Question:.... Mauser or Carcano? At this late date we should have reached a firm unanimous conclusion about what kind of rifle was found buried beneath the pallet of books in the NW corner of the sixth floor. I believe that we will never have 100% in agreement.... but at this late date and the solid photographic evidence available ( Alyea film and many others) we should be near 100% in agreement about that rifle.
If we can't agree on the answer to this simple question ....then there is no hope of ever finding answers to the more important questions. Like:.... How did Lee Oswald know that Junior Jarman and Harold Norman walked by the first floor lunchroom at 12:26??
| (https://images2.imgbox.com/be/8e/rFjbqbF1_o.png) | (https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-DavbX_-cY2s/WRkmKoV6mFI/AAAAAAABLyc/U75Cxvnhbuo2iuEpa2IX3Lm66oYex-bwACLcB/s1600/TSBD-10.png) |
Oswald didn't specifically say that the two walked by the lunchroom.(http://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1j4PIpNCtZbphz0kmWxmCckNi3vDlG5He)
(https://images2.imgbox.com/be/8e/rFjbqbF1_o.png) (https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-DavbX_-cY2s/WRkmKoV6mFI/AAAAAAABLyc/U75Cxvnhbuo2iuEpa2IX3Lm66oYex-bwACLcB/s1600/TSBD-10.png)
The view from the lunchroom door to the rear door is blocked by a wall corner and there are columns that partially block the view from the lunchroom door to the open area of the first floor.
Oswald didn't specifically say that the two walked by the lunchroom.(http://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1j4PIpNCtZbphz0kmWxmCckNi3vDlG5He)
(https://images2.imgbox.com/be/8e/rFjbqbF1_o.png) (https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-DavbX_-cY2s/WRkmKoV6mFI/AAAAAAABLyc/U75Cxvnhbuo2iuEpa2IX3Lm66oYex-bwACLcB/s1600/TSBD-10.png)
The view from the lunchroom door to the rear door is blocked by a wall corner and there are columns that partially block the view from the lunchroom door to the open area of the first floor.
Oswald didn't specifically say that the two walked by the lunchroom.
OMG!.... You post a picture that clearly shows a window in the east and north wall of the first floor lunchroom, and Jarman and Norman would have had to walk next to those windows to get to the door of the shipping room and the elevators.
| (https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/Image134.jpg) | (https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-53HXs7zTTZQ/WRkmKqUbrGI/AAAAAAABLyk/2VOajdTAVVsUwns-0bpwrCyK20_i_p0PACLcB/s1600/TSBD-12.png) |
And Lee most certainly DID tell Captain Fritz that he saw those two men walk by the 1st floor lunchroom while he was there in that room.
(http://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1j4PIpNCtZbphz0kmWxmCckNi3vDlG5He)
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/Image134.jpg) (https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-53HXs7zTTZQ/WRkmKqUbrGI/AAAAAAABLyk/2VOajdTAVVsUwns-0bpwrCyK20_i_p0PACLcB/s1600/TSBD-12.png)
Seems to me that east-side window doesn't offer much of a vantage point to the sidewalk. The north window maybe for a second as does the view from the open door of the lunchroom. Oswald would have to be already staring out the north window or the lunchroom door to observe the two men passing. That suggests he wasn't reading the newspaper or eating his "lunch". Maybe Lee was looking out at the sky and daydreaming of hijacking a plane to Cuba.
I believe Oswald in the SN window could have seen the two men hanging out together on the sidewalk. Then they appear together at the same time on the floor and side of the building that was below the SN window. Not a stretch to venture they entered the building together.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/41/75/JELv4VDk_o.png)
(http://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1j4PIpNCtZbphz0kmWxmCckNi3vDlG5He)
As Oswald didn't specify seeing them pass by the north window, it's just as likely he would have assumed they entered through the front door, where--depending on where he sat in the lunchroom--his odds of seeing them were much greater.
So where does Oswald say he saw the two men men pass through the first floor at 12:25/26?
There’s the case to be made that the MC rifle seen being picked up by Lt.Day per the Aleya film was laying flat as opposed to the photo made which had the rifle laying vertical (still apparently held wedged between two rows of boxes)
There’s the question to be made that the MC rifle with offset scope ( requiring about 3” gap if wedged between 2 rows boxes only about 1”apart , left no signs of scoring on the sides of the boxes and all so , how easy or difficult it would it have been to get the sling pad into the gap 1st so that it’s under the rifle (vs on top of the rifle) and if it required pushing the rifle down or would gravity be enough, for the rifle to slide down?
If actual film footage of the rifle being removed from it's hiding place isn't enough to decide the matter then nothing will.
If a time machine were invented that allowed the likes of Walt to sit in Oswald's lap while he pulled the trigger, he would gouge his own eyes out rather than have to acknowledge Oswald's guilt.
(http://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1j4PIpNCtZbphz0kmWxmCckNi3vDlG5He)
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/Image134.jpg) (https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-53HXs7zTTZQ/WRkmKqUbrGI/AAAAAAABLyk/2VOajdTAVVsUwns-0bpwrCyK20_i_p0PACLcB/s1600/TSBD-12.png)
Seems to me that east-side window doesn't offer much of a vantage point to the sidewalk. The north window maybe for a second as does the view from the open door of the lunchroom. Oswald would have to be already staring out the north window or the lunchroom door to observe the two men passing. That suggests he wasn't reading the newspaper or eating his "lunch". Maybe Lee was looking out at the sky and daydreaming of hijacking a plane to Cuba.
I believe Oswald in the SN window could have seen the two men hanging out together on the sidewalk. Then they appear together at the same time on the floor and side of the building that was below the SN window. Not a stretch to venture they entered the building together.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/41/75/JELv4VDk_o.png)
(http://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1j4PIpNCtZbphz0kmWxmCckNi3vDlG5He)
As Oswald didn't specify seeing them pass by the north window, it's just as likely he would have assumed they entered through the front door, where--depending on where he sat in the lunchroom--his odds of seeing them were much greater.
So where does Oswald say he saw the two men men pass through the first floor at 12:25/26?
It's just the opposite.... You Mr "smith" refuse to accept factual evidence.... It may surprise you to know that once upon a time I praised Jack Ruby for doing a great service to the country for lynching Lee Oswald...... But then I learned the truth..
It should have been LBJ who went to the gallows......
I don't have any preconceived bias for or against Oswald or a JFK conspiracy?LN conclusion. The evidence makes that determination. For example, the evidence is convincing that John Wilkes Booth was involved in a conspiracy to assassinate President Lincoln and members of his Cabinet. I have no vested interest in that conclusion. It is a matter of the evidence. There is no credible evidence, however, that anyone other than LHO was involved in the assassination of JFK. What I take issue with is the use of faulty logic, outright falsehoods, and bizarre, baseless theories such as the red rings on the TSBD being a signal to LBJ. That is all complete nonsense. You have not cited a scintilla of credible evidence of a JFK conspiracy. You can't even articulate a sensible conspiracy narrative that explains the known facts and circumstances. In fact, the alleged motivations and actual actions of your fantasy conspirators are often completely contradictory. In some instances, we are told that the motivation of the conspirators was to instigate a war with Cuba. And, yet, within an hour of the assassination we are told that the conspirators were placing all the blame for the assassination on Oswald and ruling out the involvement of others. Entirely undermining the articulated objective to blame Cuba as a pretext for war etc. And on and on and on down the rabbit hole.
What I take issue with is the use of faulty logic, outright falsehoods, and bizarre, baseless theories
I don't have any preconceived bias for or against Oswald or a JFK conspiracy?LN conclusion. The evidence makes that determination.
Lee had a rock solid alibi. He saw Jarman & Norman walking past the 1st floor lunch room as they traveled from the front of the TSBD to the 5th floor at 12:25. Jarman said that they departed from the front of the TSBD at about 12:25 and arrived on the fifth floor at about 12:28.
Jarman and Norman testified that they walked on the Houston street sidewalk on the east side of the TSBD. They walked from the front of the TSBD to the rear of the building and climbed the steps to the loading dock and then entered the shipping room by the back door. Lee could have seen them in several places.......
Now then, Mr "smith"..... This the truth....Lee Oswald was in that 1st floor lunchroom at the time Jarman and Norman walked by....( 12:26)...So he couldn't have been on the sixth floor and murdering the President at 12:30....
Can you handle the truth.... , Mr "smith".... or are you too gutless.
This is just another example of faulty logic. A suspect does not have a "rock solid" alibi by claiming to have seen others. It works the other way. Someone confirms that they saw the suspect at a time and place that precludes them from having committed the crime. Even in your fantasy, it would still would not preclude Oswald from being on 6th floor. Four minutes is plenty of time to walk up a few flights of stairs or taken the elevator. The facts and evidence place LHO in the SN at 12:30.
Question:.... Mauser or Carcano? At this late date we should have reached a firm unanimous conclusion about what kind of rifle was found buried beneath the pallet of books in the NW corner of the sixth floor. I believe that we will never have 100% in agreement.... but at this late date and the solid photographic evidence available ( Alyea film and many others) we should be near 100% in agreement about that rifle.
If we can't agree on the answer to this simple question ....then there is no hope of ever finding answers to the more important questions. Like:.... How did Lee Oswald know that Junior Jarman and Harold Norman walked by the first floor lunchroom at 12:26??
"The facts and evidence place LHO in the SN at 12:30"
This is incorrect and is the key weakness at the heart of the LN narrative.
Almost every piece of evidence pertaining to who was on the 6th floor just before, during and after the assassination points away from Oswald:
Three of the five witnesses who saw a man on the 6th floor at this time describe him wearing a white/very light coloured, open neck shirt. Oswald didn't wear such a shirt to work that day and didn't have one in his possessions.
Euins describes a distinctive bald spot on top of the shooter's head - something Oswald didn't have.
Dorothy Garner followed her work colleagues out to the back stairs in time to hear them rush down and was still there when Truly and Baker came up. There was no sign of Oswald supposedly heading down the stairs.
Oswald is reported seeing Jarman and Norman together. The only time during the lunch break that this could have occurred is when the two men came back into the building by the rear door. Oswald must have been on the first floor to witness this. According to their testimonies this can be placed around 12:25pm. The importance of this is that at least ten minutes earlier Arnold Rowland witnessed a white male carrying a rifle on the 6th floor.
Even Brennan, whose dubious and belated identification of Oswald is the single piece of evidence that places Oswald at the scene, describes the shooter as a much older man than Oswald. He also describes the shooter standing at the window, admiring his handiwork, as the presidential limo enters the underpass - in stark contrast with the WC narrative, which has Oswald rushing away from the SN in time for his rendezvous with Baker and Truly. In an indirect way this is supported by Hank Norman, who can hear the shells hitting the floor just above him, but doesn't hear anyone rushing away.
The facts and the evidence most certainly do not place Oswald in the SN at 12:30pm.
"The facts and evidence place LHO in the SN at 12:30"
This is incorrect and is the key weakness at the heart of the LN narrative.
Almost every piece of evidence pertaining to who was on the 6th floor just before, during and after the assassination points away from Oswald:
Three of the five witnesses who saw a man on the 6th floor at this time describe him wearing a white/very light coloured, open neck shirt. Oswald didn't wear such a shirt to work that day and didn't have one in his possessions.
Euins describes a distinctive bald spot on top of the shooter's head - something Oswald didn't have.
Dorothy Garner followed her work colleagues out to the back stairs in time to hear them rush down and was still there when Truly and Baker came up. There was no sign of Oswald supposedly heading down the stairs.
Oswald is reported seeing Jarman and Norman together. The only time during the lunch break that this could have occurred is when the two men came back into the building by the rear door. Oswald must have been on the first floor to witness this. According to their testimonies this can be placed around 12:25pm. The importance of this is that at least ten minutes earlier Arnold Rowland witnessed a white male carrying a rifle on the 6th floor.
Even Brennan, whose dubious and belated identification of Oswald is the single piece of evidence that places Oswald at the scene, describes the shooter as a much older man than Oswald. He also describes the shooter standing at the window, admiring his handiwork, as the presidential limo enters the underpass - in stark contrast with the WC narrative, which has Oswald rushing away from the SN in time for his rendezvous with Baker and Truly. In an indirect way this is supported by Hank Norman, who can hear the shells hitting the floor just above him, but doesn't hear anyone rushing away.
The facts and the evidence most certainly do not place Oswald in the SN at 12:30pm.
In the recent Illinois shooting, the sniper left his rifle at the scene. It had a serial number. It was traced to the shooter. He was arrested. There is no doubt of his guilt. A rifle was left at the scene of the JFK assassination. It had a serial number that was traced to LHO. No other known person had access to that rifle. Witnesses confirm a rifle was pointed out the 6th floor window. Fired bullet casings from Oswald's rifle were found by that window. Oswald's prints were on that rifle. Oswald had no alibi. In fact, he fled the scene within minutes and was involved in the murder of a police officer (several witnesses ID him as the shooter). He lied about the ownership of any rifle. When approached by the DPD at the Texas Theatre, he didn't ask what they wanted. He pulled his gun and engaged in a struggle. It's a slam dunk.
Pedantic nitpicking of minor witness descriptions is weak sauce considering they were describing a person on the 6th floor of a building.
Why is Brennan's ID dubious? He explained that his initial hesitation to ID Oswald as the shooter was not based on any doubt of the issue. It was based on fear for his safety. There is nothing dubious about his identification. He said the shooter was Oswald.
Did I miss something or is this thread about the gun found? Thanks and I'll take your answer off the air.
'but doesn't hear anyone rushing away.'
Others didn't hear him rushing away either
The stairs, for instance
billchapman
Slam dunk?
There's not a single thing you list that says anything about Oswald taking the shots. Not one.
"It was Oswald's rifle therefore Oswald took the shots" - that's your argument? This kind of mentality is wide open to be fooled by a planted rifle. What better way to frame Oswald for the shooting of the President?
The fact of the matter is that any credible evidence that exists for who was on the 6th floor just before, during and after the assassination points away from Oswald. It's a real problem for the LN narrative.
Three eye-witnesses describe the man on the 6th floor wearing a white/light coloured, open neck shirt. Three!
They are describing clothing Oswald wasn't wearing and didn't own. This is not pedantic nit-picking.
Euins is emphatic about the shooter having a bald spot, something Oswald did not have. this is not pedantic nit-picking.
Dorothy Garner was perfectly placed to see Oswald hurrying down the stairs but she didn't see him. if she had she would have been a star witness but she wasn't even called to testify. this is not pedantic nit-picking.
Oswald's account of seeing Jarman and Norman places him exactly where he said he was at the time of the shooting - on the first floor. This takes place around 12:25pm and Arnold Rowland sees the man with the rifle on the 6th floor tens minutes earlier, around 12:15pm.
How this can be called "pedantic nit-picking" is baffling.
Brennan's ID is dubious because he doesn't even make the ID at the time.
It's dubious because he describes the man on the 6th floor as appearing much older than Oswald.
It's dubious because it flatly contradicts the WC's own version of events, which has Oswald hurrying down to the 2nd floor whereas Brennan has the shooter standing around, admiring his handiwork, as the limo passes under the triple overpass.
You don't believe that the presence of Oswald's rifle at the crime scene is highly incriminatory absent some explanation of its presence from Oswald!
Particularly given Oswald's actions in fleeing the scene and murdering a police officerless than an hour later. Your rebuttal to this is that some witnesses who claimed to see the person in the TSBD from the street charactered his shirt color or hair inaccurately.
And that Oswald's rifle COULD have been planted even though there is not a scintilla of evidence of such. Wow.
Brennan explained his initial reasons for not identifying Oswald. It had nothing to do with any ambiguity about who he saw. He testified under oath that the shooter was Oswald.
Does every witness have to be like a circus performer and estimate someone's age with exact precision to be credible? He didn't claim the shooter was 75 years old. But if you think this kind of pedantic nonsense rebuts the implications of Oswald's rifle being left at the crime scene, then take this argument to Illinois and defend the maniac who shot up that parade. Maybe his rifle was planted as well. I'm sure some citizen under sniper attack might have described his age or shirt color imprecisely.
The presence of the rifle is massively incriminating. It's the most incriminating piece of evidence there is. As far as I'm concerned, that's the point of the rifle - to be incriminating!
My rebuttal is that almost all the available evidence regarding who was on the 6th floor just before, during and after the assassination points away from Oswald:
Rowland, Roberts and Fischer all appear to describe the same man and that he was wearing clothes Oswald wasn't wearing and didn't own. Three independent eye-witness testimonies.
Euins is emphatic about the bald spot on the shooters head.
Garner never saw Oswald supposedly hurrying down the stairs - because he didn't hurry down the stairs, because he wasn't on the 6th floor at the time of the shooting.
He was in the Domino Room as he claims he was and this is confirmed by his observation of Jarman and Norman after they entered the rear door and were making their way to the west elevator. If they'd used the east elevator he wouldn't have seen them but it is because they had to walk around to the west one they came into view.
You can try and brush this all off all you want but it won't go away.
If Oswald wasn't on the 6th floor at the time of the shooting, and the available evidence dictates he wasn't, then the rifle was planted there to frame him. What possible evidence could there be for someone placing the rifle in it's hiding place? Film footage?
Nevertheless, he refused to identify Oswald and his reasons for not doing so are weak sauce indeed.
Wow. ???
I'll ignore the more outlandish parts of this section of your post.
Brennan states that the man he saw on the 6th floor appeared much older than Oswald. That's that.
His description of the shooter's movements after the assassination contradicts the WC's account, which left barely three seconds for Oswald to get in position on the 2nd floor looking calm and not out of breath. That's that.
Says the guy who, some months ago, inferred that Oswald 'signed out' before leaving the building.
In addition, tell us why Oswald would have to look nervous, necessarily... and why he would have to be out of breath, necessarily.
The presence of the rifle is massively incriminating. It's the most incriminating piece of evidence there is. As far as I'm concerned, that's the point of the rifle - to be incriminating!
My rebuttal is that almost all the available evidence regarding who was on the 6th floor just before, during and after the assassination points away from Oswald:
Rowland, Roberts and Fischer all appear to describe the same man and that he was wearing clothes Oswald wasn't wearing and didn't own. Three independent eye-witness testimonies.
Euins is emphatic about the bald spot on the shooters head.
Garner never saw Oswald supposedly hurrying down the stairs - because he didn't hurry down the stairs, because he wasn't on the 6th floor at the time of the shooting.
He was in the Domino Room as he claims he was and this is confirmed by his observation of Jarman and Norman after they entered the rear door and were making their way to the west elevator. If they'd used the east elevator he wouldn't have seen them but it is because they had to walk around to the west one they came into view.
You can try and brush this all off all you want but it won't go away.
If Oswald wasn't on the 6th floor at the time of the shooting, and the available evidence dictates he wasn't, then the rifle was planted there to frame him. What possible evidence could there be for someone placing the rifle in it's hiding place? Film footage?
Nevertheless, he refused to identify Oswald and his reasons for not doing so are weak sauce indeed.
Wow. ???
I'll ignore the more outlandish parts of this section of your post.
Brennan states that the man he saw on the 6th floor appeared much older than Oswald. That's that.
His description of the shooter's movements after the assassination contradicts the WC's account, which left barely three seconds for Oswald to get in position on the 2nd floor looking calm and not out of breath. That's that.
Just one account but it seems the wooden stairs were quieter or less "creaky"? then you'd think.
Thanks to Walt, Dan and others for information on this If I had ever heard of this, I never comprehended its significance While not on the level of expertise as most here, I like to think I have gotten around for many years now and it is a pleasant surprise to still find out about something so significant
I do have one question I thought I read something here that suggested Oswald's trip to the lunchroom for a coke may have been before Truly and Bakers arrival there around 12:32 (?) Is there any debate that he was there at 12:32 with Truly and Baker?
Wow. Brennan explained his initial reasons for not identifying Oswald.Then he proceeds to not really identify him?
He testified under oath that the shooter was Oswald.No he really didn't.
Mr. BELIN. Could you describe the man you saw in the window on the sixth floor?[That is a positive identification? His "best description"?]
Mr. BRENNAN. To my best description, a man in his early thirties, fair complexion, slender but neat, neat slender, possibly 5-foot 10.
Mr. BELIN. About what weight?
Mr. BRENNAN. Oh, at--I calculated, I think, from 160 to 170 pounds....
Mr. BELIN. Do you remember what kind of clothes he was wearing?
Mr. BRENNAN. Light colored clothes, more of a khaki color.
Mr. BELIN. Do you remember the color of his hair?
Mr. BRENNAN. No
Mr. BELIN. All right. Did you see anyone in the lineup you recognized?
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. And what did you say?
Mr. BRENNAN. I told Mr. Sorrels and Captain Fritz at that time that Oswald--or the man in the lineup that I identified looking more like a closest resemblance to the man in the window than anyone in the lineup.
Mr. BELIN. Were the other people in the lineup, do you remember--were they all white, or were there some Negroes in there, or what?[Someone that can't tell black from white?]
Mr. BRENNAN. I do not remember.
Mr. BELIN. As I understand your testimony, then, you said that you told him that this particular person looked the most like the man you saw on the sixth floor of the building there.That should disqualify a witness right there.
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN. In the meantime, had you seen any pictures of Lee Harvey Oswald on television or in the newspapers?
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes, on television.
The presence of the rifle is massively incriminating. It's the most incriminating piece of evidence there is. As far as I'm concerned, that's the point of the rifle - to be incriminating!
My rebuttal is that almost all the available evidence regarding who was on the 6th floor just before, during and after the assassination points away from Oswald:
Rowland, Roberts and Fischer all appear to describe the same man and that he was wearing clothes Oswald wasn't wearing and didn't own. Three independent eye-witness testimonies.
Euins is emphatic about the bald spot on the shooters head.
Garner never saw Oswald supposedly hurrying down the stairs - because he didn't hurry down the stairs, because he wasn't on the 6th floor at the time of the shooting.
He was in the Domino Room as he claims he was and this is confirmed by his observation of Jarman and Norman after they entered the rear door and were making their way to the west elevator. If they'd used the east elevator he wouldn't have seen them but it is because they had to walk around to the west one they came into view.
You can try and brush this all off all you want but it won't go away.
If Oswald wasn't on the 6th floor at the time of the shooting, and the available evidence dictates he wasn't, then the rifle was planted there to frame him. What possible evidence could there be for someone placing the rifle in it's hiding place? Film footage?
Nevertheless, he refused to identify Oswald and his reasons for not doing so are weak sauce indeed.
Wow. ???
I'll ignore the more outlandish parts of this section of your post.
Brennan states that the man he saw on the 6th floor appeared much older than Oswald. That's that.
His description of the shooter's movements after the assassination contradicts the WC's account, which left barely three seconds for Oswald to get in position on the 2nd floor looking calm and not out of breath. That's that.
So you entertain the possibility that someone went to considerable trouble and risk to plant Oswald's rifle on the 6th floor to frame him for the assassination but then allowed him to be somewhere else at the moment of the assassination? What if Oswald had done what most others did that day and stood out on the street in the presence of his coworkers? Or had been in the presence of someone in the building? What a lucky break that Old Ozzie had no apparent interest in the motorcade and was hanging about in the empty lunchroom all by his lonesome. There is no way in this scenario that the conspirators leave Oswald's presence at the moment of the assassination unaccounted for.So the idea is they planted his rifle and discovered it before his co-workers were interviewed about him, about where he was and they were at the time of the shooting. If they give him an alibi - "Lee was with us on the steps at the time" - then their whole plan collapses. Or if he shows up in the Altgens photo or some other film/photo then it also falls apart. This is the murder of the president not the framing of a guy for murdering a gas station attendant. Everyone will be interviewed again and again and again. As they were. How do you keep it quiet?
So the idea is they planted his rifle and discovered it before his co-workers were interviewed about him, about where he was and they were at the time of the shooting. If they give him an alibi - "Lee was with us on the steps at the time" - then their whole plan collapses. Or if he shows up in the Altgens photo or some other film/photo then it also falls apart. This is the murder of the president not the framing of a guy for murdering a gas station attendant. Everyone will be interviewed again and again and again. As they were. How do you keep it quiet?
His alibi would be discovered. They could not squash it forever.
Moreover, they then went through a similar process in framing him (for who knows what reason) the shooting of Tippit. Oswald is setup before all of the witnesses are interviewed. If they go to the lineups or are shown photos of him and say, "Nope, that's not the guy" or they or the media find eyewitnesses elsewhere who say "Oswald was with us" the framing of him here also collapses. Again, this is about the murder of JFK and not some 7/11 clerk. It's going to be gone over again and again.
This is just one part of this alleged conspiracy. They cannot do this. It cannot be done. Not and kept quiet.
But in conspiracy world - the world of "the CIA" and "the war state" and "the military industrial complex" - anything can be done. Their view of American institutions is so dark that they believe they could do this. And that all sorts of ordinary Americans would go along. It's a view of the US and of how real human being behave that we simply cannot reason with.
One of two things is happening here: either we lone assassin believers are complete fools, misled by "the government", conned into believing things that didn't happened, essentially living in a "Matrix" world; or the conspiracy believers live in a unreal world, a make believe world where nearly all powerful evil people and institutions - "the CIA!" "the military industrial complex! "Operation Northwoods! - covertly run the country. There is no middle ground.
So the idea is they planted his rifle and discovered it before his co-workers were interviewed about him, about where he was and they were at the time of the shooting. If they give him an alibi - "Lee was with us on the steps at the time" - then their whole plan collapses. Or if he shows up in the Altgens photo or some other film/photo then it also falls apart. This is the murder of the president not the framing of a guy for murdering a gas station attendant. Everyone will be interviewed again and again and again. As they were. How do you keep it quiet?
His alibi would be discovered. They could not squash it forever.
Moreover, they then went through a similar process in framing him (for who knows what reason) the shooting of Tippit. Oswald is setup before all of the witnesses are interviewed. If they go to the lineups or are shown photos of him and say, "Nope, that's not the guy" or they or the media find eyewitnesses elsewhere who say "Oswald was with us" the framing of him here also collapses. Again, this is about the murder of JFK and not some 7/11 clerk. It's going to be gone over again and again.
This is just one part of this alleged conspiracy. They cannot do this. It cannot be done. Not and kept quiet.
But in conspiracy world - the world of "the CIA" and "the war state" and "the military industrial complex" - anything can be done. Their view of American institutions is so dark that they believe they could do this. And that all sorts of ordinary Americans would go along. It's a view of the US and of how real human being behave that we simply cannot reason with.
One of two things is happening here: either we lone assassin believers are complete fools, misled by "the government", conned into believing things that didn't happened, essentially living in a "Matrix" world; or the conspiracy believers live in a unreal world, a make believe world where nearly all powerful evil people and institutions - "the CIA!" "the military industrial complex! "Operation Northwoods! - covertly run the country. There is no middle ground.
Question:.... Mauser or Carcano? At this late date we should have reached a firm unanimous conclusion about what kind of rifle was found buried beneath the pallet of books in the NW corner of the sixth floor. I believe that we will never have 100% in agreement.... but at this late date and the solid photographic evidence available ( Alyea film and many others) we should be near 100% in agreement about that rifle.
If we can't agree on the answer to this simple question ....then there is no hope of ever finding answers to the more important questions. Like:.... How did Lee Oswald know that Junior Jarman and Harold Norman walked by the first floor lunchroom at 12:26??
One of two things is happening here: either we lone assassin believers are complete fools, misled by "the government", conned into believing things that didn't happened, essentially living in a "Matrix" world;
or the conspiracy believers live in a unreal world, a make believe world, the world of Garrison and Oliver Stone where nearly all powerful evil people and institutions - "the CIA!" "the military industrial complex! "Operation Northwoods! - covertly run the country. There is no middle ground.
You don't need the "or" part.
we lone assassin believers are complete fools, misled by "the government", conned into believing things that didn't happened, essentially living in a "Matrix" world;
Thumb1:
One of them (see above post by me).
Try to keep up, I already corrected you on this BS claim.
That's demented even by your standards.
Your straw man was devoid of logic so you're kinda right on this one, incidentally.
before his co-workers were interviewed about him, about where he was and they were at the time of the shooting. If they give him an alibi - "Lee was with us on the steps at the time" - then their whole plan collapses
They knew where Lee was and knew that he wouldn't allow himself to be seen at the time that he was supposed to be firing shots AT AT AT JFK. (Just as he had fired a shot AT AT AT General Walker.) If Lee had decided to back out of the plot to get him into Cuba, and had been anywhere that could be confirmed by his fellow TSBD workers then they would not have fired that loud firecracker that was the signal to the snipers to open fire. They knew that Lee was out of sight and thought that they would be successful in framing him as the lone nut assassin. They didn't count on Jarman and Norman walking by the lunchroom at 12:26 and Lee would be able to use them as a rock solid alibi. Lee saw Jarman and Norman walk by the lunchroom at 12:26 and he told Captain Fritz that he'd seen them walk by. THAT was a big mistake.... Fritz realized that If Lee had a attorney and Oswald told his attorney that he had seen J&N walk by the lunchroom just a couple of minutes before the murder then he and his confederates would be headed for the gallows. In desperation Fritz set Lee up to be shot by Jack Ruby....
But some witness allegedly got the color of Oswald's shirt wrong while viewing him through a window in a six-story building and/or estimated his age incorrectly by a few years (no future career in the circus for them).
Try to keep up, I already corrected you on this BS claim.
Some witnesses???....virtually ALL of the witnesses who saw a man behind a sixth floor window said that the man was wearing a LIGHT COLORED shirt...... There was not a single witness who reported that the man was wearing a DARK colored reddish brown shirt...And Lee Oswald was in fact wearing a DARK colored reddish brown shirt.
Don't you ever get tired of lying Mr "smith??"
'Some witnesses???....virtually ALL of the witnesses who saw a man behind a sixth floor window said that the man was wearing a LIGHT COLORED shirt...... There was not a single witness who reported that the man was wearing a DARK colored reddish brown shirt...And Lee Oswald was in fact wearing a DARK colored reddish brown shirt.'
There you go again, ignoring the weather
Like the blazing sun flooding over Oswald
Dude, get in the mood:
Here Comes the Sun/The Beatles
Sunny Days/Lighthouse
Here, get a clue
(https://i.postimg.cc/Nf83DM2h/68-OSWALD-ALL-LIT-UP-OMEN.png)
billchapman
Someone should send the lawyer for that recent shooter in Illinois all these CTer defense tips. I'm sure some witness to that July 4 event didn't get his shirt color or age exactly correct. Maybe someone planted his rifle too? There doesn't have to be any evidence of such to raise doubt. Just claim it is possible.He needs to change his last name to Oswald and get some of these guys on the jury. He'll walk.
Another great example of logic fallacy. If Oswald was part of the conspiracy, then why not as the shooter on the 6th floor? LOL. At the very least, the conspirators would have kept Oswald on the 6th floor under some pretext to avoid the very real risk that he otherwise might have been in the presence of someone in the building at the moment of the assassination. Providing him with an alibi. You honestly think the plan was to frame Oswald for the crime but allow him to roam about the building to be seen by anyone? Good grief.
They could not squash it forever.
He needs to change his last name to Oswald and get some of these guys on the jury. He'll walk.
The late John McAdams once observed the number of conspiracists who "identified with Oswald as kind of a victim.....somebody who was treated badly by the authorities" and how they often refer to him as "Lee" or "Ozzie." "Poor Lee."
It is strange how they have none of this empathy for others, no concern about them being mistreated by the authorities. Garrison is usually given a pass for his abuses. Of Shaw. Of Ferrie. Of even Oswald. Ruth Paine is smeared. Others accused of treason. No compassion for them.
Nor quash it. But they could still eat squash. And play squash.I need a better editor. I'll go back and change it and nobody will ever know. You know how us CIA disinformation agents operate. We're devious like that.
Yes, it would take a psychiatrist to sort it out. I'm not sure if it has anything to do with Oswald per se or he is just the mechanism to exercise some other psychological motivation. There are two basic reasons for being a JFK CTer that I often see on display here.Your first point is spot on. But they start with the belief in a conspiracy and fit all of this information, all of this material, into their theory. It has to fit, there are no innocent explanations for it. As in: Ruth Paine goes down to Nicaragua on a program of the Quakers helping the campesinos. She's monitoring their work, accounting for their efforts. But to the conspiracists it has to be part of the assassination: she's really working for "Langley". If it's just a hobby, a passing game, then okay I guess; but these are serious people. Crazy, just crazy. But they think we're crazy <g>.
First, many CTers can't distinguish information from knowledge. The forest and trees analogy. There are endless amounts of information in the world. When you conduct a pedantic analysis of any event, you will find some oddities, inconsistencies, or actions for which there is incomplete information to explain. They are effectively overwhelmed by these details. While certain information is necessary to obtain knowledge, if they are unable to distinguish the relevant from the non-relevant by applying logic and common sense, it becomes a morass. For CTers, the inability to distinguish all this information from knowledge means that "something" more must have gone on despite the obvious evidence of Oswald's guilt. What exactly happened they can't or won't articulate because they don't know but where there is smoke there is fire. Unfortunately for them, as the Billy Joel song goes, that particular fire has been burning since the world has been turning.
Second, there is a world view held by some individuals that no important human event can be attributed merely to chance. It is all being directed by some guiding hand. They are all over the place about who is controlling these events with some vague reference to the "government" in most instances depending on whatever paranoid axe they have to grind. In some strange way this may give them comfort that someone - even a sinister group - is in control of important events and we are not at the mercy of random forces. It doesn't even seem to really matter to them who. The objective appears to be dispel any notion that one lone nut like Oswald can influence world events to such a degree.
and how they often refer to him as "Lee"
Yes, it would take a psychiatrist to sort it out. I'm not sure if it has anything to do with Oswald per se or he is just the mechanism to exercise some other psychological motivation.
commonly accepted facts
What should they refer to him as instead? Henry? That’s his name.
But "Lee" has a non sinister sound ..... and that's not what the LNer's want. From the time that Lee was arrested at the theater they immediately started referring to Lee as "Lee Harvey Oswald" With harsh sounding tones.... Similar to Snidely Whiplash, or John Wilkes Booth or Machine gun Kelley ..... as a way of letting the listener know that this man was pure evil.
Our own Lil Chappie has not been able to see Lee in any other light..... He thinks that Lee was the very essence of evil...perhaps he believes that Lee was the devil in the flesh.....
All together now:
LOL
Mr "smith" has accepted the official tale and he simply lacks the guts to face reality. There are some folks who would cut off their nose to avoid having to smell lilacs if the official position was that lilacs were putrid and the state flower of North Korea....
Who is "they"? The press? "Harsh sounding tones"! How else might someone perceive a traitor who defected to the USSR and then murdered the President and a police officer? Unreal.
I think it looks more like Oswald didn't know that the hit was actually going to happen outside the TSBD. I think he was involved with the conspirators but they had given him a role to play which bore no relation whatsoever to the assassination. I'd say that he was ordered to be in the Domino Room at that time (to meet someone? to be near the phone? to...). Once all hell broke loose, he soon realised that there was a risk that he was being set up and took off to get his gun from home.
The conspirators knew that they couldn't force Lee to do anything....They knew that he had to believe that it was his idea....and Lee knew that was a very real danger of actually being at that window with a rifle....He knew that he might get shot by a Secret Service agent if he was actually at that window...So he said he would leave the shells and the rifle as evidence that it was he who had taken a potshot at the president.....( just as he had at Walker's) and he would be out of sight in the first floor lunchroom and toilet and shower facility.
I think it looks more like Oswald didn't know that the hit was actually going to happen outside the TSBD. I think he was involved with the conspirators but they had given him a role to play which bore no relation whatsoever to the assassination. I'd say that he was ordered to be in the Domino Room at that time (to meet someone? to be near the phone? to...). Once all hell broke loose, he soon realised that there was a risk that he was being set up and took off to get his gun from home.
I believe you're on the right track....However your first sentence, says: "I think it looks more like Oswald didn't know that the hit was actually going to happen outside the TSBD." And that could infer that Lee knew that JFK was going to be murdered. I seriously doubt that he knew that JFK was going to be shot. I doubt that he would have allowed that to happen.... I'm certain that he would not have played the role he did ( A hoax attempt ) if he had known that there were killers awaiting the arrival of JFK.
Yes, I can go with that too. They could have played Oswald with a carrot leading him to Cuba or whatever else. They just had to have him in that building, that room, nice and tucked away when the bullets flew.
It must have hit him like a ton of bricks when he learned that JFK had been killed....as it did for nearly everybody who was old enough to understand .....
It must have hit him like a ton of bricks when he learned that JFK had been killed....as it did for nearly everybody who was old enough to understand .....
Must have "hit" 'Lil' Lee so hard, he left to catch a movie rather than sit in front of the TV.Still assumes that Oswald went to the Texas Theater to watch a movie....[Has made no progress]
Nah, he showed how a nut with a powerful rifle in a tall building could easily get at a president...Has made no progress....and never will :-\
Must have "hit" 'Lil' Lee so hard, he left to catch a movie rather than sit in front of the TV. ::)
Four minutes is plenty of time to walk up a few flights of stairs or taken the elevator. The facts and evidence place LHO in the SN at 12:30.
There were some guys on the 5th floor at the time. Anyone could have been walking up or down the stairs or using the lift at that moment. Do you really think your calculated LN Oswald would walk up the stairs or take the lift (with minutes to go), when he could have been seen by any lingering employee?
You then have him zooming back down to the Domino room after the shooting? Ludicrous.
There were some guys on the 5th floor at the time. Anyone could have been walking up or down the stairs or using the lift at that moment. Do you really think your calculated LN Oswald would walk up the stairs or take the lift (with minutes to go), when he could have been seen by any lingering employee?
You then have him zooming back down to the Domino room after the shooting? Ludicrous.
Still assumes that Oswald went to the Texas Theater to watch a movie....[Has made no progress]Has made no progress....and never will :-\
Oswald in the lunchroom at 12:25 is not an invention of LNers. They're just saying that IF Oswald was in the lunchroom at that time, it doesn't mean he couldn't have made it upstairs in time for the sgooting.Show me where I said that he would call off the assassination. You miss the point. He simply wouldn't have placed himself in that position as a gunman (lone or otherwise) with minutes to go and people everywhere who could have testified that they saw him going up minutes before the shooting started.
And you're the only one claiming Oswald would call off the assassination if he merely encountered someone on his way up. And Oswald "zoomed" back down. There's plenty ludicrous alright.
Show me where I said that he would call off the assassination. You miss the point. He simply wouldn't have placed himself in that position as a gunman (lone or otherwise) with minutes to go and people everywhere who could have testified that they saw him going up minutes before the shooting started.
Lee Oswald was in the 1st floor lunchroom when Jarman and Norman walked by, at about 12:26 ? 12:27 .... Jarman testified that they took the west elevator and arrived on the 5th floor at about 12:28.Exactly. Even if an LNer thinks he could have gone up in that time (or with a 4 minute window) it's a ludicrous idea for the reasons I stated.
Lee was in that 1st floor lunchroom when they walked by, and they took the elevator to the 5th floor, so Lee would have had to have left the lunchroom after they were aboard the elevator...and then climb the stairs to the 6th floor. He simply couldn't have been on the 6th floor at 12:30.
Exactly. Even if an LNer thinks he could have gone up in that time (or with a 4 minute window) it's a ludicrous idea for the reasons I stated.
it's a ludicrous idea
LNer's thrive on ludicrous ideas......
Anyone could have been walking up or down the stairs or using the lift at that moment
_ The attitude of an underachiever right there, ppl
Better not take risks; something might go wrong
FFS, Jim
Oswald in the lunchroom at 12:25 is not an invention of LNers. They're just saying that IF Oswald was in the lunchroom at that time, it doesn't mean he couldn't have made it upstairs in time for the sgooting.
And you're the only one claiming Oswald would call off the assassination if he merely encountered someone on his way up. And Oswald "zoomed" back down. There's plenty ludicrous alright.
As all LNers know, the problem with Oswald being on the first floor around 12:25pm is that Arnold Rowland had spotted the man with the rifle on the 6th floor ten minutes earlier.
Surely you don't think that he remained in that little room until 2 minutes before the (late) motorcade came by then went up to take a shot? :D
You're asking to defend some loon's idea that Oswald was in the lunchroom minutes before the assassination, when no LNer even promoted anything so ludicrous? And somehow it now takes Oswald two minutes to get through the lunchroom door (he can't leave the lunchroom closer to the alleged 12:25 time when Norman/Jarman went into the building?).
Why would Oswald care if anyone was on the stairs or even on the sixth floor when he went there? If they weren't in the Sniper's Nest, then no problem. He left his prints all over the SN
and on the rifle he owned and left behind.
He was no doubt surprised he got out of the building alive. To celebrate his lease on life, Ol' Os' done went and murdered a policeman
As all LNers know, the problem with Oswald being on the first floor around 12:25pm is that Arnold Rowland had spotted the man with the rifle on the 6th floor ten minutes earlier.
Why would Oswald care if anyone was on the stairs or even on the sixth floor when he went there? If they weren't in the Sniper's Nest, then no problem.Nonsense. He was down in the Domino room and for all he knew, anybody could have been up on the 6th floor at that moment! You have him going up there with that in mind, after having planned the assassination in a calculated way. You have Oswald casually going up to the 6th floor, simply hoping (or not caring) that people might see him on the stairs or in the lift or arriving on the 6th to take up position. Christ, you'll really stretch things into a looney universe in order to hang on to your unworkabe lone nut theory.
Nonsense. He was down in the Domino room and for all he knew, anybody could have been up on the 6th floor at that moment! You have him going up there with that in mind, after having planned the assassination in a calculated way. You have Oswald casually going up to the 6th floor, simply hoping (or not caring) that people might see him on the stairs or in the lift or arriving on the 6th to take up position. Christ, you'll really stretch things into a looney universe in order to hang on to your unworkabe lone nut theory.
"Looney universe" is when someone turns a CT theory (Oswald in the Domino Room at 12:25/26) into an LN theory. Then they take the four minutes between the alleged sighting of Norman/Jarman on the first floor and the shooting, and magically condense it to two minutes.
Than throw in Arnold Rowland's incredible claims and Oswald's "zooming" downstairs. Like such myth-spinning and dramatics would substitute for the "Warren Report" and books like "Case Closed", "JFK First Day Evidence" and "Reclaiming History"?
"Looney universe" is when someone turns a CT theory (Oswald in the Domino Room at 12:25/26) into an LN theory. Then they take the four minutes between the alleged sighting of Norman/Jarman on the first floor and the shooting, and magically condense it to two minutes.
Would you bet the farm on Rowiand?
I'd wager that his wife wouldn't
Norman testified that he and Jarman didn’t return to the building until after they got word that the motorcade was on Main. If you believe that the timestamps on the police radio transcripts are accurate (and what WC evangelist doesn’t) then that didn’t happen until 12:28.
The motorcade turned off of Main onto Houston at 12:29 but it turned onto Main from Harwood at 12:22 or 12:23.
12:20-21: "About to cross Live Oak" (They're still on Harwood, about three blocks north of Main)
12:22: "Escort drop back, go read slow speed now. Approaching Main." (Harwood and Main are eleven blocks from Dealey Plaza and the motorcade becomes slowed by the crowd)
12:24 (est.): "Just crossing Ervay Street" (Transcript doesn't specify a time; they're on Main, two blocks from Harwood)
12:25: "Crossing Lamar now." (On Main, four blocks from Dealey Plaza)
12:28: "Just crossing Market Street." (On Main, two blocks from Dealey Plaza)
Mr. BALL - How long did you stand there?
Mr. JARMAN - Well, until about 12:20, between 12:20 and 12:25.
Representative FORD - This was about what time?
Mr. JARMAN - That was about 12:25 or 12:28.
Representative FORD - You got off the fifth floor?
Mr. JARMAN - Yes, sir.
Mr. JARMAN - That was about 12:25 or 12:28.
Representative FORD - You got off the fifth floor?
Mr. JARMAN - Yes, sir.
Junior Jarman and Harold Norman walked by the first floor lunch room on their way to the elevator to take them to the 5th floor. Lee Oswald was in that lunchroom and he saw them walk by. Several witnesses on the street below, saw a man who was wearing a light colored shirt behind a sixth floor window at the time that the motorcade was approaching Dealey Plaza. This was at the same time that Lee Oswald who was wearing a DARK colored reddish brown shirt was eating lunch in the first flor lunchroom and saw Jarman and Norman walk by.
| (https://images2.imgbox.com/64/07/viath93F_o.jpg) | (https://api.time.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/lb_maccammon.jpg) |
(https://images2.imgbox.com/64/07/viath93F_o.jpg) (https://api.time.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/lb_maccammon.jpg)
That's nice. And I'm betting it doesn't matter one iota to you that Oswald's shirt appeared light when in sunlight.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/64/07/viath93F_o.jpg) (https://api.time.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/lb_maccammon.jpg)
That's nice. And I'm betting it doesn't matter one iota to you that Oswald's shirt appeared light when in sunlight.
The question is, how the Norman and Jarman hear that the motorcade was on Main. Because the police radio doesn’t say they’re on Main until after the dispatcher says “12:28”.
The question is, how did Norman and Jarman hear that the motorcade was on Main. Because the police radio doesn’t say they’re on Main until after the dispatcher says “12:28”.
Not critical, but Jerry’s contention that Norman and Jarman entered the building at 12:25 is a result of cherry-picking.Once upon a time I thought that Mr Organ was an intelligent, open minded, But researcher who would evaluate information with an open mind...... But it's not the first time I've been misled by a scoundrel .....
Not critical, but Jerry’s contention that Norman and Jarman entered the building at 12:25 is a result of cherry-picking.
Given the available evidence, approximately what time did Norman and Jarman enter the rear door of the TSBD building?