to be pedantic.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Denis Pointing on June 19, 2019, 01:13:24 PM
The licence plate number is "LMW 28 1F" not "IF".

Sorry to be pedantic.

Really? OK, thanks. Glad to be corrected.  Thumb1:
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Michael O'Brian on June 20, 2019, 05:18:45 PM
If Lee had nothing to do with the hoax.... Then explain why he created the phony dossier which had photos of Walker's house and the area around Walker's house, plus maps of the area and bus schedules.... and most important a Back Yard photo....which portrayed him as a well armed commie revolutionary ( which he wasn't, but the photo was like a carnival gag photo.)

And if you can explain that phony dossier...Then explain why he told Marina that he'd taken a shot at Walker....  And Why ..George De Morenschildt. asked him...  ( with a wink) Lee, How could you miss?   

Hello Walt
Can we believe anything whatsoever that they say about Oswald? a lot of things were made up, to suit the W.C findings witness's fobbed off and others put in their place to manufacture the evidence.
I can't even come around to say for sure that Oswald even attended Paines house on the Thursday, because the first report which Marina gave stated he had called around on the 14th and was in good spirits, according to her, he mentioned that he almost had the money for them to all live together.
So if we can't go with this why bother even consider that he shot at Walker, whoever fired at Walkers house done it with Walkers knowledge, it was a practice shot, and also to give him an alibi.
The similarities of both shooting are just too close.
So if my theory of the Dal Tex having a line of sight through the TSBD 6th floor then it entered the TSBD window, just like the shot entered Walkers window.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on December 23, 2019, 04:50:48 PM
What you are basically arguing is that the evidence against Oswald is so overwhelming that he must be innocent.  Criminals do dumb things.  Oswald did apparently destroy some documents relating to the Walker attempt.  Marina explains in her testimony why some were kept.   In terms of the cars, remember the DC sniper case?  The police were asking people to look for a white van.  This in the age of security cameras.  No white van was involved.  Just a mix up by witnesses.  Cars may have been seen driving away and witnesses erroneously connected them to the Walker attempt.  Again, there is no apparent need to "establish Oswald as a homicidal maniac" to link him to the JFK assassination in a conspiracy narrative.  Assassins, mass shooter often have no prior violent history.   The risks of linking Oswald to the Walker shooting far surpassed any gains from a conspiracy perspective.   After his death, with the authorities satisfied of his guilt in the JFK assassination there would have been no need to falsely link him to Walker.

The risks of linking Oswald to the Walker shooting far surpassed any gains from a conspiracy perspective.   After his death, with the authorities satisfied of his guilt in the JFK assassination there would have been no need to falsely link him to Walker.

Are you serious??    The Walker hoax has become integral in the legend of Lee Oswald  The Patsy.     Without the tale of the Walker hoax many folks would be unconvinced that Lee Oswald was the assassin.    The lie that Lee Oswald had tried to kill Walker convinced many skeptics .....   The FACT that Lee merely shot a bullet through Walker's window but DID NOT  try to kill Walker has been  glossed over by liars. 
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on January 13, 2020, 12:08:39 PM
Quote
The risks of linking Oswald to the Walker shooting far surpassed any gains from a conspiracy perspective.   After his death, with the authorities satisfied of his guilt in the JFK assassination there would have been no need to falsely link him to Walker.
    But yet they did anyway, in a terribly hop-scotch round about way. On page 404 WR the report states that Oswald must have been "planning the Walker shooting [April 10] 1 or maybe 2 months in advance". However he did not allegedly obtain a rifle to do it with until the previous March 13. It also states that he [again conveniently] left behind a notebook "detailing these plans". I have failed to ever see this 'notebook'!
Again I say---the only way someone could possibly believe the Warren Report is to just simply read it.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=946#relPageId=428&tab=page

Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Organ on January 13, 2020, 03:25:11 PM
    But yet they did anyway, in a terribly hop-scotch round about way. On page 404 WR the report states that Oswald must have been "planning the Walker shooting [April 10] 1 or maybe 2 months in advance". However he did not allegedly obtain a rifle to do it with until the previous March 13. It also states that he [again conveniently] left behind a notebook "detailing these plans". I have failed to ever see this 'notebook'!
Again I say---the only way someone could possibly believe the Warren Report is to just simply read it.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=946#relPageId=428&tab=page

Marina said Oswald showed her the notebook a few days after the attempt on Walker. He must have destroyed the notebook, but retained three photographs which Marina said she had seen in the notebook. Opinions vary on her credibility.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on January 13, 2020, 03:49:59 PM
Marina said Oswald showed her the notebook a few days after the attempt on Walker. He must have destroyed the notebook, but retained three photographs which Marina said she had seen in the notebook. Opinions vary on her credibility.

He did not destroy the notebook....  It was photographed among the evidence at the police station on the evening of 11/22/63.....apparently the photo of the 57 Chevy in Walker's parking area fell out of the notebook and someone simply laid it on top of the note book .   

When Marina visited Lee in Jail on Saturday afternoon, Lee was concerned about that blue note book and told Marina to  keep it safe because there were important documents in it.  Lee didn't know that the police already had possession of the notebook.
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 13, 2020, 04:52:23 PM
Opinions vary on her credibility.

Marina Oswald Porter's Statements of a Contradictory Nature (http://iacoletti.org/jfk/marina-contradictions.pdf)
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on January 13, 2020, 06:09:20 PM
Marina Oswald Porter's Statements of a Contradictory Nature (http://iacoletti.org/jfk/marina-contradictions.pdf)


Yes, the contradictory statements have created a major problem....  But Just as the early denials that their own missile battery shot down PS 752 out of Teheran created problems for the Iranian government....  Marina's contradictory tales have created problems for researchers....   I believe the truth will prevail and rise and be recognized as truth.....
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Jerry Freeman on January 16, 2020, 08:06:39 PM
Marina Oswald Porter's Statements of a Contradictory Nature (http://iacoletti.org/jfk/marina-contradictions.pdf)
In the fantasy fictional yarn called "Marina and Lee" ...Oswald had taken several pictures utilizing various angles of the Walker house.
I believe I read that the proposed reasoning for this ludicrous camera work was--they were to be be kept as souvenirs  :)
Title: Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on January 16, 2020, 08:14:37 PM
In the fantasy fictional yarn called "Marina and Lee" ...Oswald had taken several pictures utilizing various angles of the Walker house.
I believe I read that the proposed reasoning for this ludicrous camera work was--they were to be be kept as souvenirs  :)

they were to be be kept as souvenirs

Souvenirs of what ?    If Lee took the photos of Walker's house ( And I believe that he did) Why would they be "souvenirs"?   I suspect that Lee took them as "evidence" that the owner of the vehicles was visiting walker......