JFK Assassination Forum

Dear Herr Smith.

You're right.

Mussolini is more apt.

My bad.

-- Tom

Bad comp, Mussolini was assassinated. The left has failed three times to take out Trump. That doesn't mean they won't keep trying.

$13 in 1963 was quite a bit of money, the equivalent of $141 today.

As for your other comments, I recommend you read two articles:

Faulty Evidence: Problems with the Case Against Lee Harvey Oswald
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1R1CZaCZfLA5QFjTCHNINcKxTH4cBiPfw/view?usp=sharing

Extra Bullets and Missed Shots in Dealey Plaza
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WRwhDQ9HMydf5pICsHwgtkoNKw0YSO8T/view?usp=sharing

$141 isn't going to get you very far today. I just looked up the Greyhound bus fare from Dallas to El Paso. it's $62.99. Roughly 45% of your cash. $13 might have allowed Oswald to eat some meals and take a short trip somewhere in 1963, but it would be gone in a few days. Complicating this is his face would be in every newspaper and TV news program not just in this country but neighboring countries as well.

I read your article about the problems with the case against Oswald. You should have quit after the second paragraph. You immediately started to go downhill from there. You demonstrate something I wrote recently in another thread. CTs will invent one lame excuse after another to dismiss any and all evidence of Oswald's guilt. Just taking your imagined problems regarding the Carcano rifle. You claim the money order Oswald used to purchase the rifle was bought at a time Oswald was at work. You cited Summers as a source. I'm assuming that's Anthony Summers, longtime conspiracy author. Do you have another source for that. My research tells me the claim is based on the postmark of the letter to Klein's which contained the money  order. The post office doesn't postmark letters when they are mailed. They have collection times for mailboxes and the time stamps are made when those collected letters are processed. There's no telling when Oswald mailed the letter to Klein's.

You also pointed out that nobody at the post office remembered handing Oswald a long package. Seriously? There's no telling which postal employee handed the package to Oswald and do you really think whoever it was that handed Oswald the package would have remembered doing so 8 months prior to the assassination.

You make an issue of the fact that Oswald ordered a 36 inch rifle but received a 40 inch rifle. Gee, whoever heard of a mail order house making a substitution like that? Even today I occasionally have to send something back to Amazon because what I received was not what I ordered. The serial number C2766 was unique to that rifle and that is the one Klein's sent to Oswald. He was photographed with the rifle and his palmprint was on the underside of the barrel.

Furthermore, the purchaser was listed as A. Hidell. How did these conspirators know 8 months in advance that one day Oswald would be working at a building overlooking a motorcade that was part of a presidential visit toe Dallas that wasn't even in the planning stages. How could they have known their patsy would have been carrying a fake ID with the name Alex Hidell. Do you guys ever bother to think these things out before you make these outrageous claims.

Then you suggest that all the documents with Oswald's handwriting on them could have been forged. I sat on a jury in a forgery case once and it was explained to us that most forgeries do not involve the forger copying somebody else's handwriting but disguising their own. Again, the suggestion that the conspirators were already trying to frame Oswald 8 months before the assassination are ludicrous.

The rest of your perceived problems with the evidence regarding the Carcano fall into the coulda, wouldna, shoulda category with zero evidence to support any of them.

The above are just the logical fallacies you committed in the first three pages of your article. Had I continued pointing out the logical fallacies in the rest of your 39 page diatribe, I might be here until next week. I wonder how much of your time you wasted on that article but I wasn't going to waste my time pointing out your silliness. I've told you before your material hasn't improved one bit since I first came across it on the old Prodigy service 35 years ago. If anything, you have just become more verbose.

This is a classic example of what I wrote in another thread. You're overthinking this. You are making assumptions about what you think Oswald's demeanor should have been had he shot JFK. Perhaps you are imagining how you would have acted had you been in Oswald's shoes. That approach only makes sense if you assume Oswald would think like you in the same circumstances. I am going to assume you are not a wannabe presidential assassin so I see no reason to believe Oswald demeanor would mimic yours under the same circumstances.

I see no reason to think Oswald would have been surprised by being confronted by a cop with his gun drawn given that he knew what he had just done. Acting innocent when we have done something wrong is a life skill most of us learn when we are very young. "I don't know who knocked over the flower pot". That skill has served me well over the years. I even pulled it on my boss once. And it worked. That was many years ago. I hope he's not reading this.

No, I don't believe I'm overthinking it. I am simply noting Oswald's behavior as described by Baker and Truly and finding it exceedingly odd. If I jumped to "and that behavior is impossible for someone who just assassinated JFK," that would indeed be overthinking it. I simply note that this is a guy who shot the President of the United States something like two minutes previously, stashed his rifle, started down the stairs, heard someone coming up, ducked into the lunchroom - and was cooler than the proverbial cucumber when confronted by an officer who stuck a gun in his stomach. By any standard, that is remarkable - and suggestive to me of a dissociative state of some sort. We are allowed to at least think in LN Land, aren't we? It's a certainty that Baker and Truly would have been star witnesses for the defense if there had been a trial.

The Hitler comparison mystifies me.  Hitler had two primary political objectives.  Eliminating the Jews and obtaining land in Eastern Europe for colonization.  Hiter murdered millions of Jews.  Trump has a Jewish daughter, grandchildren, and is a strong advocate for Israel.  So much so that anti-Semite liberals who have much more in common with Hitler than Trump often criticize him for it.  Can you imagine Hitler being awarded the Israel Prize?  Such a profound ignorance of history under the guise of politics is pathetic and offensive:

"US President Donald Trump was awarded the Israel Prize, the country’s highest honor, at the annual Independence Day ceremony in Jerusalem on Wednesday.

At Wednesday’s ceremony, Kisch said Trump has been a true friend of the Jewish people and Israel for decades, standing uncompromisingly against manifestations of antisemitism.”

Trump was informed in December by Education Minister Yoav Kisch that he would be awarded the prize in the category of “special contribution to the Jewish people.”

Kisch signed an Israel Prize certificate in honor of the US president on Tuesday, declaring in a video sent to the press that he didn’t think there was “any other person who can mark such amazing achievements and a wonderful connection to the Jewish people except for Trump at this time.”

“His name will be remembered in the annals of our people,” he declared."

Dear Herr Smith.

You're right.

Mussolini is more apt.

My bad.

-- Tom

Anytime we ask ourselves what Oswald was thinking at any given time, we are speculating because he was the only one who knew and he took those secrets to his grave. If you believe in a hereafter and you go to the hot place, maybe you can ask him.

Obviously his decision to kill JFK was not done on the spur of the moment. That took planning and preparation. He made the bag for concealing the gun on Thursday at the latest. His traveling to Irving on a Thursday rather than his normal weekend trip is an indication he went there to fetch his rifle. Had the case gone to trial, those facts would have been used to establish premeditation.

His actions post assassination are another matter. We have no idea what he was thinking from that point on. He probably knew he would be the subject of a manhunt and his decision to get his gun might well have been to arm himself against a cop(s). The fact he killed the first cop who encountered him and tried to kill the second is a strong indication he didn't intend to be taken alive. The cops would have been legally justified in killing him in the theater but chose instead to act with restraint. Did he have a destination in mind? Who knows but with only $13 in his pocket, he wasn't likely to get far. Maybe he would have held up a bank or a liquor store to get more cash. Who knows but it's fun to speculate about, just as it is fun to speculate about his motive for killing JFK.

$13 in 1963 was quite a bit of money, the equivalent of $141 today.

As for your other comments, I recommend you read two articles:

Faulty Evidence: Problems with the Case Against Lee Harvey Oswald
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1R1CZaCZfLA5QFjTCHNINcKxTH4cBiPfw/view?usp=sharing

Extra Bullets and Missed Shots in Dealey Plaza
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WRwhDQ9HMydf5pICsHwgtkoNKw0YSO8T/view?usp=sharing