Recent Posts
61
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: How Do LNers Deal With Givens?
« Last post by John Corbett on Yesterday at 01:40:18 AM »It amuses me how people get their shorts in a bunch trying to nail down precisely who was where in the minutes leading up to the shooting. They ignore the obvious evidence that tells us without question Oswald was in the sniper's nest firing the shots that killed JFK at 12:30. His fingerprints were on the boxes in the sniper's nest. The three shells found at that location were positively matched to Oswald's rifle which was found a short distance away. The only two recovered bullets were also positively matched to that same rifle, which also had Oswald's palm print on the underside of the barrel where it could only have been placed when the rifle was disassembled. Fibers matching the shirt Oswald was wearing when arrested were found on the butt plate of the rifle. There was also a makeshift bag found near the sniper's nest with Oswald's palm and fingerprint on the bottom. The bag contained fibers that matched the blanket Oswald used to store his rifle when he kept it at the Paine's house.
It is mind boggling that someone could look at all that evidence of Oswald's guilt and come to any other conclusion other than Oswald was the assassin. We have people on this forum willing to disregard all that evidence, yet these same people will mindlessly argue about what the cast of characters in front of the TSBD were doing in the immediate aftermath of the shooting, as if that had any bearing on anything of consequence.
Stupid is as stupid does.
It is mind boggling that someone could look at all that evidence of Oswald's guilt and come to any other conclusion other than Oswald was the assassin. We have people on this forum willing to disregard all that evidence, yet these same people will mindlessly argue about what the cast of characters in front of the TSBD were doing in the immediate aftermath of the shooting, as if that had any bearing on anything of consequence.
Stupid is as stupid does.
62
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: How Do LNers Deal With Givens?
« Last post by Dan O'meara on Yesterday at 12:08:48 AM »I may be one the who 1st floated that 12:16 BRW leaving earlier time , which was a mistake on my part if I’m going with Arnold Rowlands as a credible witness.
I looked up Arnold Rowland WC testimony and that’s when I found where he was looking back about every 30 secs after he saw BRW at 12:15 which means he saw BRW not just one more time at 12:20 but every 30 secs AFTER that until about 12:24 and THEN at 12:25 , he no longer saw BRW.
I generally agree with most of your arguments except the notion the shooter would not have assembled the MC rifle sometime earlier than 12:00 because imo the 7th floor was available ( which is like an attic)
If that’s the case, though the shooter had to have transported the rifle multiple times inside the bag for it to ever have wound up in the SN. ( unless Bag was moved there after the fact by Fritz team)
So it’s possible after transporting rifle in bag to the SW 6th floor and taking rifle out of bag such that he was seen by Rowland at 12:15, the shooter after backing away, put the rifle back in the bag, then he had to hide the rifle again (if he is Oswald ) and go back down to 2nd floor lunchroom to be seen
By Carolyn Arnold at 12:17.
However if the shooter is not Oswald then he wouldn’t have to go back down at all. In fact he could have found some spot on the NE corner of the floor where he could have hidden and taken his rifle with him in the bag once more.
This is where it gets into time trouble for the shooter to have arranged the 3 boxes before 12:25 if BRW is still on the floor till 12:24.
And once BRW did leave the floor that late , the shooter must have carried the rifle in the bag one last time to the SN and left it there.
For this hypothetical scenario to be plausible would require the shooter was wearing gloves as he handled bag ( with he had gotten Oswald’s prints on ) and while the shooter fired the rifle
Rowland recalls seeing the man with the rifle and the black man in the SN around 12:16pm. He remembers this because just before he saw these men he heard a timestamp on a police motorcycles radio. The detail he gives about the time and Cedar Springs demonstrates how accurate his memory was as he had no way to know that the transcripts of the police transmissions confirm his account:
Mr. ROWLAND - Right afterwards. There was--just before I observed him there was a police motorcycle parked just on the street, not in front of us, just a little past us, and the radio was on it giving the details of the motorcade, where it was positioned...the dispatcher came on and gave the position of the motorcade as being on Cedar Springs. This would be in the area of Turtle Creek, down in that area.
I can't remember the street's name but I know where it is at. And this was the position of the motorcade and it was about 15 or 16 after 12.
The police transcripts confirm this timing:
Rowland states he looked back to the 6th floor around twice a minute trying to find the man with the rifle to show his wife.
If we stick to the Oswald-Did-It narrative, the evidence, as it stands, paints a picture of Oswald assembling the rifle in the SN (the long bag for carrying the disassembled rifle found in the southeast corner) and, for some unknown reason, making his way over to the west side of the building with the assembled rifle where he is seen by Rowland.
If the rifle was assembled elsewhere there would be no need to carry the long bag over to the southeast corner. Rowland saw the man carrying the rifle so it's not like he felt the need to carry the assembled rifle in the bag.
The main problem with this is BRW. How could Oswald assemble the rifle in the SN and wander around the 6th floor with it without BRW noticing him? And why would Oswald wander over to the west side with the rifle anyway?
Another problem is Rowland's description of the clothes worn by the man with the rifle - "open collared shirt, light-colored shirt". Oswald didn't even own such a garment, let alone wear it on the day of the assassination. Both Ronald Fischer and Robert Edwards also recall the man on the 6th floor wearing an open-neck shirt.
Another problem is the black man in the SN. Rowland scanned the 6th floor quite often looking for the man with the rifle and would have seen the black man every time until he disappeared around 12:25pm.
63
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by Zeon Mason on October 03, 2026, 11:03:12 PM »This whole train of thought is predicated on the assumption the rifle was disassembled in the first place and/or LHO had no opportunity to assemble the rifle on a different floor between the hours of 8:00 to 12:30.
It’s the arrangement of those 3 boxes that had to be completed before the Bronson film starts at 12:25 which is problem. It’s going to be really close if BRW did not leave that window until 12:23 cause the shooter has to wait for BRW to walk abut 160 ft and get on the elevator and operate it before the shooter could be confident BRW was gone from the floor.
The shooter has to walk 100 ft and squeeze thru narrow opening of the box wall and then he has to select which boxes which he wants to use, slide 2 of them in the angle he desired , stack the 3rd box on the window ledge and he has to LOWER the window from its full half open when Rowland saw the black man “hanging out” the window. To the 15.5 in height it was in the Bronson film.
All of this moving of the 3 boxes in place and lowering the window was occurring AFTER Norman was at his 5th floor window from 12:23 till the 12:30 shooting started. Should not Norman heard something?
64
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: How Do LNers Deal With Givens?
« Last post by Jack Nessan on October 03, 2026, 10:27:48 PM »I may be one the who 1st floated that 12:16 BRW leaving earlier time , which was a mistake on my part if I’m going with Arnold Rowlands as a credible witness.
I looked up Arnold Rowland WC testimony and that’s when I found where he was looking back about every 30 secs after he saw BRW at 12:15 which means he saw BRW not just one more time at 12:20 but every 30 secs AFTER that until about 12:24 and THEN at 12:25 , he no longer saw BRW.
I generally agree with most of your arguments except the notion the shooter would not have assembled the MC rifle sometime earlier than 12:00 because imo the 7th floor was available ( which is like an attic)
If that’s the case, though the shooter had to have transported the rifle multiple times inside the bag for it to ever have wound up in the SN. ( unless Bag was moved there after the fact by Fritz team)
So it’s possible after transporting rifle in bag to the SW 6th floor and taking rifle out of bag such that he was seen by Rowland at 12:15, the shooter after backing away, put the rifle back in the bag, then he had to hide the rifle again (if he is Oswald ) and go back down to 2nd floor lunchroom to be seen
By Carolyn Arnold at 12:17.
However if the shooter is not Oswald then he wouldn’t have to go back down at all. In fact he could have found some spot on the NE corner of the floor where he could have hidden and taken his rifle with him in the bag once more.
This is where it gets into time trouble for the shooter to have arranged the 3 boxes before 12:25 if BRW is still on the floor till 12:24.
And once BRW did leave the floor that late , the shooter must have carried the rifle in the bag one last time to the SN and left it there.
For this hypothetical scenario to be plausible would require the shooter was wearing gloves as he handled bag ( with he had gotten Oswald’s prints on ) and while the shooter fired the rifle
Rowland was a complete clown. By the end of his testimony they were making fun of how ridiculous his answers were.
65
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: How Do LNers Deal With Givens?
« Last post by Jack Nessan on October 03, 2026, 10:21:39 PM »Present a single piece of credible evidence that places Oswald in the SN at 12:30pm.
You're in luck there are two pieces. His rifle and his fingerprints.
66
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: How Do LNers Deal With Givens?
« Last post by Zeon Mason on October 03, 2026, 10:00:32 PM »Present a single piece of credible evidence that places Oswald in the SN at 12:30pm.
I may be one the who 1st floated that 12:16 BRW leaving earlier time , which was a mistake on my part if I’m going with Arnold Rowlands as a credible witness.
I looked up Arnold Rowland WC testimony and that’s when I found where he was looking back about every 30 secs after he saw BRW at 12:15 which means he saw BRW not just one more time at 12:20 but every 30 secs AFTER that until about 12:24 and THEN at 12:25 , he no longer saw BRW.
I generally agree with most of your arguments except the notion the shooter would not have assembled the MC rifle sometime earlier than 12:00 because imo the 7th floor was available ( which is like an attic)
If that’s the case, though the shooter had to have transported the rifle multiple times inside the bag for it to ever have wound up in the SN. ( unless Bag was moved there after the fact by Fritz team)
So it’s possible after transporting rifle in bag to the SW 6th floor and taking rifle out of bag such that he was seen by Rowland at 12:15, the shooter after backing away, put the rifle back in the bag, then he had to hide the rifle again (if he is Oswald ) and go back down to 2nd floor lunchroom to be seen
By Carolyn Arnold at 12:17.
However if the shooter is not Oswald then he wouldn’t have to go back down at all. In fact he could have found some spot on the NE corner of the floor where he could have hidden and taken his rifle with him in the bag once more.
This is where it gets into time trouble for the shooter to have arranged the 3 boxes before 12:25 if BRW is still on the floor till 12:24.
And once BRW did leave the floor that late , the shooter must have carried the rifle in the bag one last time to the SN and left it there.
For this hypothetical scenario to be plausible would require the shooter was wearing gloves as he handled bag ( with he had gotten Oswald’s prints on ) and while the shooter fired the rifle
67
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Cuban Intel Had Foreknowledge of the JFKA?
« Last post by Steve M. Galbraith on October 03, 2026, 08:46:49 PM »Oswald's views about Cuba after returning from Mexico City. From "Marina and Lee."
"Marina stood in the bedroom and stared at the prodigal who had come home [from Mexico City] to her. He kissed her and asked if she had missed him? Then he started right in: “Ah, they’re such terrible bureaucrats that nothing came of it after all.” He described his shuttling from embassy to embassy, how each one told him he had to wait and wait, and see what the other one did, and how the whole time he had been worried about running out of money. He was especially vociferous about the Cubans—“the same kind of bureaucrats as in Russia. No point going there.” Marina was so delighted that she could scarcely believe her ears. Indeed, Lee’s disenchantment with Castro and Cuba was complete. He never again talked about “Uncle Fidel,” nor sang the song “Viva Fidel,” as he used to do, nor used the alias “Hidell.” --- "Marina and Lee", pg. 650.
"Lee's disenchantment with Castro and Cuba was complete."
Doesn't sound like a man who would kill JFK in revenge for the war on "the Revolution." Or who would be motivated by Cuban agents to do so.
On the other hand (there's always three of four or six or seven of these in the assassination), it's hard to believe someone would reject Castro because some bureaucrats in a consulate acted rudely. How is Castro to blame?
"Marina stood in the bedroom and stared at the prodigal who had come home [from Mexico City] to her. He kissed her and asked if she had missed him? Then he started right in: “Ah, they’re such terrible bureaucrats that nothing came of it after all.” He described his shuttling from embassy to embassy, how each one told him he had to wait and wait, and see what the other one did, and how the whole time he had been worried about running out of money. He was especially vociferous about the Cubans—“the same kind of bureaucrats as in Russia. No point going there.” Marina was so delighted that she could scarcely believe her ears. Indeed, Lee’s disenchantment with Castro and Cuba was complete. He never again talked about “Uncle Fidel,” nor sang the song “Viva Fidel,” as he used to do, nor used the alias “Hidell.” --- "Marina and Lee", pg. 650.
"Lee's disenchantment with Castro and Cuba was complete."
Doesn't sound like a man who would kill JFK in revenge for the war on "the Revolution." Or who would be motivated by Cuban agents to do so.
On the other hand (there's always three of four or six or seven of these in the assassination), it's hard to believe someone would reject Castro because some bureaucrats in a consulate acted rudely. How is Castro to blame?
68
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: How Do LNers Deal With Givens?
« Last post by Dan O'meara on October 03, 2026, 06:43:19 PM »I suppose you could make a dumber statement, but it is hard to imagine how.
Present a single piece of credible evidence that places Oswald in the SN at 12:30pm.
69
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: How Do LNers Deal With Givens?
« Last post by John Corbett on October 03, 2026, 06:41:41 PM »The is zero credible evidence that Oswald was in the SN at 12:30. Zero.
I suppose you could make a dumber statement, but it is hard to imagine how.
70
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: How Do LNers Deal With Givens?
« Last post by Dan O'meara on October 03, 2026, 06:36:48 PM »Can you explain how anyone could know that or why it is even important to know that? Of course you can't. There is ample evidence that Oswald was in the sniper's nest at 12:30 firing the shots that killed JFK. The fact you think it is important to know where Oswald was in the minutes leading up to the assassination reveals just how dumb you rare.
The is zero credible evidence that Oswald was in the SN at 12:30. Zero.
You are so dumb you don't know the difference between a fact and a theory.
Talking about your dumbness...let me spoon feed to you exactly what is going on in this thread.
I am demonstrating a specific pattern of evidential fabrication, manipulation and omission by the Warren Commission, designed to create a false narrative that placed Oswald all alone on the 6th floor after everyone else went down to lunch.
The fact you don't think it's important that the Sham would do such a thing just shows what a rabid Nutter you are.
On top of the testimonies of Williams, Givens, Lovelady, Arce and Piper the Sham had to 'ignore', was the testimony of Arnold Rowland who observed a man with a scoped, high-powered rifle on the 6th floor. This testimony should have been the centrepiece of the Sham's narrative regarding Oswald's movements leading up to the assassination. Instead it was quietly dropped in a most devious fashion but not because of the man with the rifle. The problem with Arnold's testimony was the black male he reported seeing in the SN window who disappeared a few minutes before the motorcade arrived in Dealey Plaza. It was also notable what Rowland didn't see. His gaze constantly returned to the 6th floor as he scanned the windows looking for the man with the rifle and what he didn't see was BRW sat at the third set of windows along. Instead he saw a black man in the SN window.
Quote
Nobody could have a rational debate with someone as stupid as you. You think the most trivial things are important while ignoring the compelling evidence that Oswald was the assassin. That is not an assumption. An assumption is a belief made in lieu of evidence, such as all theories that anyone except Oswald took part in the crime. The fact that you obsess over trivialities such as a supposed elevator race prior to the assassination reveals just how clueless you are. You focus on all the dumb stuff while ignoring what is important. Sorry, just being honest.
I didn't expect for a second that you would actually engage in any kind of rational debate.
That would require far more knowledge about the evidence than you possess, not to mention a bit of backbone.
All you've done is misrepresent and insult. You have offered nothing and will continue to do so.
You really should run along.