Questions For Buell Wesley Frazier

[Bill Chapman]

Did the short bag get longer or did the long bag get shorter

[Charles Collins]

Did the short bag get longer or did the long bag get shorter

What short bag?   

[Martin Weidmann]

Bug’s question does not have the word “if” in it. Frazier didn’t agree to an “if” question. Your game playing sucks if you have to rely on changing the question.

I should have used the word bag or package instead of the word rifle. I stand corrected. Bugs succeeded in putting doubt in everyone’s mind (including Frazier) about whether or not the package was actually tucked under the armpit. Frazier himself (the one who actually saw LHO carrying the package) admitted this by answering that Bug’s statement was true.

Bug’s question does not have the word “if” in it.

Where did I say it did?

Frazier didn’t agree to an “if” question. Your game playing sucks if you have to rely on changing the question.

True, he answered an equally speculative "could have" question. As there is no proof whatsoever that Oswald carried a bag protruding out it's basically the same thing.

Bugs succeeded in putting doubt in everyone’s mind

Which was exactly the purpose of the loaded question. Bugs could not prove the bags protruded out, so he did the next best thing. A typical lawyers trick!

Frazier himself (the one who actually saw LHO carrying the package) admitted this by answering that Bug’s statement was true.

Only in your biased mind. Whenever a lawyer tries to discredit a witness, or, as in this case, create doubt, it is a clear sign that the lawyers knows the witness is actually telling the truth.

[Charles Collins]

Bug’s question does not have the word “if” in it.

Where did I say it did?

Frazier didn’t agree to an “if” question. Your game playing sucks if you have to rely on changing the question.

True, he answered an equally speculative "could have" question. As there is no proof whatsoever that Oswald carried a bag protruding out it's basically the same thing.

Bugs succeeded in putting doubt in everyone’s mind

Which was exactly the purpose of the loaded question. Bugs could not prove the bags protruded out, so he did the next best thing. A typical lawyers trick!

Frazier himself (the one who actually saw LHO carrying the package) admitted this by answering that Bug’s statement was true.

Only in your biased mind. Whenever a lawyer tries to discredit a witness, or, as in this case, create doubt, it is a clear sign that the lawyers knows the witness is actually telling the truth.

Where did I say it did?

… Instead he only agrees that if Oswald had carried the bag in front of him, he wouldn't have seen it. …

That’s not what he agreed with. Bug’s statement does not include the word if. Yet Frazier answered that it is true that it is a correct statement.


As there is no proof whatsoever that Oswald carried a bag protruding out it's basically the same thing.

He did not ask Frazier whether or not LHO was holding the package out front. No proof is called for. But I believe that an unbiased person would conclude (based on the length of the bag discovered near the sniper’s nest with LHO’s fingerprint on it) that LHO did in fact have it in front and that Frazier couldn’t see it. Frazier himself admits that it is possible.

[Martin Weidmann]

Where did I say it did?

That’s not what he agreed with. Bug’s statement does not include the word if. Yet Frazier answered that it is true that it is a correct statement.

Aha, so you are another one with a reading comprehension problem. I never said that Bugs used the word "if". It was merely my interpretation of what he meant

As there is no proof whatsoever that Oswald carried a bag protruding out it's basically the same thing.

He did not ask Frazier whether or not LHO was holding the package out front. No proof is called for. But I believe that an unbiased person would conclude (based on the length of the bag discovered near the sniper’s nest with LHO’s fingerprint on it) that LHO did in fact have it in front and that Frazier couldn’t see it. Frazier himself admits that it is possible.

He did not ask Frazier whether or not LHO was holding the package out front.

Exactly right. He only wanted to know if (there's that word again) Frazier would have been able to see it if (there it is again) it was indeed protruding out. And Frazier answered honestly.

But I believe that an unbiased person would conclude (based on the length of the bag discovered near the sniper’s nest with LHO’s fingerprint on it) that LHO did in fact have it in front and that Frazier couldn’t see it. Frazier himself admits that it is possible.

Hilarious. You actually consider yourself to be unbiased? Really?

One thing is for sure an unbiased and reasonable person would conclude that you are jumping to conclusions based on assumptions for which there is not a shred of credible evidence. The print on a bag, found at the TSBD, and made from materials common to the TSBD, of an employee of the TSBD could easily have another explanation. Frazier can admit all he wants that it is possible, but that does not constitute evidence that it did happen.

And BTW Frazier never admitted that LHO had that particular bag in front of him. You rather cheeky are misrepresenting the evidence again.

[Charles Collins]

Aha, so you are another one with a reading comprehension problem. I never said that Bugs used the word "if". It was merely my interpretation of what he meant

He did not ask Frazier whether or not LHO was holding the package out front.

Exactly right. He only wanted to know if (there's that word again) Frazier would have been able to see it if (there it is again) it was indeed protruding out. And Frazier answered honestly.

But I believe that an unbiased person would conclude (based on the length of the bag discovered near the sniper’s nest with LHO’s fingerprint on it) that LHO did in fact have it in front and that Frazier couldn’t see it. Frazier himself admits that it is possible.

Hilarious. You actually consider yourself to be unbiased? Really?

One thing is for sure an unbiased and reasonable person would conclude that you are jumping to conclusions based on assumptions for which there is not a shred of credible evidence. The print on a bag, found at the TSBD, and made from materials common to the TSBD, of an employee of the TSBD could easily have another explanation. Frazier can admit all he wants that it is possible, but that does not constitute evidence that it did happen.

And BTW Frazier never admitted that LHO had that particular bag in front of him. You rather cheeky are misrepresenting the evidence again.

It was merely my interpretation of what he meant


Which you used as your argument. It is wrong. Frazier agreed that LHO could have had the bag in front of him. Not just that he couldn’t have seen it if it was. He agreed to the entire statement that Bugs made. That’s the difference that you refuse to accept.

If Frazier had seen the top of the bag tucked up under the armpit, he would have said so. Frazier had in fact earlier testified, to another investigation, that he did not see the top of the bag tucked up under the armpit (see Jerry’s post above). And that he only saw it from behind. I believe that Bugs knew this and worded his questioning accordingly.

You can believe in fairy tales about bags that never existed if you wish. I really don’t give a hoot.

[Bill Chapman]

I don't think these dorks know what a Proof of Concept study consists of

[Martin Weidmann]

It was merely my interpretation of what he meant

Which you used as your argument. It is wrong. Frazier agreed that LHO could have had the bag in front of him. Not just that he couldn’t have seen it if it was. He agreed to the entire statement that Bugs made. That’s the difference that you refuse to accept.

If Frazier had seen the top of the bag tucked up under the armpit, he would have said so. Frazier had in fact earlier testified, to another investigation, that he did not see the top of the bag tucked up under the armpit (see Jerry’s post above). And that he only saw it from behind. I believe that Bugs knew this and worded his questioning accordingly.

You can believe in fairy tales about bags that never existed if you wish. I really don’t give a hoot.

Frazier agreed that LHO could have had the bag in front of him. Not just that he couldn’t have seen it if it was. He agreed to the entire statement that Bugs made. That’s the difference that you refuse to accept.

Bugs didn't make a statement. He asked a question. What you fail to understand is that even if Frazier agreed that the bag could have been protruding out that still does not automatically mean that it was. And it most certainly doesn't mean that it was the bag that was found in the TSBD.


Frazier had in fact earlier testified, to another investigation, that he did not see the top of the bag tucked up under the armpit

What earlier investigation would that be?

You can believe in fairy tales about bags that never existed if you wish. I really don’t give a hoot.

What a silly comment. First of all, I don't believe in bags that never existed. I believe in credible evidence and two witnesses said that bag did exist. And as far as not giving a hoot, you sure reply a lot to my posts. Go figure