Six Things Made To Order For Lee Harvey Oswald

[David Von Pein]

IN ANOTHER DISCUSSION IN 2012, DAVID JOSEPHS SAID:

An open letter to Gary Mack and DVP:

Are you going to now try and say that the HIDELL ORDER was the only one in which a rifle serial # and VC # were written? That Klein's would not keep track of who bought what, when and where? As they did on the HIDELL ORDER?

Are you claiming that you've NEVER SEEN ANOTHER KLEIN'S order…EVER?

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Why on Earth would the FBI care about other orders in the Klein's files other than the paperwork connected with the purchase of one particular rifle with the serial number C2766 on it (which was purchased by Oswald, of course)?

That's the only gun purchase the FBI was looking for -- the one with C2766 attached to it. And that's because they knew that the JFK murder weapon was a gun with "C2766" on it. Any other Klein's order was useless and immaterial to the FBI's investigation. Isn't this obvious?

You, David Josephs, are merely concentrating on all the wrong things (again), in order to make Oswald blameless.

Of course there were many other order forms in the Klein's files that looked similar to Waldman #7. But none of those other orders had the serial number "C2766" written on them, and therefore none of those many other Klein's orders had any bearing whatsoever on the JFK murder case.

DVP

August 6, 2012

EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=19357#entry257775

Edited April 28, 2015 by David Von Pein

[B. A. Copeland]

But, B.A., do you really think Klein's is a co-conspirator in this thing? Really?

If so....for what possible purpose? Coerced by the FBI to do so?

Or don't you consider that a valid question for me to ask?

No DVP, I don't believe Klein's was in on the conspiracy (I'm not sure that would be necessary). At least, the evidence, as I have seen and observed, does not lead me to that conclusion and I think its a perfectly valid question to ask. Thanks for asking.

There is an interesting thought however. You ask "do you really think Klein's is a co-conspirator in this thing?" and you frame the question as if to assume that it would be "absurd". If we take a step back and have an honest look at the JFK murder we see many, many instances of what may be the conspirators in action without many individuals literally being involved in the conspiracy/coverup. Perhaps you do not interpret the evidence as conclusive as involving a conspiracy but lets just say, for the sake of discussion, Klein's is technically involved in the coverup or framing of LHO. Klein's doesn't necessarily have to be "in on the conspiracy". They could have simply been used in some way by those who wished to frame LHO in order for the official conclusion to work. If LHO never ordered a rifle then we'd have a problem even though I believe many problems existed and exists to this very day. The most important matter or question is, would that be a rational theory to espouse? I believe so unless the evidence overwhelmingly and undoubtedly says otherwise. If we follow the evidence, what we have are many instances of copied documents and no originals. I do not believe this particular batch of evidence would be effectively used against LHO were he to stand trial today.

Edited April 28, 2015 by B. A. Copeland

[David Josephs]

Therefore, David J., you think KLEIN'S SPORTING GOODS of Chicago, Illinois, played a large part in the "plot" to frame Lee Oswald. Is that correct?

You do realize how goofy that accusation is, don't you David?

Classic Von Pein...

Can you or anyone prove what we see printed as that order was what was actually on the microfilm - now that the cannister remains yet the film is gone?

Do you understand that the only thing that relates THAT rifle to THAT order is Waldman's own pencil writing in of the VC # and Seriel #.?

Kleins does not need to be part of the "plot" at all... they just needed to have given the FBI the evidence before it was authenticated. We also have the VP of the bank of Chicago stating that the MO deposited on this order would have been sent to and processed by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago... as we all know, there are no processing mark or stamps on the Money Order, only the stamp Waldman THINKS is the same as the one they use...

It's close, but not the same stamp... and as we can see, this is a KLEINS stamp. The Banking processes were never performed on this piece of paper.

Let's see what else Waldman has to say....

So basically, before we have any idea what is actually on this roll of film, the FBI has it in their possession.

We do not know anything about the state of Klein's inventory of C20-T750's as of March 1963.

There is no way to connect C2766 from Riva in Italy to this order.

Feldsott already told us about C2766 from an order shipped to Kleins in June 1962, not Feb 1963.

The microfilm with this and any other order form which can be used to compare SOP at this time is no longer in the Archives... the cannister is empty.

As to Waldman being the "proper individual" from Kleins...

Mr. BELIN. Do you know who the person is that filled out this order?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; his initials are so indicated as "M.W."

Mr. BELIN. Would that be the name at the lower lefthand corner of Exhibit 1?

Mr. WALDMAN. It is.

Mr. BELIN. And that is who?

Mr. WALDMAN. Mitchell W. Westra.

Mr. BELIN. At that time was he an employee of your company?

Mr. WALDMAN. He was.

Mr. BELIN. Was he under your jurisdiction and supervision?

Mr. WALDMAN. He was not under my direct supervision, no. He was under the supervision of Sam Kasper

Westra nor Kasper were interviewed... the man who filled the order and his boss were not consulted... Waldman was. And Waldman does not know his own inventory as evidenced by this stated regarding a non-existent Model 91/38EFF

Mr. WALDMAN. As for example, the different manufacturers making the Springfield rifle. Basically, the weapons were of the same general design, but as I say, there were details that were different.

We originally had ordered one style of Carcano rifle, one that was known as the Model 91TS. As time went on, we changed to another model known as the Model 91/38EFF, this on April 13, 1962.

Waldman testified on May 20, 1964. The microfilm in question had been in the possession of the FBI since the day they took it, Nov 23, 1963.

Mr. WALDMAN. The number that you referred to, C20-T750 is a catalog number.

Mr. BELIN. And after that, there appears some words of identification or description. Can you state what that is?

Mr. WALDMAN. The number designates an item which we sell, namely, an Italian carbine, 6.5 caliber rifle with the 4X scope

The TS rifle was a 36" scoped carbine

The FC was not.

C20-T750 had been advertised as a 36" carbine with a scope for $19.95 since March 1962. It was waht the Hidell Order refers to. Even the Secret Service told us the rifle found was a TS carbine.

So the question remains. All the evidence points to the rifle ordered and shipped on the microfilm receipt as a 36" scoped carbine 91/38TS rifle.

LNers like you claim that Kleins was shipping the larger rifle yet you provide nothing to support such a speculation. That a 40" FC rifle is found on the 6th floor does not equate to this having anything at all to do with that Hidell order unless you can show it was standard practice to replace one rifle with another... simply done too - just so us one other C20-T750 order and call it a day.

But you can't give us anything but excuses for WHY we would need to do that in the first palce.

Why on Earth would the FBI care about other orders in the Klein's files other than the paperwork connected with the purchase of one particular rifle with the serial number C2766 on it (which was purchased by Oswald, of course)?

Because, as BA posted, it would prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the order for C20-T750 was either the ONLY one where a different rifle was shipped, or was part of many 40" FC rifles shipped for that order number...

That Kleins had been selling the C20-T750 since March 1962 and was on ad every month until Feb 1963... unchanged as to description for all those months - a 36" scoped TS carbine. Yet you are trying to get us to believe that not a single other C20-T750 was ordered during that entire year. Which would also be proven if we could see the other orders from that film or ANY of the Kleins film.

The entire point von Pein is to see other orders with one of the other 99 seriel numbers on it.

There are 100 rifles listed here... does the FBI show us that any one of these is a 40" FC rifle?

Does Kleins offer any evidence related to these 99 OTHER rifles?

Of course not because they like we know these are from the June 1962 shipment of 36" rifles

We know that Riva removed the seriel number of all the rifles he worked on - except, says the FBI, this one batch... but they offer no proof of a single other rifle.

At the end of the day von Pein, the evidence you and the WCR uses to implicate a man of murder is woefully inadequate and terribly inauthentic. We have breaks in the custody at an agency known for altering, creqating and destroying evidence when it suited them. (the entirety of the Mexico evidence was created with the help of an FBI asset named Ochoa)

So it is really left up to you to connect the dots... and again - the evidence you choose to use falls terribly short and in reality shows the conspiracy of evidence thru the FBI that permeated this case...

If the WCR/FBi could convict using real evidence that said what it intended we have to assume they would have. Instead we constantly see the FBI bending in every conceivable way to get the evidence to conform to the accusation and conclusions... while never offereing corroboration or authentication of said evidence. The man was dead - they just needed to make their case.

Edited April 28, 2015 by David Josephs

[Larry Hancock]

Just for a bit of context, the following study might lead one to at least be a bit skeptical that the FBI's evidence handling is always that reliable ....nor to mention their forensics and criminology lab work....

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/20/us/politics/fbi-evidence-keeping-criticized.html?_r=0

Realistically it also seems that the Bureau's labs and expert testimony is open to challenge:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/csi-is-a-lie/390897/

Edited April 29, 2015 by Larry Hancock

[Robert Prudhomme]

"We know that Riva removed the seriel number of all the rifles he worked on - except, says the FBI, this one batch... but they offer no proof of a single other rifle."

Hi Dave

This has always troubled me. According to the terms of the export agreement, all markings and stampings on surplus Carcano rifles were to be removed, yet I defy anyone to find a Carcano with this done to it.

[David Josephs]

"We know that Riva removed the seriel number of all the rifles he worked on - except, says the FBI, this one batch... but they offer no proof of a single other rifle."

Hi Dave

This has always troubled me. According to the terms of the export agreement, all markings and stampings on surplus Carcano rifles were to be removed, yet I defy anyone to find a Carcano with this done to it.

The tired old argument that no other comparable orders or inventories or shipments would be of any benefit to the evidence is obviously a tactic to deflect the question.

The rifle is one of the most important pieces of evidence and yet the limiting of the FBI investigation to that one order and no other context is yet another example of the conclusion dictating the investigation.

When the FBI has prime, original evidence in its possession for months before evidence is offered as Exhibit and then the source materials disappear (like oh so many films, right Gayle?)

how can the evidence then offered be considrede anything but junk? - or solely indicative of a conver-up?

Bob... you know the rifle evidence - has anyone ever come forward with a 40"FC rifle they got from ordering C20-T750? Come forward with the 36"TS? Are is it that only the rifle attributed to Oswald has such a detailed and specific past?

Amazing how incriminating evidence is easy to find, while in so many cases the FBI can find everyone and anyone to circumstantially corroborate evidence against Oswald, they just cant find evidence directly from Oswald.

[Robert Prudhomme]

Yes, I agree with you, Dave. Not one single example of a 40" short rifle being substituted in an order to Klein's for a 36" carbine has ever been produced by the FBI, nor will such an example likely ever be produced.

It still bothers me, though, that Riva had EXPLICIT instructions to remove all stampings, proofs, and markings from Carcano rifles destined for the surplus market (save for "6,5 CAL" and "MADE ITALY"), yet there is not a photo of a Carcano barrel anywhere that does not show proofs, manufacture date, name of small arms factory and serial numbers.

Edited April 29, 2015 by Robert Prudhomme

[Paul Trejo]

SIX THINGS MADE TO ORDER FOR LEE HARVEY OSWALD

Lee Harvey Oswald was lucky enough (from his warped point-of-view) to have these six things all align themselves into perfect harmony on November 22, 1963:

1.) He (Oswald) hated America and its Government's representatives.

2.) Oswald owned and had ready access to a rifle in November '63.

3.) Oswald worked in a building which just happened to overlook the last portion of JFK's motorcade route through Dallas on 11/22/63.

4.) It stopped raining prior to 12:00 noon on 11/22/63 (hence, the bubbletop roof was left off of JFK's limousine for the motorcade drive through Dallas)...

5.) Oswald was lucky enough to have President Kennedy visit Dallas on a Friday (i.e., a regular workday for Lee Oswald and the other Book Depository employees), instead of, say, a Saturday or a Sunday.

6.) ...The parade route took JFK's limo past the Book Depository Building RIGHT AT LUNCHTIME as well, which meant that most TSBD employees were on their normal lunch breaks at that hour of the day (and would have been even if Kennedy had not been scheduled to drive by the building at noontime).

...Happenstance (and a kook named Lee Oswald, who definitely had murder running through his own veins, as evidenced by the fact he tried to kill General Edwin Walker in April 1963) got John F. Kennedy killed. Not conspiracy.

David Von Pein

January 2008

Revised November 2011

Well, David, I presume this is intended as a provocation here, so well done.

Yet how can you ignore the ballistics evidence that all by itself demonstrates a conspiracy of more than one?

That, aside from dozens of witnesses who testify to shots from behind the picket fence, and even smoke from behind the fence at the moment of shooting -- and the direction of shots into JFK's throat, and the splattering of his brain to the southeast of the Presidential limo?

It's so easy to blame OSWALD for the JFK murder, because the WC insisted on that. Also, OSWALD was no angel.

Yet you must also explain why US Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren said that the TRUTH about the JFK murder could not be revealed for 75 years.

No comment on this?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited April 29, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[David Von Pein]

Yet you must also explain why US Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren said that the TRUTH about the JFK murder could not be revealed for 75 years.

Now this a very good example of why I post at forums like this one. And also a good example of why this "mostly CTer" forum NEEDS an "LNer" around to stamp out the conspiracy myths that never seem to die the death they deserve---like the one above that Paul Trejo just spouted.

I hope you won't mind my quoting Mr. Bugliosi (yet again). For occasions like this one, about a year or so ago I created the following screen capture, which includes a portion of Pages 134 and 135 of Endnotes in Vincent Bugliosi's book "Reclaiming History". These excerpts totally destroy the common myth that conspiracy theorists still cling to even to this day about Chief Justice Earl Warren's "Not in your lifetime" quote, as well as destroying the myth about Warren himself allegedly sealing the Warren Commission records for "75 years". (Click on the link directly above the image to see a much bigger version of the RH book excerpts.) ....

"RECLAIMING HISTORY" BOOK EXCERPTS

Edited April 29, 2015 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

...dozens of witnesses who testify to shots from behind the picket fence...

Here's what really happened with respect to those "Grassy Knoll"

witnesses (almost as assuredly as grass is green):

The "Knoll" earwitnesses quite obviously heard the ONLY shots that

were really fired in the Plaza on 11/22/63--which were the three

that came from Lee Harvey Oswald's rifle on the sixth floor of the

Book Depository--but the acoustics in the Plaza played some tricks on

those witnesses' ears, and they thought that ALL of the shots (from

the TSBD) had come from a point FURTHER WEST in Dealey Plaza, nearer

the Grassy Knoll.

But the KEY is that only FIVE out of 104 witnesses thought shots came

from MULTIPLE DIRECTIONS. And please note that there wasn't a single

witness in the Plaza (that I am aware of anyway) who said they thought

shots came from THREE different places, which is really what you would

expect at least A FEW of the witnesses to hear if Oliver Stone's

"triangulation of crossfire" THREE-SHOOTER assassination plot had

really taken place on November 22nd.

And even if you want to think John McAdams has deliberately chosen

only the witnesses who might help his "Lone Nut" conclusions in the

pie charts [on his website], there are other very similar earwitness

charts available to study, such as the ones [referenced] below:

The HSCA's witness tabulation reveals that a mere 4.0% of the

witnesses thought they heard shots coming from more than one location.

And Stewart Galanor, a conspiracy theorist(!), put together an

interesting "witness" study. Although Galanor inflates the number of

"Knoll" earwitnesses to a larger percentage than it probably is (as

did Josiah Thompson in his study), the key to his chart (once again)

is the amazingly low percentage of people who claimed to hear shots

coming from "TWO DIRECTIONS".

Galanor has a mere 4.6% of the witnesses occupying the "Two Directions"

section of his pie chart (and please note, again, there's not even a slice

of this pie reserved for "Three Directions" at all; so, once again, Oliver

Stone's three-gunmen theory seems to be having a difficult time taking

hold).

And Josiah Thompson, another conspiracy believer, only has 6.3% of the

witnesses falling into the "Two Directions" category.

More here (including graphics, pie charts, and source links):

jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/09/dealey-plaza-earwitnesses.html

----------------

Edited April 29, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Paul Trejo]

So, DVP, all you have is Bugliosi? He merely repeated the Warren Report in all CAPITAL LETTERS. He added nothing at all to our knowledge.

Bugliosi was and is merely a Patriot posing by the American Flag and the Warren Report. Stubborn Loyalty is his only virtue. Reason and logic suffered terribly under his argumentation.

You also cited that 1986 TV show, "On Trial: Lee Harvey Oswald," starring Vincent Bugliosi and some retard hack from the boonies as his sidekick "Defense" Attorney. That was a rigged trial if ever there was one. Not one hard question was ever asked to any of the witnesses -- and the best witnesses were not even called (e.g. Edwin Walker, whose name appeared more than 500 times in the WC volumes).

The bias of the "Lone Nut" theorists is patent.

As for this excerpt from Bugliosi, his main argument was about WHEN Bugliosi made the remark, "Not in your lifetime," i.e. not at the end of the WC proceedings, but at the very beginning -- as if that somehow changes things. It doesn't.

It actually serves to demonstrate that Earl Warren, like J. Edgar Hoover, Allen Dulles and LBJ, all knew that Lee Harvey Oswald was only a part of a larger Conspiracy -- but that the Truth about this Conspiracy was a matter of NATIONAL SECURITY.

There is no other explanation for the Secrecy involved in the JFK murder, e.g. for hiding the X-rays, and medical and autopsy photographs (which would have shown many more wounds and multiple bullet types).

As Bertrand Russell famously asked in 1964, "If Lee Oswald was the lone shooter, and he is now dead, then where is the question of National Security?" Brilliant question.

SOMEBODY was being hidden -- I don't say protected -- but hidden from the public view, for reasons of National Security. My hypothesis is that if the Truth had come out in 1963/1964, there would have been massive riots in the streets of the USA -- in the middle of the Cold War -- which would have been a National Security nightmare.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited April 29, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[David Von Pein]

Choose to believe silly things if you wish, Paul. But don't expect everybody to fall at the feet of people spouting conspiracy nonsense 24/7.

Also .... If Earl Warren's "Not in your lifetime" remark was being uttered by a person who KNEW he was engaging in a massive cover-up from Day 1 of the Warren Commission's existence, do you REALLY think he would have been, in effect, ADVERTISING the cover-up for all the public to hear on Feb. 3, 1964?

Or was the Chief Justice just throwing the conspiracy theorists a little bread crumb of "the truth" on 2/3/64, and he was hoping against hope that the CTers were as dumb as a box of rocks? Similar to the autopsy surgeons, who apparently tossed out just a tiny little crumb of "truth" for the CTers in their autopsy report (a report that is completely phony, according to many conspiracists) when Dr. Humes put the words "somewhat into the occipital" in the report.

Maybe it's time for CTers to stop believing in silly things. Don't you think, Paul?

Edited April 29, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Paul Trejo]

Choose to believe silly things if you wish, Paul. But don't expect everybody to fall at the feet of people spouting conspiracy nonsense 24/7.

Also .... If Earl Warren's "Not in your lifetime" remark was being uttered by a person who KNEW he was engaging in a massive cover-up from Day 1 of the Warren Commission's existence, do you REALLY think he would have been, in effect, ADVERTISING the cover-up for all the public to hear on Feb. 3, 1964?

Or was the Chief Justice just throwing the conspiracy theorists a little bread crumb of "the truth" on 2/3/64, and he was hoping against hope that the CTers were as dumb as a box of rocks? Similar to the autopsy surgeons, who apparently tossed out just a tiny little crumb of "truth" for the CTers in their autopsy report (a report that is completely phony, according to many conspiracists) when Dr. Humes put the words "somewhat into the occipital" in the report.

Maybe it's time for CTers to stop believing in silly things. Don't you think, Paul?

Well, David, I happen to agree with you this far -- most Conspiracy Theories are ridiculous.

There are so many of them -- they can't all be right. So, most of them are just back-assward.

As for Earl Warren's "not in your lifetime" remark, I take this as a historical statement by a Great American who really worried about the future of the USA during the Cold War.

Earl Warren loved America, and it strikes me that he felt truly torn by this National Security decision to LIE to the American People.

Naturally there would be those who would recognize that there was a Conspiracy being covered-up -- but the intent of Earl Warren's statement was that the US Government was not at the heart of the Conspiracy -- even though the US Government was obliged by National Security to keep the Conspiracy Secret.

This tells us, by implication, who the guilty parties really were, IMHO. That is, the right-wing and the DPD were spouting nonsense that Fidel Castro and the USSR were behind the JFK murder. That was the first Conspiracy Theory.

As LBJ said to Senator Russell, "We know they didn't have a damn thing to do with it."

On the other hand, the other alternative cited in 1963 was that Edwin WALKER and the right-wing killed JFK in order to blame Fidel Castro and the USSR, to justify an invasion of Cuba.

However, if the American People had learned that this was really the Truth, they would have rioted in the streets -- right in the middle of the Cold War. If the Minutemen and other radical, armed rightists groups took to the streets to make their voice heard, this could have expanded into a full-scale Civil War (probably close to the lines of the North and South fault-line of the old Civil War). After all, JFK was murdered in the SOUTH.

The only alternative that Hoover (and LBJ and Dulles and Warren) could see was to insist that there was NO CONSPIRACY at all -- despite all the evidence to the contrary. The code-word for "No Conspiracy" was "Lone Nut."

In the interest of National Security, the "Lone Nut" theory was pushed with all the force and authority of the US Government. To oppose it in the 1960's was to be considered a Radical. Only after Watergate was it possible to question the US Government sufficiently to justify the HSCA and its honest conclusion, viz. that "President Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy."

So -- I think that Earl Warren knew that most people would interpret his remark correctly -- that this was a matter of National Security -- and your Government knows best -- to prevent massive riots and bloodshed.

It was -- in fact -- a healthy, honest confession of a Cover-up for the Greater Good. Intelligent Loyal Americans understood this (like Bugliosi) and just put their shoulder to the Conservative Wheel, in the face of a mountain of evidence to the contrary.

The "Lone Nut" theory has nothing to do with honest evidence and reasoning, but with Patriotic Loyalty.

After the HSCA verdict, however, all that was set aside. Still, even in 1979 the Cold War was raging hot, so that the FBI and the CIA could not, in good faith, hand over its Top Secret OSWALD files.

After the USSR fell in 1990, President GWH Bush in 1992 signed the JFK Records Act to release all ARRB records by 26 October 2017. This is more evidence that the Cold War with Communism was the National Security issue that caused the Top Secret status of the Truth of the JFK murder.

Again, David, while most CT's are silly -- there is one that is Rock Solid -- that is the True Story of the JFK murder that will be revealed in 2017.

Finally, as for silly theories, the "Lone Nut" theory is the silliest of them all.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited April 29, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[David Von Pein]

Finally, as for silly theories, the "Lone Nut" theory is the silliest of them all.

And somehow you can say that despite the fact that all of the physical evidence points directly to that conclusion --- i.e., a Lone Nut named Oswald.

Most curious.

But, you can always look forward to that big bombshell "proof" coming in October of 2017. Right?

But I'm still waiting to see the "bombshell" type documents that Jim DiEugenio insists were released by the ARRB in the '90s that Jimmy keeps claiming prove the conspiracy to kill JFK. To date, I've seen none.

Hey, Jim. I know you're lurking out there. Can you post a link at DPF to those key "bombshell" documents released through the ARRB that you love so dearly? I've been anxious to see them. Thanks.

Regards,

--DVP

Edited April 29, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Guest Mark Valenti]

Choose to believe silly things if you wish, Paul. But don't expect everybody to fall at the feet of people spouting conspiracy nonsense 24/7.

Also .... If Earl Warren's "Not in your lifetime" remark was being uttered by a person who KNEW he was engaging in a massive cover-up from Day 1 of the Warren Commission's existence, do you REALLY think he would have been, in effect, ADVERTISING the cover-up for all the public to hear on Feb. 3, 1964?

Or was the Chief Justice just throwing the conspiracy theorists a little bread crumb of "the truth" on 2/3/64, and he was hoping against hope that the CTers were as dumb as a box of rocks? Similar to the autopsy surgeons, who apparently tossed out just a tiny little crumb of "truth" for the CTers in their autopsy report (a report that is completely phony, according to many conspiracists) when Dr. Humes put the words "somewhat into the occipital" in the report.

Maybe it's time for CTers to stop believing in silly things. Don't you think, Paul?

Well, David, I happen to agree with you this far -- most Conspiracy Theories are ridiculous.

There are so many of them -- they can't all be right. So, most of them are just back-assward.

As for Earl Warren's "not in your lifetime" remark, I take this as a historical statement by a Great American who really worried about the future of the USA during the Cold War.

Earl Warren loved America, and it strikes me that he felt truly torn by this National Security decision to LIE to the American People.

Naturally there would be those who would recognize that there was a Conspiracy being covered-up -- but the intent of Earl Warren's statement was that the US Government was not at the heart of the Conspiracy -- even though the US Government was obliged by National Security to keep the Conspiracy Secret.

Funny thing about Earl Warren. His reluctance to do anything freely and openly may have had something to do with this:

From the Tri-City Herald, July 7, 1964

POLICE SEEK THIEF WHO BROKE INTO WARREN APARTMENT

"Police are still looking for the thief who broke into the Sheraton Park Hotel suite of Chief Justice and Mrs. Earl Warren early Sunday. The thief fled when Mrs. Warren awoke. Nothing was reported missing."

At the time, Earl Warren was deep into the investigation of the JFK murder. A break-in would be cause for serious alarm; it's frightening to know that one's privacy and safety could be so easily breached.

In Earl Warren's case, this simple break-in may have reminded him of an earlier, more fatal encounter involving his own father some 25 years earlier.

On May 14, 1938, Earl Warren's father, Methias, 73, was bludgeoned to death by an unknown assailant in his own home. The motive was listed as robbery.

It was immediately rumored that the savage murder was meant as a message to Methias' crimebusting son.

(http://mdeansutton.com/site/other/earl-warren.html)

Can't help but wonder: was the break-in at Warren's Washington hotel room - during his tenure as head of the Warren Commission - meant as another warning?