Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton


      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team

Chris Newton

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Chris Newton

  • Rank
    Super Member
  • Birthday 10/24/1959

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Florida, USA
  • Interests
    solving puzzles

Recent Profile Visitors

8,646 profile views
  1. Ruth - a typewriter - 15 days

    That's an inaccurate statement unless Ruth has "alternative facts" to reveal. By Ruth's testimony he had typed the letter between shortly after breakfast and when they left to go to the Driver's Testing Facility. Marina stated that he had re-typed the envelope several times. Ruth stated that she noticed the draft folded in half on her little desk secretary sometime in the afternoon on Saturday. There is no other mention of Oswald typing anything at any other time. "the weekend" = 2-3 hours max.
  2. They don't seem to be doing any network traffic management. Does anyone else see ridiculous slow d/l rates?
  3. The St. Ruthie and St. Michael "We both know" call

    Wasn't a home on 5th street "unoccupied", (Hosty claimed to have parked his car in front of the unoccupied home)? Could this have been used for surveillance as well?
  4. The Paine Files

    Ruth Paine's WC testimony is as follows: March 21st at 9:15 and 2:25 in Washington, DC before Asst. Counsels Redlich and Jenner March 23rd at 7:30 PM in Irving, Texas before Asst. Counsel Jenner, SS Agent John Joe Howlett and Warren Commission transcriptionist. March 29th at 2:20 PM in Washington, DC before the commission. March 30th at 9:05 AM in Washington, DC before the commission.
  5. That would be almost impossible to determine without an original that you could tilt to see how the different inks reflect light. I think the main reason to put him on a bus is the plausible denial of conspiracy... i.e no one took him there in a privately owned vehicle. So anything that didn't fit well with a "bus trip" timeline got obfuscated or swept under the rug.
  6. The St. Ruthie and St. Michael "We both know" call

    Was this the result of a black bag job (a tap) or was there a physical operator and transcriptionist assigned to monitor that line? It's Paine that mentions an operator not Liebeler. If it was a black bag job then it raises lots of questions about when it was installed. This is why there was probably limited questions and no follow up.
  7. The Paine Files

    Was the Paine garage secure? I think not, in fact, in a "real" trial a real defense lawyer could make a good argument that all evidence located there should have been tossed.
  8. It's not clear if the "Kostikov" letter, sent by LHO to the Russian embassy, was intercepted because of it's destination or because it was sent by LHO. Has it been determined if HTLINGUAL targeted LHO directly or did the operation simply include all mail sent "to" and "from" the USSR, as well? If the operation targeted LHO then it's ridiculous to think it would not have targeted any PO Box he established in his true name. Remember that it was the "change of address" notice that triggered the FBI in New Orleans to contact Dallas to re-locate LHO in OCT. '63. That event would support the idea that LHO himself was the target of mail surveillance. interesting HSCA claim: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=30142&relPageId=3
  9. The latest from Ruth Paine

    One of the things that doesn't sit right with me is the total nonchalance of both Paines in regards to the FBI visits of early November (and late Oct. if you want to believe Marina and the SS). I'd think that being visited by the FBI would be a big deal, even today. If the visit had nothing to do with me and they were just asking about someone I knew, I'd still be pretty shook up over it. I know I'd be pretty nervous if the same person they were looking for had a bunch of stuff in my garage and I decided not to mention that fact. Oh shoot... they asked where he lived and I forgot to give them his phone number. Four days later they're back, two of them this time, asking the same old questions... I forgot about that all stuff again. drat. Then to get dragged downtown by the Sheriff and the DPD in a squad car because that guy that the FBI was out to my place looking for... he shot POTUS! Don't ask me why I didn't mention the letter I stole from the alleged killer to them. It slipped my mind too.
  10. Ron -you can find the story in both Hosty's and RP's WC testimony and Hosty's HSCA, as well. Apparently, if you read FBI Agent Bardwell Odem's testimony, Hosty committed a host of FBI violations, (excuse the pun), when he showed up at Ruth's alone. On Nov. 5th, he brought an agent-in-training over there with him and did not go inside. I think we've successfully hijacked the thread, sorry. For the record, I think the Carcano 91theory unlikely. Highly unlikely. The only detail that gives me pause is the earlier reported discrepancies , (Probe maybe?), found between photos of the serial number on the rifle.
  11. I think there's much more to this. There was a concerted effort by all involved to distance themselves from any foreknowledge. My own suspicions at this time could include potentially embarrassing revelations about who knew what prior to 11/22/63. No one can claim that anything stored in that garage was 'secure'. When James P Hosty allegedly visited Ruth Paine, alone, on Nov. 1st and "shot the breeze" with Ruth while sitting on the couch in the living room., did Ruth mention that all Oswald's stuff was in the garage? Why the hell not? Of course, we have their testimony that they didn't and just because something defies logic doesn't mean it's untrue.
  12. It's my assumption that the boat is the one pictured in my post above. Simply because it's a boat in the garage and the only boat we have any evidence of, despite this evidence being "after the fact". The boat was on the rack according to Ruth's testimony here: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=39&relPageId=17&search=boat and here: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=39&relPageId=27&search=boat If "the boat" testified to was not hung from the ceiling of the garage in the WC garage photo and/or it was not the sailfish in the photo, what happened to it? It's interesting that Michael doesn't mention the boat. If I was a really suspicious person I might think his entire explanation is a lie and he had nothing to do with unloading the car since he doesn't mention the boat at all. Curious. I do not think that everything that Ruth Paine testified to was a lie... but I think her entire testimony should be struck, if any part of it turns out to be perjury. I think once you show part of it to be untrue then it's dangerous to "cherry pick" the rest of it. Furthermore, I think It can be shown that Ruth perjured herself at least three times both in the testimony as to the provenance of the Oswald draft of the "Kostin" Letter and subsequently in testimony designed to undermine the "first responder's" testimonies about their observations (RE: the Paine home) on 11/22/1963 [because their statements conflicted with the story that Ruth Paine was now telling.] This undermining was abetted by the WC in their lines of questioning and their alteration of the Paine home floor plan that is an extant WC exhibit (CE 430).
  13. Outside of the main argument to this thread (in which I agree with you)... ...I think your standing on very swampy ground when you cite any part of Ruth Paine's testimony to support a theory. In another recent thread, in this forum, I've found some serious inconsistencies, perjurious testimony and indications of probable collusion to alter evidence with the WC and Counsel Jenner. Ruth testimony of how her car was unloaded is equally vague. Note what appears to be a "sailfish" type sailboat in the garage. In the quoted portion above, Ruth is very evasive as to how her station wagon was unloaded and it's never explained who did it. Ruth says she "helped". Marina was 8+ months pregnant. Trivia: There was a sailboat strapped to the car's roof rack. I think it can be seen, faintly, attached to the ceiling in the WC photo taken of the garage interior. Who took the sailboat off the roof rack of the car and put it up there? Not very pregnant Ruth and Marina. https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=39&relPageId=27&search=boat Why didn't MR. JENNER ask her who else unloaded the car?
  14. Where's Ruth's couch?

    No problem Tom. I'm bust too so understood. No rush, it might not be anything at all. I don't know what the fate of the dictionary is or even if there are samples of the pages in question. There were few, (if any), publications in evidence that have pages reproduced that were also deemed, (by the WC), to be of doubtful importance. I'll see if I can find anything.
  15. New Book from Larry Hancock

    I, for one, appreciate the heads up. Surprise Attack was my favorite recent, (in the last year or so), non-fiction read. I'll be picking up a copy of this one. Fascinating subject.