JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Jerry Freeman on August 22, 2022, 03:08:33 AM
-
Again... thanks to David Von Pein for compiling the YouTube video below [46 1/2 minutes]
A background........
On November 23, 1963 Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry held a news conference that was filmed by ABC affiliate WFAA TV in Dallas. Curry was telling reporters about the rifle found by Dallas Police when an unidentified individual interrupted Curry and asked a question that was completely out of context. This person asked, "Is there any connection yet between this and the firing at Major General Walker?"
By using the phrase "any connection yet," this unidentified person seemed to be challenging Chief Curry and the Dallas Police to establish a connection between the Walker shooting and the assassination of President Kennedy.
On November 24, the morning after Chief Curry's press conference, General Walker was in Shreveport, Louisiana. He was telephoned by Hasso Thorsten, a reporter from the West German newspaper Deutsche National Zeitung, which was published in Munich, West Germany. Thorsten asked Walker about the shooting incident and attempted to elicit from Walker a statement to the effect that Oswald was the man who had shot at him.
Warren Commission attorney Liebeler asked Walker if he had told the German reporter that Oswald had shot at him. Walker said, "No; I did not. I wouldn't have known it. It was much later that they began to tie Oswald into me, and I didn't even know it yet."
On November 29 the Deutsche National Zeitung published an article entitled, "The Strange Case of Oswald." The article was allegedly based on the telephone interview with General Walker and reported that Walker said it was Oswald who shot at him. But Walker told the Warren Commission, "I was very surprised to see this article."
Commission attorney Liebeler agreed and said, "I am somewhat puzzled by the whole thing, because the newspaper in which this apparently appeared is dated November 29 and, in fact, that information (that Oswald may have been involved) was not known to anybody that I know of until a later date than that ..... several days, at any rate. "
"Is there any connection yet between this and the firing at Major General Walker?"
John Armstrong
Who is the 'psychic' reporter that asks this question on November 23?
You can hear the question around 6:15 but you cannot see the reporter.
Was it a reporter who had covered the Walker shooting?
Arjan Hut
No one has ever explained why Oswald would try and kill an arch-conservative commie hater general and then turn around and then successfully kill an accused commie sympathizer and liberal POTUS. I believe that the unidentified reporter was a plant meant to shine on the chief and force him to "look into it" [the Walker thing]
See my revised thread on Curry here--
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1021.msg22885.html#msg22885
-
Again... thanks to David Von Pein for compiling the YouTube video below [46 1/2 minutes]
A background........
No one has ever explained why Oswald would try and kill an arch-conservative commie hater general and then turn around and then successfully kill an accused commie sympathizer and liberal POTUS. I believe that the unidentified reporter was a plant meant to shine on the chief and force him to "look into it" [the Walker thing]
See my revised thread on Curry here--
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1021.msg22885.html#msg22885
Planted by who? Perhaps planted by LHO because he wanted to make sure that he got credit for the attempt? ;D. 8)
-
No one has ever explained why Oswald would try and kill an arch-conservative commie hater general and then turn around and then successfully kill an accused commie sympathizer and liberal POTUS. I believe that the unidentified reporter was a plant meant to shine on the chief and force him to "look into it" [the Walker thing]
See my revised thread on Curry here--
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1021.msg22885.html#msg22885
This is pretty obvious. Oswald was a homicidal political nut job with an anti-American bent. Walker was a target of choice. A right winger who lived in his own backyard. Someone that Oswald hated and selected for that reason. JFK was a target of opportunity. By mere chance, the leader of the country that Oswald detested was going to drive by the building that he worked in. JFK's assassination had nothing to do with any grievance toward JFK himself but with killing the symbolic representative of the United States. Oswald likely would never have otherwise targeted JFK except for the fact that the golden opportunity fell into his lap. Almost literally. It was a revolutionary political act in his demented mind to wake up Americans who he viewed as sheep.
-
Again... thanks to David Von Pein for compiling the YouTube video below [46 1/2 minutes]
A background........
No one has ever explained why Oswald would try and kill an arch-conservative commie hater general and then turn around and then successfully kill an accused commie sympathizer and liberal POTUS. I believe that the unidentified reporter was a plant meant to shine on the chief and force him to "look into it" [the Walker thing]
On November 23, 1963 Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry held a news conference that was filmed by ABC affiliate WFAA TV in Dallas. Curry was telling reporters about the rifle found by Dallas Police when an unidentified individual interrupted Curry and asked a question that was completely out of context. This person asked, "Is there any connection yet between this and the firing at Major General Walker?"
By using the phrase "any connection yet," this unidentified person seemed to be challenging Chief Curry and the Dallas Police to establish a connection between the Walker shooting and the assassination of President Kennedy.
On November 24, the morning after Chief Curry's press conference, General Walker was in Shreveport, Louisiana. He was telephoned by Hasso Thorsten, a reporter from the West German newspaper Deutsche National Zeitung, which was published in Munich, West Germany. Thorsten asked Walker about the shooting incident and attempted to elicit from Walker a statement to the effect that Oswald was the man who had shot at him.
Warren Commission attorney Liebeler asked Walker if he had told the German reporter that Oswald had shot at him. Walker said, "No; I did not. I wouldn't have known it. It was much later that they began to tie Oswald into me, and I didn't even know it yet."
On November 29 the Deutsche National Zeitung published an article entitled, "The Strange Case of Oswald." The article was allegedly based on the telephone interview with General Walker and reported that Walker said it was Oswald who shot at him. But Walker told the Warren Commission, "I was very surprised to see this article."
Commission attorney Liebeler agreed and said, "I am somewhat puzzled by the whole thing, because the newspaper in which this apparently appeared is dated November 29 and, in fact, that information (that Oswald may have been involved) was not known to anybody that I know of until a later date than that ..... several days, at any rate. "
"Is there any connection yet between this and the firing at Major General Walker?"
John Armstrong
See my revised thread on Curry here--
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1021.msg22885.html#msg22885
On November 23, 1963 Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry held a news conference that was filmed by ABC affiliate WFAA TV in Dallas. Curry was telling reporters about the rifle found by Dallas Police when an unidentified individual interrupted Curry and asked a question that was completely out of context. This person asked, "Is there any connection yet between this and the firing at Major General Walker?"
By using the phrase "any connection yet," this unidentified person seemed to be challenging Chief Curry and the Dallas Police to establish a connection between the Walker shooting and the assassination of President Kennedy.
On November 24, the morning after Chief Curry's press conference, General Walker was in Shreveport, Louisiana. He was telephoned by Hasso Thorsten, a reporter from the West German newspaper Deutsche National Zeitung, which was published in Munich, West Germany. Thorsten asked Walker about the shooting incident and attempted to elicit from Walker a statement to the effect that Oswald was the man who had shot at him.
Warren Commission attorney Liebeler asked Walker if he had told the German reporter that Oswald had shot at him. Walker said, "No; I did not. I wouldn't have known it. It was much later that they began to tie Oswald into me, and I didn't even know it yet."
On November 29 the Deutsche National Zeitung published an article entitled, "The Strange Case of Oswald." The article was allegedly based on the telephone interview with General Walker and reported that Walker said it was Oswald who shot at him. But Walker told the Warren Commission, "I was very surprised to see this article."
Commission attorney Liebeler agreed and said, "I am somewhat puzzled by the whole thing, because the newspaper in which this apparently appeared is dated November 29 and, in fact, that information (that Oswald may have been involved) was not known to anybody that I know of until a later date than that ..... several days, at any rate. "
"Is there any connection yet between this and the firing at Major General Walker?"
John Armstrong
On November 24, the morning after Chief Curry's press conference, General Walker was in Shreveport, Louisiana. He was telephoned by Hasso Thorsten, a reporter from the West German newspaper Deutsche National Zeitung, which was published in Munich, West Germany. Thorsten asked Walker about the shooting incident and attempted to elicit from Walker a statement to the effect that Oswald was the man who had shot at him.
Walker was not the recipient of the telephone call.... Walker made the call to Hasso Thorsen because he was in a panic. Lee Oswald had not been killed as they had planned and it looked like Lee Oswald had established a rock solid alibi. Walker was desperate to pin the blame on Lee. He therefore wanted a reporter to establish that the commie punk Oswald was the culprit who had fired a bullet through his window back in April.
The solution to this case lies in this tale and the reversal of the direction of that phone call.
It doesn't take a genius to see that there would have been no reason for a reporter from a small weekly paper in Germany to have any knowledge ( or interest in) about a little publicized event that happened in Dallas, Texas way back in April. Anybody who believes the telephone call originated with Hasso Thorsen in Germany simply aren't using there head.
-
Again... thanks to David Von Pein for compiling the YouTube video below [46 1/2 minutes]
A background........
No one has ever explained why Oswald would try and kill an arch-conservative commie hater general and then turn around and then successfully kill an accused commie sympathizer and liberal POTUS. I believe that the unidentified reporter was a plant meant to shine on the chief and force him to "look into it" [the Walker thing]
See my revised thread on Curry here--
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1021.msg22885.html#msg22885
Mr Freeman, This is probably the most important post that you've ever posted about the assassination of president Kennedy. The big lie by one of the key conspirators is the key to the mystery.
BTW.... All of the conspirators had a preplanned alibi for their whereabouts at the time of the murder. Do you know where Walker was and what action he took, when the assassination was announced?
-
Political assassination involving a sniper are extremely rare events. After the JFK assassination, it would be entirely reasonable to speculate that another such attempt in Dallas to assassinate another political figure via a sniper attack within just a few months of the JFK assassination was related. It wouldn't take Sherlock Holmes to conclude that two such rare events occurring in proximity both in time and place might be committed by the same person. And, of course, the evidence subsequently confirmed this was the case. There is no doubt of the fact that Oswald committed both crimes. In fact, Oswald confessed to his wife about the Walker attempt. He left his rifle at the scene of the JFK assassination.
Just because Walker and JFK were of different political backgrounds is not cause for doubt. Both were targets of opportunity due to their presence in Dallas. Oswald hated Walker because of his right wing beliefs. He hated the US because of its opposition to Russia/Cuba and JFK was the symbolic representative of the US. Killing him was a symbolic revolutionary act against the system that Oswald detested when the opportunity fell into his lap. Seemingly, a quirk of fate that a homicidal political nut happened to work in a building overlooking the motorcade. In retrospect, however, the obvious security flaws involved in driving the president around in an open car on a preannounced route are obvious. Sooner or later someone was going to exploit that flaw. Oswald happened to be first in line.
-
Political assassination involving a sniper are extremely rare events. After the JFK assassination, it would be entirely reasonable to speculate that another such attempt in Dallas to assassinate another political figure via a sniper attack within just a few months of the JFK assassination was related. It wouldn't take Sherlock Holmes to conclude that two such rare events occurring in proximity both in time and place might be committed by the same person. And, of course, the evidence subsequently confirmed this was the case. There is no doubt of the fact that Oswald committed both crimes. In fact, Oswald confessed to his wife about the Walker attempt. He left his rifle at the scene of the JFK assassination.
Just because Walker and JFK were of different political backgrounds is not cause for doubt. Both were targets of opportunity due to their presence in Dallas. Oswald hated Walker because of his right wing beliefs. He hated the US because of its opposition to Russia/Cuba and JFK was the symbolic representative of the US. Killing him was a symbolic revolutionary act against the system that Oswald detested when the opportunity fell into his lap. Seemingly, a quirk of fate that a homicidal political nut happened to work in a building overlooking the motorcade. In retrospect, however, the obvious security flaws involved in driving the president around in an open car on a preannounced route are obvious. Sooner or later someone was going to exploit that flaw. Oswald happened to be first in line.
What a pile of BS!...... Perhaps you should back up to page one ..... Lee Oswald was in the first floor lunchroom at 12:27. He could not have been on the sixth floor at the time JFK was ambushed and murdered. This very elementary FACT flushes al of your BS down the drain.
-
What a pile of BS!...... Perhaps you should back up to page one ..... Lee Oswald was in the first floor lunchroom at 12:27. He could not have been on the sixth floor at the time JFK was ambushed and murdered. This very elementary FACT flushes al of your BS down the drain.
As usual, you are trying to change the subject after being confronted with the facts and logic. We were discussing here why Oswald might try to assassinate both a right winger like Walker and a Democrat like JFK. Haven't you yourself suggested that Oswald fired the shots at Walker and JFK (albeit in some delusion fantasy scenario that he intentionally missed as part of some conspiracy to get him to Cuba)? If so, we are not in disagreement that Oswald pulled the trigger in both instances.
-
As usual, you are trying to change the subject after being confronted with the facts and logic. We were discussing here why Oswald might try to assassinate both a right winger like Walker and a Democrat like JFK. Haven't you yourself suggested that Oswald fired the shots at Walker and JFK (albeit in some delusion fantasy scenario that he intentionally missed as part of some conspiracy to get him to Cuba)? If so, we are not in disagreement that Oswald pulled the trigger in both instances.
after being confronted with the facts and logic.
Let's see what we actually got here;
Political assassination involving a sniper are extremely rare events. After the JFK assassination, it would be entirely reasonable to speculate that another such attempt in Dallas to assassinate another political figure via a sniper attack within just a few months of the JFK assassination was related. It wouldn't take Sherlock Holmes to conclude that two such rare events occurring in proximity both in time and place might be committed by the same person. And, of course, the evidence subsequently confirmed this was the case. There is no doubt of the fact that Oswald committed both crimes. In fact, Oswald confessed to his wife about the Walker attempt. He left his rifle at the scene of the JFK assassination.
Just because Walker and JFK were of different political backgrounds is not cause for doubt. Both were targets of opportunity due to their presence in Dallas. Oswald hated Walker because of his right wing beliefs. He hated the US because of its opposition to Russia/Cuba and JFK was the symbolic representative of the US. Killing him was a symbolic revolutionary act against the system that Oswald detested when the opportunity fell into his lap. Seemingly, a quirk of fate that a homicidal political nut happened to work in a building overlooking the motorcade. In retrospect, however, the obvious security flaws involved in driving the president around in an open car on a preannounced route are obvious. Sooner or later someone was going to exploit that flaw. Oswald happened to be first in line.
it would be entirely reasonable to speculate
might be committed by the same person
Facts and logic, you say? Not so much. More just pure speculation.
And, of course, the evidence subsequently confirmed this was the case.
No it didn't, regardless of what Marina testified.
-
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/19631129_Deutsche_NZ.jpg?width=960&height=720&fit=bounds)
-
What a pile of BS!...... Perhaps you should back up to page one ..... Lee Oswald was in the first floor lunchroom at 12:27. He could not have been on the sixth floor at the time JFK was ambushed and murdered. This very elementary FACT flushes al of your BS down the drain.
You might have something with the "lunchroom alibi" thing, except we don't know for sure that Jarman and Norman entered the building at 12:27. They said it was more like 12:20 to 12:25. The two men were familiar with the area; if, at 12:24, they heard "Just crossing Ervay Street" on the police radio, they would have known that the motorcade was on Main. Or someone in the crowd could have said so. If Oswald was in the lunchroom at 12:25 and saw Jarman and Norman, he would have time to ascend the stairs.
Fritz's notes on this are not specific. Also, if Jarman and Norman had gone to, say, to the SW corner of the fifth floor rather then the SE corner, that would help the idea that Oswald was in the lunchroom and saw the two men go by. But the men two men showed up beneath the SN window affording Oswald the opportunity to know that Jarman and Norman were together during lunch (as Oswald might have seen them together regularly previous to Nov. 22nd). Entering the building from the front or rear means passing through the first floor (to access the stairs or elevators; they could cross the second floor from the front but that route was probably not for warehouse workers). Crossing the first floor means they could have been visible to someone (depending on where they were seated or standing) in the first-floor lunchroom.
Not hard to rationalize without actually witnessing it. Oswald could have put two-and-two together. It was an ad hoc after-thought "ghost alibi". Now, if Oswald had really seen the two men cross the first floor, he would have expanded on what he saw, such as the two men entered through the rear. That would have been the clincher. But guessing that would have been taking a huge risk.
Then one has to wonder why Oswald--who was so politically-minded, subscribed to Time, read newspapers and borrowed books about politics--didn't bother to join his coworkers outside to watch the Presidential motorcade so by (didn't Marina say Lee liked JFK?). Then you expect people to disregard the "long bulky package" Oswald took to work that morning, his prints on boxes at the Sniper's Nest and on the rifle, his behavior after the assassination, in which he was in flight murdering a policeman and trying to hide in a movie theater.
-
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/19631129_Deutsche_NZ.jpg?width=960&height=720&fit=bounds)
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/19631129_Deutsche_NZ.jpg?width=960&height=720&fit=bounds)
Thank you Gary, for posting the article from the German News paper. It seems rather brief for a sensational story. Do you suppose that the reporter didn't believe the tale that General Walker unloaded on him on Saturday morning 11/23/63?
The story wasn't published until Nov. 29. If the editor really believed Walker's tale he would have rushed the paper to publication, and it would have been picked up and published round the world by 11/24 /63.
This wild tale from Walker reveals the panic he felt..... He realized that his neck was in the noose if Lee Oswald started talking about the plot. He with out a doubt breathed a huge sigh of relief when Jack Ruby murdered Lee Oswald.
-
after being confronted with the facts and logic.
Let's see what we actually got here;
it would be entirely reasonable to speculate
might be committed by the same person
Facts and logic, you say? Not so much. More just pure speculation.
And, of course, the evidence subsequently confirmed this was the case.
No it didn't, regardless of what Marina testified.
You are easily confused. We are discussing two different points in time. Right after the assassination, there could only be speculation that the two crimes were related due to their similarity, uniqueness, and proximity in time and place. An investigation then occurred that confirmed the fact. Oswald confessed to his own wife. The fact that you don't like this is meaningless as to the facts.
-
As usual, you are trying to change the subject after being confronted with the facts and logic. We were discussing here why Oswald might try to assassinate both a right winger like Walker and a Democrat like JFK. Haven't you yourself suggested that Oswald fired the shots at Walker and JFK (albeit in some delusion fantasy scenario that he intentionally missed as part of some conspiracy to get him to Cuba)? If so, we are not in disagreement that Oswald pulled the trigger in both instances.
Pay close attention dumbass...... I'm not changing the subject. I'm merely relating the FACT that Lee Oswald was in the 1st floor lunchroom at 12:27 and he was not on the sixth floor at 12:30. THAT mr "Smith" is a FACT. I'm not going to discuss nonsense with you.... Extract your head and then perhaps we can talk....
-
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/19631129_Deutsche_NZ.jpg?width=960&height=720&fit=bounds)
I pray that your post catches fire Gary..... This brief story in the German weekly newspaper is dynamite.
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/19631129_Deutsche_NZ.jpg?width=960&height=720&fit=bounds)
-
Pay close attention dumbass...... I'm not changing the subject. I'm merely relating the FACT that Lee Oswald was in the 1st floor lunchroom at 12:27 and he was not on the sixth floor at 12:30. THAT mr "Smith" is a FACT. I'm not going to discuss nonsense with you.... Extract your head and then perhaps we can talk....
So angry. Have you claimed on this board or not that Oswald fired the shots at Walker and JFK but intentionally missed as part of what he thought was plan to fake an assassination attempt as a pretext to get him into Cuba? That fantasy cannot be reconciled with conflicting fantasy that Oswald was in the lunchroom and couldn't have pulled the trigger. If you are going to be a kook, at least keep your fantasies straight so they don't conflict.
-
You might have something with the "lunchroom alibi" thing, except we don't know for sure that Jarman and Norman entered the building at 12:27. They said it was more like 12:20 to 12:25. The two men were familiar with the area; if, at 12:24, they heard "Just crossing Ervay Street" on the police radio, they would have known that the motorcade was on Main. Or someone in the crowd could have said so. If Oswald was in the lunchroom at 12:25 and saw Jarman and Norman, he would have time to ascend the stairs.
Fritz's notes on this are not specific. Also, if Jarman and Norman had gone to, say, to the SW corner of the fifth floor rather then the SE corner, that would help the idea that Oswald was in the lunchroom and saw the two men go by. But the men two men showed up beneath the SN window affording Oswald the opportunity to know that Jarman and Norman were together during lunch (as Oswald might have seen them together regularly previous to Nov. 22nd). Entering the building from the front or rear means passing through the first floor (to access the stairs or elevators; they could cross the second floor from the front but that route was probably not for warehouse workers). Crossing the first floor means they could have been visible to someone (depending on where they were seated or standing) in the first-floor lunchroom.
Not hard to rationalize without actually witnessing it. Oswald could have put two-and-two together. It was an ad hoc after-thought "ghost alibi". Now, if Oswald had really seen the two men cross the first floor, he would have expanded on what he saw, such as the two men entered through the rear. That would have been the clincher. But guessing that would have been taking a huge risk.
Then one has to wonder why Oswald--who was so politically-minded, subscribed to Time, read newspapers and borrowed books about politics--didn't bother to join his coworkers outside to watch the Presidential motorcade so by (didn't Marina say Lee liked JFK?). Then you expect people to disregard the "long bulky package" Oswald took to work that morning, his prints on boxes at the Sniper's Nest and on the rifle, his behavior after the assassination, in which he was in flight murdering a policeman and trying to hide in a movie theater.
we don't know for sure that Jarman and Norman entered the building at 12:27. They said it was more like 12:20 to 12:25.
Take a refresher course in reading comprehension .... They said that they were at the front of the building at 12:25 when they decided to go up to the 5th floor to watch the parade. They would have walked by the lunchroom at about 12:27.... And Lee saw them walk by.
If Oswald was in the lunchroom at 12:25 and saw Jarman and Norman, he would have time to ascend the stairs.
Maybe possible ...except... Jarman and Norman said they arrived on the 5th floor at 12:28 .... Therefore they would have walked by the lunchroom at about 12:27 .
Your desperation is hanging out a country mile Mr. O...... Why don't you heed your own advise and simply admit you've made a mistake. That would be a big first step in enlightenment.
-
So angry. Have you claimed on this board or not that Oswald fired the shots at Walker and JFK but intentionally missed as part of what he thought was plan to fake an assassination attempt as a pretext to get him into Cuba? That fantasy cannot be reconciled with conflicting fantasy that Oswald was in the lunchroom and couldn't have pulled the trigger. If you are going to be a kook, at least keep your fantasies straight so they don't conflict.
Have you claimed on this board or not that Oswald fired the shots at Walker and JFK but intentionally missed as part of what he thought was plan to fake an assassination attempt as a pretext to get him into Cuba?
The answer to your question is ....NO!..... Your ability to comprehend the written word is subpar .....
A) Lee did not fire a shot at Walker.....He fired a bullet through Walker's window. That was a hoax that was intended to fool Castro's spies into believing that Lee Oswald was a friend of Castro's who had attempted to shoot one of Castro's most vocal foes.
B) He was involved in the same basic ruse when evidence (spent shells and rifle) was left on the sixth floor as mute evidence that he had fired at JFK.
-
Have you claimed on this board or not that Oswald fired the shots at Walker and JFK but intentionally missed as part of what he thought was plan to fake an assassination attempt as a pretext to get him into Cuba?
The answer to your question is ....NO!..... Your ability to comprehend the written word is subpar .....
A) Lee did not fire a shot at Walker.....He fired a bullet through Walker's window. That was a hoax that was intended to fool Castro's spies into believing that Lee Oswald was a friend of Castro's who had attempted to shoot one of Castro's most vocal foes.
B) He was involved in the same basic ruse when evidence (spent shells and rifle) was left on the sixth floor as mute evidence that he had fired at JFK.
So you are admitting Oswald fired the shot at Walker. Got it! LOL. And your explanation about the JFK assassination is that - even though Oswald was apparently in on the plot to frame himself - he sat in the lunchroom where anyone could have seen him and provide him an unwanted alibi while someone else fired the shot. LOL. Why didn't they just instruct Oswald to fire a shot and miss JFK if they were ordering him around? Do you realize how idiotic and bizarre what you are suggesting is? That's a rhetorical question.
-
How could Oswald “guess” that Norman and Jarman would ever have been in a place where he could have seen them from the domino room, even if he knew they were together?
-
An investigation then occurred that confirmed the fact. Oswald confessed to his own wife.
“Confirmed”. LOL
“Fact”. LOL.
-
If LHO was in the sniper’s nest (I believe that he was, others can believe whatever they want to believe), I think he would have been aware of the elevator noise when Norman and Jarman took it to the fifth floor. I believe that LHO would have been able to hear Norman and Jarman when they stationed themselves on the fifth floor, just below the sniper’s nest. If Norman and Jarman said anything (they probably did) I believe that LHO could have recognized their voices and known who it was just below. LHO would know that in order to access the elevator on the first floor Norman and Jarman would have been within sight of the door to the domino room. In my opinion, LHO didn’t need to see the two of them outside (nor did he need to be in the domino room at the time) in order to know these things.
-
So you are admitting Oswald fired the shot at Walker. Got it! LOL.
That’s always been Walt’s story. It you really “got it”, you would have gotten it years ago. But you are a one-way propaganda fountain.
-
So you are admitting Oswald fired the shot at Walker. Got it! LOL. And your explanation about the JFK assassination is that - even though Oswald was apparently in on the plot to frame himself - he sat in the lunchroom where anyone could have seen him and provide him an unwanted alibi while someone else fired the shot. LOL. Why didn't they just instruct Oswald to fire a shot and miss JFK if they were ordering him around? Do you realize how idiotic and bizarre what you are suggesting is? That's a rhetorical question.
So you are admitting Oswald fired the shot at Walker.
DUH!..... Do you believe that Walker was a name for the window pane? Lee fired a bullet through the WINDOW PANE. Which was a ruse that was intended to make it appear that he had tried to shoot Walker.
Lee was NOT in on the plot to murder JFK..... In fact he had suspected that someone ( Walker's gang) might try to assassinate JFK while he was playing the role of an assassin who had ATTEMPTED to shoot JFK. He reported to the FBI that he had caught wind of a plot by a " MILITANT REVOLUTIONARY GROUP" who might attempt to assassinate JFK on his proposed trip to Texas. His contact with the FBI Warren DeBrueys told him not to worry because they already knew about the plot and had everything under control. Lee the sucker patsy didn't know that he was reporting to one of the key conspirators.
-
That’s always been Walt’s story. It you really “got it”, you would have gotten it years ago. But you are a one-way propaganda fountain.
That’s always been Walt’s story.
No, that is not my story..... I've never said that Lee shot at Walker .....I beleve that Lee fired a bullet through Walker's window in a ruse to make it appear that he had shot at Walker. ( Frankly, I doubt that Walker was even in that room at the time that Lee fired the shot )
-
I believe that LHO would have been able to hear Norman and Jarman when they stationed themselves on the fifth floor, just below the sniper’s nest.
If so, then it would have been especially stupid to claim that he saw them somewhere else.
If Norman and Jarman said anything (they probably did) I believe that LHO could have recognized their voices and known who it was just below.
He didn’t even know their names, but we’re to believe that he could pinpoint their voices through the floor with another guy talking as well? Remember, these guys didn’t hear any footsteps when the gunman supposedly made his mad dash for the staircase.
LHO would know that in order to access the elevator on the first floor Norman and Jarman would have been within sight of the door to the domino room.
That’s not true. There were many ways into the first floor, including open roll-up doors on the west side.
-
I think “Richard” meant fired the shot through the Walker window that night, because that’s the thing in your post that he was responding to. Then he acts surprised that you said that.
However, there isn’t any good evidence that Oswald fired anything that night. “Marina said” isn’t good evidence of anything.
-
If so, then it would have been especially stupid to claim that he saw them somewhere else.
He didn’t even know Jarman’s name, but we’re to believe that he could pinpoint his voice one floor down. Remember, these guys didn’t hear any footsteps when the gunman supposedly made his mad dash for the staircase.
That’s not true. There were many ways into the first floor, including open roll up doors on the west side.
I'm puzzled by the idea that Lee would have had to have seen Jarman and Norman in the shipping room by the elevators. Although he could have seen them there I believe it's more likely that he saw them as they walked past the windows of the Domino Room
-
If so, then it would have been especially stupid to claim that he saw them somewhere else.
He didn’t even know their names, but we’re to believe that he could pinpoint their voices through the floor with another guy talking as well? Remember, these guys didn’t hear any footsteps when the gunman supposedly made his mad dash for the staircase.
That’s not true. There were many ways into the first floor, including open roll-up doors on the west side.
If so, then it would have been especially stupid to claim that he saw them somewhere else.
Not if he was lying about where he was.
He didn’t even know their names, but we’re to believe that he could pinpoint their voices through the floor with another guy talking as well?
Their names are irrelevant.
Remember, these guys didn’t hear any footsteps when the gunman supposedly made his mad dash for the staircase.
Remember, the sound of the bolt being cycled and the empty hulls hitting the floor were heard. And there was open windows on both floors. Plenty of reason to believe that LHO could have heard them talking and recognized the voices.
That’s not true. There were many ways into the first floor, including open roll-up doors on the west side.
The elevators are within sight of the door to the domino room. The path to the elevators is irrelevant.
-
I think “Richard” meant fired the shot through the Walker window that night, because that’s the thing in your post that he was responding to. Then he acts surprised that you said that.
However, there isn’t any good evidence that Oswald fired anything that night. “Marina said” isn’t good evidence of anything.
“Marina said” isn’t good evidence of anything./quote]
there isn’t any good evidence that Oswald fired anything that night.
If you reject the story.....Then you must believe it was made up out of whole cloth and has no basis in fact.
Do you believe it was all concocted, John?
-
If so, then it would have been especially stupid to claim that he saw them somewhere else.
Not if he was lying about where he was.
If he had no idea they were ever near the domino room and only heard them on the fifth floor, it would be incredibly stupid to claim that he saw them on the first floor near the time of the shooting, because they’d easily refute that.
Their names are irrelevant.
Do you recognize the voice of any person whose name you do not know?
Remember, the sound of the bolt being cycled and the empty hulls hitting the floor were heard.
Only one of them claimed to hear that, and it was long after the fact. But hearing some mechanical noise is very different from discerning individual voices.
The elevators are within sight of the door to the domino room.
That’s not true either.
-
(https://gregwagnersite.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/first-floor-tsbd.png)
The door to the west elevator is on the far west side by the staircase and the overhead door.
-
If he had no idea they were ever near the domino room and only heard them on the fifth floor, it would be incredibly stupid to claim that he saw them on the first floor near the time of the shooting, because they’d easily refute that.
Do you recognize the voice of any person whose name you do not know?
Only one of them claimed to hear that, and it was long after the fact. But hearing some mechanical noise is very different from discerning individual voices.
That’s not true either.
If he had no idea they were ever near the domino room and only heard them on the fifth floor, it would be incredibly stupid to claim that he saw them on the first floor near the time of the shooting, because they’d easily refute that.
You missed the point. He hears the elevator moving and stopping before it gets to the sixth floor. Seconds later he hears Norman and Jarman just below him on the fifth floor. He deduces that they just took the elevator up to the fifth floor. And the elevators are within sight of the domino room door.
Do you recognize the voice of any person whose name you do not know?
If I was recently employed at a facility with 70 employees, there would be many people there I didn’t know the names of. However, I believe that I could recognize voices of some of the ones I had had contact with and which I didn’t yet know their names and place them with the correct faces.
Only one of them claimed to hear that, and it was long after the fact. But hearing some mechanical noise is very different from discerning individual voices.
If I remember correctly, the WC did a demonstration that showed they could be heard. And consider there were open windows on both floors (~10-feet apart in elevation) directly over/under each other. And the people concerned were right at the windows. Given the conditions, I think it would be difficult not to hear Norman and Jarman.
-
(https://gregwagnersite.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/first-floor-tsbd.png)
The door to the west elevator is on the far west side by the staircase and the overhead door.
There is simply no evidence that they used the stairs or the overhead door to get to the elevator. There is evidence that they didn’t use either.
-
There is simply no evidence that they used the stairs or the overhead door to get to the elevator. There is evidence that they didn’t use either.
There is evidence that they didn’t use either.
And what exactly might that evidence be?
-
You are easily confused. We are discussing two different points in time. Right after the assassination, there could only be speculation that the two crimes were related due to their similarity, uniqueness, and proximity in time and place. An investigation then occurred that confirmed the fact. Oswald confessed to his own wife. The fact that you don't like this is meaningless as to the facts.
You are constantly confused....if indeed one can actually call it confusion.
We are discussing two different points in time.
You 'discuss' nothing... only ramble on about stuff only you could imagine. ...their similarity, uniqueness, and proximity in time and place.
You contradict yourself always. Different times? Yeah 7 months apart. What is similar about a pot shot into a crackpot generals house and the slaying of a man who's brother had said general committed to a nut house?
-
So you are admitting Oswald fired the shot at Walker. Got it! LOL. And your explanation about the JFK assassination is that - even though Oswald was apparently in on the plot to frame himself - he sat in the lunchroom where anyone could have seen him and provide him an unwanted alibi while someone else fired the shot. LOL. Why didn't they just instruct Oswald to fire a shot and miss JFK if they were ordering him around? Do you realize how idiotic and bizarre what you are suggesting is? That's a rhetorical question.
even though Oswald was apparently in on the plot to frame himself - he sat in the lunchroom where anyone could have seen him and provide him an unwanted alibi while someone else fired the shot.
(https://gregwagnersite.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/first-floor-tsbd.png)
Perhaps you've overlooked the fact that Lee could easily have ducked out of sight when he was in that 1st floor lunchroom. And I believe that he may have ducked into the toilet / shower when Jarman and Norman walked by the Domino Room to insure that they did not see him. Lee may have said that he was sitting in the 1st floor lunchroom but he was prepared to duck into the toilet/ shower if anybody approached the Domino Room.
-
There is simply no evidence that they used the stairs or the overhead door to get to the elevator. There is evidence that they didn’t use either.
You missed the point. How would this hypothetical Oswald on the sixth floor know how they got to the elevator, even if he saw them outside, heard the elevator, and recognized their voices below him? Pretty silly to make up a sighting at the domino room without knowing they went by the domino room.
-
You missed the point. How would this hypothetical Oswald on the sixth floor know how they got to the elevator, even if he saw them outside, heard the elevator, and recognized their voices below him? Pretty silly to make up a sighting at the domino room without knowing they went by the domino room.
Not a problem since Oswald hadn't committed to saying which way the two men entered. If the highly-unlikely scenarios that you're grasping at came to light, Oswald could easily amend his "ghost alibi" to say he saw the men while on his way to the second floor, after being in the Domino Room.
Now if Oswald really did see Jarman and Norman go by the lunchroom, why didn't he give specifics?
The first-floor lunchroom was about the only option Oswald had for an alibi. He couldn't say he spent ten minutes on the second-floor buying a Coke or in the main area trying to get change. He's not normally allowed on the third and fourth floors, and would have to know someone not from the warehouse to be at a south-facing window. He couldn't say he was on the fifth floor because he knew people were there. Of course Oswald's not going to say the sixth floor. Maybe the seventh, but then he has even further to go to make it to the second-floor encounter.
Oswald couldn't claim to be out standing on the front entrance or the sidewalk, knowing he wouldn't have been seen.
-
Now if Oswald really did see Jarman and Norman go by the lunchroom, why didn't he give specifics?
You don’t know that he didn’t.
-
You don’t know that he didn’t.
Exactly. There are two things we know with certainty.
1.
The various reports give different versions of what Oswald is supposed to have said. One talks of Oswald having lunch with the two men, the other talks about the two men walking through a room. This alone justifies the conclusion that Oswald may well have told the correct story which was subsequently written down in the reports in an abbreviated and incorrect manner.
2.
Although perhaps not verbatim, all the reports say that Oswald claimed to have seen Norman (or was it Jarman?) and another black man he didn't know the name of. This alone makes it pretty certain that the encounter must indeed have taken place and when you look at the timeline, this could only have happened as Norman and Jarman made their way to the elevator to go to the 5th floor.
-
You missed the point. How would this hypothetical Oswald on the sixth floor know how they got to the elevator, even if he saw them outside, heard the elevator, and recognized their voices below him? Pretty silly to make up a sighting at the domino room without knowing they went by the domino room.
Your false premise that he ”had to know” how they got to the elevator in order to say anything about seeing them is not the point. The other possibilities include:
1. He was just simply lying without really having any idea of where Norman and Jarman were at the time. But thought it would sound good as part of his lie.
2. He heard the elevator being used and stopping before it got to the sixth floor and seconds later heard Norman and Jarman below him. He deduced that in order to get onto the elevators Norman and Jarman would [most likely, if you insist] have been within sight of the door of the domino room. And he included this as part of his lie.
My point is that it wasn’t necessary for him to see Norman and Jarman outside in order to deduce that they would [most likely, if you insist] have been in view from the door of the domino room.
-
Your false premise that he ”had to know” how they got to the elevator in order to say anything about seeing them is not the point. The other possibilities include:
1. He was just simply lying without really having any idea of where Norman and Jarman were at the time. But thought it would sound good as part of his lie.
2. He heard the elevator being used and stopping before it got to the sixth floor and seconds later heard Norman and Jarman below him. He deduced that in order to get onto the elevators Norman and Jarman would [most likely, if you insist] have been within sight of the door of the domino room. And he included this as part of his lie.
My point is that it wasn’t necessary for him to see Norman and Jarman outside in order to deduce that they would [most likely, if you insist] have been in view from the door of the domino room.
Anything but the obvious, right? The less contrived answer is of course that Oswald simply did see both men on the 1st floor.
Your assumptions are based on the preconceived notion that (1) Oswald must have lied and (2) that he was indeed on the 6th floor. For neither you actually have any evidence.
-
You are constantly confused....if indeed one can actually call it confusion. You 'discuss' nothing... only ramble on about stuff only you could imagine. You contradict yourself always. Different times? Yeah 7 months apart. What is similar about a pot shot into a crackpot generals house and the slaying of a man who's brother had said general committed to a nut house?
It's been explained to you. You are simply asking the same question over and over. The answer must by necessity contain a certain amount of logical inference. Rejecting or ignoring that explanation on the basis that only Oswald can know the answer for why he did certain things is just going around in circles. Oswald was a leftist political nut with an anti-American bent. He would fit in nicely in the current America. He had obvious reasons to target a right winger like Walker. In addition, he had access to Walker because he also lived in Dallas. Oswald would not likely have tracked Walker down had he lived somewhere else. Similarly, JFK came to Dallas. His motorcade literally drove right by Oswald's place of employment. A golden opportunity. As President, JFK was the literal and symbolic head of the country that Oswald detested. Assassinating him was a revolutionary political act against that system. It has nothing to do with JFK himself. The act of a political nut job willing to die for the cause.
-
My point is that it wasn’t necessary for him to see Norman and Jarman outside in order to deduce that they would [most likely, if you insist] have been in view from the door of the domino room.
My point is that this deduction makes no sense whatsoever.
-
It's been explained to you. You are simply asking the same question over and over. The answer must by necessity contain a certain amount of logical inference. Rejecting or ignoring that explanation on the basis that only Oswald can know the answer for why he did certain things is just going around in circles. Oswald was a leftist political nut with an anti-American bent. He would fit in nicely in the current America. He had obvious reasons to target a right winger like Walker. In addition, he had access to Walker because he also lived in Dallas. Oswald would not likely have tracked Walker down had he lived somewhere else. Similarly, JFK came to Dallas. His motorcade literally drove right by Oswald's place of employment. A golden opportunity. As President, JFK was the literal and symbolic head of the country that Oswald detested. Assassinating him was a revolutionary political act against that system. It has nothing to do with JFK himself. The act of a political nut job willing to die for the cause.
Your made-up, fanciful stories don’t “explain” anything.
-
A class contrarian rabbit hole scenario. They ask a question which must, by necessity, include a certain amount of logical inference from the facts to answer. Like why would Oswald target Walker, a right winger, and JFK, a Dem. Of course, only Oswald would know the answer with absolute certainty. And he was a nut job meaning there isn't a tidy, logical explanation for his every action. Everyone else must use what was known about Oswald and these events to formulate a logical inference. When the answer is provided it is rejected as the produce of "story telling" or "speculation" but without any substantive rebuttal as to why they think it is wrong. LOL. And round and round we go. The contrarian kooks don't like the answer to their question which necessitates drawing inferences from the facts and dismiss any answer on the basis of not having an Ouija board to contact Oswald.
-
A class contrarian rabbit hole scenario. They ask a question which must, by necessity, include a certain amount of logical inference from the facts to answer. Like why would Oswald target Walker, a right winger, and JFK, a Dem. Of course, only Oswald would know the answer with absolute certainty. And he was a nut job meaning there isn't a tidy, logical explanation for his every action. Everyone else must use what was known about Oswald and these events to formulate a logical inference. When the answer is provided it is rejected as the produce of "story telling" or "speculation" but without any substantive rebuttal as to why they think it is wrong. LOL. And round and round we go. The contrarian kooks don't like the answer to their question which necessitates drawing inferences from the facts and dismiss any answer on the basis of not having an Ouija board to contact Oswald.
a certain amount of logical inference from the facts
Before you make any kind of inference you first need to establish that the so-called "facts" are in fact facts. You just believe whatever they have told you about Oswald, regardless of it being true or not.
You are not making any kind of "logical inference". Instead you are making stuff up based on what you (often mistakenly) think you know.
-
A class contrarian rabbit hole scenario. They ask a question which must, by necessity, include a certain amount of logical inference from the facts to answer. Like why would Oswald target Walker, a right winger, and JFK, a Dem. Of course, only Oswald would know the answer with absolute certainty. And he was a nut job meaning there isn't a tidy, logical explanation for his every action. Everyone else must use what was known about Oswald and these events to formulate a logical inference. When the answer is provided it is rejected as the produce of "story telling" or "speculation" but without any substantive rebuttal as to why they think it is wrong. LOL. And round and round we go. The contrarian kooks don't like the answer to their question which necessitates drawing inferences from the facts and dismiss any answer on the basis of not having an Ouija board to contact Oswald.
Everyone else must use what was known about Oswald and these events to formulate a logical inference. When the answer is provided it is rejected as the produce of "story telling" or "speculation" but without any substantive rebuttal as to why they think it is wrong.
I call it “holding for Hux”, they will “tool” with you as long as you let them. Nothing that tends to incriminate their idol makes any sense to them. But, believing that everyone except their idol lied, and that all of the incriminating evidence is “highly questionable”, or outright fake, makes perfect sense to them. It’s more than simple confirmation bias. It’s insanity personified.
-
There’s a difference between a logical inference and assuming something is true and then inventing a story out of whole cloth to “explain” it.
-
I call it “holding for Hux”, they will “tool” with you as long as you let them. Nothing that tends to incriminate their idol makes any sense to them. But, believing that everyone except their idol lied, and that all of the incriminating evidence is “highly questionable”, or outright fake, makes perfect sense to them. It’s more than simple confirmation bias. It’s insanity personified.
As soon as you start invoking this “idol” nonsense, you’ve already lost the debate. Nobody believes that “everybody lied” — that’s a strawman. The evidence (real evidence, not nonsense like “he preferred Dr. Pepper”) isn’t all that incriminating, which is why WC evangelists are forced to use rhetoric and misrepresentation.
-
Your false premise that he ”had to know” how they got to the elevator in order to say anything about seeing them is not the point. The other possibilities include:
1. He was just simply lying without really having any idea of where Norman and Jarman were at the time. But thought it would sound good as part of his lie.
2. He heard the elevator being used and stopping before it got to the sixth floor and seconds later heard Norman and Jarman below him. He deduced that in order to get onto the elevators Norman and Jarman would [most likely, if you insist] have been within sight of the door of the domino room. And he included this as part of his lie.
My point is that it wasn’t necessary for him to see Norman and Jarman outside in order to deduce that they would [most likely, if you insist] have been in view from the door of the domino room.
1. He was just simply lying without really having any idea of where Norman and Jarman were at the time. But thought it would sound good as part of his lie.
You've got to be joking! This idea isn't even rational. Lee had to have seen Jarman and Norman as they walked past the lunchroom or he couldn't have told Fritz that he had seen them as they walked by. You're making a fool of yourself Mr Collins.....
-
1. He was just simply lying without really having any idea of where Norman and Jarman were at the time. But thought it would sound good as part of his lie.
You've got to be joking! This idea isn't even rational. Lee had to have seen Jarman and Norman as they walked past the lunchroom or he couldn't have told Fritz that he had seen them as they walked by. You're making a fool of yourself Mr Collins.....
Why would anyone claim that LHO couldn’t tell a lie? ???
This isn’t the story about George Washington and the cherry tree. ::)
-
As soon as you start invoking this “idol” nonsense, you’ve already lost the debate. Nobody believes that “everybody lied” — that’s a strawman. The evidence (real evidence, not nonsense like “he preferred Dr. Pepper”) isn’t all that incriminating, which is why WC evangelists are forced to use rhetoric and misrepresentation.
As soon as you start invoking this “idol” nonsense…
The perfect opening for chappie and his claim of seeing an image of you taking a knee at his gravesite. Seems that you have a rather sensitive area…
-
a certain amount of logical inference from the facts
Before you make any kind of inference you first need to establish that the so-called "facts" are in fact facts. You just believe whatever they have told you about Oswald, regardless of it being true or not.
You are not making any kind of "logical inference". Instead you are making stuff up based on what you (often mistakenly) think you know.
Jerry posed the question as to why Oswald would target Walker, a right winger, and JFK, a leftist, for assassination. What facts do I "need to establish" to respond to this question? There is no debate that a sniper attack on a public figure is an extremely rare crime. There is no debate that both crimes occurred in Dallas. There is no debate that both crimes occurred just a few months apart. From those widely known and accepted facts, we can logically infer that the crimes were related due to their rarity and proximity in time and location. It would be extremely unlikely that two such rare crimes would occur in Dallas within such a relatively short time frame and be unrelated. So the same shooter almost certainly committed both crimes.
Are you suggesting these facts are incorrect and that the two crimes are not related? If Oswald committed both crimes (as the evidence confirms including his confession to Marina regarding his involvement in the Walker attempt), then we can infer from these facts certain conclusions as to why Oswald choose these specific targets for the reasons that I've discussed. Most importantly opportunity and political grievances. Walker lived in Dallas. He was a right winger who Oswald hated for his political views. His presence in Dallas made him accessible to Oswald who had limited means of transportation and funds. Similarly, JFK's motorcade passed Oswald's place of employment. Oswald had grievances against the US that he freely expressed. JFK was the literal and symbolic head of the country that Oswald detested. Oswald had motive and opportunity to commit both crimes. There is nothing made up about any of this. Certainly nothing you have articulated since your responses have been limited to contrarian commentary directed at me instead of addressing the facts and circumstances of the case.
-
It would be extremely unlikely that two such rare crimes would occur in Dallas within such a relatively short time frame and be unrelated. So the same shooter almost certainly committed both crimes.
Making up likelihoods is what “Richard” considers “logic”.
-
The perfect opening for chappie and his claim of seeing an image of you taking a knee at his gravesite. Seems that you have a rather sensitive area…
Where did you get the idea that there’s anything sensitive about it for me? Chapman has yet to explain why it’s such a sensitive matter for him though.
-
Where did you get the idea that there’s anything sensitive about it for me? Chapman has yet to explain why it’s such a sensitive matter for him though.
Only 3 things you need to know
about the nightmare on Elm
1) That Oswald got what he deserved
2) That IacLOLetti worships a cold-blooded killer
3) See above
-
Why would anyone claim that LHO couldn’t tell a lie? ???
This isn’t the story about George Washington and the cherry tree. ::)
I've never heard of anybody claiming that Lee Oswald was a saint.... But when he answered Fritz's question about where he was when JFK passed by the TSBD, he simply answered Fritz and said that he was in the 1st floor lunchroom .....and when Fritz asked him if there was anybody else in the lunchroom, Lee simply said that he recalled seeing a couple of fellow employees walk by the room as he was sitting there.
I will tell you that I have some doubt that Lee was simply sitting there in the lunchroom, because I believe he was prepared to duck out of sight into the adjoining shower room, because he didn't want anybody to see him. He was playing the role of a man who had attempted to shoot JFK..... And if somebody told one of Castro's spies that they knew that Lee Oswald hadn't shot at JFK because they had seen him in the lunchroom just a minute or so before the shots were fired then Lee would have ended his life in front of Castro's firing squad in Cuba.
-
I will tell you that I have some doubt that Lee was simply sitting there in the lunchroom, because I believe he was prepared to duck out of sight into the adjoining shower room, because he didn't want anybody to see him. He was playing the role of a man who had attempted to shoot JFK..... And if somebody told one of Castro's spies that they knew that Lee Oswald hadn't shot at JFK because they had seen him in the lunchroom just a minute or so before the shots were fired then Lee would have ended his life in front of Castro's firing squad in Cuba.
This part is pure comedy gold. Why didn't he just stay on the 6th floor if he was part of the plot to frame himself and wanted to stay out of sight? Instead he goes down to the lunchroom (the place most likely to be seen an lunchtime) and hangs out while preparing to duck into a shower room? LOL. What was he going to do if someone was taking a shower etc.?
-
As soon as you start invoking this “idol” nonsense…
The perfect opening for chappie and his claim of seeing an image of you taking a knee at his gravesite. Seems that you have a rather sensitive area…
Their type of thinking, of reasoning or judgment, is never applied to anyone else in this event. Only Oswald's behavior or actions are considered off limits. Or given the most innocent of explanations. Meanwhile, the behavior of others, of Brennan or Brewer or McDonald or "X" or "Y", is given the most critical of interpretations. Interpretations that are then used to impeach that person's credibility or to label the evidence "tainted." They will be silent, for example, when Ruth Paine is accused of being involved - no critical examination of the claims against her - while they are always - always - quick to come to Oswald's defense. Every single time.
If you go to other sites where controversial historic events are discussed - the Lindbergh baby kidnapping, Sacco and Vanzetti whatever - none of the participants discuss the evidence the way the Oswald defenders do. Nobody. And participants give their own ideas, their own theories, as to who was involved. Nobody dodges requests on who they think kidnapped the baby. Or who killed JonBenet Ramsay. And simply and only attack the evidence against Hauptmann or whoever.
It's only with Oswald. "Idolize" or "cult followers", however you want to label it, it's obvious and very bizarre. It's again, as I've said, Oswald as a sort of American Dreyfus.
-
Making up likelihoods is what “Richard” considers “logic”.
Yes, John....I believe that you're right. Attempting to tie the Walker incident to the assassination of JFK isn't logical. Apparently the investigators weren't as perceptive as our Mr "Smith" because DPD Chief Curry simply shrugged off the suggestion when he was asked if there was a connection between the two events.
However....I do believe there is a common MO in the two events. Though there would have been no logical reason to tie the two events together on the evening of 11/22/63, it is now obvious that there is a common MO that can be applied to both events.
The common denominator is... Lee Oswald. And in both events there are many many questions that require answers that only Lee Oswald could supply.
-
I've never heard of anybody claiming that Lee Oswald was a saint.... But when he answered Fritz's question about where he was when JFK passed by the TSBD, he simply answered Fritz and said that he was in the 1st floor lunchroom .....and when Fritz asked him if there was anybody else in the lunchroom, Lee simply said that he recalled seeing a couple of fellow employees walk by the room as he was sitting there.
The note-takers said Oswald claimed to be in the domino room having lunch with one or more people there, or that Oswald saw two people who came into the lunchroom. Taking all the reports from those present when Oswald was questioned, Fritz's note saying they "came in" means the two black men entered the lunchroom and possibly had lunch with Oswald there.
-
The note-takers said Oswald claimed to be in the domino room having lunch with one or more people there, or that Oswald saw two people who came into the lunchroom. Taking all the reports from those present when Oswald was questioned, Fritz's note saying they "came in" means the two black men entered the lunchroom and possibly had lunch with Oswald there.
Fritz's note saying they "came in" means the two black men entered the lunchroom
Not necessarily. It could just as easily mean that Oswald saw both men as they "came in" the building through the backdoor, which was very close to the door of the Domino room.
-
The note-takers said Oswald claimed to be in the domino room having lunch with one or more people there, or that Oswald saw two people who came into the lunchroom. Taking all the reports from those present when Oswald was questioned, Fritz's note saying they "came in" means the two black men entered the lunchroom and possibly had lunch with Oswald there.
The note-takers said Oswald claimed to be in the domino room having lunch with one or more people there,
No, that's not true Mr O.... Both Fritz's and Hosty's scribbled notes have been posted many times, and those notes say nothing about Lee telling Fritz that he ate lunch with anybody....He said that he was alone in the lunchroom.
or that Oswald saw two people who came into the lunchroom.
No, that's not true Mr O....Lee said that he saw two fellow employees walk by the lunchroom as he was eating his lunch..
-
If you go to other sites where controversial historic events are discussed - the Lindbergh baby kidnapping, Sacco and Vanzetti whatever - none of the participants discuss the evidence the way the Oswald defenders do. Nobody. And participants give their own ideas, their own theories, as to who was involved. Nobody dodges requests on who they think kidnapped the baby. Or who killed JonBenet Ramsay. And simply and only attack the evidence against Hauptmann or whoever.
Making conjectures about who committed crimes is pitifully easy. Substantiating those conjectures with reliable evidence — not so much. That applies to the JonBenet case (still unsolved) as much as it does to the JFK case. There is no virtue in making up creative stories.
-
Jerry posed the question as to why Oswald would target Walker, a right winger, and JFK, a leftist, for assassination. What facts do I "need to establish" to respond to this question? There is no debate that a sniper attack on a public figure is an extremely rare crime. There is no debate that both crimes occurred in Dallas. There is no debate that both crimes occurred just a few months apart. From those widely known and accepted facts, we can logically infer that the crimes were related due to their rarity and proximity in time and location. It would be extremely unlikely that two such rare crimes would occur in Dallas within such a relatively short time frame and be unrelated. So the same shooter almost certainly committed both crimes.
Are you suggesting these facts are incorrect and that the two crimes are not related? If Oswald committed both crimes (as the evidence confirms including his confession to Marina regarding his involvement in the Walker attempt), then we can infer from these facts certain conclusions as to why Oswald choose these specific targets for the reasons that I've discussed. Most importantly opportunity and political grievances. Walker lived in Dallas. He was a right winger who Oswald hated for his political views. His presence in Dallas made him accessible to Oswald who had limited means of transportation and funds. Similarly, JFK's motorcade passed Oswald's place of employment. Oswald had grievances against the US that he freely expressed. JFK was the literal and symbolic head of the country that Oswald detested. Oswald had motive and opportunity to commit both crimes. There is nothing made up about any of this. Certainly nothing you have articulated since your responses have been limited to contrarian commentary directed at me instead of addressing the facts and circumstances of the case.
From those widely known and accepted facts, we can logically infer that the crimes were related due to their rarity and proximity in time and location. '
There you go again, jumping to a conclusion not supported by the evidence. The mere fact that two attacks took place in Dallas within a few months of eachother tells you absolutely nothing about any possible relationship between those two crimes.
It would be extremely unlikely that two such rare crimes would occur in Dallas within such a relatively short time frame and be unrelated.
Your opinion isn't evidence. It is, at best, wishful thinking.
Are you suggesting these facts are incorrect and that the two crimes are not related?
No, I am suggesting that you are (once again) jumping to selfserving "conclusions".
Certainly nothing you have articulated since your responses have been limited to contrarian commentary directed at me instead of addressing the facts and circumstances of the case.
What facts would that be? All I see are your opinions and there is no point for me to debate those. Start presenting actual facts and circumstances of the case and I will respond. As long as you keep up making your own alternate reality (just like your orange high priest) I am not going to bother to justify any of it with a response.
-
The note-takers said Oswald claimed to be in the domino room having lunch with one or more people there, or that Oswald saw two people who came into the lunchroom. Taking all the reports from those present when Oswald was questioned, Fritz's note saying they "came in" means the two black men entered the lunchroom and possibly had lunch with Oswald there.
Nobody (except arguably Hosty) took contemporaneous notes. Not all the accounts said domino room either, just first floor.
-
Yes, John....I believe that you're right. Attempting to tie the Walker incident to the assassination of JFK isn't logical. Apparently the investigators weren't as perceptive as our Mr "Smith" because DPD Chief Curry simply shrugged off the suggestion when he was asked if there was a connection between the two events.
However....I do believe there is a common MO in the two events. Though there would have been no logical reason to tie the two events together on the evening of 11/22/63, it is now obvious that there is a common MO that can be applied to both events.
The common denominator is... Lee Oswald. And in both events there are many many questions that require answers that only Lee Oswald could supply.
Two sniper attacks occurring on public figures in the same city within a few months of each other is a pretty "logical reason to tie the two events together." They couldn't know with certainty that on 11.22 that they were connected until an investigation could be conducted but they certainly had a reasonable basis to believe they were related due to rarity of such a crime and the proximity in time and location. I'm not sure why you find this mysterious or sinister.
-
Fritz's note saying they "came in" means the two black men entered the lunchroom
Not necessarily. It could just as easily mean that Oswald saw both men as they "came in" the building through the backdoor, which was very close to the door of the Domino room.
Fritz's note saying they "came in" means the two black men entered the lunchroom
My first thought when I read that they "came in" is that Lee was saying that Jarman and Norman "came in" meant that they came in from outside... IOW Lee said they came into the building. He sure as hell wasn't saying that they came into the Lunchroom....Because he said that he was there in that lunchroom alone and he said nothing about anybody joining him and what's more Jarman and Norman never said anything about entering the lunchroom.
This is the crap that the LNer's attempt to use to propagate the Warren Commission's big lie.
-
Nobody (except arguably Hosty) took contemporaneous notes. Not all the accounts said domino room either, just first floor.
I know that Fritz testified that he took no notes while interrogating Lee Oswald, but if you've seen the Notes that Fritz said he took several days after the interrogation you should be able to see that Fritz was a damned liar. Nobody would hastily scribble those notes in the truncated and haphazard manner that is seen in Fritz's notes if he wrote them several days afterward. ( Just the idea that he would take notes several days later is absurd)
-
The note-takers said Oswald claimed to be in the domino room having lunch with one or more people there,
No, that's not true Mr O.... Both Fritz's and Hosty's scribbled notes have been posted many times, and those notes say nothing about Lee telling Fritz that he ate lunch with anybody....He said that he was alone in the lunchroom.
I don't think they say Oswald said he was alone.
or that Oswald saw two people who came into the lunchroom.
No, that's not true Mr O....Lee said that he saw two fellow employees walk by the lunchroom as he was eating his lunch..
FBI agent James Bookhout, wrote:
"OSWALD stated that on November 22, 1963, he had eaten lunch in the lunch room at the Texas School Book Depository, alone, but recalled possibly two Negro employees walking through the room during this period. He stated possibly one of these employees was called ‘Junior’ and the other was a short individual whose name he could not recall but whom he would be able to recognize." (WR, p.622)
Secret Service agent Thomas Kelley wrote:
"He said he ate his lunch with the colored boys who worked with him. He described one of them as ‘Junior’, a colored boy, and the other was a little short negro boy." (WR, p.626)
What Fritz wrote: "say two negr. came in. One Jr. + short negro" refers to what Bookhout and Kelley wrote. There's nothing in all these accounts about Jarman and Norman entering the building through the back door.
-
Nothing that tends to incriminate their idol makes any sense to them. But, believing that everyone except their idol lied, and that all of the incriminating evidence is “highly questionable”, or outright fake, makes perfect sense to them. It’s more than simple confirmation bias. It’s insanity personified.
Why do you have to be so profoundly ludicrous?
-
Why do you have to be so profoundly ludicrous?
-
I don't think they say Oswald said he was alone.
FBI agent James Bookhout, wrote:
"OSWALD stated that on November 22, 1963, he had eaten lunch in the lunch room at the Texas School Book Depository, alone, but recalled possibly two Negro employees walking through the room during this period. He stated possibly one of these employees was called ‘Junior’ and the other was a short individual whose name he could not recall but whom he would be able to recognize." (WR, p.622)
Secret Service agent Thomas Kelley wrote:
"He said he ate his lunch with the colored boys who worked with him. He described one of them as ‘Junior’, a colored boy, and the other was a little short negro boy." (WR, p.626)
What Fritz wrote: "say two negr. came in. One Jr. + short negro" refers to what Bookhout and Kelley wrote. There's nothing in all these accounts about Jarman and Norman entering the building through the back door.
And so, we have three different versions of what Oswald is supposed to have said.
We can be pretty sure, however, that Oswald, who knew the building and first floor lay out better that any of the three men, would not have said that "Junior and the short negro boy" walked through the lunchroom as that is simply impossible. Bookhout also doesn't say they walked through the lunchroom. It is however possible, and indeed more likely, that he saw Jarman and Norman come in, through the back door and walk towards the elevators which Bookhout describes as ""walk through the room".
There's nothing in all these accounts about Jarman and Norman entering the building through the back door.
There doesn't have to be. Where else would they have entered the building, on their way to the elevators, if not through the back door?
A fact that can't be denied is that all three reports confirm that Oswald said he saw "Junior and the short negro boy" (who we now know to be Jarman and Norman) when he was in the lunchroom eating his lunch. We know from the testimony of Jarman and Norman this could only have happened minutes prior to the shooting.
-
Why do LNs always act like a cry baby or an entitled Karen?
-
I don't think they say Oswald said he was alone.
FBI agent James Bookhout, wrote:
"OSWALD stated that on November 22, 1963, he had eaten lunch in the lunch room at the Texas School Book Depository, alone, but recalled possibly two Negro employees walking through the room during this period. He stated possibly one of these employees was called ‘Junior’ and the other was a short individual whose name he could not recall but whom he would be able to recognize." (WR, p.622)
Secret Service agent Thomas Kelley wrote:
"He said he ate his lunch with the colored boys who worked with him. He described one of them as ‘Junior’, a colored boy, and the other was a little short negro boy." (WR, p.626)
What Fritz wrote: "say two negr. came in. One Jr. + short negro" refers to what Bookhout and Kelley wrote. There's nothing in all these accounts about Jarman and Norman entering the building through the back door.
Fritz wrote; ...."say two negr. came in. One Jr. + short negro"
FBI agent James Bookhout, wrote:
"OSWALD stated that on November 22, 1963, he had eaten lunch in the lunch room at the Texas School Book Depository, alone, but recalled possibly two Negro employees walking through the room during this period. He stated possibly one of these employees was called ‘Junior’ and the other was a short individual whose name he could not recall but whom he would be able to recognize." (WR, p.622)
Secret Service agent Thomas Kelley wrote:
"He said he ate his lunch with the colored boys who worked with him. He described one of them as ‘Junior’, a colored boy, and the other was a little short negro boy." (WR, p.626)
Kelley wasn't there at the first interrogation, so he couldn't have heard Lee's statements....
What Fritz wrote: "say two negr. came in. One Jr. + short negro" refers to what Bookhout and Kelley wrote. There's nothing in all these accounts about Jarman and Norman entering the building through the back door.
"OSWALD stated that on November 22, 1963, he had eaten lunch in the lunch room at the Texas School Book Depository, alone, but recalled possibly two Negro employees walking through the room during this period. He stated possibly one of these employees was called ‘Junior’ and the other was a short individual whose name he could not recall but whom he would be able to recognize."
Lee told the interrogators that he had eaten lunch in the lunch room at the Texas School Book Depository, alone, He recalled possibly two Negro employees walking through the room during this period.
This is written by someone (Bookhout) who was unfamiliar with the 1st floor lunchroom, because it is impossible to "walk through" (transit) the lunchroom, because there is only one entrance / exit door.
Lee said that he saw Jarman and Norman come into the building and walk to the west elevator. We know this is true because both Jarman and Norman said that they walked up the Houston street steps, and across the loading dock, and then entered the building by the back door.
You've omitted Hosty, and inserted Kelley, but Kelly wasn't present at the interrogation on 11/22/63 at 3:15 pm. and Hosty said that
What's so difficult about understanding Lee's simple reply to Fritz that he was eating lunch alone in the first floor lunchroom when he saw Junior Jarman and Harold Norman come into the building by the back door. Both Jarman and Norman testified that they did in fact enter the TSBD by the back door at about 12:27.
-
And so, we have three different versions of what Oswald is supposed to have said.
We can be pretty sure, however, that Oswald, who knew the building and first floor lay out better that any of the three men, would not have said that "Junior and the short negro boy" walked through the lunchroom as that is simply impossible. Bookhout also doesn't say they walked through the lunchroom. It is however possible, and indeed more likely, that he saw Jarman and Norman come in, through the back door and walk towards the elevators which Bookhout describes as ""walk through the room".
There's nothing in all these accounts about Jarman and Norman entering the building through the back door.
There doesn't have to be. Where else would they have entered the building, on their way to the elevators, if not through the back door?
A fact that can't be denied is that all three reports confirm that Oswald said he saw "Junior and the short negro boy" (who we now know to be Jarman and Norman) when he was in the lunchroom eating his lunch. We know from the testimony of Jarman and Norman this could only have happened minutes prior to the shooting.
And so, we have three different versions of what Oswald is supposed to have said.
No, that's not accurate because Kelly wasn't present so we can discard his statement. ...And Bookhout and Fritz statements are corroborating ....
-
Why do LNs always act like a cry baby or an entitled Karen?
Don't the lyrics in that video present the crux of their mentality?
"Get out da way btch ..Get out da way..Get out da way btch" A profusely limited composition there. Mozart would frown.
BTW ...I had to look up "entitled Karen" found... Most Entitled Karens Who Went Too Far [youtube]
A glaring example of airline passengers who really needed to just change seats.
-
And so, we have three different versions of what Oswald is supposed to have said.
We can be pretty sure, however, that Oswald, who knew the building and first floor lay out better that any of the three men, would not have said that "Junior and the short negro boy" walked through the lunchroom as that is simply impossible. Bookhout also doesn't say they walked through the lunchroom. It is however possible, and indeed more likely, that he saw Jarman and Norman come in, through the back door and walk towards the elevators which Bookhout describes as ""walk through the room".
There's nothing in all these accounts about Jarman and Norman entering the building through the back door.
There doesn't have to be. Where else would they have entered the building, on their way to the elevators, if not through the back door?
A fact that can't be denied is that all three reports confirm that Oswald said he saw "Junior and the short negro boy" (who we now know to be Jarman and Norman) when he was in the lunchroom eating his lunch. We know from the testimony of Jarman and Norman this could only have happened minutes prior to the shooting.
We know from the testimony of Jarman and Norman this could only have happened minutes prior to the shooting.
Here's the LNer's timeline for Lee Oswald.....
12:27--- LHO in 1st floor lunchroom
12:29---LHO arrives on 6th floor and retrieves the disassembled rifle that was in a paper sack and walks to the SE corner window.
!2:29 :30 ---LHO removes pieces of the rifle from the paper sack and tosses the sack in the corner and assembles the rifle
12:30--- LHO aims rifle from the window at the Lincoln which is behind the foliage of a tree, and hastily fires three shots.
12:31---LHO walks across the sixth floor and hides the rifle beneath boxes of books and then walks down the stairs to the 2nd floor lunchroom, where he is encountered by Baker and Truly at 12: 31: 45....
Total elapsed time...4 minutes 45 seconds...
Whew!.... It's unbelievable how quick LHO could move.....
-
We know from the testimony of Jarman and Norman this could only have happened minutes prior to the shooting.
Here's the LNer's timeline for Lee Oswald.....
12:27--- LHO in 1st floor lunchroom
12:29---LHO arrives on 6th floor and retrieves the disassembled rifle that was in a paper sack and walks to the SE corner window.
!2:29 :30 ---LHO removes pieces of the rifle from the paper sack and tosses the sack in the corner and assembles the rifle
12:30--- LHO aims rifle from the window at the Lincoln which is behind the foliage of a tree, and hastily fires three shots.
12:31---LHO walks across the sixth floor and hides the rifle beneath boxes of books and then walks down the stairs to the 2nd floor lunchroom, where he is encountered by Baker and Truly at 12: 31: 45....
Whew!.... It's unbelievable how quick LHO could move.....
No LNer believes that is an accurate timeline. Oswald's movements in minutes leading up to the assassination are uncertain. The evidence, however, places him in the SN at 12:30 beyond any doubt. You have also falsely suggested that JFK's car was "behind the foliage of a tree" when the shots were fired. As apparent from the WC recreation of the event, his car was in a clear line of sight on Elm from Oswald's window when he was struck. An easy shot for Oswald who was trained in the USMC.
-
No LNer believes that is an accurate timeline. Oswald's movements in minutes leading up to the assassination are uncertain. The evidence, however, places him in the SN at 12:30 beyond any doubt. You have also falsely suggested that JFK's car was "behind the foliage of a tree" when the shots were fired. As apparent from the WC recreation of the event, his car was in a clear line of sight on Elm from Oswald's window when he was struck. An easy shot for Oswald who was trained in the USMC.
No LNer believes that is an accurate timeline.
OK , Mr "Smith" if that's not an accurate time line ....then perhaps you can present an accurate one...starting at 12:27 when Lee saw Jarman and Norman walk by the 1st floor lunchroom.
-
No LNer believes that is an accurate timeline. Oswald's movements in minutes leading up to the assassination are uncertain. The evidence, however, places him in the SN at 12:30 beyond any doubt. You have also falsely suggested that JFK's car was "behind the foliage of a tree" when the shots were fired. As apparent from the WC recreation of the event, his car was in a clear line of sight on Elm from Oswald's window when he was struck. An easy shot for Oswald who was trained in the USMC.
Notice the Loons also have Oswald incapable of assembling the rifle despite having all morning to do so. In the Land O' Loons, if Oswald had assembled the rifle before noon, the rifle would have been left out in the open and noticed. No LN scenario or evaluation of the evidence is possible. Why do they love this Oswald? A shared hatred of authority?
-
No LNer believes that is an accurate timeline.
OK , Mr "Smith" if that's not an accurate time line ....then perhaps you can present an accurate one...starting at 12:27 when Lee saw Jarman and Norman walk by the 1st floor lunchroom.
There is insufficient information to reconstruct Oswald's movements before the assassination. There was no real cause of others to take notice of him or the specific time down to the precise minute of mundane events that were occurring in the building before the assassination. What we know with certainty is that Oswald was in the SN at 12:30 based upon the evidence that he left behind.
-
Notice the Loons also have Oswald incapable of assembling the rifle despite having all morning to do so. In the Land O' Loons, if Oswald had assembled the rifle before noon, the rifle would have been left out in the open and noticed. No LN scenario or evaluation of the evidence is possible. Why do they love this Oswald? A shared hatred of authority?
Yes, it's a reoccurring pattern. And, of course, we are constantly told that Oswald couldn't have done things that someone else apparently could. Oswald would require "superpowers" to perform these mundane acts while some stranger on the floor apparently could pull it off and escape unnoticed. Repeat endlessly.
-
Notice the Loons also have Oswald incapable of assembling the rifle despite having all morning to do so. In the Land O' Loons, if Oswald had assembled the rifle before noon, the rifle would have been left out in the open and noticed. No LN scenario or evaluation of the evidence is possible. Why do they love this Oswald? A shared hatred of authority?
Dear Mr Tiny Organ.... Are you aware that Mr "Smith" provided me with the information that Lee hid the paper sack that contained the disassembled rifle and then retrieved that sack with the rifle in it just before he shot JFK?
If you have a problem with Mr "Smith's" statement then perhaps you can present a different scenario. But you need to keep in mind that the rifle could not have been assembled in less than five minutes .....so if you believe that Lee assembled the rifle while other workers were moving about then he would have run the risk of being caught with the rifle.
-
Yes, it's a reoccurring pattern. And, of course, we are constantly told that Oswald couldn't have done things that someone else apparently could. Oswald would require "superpowers" to perform these mundane acts while some stranger on the floor apparently could pull it off and escape unnoticed. Repeat endlessly.
Wottsamatter wit you, Mr "Smith"? .... Can't you provide me with a time line for Lee Oswald starting at the time (12:27) that he saw Jarman and Norman walk by the 1st floor lunchroom.
-
Dear Mr Tiny Organ.... Are you aware that Mr "Smith" provided me with the information that Lee hid the paper sack that contained the disassembled rifle and then retrieved that sack with the rifle in it just before he shot JFK?
Where does any LNer say Oswald started for the 6th floor at 12:27?
If you have a problem with Mr "Smith's" statement then perhaps you can present a different scenario. But you need to keep in mind that the rifle could not have been assembled in less than five minutes .....so if you believe that Lee assembled the rifle while other workers were moving about then he would have run the risk of being caught with the rifle.
I think it's possible Oswald took the rifle to work without disassembling it. An inch or two of the barrel end sticking out, easily concealed by holding the bag at the top and tucking the open end in between Frazier's back seat and seat back.
As for Oswald being too stupid or naive to figure out a way to assembly/unpackaged the rifle and place it somewhere without being noticed, is this one of those "superpowers" he would have required?
-
There is insufficient information to reconstruct Oswald's movements before the assassination. There was no real cause of others to take notice of him or the specific time down to the precise minute of mundane events that were occurring in the building before the assassination. What we know with certainty is that Oswald was in the SN at 12:30 based upon the evidence that he left behind.
What we know with certainty is that Oswald was in the SN at 12:30 based upon the evidence that he left behind.
Really?..... You can know that Lee was in the so called "Sniper's Nest" at 12:30 based upon the evidence that was found there?
Please enlighten me .... Let's start with the spent shells....( Originally there were only TWO shells but that number had to be changed after most witnesses reported that they heard more than two explosions.) But HOW do those spent shells provide any information about when they were fired?
We'll move along to another piece of "Evidence" after you present your answer.....
-
What we know with certainty is that Oswald was in the SN at 12:30 based upon the evidence that he left behind.
Really?..... You can know that Lee was in the so called "Sniper's Nest" at 12:30 based upon the evidence that was found there?
Please enlighten me .... Let's start with the spent shells....( Originally there were only TWO shells but that number had to be changed after most witnesses reported that they heard more than two explosions.) But HOW do those spent shells provide any information about when they were fired?
We'll move along to another piece of "Evidence" after you present your answer.....
The first Crime Lab photos of the "nest" show three shells on the floor. ???
-
Where does any LNer say Oswald started for the 6th floor at 12:27?
I think it's possible Oswald took the rifle to work without disassembling it. An inch or two of the barrel end sticking out, easily concealed by holding the bag at the top and tucking the open end in between Frazier's back seat and seat back.
As for Oswald being too stupid or naive to figure out a way to assembly/unpackaged the rifle and place it somewhere without being noticed, is this one of those "superpowers" he would have required?
Where does any LNer say Oswald started for the 6th floor at 12:27?
Well, since Lee Oswald saw Jarman and Norman walk by the 1st floor lunchroom at about 12:27 he couldn't have started climbing the stairs to the 6th floor any earlier.... I'd hasten to remind you that Jarman testified that they arrived on the fifth floor at 12:28. so they walked by the lunchroom at about 12:26 / 12;27.
I think it's possible Oswald took the rifle to work without disassembling it. An inch or two of the barrel end sticking out, easily concealed by holding the bag at the top and tucking the open end in between Frazier's back seat and seat back.
That's not what it says in your bible Mr. Organ...... Are you a heretic?
-
No LNer believes that is an accurate timeline. Oswald's movements in minutes leading up to the assassination are uncertain. The evidence, however, places him in the SN at 12:30 beyond any doubt. You have also falsely suggested that JFK's car was "behind the foliage of a tree" when the shots were fired. As apparent from the WC recreation of the event, his car was in a clear line of sight on Elm from Oswald's window when he was struck. An easy shot for Oswald who was trained in the USMC.
Oswald's movements in minutes leading up to the assassination are uncertain.
Of course they are. That's exactly why Jesse Curry said that nobody has ever been able to place Oswald on the 6th floor with a rifle in his hand.
The shooter (if there was one in the so-called sniper's nest) needed to get into the nest on time for the arrival of the motorcade, which was scheduled at around 12:15. There is no evidence that places Oswald on the 6th floor around that time. However, Bonnie Ray Williams was there and he did not see or hear anybody, when even the slightest footstep would have made the wooden floor crack. On the other hand, Carolyn Arnold saw Oswald (iirc) on the 2nd floor somewhere between 12:15 and 12:25. And Oswald himself saw two co-workers, we now know to be Jarman and Norman, as they were walking towards the elevator on the 1st floor at around 12:25.
The evidence, however, places him in the SN at 12:30 beyond any doubt.
You really need to stop telling the same lie over and over again. Even more so now that so-called "evidence" has been completely debunked, whether you like it or not.
The fact is that you still haven't been able to explain how Oswald could have gotten on to the 6th floor without being seen or heard by anybody, how he could leave that floor, after the shots, without the guys on the 5th hearing as much as a crack of the wooden floor and how he managed to get down to the 2nd floor lunchroom in less than 75 seconds after the last shot, without being heard on the noisy stairs and/or being seen by Dorothy Garner, who was standing next to the stairs on the 4th floor.
-
Notice the Loons also have Oswald incapable of assembling the rifle despite having all morning to do so. In the Land O' Loons, if Oswald had assembled the rifle before noon, the rifle would have been left out in the open and noticed. No LN scenario or evaluation of the evidence is possible. Why do they love this Oswald? A shared hatred of authority?
It's not a matter of loving Oswald, at least not for me. I don't care either way. If Oswald did it and the evidence proves it, then so be it.
The problem with LN scenarios and evaluations is that they are contrived, ignore known facts, are highly biased and lack credibility. Anybody who starts with insulting people who disagree with him as "loons" and declare themselves to be an "authority" usually hasn't got persuasive and conclusive arguments to support his claims.
-
Notice the Loons also have Oswald incapable of assembling the rifle despite having all morning to do so. In the Land O' Loons, if Oswald had assembled the rifle before noon, the rifle would have been left out in the open and noticed. No LN scenario or evaluation of the evidence is possible. Why do they love this Oswald? A shared hatred of authority?
Why do they love this Oswald?
Love Oswald??.... I doubt that I would have liked him .... But I'm a sucker for the idea of "liberty and Justice for all" as we thoughtlessly mouth in our pledge of allegiance. No rational person can possibly believe that Lee Oswald had his chance to defend himself in court and received anything remotely like "justice" .... He was lynched .....
-
The evidence, however, places him in the SN at 12:30 beyond any doubt.
Because these old conservative white guys with the honest faces said so?----
(https://www.history.com/.image/c_limit%2Ccs_srgb%2Cq_auto:good%2Cw_686/MTU3ODc4NjAwNTYxNjY1NzU5/image-placeholder-title.webp)
"Earl, thanks for bailing my ass out a job well done."
An easy shot for Oswald who was trained in the USMC.
Not that again [like he was in the infantry]
A chump statement made by someone who probably never even shot a gun.
Oswald--trained sniper forever [because he was a Marine short timer]
The problem with LN scenarios and evaluations is that they are contrived, ignore known facts, are highly biased and lack credibility. Anybody who starts with insulting people who disagree with him as "loons" and declare themselves to be an "authority" usually hasn't got persuasive and conclusive arguments to support his claims.
I would call those guys .. chumps...they are enough to drive the rest of us loony.
-
Because these old conservative white guys with the honest faces said so?----
(https://www.history.com/.image/c_limit%2Ccs_srgb%2Cq_auto:good%2Cw_686/MTU3ODc4NjAwNTYxNjY1NzU5/image-placeholder-title.webp)
"Earl, thanks for bailing my ass out a job well done."
Not that again [like he was in the infantry]
A chump statement made by someone who probably never even shot a gun.
Oswald--trained sniper forever [because he was a Marine short timer]
I would call those guys .. chumps...they are enough to drive the rest of us loony.
(https://www.history.com/.image/c_limit%2Ccs_srgb%2Cq_auto:good%2Cw_686/MTU3ODc4NjAwNTYxNjY1NzU5/image-placeholder-title.webp)
Honest faces??.... They couldn't even be honest about the book in the photo.... That is not the Warren Report, but you can bet that LBJ wanted to substitute some thick tome for the photo to deceive us suckers into believing they had gathered a huge amount of information in their "investigation"
-
They couldn't even be honest about the book in the photo.... That is not the Warren Report..........
No...it's not! Wrong holster book. What a sham all the way around.
-
I don't think they say Oswald said he was alone.
Bookhout’s account is pretty specific about that. Kelley is the outlier.
-
No LNer believes that is an accurate timeline. Oswald's movements in minutes leading up to the assassination are uncertain. The evidence, however, places him in the SN at 12:30 beyond any doubt.
LOL
BS:
-
Notice the Loons also have Oswald incapable of assembling the rifle despite having all morning to do so.
BS:
You don’t know he had “all morning to assemble a rifle”. You don’t even have any evidence that he ever did assemble a rifle.
Why do you love making up stories you cannot substantiate? Shared hatred of Oswald?
-
Yes, it's a reoccurring pattern. And, of course, we are constantly told that Oswald couldn't have done things that someone else apparently could.
BS:
Nobody ever told you that, Strawman “Smith”. You’re either a pathological liar, or delusional (or both).
-
Where does any LNer say Oswald started for the 6th floor at 12:27?
I think it's possible Oswald took the rifle to work without disassembling it. An inch or two of the barrel end sticking out, easily concealed by holding the bag at the top and tucking the open end in between Frazier's back seat and seat back.
As for Oswald being too stupid or naive to figure out a way to assembly/unpackaged the rifle and place it somewhere without being noticed, is this one of those "superpowers" he would have required?
Anything’s possible. There’s just no evidence for any of this.
-
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/19631129_Deutsche_NZ.jpg?width=960&height=720&fit=bounds)
I had hoped that someone would discuss this aspect of the cae with me.....
-
I think it's possible Oswald took the rifle to work without disassembling it.
Oh for crying out loud! Not even the blasted Report would have suggested that.
Why not say he possibly had it shoved...down his pants?
-
The evidence, however, places him in the SN at 12:30 beyond any doubt.
You really need to stop telling the same lie over and over again. Even more so now that so-called "evidence" has been completely debunked, whether you like it or not.
The fact is that you still haven't been able to explain how Oswald could have gotten on to the 6th floor without being seen or heard by anybody, how he could leave that floor, after the shots, without the guys on the 5th hearing as much as a crack of the wooden floor and how he managed to get down to the 2nd floor lunchroom in less than 75 seconds after the last shot, without being heard on the noisy stairs and/or being seen by Dorothy Garner, who was standing next to the stairs on the 4th floor.
Yes, we know. Oswald couldn't do this without "superpowers" but someone else could. Yawn. Good grief, Try to think about what you are implying. That someone other than Oswald managed to carry a rifle unseen into the building and up to the 6th floor. Someone other than Oswald managed to plant Oswald's rifle on the 6th floor or even assassinate JFK from the 6th floor SN. Someone was pointing a rifle out the 6th floor window at 12:30. They managed to reach that floor without "being seen or heard by anybody." They managed to leave that floor "without the guys on the 5th floor hearing as much as a crack of the wooden floor." LOL. And they managed to get completely out of the TSBD without being seen by anyone. Something Oswald couldn't do even though he worked in the building and had a legitimate reason to be there. That doesn't even get into how they managed to obtain Oswald's rifle to plant or knew that Oswald would not be in the presence of anyone at the moment of the assassination to give him an airtight alibi. Completely absurd. You should be embarrassed.
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/7LjN6SzF/OSWALD-QUIET-STAIRS.png)
Bill Chapman
Tests show Oswald could have made the descent in 48 seconds
-
Yes, we know. Oswald couldn't do this without "superpowers" but someone else could. Yawn. Good grief, Try to think about what you are implying. That someone other than Oswald managed to carry a rifle unseen into the building and up to the 6th floor. Someone other than Oswald managed to plant Oswald's rifle on the 6th floor or even assassinate JFK from the 6th floor SN. Someone was pointing a rifle out the 6th floor window at 12:30. They managed to reach that floor without "being seen or heard by anybody." They managed to leave that floor "without the guys on the 5th floor hearing as much as a crack of the wooden floor." LOL. And they managed to get completely out of the TSBD without being seen by anyone. Something Oswald couldn't do even though he worked in the building and had a legitimate reason to be there. That doesn't even get into how they managed to obtain Oswald's rifle to plant or knew that Oswald would not be in the presence of anyone at the moment of the assassination to give him an airtight alibi. Completely absurd. You should be embarrassed.
You're absolutely right about this, Richard. But evidently most CTers don't get embarrassed very easily. (Although they certainly should.)
Along those same lines, here's a discussion I had several years ago....
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
The amount of physical and circumstantial evidence that exists to this day against Lee Harvey Oswald for the murders of both President Kennedy and policeman J.D. Tippit is just too massive and comprehensive to be dismissed or ignored or swept under the rug -- even with the kind of information supplied on June 2, 1964, by Dorothy Garner.
And remember to keep asking yourself one important question --
If Lee Oswald wasn't the sixth-floor assassin, then how did the "real killer(s)" manage to remain completely out of the sight of Vickie Adams and Sandra Styles and Dorothy Garner and Roy Truly and Marrion Baker following the assassination of the President?
Did the "real killer" somehow manage to make himself invisible to all of those witnesses right after the shooting? Or did the real killer (if it wasn't Oswald) decide to remain on the sixth floor for many minutes after he shot at JFK, running the fearful risk of being captured on the TSBD floor where Oswald's rifle and the three spent shells were found?
I think even most hardened conspiracy theorists would find that latter option a little hard to swallow.
Also....
It's funny to note that the conspiracy theorists don't think Lee Oswald had a prayer of getting from the sixth floor to the second floor of the Book Depository in 90 seconds, and yet those same conspiracists don't have any problem at all believing that the two women (Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles--wearing high heels too) could go from the 4th floor to the 1st floor in just 60 seconds.
And the difference in the distance travelled is just one floor (with Oswald needing to travel down four flights--from 6 to 2--while the girls need to go down three flights--from 4 to 1).
I guess the CTers just can't believe that Oswald could have traversed that ONE extra flight of stairs (and hide the rifle near the stairs) in the 30 seconds that separates LHO's time from the time the CTers like for the girls so much (1 minute flat).
Ironic, huh?
WALT CAKEBREAD SAID:
It would have taken several minutes to place the rifle in position and then cover it with paper and boxes of books.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Absolute nonsense. You make it sound like he was constructing the Pyramids.
FWIW, it's my own opinion (based on LHO's clipboard being found very near this same area of the stairs and rifle) that Oswald likely pre-arranged his rifle-stashing area near the stairwell in advance of 12:30 PM.
But even if he didn't pre-arrange it, Walt's theory is just more of the same over-the-top dreck that Walt always utilizes in order to keep from having to admit what the evidence so plainly shows--and that is:
Walt's favorite "patsy" was, in truth, the assassin of President Kennedy -- and Oswald himself hid his own rifle in those boxes before fleeing down the nearby stairway.
Simple and Occam-like. But Walt likes the "Pyramids" approach better.
More:
https://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/07/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-743.html
-
You're absolutely right about this, Richard. But evidently most CTers don't get embarrassed very easily. (Although they certainly should.)
Along those same lines, here's a discussion I had several years ago....
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
The amount of physical and circumstantial evidence that exists to this day against Lee Harvey Oswald for the murders of both President Kennedy and policeman J.D. Tippit is just too massive and comprehensive to be dismissed or ignored or swept under the rug -- even with the kind of information supplied on June 2, 1964, by Dorothy Garner.
And remember to keep asking yourself one important question --
If Lee Oswald wasn't the sixth-floor assassin, then how did the "real killer(s)" manage to remain completely out of the sight of Vickie Adams and Sandra Styles and Dorothy Garner and Roy Truly and Marrion Baker following the assassination of the President?
Did the "real killer" somehow manage to make himself invisible to all of those witnesses right after the shooting? Or did the real killer (if it wasn't Oswald) decide to remain on the sixth floor for many minutes after he shot at JFK, running the fearful risk of being captured on the TSBD floor where Oswald's rifle and the three spent shells were found?
I think even most hardened conspiracy theorists would find that latter option a little hard to swallow.
Also....
It's funny to note that the conspiracy theorists don't think Lee Oswald had a prayer of getting from the sixth floor to the second floor of the Book Depository in 90 seconds, and yet those same conspiracists don't have any problem at all believing that the two women (Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles--wearing high heels too) could go from the 4th floor to the 1st floor in just 60 seconds.
And the difference in the distance travelled is just one floor (with Oswald needing to travel down four flights--from 6 to 2--while the girls need to go down three flights--from 4 to 1).
I guess the CTers just can't believe that Oswald could have traversed that ONE extra flight of stairs (and hide the rifle near the stairs) in the 30 seconds that separates LHO's time from the time the CTers like for the girls so much (1 minute flat).
Ironic, huh?
WALT CAKEBREAD SAID:
It would have taken several minutes to place the rifle in position and then cover it with paper and boxes of books.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Absolute nonsense. You make it sound like he was constructing the Pyramids.
FWIW, it's my own opinion (based on LHO's clipboard being found very near this same area of the stairs and rifle) that Oswald likely pre-arranged his rifle-stashing area near the stairwell in advance of 12:30 PM.
But even if he didn't pre-arrange it, Walt's theory is just more of the same over-the-top dreck that Walt always utilizes in order to keep from having to admit what the evidence so plainly shows--and that is:
Walt's favorite "patsy" was, in truth, the assassin of President Kennedy -- and Oswald himself hid his own rifle in those boxes before fleeing down the nearby stairway.
Simple and Occam-like. But Walt likes the "Pyramids" approach better.
More:
https://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/07/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-743.html
The amount of physical and circumstantial evidence that exists to this day against Lee Harvey Oswald for the murders of both President Kennedy and policeman J.D. Tippit is just too massive and comprehensive to be dismissed or ignored or swept under the rug
Here we go again with the usual bogus blanket statement that simply isn't true. There is no physical evidence against Oswald for the murder of Kennedy. Even if it was his rifle that was found on the 6th floor, that still is not evidence of either him being on the 6th floor and/or shooting Kennedy. I was never even established that the rifle had been fired that day. The whole case against Oswald, in the Kennedy murder, is 100% speculation and assumptions.
As for the murder of Tippit, there is no physical evidence whatsoever. The revolver the DPD claimed to have taken from Oswald has no chain of custody, nor can it be proven that Oswald ever owned that revolver.
In short there is nothing massive and/or comprehensive about the physical evidence in either case. And circumstantial evidence, for the largest part is what anybody can make up to get to a narrative when there is a lack of conclusive evidence.
If Lee Oswald wasn't the sixth-floor assassin, then how did the "real killer(s)" manage to remain completely out of the sight of Vickie Adams and Sandra Styles and Dorothy Garner and Roy Truly and Marrion Baker following the assassination of the President?
That's an easy one; any other assassin but Oswald did not need to run down the stairs to get to the 2nd floor lunchroom for his encounter with Truly and Baker within 75 seconds after the shots. It is possible there wasn't even an assassin on the 6th floor (I know, this is sacrilegious in the eyes of the LNs, but it could be true nevertheless), but if there was one, all he needed to do is carry a fake law enforcement ID and hide in the open on the 6th floor until the room was full with other officers and then simply walk out. Just to make sure there is no misunderstanding (or need for David to misrepresent what I am saying), I am not claiming that is what actually happened, but it is a possible answer to David's question.
Perhaps now David can explain how he thinks Oswald managed to remain completely out of the sight of Vickie Adams and Sandra Styles and Dorothy Garner and Roy Truly and Marrion Baker following the assassination of the President? I doubt he can, though....
Did the "real killer" somehow manage to make himself invisible to all of those witnesses right after the shooting? Or did the real killer (if it wasn't Oswald) decide to remain on the sixth floor for many minutes after he shot at JFK, running the fearful risk of being captured on the TSBD floor where Oswald's rifle and the three spent shells were found?
I think even most hardened conspiracy theorists would find that latter option a little hard to swallow.
Why would that option be hard to swallow. The mere fact that you can't (or don't want to) consider such an option as feasible, doesn't mean it couldn't have happened. Hiding in plain sight is actually a good option. With the 6th floor flooding with law enforcement agents from all sorts of agencies, who would notice just another plain clothes guy with possibly a fake badge (just like the one behind the fence on the grassy knoll)? In the pandemonium that broke out after the shooting, it would be easy to just slip away unnoticed after the TSBD was full of officers.
It's funny to note that the conspiracy theorists don't think Lee Oswald had a prayer of getting from the sixth floor to the second floor of the Book Depository in 90 seconds, and yet those same conspiracists don't have any problem at all believing that the two women (Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles--wearing high heels too) could go from the 4th floor to the 1st floor in just 60 seconds.
Wow, yet another wilful misrepresentation of what non-LNs think. If he was the assassin, Oswald would most certainly have been able to get to the 2nd floor lunchroom and he could even have done so in 75 seconds. Tests have shown that it was possible. And yes, it was equally possible for Adams and Styles to get down to the 1st floor in less than 60 seconds. In fact, they must have done as they were already outside the building when Truly and Baker reached the door to the stairs on the first floor. The problem with this scenario is that Oswald would have had to go down the stairs after Adams and Styles, which means that Dorothy Garner, who, by then, was standing near the stairs would most certainly have seen him. In fact, with those noisy stairs, there simply isn't a way that she could have missed him.
This is where it gets problematic for LNs such as David. There are several versions of what could have happened, but only one sequence of events actually works and fits all the known information. Let's see if David can work it out by himself or if he needs it to be explained to him.
And the difference in the distance travelled is just one floor (with Oswald needing to travel down four flights--from 6 to 2--while the girls need to go down three flights--from 4 to 1).
I guess the CTers just can't believe that Oswald could have traversed that ONE extra flight of stairs (and hide the rifle near the stairs) in the 30 seconds that separates LHO's time from the time the CTers like for the girls so much (1 minute flat).
More BS.... If it was Oswald on the 6th floor, he had to cover nearly double the distance Adams and Styles did. The girls left their office through the back door, which gave them direct access to nearly the center of the 4th floor. All they needed to do was cross the room diagonally to get to the stairs. On the other hand, Oswald's route was predetermined by the boxes stored on the 6th floor. He first would have had to run from the s/n to nearly the back of the building and then turn left and run nearly the same distance again to get to the stairs. Why do you ignore this?
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/SsY2QhfR/280-INVISIBLE-GORILLA.png)
Bill Chapman
-
That's an easy one; any other assassin but Oswald did not need to run down the stairs to get to the 2nd floor lunchroom for his encounter with Truly and Baker within 75 seconds after the shots.
“Richard” isn’t intellectually honest enough to acknowledge this point. Maybe DVP will be.
But who ever said that Adams and Styles must have gotten down and out in 60 seconds anyway?
-
If Lee Oswald wasn't the sixth-floor assassin, then how did the "real killer(s)" manage to remain completely out of the sight of Vickie Adams and Sandra Styles and Dorothy Garner and Roy Truly and Marrion Baker following the assassination of the President?
That's an easy one; any other assassin but Oswald did not need to run down the stairs to get to the 2nd floor lunchroom for his encounter with Truly and Baker within 75 seconds after the shots. It is possible there wasn't even an assassin on the 6th floor (I know, this is sacrilegious in the eyes of the LNs, but it could be true nevertheless), but if there was one, all he needed to do is carry a fake law enforcement ID and hide in the open on the 6th floor until the room was full with other officers and then simply walk out. Just to make sure there is no misunderstanding (or need for David to misrepresent what I am saying), I am not claiming that is what actually happened, but it is a possible answer to David's question.
Perhaps now David can explain how he thinks Oswald managed to remain completely out of the sight of Vickie Adams and Sandra Styles and Dorothy Garner and Roy Truly and Marrion Baker following the assassination of the President? I doubt he can, though....
Excellent point. Oswald only made it to the 2nd floor before encountering the police. And Oswald had a legitimate reason to be in building which is the only reason that he was allowed to escape. Any other assassin would have to get out of the entire building without being seen. Thus, it was much easier for Oswald to reach the 2nd floor and then escape the building than for some stranger to get completely out of the building unnoticed. And are you really claiming there was no one on the 6th floor at 12:30? The rifle seen pointing out the window at the moment of the assassination was being held by a ghost. Ridiculous. And repeating the 75 second estimate as though it is absolute is weak. Even if you repeat it. No one knows the exact timing but even 75 seconds doesn't preclude Oswald from reaching the lunchroom. And how do your fantasy conspirators obtain Oswald's rifle in the first place to plant it? How do they get to the 6th floor to plant the rifle, shells, and bag and escape unnoticed?
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/fRvm1khd/262-BATTER-UP.png)
Bill Chapman
-
Excellent point. Oswald only made it to the 2nd floor before encountering the police. And Oswald had a legitimate reason to be in building which is the only reason that he was allowed to escape. Any other assassin would have to get out of the entire building without being seen. Thus, it was much easier for Oswald to reach the 2nd floor and then escape the building than for some stranger to get completely out of the building unnoticed. And are you really claiming there was no one on the 6th floor at 12:30? The rifle seen pointing out the window at the moment of the assassination was being held by a ghost. Ridiculous. And repeating the 75 second estimate as though it is absolute is weak. Even if you repeat it. No one knows the exact timing but even 75 seconds doesn't preclude Oswald from reaching the lunchroom. And how do your fantasy conspirators obtain Oswald's rifle in the first place to plant it? How do they get to the 6th floor to plant the rifle, shells, and bag and escape unnoticed?
Oswald only made it to the 2nd floor before encountering the police.
True, if he was indeed on the 6th floor to begin with, that is.....
Oswald had a legitimate reason to be in building which is the only reason that he was allowed to escape
I would not call Baker letting Oswald go, after Truly vouched for him, an "escape".
Any other assassin would have to get out of the entire building without being seen.
Who said he needed to be not seen? He may well have been seen with people just not paying attention simply because he was one of many men who were inside the TSBD by then.
Thus, it was much easier for Oswald to reach the 2nd floor and then escape the building than for some stranger to get completely out of the building unnoticed.
Utter nonsense. If Oswald had come down the stairs within 75 seconds after the shots, he would have been seen by Dorothy Garner, who was standing next to the stairs on the 4th floor.
She heard Adams and Styles going down on the stairs and saw Baker and Truly come up. Somewhere inbetween these two events Oswald would have be passing the 4th floor. The reason Garner did not see him is simple; he didn't come down the stairs.
And are you really claiming there was no one on the 6th floor at 12:30?
It's possible.
The rifle seen pointing out the window at the moment of the assassination was being held by a ghost.
What rifle would that be? Euins only saw a pipe and the Z-film shows that Brennan was watching the motorcade when the shots were being fired. He later lied about that of course..
And repeating the 75 second estimate as though it is absolute is weak. Even if you repeat it. No one knows the exact timing but even 75 seconds doesn't preclude Oswald from reaching the lunchroom.
Do you have a reading problem? I never claimed the 75 seconds estimate to be absolute. This is what I said;
If he was the assassin, Oswald would most certainly have been able to get to the 2nd floor lunchroom and he could even have done so in 75 seconds. Tests have shown that it was possible.
The only problem with the 75 seconds scenario is that there is no way for him to pass by the 4th floor without Dorothy Garner seeing him. The WC solved the problem by not calling Garner to testify and discredit Victoria Adams with a outrageous and physically impossible bogus claim.
And how do your fantasy conspirators obtain Oswald's rifle in the first place to plant it?
Try to assume for a second that it wasn't Oswald's rifle at all and you may arrive at an answer.
How do they get to the 6th floor to plant the rifle, shells, and bag and escape unnoticed?
What bag? The one that wasn't there when the first six officers got into the sniper's nest? The one that doesn't show up on any in situ crime scene photo?
And which shells? The ones Fritz picked up or the ones he threw down?
And as for the rifle (and this will freak you out), what if it wasn't planted until after the shooting? Within minutes after the shooting you've got law enforcement with rifles running up the stairs. There are photos showing this. Nobody would notice an extra rifle carried by another guy in a suit. Once he gets to the 6th floor he just dumps the rifle behind the first set of boxes he encounters. I'm sure you're going to find it incredible, impossible and whatever more, but that doesn't interest me much. What would interest me is this; if you claim it couldn't have happened, then explain for once why it couldn't have happened instead of simply dismissing it out of hand as per usual.
-
In the pandemonium that broke out after the shooting
> AKA 'commotion'
> Likely to 'garner' (see what I did there) more attention than what proportion of the population was on the stairway
And how much noise they might have made
About as exciting as taking a census
-
And are you really claiming there was no one on the 6th floor at 12:30?
It's possible.
The rifle seen pointing out the window at the moment of the assassination was being held by a ghost.
What rifle would that be? Euins only saw a pipe and the Z-film shows that Brennan was watching the motorcade when the shots were being fired. He later lied about that of course..
LOL. Who held the "pipe" Euins saw? A ghost. Of course, others also saw a rifle pointing out the window such as James Worrell, Robert Jackson, and Malcolm Couch. And multiple witnesses on the 5th floor heard the shots directly above their heads. There is no doubt that someone was on the 6th floor pointing a rifle out the window at the moment of the assassination. Nothing you have suggested about the timing of the lunchroom encounter precludes Oswald from being this person. He had ample time to reach that location. Recreations such as those done by Gary Mack indicate it could have been accomplished in less than one minute. In addition, your claim that he could not have reached that location unnoticed is baseless since the exact timing of the participants is unknowable and based of recollections that are not precise to the second. Lastly, as has been pointed out, Oswald was encountered before he escaped the building. Only the fact that he worked here allowed him to escape apprehension. Your fantasy assassin would have to have escaped the building completely unnoticed. Baseless fantasies to explain this away such as an assassin hanging around in the building dressed as a law enforcement officer are tin foil nonsense. Truly and Baker did not encounter any such person. They saw no such person.
-
In the pandemonium that broke out after the shooting
> AKA 'commotion'
> Likely to 'garner' (see what I did there) more attention than what proportion of the population was on the stairway
And how much noise they might have made
About as exciting as taking a census
When you learn to communicate in a manner that anybody can understand, get back to us...
-
Excellent point. Oswald only made it to the 2nd floor before encountering the police. And Oswald had a legitimate reason to be in building which is the only reason that he was allowed to escape. Any other assassin would have to get out of the entire building without being seen. Thus, it was much easier for Oswald to reach the 2nd floor and then escape the building than for some stranger to get completely out of the building unnoticed. And are you really claiming there was no one on the 6th floor at 12:30? The rifle seen pointing out the window at the moment of the assassination was being held by a ghost. Ridiculous. And repeating the 75 second estimate as though it is absolute is weak. Even if you repeat it. No one knows the exact timing but even 75 seconds doesn't preclude Oswald from reaching the lunchroom. And how do your fantasy conspirators obtain Oswald's rifle in the first place to plant it? How do they get to the 6th floor to plant the rifle, shells, and bag and escape unnoticed?
Oswald only made it to the 2nd floor before encountering the police.
Amazing ...Simply F--ing amazing!! So now you endow Lee with x-ray vision. Obviously he would have had to have X-ray vision to see through the floors of the building and see that a cop was on the 1st floor and starting to climb the stairs.... Lee thought ..."Oh, Oh, I see a cop coming up the stairs, I'd better duck into the lunchroom. It would be just as easy to go through the door and across the office area to avoid him, but I'm thirsty for a coke, so I'll duck into the lunchroom.... LOL!! :D
-
LOL. Who held the "pipe" Euins saw? A ghost. Of course, others also saw a rifle pointing out the window such as James Worrell, Robert Jackson, and Malcolm Couch. And multiple witnesses on the 5th floor heard the shots directly above their heads. There is no doubt that someone was on the 6th floor pointing a rifle out the window at the moment of the assassination. Nothing you have suggested about the timing of the lunchroom encounter precludes Oswald from being this person. He had ample time to reach that location. Recreations such as those done by Gary Mack indicate it could have been accomplished in less than one minute. In addition, your claim that he could not have reached that location unnoticed is baseless since the exact timing of the participants is unknowable and based of recollections that are not precise to the second. Lastly, as has been pointed out, Oswald was encountered before he escaped the building. Only the fact that he worked here allowed him to escape apprehension. Your fantasy assassin would have to have escaped the building completely unnoticed. Baseless fantasies to explain this away such as an assassin hanging around in the building dressed as a law enforcement officer are tin foil nonsense. Truly and Baker did not encounter any such person. They saw no such person.
Who held the "pipe" Euins saw?
Maybe the same guy Rowland saw at the other side of the building.
There is no doubt that someone was on the 6th floor pointing a rifle out the window at the moment of the assassination.
If you say so..
Nothing you have suggested about the timing of the lunchroom encounter precludes Oswald from being this person. He had ample time to reach that location.
You're not paying attention, as per usual. I've already said that he could have made it to the 2nd floor lunchroom in 75 seconds. What precludes it is that he would have been seen by Dorothy Garner. Now, isn't it odd that you keep on ignoring that?
Recreations such as those done by Gary Mack indicate it could have been accomplished in less than one minute.
Too bad that's simply a lie
In addition, your claim that he could not have reached that location unnoticed is baseless since the exact timing of the participants is unknowable and based of recollections that are not precise to the second.
More BS... Playing the WC's game simply isn't going to cut it. Adams said she left the window after the last shot. Garner confirmed this to Barry Ernest and told him the girls instantly ran to the stairs. She followed them and heard them as they went down the noisy stairs. The next thing she saw was Truly and a policeman [Baker] come up. What basically closes the deal is that Styles was photographed in front of the main entrance of the TSBD at roughly 12:36. The only way she, and Adams, could have gotten there is if they left the 4th floor directly after the shots, as it would have taken them a couple of minutes to go down the stairs, leave the building at the loading dock, walk towards the railroad yard and then walk the distance of the TSBD annex and turn left onto Elm in order to get to the front door. I fully understand that you don't like any of this, but simply dismissing it without any kind of credible explanation only makes your own claims even weaker than they already are.
Your fantasy assassin would have to have escaped the building completely unnoticed. Baseless fantasies to explain this away such as an assassin hanging around in the building dressed as a law enforcement officer are tin foil nonsense.
Only in the mind of a fanatical WC defender. You wanted to know how another assassin could have escaped unnoticed and I just gave you a possible explanation. The mere fact that you don't like it doesn't make it impossible. It only demonstrates just how narrow-minded and naive you really are.
Truly and Baker did not encounter any such person. They saw no such person.
Why in the world would they?
-
Oswald only made it to the 2nd floor before encountering the police.
Amazing ...Simply F--ing amazing!! So now you endow Lee with x-ray vision. Obviously he would have had to have X-ray vision to see through the floors of the building and see that a cop was on the 1st floor and starting to climb the stairs.... Lee thought ..."Oh, Oh, I see a cop coming up the stairs, I'd better duck into the lunchroom. It would be just as easy to go through the door and across the office area to avoid him, but I'm thirsty for a coke, so I'll duck into the lunchroom.... LOL!! :D
It's even worse than that. Truly was running up the stairs before Baker and if Oswald had come down to get to the point where Baker allegedly saw him (through that pathetically small window :D) he would have run over Truly completely. For crying out loud, Truly was already on the 3rd floor when he realized Baker wasn't following him anymore. So, what in the world does "Richard" think happened there? If Oswald had gotten down before Truly reached the 2nd floor, the only way he would have been where Baker said he saw him would be if he waited there for several seconds to make sure he was seen.
-
Oswald only made it to the 2nd floor before encountering the police.
Amazing ...Simply F--ing amazing!! So now you endow Lee with x-ray vision. Obviously he would have had to have X-ray vision to see through the floors of the building and see that a cop was on the 1st floor and starting to climb the stairs.... Lee thought ..."Oh, Oh, I see a cop coming up the stairs, I'd better duck into the lunchroom. It would be just as easy to go through the door and across the office area to avoid him, but I'm thirsty for a coke, so I'll duck into the lunchroom.... LOL!! :D
Officer Baker wore motorcycle boots, which would have made quite a racket on the stairs.
So much so that Garner, if she really was in the back room that early, could have thought it was Adams and Styles descending. The noise then stops for awhile (Baker confronting assassin Oswald) and then resumes, getting louder until Garner sees the two men run through the fourth floor. This round of noise on the staircase she correctly attributes to Truly and Baker.
Meanwhile Adams and Styles are over at the passenger elevator; they cross the fourth floor while Garner is busy looking out the windows or has gone back to her office.
-
Oswald only made it to the 2nd floor before encountering the police.
True, if he was indeed on the 6th floor to begin with, that is.....
Oswald had a legitimate reason to be in building which is the only reason that he was allowed to escape
I would not call Baker letting Oswald go, after Truly vouched for him, an "escape".
Any other assassin would have to get out of the entire building without being seen.
Who said he needed to be not seen? He may well have been seen with people just not paying attention simply because he was one of many men who were inside the TSBD by then.
Thus, it was much easier for Oswald to reach the 2nd floor and then escape the building than for some stranger to get completely out of the building unnoticed.
Utter nonsense. If Oswald had come down the stairs within 75 seconds after the shots, he would have been seen by Dorothy Garner, who was standing next to the stairs on the 4th floor.
She heard Adams and Styles going down on the stairs and saw Baker and Truly come up. Somewhere inbetween these two events Oswald would have be passing the 4th floor. The reason Garner did not see him is simple; he didn't come down the stairs.
And are you really claiming there was no one on the 6th floor at 12:30?
It's possible.
The rifle seen pointing out the window at the moment of the assassination was being held by a ghost.
What rifle would that be? Euins only saw a pipe and the Z-film shows that Brennan was watching the motorcade when the shots were being fired. He later lied about that of course..
And repeating the 75 second estimate as though it is absolute is weak. Even if you repeat it. No one knows the exact timing but even 75 seconds doesn't preclude Oswald from reaching the lunchroom.
Do you have a reading problem? I never claimed the 75 seconds estimate to be absolute. This is what I said;
The only problem with the 75 seconds scenario is that there is no way for him to pass by the 4th floor without Dorothy Garner seeing him. The WC solved the problem by not calling Garner to testify and discredit Victoria Adams with a outrageous and physically impossible bogus claim.
And how do your fantasy conspirators obtain Oswald's rifle in the first place to plant it?
Try to assume for a second that it wasn't Oswald's rifle at all and you may arrive at an answer.
How do they get to the 6th floor to plant the rifle, shells, and bag and escape unnoticed?
What bag? The one that wasn't there when the first six officers got into the sniper's nest? The one that doesn't show up on any in situ crime scene photo?
And which shells? The ones Fritz picked up or the ones he threw down?
And as for the rifle (and this will freak you out), what if it wasn't planted until after the shooting? Within minutes after the shooting you've got law enforcement with rifles running up the stairs. There are photos showing this. Nobody would notice an extra rifle carried by another guy in a suit. Once he gets to the 6th floor he just dumps the rifle behind the first set of boxes he encounters. I'm sure you're going to find it incredible, impossible and whatever more, but that doesn't interest me much. What would interest me is this; if you claim it couldn't have happened, then explain for once why it couldn't have happened instead of simply dismissing it out of hand as per usual.
Euins only saw a pipe
_ Calm down: Seems you have a bit of a 'trigger finger' today
Hey, maybe what Euins actually saw was a blowgun, not a pipe.
Or a curtain rod
-
In addition, your claim that he could not have reached that location unnoticed is baseless since the exact timing of the participants is unknowable and based of recollections that are not precise to the second.
So you can’t explain how it could have happened, you just know it did.
Brilliant as always.
-
Unknowable - not able to be known.
-
Officer Baker wore motorcycle boots, which would have made quite a racket on the stairs.
So much so that Garner, if she really was in the back room that early, could have thought it was Adams and Styles descending. The noise then stops for awhile (Baker confronting assassin Oswald) and then resumes, getting louder until Garner sees the two men run through the fourth floor. This round of noise on the staircase she correctly attributes to Truly and Baker.
Meanwhile Adams and Styles are over at the passenger elevator; they cross the fourth floor while Garner is busy looking out the windows or has gone back to her office.
You're a funny man...
Garner told Barry Ernest that the girls ran out of the office, through the back door, and she followed them seconds later. When she got to the stairs the girls were gone. What happened, Jerry? Did they just disappear in a puff of smoke?
Meanwhile Adams and Styles are over at the passenger elevator; they cross the fourth floor while Garner is busy looking out the windows or has gone back to her office.
Nice bit of speculation. Too bad it doesn't work and it contradicts what Garner actually said. Styles was photographed in front of the main entrance of the TSBD at around 12:36 and went back into the building just before it was locked down. This could never have happened if the girls had left the 4th floor later than Adams said all along. So, how do you explain that? Can't wait to read your response...
-
Euins only saw a pipe
_ Calm down: Seems you have a bit of a 'trigger finger' today
Hey, maybe what Euins actually saw was a blowgun, not a pipe.
Or a curtain rod
Imagine the contrarian explanation for someone sticking a "pipe" out the 6th floor window at the moment of the assassination. Unreal. And they must have yelled "bang" really loud since the folks on the 5th floor thought there were gun shots above their heads. Of course, the truly humorous thing about this claim is that whatever the kooks think is being held - a banana, hockey stick. pipe etc. - it must be held by a person who was on the 6th floor window at the moment of the assassination. And a rifle barrel is "pipe" shaped. Nevertheless, Martin uses this example to suggest it was "possible" that no one was on the 6th floor. HA HA HA. Comedy gold.
-
Unknowable - not able to be known.
Yet you claim to know, because you claim that Oswald made it down the stairs without Garner seeing him.
In other words, you somehow "know" that Garner wasn't in a position to see him as he came down.
Amazing....
-
Yet you claim to know, because you claim that Oswald made it down the stairs without Garner seeing him.
In other words, you somehow "know" that Garner wasn't in a position to see him as he came down.
Amazing....
Wisdom comes slow. The evidence places Oswald in the SN at 12:30 and in the lunchroom when Baker enters. I don't claim to know the movements of Oswald and other folks in the building down to the exact second because those individuals themselves did not have that level of knowledge. However, you have tried to take witness testimony and graft it to an outcome that you desire. And using that subjective analysis of the testimony to rebut the actual evidence left at the crime scene. Nothing you have claimed precludes Oswald from being the assassin and being in the 2nd floor lunchroom. You repeat the same speculative interpretation of the testimony as a fact. The movements of these parties down to the level of time that you are suggesting (seconds) is unknowable from their recollection of events.
-
Oswald only made it to the 2nd floor before encountering the police.
True, if he was indeed on the 6th floor to begin with, that is.....
Oswald had a legitimate reason to be in building which is the only reason that he was allowed to escape
I would not call Baker letting Oswald go, after Truly vouched for him, an "escape".
Any other assassin would have to get out of the entire building without being seen.
Who said he needed to be not seen? He may well have been seen with people just not paying attention simply because he was one of many men who were inside the TSBD by then.
Thus, it was much easier for Oswald to reach the 2nd floor and then escape the building than for some stranger to get completely out of the building unnoticed.
Utter nonsense. If Oswald had come down the stairs within 75 seconds after the shots, he would have been seen by Dorothy Garner, who was standing next to the stairs on the 4th floor.
She heard Adams and Styles going down on the stairs and saw Baker and Truly come up. Somewhere inbetween these two events Oswald would have be passing the 4th floor. The reason Garner did not see him is simple; he didn't come down the stairs.
And are you really claiming there was no one on the 6th floor at 12:30?
It's possible.
The rifle seen pointing out the window at the moment of the assassination was being held by a ghost.
What rifle would that be? Euins only saw a pipe and the Z-film shows that Brennan was watching the motorcade when the shots were being fired. He later lied about that of course..
And repeating the 75 second estimate as though it is absolute is weak. Even if you repeat it. No one knows the exact timing but even 75 seconds doesn't preclude Oswald from reaching the lunchroom.
Do you have a reading problem? I never claimed the 75 seconds estimate to be absolute. This is what I said;
The only problem with the 75 seconds scenario is that there is no way for him to pass by the 4th floor without Dorothy Garner seeing him. The WC solved the problem by not calling Garner to testify and discredit Victoria Adams with a outrageous and physically impossible bogus claim.
And how do your fantasy conspirators obtain Oswald's rifle in the first place to plant it?
Try to assume for a second that it wasn't Oswald's rifle at all and you may arrive at an answer.
How do they get to the 6th floor to plant the rifle, shells, and bag and escape unnoticed?
What bag? The one that wasn't there when the first six officers got into the sniper's nest? The one that doesn't show up on any in situ crime scene photo?
And which shells? The ones Fritz picked up or the ones he threw down?
And as for the rifle (and this will freak you out), what if it wasn't planted until after the shooting? Within minutes after the shooting you've got law enforcement with rifles running up the stairs. There are photos showing this. Nobody would notice an extra rifle carried by another guy in a suit. Once he gets to the 6th floor he just dumps the rifle behind the first set of boxes he encounters. I'm sure you're going to find it incredible, impossible and whatever more, but that doesn't interest me much. What would interest me is this; if you claim it couldn't have happened, then explain for once why it couldn't have happened instead of simply dismissing it out of hand as per usual.
What rifle would that be? Euins only saw a pipe and the Z-film shows that Brennan was watching the motorcade when the shots were being fired. He later lied about that of course..
It's easy to believe that Brennan lied.... But I don't believe he did in the immediate aftermath of the murder.
I believe his mind played tricks on him.... He knew that he'd seen a man aiming a rifle out of a sixth floor window just as Arnold Rowland had seen a man holding a rifle behind a window of the sixth floor minutes before the shooting. Then with the confusion that reined after the shooting his mind simply tied the two events together. Or he may have actually lied about seeing the man aiming the rifle out of the window during the shooting and he saw no harm or malice in saying that he saw the man aiming the rifle because he calculated that there was no harm in garnering a little fame. As a matter of fact his wife give him hell when he got home that afternoon, because she said that she had seen him on TV and telling the reporter that he'd seen the man aiming the rifle out of the window. His wife was upset because the killer was still on the loose and he had told the whole wide world that he could identify the man with the rifle. Thereby placing himself and the family in danger.
-
When you learn to communicate in a manner that anybody can understand, get back to us...
I have no interest in catering to high school dropouts and Oswald worshippers.
But thanks so much for your always-useful input
-
What rifle would that be? Euins only saw a pipe and the Z-film shows that Brennan was watching the motorcade when the shots were being fired. He later lied about that of course..
It's easy to believe that Brennan lied.... But I don't believe he did in the immediate aftermath of the murder.
I believe his mind played tricks on him.... He knew that he'd seen a man aiming a rifle out of a sixth floor window just as Arnold Rowland had seen a man holding a rifle behind a window of the sixth floor minutes before the shooting. Then with the confusion that reined after the shooting his mind simply tied the two events together. Or he may have actually lied about seeing the man aiming the rifle out of the window during the shooting and he saw no harm or malice in saying that he saw the man aiming the rifle because he calculated that there was no harm in garnering a little fame. As a matter of fact his wife give him hell when he got home that afternoon, because she said that she had seen him on TV and telling the reporter that he'd seen the man aiming the rifle out of the window. His wife was upset because the killer was still on the loose and he had told the whole wide world that he could identify the man with the rifle. Thereby placing himself and the family in danger.
As pointed out, several witnesses confirmed seeing the rifle at the moment of the assassination. Did all their "minds play tricks" on them? A mass delusion. Confirmed by the witnesses on the 5th floor who heard gun shots directly above their heads.
-
Wisdom comes slow. The evidence places Oswald in the SN at 12:30
BS: What evidence?
-
I have no interest in catering to high school dropouts and Oswald worshippers.
But thanks so much for your always-useful input
You have no interest in even forming coherent sentences.
-
You have no interest in even forming coherent sentences.
You have a lot of interest in worshipping cold-blooded killers
I have a lot of interest in knowing that Oswald got what he deserved.
-
You have a lot of interest in worshipping cold-blooded killers
I have a lot of interest in knowing that Oswald got what he deserved.
Dear Chappie.... You are no different than little kids who watched the Dudley Dooright cartoons ....
It was very easy for the kids to identify Snidely Whiplash as the evil villain who they could boo and spit at.
Lee Oswald was presented to us in the same way that Snidely Whiplash was presented to the little kids.
It's a shame that you're too stupid to understand .....
-
You have a lot of interest in worshipping cold-blooded killers
I have a lot of interest in knowing that Oswald got what he deserved.
I don’t worship anything. And you don’t know what anybody deserves.
-
I don’t worship anything. And you don’t know what anybody deserves.
OAKers
> Nothing is Knowable
> Nothing is Provable
< Nothing is Believable
-
Wisdom comes slow. The evidence places Oswald in the SN at 12:30 and in the lunchroom when Baker enters. I don't claim to know the movements of Oswald and other folks in the building down to the exact second because those individuals themselves did not have that level of knowledge. However, you have tried to take witness testimony and graft it to an outcome that you desire. And using that subjective analysis of the testimony to rebut the actual evidence left at the crime scene. Nothing you have claimed precludes Oswald from being the assassin and being in the 2nd floor lunchroom. You repeat the same speculative interpretation of the testimony as a fact. The movements of these parties down to the level of time that you are suggesting (seconds) is unknowable from their recollection of events.
Pathetic. All I see you say, time after time, is that "evidence places Oswald in the SN at 12:30" (which is an outright lie as there is no such evidence) and "nothing precludes Oswald from being the assassin and being in the 2nd floor lunchroom" which is also a lie.
What I don't see you do, in fact what I never see you do, is support your silly "could have" claims with anything that actually shows that Oswald was the assassin, that he was in the SN at 12:30, and that he managed to go down the stairs in 75 seconds or less after the shots without being seen or heard by anybody.
The notion that the presence of a rifle (even if it was Oswald's, which is doubtful) and three shells somehow proves that Oswald was on the 6th floor at 12:30 is simply idiotic.
-
I have no interest in catering to high school dropouts and Oswald worshippers.
But thanks so much for your always-useful input
Good, since I am neither you do have an interest in catering to me.
So, let's have a coherent thought for once.... Go on then...
-
OAKers
> Nothing is Knowable
> Nothing is Provable
< Nothing is Believable
Not true... it is absolutely knowable and believable that you are a first class fruitcake who provides the evidence to justify that conclusion with every post he writes.
-
You're a funny man...
Garner told Barry Ernest
The transcripts are available. Right?
that the girls ran out of the office, through the back door, and she followed them seconds later. When she got to the stairs the girls were gone. What happened, Jerry? Did they just disappear in a puff of smoke?
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-5D1kkNnLfqA/WRkmL2vLJFI/AAAAAAABLzg/6xPp9q2BfkYhNxUwx7sl9_2txqF-lH9nQCLcB/s1600/TSBD-Floor-Plan-Fourth-Floor.png)
If Garner is mere seconds behind the two girls and loses sight of them, then it seems they must have "disappeared" while crossing the large open space. More likely the two girls turned right and went to the public elevator, just like Styles said they did. Garner is looking towards the west windows and supposedly ends up near the stairway.
While Adams and Styles press buttons, talk about what happened and wait for the elevator, Garner hears the first round of Baker's footsteps in the stairwell, thinking the noise is that of the girls going down. The noise stops, then resumes, getting louder until Garner sees Truly and Baker pass. Garner then goes to the supply room or her office, and is unaware when Adams and Styles cross the open space to begin their descend.
Meanwhile Adams and Styles are over at the passenger elevator; they cross the fourth floor while Garner is busy looking out the windows or has gone back to her office.
Nice bit of speculation. Too bad it doesn't work and it contradicts what Garner actually said. Styles was photographed in front of the main entrance of the TSBD at around 12:36 and went back into the building just before it was locked down. This could never have happened if the girls had left the 4th floor later than Adams said all along. So, how do you explain that? Can't wait to read your response...
I don't see where it's taking more than a few minutes to walk from the back of the building to the front.
-
The transcripts are available. Right?
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-5D1kkNnLfqA/WRkmL2vLJFI/AAAAAAABLzg/6xPp9q2BfkYhNxUwx7sl9_2txqF-lH9nQCLcB/s1600/TSBD-Floor-Plan-Fourth-Floor.png)
If Garner is mere seconds behind the two girls and loses sight of them, then it seems they must have "disappeared" while crossing the large open space. More likely the two girls turned right and went to the public elevator, just like Styles said they did. Garner is looking towards the west windows and supposedly ends up near the stairway.
While Adams and Styles press buttons, talk about what happened and wait for the elevator, Garner hears the first round of Baker's footsteps in the stairwell, thinking the noise is that of the girls going down. The noise stops, then resumes, getting louder until Garner sees Truly and Baker pass. Garner then goes to the supply room or her office, and is unaware when Adams and Styles cross the open space to begin their descend.
I don't see where it's taking more than a few minutes to walk from the back of the building to the front.
The transcripts are available. Right?
Ask Barry Ernest? Or are you claiming he is lying?
If Garner is mere seconds behind the two girls and loses sight of them, then it seems they must have "disappeared" while crossing the large open space.
Or the girls simply got onto the stairs in those few seconds. The diagram clearly shows the back door of the office is roughly halfway the floor. Crossing the large open space would only have taken them a few seconds.
More likely the two girls turned right and went to the public elevator, just like Styles said they did. Garner is looking towards the west windows and supposedly ends up near the stairway.
First of all, where did Styles say that? The transcript is available. Right?
Secondly, Garner said she followed the girls. Seems a silly thing to say if the girls went through the side door and Garner went through the back door. Besides, if the girls had first gone to the elevator and then to the stairs, Garner would have seen them crossing the room.
While Adams and Styles press buttons, talk about what happened and wait for the elevator, Garner hears the first round of Baker's footsteps in the stairwell, thinking the noise is that of the girls going down. The noise stops, then resumes, getting louder until Garner sees Truly and Baker pass. Garner then goes to the supply room or her office, and is unaware when Adams and Styles cross the open space to begin their descend.
Nice theory except for the fact that it is physically impossible.
I don't see where it's taking more than a few minutes to walk from the back of the building to the front.
It doesn't. My guess is 3 minutes would do. The problem is that there is undisputable proof that Styles was in front of the main entrance of the TSBD on Elm Street at around 12:36 because she was photographed being there at that time. So, if you allow 3 minutes for walking [the long way around passing the annex building next to the railroad yard] from the back to the front of the building and another minute or so to get down the stairs and leave the building, you would have them coming down the stairs roughly two minutes after the shots, which means they would have run into Truly and Baker on the stairs. Your math simply doesn't work.
And btw, DPD radio transcripts have Sgt. D.V. Harkness telling the dispatcher that they are sealing of the building. This was at 12:36. Styles went back into the building before it was sealed of completely. Now how could she do that if she still was on the 4th floor as you seem to suggest?
-
It is possible there wasn't even an assassin on the 6th floor (I know, this is sacrilegious in the eyes of the LNs, but it could be true nevertheless), but if there was one, all he needed to do is carry a fake law enforcement ID and hide in the open on the 6th floor until the room was full with other officers and then simply walk out.
Thumb1: Especially if there were some cops that were in on it.
Impossible? Why?
-
OAKers
> Nothing is Knowable
> Nothing is Provable
< Nothing is Believable
Something isn’t true just because you believe it.
-
While Adams and Styles press buttons, talk about what happened and wait for the elevator, Garner hears the first round of Baker's footsteps in the stairwell, thinking the noise is that of the girls going down. The noise stops, then resumes, getting louder until Garner sees Truly and Baker pass. Garner then goes to the supply room or her office, and is unaware when Adams and Styles cross the open space to begin their descend.
Cool story, bro.
-
Dear Chappie.... You are no different than little kids who watched the Dudley Dooright cartoons ....
It was very easy for the kids to identify Snidely Whiplash as the evil villain who they could boo and spit at.
Lee Oswald was presented to us in the same way that Snidely Whiplash was presented to the little kids.
It's a shame that you're too stupid to understand .....
Dudley Dooright
_LOL Try Dudley Do-Right next time, Waldo
So who's stupid now, big fella?
-
Something isn’t true just because you believe it.
I have the photo of your knee-taking @Oswald
Better believe it
-
Good, since I am neither you do have an interest in catering to me.
So, let's have a coherent thought for once.... Go on then...
'since I am neither'
_Could have fooled me
-
Dudley Dooright
_LOL Try Dudley Do-Right next time, Waldo
So who's stupid now, big fella?
So you were one of the little kids who learned how to hate the officially approved villain....You should try to learn to think for yourself, little fella.
-
'since I am neither'
_Could have fooled me
It's too easy to fool you, so no surprise there.
-
I have the photo of your knee-taking @Oswald
Better believe it
So what?
-
Pathetic. All I see you say, time after time, is that "evidence places Oswald in the SN at 12:30" (which is an outright lie as there is no such evidence) and "nothing precludes Oswald from being the assassin and being in the 2nd floor lunchroom" which is also a lie.
What I don't see you do, in fact what I never see you do, is support your silly "could have" claims with anything that actually shows that Oswald was the assassin, that he was in the SN at 12:30, and that he managed to go down the stairs in 75 seconds or less after the shots without being seen or heard by anybody.
The notion that the presence of a rifle (even if it was Oswald's, which is doubtful) and three shells somehow proves that Oswald was on the 6th floor at 12:30 is simply idiotic.
You know the evidence that places Oswald in the SN (i.e. his rifle, fired bullet casings from his rifle, his prints on the SN boxes, his prints on the bag, no credible alibi, flight from the scene, involvement in another murder less than an hour later, lying to the police about his ownership of any rifle or explanation for its presence in the building). We also know from several witnesses that a rifle was pointed out the 6th floor window at the moment of the assassination putting someone in the SN at 12:30. We also know that Oswald was encountered on the 2nd floor sometime shortly after the shooting. Your insistence that it was 75 seconds is your subjective estimate. It could have been less time or more time. There is insufficient information to track Oswald's movements and those of others down to the level of detail that you insist is accurate. Just a short variation changes the whole equation and allows Oswald to make it to the 2nd floor unseen. There is no reason or basis to debate the unknowable while ignoring the actual evidence that tells us where Oswald was at a particular time.
Your explanation for all the evidence left on the 6th floor and escape of whomever you believe was in the SN is preposterous and baseless to the point of being humorous. Your desperate clinging to some pedantic timeline that you have constructed to suit your desired outcome is identical to your bizarre approach to Oswald's involvement in the murder of Tippit. You attempt to construct a timeline from imprecise witness estimates to prove he couldn't be there when multiple witnesses place him at the time and place of the shooting with the gun in his hand. It's Alice-in-Wonderland logic to suggest that you can conjure up a timeline by somehow knowing not just to the minute but often within a few seconds that some action took place when the participants themselves didn't have this level of knowledge and were merely making estimates. And then claim over and over that this casts doubt on the actual evidence. The evidence speaks for itself. It places Oswald in the SN at 12:30 and then in the lunchroom whenever the Baker encounter took place. Of course, if someone HAD seen Oswald coming down the stairs, you would dismiss that with some contrarian explanation like he worked in building, or it doesn't prove that he was on the 6th floor just because he was seen on the stairs etc. An endless impossible standard of proof.
-
I think it's possible Oswald took the rifle to work without disassembling it. An inch or two of the barrel end sticking out, easily concealed by holding the bag at the top and tucking the open end in between Frazier's back seat and seat back.
Based on Frazier's statement that didn't happen---
We then walked to my car, it was parked backed up at the side of the car port. Before I got in the car, I glanced in the back seat, and saw a big sack. It must have been about 2' long, and the top of the sack was sort of folded up, and the rest of the sack had been kind of folded under.
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/frazierb4.htm
So how long was the rifle that was found? I understand that it was 40.1 inches fully assembled. If I am wrong...someone please correct this.
You know the evidence that places Oswald in the SN (i.e. his rifle, fired bullet casings from his rifle, his prints on the SN boxes, his prints on the bag, no credible alibi, flight from the scene, involvement in another murder less than an hour later, lying to the police about his ownership of any rifle or explanation for its presence in the building). We also know from several witnesses that a rifle was pointed out the 6th floor window at the moment of the assassination putting someone in the SN at 12:30. We also know that Oswald was encountered on the 2nd floor sometime shortly after the shooting.
Ho hum ::)
-
Based on Frazier's statement that didn't happen---https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/frazierb4.htm
So how long was the rifle that was found? I understand that it was 40.1 inches fully assembled. If I am wrong...someone please correct this.
Ho hum ::)
Wonder what Frazier meant by "the rest of the sack was kind of folded over"? Almost as if the package was tapered along its length, as would be the case if part of it was tucked in between the seat and seat-back.
-
You know the evidence that places Oswald in the SN (i.e. his rifle, fired bullet casings from his rifle, his prints on the SN boxes, his prints on the bag, no credible alibi, flight from the scene, involvement in another murder less than an hour later, lying to the police about his ownership of any rifle or explanation for its presence in the building).
None of that — even if true — places Oswald in the sixth floor window at 12:30.
-
You know the evidence that places Oswald in the SN (i.e. his rifle, fired bullet casings from his rifle, his prints on the SN boxes, his prints on the bag, no credible alibi, flight from the scene, involvement in another murder less than an hour later, lying to the police about his ownership of any rifle or explanation for its presence in the building). We also know from several witnesses that a rifle was pointed out the 6th floor window at the moment of the assassination putting someone in the SN at 12:30. We also know that Oswald was encountered on the 2nd floor sometime shortly after the shooting. Your insistence that it was 75 seconds is your subjective estimate. It could have been less time or more time. There is insufficient information to track Oswald's movements and those of others down to the level of detail that you insist is accurate. Just a short variation changes the whole equation and allows Oswald to make it to the 2nd floor unseen. There is no reason or basis to debate the unknowable while ignoring the actual evidence that tells us where Oswald was at a particular time.
Your explanation for all the evidence left on the 6th floor and escape of whomever you believe was in the SN is preposterous and baseless to the point of being humorous. Your desperate clinging to some pedantic timeline that you have constructed to suit your desired outcome is identical to your bizarre approach to Oswald's involvement in the murder of Tippit. You attempt to construct a timeline from imprecise witness estimates to prove he couldn't be there when multiple witnesses place him at the time and place of the shooting with the gun in his hand. It's Alice-in-Wonderland logic to suggest that you can conjure up a timeline by somehow knowing not just to the minute but often within a few seconds that some action took place when the participants themselves didn't have this level of knowledge and were merely making estimates. And then claim over and over that this casts doubt on the actual evidence. The evidence speaks for itself. It places Oswald in the SN at 12:30 and then in the lunchroom whenever the Baker encounter took place. Of course, if someone HAD seen Oswald coming down the stairs, you would dismiss that with some contrarian explanation like he worked in building, or it doesn't prove that he was on the 6th floor just because he was seen on the stairs etc. An endless impossible standard of proof.
You know the evidence that places Oswald in the SN (i.e. his rifle, fired bullet casings from his rifle, his prints on the SN boxes, his prints on the bag, no credible alibi, flight from the scene, involvement in another murder less than an hour later, lying to the police about his ownership of any rifle or explanation for its presence in the building).
Mere assumptions and unsubtantiated claims and none of it proves that Oswald was in the SN at 12:30. If this is what you call evidence, then you believe in fairytales, pure and simple.
We also know that Oswald was encountered on the 2nd floor sometime shortly after the shooting. Your insistence that it was 75 seconds is your subjective estimate. It could have been less time or more time.
Why do you insist in this stupidity? First of all I never claimed it was exactly 75 seconds. That's just another one of your lies. And secondly, Baker encountered Oswald in the 2nd floor lunchroom, which means that Oswald was already there when Baker arrived there. So, all you need to do is figure out how long it took Baker to get there. We have film of him running from his parked motorbike to the front entrance and in one of the movies made about this case (can't remember which one it was) they actually showed the actors playing Baker and Truly running from the front entrance of the first floor to the entrance of the stairs. Combined it tells us that Baker got to the lunchroom at about 80 seconds after the shots. As Oswald was already there he must have taken less to come down the stairs. A 5 year old can figure this out, so what is it about this simple matter that you just don't understand?
There is insufficient information to track Oswald's movements and those of others down to the level of detail that you insist is accurate. Just a short variation changes the whole equation and allows Oswald to make it to the 2nd floor unseen.
Utter BS, but convince us and give us an example how that could have worked. I bet you can't!
There is no reason or basis to debate the unknowable while ignoring the actual evidence that tells us where Oswald was at a particular time.
Except that there simply is no such evidence. Jesse Curry agreed that nobody has ever conclusively placed Oswald on the 6th floor with a rifle in his hand, yet here you are claiming you have the evidence for that. So, why don't you just show us what you have that Curry didn't have?
Your explanation for all the evidence left on the 6th floor and escape of whomever you believe was in the SN is preposterous and baseless to the point of being humorous. Your desperate clinging to some pedantic timeline that you have constructed to suit your desired outcome is identical to your bizarre approach to Oswald's involvement in the murder of Tippit. You attempt to construct a timeline from imprecise witness estimates to prove he couldn't be there when multiple witnesses place him at the time and place of the shooting with the gun in his hand. It's Alice-in-Wonderland logic to suggest that you can conjure up a timeline by somehow knowing not just to the minute but often within a few seconds that some action took place when the participants themselves didn't have this level of knowledge and were merely making estimates.
You sound like a broken record playing a terrible tune. This entire rant is a complete waste of time.
And then claim over and over that this casts doubt on the actual evidence. The evidence speaks for itself. It places Oswald in the SN at 12:30 and then in the lunchroom whenever the Baker encounter took place.
I have had better conversations with a brick wall. Again what evidence are you talking about? Your assumptions are not evidence. There is no evidence that places Oswald in the SN at 12:30 because if there was we would have heard about it al long time ago. All you've got is conclusions not supported by the evidence, no matter how ofter you repeat your BS
Of course, if someone HAD seen Oswald coming down the stairs, you would dismiss that with some contrarian explanation like he worked in building, or it doesn't prove that he was on the 6th floor just because he was seen on the stairs etc. An endless impossible standard of proof.
And there is the usual whining. As the saying goes; Ill doers are ill deemers. But at least you admit that nobody saw Oswald coming down the stairs. Now all you need to do is tell us how he managed to do that and you will have convinced me. Go on then....
-
None of that — even if true — places Oswald in the sixth floor window at 12:30.
I've told him that time after time, but this idiot is a Trump supporter so there is no chance of having a reasonable conversation with him. No matter how much you hit him with reality he will still keep on repeating the same propaganda crap, as if he actually believes it himself.
-
So you were one of the little kids who learned how to hate the officially approved villain....You should try to learn to think for yourself, little fella.
Never saw that cartoon
I was in school learning to spell
-
It's too easy to fool you, so no surprise there.
Thanks for admitting you're here trying to fool people
Nice high school drop-out move, professor
-
I've told him that time after time, but this ____ is a Trump supporter .....
According to Jerry Organ--- a Republican = a conspiracy theorist = a Trump supporter = me.
But of course I am not really any of this so much but then isn't Roger Stone a Trump supporter? And he also believes in the JFK conspiracy.
Then there is Rick Plant ...a blue flag waving actual Trump despiser and yet tends to believe in the cover up.
So things do cross political lines.
Jesse Curry was probably a tag along Republican but was bullied around it seems...not a very strong commander.
-
It is possible there wasn't even an assassin on the 6th floor (I know, this is sacrilegious in the eyes of the LNs, but it could be true nevertheless), but if there was one, all he needed to do is carry a fake law enforcement ID and hide in the open on the 6th floor until the room was full with other officers and then simply walk out. Just to make sure there is no misunderstanding (or need for David to misrepresent what I am saying), I am not claiming that is what actually happened, but it is a possible answer to David's question.
Mr. BALL - There are two elevators there?
Mr. MOONEY - I found that out later. I didn't know it at that time.
Mr. BALL - You took the west one, or the east one?
Mr. MOONEY - I would say it was the west elevator, the one nearest to the staircase.
Mr. BALL - Did it work with a push button?
Mr. MOONEY - It was a push button affair the best I can remember. got hold of the controls and it worked. We started up and got to the second. I was going to let them off and go on up. And when we got there, the power undoubtedly cut off, because we [Officer Vickery and Webster] had no more power on the elevator. So I looked around their office there, just a short second or two, and then I went up the staircase myself. And I met some other officers coming down, plainclothes, and I believe they were deputy sheriffs. They were coming down the staircase. But I kept going up. And how come I get off the sixth floor, I don't know yet. But, anyway, I stopped on six, and didn't even know what floor I was on.
Mr. BALL - You were alone?
Mr. MOONEY - I was alone at that time.
There was no further interest in those men that Mooney didn't seem to really know. Like ---Where did they come from?...What were they doing there?...& Where did they go?
-
Thanks for admitting you're here trying to fool people
Nice high school drop-out move, professor
I said that fooling you is easy, so no trying is required.
Beyond that, if you take away from what I said that I somehow admitted that I am here to fool people, you really should ask the tuition fees back that your parents have wasted on you.
-
There was no further interest in those men that Mooney didn't seem to really know. Like ---Where did they come from?...What were they doing there?...& Where did they go?
Nice find. And yet here we have "Richard" saying;
Your fantasy assassin would have to have escaped the building completely unnoticed. Baseless fantasies to explain this away such as an assassin hanging around in the building dressed as a law enforcement officer are tin foil nonsense. Truly and Baker did not encounter any such person. They saw no such person.
Let's see if he still maintains that it would have been impossible for somebody in plain clothes, pretending to be an officer, to just go down the stairs and leave the building without being noticed or paid any attention to.
-
According to Jerry Organ--- a Republican = a conspiracy theorist = a Trump supporter = me.
I see when you parse information, you add and spin. I actually said you're a Republican and Conspiracy Theorist, not that the two were connected. I didn't say you were a Trump supporter, but maybe it's something you should own as well.
But of course I am not really any
Add gaslighting to what you are.
of this so much but then isn't Roger Stone a Trump supporter? And he also believes in the JFK conspiracy.
Then there is Rick Plant ...a blue flag waving actual Trump despiser and yet tends to believe in the cover up.
So things do cross political lines.
Jesse Curry was probably a tag along Republican but was bullied around it seems...not a very strong commander.
"Trump despiser"? As if Trump and his movement aren't based on racial and class hate. And their maniacal demeaning attacks on women achievers like Hillary, Harris and now Cheney show they hate women, too.
-
I see when you parse information, you add and spin. I actually said you're a Republican and Conspiracy Theorist, not that the two were connected. I didn't say you were a Trump supporter, but maybe it's something you should own as well.
Add gaslighting to what you are.
"Trump despiser"? As if Trump and his movement aren't based on racial and class hate. And their maniacal demeaning attacks on women achievers like Hillary, Harris and now Cheney show they hate women, too.
Living in a black and white reality must be so much easier than having to deal with all those shades of grey.
-
I see when you parse information, you add and spin. I actually said you're a Republican and Conspiracy Theorist, not that the two were connected. I didn't say you were a Trump supporter, but maybe it's something you should own as well.
Add gaslighting to what you are.
"Trump despiser"? As if Trump and his movement aren't based on racial and class hate. And their maniacal demeaning attacks on women achievers like Hillary, Harris and now Cheney show they hate women, too.
"Trump and his movement" :D
-
I was in school learning to spell
Then...what happened? ???
-
I've told him that time after time, but this idiot is a Trump supporter so there is no chance of having a reasonable conversation with him. No matter how much you hit him with reality he will still keep on repeating the same propaganda crap, as if he actually believes it himself.
Says the guy who suggested it is possible that no one was in the 6th floor window by citing someone holding a "pipe-like" object at the moment of the assassination! HA HA HA. Comedy gold. As though it were possible for a "pipe-like" object to levitate at the window by itself. And what is the explanation for someone pointing this "pipe-like" object out the window? And what caused the sound of gunshots to those immediately below the window? I guess we will never know. Just another mystery. You also were apparently unaware of several witnesses who did see a rifle pointing from the window. Nevertheless, we are told it is "possible" that no one was there. Rabbit hole.
-
Mysteries are always best solved by “Richard” making up fanciful stories and laughing maniacally.
-
There was no further interest in those men that Mooney didn't seem to really know. Like ---Where did they come from?...What were they doing there?...& Where did they go?
Meaningless. Baker and Truly saw no one. They were the first to go up the building. There were undoubtedly law enforcement in the building by the time Mooney had run down to the railroad tracks, looked around, and took his elevator ride. Do you really think the fantasy assassins hung around in the building until then? What a plan. Who got to hold the "pipe-like" object out the 6th floor window and yell "bang"! Larry, Moe or Curly?
SENATOR COOPER - Did you see anyone?
Mr. BAKER - No, sir.
SENATOR COOPER - When you looked?
Mr. BAKER - Not from the second floor on up.
-
I said that fooling you is easy, so no trying is required.
Beyond that, if you take away from what I said that I somehow admitted that I am here to fool people, you really should ask the tuition fees back that your parents have wasted on you.
I always include 'trying/try/tried/ with you lot since you never succeed in casting doubt
Not my bad that you cheated in school (aka 'fooled)
You outed yourself, dropout
-
Mysteries are always best solved by “Richard” making up fanciful stories and laughing maniacally.
Says IaLOLetti
-
Then...what happened? ???
Walt promptly demonstrated that he doesn't understand sarcasm
-
Meaningless. Baker and Truly saw no one. They were the first to go up the building. There were undoubtedly law enforcement in the building
If all this testimony is meaningless then why testify?
Mr. BALL - Was there any reason for you to go to the sixth floor?
Mr. MOONEY - No, sir. That is what I say. I don't know why. I just stopped on that particular floor....
Mr. BALL - Were there any other officers on the floor?
Mr. MOONEY - I didn't see any at that time. I assume there had been other officers up there. But I didn't see them.
He sees guys coming down and then he 'assumes' they were 'up there' ---
I agree...quite 'meaningless'.
-
Walt promptly demonstrated that doesn't understand sarcasm
Huh?? Your tiny brain isn't working at all today....
-
Says IaLOLetti
:D Spot on.
-
Meaningless. Baker and Truly saw no one. They were the first to go up the building. There were undoubtedly law enforcement in the building by the time Mooney had run down to the railroad tracks, looked around, and took his elevator ride.
“Undoubtedly”, LOL.
That’s “Richard”-speak for “made-up BS”.
-
I always include 'trying/try/tried/ with you lot since you never succeed in casting doubt
Not my bad that you cheated in school (aka 'fooled)
You outed yourself, dropout
Nobody is interested in your nonsensical ramblings, troll-boy.
-
:D Spot on.
If people stop making ridiculous assertions, I’ll stop LOL-ing.
-
Meaningless. Baker and Truly saw no one. They were the first to go up the building. There were undoubtedly law enforcement in the building by the time Mooney had run down to the railroad tracks, looked around, and took his elevator ride. Do you really think the fantasy assassins hung around in the building until then? What a plan. Who got to hold the "pipe-like" object out the 6th floor window and yell "bang"! Larry, Moe or Curly?
SENATOR COOPER - Did you see anyone?
Mr. BAKER - No, sir.
SENATOR COOPER - When you looked?
Mr. BAKER - Not from the second floor on up.
Utter BS.
Baker and Truly saw no one. They were the first to go up the building.
By this reasoning there can't have been anybody on the 6th floor, because, just like Truly and Baker, Bonnie Ray Williams (who was up there a lot longer than the others) didn't see or hear anybody. Just how much of an idiot must you be to not understand that not being seen by somebody isn't the same as not being there.
There were undoubtedly law enforcement in the building by the time Mooney had run down to the railroad tracks, looked around, and took his elevator ride. Do you really think the fantasy assassins hung around in the building until then?
A far better question is do you really think that somebody hiding on the 6th floor, who doesn't want to be noticed, would not wait until more people were on the floor, rather than letting themselves be seen by Baker and Truly. What an idiot! All he or they needed to do to hang around on the 6th floor is pretend to be searching, just like all the others were.
-
Walt promptly demonstrated that doesn't understand sarcasm
Your lack of education is showing...
Walt promptly demonstrated that he doesn't understand sarcasm
There, I fixed it for you, regardless of the fact that it's BS.
Oh btw, you've got egg on your face.
-
If people stop making ridiculous assertions, I’ll stop LOL-ing.
John..... Perhaps you could just snicker quietly.... Like this ;D. But I agree..... some of Mr "Smith's" stuff is really ridiculously comical....
-
Meaningless. Baker and Truly saw no one. They were the first to go up the building. There were undoubtedly law enforcement in the building by the time Mooney had run down to the railroad tracks, looked around, and took his elevator ride. Do you really think the fantasy assassins hung around in the building until then? What a plan. Who got to hold the "pipe-like" object out the 6th floor window and yell "bang"! Larry, Moe or Curly?
SENATOR COOPER - Did you see anyone?
Mr. BAKER - No, sir.
SENATOR COOPER - When you looked?
Mr. BAKER - Not from the second floor on up.
I vote for Curly because he had a bald spot…. ;D
-
I vote for Curly because he had a bald spot…. ;D
SENATOR COOPER - Did you see anyone?
Mr. BAKER - No, sir.
SENATOR COOPER - When you looked?
Mr. BAKER - Not from the second floor on up.
Then Mr Baker needs to explain why he gave a sworn affidavit in which he said that he encountered a 30 year old, 165 pound man, who was wearing a brown jacket, on either the 3rd or 4th floor.
-
SENATOR COOPER - Did you see anyone?
Mr. BAKER - No, sir.
SENATOR COOPER - When you looked?
Mr. BAKER - Not from the second floor on up.
Then Mr Baker needs to explain why he gave a sworn affidavit in which he said that he encountered a 30 year old, 165 pound man, who was wearing a brown jacket, on either the 3rd or 4th floor.
Read the post that I responded to. The three stooges comment is referring to who held the pipe-like object out of the window.
-
Read the post that I responded to. The three stooges comment is referring to who held the pipe-like object out of the window.
But you posted Baker's statement in which .....He told Senator Cooper that he hadn't seen anybody from the 2nd floor up. But that's not what he said in his sworn affidavit.
-
But you posted Baker's statement in which .....He told Senator Cooper that he hadn't seen anybody from the 2nd floor up. But that's not what he said in his sworn affidavit.
I should have copied the sentence that includes the three stooges, bolded it then pasted it above my response. Then it would be clear to even the dummies exactly what I was responding to. I apparently incorrectly assumed that this would be apparent to everyone. My apologies…
-
Huh?? Your tiny brain isn't working at all today....
You've asked here before to be told when somebody has written a spoof.
You just don't get it.
-
Your tiny brain isn't working at all today....
"Tiny brain"?
You give far too much acclaim there.
-
Walt promptly demonstrated that doesn't understand sarcasm
Your lack of education is showing...
Walt promptly demonstrated that he doesn't understand sarcasm
There, I fixed it for you, regardless of the fact that it's BS.
Oh btw, you've got egg on your face.
Walt promptly demonstrated that he doesn't understand sarcasm
« Last Edit: August 27, 2022, 09:55:51 PM by Bill Chapman »
Correcting your post after having been embarrassed, does not alter the lack of eduction you have demonstrated.
-
Correcting your post after having been embarrassed, does not alter the lack of eduction you have demonstrated.
Pretty sure I added 'he' last night.
And you still come off as a high-school dropout
And no, Walt does not understand mockery, sarcasm or spoofing
(https://i.postimg.cc/rw373WgB/......-POLL-ONION.png)
Note how he buys into The Onion spoof wholeheartedly
-
Pretty sure I added 'he' last night.
And you still come off as a high-school dropout
And no, Walt does not understand mockery, sarcasm or spoofing
(https://i.postimg.cc/rw373WgB/......-POLL-ONION.png)
Note how he buys into The Onion spoof wholeheartedly
Pretty sure I added 'he' last night.
Absolutely sure, you're a liar...
And you still come off as a high-school dropout
Ah, the opinion of a real high-school dropout.
Note how he buys into The Onion spoof wholeheartedly
In 2018! He clearly has learned not to rely on anything you write since then.
You on the other hand are so stupid that you think you can fool people twice. What a pathetic little man.
-
Pretty sure I added 'he' last night.
Absolutely sure, you're a liar...
And you still come off as a high-school dropout
Ah, the opinion of a real high-school dropout.
Note how he buys into The Onion spoof wholeheartedly
In 2018! He clearly has learned not to rely on anything you write since then.
You on the other hand are so stupid that you think you can fool people twice. What a pathetic little man.
What a pathetic little man.
Succinct and precise, Mr Martin.....
I have no idea why the little man believes that I believe the poll was authentic.... I guess his bloated ego has control of his tiny brain.
-
Living in a black and white reality must be so much easier than having to deal with all those shades of grey.
Odd.. the use of that particular euphemism. Stated as much in this post 3 years ago...
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2346.msg71420.html#msg71420
The world is mostly grays, Tommy. There are liberals who are LNers and conservatives who are CTs. Ted Kennedy, for example, believed the Warren Report LN finding. Roger Stone is a JFK CT.
Is it grey or gray? Oh well--
Ted Kennedy said he 'accepted' the Warren Report...Ted Kennedy said a lot of things.
-
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/19631129_Deutsche_NZ.jpg?width=960&height=720&fit=bounds)
Thank you Gary, for posting the article from the German News paper. It seems rather brief for a sensational story. Do you suppose that the reporter didn't believe the tale that General Walker unloaded on him on Saturday morning 11/23/63?
The story wasn't published until Nov. 29. If the editor really believed Walker's tale he would have rushed the paper to publication, and it would have been picked up and published round the world by 11/24 /63.
This wild tale from Walker reveals the panic he felt..... He realized that his neck was in the noose if Lee Oswald started talking about the plot. He with out a doubt breathed a huge sigh of relief when Jack Ruby murdered Lee Oswald.
Doesn't anybody want to discuss this key aspect of the case?
I find the statement that Bobby Kennedy shut down the investigation particularly intriguing ....
-
Doesn't anybody want to discuss this key aspect of the case?
I find the statement that Bobby Kennedy shut down the investigation particularly intriguing ....
Is there any evidence that Oswald was ever arrested for the Walker shooting and/or that Bobby Kennedy shut the investigation down?
Of could this "article" in a German soldiers magazine be just the result of misinformation?
-
Is there any evidence that Oswald was ever arrested for the Walker shooting and/or that Bobby Kennedy shut the investigation down?
Of could this "article" in a German soldiers magazine be just the result of misinformation?
Hi Martin, I believe that you are fluent in German..... So my first question for you is: Is the article accurately translated?
Already you've provided info that I was unaware of.... I didn't know that the story appeared in a German soldiers magazine. It was reported that the story first appeared in some small weekly newspaper.
In my opinion this story did not originate with Hasso Thorsen. I'm sure the call was from Edwin Walker to Hasso Thorsen.... and not vice versa. Walker was in a panic because he was a key conspirator in the murder of JFK, and he realized that that there was a noose around his neck when Lee Oswald slipped away and was not killed in the TSBD. He was in a panic to get that noose off his neck and he thought that he could heap more BS on Lee Oswald and divert the attention away from himself by letting the public know that Oswald had tried to kill him ( which is BS) back in April.
-
Hi Martin, I believe that you are fluent in German..... So my first question for you is: Is the article accurately translated?
Already you've provided info that I was unaware of.... I didn't know that the story appeared in a German soldiers magazine. It was reported that the story first appeared in some small weekly newspaper.
In my opinion this story did not originate with Hasso Thorsen. I'm sure the call was from Edwin Walker to Hasso Thorsen.... and not vice versa. Walker was in a panic because he was a key conspirator in the murder of JFK, and he realized that that there was a noose around his neck when Lee Oswald slipped away and was not killed in the TSBD. He was in a panic to get that noose off his neck and he thought that he could heap more BS on Lee Oswald and divert the attention away from himself by letting the public know that Oswald had tried to kill him ( which is BS) back in April.
Yes, the translation is fairly accurate. The paper was a extreme-right wing weekly publication with only a few thousand readers.
What seems strange to me is the document claims to be a translation from a German paper "Deutsche National Zeitung" when in fact the German paper provides a translation of the English article. What the source of the English article was is anybody's guess.
-
Yes, the translation is fairly accurate. The paper was a extreme-right wing weekly publication with only a few thousand readers.
What seems strange to me is the document claims to be a translation from a German paper "Deutsche National Zeitung" when in fact the German paper provides a translation of the English article. What the source of the English article was is anybody's guess.
What seems strange to me is the document claims to be a translation from a German paper "Deutsche National Zeitung" when in fact the German paper provides a translation of the English article. What the source of the English article was is anybody's guess.
That's very interesting info Martin..... I doubt that the story had ever been published in an English language publication, But I don't doubt that you know what you're talking about.....Sooo..... I'm forced to speculate that Walker sent Hasso Thorsen the story all typed up and Thorsen translated it for the article in the Deutsche National Zeitung
I would love to know WHY Walker told Hasso that Bobby Kennedy knew that Lee Oswald had tried to kill him and Bobby Kennedy ordered the investigation to be stopped. There isn't one tiny iota of evidence to support Walker's charge.... But I now wonder if Lee Oswald wasn't a patsy in the Walker hoax also.... There was serious bad blood between Walker and the Kennedy's ( a deep and bitter hatred) and of course Walker would have chortled with glee if he could have gotten RFK charged with interfering in an attempted murder case.
But putting the speculation aside..... The story in the German paper was effectual..... In the fact that the article opened the FBI's eyes to the possibility that Lee Oswald was the unknown sniper who had fired a bullet through Walker's window. And that article caused the FBI to go to Marina Oswald and ask her what she knew about the story that Lee had tried to shoot Walker. Prior to the publication of that story the investigators never suspected that Lee Oswald might have been involved in the Walker incident.
The investigators had the Back Yard photo and the recon photos of Walker's house that they had found among Lee Possessions, but they hadn't linked the photos to the Walker incident until the story appeared in that German paper.
P.S. Recall that the photo of the light colored 57 Chevy parked in Walkers back yard can be seen in a photo in Jesse Curry's book and the rear license plate is intact. But AFTER the FBI became aware of the significance of the photo the license plate was scratched off the photo. Obviously they didn't want us to know who owned that Chevy.... I believe that Lee Knew who owned that 57 Chevy and he realized that that person's affiliation with Walker was dynamite. That's the reason he snapped the photo.
-
"Trump despiser"? As if Trump and his movement aren't based on racial and class hate. And their maniacal demeaning attacks on women achievers like Hillary, Harris and now Cheney show they hate women, too.
"Hate women"......What an absurdly anemic statement!
But I'll bite...they are all politicians ...the whole lot them. D or R after the name matters not. What great achievement did they [any of them] accomplish besides keeping a congressional seat warm? Or is there a response void of being demeaning or maniacal?
-
Doesn't anybody want to discuss this key aspect of the case?
It's crap.
999 out of a 1000 times an anonymous source--- ["as it was reported to us"] is what I call an onionhead...you can peel it down to zero.
-
It's crap.
999 out of a 1000 times an anonymous source--- ["as it was reported to us"] is what I call an onionhead...you can peel it down to zero.
i]Oswald was seized but following investigation- as reported to us - was stopped by US General Attorney, Robert Kennedy[/i]
Oswald was seized..... Never happened
Following investigation....Never happened
As reported to us..... Never happened
Was stopped by US General Attorney Robert Kennedy..... Never Happened