Author Topic: Statements That Sink The WCs Conclusions -- #433  (Read 12906 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10048
Re: Statements That Sink The WCs Conclusions -- #433
« Reply #21 on: March 20, 2017, 10:51:54 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Or that there is "no evidence" that Oswald used the Hidell alias even though there is an order form for the rifle in that name in his handwritting, that name is listed on Oswald's NO post office box form, and the SS card with that name was in his pocket when he was arrested. 

None of this actually shows that Oswald used the Hidell name as an alias, besides the SS card which we don't actually know was in his pocket when he was arrested.

Online Walt Cakebread

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12597
Re: Statements That Sink The WCs Conclusions -- #433
« Reply #22 on: March 20, 2017, 11:02:41 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
None of this actually shows that Oswald used the Hidell name as an alias, besides the SS card which we don't actually know was in his pocket when he was arrested.

None of this actually shows that Oswald used the Hidell name as an alias,

Exactly Right!.....    There's nothing to prove that Lee ever actually presented himself as AJ Hidell......

Offline Rob Caprio

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23069
Re: Statements That Sink The WCs Conclusions -- #433
« Reply #23 on: March 21, 2017, 12:54:06 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are really losing it.  What I confirmed is that you are a dishonest imbecile at best and an outright lunatic at worst.  Something that is obvious to just about every person who frequents this board including your fellow CTers.  I have no idea what you are babbling about here.  You appear to have mixed up several issues in which you have should be embarrassed had you a functioning brain.  For example, claiming that an arrest report with a time notation for the arrest at  "1:40" indicates that it must have been written at 1:40 even though it contains information that occurred days later.   Or that there is "no evidence" that Oswald used the Hidell alias even though there is an order form for the rifle in that name in his handwritting, that name is listed on Oswald's NO post office box form, and the SS card with that name was in his pocket when he was arrested.  That is what people with a functioning brain refer to as evidence and what lunatics ignore to maintain their paranoid fantasies.

You can personal attack all you want. In fact, that is all that you can do since you have NO supporting evidence for your claims. LHO was NOT arrested at 1:40 p.m.  That is simply a fact. And yet, the arrest report claims that he was.

This tells us that LHO was the designated patsy as he claimed. Thanks for your honesty and for confirming that a conspiracy killed JFK.

Offline Tom Perry

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: Statements That Sink The WCs Conclusions -- #433
« Reply #24 on: April 02, 2017, 01:31:19 AM »
Thanks for the reply Walt, and if I ever have a question again I'll include the context
« Last Edit: April 02, 2017, 01:33:30 AM
by Tom Perry
»

Online Walt Cakebread

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12597
Re: Statements That Sink The WCs Conclusions -- #433
« Reply #25 on: April 02, 2017, 05:05:29 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Thanks for the reply Walt, and if I ever have a question again I'll include the context


I'm not trying to put you on the spot..... I'm merely curious if Lee said that he hadn't killed ( or shot) anybody as early as 2:00pm???

I would find it hard to believe if the cops in the car with Lee hadn't  accused him of shooting Tippit.......  But I wonder how they would have had enough information to accuse him of both murders. ????  How would they have a clue that Lee Oswald was the man wanted as a suspect in the murder of JFK???

Roy Truly didn't report Lee missing until AFTER Lee was arrested.....  So there was no APB alerting the cops that the man being sought was Lee H. Oswald.

IOW......  It's easy to understand how the cops would have accused him of shooting Tippit.....  But not so easy to understand how they could have accused him of shooting JFK.

 

Offline Steve Logan

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 552
  • "A pure hand needs no glove to cover it."
Re: Statements That Sink The WCs Conclusions -- #433
« Reply #26 on: April 02, 2017, 05:47:49 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I'm not trying to put you on the spot..... I'm merely curious if Lee said that he hadn't killed ( or shot) anybody as early as 2:00pm???

I would find it hard to believe if the cops in the car with Lee hadn't  accused him of shooting Tippit.......  But I wonder how they would have had enough information to accuse him of both murders. ????  How would they have a clue that Lee Oswald was the man wanted as a suspect in the murder of JFK???

Roy Truly didn't report Lee missing until AFTER Lee was arrested.....  So there was no APB alerting the cops that the man being sought was Lee H. Oswald.

IOW......  It's easy to understand how the cops would have accused him of shooting Tippit.....  But not so easy to understand how they could have accused him of shooting JFK.

  

We all know there was one Dallas cop that stopped him and had no knowledge of him being the accused killer of Tippit.
« Last Edit: April 05, 2017, 02:52:57 AM
by Steve Logan
»

Online Walt Cakebread

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12597
Re: Statements That Sink The WCs Conclusions -- #433
« Reply #27 on: April 02, 2017, 06:15:07 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
We all know there was one Dallas cop that stopped him and no knowledge of him being the accused killer of Tippit.

You know nothing......But who are you referring to as "we" ?    Would you be referring to all those voices you hear in your head?