Oswald confessed to his wife..And she reported it when? Unless you were there and heard this confession yourself.
Oswald confessed to his wife even before the Walker attempt was known to the public.
"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?
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).
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.
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.
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
What you are basically arguing.. Criminals do dumb things.I am not arguing anything [I believe you are though]... I only posted a report for the forum and proposed an alternative.
Marina explains in her testimony why some were kept.
DC sniper case?
Mr. RANKIN. Did you learn at any time that he had been practicing with the rifle?How [in the name of all that's holy] could anybody have believed this woman's "testimony"?
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.
He also had EAW's phone number in his notebook. Why?
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
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.
...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?
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?
Cite thatCite what? About the bullet? Did you read that police report in the lead post? Did you even know about that report?
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?
You asked why Oswald would have Walker's number, and I offered up a reasonable possibility.
Well?
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]?
I covered this in several posts of my series, but...It got erased?
There is nothing "reasonable" about your possibility. In fact, it is quite laughable.
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?
....the Commission has concluded that Lee Harvey Oswald attempted tohttp://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/walker.txt
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...
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
Made a leisurely [7 or 8 mile] stroll at right shoulder arms? Maybe he took a cab? Then why need a map?
There is nothing "reasonable" about your possibility. In fact, it is quite laughable.
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.
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.
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.
And the evidence that Oswald took these photos or marked this map?
<crickets>
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.
The same camera that took the Walker photos also took the backyard photos and Oswald family snaps.
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."
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 :)
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.
Too bad the camera wasn?t.
But define ?Oswald?s possessions?. Anything in the Paine garage that seemed incriminating?
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.
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.
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.
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 ::)
...might recreate this event using a video game to help visualize what happened.And every historical event mentioned in this forum ...awesome idea!
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
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?
The same camera that took the Walker photos also took the backyard photos and Oswald family snaps.
Nothing to see here!
JohnM
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
And every historical event mentioned in this forum ...awesome idea!
I have not seen the Dale Myers video game.
Great ? arrest the camera.
Tell us a more efficient way to find out if Walker was home that night, if not by calling his number?
Hello General...listen, I'd like to come over and shoot you...will you be up for awhile?
So when you make up conspirators in order to be sarcastic, you are somehow "not making up conspirators".
Then you can prove your claim with phone records, right?
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?
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.
What is laughable is thinking that LHO, or anyone, would call a person before they shot at them.
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?
And every historical event mentioned in this forum ...awesome idea!
I have not seen the Dale Myers video game.
::)
Where did I say Oswald should actually talk to him? Just wait for Walker to pick up, then just hang up.
Duh.
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
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:
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 ?
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.
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.
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"?
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...
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.
He also had EAW's phone number in his notebook.What page is that on?
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.
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.
LOL! You think that 44 m.p.h. is "too fast?" LOL!
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.
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.
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, 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.
He also had EAW's phone number in his notebook.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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........................
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.
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 ?
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.
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 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.
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........................
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 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.
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.
"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.
Page 3, top left.OK...It's there and there it is.
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".
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.
There was NO need for those turns. End of story.
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.
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.
any support for the 44mph claim.......(http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/Smileys/default2/Off_Topic.gif)
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.
Cite for your claim of 15 m.p.h. being "parade speed."
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.
:D
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
The biggest rightwing CT?er is now Donald Trump.Trump believes that Oswald was the killer [as far as I know]. His view on conspiracy???? Not sure ::)
Mainstream/Establishment Liberals who work for CBS, the NY Times and other traditional Media have always supported and defended the Lone Assassin narrative.
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?
Seems you've read quite a few. Would seem it's LN books and websites you're avoiding.
So John believes Marina had total recall here but otherwise claims her memory is faulty.
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.
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?
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.
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.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.
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.
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)
[...]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.
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.....
[...]
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.
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.
...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?
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 allWalker 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.
An assassination attempt would have ultimately still happened at some time and place.
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.
... those two turns were NOT needed and were only added to make the killing of JFK much easier.
Wow, so you think trained police investigators and a former general cannot tell the difference?
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.
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.
Greer drove the limo.(http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/Smileys/default2/Off_Topic.gif)
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.Ignoring this, the Commission goons still relied on the Marina yarn and various scraps of drivel and pegged Oswald with some senseless shooting.
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.
Anything's possible. Do you have any evidence that a sleepy, sloppy, cop meant copper jacket?
An assassination attempt would have ultimately still happened at some time and place.
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.
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" 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.
Jerry: This is off-topic. Anybody ever tell you that you look like "Frank Cannon"? Some people say I look like JFK... in profile.
To quote an often repeated two-word phrase of yours ....
prove it
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?
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.
There is NO chain of custody for CE 573. None. It couldn't even be tied to CE 139 for goodness sake.
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?
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.
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)
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?
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.....?
... believe me I already proved it....
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.
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.
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.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.
The unnecessary two turns are the issue, but of course you don't want to tackle that issue.
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 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?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.
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.
(http://iacoletti.org/jfk/walker-bullet-telegram.png)
"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.russianwomendiscussion.com/Smileys/default2/Off_Topic.gif) What does that have to do with Walker?
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.
(http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/Smileys/default2/Off_Topic.gif) What does that have to do with Walker?
You just keep changing the focus. Anything to avoid discussing the unnecessary two turns.
(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?
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 ::)
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?
Entered as CE 573 I don't know what you are talking about...do you?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
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.
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?
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.
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.
He saw the 30.06 that was dug out of his wall.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?
Also the cops that dug out that bullet were never called to identify anything.
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
So, John, afraid to answer my question?
As far as I know, the HSCA never showed CE573 or a photo of it during the HSCA Hearings.
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.
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
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.
Officer B.G. NORVELL found the bullet. . . and it was given to Det. B.G. BROWN, Crime Laboratory Division .https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2015/05/19/judyth-baker-lee-harvey-oswald-did-not-shoot-at-general-walker/
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.
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.
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.
As far as you know? Did you attend the hearings?
They generally think that if anybody rattles off a list of names that's good enough.
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.
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?
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?
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......
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?
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.
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?
So you are claiming that EAW never saw CE 573?
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:
The hearings were also transcribed and printed as the first five volumes of the HSCA set.HistoryMatters does the entire set on line-----
Oh, but I did, grasshopper.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.
HistoryMatters does the entire set on line-----HM has the whole thing. Mcadams site has a text version that's easier to search:
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
Why so combative? How should I know, though? Ask Walker.
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.
If you can find a ballistics expert who can look at the data and differ, please fell free...
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.
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..Most likely. I audio recorded a lot of the stuff on 1/4" two track reel to reel and still have them.
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.
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.
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.
Do they make any mention of showing any bullet?
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/)
<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.
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/)
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.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?
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?
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."
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.
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.
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?
There would have been NO turns. Upon entering DP the motorcade could have picked up speed.
Mitch Todd: "And what training do Generals have that makes them experts at determining the construction of spent ammunition?"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?
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.Then it shouldn't be too all that hard to to answer my question, now that you've studied it.
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?
So, when pressed, you're simply going to claim that Duncan ate your homework?
"Could have."
The limo could have picked up speed after the turn, too, so that's and excuse, not
a reason.
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.
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.
???
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?
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.
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
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.
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.
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
You lot put way too much emphasis on evidence chain of custodyHe could have just as well stated that 110% of the Phys Evid would have been admissible.
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.
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
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.
The turns were an excuse for why the motorcade didn't speed up. Without the turns there would have been no excuse.Who said that "he turns were an excuse for why the motorcade didn't speed up?" I mean, other than you?
Why don't you support the WC's claim and show why the two turns were necessary?
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
I figure if that were really true, Rob would have already said that when he replied to Chapman.
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?
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...
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?
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.
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?Did I ever say that CE 573 "was relevant"?
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.
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?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.
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.
So you offer opinion instead of evidence. No surprise there. It is clear that you cannot support the WC's claim.
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...
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?
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.
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.
Did I ever say that CE 573 "was relevant"?
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.
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.
Well, we are making progress then. You agree that LHO did not shoot at EAW. 👍
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.
" 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.
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.......
" 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.
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.
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.....
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.
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.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.
It is apparent that you cannot support their claim either.
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.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.
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?
Well, we are making progress then. You agree that LHO did not shoot at EAW. 👍I never said that, either.
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.....
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.
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.
I never said that, either.
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.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.
"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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 ?
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?
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?
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.
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.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.
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.
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 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.
Walt , I have not been scolded like that since the 3rd grade . Thanks for bringing those facts up to me . I should know better .
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
(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.
::)
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/19631129_Deutsche_NZ.jpg)
-----------------------
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/PageImage2-1.jpg)
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 ......
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.
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.
"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.
"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
Why wouldn't it be a better path? It connected directly to the Stemmons Freeway.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.
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)
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.
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 ?
"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.
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.
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.....
Edwin didn't seem too concerned ;-)
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...
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
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.
And you know this how? I know that I'll regret that I asked.
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.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.
Those two turns were NOT needed. End of story.
You keep making claims that you never support?
Why don't you post evidence?
JohnM
Photos of the rifle....It's a Carcano.... You'll have to extract your head to see......
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.
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.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.So you still can't support their claim. Got it.
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.
And that proves that there was no Mauser too how? Talk about having your head buried.
( 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?
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 ....
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.
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?
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....
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
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.
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......
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?
No they wouldn't
You're way too paranoid
Wally the LNer strikes again.
The evidence that has been posted numerous times for you proves that you are a liar. Plain and simple. End of story.
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?
So the evidence proves that I'm a liar ...Does it?? Then present that evidence......
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 waste more time? It has been cited tons of times for you, but you keep on lying about it.
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....
Except for that pesky 7.65 Mauser that Boone, Weitzman, and Craig reported...
Captain Fritz picked up the rifle...Fritz picked up the shells.
I forgot.Only after it was contaminated.
DP crime scene preservation.
That wasn't on film was it?
Right, so who knows what else happened until Alyea arrived.I guess it's a mystery.
(http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/boone.gif)
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........
Except for that pesky 7.65 Mauser that Boone, Weitzman, and Craig reported...
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..
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
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.
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.
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.
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....
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.
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.....
Robert Frazier identified them by lining up the marks "in his mind".
(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.
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
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
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...
But still no expert opinion from someone representing LHO's interests. 🤔
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
(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.
Wally is still ignoring the evidence. Cite a report that says it was a 6.5 Carcano.
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
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
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?
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.
| (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) |
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.
LHO was entitled to have his own expert witnesses, but that never happened.
which means that the bottom of the barrel that Day referred to was about 1/2 inch wide. ( 1/4 of 2 inches.)
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]
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."
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"?
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'.
There's a case where a palmprint partial was obtained from a .38 Special cartridgeWho loads pistol ammo with the palm of their hand?
Who loads pistol ammo with the palm of their hand?
take a look at his position on the so called palm print ....alleged "palm Print" ( CE 639 ).Have a glance at CE 640
No one would think that obviously.I might suppose so...if your hand is the size of a tic-tac :D
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.
I might suppose so...if your hand is the size of a tic-tac :D
Fingerprint guys are good....but not that good.
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.
Well, with people like you (and Wecht, Fetzer, Cinque, Prudhomme, Groden, Waldon and Marsh) as "expert witnesses", we see how that turned out.
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.
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.
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 !
Excellent point.
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.... 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'.
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?
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....
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.
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.
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).
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.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
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
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
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....
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.OWhile 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?
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?
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. 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. 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?
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.
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....
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.
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
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 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.
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?
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.
The licence plate number is "LMW 28 1F" not "IF".
Sorry to be pedantic.
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?
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.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'!
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.
Opinions vary on her credibility.
Marina Oswald Porter's Statements of a Contradictory Nature (http://iacoletti.org/jfk/marina-contradictions.pdf)
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.
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......
This is a genuine mystery that has never been explained. Oswald burned some of his papers regarding Walker, but kept the photos taken from the back of Walkers house. If those photos were ever found, Oswald was leaving himself wide open to being charged with attempted murder which i'd image would have given him a nice 20 year term or more in jail.
At 6:10 Curry is asked if the Walker shooting is connected.Never seen that clip before.
Never seen that clip before.
It's been mentioned..Kennedy had accepted Walker's [a radical right wing Republican] resignation.
Why or who made this nameless reporter think there was a connection [that otherwise contradicted logic]?
Never seen that clip before.
It's been mentioned..Kennedy had accepted Walker's [a radical right wing Republican] resignation.
Why or who made this nameless reporter think there was a connection [that otherwise contradicted logic]?
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/19631129_Deutsche_NZ.jpg)
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/19631129_Deutsche_NZ.jpg)
General Walker swore he had never heard of Lee Oswald before 11/22/63
~SNIP~
Do you believe Walker??
Is the transcript of the conversation highlighted above available?
The transcripts and copies of the original newspaper articles etc. are at the MFF link below. 45 pages
"Commission Document 1543 - FBI Letter from Director of 26 Jun 1964 with Attachments"
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11938#relPageId=2&tab=page
General Walker swore he had never heard of Lee Oswald before 11/22/63
Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know Helmet Hubert Muench?
General WALKER. That name is not familiar to me. Can you give me anything to refresh me?
Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. He is a West German journalist who wrote an article that appeared in the Deutsche Nationalzeitung und Soldatenzeitung, a Munich, Germany, newspaper.
General WALKER. No; I don't know him.
Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever talk to him?
General WALKER. Not that I know of.
Mr. LIEBELER. Did you talk to him on a transatlantic telephone call in which you told him about the fact or the alleged fact that Lee Harvey Oswald was the person who made an attempt on your life?
General WALKER. I don't recall that name. Did he speak English? I don't speak German.
Mr. LIEBELER. Have you ever seen a copy of that newspaper?
General WALKER. Yes; I have.
Mr. LIEBELER. In fact, I suggest that you have seen the November 29, 1963, copy of that newspaper which had on its front page a story entitled in German "The Strange Case of Oswald", that told about how Oswald had allegedly attacked you.
General WALKER. November 29, that is correct.
Mr. LIEBELER. Now, where did that newspaper get that information, do you know?
General WALKER. I do not. There was all article in the paper that he probably got from me.
Mr. LIEBELER. Well, in fact, the issue of that newspaper has right on the front page what purports to be a transcript of a telephone conversation between you and some other person.
General WALKER. Thorsten?
Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. Hasso Thorsten, is that the man?
General WALKER. He called me in Shreveport.
Mr. LIEBELER. When were you in Shreveport?
General WALKER. He called me the morning of November 23, 1963, about 7 a.m.
Mr. LIEBELER. That is when you gave him this information about Oswald having attacked you?
General WALKER. I didn't give him all the information--I think the portion you are referring to, I didn't give him, because I had no way of knowing that Oswald attacked me. I still don't. And I am not very prone to say in fact he did. In fact, I have always claimed he did not, until we can get into the case or somebody tells us differently that he did.
Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have a record here that indicates when you were in Shreveport?
General WALKER. I don't know that I have a record here. I can tell you definitely when I was in Shreveport.
Mr. LIEBELER. Would you?
General WALKER. Well, starting back to make the record clear, I had a speaking engagement in Hattiesburg, Miss., either the 18th or 19th of November. I went from there to New Orleans and stayed 2 or 3 days. I was in the airplane between New Orleans and Shreveport about halfway, when the pilot announced that the President had been assassinated. I landed in Shreveport and went to the Captain Shreve Hotel and stayed there two nights and returned to Dallas and was walking into my house, just about the time of the immediate rerun of the shooting of Oswald. I had been out of the city on speaking engagements.
Mr. LIEBELER. The question was, when were you in Shreveport, and when did you talk to this man?
General WALKER. I was in Shreveport the night of the 23d and the night of the 22d. Do you have a transcript of my conversation with Mr. Thorsten?
Mr. LIEBELER. Yes, sir.
General WALKER. Sir?
Mr. LIEBELER. I have what appears to be that; yes.
General WALKER. Where did you get that?
Mr. LIEBELER. It is apparently taken from the newspaper. The newspaper itself had a transcript printed right in it.
General WALKER. I believe the article you referred to in the newspaper was separate from the other article in the paper which evolved out of the conversation.
Mr. LIEBELER. Now so that there were in this particular issue of the newspaper two transcripts of a conversation between yourself and Thorsten, and also a story about how Oswald had allegedly fired at you, is that correct?
General WALKER. In the newspaper I remember two separate articles. One based upon the conversation we had between us, as he understood it, and then as a separate article which I consider that the newspaper had done on its own.
Mr. LIEBELER. What was the separate article about? Did that have any reference to the fact that Oswald had allegedly fired at you?
General WALKER. Yes. As I remember the article, it alleged that Oswald was the one that had fired at me, and that this had been known earlier, and that this had been known and that nothing was done about it.
And if something had been done about it at that time, he wouldn't have been the man that--it wouldn't have been possible for him to have killed the President.
Mr. LIEBELER. Well, now, did you tell anybody from this newspaper that Oswald had shot at you and that this had been known prior to the time of the assassination of the President?
General WALKER. No; I did not. I wouldn't have known it. It was much later that they began to tie Oswald into me, and I don't even know it yet.
Mr. LIEBELER. And you certainly didn't know it before November 22?
General WALKER. Or the morning of the 23d, certainly not. I was very surprised to see the article.
Mr. LIEBELER. So the best of your recollection is that you never provided them with the information?
General WALKER. I did not. I didn't know it at the time of this conversation at all. I didn't know it until I started reading the newspaper, which would have been later than then.
Mr. LIEBELER. I think that is right, so that you only had two conversations with these people, is that correct?
General WALKER. In connection with this incident, as I remember, there was a call back to verify something on the original conversation? I don't remember how the conversation came about. There were two telephone conversations; right.
Mr. LIEBELER. They both took place while you were down in Louisiana, the 23d and the 22d of November?
General WALKER. The first one was 7 o'clock in the morning the 23d, and it woke me up.
Do you believe Walker??
Is the transcript of the conversation highlighted above available?
Thanks Gary, I read the documents that you provided the link to......But I didn't understand a single word in the German documents :D....
Hoover's letter makes it clear that Walker was the source of the information from which the article was written.
So Hoover knew that Walker knew that Lee Oswald was the person who had fired a bullet through his window..... And yet Walker was never investigated.
It's obvious to me that Walker was a willing participant ( and probably the engineer at the controls) at in the hoax shooting at his house on 4 / 10 /63.
Many researchers have referred to the ambush of JFK as a military operation conducted with well planned military precision.... General Walker certainly qualified as
military strategist....
The telephone transcripts of the 2 conversations are in English but Walker doesn't say anything about knowing LHO was the person who shot at him in them. Are they in the German newpaper copies, (I can't read German either)?
It is noted in JEH's letter to Rankin that the German newspaper article is dated 11/29/63 and Marina didn't divulge the alleged info tying Ozzie to the attempted shooting of Walker until 12/3/63.
So someone at that paper knew the bullet from the Walker shooting was going to be used to tie the TSBD Carcano, and thus LHO, to the shooting, apparently before the authorities in the US.
Did Walker give them the info? If he did, IMO, he had inside info about the Assassination.
-------------------------------
The transcripts and copies of the original newspaper articles etc. are at the MFF link below. 45 pages
"Commission Document 1543 - FBI Letter from Director of 26 Jun 1964 with Attachments"
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11938#relPageId=2&tab=page
The telephone transcripts of the 2 conversations are in English but Walker doesn't say anything about knowing LHO was the person who shot at him in them. Are they in the German newpaper copies, (I can't read German either)?
It is noted in JEH's letter to Rankin that the German newspaper article is dated 11/29/63 and Marina didn't divulge the alleged info tying Ozzie to the attempted shooting of Walker until 12/3/63.
So someone at that paper knew the bullet from the Walker shooting was going to be used to tie the TSBD Carcano, and thus LHO, to the shooting, apparently before the authorities in the US.
Did Walker give them the info? If he did, IMO, he had inside info about the Assassination.
-------------------------------
The transcripts and copies of the original newspaper articles etc. are at the MFF link below. 45 pages
"Commission Document 1543 - FBI Letter from Director of 26 Jun 1964 with Attachments"
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11938#relPageId=2&tab=page
Did Walker give them the info? If he did, IMO, he had inside info about the Assassination.Thumb1:
I'm sure he did......and I agree, Walker was involved in the coup d e'tat up to his eyeballs......
Thumb1:
Re: The Deutsche_NZ article--
After the Walker 'episode', Oswald was 'seized' Really? ...but the investigation was stopped by the AG? Nah--- I don't buy it.
General WALKER. I was sitting behind my desk. It was right at 9 o'clock, and most of the lights were on in the house and the shades were up. I was sitting down behind a desk facing out from a corner, with my head over a pencil and paper working on my income tax when I heard a blast and a crack right over my head.That would have been around this time of year. The general had a 1911 Colt .45 [I saw it one time] What I try and visualize...is shooting through a screened in window case--I just never got that.
Mr. LIEBELER. What did you do then?
General WALKER. I thought--we had been fooling with the screens on the house and I thought that possibly somebody had thrown a firecracker, that it exploded right over my head through the window right behind me. Since there is a church back there, often there are children playing back there. Then I looked around and saw that the screen was not out, but was in the window, and this couldn't possibly happen, so I got up and walked around the desk and looked back where I was sitting and I saw a hole in the wall which would have been to my left while I was sitting to my right as I looked back, and the desk was catercornered in the corner up against this wall. I noticed there was a hole in the wall, so I went upstairs and got a pistol and came back down and went out the back door, taking a look to see what might have happened.
Mr. LIEBELER. Did you find anything outside that you 'could relate to this attack on you?
General WALKER. No, sir; I couldn't. As I crossed a window coming downstairs in front, I saw a car at the bottom of the church alley just making a turn onto Turtle Creek. The car was unidentifiable. I could see the two back lights, and you have to look through trees there, and I could see it moving out. This car would have been about at the right time for anybody that was making a getaway.
That would have been around this time of year. The general had a 1911 Colt .45 [I saw it one time] What I try and visualize...is shooting through a screened in window case--I just never got that.
If someone really wanted to kill the general..they could have just busted in and done it.
If someone really wanted to kill the general..they could have just busted in and done it.
EXCELLENT POINT!!....
I'm 100% convinced that the shot through the window was nothing but a HOAX.... It would have been beneficial to both Walker, who craved the publicity, and Lee Oswald who wanted to appear as a friend of Castro.... Lee's mission was to infiltrate Castro's Bastion and try to find out if all of the missiles had been removed.....
The cameras picked up images of the whole in Walkers window and wall beside his head. That can't be faked.
P.S. If you'll post the DPD photos of the "crime scene".... I may be able to show you some startling evidence.
Can you show me the startling evidence of your own accord? Why do you need my help?
If you're not interested..That's fine with me.
The cameras picked up images of the whole in Walkers window and wall beside his head. That can't be faked.Where are these pictures that "can't be faked"?
If you read the article linked above, it explains the significance. The tag number was covered up after the fact likely by the FBI since the Curry book shows the tag number there and MARINA OSWALD testifed that she recalls the tag number was there when the FBI first let her look at the photograph. The year, make, model and color is the same as what LAWRENCE HOWARD drove. LAWRENCE HOWARD and his partner LORAN HALL had both been named by EDWIN WALKER as the two who helped set OSWALD up as a patsy. Through other sources, they can both be placed at WALKER'S home having meetings, can both be placed in contact with OSWALD before the assassination and can both be placed in Dallas on 11.22.1963. An APB radio call when out by the DPD to be on the lookout for the same year, make, model and color of car right after the TIPPIT shooting and near the TIPPIT shooting.
Where are these pictures that "can't be faked"?
Anyway I found this while looking around...
https://www.facebook.com/notes/ralph-thomas/the-walker-photo-is-evidence-of-a-cover-up-to-set-oswald-up-as-a-patsy/10156518831612350/
Some links there are gone but consider the 'alleged' recon photo that was 'found' in Oswald's possessions.
Ralph Thomas wrote...
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.I disagree.
Representative FORD - At the time of the dinner at your home on April 2, following that or during that time, do you recollect any discussion about General Walker between your husband and Lee Harvey Oswald?Question asked and answered a dozen times. Those guys were incorrigible. All of them.
Mrs. PAINE - No; I don't recollect any such discussion.
Representative FORD - That night?
Mrs. PAINE - If there was any it would have had to have been in the living room while I was talking to Marina in Russian in the kitchen. I didn't hear any reference to it.
Representative FORD - You didn't hear any discussion that evening between your husband and Lee Oswald about General Walker?
Mrs. PAINE - No.
Representative FORD - Did your husband ever tell you subsequently of any such discussion?
Mrs. PAINE - I don't recall it.
Mr. JENNER - Do you recall any discussion of General Walker at all with Marina or in the presence of Marina or with Lee Oswald or in his presence in your home or their home or even out in the parkway on the subject of General Walker up to April 11, 1963?
Mrs. PAINE - No.
Mr. JENNER - None whatsoever?
Mrs. PAINE - No.
Mr. JENNER - Morning paper. Do you have a recollection of being aware in the edition of April 11 of an attack on General Walker the night before?
Mrs. PAINE - It is more likely that I heard it on television. I think I must have heard it.
Mr. JENNER - You have a television and a radio?
Mrs. PAINE - We get news from the television.
Mr. JENNER - And you were aware of the attack on General Walker the evening of April 10
[a statement of matter of fact rather than of inquiry.... despicable]
Mr. JENNER - Was there any discussion between you and Marina on the subject of the General Walker incident?
Mrs. PAINE - No.
Mr. JENNER - None whatsoever? ---------
Mrs. PAINE - Adlai Stevenson, and Lee had been to a meeting of the National Indignation Committee held another night that week, and he was at our home the following Friday night and commented that he didn't like General Walker. This is the only thing I heard from him on the subject.
Representative BOGGS - Did he ever express any violence toward General Walker?
Mrs. PAINE - No.
Representative BOGGS - Did he ever discuss President Kennedy with you?
Mrs. PAINE - He never mentioned Kennedy at all.
Mr. McCLOY - You said that Lee had mentioned General Walker and indicated that he didn't like General Walker. Can you elaborate on that a little bit, to what extent, how violent was he in his expression?
Mrs. PAINE - No; it wasn't violent at all. It was more of, oh, well, more not giving him much credit even, but it was done briefly, this was in passing, so my recollection is hazy. But certainly there was no strong expression.
Mr. McCLOY - No vehemence about it?
Mrs. PAINE - Absolutely not, I would have remembered that. And I recall that Marina said nothing.
Mr. McCLOY - Yes.
Mr. DULLES - You mentioned that Lee did not receive any calls at your house. Did he make any telephone calls?
Mrs. PAINE - I heard him call what he said was the "Time." You know, he dialed, listened and hung up, and then he told us what time it was. That is all his social contact.
Mr. McCLOY - This is only on one occasion that he spoke of General Walker?
The cameras picked up images of the whole in Walkers window and wall beside his head. That can't be faked.
I am interested. Show me what you got? I listen to everyone.