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

[David Von Pein]

Ian,

Re: your "cheque" question (it was actually a money order, not a check)....

I haven't the slightest idea.

Edited June 4, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Robert Prudhomme]

"Well, Bob, shouldn't that tell you something right there?

Or do you now want to say that the CBS/Schiller re-creation photo is a fake too?"

I seriously doubt the people behind the cover up are not above supplying a re-touched photo to CBS/Schiller. Of course there is a possibility this photo is faked! Everything else in this case has been a lie, why would one more re-touched photo matter.

No, Dave, I want to see a video of you holding a rifle with your thumb sticking out a mile before I believe anything you post.

[Robert Prudhomme]

Most importantly though, Dave, your recreation photo, despite possibly being re-touched, comes nowhere close to reproducing the bizarre thumb seen in the BYP.

[David Von Pein]

I seriously doubt the people behind the cover up are not above supplying a re-touched photo to CBS/Schiller. Of course there is a possibility this photo is faked! Everything else in this case has been a lie, why would one more re-touched photo matter.

Why did I even bother to ask? I knew what Bob's ridiculous answer was going to be.

So now let's heap on still more plotters and cover-up operatives, Bob.

What's the number up to nowadays? Has it reached 5 digits yet? Must be pert-near that.

Edited June 4, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Robert Prudhomme]

Instead of your usual drivel, Dave, explain to us how LHO's thumb can be in such an impossible position.

Can't do it, right? I thought so.

[David Von Pein]

Instead of your usual drivel, Dave, explain to us how LHO's thumb can be in such an impossible position.

Can't do it, right? I thought so.

I'm not convinced it is Oswald's thumb. But it might be (as I said before).

But the things that CTers believe to be "impossible" are of no consequence whatsoever. And particularly when it comes to ANYTHING they declare as "impossible" regarding the JFK case. Because they are ALWAYS wrong about everything.

It was impossible for Oswald to fire the rifle in XXX seconds... (Wrong.)

It was impossible for Oswald to make it to the second floor in XXX seconds... (Wrong.)

It was impossible for Oswald to have gotten to 10th St. in time... (Wrong.)

It was impossible for a rear shot to result in JFK's head moving to the rear... (Wrong.)

The Single-Bullet Theory is impossible... (Wrong.)

The shadows in the BY photos are impossible... (Wrong. As I just proved above with the re-creation photo.)

And on and on to "impossible" infinity.

So when the all-knowing Bob Prudhomme tells me something is "impossible", forgive me for not bowing down and taking his word as Gospel.

Edited June 4, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Ray Mitcham]

Corrected for perspective

Note Oswald's head is outside the vertical line of his right foot. (He must have been a circus performer.)

Edited June 4, 2015 by Ray Mitcham

[Ian Lloyd]

Ian,Re: your "cheque" question (it was actually a money order, not a check)....I haven't the slightest idea.

Oops, yes, it was a money order...

Well, I'm surprised.

Waldman exhibit #10?...

Edited June 4, 2015 by Ian Lloyd

[David Von Pein]

So, Ray, I guess this means you also think that NOBODY is really standing there in the Neely backyard, right? The ENTIRE BODY of the man has been drawn in or added to the Neely background. Is that it?

And, for some silly reason, the photo fakers decided to draw in a man whose posture is IMPOSSIBLE (according to CTers anyway). Correct?

And these same photo manipulators also thought it would be a really good idea to paint in a thumb on the fake "person" that was way too long. Right? (But what for, pray tell?)

Those photo fakers were sure a bunch of screw-ups, weren't they? (Or was it just one goofy guy painting in all of the "impossible" things in the pics?)

Edited June 4, 2015 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

Waldman exhibit #10?

Re: Waldman No. 10 -----> jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/02/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-149.html

Edited June 4, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Ray Mitcham]

So, Ray, I guess this means you also think that NOBODY is really standing there in the Neely backyard, right? The ENTIRE BODY of the man has been drawn in or added to the Neely background. Is that it?

And, for some silly reason, the photo fakers decided to draw in a man whose posture is IMPOSSIBLE (according to CTers anyway). Correct?

And these same photo manipulators also thought it would be a really good idea to paint in a thumb on the fake "person" that was way too long. Right? (But what for, pray tell?)

Those photo fakers were sure a bunch of screw-ups, weren't they? (Or was it just one goofy guy painting in all of the "impossible" things in the pics?)

That explains why he is standing in an impossible position. Well done, Dave.

Remember these photos were made for an unsophisticated audience, who never had the tools to examine them they way we can now.

Edited June 4, 2015 by Ray Mitcham

[David Von Pein]

So, Ray, I guess this means you also think that NOBODY is really standing there in the Neely backyard, right? The ENTIRE BODY of the man has been drawn in or added to the Neely background. Is that it?

And, for some silly reason, the photo fakers decided to draw in a man whose posture is IMPOSSIBLE (according to CTers anyway). Correct?

And these same photo manipulators also thought it would be a really good idea to paint in a thumb on the fake "person" that was way too long. Right? (But what for, pray tell?)

Those photo fakers were sure a bunch of screw-ups, weren't they? (Or was it just one goofy guy painting in all of the "impossible" things in the pics?)

That explains why he is standing in an impossible position. Well done, Dave.

There's that word again --- "impossible".

You have no idea that such a pose is "impossible", Ray. And it obviously wasn't "impossible", because we can see Oswald standing in such a posture in the photos. And the photos are verified as real by the person who took them --- Marina Oswald.

Try again, Ray. The "impossible" thing is getting old.

Remember these photos were made for an unsophisticated audience, who never had the tools to examine them they way we can now.

Yeah, right. Like the man's basic posture is something NOBODY could "examine" back in '63, right?

So, again Ray, how were the fake photos made? Do you think a real person stood in the backyard or not? (Apparently not.)

So they got a picture of an empty backyard and then they drew in an Oswald-like body and then pasted on a real Oswald head? Is that how it was done?

And they wanted to make sure to leave you CT buffs lots of crumbs and they wanted to make it much more likely their fakery would be discovered, so they decided to fake THREE or FOUR separate pictures, even though they all show the very same thing ("Oswald" with guns). Right?

And what about Marina saying she took the pictures of Lee while he was carrying guns and dressed all in black? All lies?

At what point does this BYP insanity end, Ray?

Edited June 4, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Ray Mitcham]

So, Ray, I guess this means you also think that NOBODY is really standing there in the Neely backyard, right? The ENTIRE BODY of the man has been drawn in or added to the Neely background. Is that it?

And, for some silly reason, the photo fakers decided to draw in a man whose posture is IMPOSSIBLE (according to CTers anyway). Correct?

And these same photo manipulators also thought it would be a really good idea to paint in a thumb on the fake "person" that was way too long. Right? (But what for, pray tell?)

Those photo fakers were sure a bunch of screw-ups, weren't they? (Or was it just one goofy guy painting in all of the "impossible" things in the pics?)

That explains why he is standing in an impossible position. Well done, Dave.

There's that word again --- "impossible".

You have no idea that such a pose is "impossible", Ray. And it obviously wasn't "impossible", because we can see Oswald standing in such a posture in the photos. And the photos are verified as real by the person who took them --- Marina Oswald.

Try again, Ray. The "impossible" thing is getting old.

Try it yourself, David. Please remember to film it as it will make a great laugh when you fall on your butt.

Remember these photos were made for an unsophisticated audience, who never had the tools to examine them they way we can now.

Yeah, right. Like the man's basic posture is something NOBODY could "examine" back in '63, right?

It's called sleight of hand. They didn't expect the photos to be examined minutely.

So, again Ray, how were the fake photos made? Do you think a real person stood in the backyard or not? (Apparently not.)

I wasn't here so I don't know. Neither were you.

So they got a picture of an empty backyard and then they drew in an Oswald-like body and then pasted on a real Oswald head? Is that how it was done?

See above answer

And they wanted to make sure to leave you CT buffs lots of crumbs and they wanted to make it much more likely their fakery would be discovered, so they decided to fake THREE or FOUR separate pictures, even though they all show the very same thing ("Oswald" with guns). Right?

They thought it was a slam dunk case. they weren't worried about anybody checking their work.

And what about Marina saying she took the pictures of Lee while he was carrying guns and dressed all in black? All lies?

Which photos,David, The one she took first? Oh then she said she took two, Oops then she said she took three.All with the Imperial held up to her eyes.

At what point does this BYP insanity end, Ray?

No you tell me, David. You should be the one to say.. Hallejujah! It's in the good book!.

Edited June 4, 2015 by Ray Mitcham

[David Von Pein]

Remember these photos were made for an unsophisticated audience, who never had the tools to examine them they way we can now.

[...]

It's called sleight of hand. They didn't expect the photos to be examined minutely.

Oh for Pete sake, Ray. You're trying to say that examining this man's posture in the picture below is something that can only be done in this new "electronic age" we live in? Get real. You're flying by the seat of your pants on this BYP thing, Ray. You can't prove the photos are fraudulent and you know it. Nor can any other CTer prove they're fake.

Edited June 4, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Robert Prudhomme]

"Those photo fakers were sure a bunch of screw-ups, weren't they?"

First sensible thing I've ever heard come out of that mouth. Well said, Davey!