Yet another money order problem.

[Sandy Larsen]

Here's an IBM punch card that was used in the 1960s to program computers:

Here's a 1961 postal money order whose design was based on the IBM punch card:

Now, here's the 1963 Hidell money order:

Notice anything missing from the Hidell money order? (Or rather, not missing?)

Hint: Ask Chris Newton.

EDIT: I no longer believe this to be an issue. Post-1962 cards no longer used the cut-corner feature. See post 41 on page 3.

Edited February 21, 2016 by Sandy Larsen

[David Von Pein]

The watermark?

[Ian Lloyd]

Top left corner (looking at the front)?

[Sandy Larsen]

Top left corner (looking at the front)?

Yep! The registration cutout is missing. There's no way the Hidell money order could have been fed into the card reader as-is. LOL

I noticed this last night, and Chris Newton noticed it today (I think).

Edited November 15, 2015 by Sandy Larsen

[Guest]

I'm reasonably informed about the money order issue but am not following the significance of this thread. Here is a 1963 postal money order that does not have the corner cut. (Weirdly, the payee is the same as the 1961 example in the OP: Harry Smuckler.) The Wikipedia article on punched cards states, "Some cards have one upper corner cut so that cards not oriented correctly, or cards with different corner cuts, could be easily identified." So it doesn't appear that a corner cut is essential.

[David Von Pein]

The Wiki article referred to by Lance:

wikipedia.org/wiki/Punched_card

Edited November 15, 2015 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

And look at the serial number on the 1963 U.S. Postal Money Order Lance posted (also shown again below) -- it's 1.4 billion numbers LOWER than the Hidell M.O., even though Lance's example is stamped 6 months AFTER the Hidell money order.

That numbering snafu should make John Armstrong's head really spin, huh?

Of course, it would appear as if that M.O. Lance posted is some kind of SAMPLE money order. It's only made out for one cent, and still has the stub attached. But all the other markings seem to be in place. Kind of odd.

EDIT --- And now I just noticed that the 1961 money order posted in the first post above, made out to the same person, is also made out in the amount of just one cent ($0.01).

So that's double the "Harry Smuckler" weirdness.

But I see also by this 1961 M.O. that the person who supposedly purchased the M.O. is listed as a "Postmaster" in Samoa. Maybe that has something to do with it. ~shrug~

Edited November 16, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Guest]

https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1964&dat=19620623&id=2PQiAAAAIBAJ&sjid=Nc0FAAAAIBAJ&pg=5330,4714873&hl=en

I found the above newspaper article indicating that new yellow punch cards for money orders were implemented in nine states in June of 1962. The holes corresponding to the dollar amounts were punched on a hand-cranked machine at the point of purchase. The accompanying photo shows the postmaster holding up one of the new forms, which does not appear to have a corner cut.

If someone is way more interested in this than I am, it appears that the card specifications could be tracked down as follows: "INVITATION FOR BIDS FOR FURNISHING POSTAL MONEY ORDER FORMS FOR THE 1963 FISCAL YEAR IN ACCORDANCE WITH POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT SPECIFICATIONS POD-F-172 (RE) DATED MAY 18, 1962, FEDERAL SPECIFICATION G- C-116A AND UU-P-31B."

[David Von Pein]

Lance,

All of that info regarding that 1962 Palm Beach newspaper article (except for the "cut corner" discovery, which just came up today at this forum) has already been discussed (after that very same Palm Beach article was tracked down by Tom Scully a few days ago).

I've archived a lot of the see-saw discussion at my site, here....

jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/10/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1058.html

Edited November 16, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Sandy Larsen]

I'm reasonably informed about the money order issue but am not following the significance of this thread. Here is a 1963 postal money order that does not have the corner cut. (Weirdly, the payee is the same as the 1961 example in the OP: Harry Smuckler.) The Wikipedia article on punched cards states, "Some cards have one upper corner cut so that cards not oriented correctly, or cards with different corner cuts, could be easily identified." So it doesn't appear that a corner cut is essential.

1_af1f64b76362ea939a7fa6537ea4b468.jpg

Thanks for posting that, Lance.

The money order I posted was issued when the Federal Reserve Bank was charged with punching the amount codes (with round holes). The one you posted was issued later, when Postal workers were charged with that duty.

I wonder what the deal is with Harry Smuckler being sent 1 cent money orders. And why they still exist. Very, very odd.

May I ask where you got that photo from? I'd like to see the back side if possible.

It looks like I am wrong about the corner. But given the oddity of the two MOs, I'm not quite ready to concede yet.

If I am wrong (and I think I probably am), I suspect that that the cut corner was removed when they switched over to the new cards that were punched by Postal workers. Though it makes no sense for them to do that.

BTW, I'm not of the opinion that the news article is showing a card with no cut corner. To me it looks like they are holding the card upside-down, so that the cut corner is located on the opposite corner. Posing for the photo and not paying attention to the card.

P.S. Does your wife know if Oswald was known to speak Russian there in Minsk?

Edited November 16, 2015 by Sandy Larsen

[David Von Pein]

.....

Edited November 16, 2015 by David Von Pein

[James DiEugenio]

John Armstrong will be posting on this soon.

Armstrong knows more about this issue than any person alive. Or dead.

What silliness DVP produced, walking around in the dark groping here and there, anywhere. But never doing his own original research.

Armstrong has digested the whole history of money orders in America.

Edited November 16, 2015 by James DiEugenio

[David Von Pein]

John Armstrong will be posting on this soon.

Armstrong knows more about this issue than any person alive. Or dead.

What silliness DVP produced, walking around in the dark groping here and there, anywhere. But never doing his own original research.

Armstrong has digested the whole history of money orders in America.

Now, if only Armstrong can somehow find a way to conveniently explain away how on Earth the Klein's endorsement stamp **AND** Lee Harvey Oswald's own handwriting (which was verified as Oswald's by at least 4 different handwriting analysts) managed to attach themselves to the CE788 Hidell U.S. Postal Money Order, then Mr. Armstrong will be home free on this issue.

Until then, I'm afraid Armstrong is fighting an uphill battle.

Oh, I'm sure Armstrong has treated the world to his own speculative and lame-ass "Everything's Fake" excuse to try and explain how the Klein's stamp and Oswald's writing got onto CE788, but it would sure be nice to see some PROOF that those two very important things that exist on the money order were faked by evil conspirators. Any chance we'll ever see any proof of that, Jim?

And the lack of a bank stamp on the back of the money order does not prove that either the Klein's stamp or Lee Oswald's handwriting are fraudulent markings on Commission Exhibit 788.

Edited November 16, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Guest]

Thanks for posting that, Lance.

The money order I posted was issued when the Federal Reserve Bank was charged with punching the amount codes (with round holes). The one you posted was issued later, when Postal workers were charged with that duty.

I wonder what the deal is with Harry Smuckler being sent 1 cent money orders. And why they still exist. Very, very odd.

Yes, I was astounded. Perhaps he was some sort of postal money order collector who collected these things like stamps. Both were from exotic locations.

May I ask where you got that photo from? I'd like to see the back side if possible.

I just did a Google Images search and that popped up. Naturally, I can't remember what search phrase I used!

It looks like I am wrong about the corner. But given the oddity of the two MOs, I'm not quite ready to concede yet.

If I am wrong (and I think I probably am), I suspect that that the cut corner was removed when they switched over to the new cards that were punched by Postal workers. Though it makes no sense for them to do that.

BTW, I'm not of the opinion that the news article is showing a card with no cut corner. To me it looks like they are holding the card upside-down, so that the cut corner is located on the opposite corner. Posing for the photo and not paying attention to the card.

P.S. Does your wife know if Oswald was known to speak Russian there in Minsk?

No, and I really haven't made any inquiries. I can tell you that I completed the Level 3 Pimsleur course in Russian as well as Rosetta Stone, and I have been living for eight years with a woman who speaks with all of her friends and family in Russian, and I'd have a hard time carrying on a conversation with a three-year-old toddler. It strikes me as an extremely difficult and "alien" language. And the natives speak so fast all I can ever do is pick out a couple of words here and there. LHO's proficiency in Russian - whatever level he was at - amazes me.

[David Von Pein]

TIM NICKERSON SAID:

That money order sold on E-BAY on June 21, 2014 as a stamp collection item [is the top picture below]. The money order itself was never cashed. Compare that money order with the Klein's rifle money order:




DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Thanks, Tim.

Perhaps that number that you've highlighted at the top of the Hidell money order — 138 4159796 — does mean something as far as "processing" is concerned. Could the Federal Reserve Bank have stamped that number on the money order in Washington? I don't know. But it obviously got there somehow. And it's not part of the money order's serial number. So what does that ten-digit number mean? And who stamped it there? And when?

But I have a feeling that conspiracists like John Armstrong and Jim DiEugenio will be doing cartwheels due to the fact that the yellow uncashed money order, dated September 11, 1963, has a serial number that is 1.4 billion numbers LOWER than the Hidell money order, even though the September money order was stamped (and, I would assume, purchased by someone) six months AFTER Lee Harvey Oswald purchased the CE788 money order in March.

That huge difference in the serial numbers will likely cause CTers to cast still more doubt on the legitimacy of Oswald's money order.