Jump to content
The Education Forum
David Von Pein

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

Recommended Posts

It is connected to it. Look at your larger photo, you can see the strap run to alongside the stock to the mount.

Sorry, I can't see what you're seeing, Ken. I see no sign of the strap meeting up with the alleged "sling mount".

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He [DVP] says I am trying to say that JFK was shot with a handgun. Clearly anyone that read my statement knows that's not true.

Looks like Ken is suffering from another bout of his "false memory" again. He doesn't seem to recall much of anything he has written--even stuff he wrote yesterday. Just a little more than 24 hours ago, Kenneth Drew said the following in this Education Forum post....

"Certainly could have been with a handgun." -- K. Drew

My post in response to Ken's absurd "handgun" speculation is, therefore, a perfectly accurate summary of what Ken had said....

"To show just how pathetic and miserable the case for conspiracy is at this forum, Ken Drew is running around trying to pretend that just maybe JFK was killed by a pistol shot--or a handgun of some type. Even with CE567/569 staring him in the face (assuming he even knows what those are). The case for "denying the evidence" doesn't get much stronger than that." -- DVP

My statement clearly said that 'there is no proof that he was shot with a rifle'.

And that statement--all by itself--ranks as one of the dumbest statements ever written on any JFK forum since the invention of this great thing called "The Internet". Congrats.

And, of course, there is no 'proof' that he was shot with a 'rifle'.

Take another look at CE567 and CE569 again, Kenneth. How do you think those two bullet fragments from the C2766 rifle managed to get into the front seat of the President's limousine?

Just take a wild, off-the-wall guess.

JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/2011/09/ce567-and-ce569.html

Not one person has ever been linked, by evidence, to the shooting.

I think you just might have topped yourself in the "Dumbest Statements" category, Ken. Nice job.

No gun is associated with the shooting.

A hat trick! Three incredibly dumb statements in just one single post. Not easy to accomplish, but Ken makes it look easy.

Ken thinks the C2766 Carcano rifle can't be "associated" with the JFK shooting. Even though the following items exist in the evidence pile....

...Three bullet shells from the C2766 rifle.

...Two large bullet fragments from the C2766 rifle.

...The stretcher bullet (CE399) from the C2766 rifle. (And as much as Ken and all other conspiracy theorists hate that CE399 bullet, it's still there in the JFK assassination evidence pile nonetheless. And it always will be.)

...And then there's the C2766 rifle itself, which I guess Ken wants to pretend really WASN'T found on the sixth floor of the Book Depository Building at all.

Isn't it embarrassing to be THIS wrong about everything, Kenneth? I would think it would be.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that it's the most definitive of evidence yet there is a coincidence that the image in the ads shows a bottom mount while the arrest rifle has a side mount...

But as you can plainly see, the rifles are not the same. Close, but not the same.

One other question... would you please produce any document or record that shows LEE HARVEY OSWALD ordered a rifle which is not based on the HSC(IA)A's tainted handwriting analysis on reproductions. If the only evidenec related to these purchases are only Xerox copies of copies from microfilm, the conclusions based on these copies are worthless.

Please show us that OSWALD ordered, paid for and picked up siad rifle in March - and then explain how that rifle gets from New Orleans on Sept 23, 1963 to the Paine garage when neither Ruth nor Marina nor Michael sees a rifle in the Oswald belongings while Ozzie is supposedly to and from Mexico with a small zippered bag... no rifle and an empty 4907 Magazine.

If and when you ever get to addressing this we'll be here...

HSCA Handwriting analysis http://jfkassassination.net/parnell/hscahand.htm

29. March 12, 1963. U.S. postal money order No. bearing handwritten fill-ins as follows: Klein's Sporting Goods, A. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915. Dallas, Tex. Blue ink, ballpoint pen. Location: Archives. (CE 788; JFK exhibit F-509A and 509B.)

30. March 12, 1963. Enlargement of microfilm reproduction of Klein's order form for rifle from A. Hidell, superimposed on envelop, postmarked March 12, 1963, addressed to Klein's, Dept. 358, 227 W. Washington Street, Chicago 6, Ill., with return address: A. Hidell. P.O. Box 2915, Dallas, Tex. Location:Archives. (CE 773: Cadigan's exhibit 1; JFK exhibit F-504.)

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF CHARLES C. SCOTT

Photographic reproductions could only be compared visually with other photographic reproductions or with original documents. All conclusions based solely upon photographic reproductions are necessarily tentative and inconclusive. since they cannot reveal much about pen pressure and other dynamic qualities of handwriting. Further, they sometimes conceal, rather than reveal, evidence of tracings, alterations, erasures, or obliterated writing.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF JOSEPH P. MC NALLY

Letter to "The Worker". 29. Xerox of Klein's money order. 30 (DJ: Joe here does not even have the correct item with the correct # ???)

In particular, members noted that not all documents were available in their original. It is standard practice in the profession of questioned document examination to make definitive conclusions only about documents examined in their original. Thus the panel members gave only tentative opinions for items provided them in some type of facsimile.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF DAVID J. PURTELL

Procedures (55)Items 1,2,4,5,6,7,8,9,11,12,15,16,17,18,19,20,22,23,24,25, 27,29,31,32,33,34,36,38,39,40,43,45,47,48,51,54,55,56,57,58,59,61,and 62 were studied, both visually and microscopically

Item 29 was a Xerox copy made from a microfilm copy. Such a second generation copy has the defects of both processes.

Riflesideslingversusrifleordered.jpg

Rifle-BYversusNARA.jpg

Edited by David Josephs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you please produce any document or record that shows LEE HARVEY OSWALD ordered a rifle which is not based on the HSC(IA)A's tainted handwriting analysis on reproductions. If the only evidence related to these purchases are only Xerox copies of copies from microfilm, the conclusions based on these copies are worthless.

The C2766 rifle that Klein's mailed to Oswald/(Hidell) has LHO's prints on it, David. Three prints, in fact.

That's definitive proof that Oswald had the C2766 weapon in his possession at some point in time.

And since it's obvious that OSWALD had the C2766 weapon in his possession at some point in time, then why would you think that OSWALD did not ORDER the weapon himself from Klein's (especially in light of all that paperwork that proves he DID order it)?

Or are you going to argue that the three LHO prints were planted there too? (And, yes, I'm including the two trigger guard prints.)

Good luck in pretending those three LHO prints are "tainted" and "worthless" too.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David Von Pein, if , by the "C2766 rifle", you mean the Italian Manlicher-Carcano rifle, most of what I have read says that the Manlicher - Carcano rifle would not allow even some of the best snipers/marksman to kill JFK and wound Connolly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watch the video on this page, Chuck. The Carcano was easily capable of firing all three shots in well under 6 or 7 seconds, with fairly good accuracy....as these riflemen demonstrated in 1967:

jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/12/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-499.html

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bruce,

I'm not convinced that the object that CTers are referring to as a "sling mount" in the backyard photograph is really part of the rifle at all. It looks to me (especially in the super-big version below) that the "sling mount" might be something in the background behind Oswald....

Extra large version -----> Lee-Harvey-Oswald-Backyard-Photo.jpg

BTW, Bruce, that "JFK Research" site is not mine.

Lee-Harvey-Oswald-Backyard-Photo.jpg

There is one thing that gives this photo away as being faked more than anything else.

If we look at the enlarged version, which DVP has been so gracious to provide us with, there is something very unnatural about the left hand, holding the rifle. Comparing the left hand with the right hand, we can see the entire length of the four fingers of the left hand. Looking at your own hand, you can see the thumb begins quite far back on the hand, and even when laid along the fore finger, does not even extend to the second knuckle of the fore finger.

In the photograph, you can see the thumb of the left hand in an impossible position on the opposite side of the rifle from where the thumb joins to the hand. The left thumb in this photo would have to be about 8 inches long to do what we are seeing.

Was LHO a circus freak, as well?

P.S.

Perhaps DVP would be so good as to take a "selfie" of himself, holding a rifle, and recreate this impossible positioning of fingers and thumb.

Dave??

Edited by Robert Prudhomme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave's not going to do that. If it's not in the WC report--and his hand isn't--then he has no interest in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you please produce any document or record that shows LEE HARVEY OSWALD ordered a rifle which is not based on the HSC(IA)A's tainted handwriting analysis on reproductions. If the only evidence related to these purchases are only Xerox copies of copies from microfilm, the conclusions based on these copies are worthless.

The C2766 rifle that Klein's mailed to Oswald/(Hidell) has LHO's prints on it, David. Three prints, in fact.

That's definitive proof that Oswald had the C2766 weapon in his possession at some point in time.

And since it's obvious that OSWALD had the C2766 weapon in his possession at some point in time, then why would you think that OSWALD did not ORDER the weapon himself from Klein's (especially in light of all that paperwork that proves he DID order it)?

Or are you going to argue that the three LHO prints were planted there too? (And, yes, I'm including the two trigger guard prints.)

Good luck in pretending those three LHO prints are "tainted" and "worthless" too.

How dumb can one human be? DVP is attempting to reach that achievement.. Of course he knows that the palmprint that was on the rifle was put on the rifle while LHO was lying in the mortuary. Doesn't DVP know that? Before the C2766 was sent to the FBI and while at the FBI lab, it had no prints. They only showed up after LHO was dead. Right DVP? you do agree? I wouldn't have thrown in the dumb word there DVP but apparently before you wrote 227, you had been eating dumb pills all day and kept spitting out the seeds. I love it where David Josephs asks for dVP to give us just one solid piece of evidence that OSWALD, not A Hidell ordered a rifle from Kleins and he had to decline as he had no proof. NONE.....zip.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we look at the enlarged version, which DVP has been so gracious to provide us with, there is something very unnatural about the left hand, holding the rifle. Comparing the left hand with the right hand, we can see the entire length of the four fingers of the left hand. Looking at your own hand, you can see the thumb begins quite far back on the hand, and even when laid along the fore finger, does not even extend to the second knuckle of the fore finger.

In the photograph, you can see the thumb of the left hand in an impossible position on the opposite side of the rifle from where the thumb joins to the hand. The left thumb in this photo would have to be about 8 inches long to do what we are seeing.

Was LHO a circus freak, as well?

P.S.

Perhaps DVP would be so good as to take a "selfie" of himself, holding a rifle, and recreate this impossible positioning of fingers and thumb.

Now wait a second, Bob. Isn't the most popular theory for the "fake backyard photos" the one that has a REAL PERSON standing in the Neely backyard holding a rifle and that only the HEAD of Oswald was pasted onto this "other person's" body?

So, if that's the theory, the Oswald stand-in would still have a THUMB on his left hand too. So the "stand-in" would be the "freak" with the weird thumb.

Just HOW MANY things can you guys come up with that "don't quite look right" in the BY pictures? Is there any limit?

So, Bob, I guess you think that NOBODY was really standing in the Neely backyard at all, is that right? And pretty much everything except the background was added into the picture artificially? Including the freakish left thumb that apparently belonged to NO flesh-and-blood person? Is that correct?

And don't forget the alleged "impossible" leaning posture being exhibited by the "person" (or the drawn-in person) in the picture too.

And the stubby fingers on the "person's" right hand too. Don't forget that.

Plus the "impossible" shadows.

And the cropped chin.

Did I leave anything out?

Keep looking at the pic below. I'm sure before the end of the day, you can add a dozen more things that you see in the photo that are "impossible".

And keep ignoring Marina whatever you do. She has always said she took the backyard pictures. But she was probably just dreaming the whole thing. Right, Bob?

Lee-Harvey-Oswald-Backyard-Photo.jpg

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DVP no. 227

Too Easy DVP, too easy...."Take another look at CE567 and CE569 again, Kenneth. How do you think those two bullet fragments from the C2766 rifle managed to get into the front seat of the President's limousine?" and so? no evidence they were fired from that rifle, no evidence they were fired while JFK was in the limo. No evidence they were not planted there. How much more you need DVP?

"Could have been with a handgun" is not equivalent to "was done with a handgun" English 101 there DVP. Try to keep up.

"And that statement--all by itself--ranks as one of the dumbest statements" and of course you have no rebuttal, none..........

To put it plain and simple DVP, you got nothing. LOL....just a plain ole Nutter shilling for the WC. All smoke and mirrors, no substance......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watch the video on this page, Chuck. The Carcano was easily capable of firing all three shots in well under 6 or 7 seconds, with fairly good accuracy....as these riflemen demonstrated in 1967:

jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/12/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-499.html

Chuck, that's all a waste of time. You will not find what DVP says by viewing that video. It can not and does not show that the MC as found in the condition at the time it was produced would be capable or did actually ever fire any shots at all. Not even one. He's sending you off on a DVP smoke and mirrors chase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bruce,

I'm not convinced that the object that CTers are referring to as a "sling mount" in the backyard photograph is really part of the rifle at all. It looks to me (especially in the super-big version below) that the "sling mount" might be something in the background behind Oswald....

Extra large version -----> Lee-Harvey-Oswald-Backyard-Photo.jpg

BTW, Bruce, that "JFK Research" site is not mine.

Lee-Harvey-Oswald-Backyard-Photo.jpg

There is one thing that gives this photo away as being faked more than anything else.

If we look at the enlarged version, which DVP has been so gracious to provide us with, there is something very unnatural about the left hand, holding the rifle. Comparing the left hand with the right hand, we can see the entire length of the four fingers of the left hand. Looking at your own hand, you can see the thumb begins quite far back on the hand, and even when laid along the fore finger, does not even extend to the second knuckle of the fore finger.

In the photograph, you can see the thumb of the left hand in an impossible position on the opposite side of the rifle from where the thumb joins to the hand. The left thumb in this photo would have to be about 8 inches long to do what we are seeing.

Was LHO a circus freak, as well?

P.S.

Perhaps DVP would be so good as to take a "selfie" of himself, holding a rifle, and recreate this impossible positioning of fingers and thumb.

Dave??

and the fact that you can see the twigs of the plant and the slats of the fence through the overlay of the body gives it away a little also. But DVP has proof the A Hidell is the guy with the long thumb, not LHO, right DVP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we look at the enlarged version, which DVP has been so gracious to provide us with, there is something very unnatural about the left hand, holding the rifle. Comparing the left hand with the right hand, we can see the entire length of the four fingers of the left hand. Looking at your own hand, you can see the thumb begins quite far back on the hand, and even when laid along the fore finger, does not even extend to the second knuckle of the fore finger.

In the photograph, you can see the thumb of the left hand in an impossible position on the opposite side of the rifle from where the thumb joins to the hand. The left thumb in this photo would have to be about 8 inches long to do what we are seeing.

Was LHO a circus freak, as well?

P.S.

Perhaps DVP would be so good as to take a "selfie" of himself, holding a rifle, and recreate this impossible positioning of fingers and thumb.

Now wait a second, Bob. Isn't the most popular theory for the "fake backyard photos" the one that has a REAL PERSON standing in the Neely backyard holding a rifle and that only the HEAD of Oswald was pasted onto this "other person's" body?

So, if that's the theory, the Oswald stand-in would still have a THUMB on his left hand too. So the "stand-in" would be the "freak" with the weird thumb.

Just HOW MANY things can you guys come up with that "don't quite look right" in the BY pictures? Is there any limit?

So, Bob, I guess you think that NOBODY was really standing in the Neely backyard at all, is that right? And pretty much everything except the background was added into the picture artificially? Including the freakish left thumb that apparently belonged to NO flesh-and-blood person? Is that correct?

And don't forget the alleged "impossible" leaning posture being exhibited by the "person" (or the drawn-in person) in the picture too.

And the stubby fingers on the "person's" right hand too. Don't forget that. (Plus the "impossible" shadows.)

And the cropped chin.

Did I leave anything out?

Keep looking at the pic below. I'm sure before the end of the day, you can add a dozen more things that you see in the photo that are "impossible".

And keep ignoring Marina whatever you do. She has always said she took the backyard pictures. But she was probably just dreaming the whole thing. Right, Bob?

Lee-Harvey-Oswald-Backyard-Photo.jpg

"And keep ignoring Marina whatever you do. She has always said she took the backyard pictures." Not always DVP, only after she was told the WC had her return flight booked to Russia unless she took those photos. Remember, I'm fairly sure that's in the WCR.

"Now wait a second, Bob. Isn't the most popular theory" Now wait a minute DVP, you're not allowed to use 'theory' only WCR 'facts', so you're gonna have to re phrase that question.....okay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Could have been with a handgun" is not equivalent to "was done with a handgun". English 101 there DVP. Try to keep up.

You can't get anything right, can you Ken? Even when I quote my statements back to you, you still get them wrong. My previous statement regarding your silly "handgun" post was perfectly stated. I said you said that "just maybe" JFK was shot with a handgun. Do try to keep up. ....

"To show just how pathetic and miserable the case for conspiracy is at this forum, Ken Drew is running around trying to pretend that just maybe JFK was killed by a pistol shot--or a handgun of some type. Even with CE567/569 staring him in the face (assuming he even knows what those are). The case for "denying the evidence" doesn't get much stronger than that." -- DVP

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...