The Dead-Letter Package

[Jerry Freeman]

You mean like that map of DP they found at Ozzie's pad, dad?

A map that has an 'X' marking the TSBD? He did that when he went to find a job there.
If you can produce a link showing this map I would like to see it.

[Alan Ford]

Try to focus instead of rambling on.  Here is the question again:  How would this package show foreknowledge of the motorcade route?

~Grin~

Asks the man who dismissed my hypothesis on the basis that it would show too much foreknowledge of the motorcade route

Still no explanation of how a random hoaxer could have known to write the name and address in a way that even you have to admit looks like Mr Oswald's handwriting? Your inability to focus on this is noted, Mr Smith! 

[Mark A. Oblazney]

A map that has an 'X' marking the TSBD? He did that when he went to find a job there.
If you can produce a link showing this map I would like to see it.

I stand corrected, sir.  Still un-tying the conspiratorial knots from my wee mind, which is constantly getting much mo' wee-er, uh.  Older researchers understand the 'wee-er' part........ or do they?

[Richard Smith]

~Grin~

Asks the man who dismissed my hypothesis on the basis that it would show too much foreknowledge of the motorcade route

Still no explanation of how a random hoaxer could have known to write the name and address in a way that even you have to admit looks like Mr Oswald's handwriting? Your inability to focus on this is noted, Mr Smith! 

You have stated repeatedly that this package demonstrates that Oswald had foreknowledge of the motorcade.  Could you just explain why instead of dancing around like a circus monkey?  The date on the package is indecipherable.  So how does it shed any light on when it was mailed?  As I've said repeatedly, I'm not sure whether Oswald sent the package or not.  I can't think of any logical reason for him to address a package to a nonexistent address and your explanation makes no sense as usual.  If there is no logical reason for him to have done so, that lends itself to another explanation like a hoax.  I'm not a handwriting expert.  I assume that you are not either.  The handwriting does look similar but some people have similar looking handwriting.  Again, I'm not ruling out that this is Oswald's handwriting but in the case of the forms linking Oswald to the rifle etc we have been told repeatedly by CTers that handwriting analysis is not an exact science even when conducted by an expert.  But here suddenly we are told this looks - to a non-expert - like Oswald's handwriting and thus it must be so.  When was the first example of Oswald's signature offered to the public?  I don't know the answer.  Do you?  It seems like an important issue if you are claiming no one had an opportunity to write his name in a similar way.

[Alan Ford]

You have stated repeatedly that this package demonstrates that Oswald had foreknowledge of the motorcade.

~Grin~

Again you are trying to row back on your own stated objection to my hypothesis: that the window between Mr Oswald's learning that the motorcade would pass in front of the building he worked at and the time needed to execute such a game with the postal authorities would have been too tight. Why are you now objecting to your own objection, Mr Smith? Is it because your objection fades away once we DON'T assume we know when Mr Oswald learned of the motorcade route? Hm?

Could you just explain why instead of dancing around like a circus monkey?  The date on the package is indecipherable.  So how does it shed any light on when it was mailed?  As I've said repeatedly, I'm not sure whether Oswald sent the package or not.  I can't think of any logical reason for him to address a package to a nonexistent address and your explanation makes no sense as usual.  If there is no logical reason for him to have done so, that lends itself to another explanation like a hoax.  I'm not a handwriting expert.  I assume that you are not either.  The handwriting does look similar but some people have similar looking handwriting.

The handwriting doesn't look similar, it looks uncannily similar------------have you actually placed the writing on the package next to authenticated samples of Mr Oswald's writing? I suggest you take a break from your usual 'Nothing to see here' routine and do so

Your freak coincidence theory just doesn't wash. You are a private citizen. A heinous crime has been committed, and one man has been singled out for this crime. The story has been all over the news. OK. Without having privileged access to files, without having internet, without having a clue how the man writes, you mail a package to this man in handwriting that just so happens to look awfully like his. What are the odds of your getting this right? Very slim indeed! There are many, many different styles of handwriting.

Again, I'm not ruling out that this is Oswald's handwriting but in the case of the forms linking Oswald to the rifle etc we have been told repeatedly by CTers that handwriting analysis is not an exact science even when conducted by an expert.  But here suddenly we are told this looks - to a non-expert - like Oswald's handwriting and thus it must be so.  When was the first example of Oswald's signature offered to the public?  I don't know the answer.  Do you?

No, but common sense says that IF no sample of Mr Oswald's signature was offered to the public in time for a hoaxer to imitate his signature, then we have a high probability that Mr Oswald mailed a heavy brown paper bag to himself at a fake address not long before the assassination. Your fluke coincidence theory would be a very, very last resort. And yet here you are, putting it forward as your first explanatory port of call. All because you don't like the time implications!

It seems like an important issue if you are claiming no one had an opportunity to write his name in a similar way.

I have not said that. I have said that only someone who has seen a sample or samples of his handwriting could have written his name AND the address in such a remarkably similar way. And even then we would be left with a hoax OR a frame-up attempt that makes absolutely no sense (at least that anyone has ever been able to discern). My hypothesis, by contrast, would finally make sense of the enduring riddle posed by the Nixie parcel: Mr Oswald was doing a non-dangerous dry run to test if the postal authorities had him under surveillance

 

[Richard Smith]

~Grin~

Again you are trying to row back on your own stated objection to my hypothesis: that the window between Mr Oswald's learning that the motorcade would pass in front of the building he worked at and the time needed to execute such a game with the postal authorities would have been too tight. Why are you now objecting to your own objection, Mr Smith? Is it because your objection fades away once we DON'T assume we know when Mr Oswald learned of the motorcade route? Hm?

The handwriting doesn't look similar, it looks uncannily similar------------have you actually placed the writing on the package next to authenticated samples of Mr Oswald's writing? I suggest you take a break from your usual 'Nothing to see here' routine and do so

Your freak coincidence theory just doesn't wash. You are a private citizen. A heinous crime has been committed, and one man has been singled out for this crime. The story has been all over the news. OK. Without having privileged access to files, without having internet, without having a clue how the man writes, you mail a package to this man in handwriting that just so happens to look awfully like his. What are the odds of your getting this right? Very slim indeed! There are many, many different styles of handwriting.

No, but common sense says that IF no sample of Mr Oswald's signature was offered to the public in time for a hoaxer to imitate his signature, then we have a high probability that Mr Oswald mailed a heavy brown paper bag to himself at a fake address not long before the assassination. Your fluke coincidence theory would be a very, very last resort. And yet here you are, putting it forward as your first explanatory port of call. All because you don't like the time implications!

I have not said that. I have said that only someone who has seen a sample or samples of his handwriting could have written his name AND the address in such a remarkably similar way. And even then we would be left with a hoax OR a frame-up attempt that makes absolutely no sense (at least that anyone has ever been able to discern). My hypothesis, by contrast, would finally make sense of the enduring riddle posed by the Nixie parcel: Mr Oswald was doing a non-dangerous dry run to test if the postal authorities had him under surveillance

 

So many words.  None of which answer the only relevant question.  How does this package demonstrate that Oswald had foreknowledge of the motorcade EVEN if he sent it?  Can you focus on that?  Let me help get started:  "This package demonstrates that Oswald had foreknowledge of the motorcade because [HERE YOU ENTER WHATEVER YOU BELIEVE PROVES THIS POINT].  Lastly, you repeat over and over that this is Oswald's writing because it looks similar.  Are you an expert in handwriting in a position to make such determinations?  When did the public first see a copy of Oswald's signature?  This seems like a critical point in your theory.  That no one could have been aware of what his signature looked like at that time.  I don't know the answer.  Do you?  You seem to assume to no one could have seen Oswald's signature and reproduced it but what is the basis of that claim? 

[Alan Ford]

So many words.  None of which answer the only relevant question.  How does this package demonstrate that Oswald had foreknowledge of the motorcade EVEN if he sent it?  Can you focus on that?  Let me help get started:  "This package demonstrates that Oswald had foreknowledge of the motorcade because [HERE YOU ENTER WHATEVER YOU BELIEVE PROVES THIS POINT].  Lastly, you repeat over and over that this is Oswald's writing because it looks similar.  Are you an expert in handwriting in a position to make such determinations?  When did the public first see a copy of Oswald's signature?  This seems like a critical point in your theory.  That no one could have been aware of what his signature looked like at that time.  I don't know the answer.  Do you?  You seem to assume to no one could have seen Oswald's signature and reproduced it but what is the basis of that claim?

Mr Smith, you're embarrassed because you yourself previously accepted the linkage with the motorcade route. I get that, but I'm not letting you away with your game of now suddenly playing dumb. Sorry! 

Now! As already explained: IF Mr Oswald mailed this package to himself, then it demonstrates that he had foreknowledge of the motorcade route because it shows him engaging in clandestine business with a heavy brown paper bag at some point before he is accused of bringing a rifle, hidden in a heavy brown paper bag, to his place of work for the purpose of JFK's assassination. By your own analysis, for this plan to work he would have realistically needed to send such a package BEFORE the parade route was made public on 19 November.

Given that this parcel was almost certainly sent BEFORE the assassination, what logical explanation other than mine do we have for this parcel's existence? You certainly haven't come up with one, and nor IMO has any CTer

 

[Richard Smith]

Mr Smith, you're embarrassed because you yourself previously accepted the linkage with the motorcade route. I get that, but I'm not letting you away with your game of now suddenly playing dumb. Sorry! 

Now! As already explained: IF Mr Oswald mailed this package to himself, then it demonstrates that he had foreknowledge of the motorcade route because it shows him engaging in clandestine business with a heavy brown paper bag at some point before he is accused of bringing a rifle, hidden in a heavy brown paper bag, to his place of work for the purpose of JFK's assassination. By your own analysis, for this plan to work he would have realistically needed to send such a package BEFORE the parade route was made public on 19 November.

Given that this parcel was almost certainly sent BEFORE the assassination, what logical explanation other than mine do we have for this parcel's existence? You certainly haven't come up with one, and nor IMO has any CTer

 

You are rambling again.  Focus on one thing at a time.  How is it a "given that this parcel was almost certainly sent BEFORE the assassination"?  Can you cite to any evidence whatsoever to support this point?  Focus.