Jump to content
The Education Forum
David Von Pein

Did Lee Harvey Oswald Order The Rifle? The Answer Is Yes

Recommended Posts

DEBUNKING THE "OSWALD NEVER ORDERED THE RIFLE" MYTH....

======================

Here's a real doozy of a conspiracy myth:

Lee Harvey Oswald never ordered any rifle at all from Klein's Sporting Goods in March of 1963.

Now, given the overwhelming evidence in this case that proves Lee Oswald definitely did order the rifle that ultimately ended up being the weapon that killed John F. Kennedy, the above theory/myth is totally preposterous and should be downright embarrassing to any conspiracy theorist who suggests such a thing.

And it's certainly not a new allegation either. In one of the first books ever written on the JFK assassination in 1966, "Rush To Judgment", lawyer and first-generation Warren Commission critic Mark Lane strongly suggested that there could have been something sinister going on with respect to the rifle and the way it was ordered through the mail. Lane also seemed to suggest the possibility that Oswald and A.J. Hidell (Oswald's alias) just might have been two different persons, which is an utterly implausible notion. Here's what Lane said in his book:

"It is of course possible that Oswald or Hidell or someone else ordered a rifle from the February issue of The American Rifleman and that Klein's sent a different but similar weapon by mistake. Without a suitable explanation, however, the chain of evidence relating Oswald, or Hidell, to the weapon appears damaged. The Commission failed to explore this possibility and thereby closed its mind to an important aspect of the investigation." -- Page 138 of "Rush To Judgment"

But, in reality, the "chain of evidence relating Oswald to the weapon" is not "damaged" at all, because the trail of evidence that tells any reasonable person that Mannlicher-Carcano rifle #C2766 (Commission Exhibit 139) was ordered, paid for, and possessed by Lee Harvey Oswald (aka "A. Hidell") is so extensive and complete and ironclad that it would take a person who has his head completely buried in conspiracy sand to believe that Oswald did not receive that exact rifle in the mail in late March 1963.


THE RIFLE FACTS:

1.) It has been proven, beyond all reasonable doubt, that Lee Harvey Oswald did, in fact, order a mail-order rifle from Klein's Sporting Goods Company in Chicago in March of 1963. The handwriting on all of the documents connected with the Klein's transaction is that of Oswald's, which proves beyond all doubt that it was Oswald (and no other person) who ordered and paid for Carcano rifle #C2766 that was shipped to Oswald/Hidell by Klein's in March 1963 [Warren Report, p.118-122]. (But, of course, many conspiracy buffs no longer think any handwriting analysis is worth a hill of beans. Which would mean that all of the various handwriting experts who testified over the years that it was positively Oswald's writing on the multiple documents associated with the rifle purchase must have all been dead wrong--or they all simply lied.)


2.) Regardless of the fact that Oswald technically did order a 36-inch Italian carbine, per the words written in the February 1963 American Rifleman magazine ad that Oswald used to order the rifle (pictured below), Klein's Sporting Goods in Chicago shipped a 40-inch rifle with serial number C2766 on it to "A. Hidell" on March 20, 1963.


Kleins-Rifle-Ad-February-1963.jpg


The internal paperwork generated by Klein's at the time in March of 1963 (see Waldman Exhibit No. 7 and the Warren Commission testimony of William J. Waldman, beginning at 7 H 360) confirms that Oswald/"Hidell" was shipped an Italian 6.5mm rifle with that exact serial number on it ("C2766").


Waldman-Exhibit-7.jpg


The likely explanation for why Oswald received a 40-inch rifle instead of the 36-inch model that he ordered via the Klein's mail-order coupon is pretty simple and logical, and it is this: Klein's very likely ran out of the 36-inch model shortly before receiving Oswald's order, and hence shipped a very similar (but slightly lengthier) gun instead.

In August 2010, Gary Mack of the Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza provided this writer with some detailed information concerning the advertisements that Klein's was running in American Rifleman magazine throughout the calendar year of 1963. Mr. Mack's research revealed the fact that the February '63 Klein's ad was very likely the last time during the year 1963 that Klein's advertised the 36-inch Italian carbine. All other ads for that year that Mack was able to find indicate that the 40-inch rifle was being advertised. Here's the breakdown of the Klein's ads for that year in American Rifleman magazine:

Jan 63 -- p. 61 -- 36-inch 6.5 Italian Carbine -- $12.88 -- $19.95 (with scope)

Feb 63 -- p. 65 -- Same ad as above

Mar 63 -- No ad

Apr 63 -- p. 55 -- 40-inch 6.5 Italian Carbine -- $12.88 -- $19.95 (with scope)

May 63 -- Missing pp. 63-66

Jun 63 -- p. 59 -- 40-inch 6.5 Italian Carbine -- $12.88 -- $19.95 (with scope)

Jul 63 -- p. 67 -- 40-inch 6.5 Italian Carbine -- $12.78 -- $19.95 (with scope)

Aug 63 -- p. 79 -- Same ad as above

Sep 63 -- p. 89 -- Same ad as above

Oct 63 -- p. 85 -- Same ad as above

Nov 63 -- No ad

Dec 63 -- No ad


[source: E-mail to David Von Pein from Gary Mack, August 18, 2010.]

In that same e-mail, Gary Mack went on to say this:

"Oswald ordered the 36-inch rifle but, probably due to Klein's running out of stock, he received the 40-inch model instead. The price remained the same, so Klein's may have just sent him the newly available model instead. They would certainly accept a return if he didn't want it.

The [sixth Floor] Museum's copy of the May 1963 issue is missing four pages and, since Klein's ads normally ran in the back half of the magazine, it was likely on one of those pages. But as you can see, the ad for the months before and after May showed the exact same 40-inch rifle.

I don't know when the American Rifleman normally went to press, but I would think they'd want the new issue to appear on the newsstands and in subscribers
' mailboxes at or shortly before the beginning of each month. That would mean all ad copy must be ready and in the hands of the publisher at least 30 days ahead of time, maybe more.

If Klein's ran out of 36-inch rifles in January, they might not even have enough time to get a corrected ad in by the March deadline. Maybe that's why there was no ad in the March issue. Perhaps Klein's sold out of the Carcano and other weapons and just couldn't update their new ad before the deadline."



3.) A palmprint belonging to that of Lee Harvey Oswald was discovered on a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle with the serial number C2766 on it after the gun was found on the sixth floor of the Book Depository on November 22, 1963.

Conspiracy theorists can gripe and moan about how this palmprint of Oswald's never really existed at all, but we're still left with the official record in this case, and that record shows us that a palmprint of Oswald's was, in fact, lifted off of rifle C2766 by Dallas Police Lieutenant J.C. Day on 11/22/63, shortly before the weapon was turned over to the FBI late that night [see 4 H 261 and 4 H 24 and this 11/23/63 FBI memo].


4.) In the early 1990s, fingerprint expert Vincent Scalice, by utilizing different methods of fingerprint photo comparison, was able to find well over a dozen points of identity linking the previously unidentified fingerprints on the trigger housing of the C2766 Carcano rifle to Lee Harvey Oswald's comparison prints. [see Part 3 of the 1993 PBS-TV documentary, "Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?"]

To any reasonable person who evaluates this evidence concerning the fingerprints found near the rifle's trigger, this shows that it's very likely that the last person who touched rifle C2766 prior to its being found on the sixth floor of the Book Depository was Lee Harvey Oswald.

5.) Just days after Klein's shipped rifle C2766 to Oswald/Hidell, Lee Oswald asked his wife, Marina, to take some pictures of him in the backyard of their small Neely Street apartment in Dallas [1 H 15-16].

As near as can be determined, those backyard pictures were taken by Marina Oswald on March 31, 1963. Klein's shipped the rifle to Oswald/Hidell on March 20th. So the timing is just about perfect in that regard. In other words, there was time for the rifle to reach Oswald's Dallas post office box in that 11-day interim.

Oswald-Backyard-Photos.jpg


6.) Photographic experts for the House Select Committee on Assassinations determined that the rifle that Oswald is holding in the backyard photos is "the same weapon" [6 HSCA 66] that was found by police on the sixth floor of the Book Depository on November 22, 1963.

The HSCA determined, therefore, that the rifle being held by Lee Harvey Oswald in the backyard photographs was, in fact, the very same rifle that was determined to be the weapon used to assassinate John F. Kennedy:

"A comparison of identifying marks that exist on the rifle as shown in photographs today with marks shown on the rifle in photographs taken in 1963 indicates both that the rifle in the Archives is the same weapon that Oswald is shown holding in the backyard picture and the same weapon, found by Dallas police, that appears in various postassassination photographs." [6 HSCA 66]


Now, given all of the above evidence (plus adding in just a small amount of common sense to go with it), can any reasonable person really come to a conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald did not own and possess Mannlicher-Carcano rifle #C2766 in the year 1963?

I'll answer that last question myself -- No, they cannot.

Author Vincent Bugliosi made an excellent observation about some conspiracy theorists when he said this in his book "Reclaiming History", which is a quote that fits in nicely when discussing the topic of Oswald's rifle purchase:

"The conspiracy community regularly seizes on one slip of the tongue, misunderstanding, or slight discrepancy to defeat twenty pieces of solid evidence; ...treats rumors, even questions, as the equivalent of proof; leaps from the most minuscule of discoveries to the grandest of conclusions; and insists that the failure to explain everything perfectly negates all that is explained."

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

For additional discussions concerning Oswald's rifle purchase and the controversy surrounding the documents related to that gun purchase, check out the Internet weblinks located HERE and HERE.

And also see pages 62-69 of "Beyond Reasonable Doubt: The Warren Report And Lee Harvey Oswald's Guilt And Motive 50 Years On".

David Von Pein
August 2010
February 2013
December 2014

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The likely explanation for why Oswald received a 40-inch rifle instead of the 36-inch model that he ordered via the Klein's mail-order coupon is pretty simple and logical, and it is this: Klein's very likely ran out of the 36-inch model shortly before receiving Oswald's order, and hence shipped a very similar (but slightly lengthier) gun instead.

And all the FBI needed to do was to show any other single order for C20-T750 where any one of their 40" serial #'s was shipped in it's stead...

But that never happened so your repeated "LIKELY" declaration is just that - a guess without evidence or corroboration.

There are 99 other rifles on those 10 slips - you mean to tell me they could not find a single order for any one of these rifles to simply prove the point?

They had the microfilm of hundreds of orders and Kleins had microfilm of their other orders - surely it would be a simple thing to find a C20-T750 order where a 40" FC rifle was "substituted".

Dave, please produce the evidence that Rupp ever removed those 10 cartons of 100 rifles from Harborside... for this Feb 1963 shipment

Rupp%20removes%20rifles%20from%20Harbors

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Either Marina's husband ordered the alleged murder weapon or someone went to lengths to make it appear he did.

If someone did go to such lengths, what did that involve? Answer: [1] forging Oswald's' handwriting, [2] fabricating Waldman Exhibit 7, [3] connecting Oswald to the alias Hidell. I have to say, all of this could have been accomplished pretty easily by individuals who were trained in such matters.

The back yard photos don't prove Oswald ordered any rifle. If the BYP are genuine, all they establish is that he possessed, when the BYP were taken, a rifle. A rifle, some argue, is different in certain ways from the alleged murder weapon.

I say reasonable doubt exists that Oswald ordered the alleged murder weapon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GOLLY IF ABC SAYS ITS SO >>>>>>>>>>> HOW CAN WE DISAGREE ??
============================================
wiki
WBKB ABC affilliated
-
In 1950, WFAA switched its primary affiliation to NBC, and also affiliated with ABC on a secondary basis. DuMont shut down in 1955 after various issues that arose from its relations with Paramount;[4] WFAA lost its NBC affiliation on September 1, 1957 when WBAP-TV boosted its signal to cover Dallas; Belo had attempted to get an exclusive NBC affiliation first, but it was awarded to WBAP-TV, leaving WFAA as an exclusive ABC affiliate.
=============================================================================
The Power Elite in Dallas Takes Charge

=
By Jim DiEugenio
November 28, 2012
-
http://www.ctka.net/2012/power_elite_50th.html
-
On November 18th, Hugh Aynesworth clocked in with his annual Kennedy assassination cover up article in the only daily circulation paper in Dallas, The Dallas Morning News. In this article the longtime CIA-FBI asset did two things. He first took his usual slam at the critics of the Warren Commission. Secondly, with help from Larry Dunkel aka Gary Mack, he did protective cover for his protégé and apparent successor in the local cover up, Dave Perry.
To understand who Perry is--and how bad he is--one needs to refer to the fine Bob Fox article on this web site. (Click here for that article see link) By reading that essay one can see that Perry is not to be trusted in his research. As Fox concluded, his work in the instance of the Mary Bledsoe arrest report was “so incomplete, so one-sided, so agenda-driven as to be misleading.” And this is a very important instance. Why? Because a hidden part of Perry’s agenda in this piece was to conceal just how bad a witness Mary Bledsoe really was. Bledsoe was the person that the Warren Commission relied upon in order to place Oswald on a bus after the assassination. In her masterly book, Accessories After the Fact, Sylvia Meagher first began to point out a few of the many problems with her testimony about Oswald being on the bus. In 2012, through the additional work of Joe Backes, Rodger Remington, Pat Speer, and Lee Farley, the nagging stream of doubt about Bledsoe has now turned into a raging river. To the point that today, when presented with all the problems with her testimony, most objective people have serious doubts that Oswald was ever on that bus—or that Bledsoe was on it when she said she was. In other words, with all the evidence we have today, it looks like Bledsoe was suborned, perhaps by Secret Service agent Forrest Sorrels. (Sorrels advised her to bring notes to her Warren Commission appearance. See James Folliard’s, “The Bledsoe Bust”, The Fourth Decade, Vol. 2, No. 1, p. 32.)
For what reason would such an act occur? As Fox states in his piece, to discredit the testimony of Roger Craig. Craig testified that, after the assassination, he saw a man running down the embankment on Elm Street. As he did so, there was a light green Rambler station wagon driving slowly west on Elm. The driver was dark complected in appearance. He was leaning to his right and looking at this man who was running down the embankment. The running man jumped into the Rambler and the car sped away from the scene. Later, when Oswald was arrested and placed in custody at the police station, Craig saw him. He told Captain Fritz that he was the man who jumped into the Rambler. (WC Vol. 19, p. 524) Marvin Robinson, who said he saw the same thing, corroborated Craig’s testimony very closely. (Josiah Thompson, Six Seconds in Dallas, p. 242)
The Commission could not tolerate this testimony. At the least, it seemed to indicate that there was an Oswald double at the scene. And that would have been impossible to explain unless there was a plot unfolding. As Fox noted in his important essay, as the years have gone on and the Commission cover up has been torn to tatters, the Craig-Robinson version has been bolstered by researchers like John Armstrong and Anna Marie Kuhns Walko. While Bledsoe’s story has been shot so full of holes that she now stands with the likes of Commission witnesses Helen Markham and Howard Brennan as models of untrustworthy testimony. As Fox also notes, somehow, in all of his writing related to Bledsoe, Perry managed to ignore all of the many problems with her testimony. Which, with all we know today, seems impossible. But it’s true.
It’s natural that Aynesworth would write this article about Perry since he set the standard for carrying water for the Commission. (Click here to see how.) And everyone who knows anything about the Kennedy case understands that fact. Only the editors at the Morning News can act as if they do not know that Aynesworth has was long ago exposed as an FBI asset and an applicant for the CIA. Therefore, only Hugh Aynesworth could call Perry a ‘One-man truth squad’. In fact, as Fox notes, Perry much more resembles Lt. Frank Drebin from The Naked Gun, telling spectators at an exploding warehouse, “Nothing to see here.” All we need to know about Perry is the he associates himself with a sell out like Aynesworth to the point of letting him write something about him. For the last thing that interests Perry or Aynesworth about the JFK case is the truth. And this extends way back to 1964. For that is when Aynesworth actually began his career of upholding the Warren Commission. Even before the Warren Report was published. In 1964, he wanted the Commission to portray Oswald as trying to shoot Richard Nixon. Even when Nixon was not in Dallas! (James DiEugenio, Destiny Betrayed, Second Edition, p. 250) Aynesworth got this story from Marina Oswald, who he was clearly manipulating at the time. Aynesworth also was actively involved in helping Kennedy murder suspect Sergio Arcacha Smith avoid questioning by Jim Garrison’s assistant, Jim Alcock. (ibid, p. 253)
On the other hand, Aynesworth has never admitted in public as to what the declassified record reveals: That he was in bed with both the FBI and the CIA while dealing with the Kennedy case. Like the late Jim Phelan, he has actually tried to deny this fact. Further, he has never written anything derogatory about the Commission itself. Even about the preposterous Magic Bullet. So when someone like Aynesworth praises someone like Perry, that tells you all one needs to know about Dave Perry.
What does Aynesworth praise Perry for? If you can believe it, for going after the likes of Judy Baker and Ricky White. The article also spends many pages on Madeleine Brown. Who has also been critiqued on this site. (See here ) The author then lets Perry add that such trickery proves a “disservice to those who wish to get to the truth of this tragic event.” Wisely, Aynesworth does not add the following fact: for him the truth is that Oswald killed Kennedy. This would mean he would then have to explain the Magic Bullet. Which he does not want to do. Or even admit to.
Towards the end Aynesworth takes a stab at Oliver Stone’s film, JFK by referencing a list by Perry called “Rashomon to the Extreme.” Yet, the list has little or nothing to do with that film. It is supposed to be a compendium of all the accused assassins of Kennedy. Except its not. For instance Perry includes Joseph Milteer and attributes his name to Bob Groden. But Groden has not said Milteer was a shooter. He has just said he thinks Milteer was in Dealey Plaza. And from his alleged position, along Houston Street in a large throng, he could not have fired without being 1.) Caught on camera, and 2.) Apprehended.
The real role of Dave Perry has been to obfuscate the true facts of the Kennedy assassination. Namely that President Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy and the Commission used some dubious witnesses to conceal that fact. Two of them being Bledsoe and Wesley Frazier. The latter has been a special assignment for, first Aynesworth, and now Perry. Today, Perry has become Frazier’s chaperone.
II
At the very end of the article, Aynesworth predictably brings up Gary Mack and the Sixth Floor Museum. And that brings us to the larger focus of this pitiful piece of reportage. And make no mistake, the Dallas Morning News is an integral part what is going on in Dallas. Or why else would they allow the silly and irrelevant meanderings of Aynesworth to appear in this day and age. In my article “How Gary Mack Became Dan Rather”, I outlined the relationship between these three men in detail. (Click here for that piece) But I also outlined the origins behind The Sixth Floor Museum. Namely that it was a creation of the Dallas power structure who, at one time, wanted to raze the building in order to wipe out the memory of JFK’s assassination altogether.
Instead, they created a monument to the Warren Commission. In the two bookstores the Sixth Floor maintains, one will not see any critiques of the Commission. In fact, among the many books and films sold within, one will only see two that can be considered contra the official story: the DVD version of JFK, and John Kelin’s Praise from a Future Generation. (The latter is not really a critique of the Commission. It traces the relationships that began the critical movement against the Warren Report.) This is in keeping with the wishes of the upper classes, which helped raise the money to finance the institution in the first place. For them, it was embarrassing to try and explain how President Kennedy, Officer J. D. Tippit , and then Lee Harvey Oswald were all killed in the space of 48 hours. The last while he was literally in the arms of the Dallas Police. And how could one explain how Jack Ruby got into the basement of the Dallas Police headquarters in order to kill Oswald? Did he have help getting there? The House Select Committee on Assassinations seemed to think so. And if that was the case, was it the police themselves who helped set up the alleged assassin to be killed? That was a truth too terrible for the upper crust to take. The Sixth Floor Museum is their attempt to conceal all that. And Gary Mack, with his buddy Dave Perry, are now the two most active citizens in Dallas plying the roots of the cover up.
This year, on the 30th of May, Aynesworth’s flagship, The Dallas Morning News, announced the formation of a “high-powered committee of Dallas philanthropists and community leaders” to begin “the sensitive job of planning events to commemorate the 50th anniversary of President John F. Kennedy’s assassination.” Mayor Mike Rawlings was the man who formed this committee. Rawlings is virtually a lifelong corporate denizen who has been the CEO of three companies, including Pizza Hut. On a radio interview he did recently for Lite FM 103.7 in Dallas, he said that since the 50th anniversary was going to be a huge international event, Dallas had to get out in front of the curve to be sure the city is represented in the right way. The world would be looking at Dallas, and the city had to be careful in order to control the face of Dallas and present it in the right way. Therefore, they had to be careful to celebrate only the life and achievements of John F. Kennedy. He then went on to praise the work of The Sixth Floor Museum as setting the right example in this regard. He described Dallas as a city of opportunity and growth. Incredibly, he then tried to equate this with Kennedy’s vision of a New Frontier. That previously mentioned May article also contained a revealing sentence about the formation of the committee, “In the immediate aftermath of the assassination, much of the world appeared to be looking for a scapegoat. Civic leaders believed the city of Dallas was miscast in the role of villain.” The article then says that city leaders “historically avoided planning any events around the anniversaries because of the lingering stain on the city. The committee’s formation indicates that the 50th anniversary…will be different.”
Rawlings was sure to appoint people to the committee like Lindalyn Adams, who was also involved with the creation of The Sixth Floor Museum. Another revealing choice is that of Ken Menges, an attorney and board chairman of The Sixth Floor Museum. The article went on to say that the committee’s makeup promised multi-ethnic events, spiritual observations, and artistic presentations. This crossover seems to suggest that the permit that The Sixth Floor was granted to take hold of Dealey Plaza for one week—from November 18-24-- was not done on its own. To pull off a permit that all encompassing, one would seem to need help. It now appears that City Hall was a part of that help.
On that radio interview, Rawlings stated some of his ideas for the November 22, 2013 commemoration. At 12:30 he said there would be a U.S. Navy flyover, a choir singing, and historian David McCullough speaking. The choice of the last is also revealing. As McCullough is Tom Hanks favorite historian. Hanks made a mini-series out of his book on John Adams. And McCullough has now succeeded the late Stephen Ambrose as the preeminent Establishment Historian. In other words, he can be relied upon not to rock any boats or disturb anyone’s sensibilities. Rawlings also said that this would be a ticketed event. Apparently, if you have no tickets, you will not get to attend. Further, that it would definitely be in Dealey Plaza.
All of this is a bit disturbing to anyone who is actually interested in not just the life, but also the puzzling circumstances surrounding the death of President Kennedy. First of all, why was it necessary to place a memorial to his life and achievements in Dealey Plaza? Dallas constructed a memorial to Kennedy a few blocks away from Dealey Plaza, near the Adolphus Hotel decades ago. If there was to be no discussion of his death, why not hold this event there? Second, why is this a ticketed event? And how will the tickets be allotted? Will one have to pay to get to see the Establishment Historian pontificate on something he knows little about? That is, the career and presidency of John F. Kennedy. Finally, if this is the main event, why was it necessary for them—through The Sixth Floor—to get a permit that lasts a week? What Rawlings is describing will last maybe an hour or two. In other words, not even the whole day, let alone the night, or the previous evening. In a democratic form of government, about an issue that is important to so many people, these kinds of questions are not ignored. If only to dispel the idea that Rawlings, his committee, and The Sixth Floor, have some kind of hidden agenda at work.
Many people, including myself, suspect that this may well be the case. Especially considering the length of the permit. If no one else is allowed to attain such a permit, then the conclusion would be that this was a preemptive move. One that was done in an effort at prior restraint. The objective being to cut off anyone else from being in Dealey Plaza to bring up questions about the one thing these people do not want discussed. Namely, the bizarre circumstances surrounding the murder of President Kennedy. And also why Dallas, the state of Texas and the government of the USA have never been able to deal with them in an honest way.
III
On November 19th the Dallas Morning News again chimed in on this issue. David Flick wrote that attendance to the event will be restricted to VIPs. Considering the make up of this committee one can imagine who those people will be. Robert Groden will not be on the list. And his article goes on to explain why he won’t be. Flick writes that because there had been no official program in other years, the plaza was “dominated by conspiracy theorists, and sometimes simply by attention seekers….” Flick then goes on to state that both city and museum officials had been concerned for months about the image of Dallas to be presented next year, when it will likely get international attention. Rawlings said, “Dallas has been somewhat defined by the events of that day. We will have a chance to present what Dallas is.” Flick then writes that, “Last year, museum officials secured a permit for Dealey Plaza during the anniversary week, a permit since taken over by city leaders.” So it appears that The Sixth Floor’s action was simply done as an appendage to Rawlings and the Power Elite. Which, of course, is what the Sixth Floor has been since its creation.
Which brings us to Judith Garrett Segura. As Joe Backes pointed out to me, the so-called restoration of Dealey Plaza now seems a part of this overall plan. As The Dallas Morning News reported in October 2012, all the rather expensive repairs to the plaza should be completed by the summer of next year. Well before the 50th anniversary of Kennedy’s death. That article then said the following: “Judith Garrett Segura, a historian and former president of the Belo Foundation, has led the effort to raise funds to restore the plaza.” The article then went on to say that 350,00 dollars of the 2 million dollar cost of the restoration came from the descendants and legacy companies of the plaza’s namesake, George Bannerman Dealey. The legacy companies include the A. H. Belo Corporation.
What is the Belo Corporation that Segura once wrote a book about? The Belo Corporation is the parent company of the Dallas Morning News. A. H. Belo was born in North Carolina and fought for the confederacy in the Civil War. He then moved to Texas and was part owner in a couple of Houston area newspapers. After his partner died, he became sole owner and named his business A. H. Belo and Co. Looking to expand, Belo sent George Bannerman Dealey to Dallas to try and establish a paper in that city. Thus the efforts of Belo and Dealey gave birth to the Dallas Morning News. Which became part of Belo’s growing newspaper dominion. After Belo died, Dealey became president of the company. He renamed it A. H. Belo Corporation. Dealey was once publisher of the newspaper and Dealey Plaza is named after him. Dealey began an expansion of Belo. In the 1930’s the Belo owned radio station WFAA-AM boosted its power to 50,000 watts, becoming the first “super station” in the southwest. In 1950, after Dealey’s death, Belo purchased Dallas TV station KBTV and renamed it WFAA-TV. Today the ABC affiliate is the leading station in Dallas, and the flagship of Belo’s TV group. As Segura wrote in her 2008 book, simply titled Belo, at the turn of the century, Belo owned four daily newspapers, twenty-six television and cable stations, and over thirty interactive web sites. In fact, on this project, Segura now appears to be working for the Belo Foundation out of the Belo Building in Dallas. Belo’s flagship newspaper is still the Dallas Morning News.
From Hugh Aynesworth, to Gary Mack and the Sixth Floor, to Rawlings and Belo, we have now come full circle in our exposure of how the Power Elite in Dallas plan on putting a lid on the 50th anniversary of John F. Kennedy’s death. At the 30th anniversary, CTKA secured a permit rather easily for the evening of the 21st. Reverend Steve Jones began with a religious invocation. Speakers like John Newman, Marina Oswald, Gaeton Fonzi and Cyril Wecht all gave powerful and dignified speeches commemorating the murder of President Kennedy. At midnight, four hundred listeners assembled in front of the speakers with candles held in front of them. It was a memorable, incandescent moment that showed just what was missing from The Sixth Floor Museum. And it is this kind of thing, under the klieg lights of the national media, that Rawlings has been told to avoid at all costs.
In fact, the Dallas Morning News and Belo Corporation gave him their official imprimatur with an editorial on November 20th. They blessed his plan as having the “right ingredients”. They even praised his exclusive list of VIPs to be in attendance. They should, since Rawlings said people started asking him about this subject almost two years ago. Therefore it appears these same people gave him the exclusive and anti-democratic idea in the first place. After all they endorsed him for mayor. Its hard to win a mayor’s race in a one newspaper town without that one newspaper on your side. Rawlings wasn’t going to risk running again without Belo behind him.

Edited by Steven Gaal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steven,

What does your above post have to do with the topic? Did you read it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steven,

What does your above post have to do with the topic? Did you read it? // BECKETT

========================================================================

Did you see post # 2 ??

DVP uses an ABC affiliate for rifle coverup. 50 Years later ABC had big cover up documentary. (don't you remember ? )

I got Harvey and Lee early on and Armstrong's work on the ordering of the rifle (part quoted by Joseph's ) is a highlight.

GAAL

Edited by Steven Gaal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I saw post 2, and I still don't think the subject in your post has much to do with the thread topic. JMHO.

(BTW,I've had H&L for years,too. Got it from Shelby Della Rosa ages ago.).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Per ABC affiliate video post # 2

Gave the implication is that he got a scoped rifle. Per Armstrong there is no proof of LHO ordering a rifle and very poor made up proof of a scoped one. (they parsed their words "rifle of this type")

So many problems with AH Belo .Fake (?) seizure man taking away DP ambulance worked for ABC affiliate AH Belo.

Gaal

Edited by Steven Gaal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Either Marina's husband ordered the alleged murder weapon or someone went to lengths to make it appear he did.

If someone did go to such lengths, what did that involve? Answer: [1] forging Oswald's' handwriting, [2] fabricating Waldman Exhibit 7, [3] connecting Oswald to the alias Hidell. I have to say, all of this could have been accomplished pretty easily by individuals who were trained in such matters.

The back yard photos don't prove Oswald ordered any rifle. If the BYP are genuine, all they establish is that he possessed, when the BYP were taken, a rifle. A rifle, some argue, is different in certain ways from the alleged murder weapon.

I say reasonable doubt exists that Oswald ordered the alleged murder weapon.

And I say you are wrong and that absolutely not a SHRED of a doubt exists regarding Oswald's rifle purchase. You, Jon, are thumbing your nose at all of the corroborative items I mentioned earlier.

The evidence shows that Lee Oswald definitely DID order a rifle from Klein's, with Klein's then shipping Rifle C2766 to Oswald ("Hidell") on 3/20/63. That fact is proven in Waldman Exhibit 7. And that document was dug out of the Klein's files in Chicago on the morning of 11/23/63. So if the FBI (or whoever) was framing Oswald with a "fake" Waldman #7, they sure did take action in a hurry to start framing the sap named Lee.

Also....

Before someone brings this up, I'll pre-empt the defense's (CTers') argument about the missing bank stamps on the back of the $21.45 money order that Oswald mailed to Klein's.....

That "No Stamps" argument, it seems to me, is a weak one. Why? Because we know (and can prove via Waldman 7 AND William Waldman's testimony) that Klein's in Chicago positively DID have that $21.45 money order in their hands on March 13, 1963 (the date stamped at the top of Waldman 7) because of the mere EXISTENCE of that document--Waldman Exhibit No. 7....

WaldmanExhibitNo7.jpg

The above document provides the proof that two things occurred:

1.) Klein's received an order for a rifle from a certain "A. Hidell" in March of '63.

2.) In connection with the order from "A. Hidell" mentioned in #1, Klein's received PAYMENT VIA MONEY ORDER in the amount of $21.45 (the exact same amount that would be needed for a Klein's customer to purchase the Italian carbine with the scope via the Klein's magazine ads).

Number 2 above is confirmed on Waldman 7 via the written-in amount "$21.45" and the initials "M.O." that appear in the box marked "Total Amount Enclosed".

Larger view of Waldman Exhibit 7:

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0364a.htm

So we KNOW from Waldman 7 that Klein's did receive a mail-order coupon and a money order in the amount of 21 dollars and 45 cents from Oswald/Hidell and we know that Klein's acted upon receiving that order form by generating Waldman #7 and then mailing a rifle with the serial number C2766 on it to P.O. Box 2915 in Dallas (Oswald's box, of course) seven days later on March 20th.

So, in order for the "No Bank Stamps = The Money Order Is A Fake" argument to be an accurate one, we'd have to completely ignore the two relevant facts above. So I'd say to CTers --- Go gripe to First National Bank in Chicago about the lack of stamps on the money order. But don't blame Klein's. Because Klein's DID stamp the back of that money order. It's clearly stamped with a Klein's stamp -- "Pay to the order of The First National Bank of Chicago".

And: That money order has Lee Oswald's writing all over it. It's the HANDWRITING OF THE SO-CALLED "PATSY". That fact was determined by more than one handwriting expert.

So we know that Oswald had possession of that money order AND Klein's had possession of that money order. And even with the "No Stamps On The Back" argument that CTers love so much, I don't see how those conspiracists can UNDO those two basic facts about both Klein's and Oswald being in possession of the money order at some point in time.

Plus, as I also mentioned, there's William Waldman's Warren Commission testimony on this matter. Waldman confirmed that Waldman No. 7 was found amongst the Klein's files in Chicago and confirmed what all the various numbers and codes mean on Waldman No. 7.

So, am I supposed to believe that Bill Waldman was just flat-out LYING to the WC when he testified about these matters? Why would I believe that? Why SHOULD I believe such a thing? I don't think any conspiracy believer can give me a good enough reason to totally dismiss and toss in the gutter all of the CORROBORATIVE things I just talked about above, which are things that indicate, when added together, the undeniable fact that Lee Harvey Oswald purchased (and was shipped) Mannlicher-Carcano C2766 from Klein's Sporting Goods in 1963.

To answer the concerns that David Josephs loves to bring up every time this "Rifle Order" topic comes up......

IN A RELATED DISCUSSION CONCERNING LEE HARVEY OSWALD'S RIFLE PURCHASE, 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.

So why in the world would those other forms for non-Oswald gun purchases be propped up in any FBI report, or the Warren Report, or anyplace else (outside a forum like this one, which is filled with people who look for excuses 24/7 to exonerate a guilty double-murderer)?

DVP

August 6, 2012

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DVP,

Would it have been easy to fabricate Waldman Exhibit 7? That's the only question.

But a lot more than just Waldman 7 would need to be fabricated in order for the CTers to be correct in this matter.

There needs to be a fake mail-order coupon to Klein's (with "fake" Oswald handprinting on it).

There also needs to be a fake money order (with "fake" Oswald writing all over it).

And another part of CE773 (the envelope) needs to be fake too, because that envelope has Oswald's writing all over it too....

jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-postmark-on-commission-exhibit-773.html

And then we'd have to have the Vice President of Klein's Sporting Goods, William J. Waldman, lying through his teeth in his WC testimony....

From 7 H 366...

DAVID BELIN -- "Now, I'm going to hand you what has been marked as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7 and ask you to state if you know what this is."

WILLIAM WALDMAN -- "This is a copy made from our microfilm reader-printer of an order received by Klein's from a Mr. A. Hidell, Post Office Box No. 2915, in Dallas, Texas. I want to clarify that this is not the order, itself, received from Mr. Hidell, but it's a form created by us internally from an order received from Mr. Hidell on a small coupon taken from an advertisement of ours in a magazine."

========================

Please tell me, Jon Tidd, with Bill Waldman's testimony staring me in the face, why should I even begin to believe that Waldman Exhibit No. 7 might have been "fabricated"?

You really think William Waldman of Klein's was part of a plot to frame Oswald? Really??

Or do you think the FBI (or some other nefarious plotter/conspirator) somehow managed to plant the document known as Waldman 7 into the Klein's files prior to 4:30 AM on November 23, 1963?

If either of those above things did NOT happen, then the rifle order shown in Waldman 7 is legitimate.

Jon, your earlier observation is a very good (and accurate) one. You said:

"Either Marina's husband ordered the alleged murder weapon or someone went to lengths to make it appear he did."

Now, with those two options in mind, in conjunction with all of the things that I've been talking about in my posts in this thread (including the testimony of the Klein's Vice President)....which of those two options should a reasonable person embrace as the likely truth?

In my opinion, it's not a very difficult choice. In fact, it's not even close. Marina's husband purchased the rifle from Klein's.

~~Mark VII~~

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

MORE RIFLE WRANGLING:

jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/04/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-935.html

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

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Either Marina's husband ordered the alleged murder weapon or someone went to lengths to make it appear he did.

If someone did go to such lengths, what did that involve? Answer: [1] forging Oswald's' handwriting, [2] fabricating Waldman Exhibit 7, [3] connecting Oswald to the alias Hidell. I have to say, all of this could have been accomplished pretty easily by individuals who were trained in such matters.

The back yard photos don't prove Oswald ordered any rifle. If the BYP are genuine, all they establish is that he possessed, when the BYP were taken, a rifle. A rifle, some argue, is different in certain ways from the alleged murder weapon.

I say reasonable doubt exists that Oswald ordered the alleged murder weapon.

And I say you are wrong and that absolutely not a SHRED of a doubt exists regarding Oswald's rifle purchase. You, Jon, are thumbing your nose at all of the corroborative items I mentioned earlier.

The evidence shows that Lee Oswald definitely DID order a rifle from Klein's, with Klein's then shipping Rifle C2766 to Oswald ("Hidell") on 3/20/63. That fact is proven in Waldman Exhibit 7. And that document was dug out of the Klein's files in Chicago on the morning of 11/23/63. So if the FBI (or whoever) was framing Oswald with a "fake" Waldman #7, they sure did take action in a hurry to start framing the sap named Lee.

Also....

Before someone brings this up, I'll pre-empt the defense's (CTers') argument about the missing bank stamps on the back of the $21.45 money order that Oswald mailed to Klein's.....

That "No Stamps" argument, it seems to me, is a weak one. Why? Because we know (and can prove via Waldman 7 AND William Waldman's testimony) that Klein's in Chicago positively DID have that $21.45 money order in their hands on March 13, 1963 (the date stamped at the top of Waldman 7) because of the mere EXISTENCE of that document--Waldman Exhibit No. 7....

WaldmanExhibitNo7.jpg

The above document provides the proof that two things occurred:

1.) Klein's received an order for a rifle from a certain "A. Hidell" in March of '63.

2.) In connection with the order from "A. Hidell" mentioned in #1, Klein's received PAYMENT VIA MONEY ORDER in the amount of $21.45 (the exact same amount that would be needed for a Klein's customer to purchase the Italian carbine with the scope via the Klein's magazine ads).

Number 2 above is confirmed on Waldman 7 via the written-in amount "$21.45" and the initials "M.O." that appear in the box marked "Total Amount Enclosed".

Larger view of Waldman Exhibit 7:

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0364a.htm

So we KNOW from Waldman 7 that Klein's did receive a mail-order coupon and a money order in the amount of 21 dollars and 45 cents from Oswald/Hidell and we know that Klein's acted upon receiving that order form by generating Waldman #7 and then mailing a rifle with the serial number C2766 on it to P.O. Box 2915 in Dallas (Oswald's box, of course) seven days later on March 20th.

So, in order for the "No Bank Stamps = The Money Order Is A Fake" argument to be an accurate one, we'd have to completely ignore the two relevant facts above. So I'd say to CTers --- Go gripe to First National Bank in Chicago about the lack of stamps on the money order. But don't blame Klein's. Because Klein's DID stamp the back of that money order. It's clearly stamped with a Klein's stamp -- "Pay to the order of The First National Bank of Chicago".

And: That money order has Lee Oswald's writing all over it. It's the HANDWRITING OF THE SO-CALLED "PATSY". That fact was determined by more than one handwriting expert.

So we know that Oswald had possession of that money order AND Klein's had possession of that money order. And even with the "No Stamps On The Back" argument that CTers love so much, I don't see how those conspiracists can UNDO those two basic facts about both Klein's and Oswald being in possession of the money order at some point in time.

Plus, as I also mentioned, there's William Waldman's Warren Commission testimony on this matter. Waldman confirmed that Waldman No. 7 was found amongst the Klein's files in Chicago and confirmed what all the various numbers and codes mean on Waldman No. 7.

So, am I supposed to believe that Bill Waldman was just flat-out LYING to the WC when he testified about these matters? Why would I believe that? Why SHOULD I believe such a thing? I don't think any conspiracy believer can give me a good enough reason to totally dismiss and toss in the gutter all of the CORROBORATIVE things I just talked about above, which are things that indicate, when added together, the undeniable fact that Lee Harvey Oswald purchased (and was shipped) Mannlicher-Carcano C2766 from Klein's Sporting Goods in 1963.

To answer the concerns that David Josephs loves to bring up every time this "Rifle Order" topic comes up......

IN A RELATED DISCUSSION CONCERNING LEE HARVEY OSWALD'S RIFLE PURCHASE, 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.

So why in the world would those other forms for non-Oswald gun purchases be propped up in any FBI report, or the Warren Report, or anyplace else (outside a forum like this one, which is filled with people who look for excuses 24/7 to exonerate a guilty double-murderer)?

DVP

August 6, 2012

"And I say you are wrong and that absolutely not a SHRED of a doubt exists regarding Oswald's rifle purchase." Wow, what a strong statement. not a SHRED? IN CAPITALS? NO LESS. And yet the best you can do is circumstantial evidence that A Hidell ordered something, and of course, ABSOLUTELY no evidence that A Hidell is LHO. No evidence at all that LHO ever even saw one of those rifles. And what difference does it make anyhow, Two of the rifles found in the TSBD on 11/22 were Mauser's and there certainly is no evidence of anyone anywhere ever ordering a Mauser associated with this case.

"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)?" So now you're claiming it was purchased by Oswald? I thought you were claiming A Hidell? Nope, the burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt. Here there is not even a reasonable probability. Everyone in the world that was watching television on 11/22 saw the Mauser being held up with the 7.65 Mauser stamped on it. So when you get some proof as to who bought and used that rifle, you might want to present it. The rifle that was sent to Washington is not related to anything except the frame up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two of the rifles found in the TSBD on 11/22 were Mausers...

Great. Now we've got TWO make-believe "Mausers" (plural) being found in the Depository.

I guess the plotters were trying to frame that schnook Oswald by planting two rifles in the building. Did they figure Lee would be holding a gun in each hand simultaneously as he shot Kennedy?

...and there certainly is no evidence of anyone anywhere ever ordering a Mauser associated with this case.

And yet your goofy patsy-framers arranged so that TWO Mausers would be left inside the Depository, eh?

Brilliant work!

Everyone in the world that was watching television on 11/22 saw the Mauser being held up with the 7.65 Mauser stamped on it.

It might be nice if you stopped making things up, Ken.

FYI, here's the film showing the rifle in the TSBD. It's a Carcano. Not a Mauser....

jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/01/alyea-film.html

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" Everyone in the world that was watching television on 11/22 saw the Mauser being held up with the 7.65 Mauser stamped on it."

Not really trying to help DVP out here but, the truth of the matter is, no 7.65mm Argentine Mauser (not the military issue, anyways) ever had the calibre stamped on it anywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...