Jump to content
The Education Forum
David Von Pein

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

Recommended Posts

David Josephs,

As I said before, I haven't the foggiest idea what the "Detective Brown" stuff is all about.

But let me once again stress the importance of the following two facts. And these are two facts that a certain number of conspiracy theorists will apparently forever label as "fake" or "phony" or "lies", but these two quotes are still going to be there for CTers to ignore until the cows come home....

"The panel detects no evidence of fakery in any of the backyard picture materials." -- HSCA Volume 6

and...

"Jack Duffy asked Marina if she had taken the backyard photos of Oswald holding the Carcano rifle. "Yes," she answered evenly, "I did"." -- Page 1487 of "Reclaiming History" by Vincent T. Bugliosi (c.2007)

And if you'd like to hear Marina herself say that she took the backyard photos, here she is doing so in this HSCA audio from September of 1978....

https://app.box.com/s/hf7yp5ctenxvgjttuq7jwtuuv57eagb7

In additional, during the same 1978 HSCA testimony, Marina Oswald made the following comments concerning Lee leaving their apartment in New Orleans during the summer of 1963 to go out to "target practice" with his rifle....

Mr. JAMES McDONALD -- "Did he ever take it out, outside the apartment, to practice with it, to do anything with it?"

Mrs. MARINA OSWALD PORTER -- "Yes, he did."

Mr. McDONALD -- "And what did he do?"

Mrs. PORTER -- "He will, like before it gets very dark outside, he would leave apartment dressed with the dark raincoat, even though it was a hot summer night, pretty hot weather anyway, and he would be wearing this, and he would be hiding the rifle underneath his raincoat. He said he is going to target practice or something like that."

Mr. McDONALD -- "This was one occasion you are talking about with the raincoat?"

Mrs. PORTER -- "It is several occasions, maybe more than once."

Mr. McDONALD -- "He did the same thing on several occasions, put the raincoat on...and the rifle under the raincoat?"

Mrs. PORTER -- "Yes."

Mr. McDONALD -- "And how long would he be gone?"

Mrs. PORTER -- "A few hours."

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

AUDIO VERSION OF ABOVE TESTIMONY -- https://app.box.com/s/wyh0qnvas7pkmkahcldp3omfjsxotmqq

So the conspiracy theorists who continue to insist that there is no evidence or testimony whatsoever to indicate that Lee Oswald ever practiced with his Carcano rifle in the months leading up to the assassination are just flat-out ignoring the above testimony by Marina Oswald, which can be found on Page 231 of HSCA Volume 2.

I guess LHO was supposed to be walking around outside his house with the rifle for hours, since he didn't have a car to drive anywhere

I can't understand anyone believing anything in the WCR. So many things are known to be outright lies and fabrications. Once you know the WC itself fabricated evidence then you know that the rest was very selectively chosen just to amplify their side. Such as the SBT. Everyone except DVP and his pigpen playmate are still laughing at that one.

Can you please site the "outright lies" contained in the WCR, or should your simply alleging it suffice?

And who is this "pigpen" guy?

I'd like to address your question Curtis...

There are so many it's almost hard to narrow it down to just posting a few... but these are some of the most egregious

Here's the ryberg/ford/bullet hole composite to show how they lied about the placement of the entry wound on the back - this is an "outright lie"

FRAUDintheevidence-rybergandford-thejack

Both the FBI and Secret Service place the final shot 40 feet further down Elm than the conclusions of the WCR allow.

Z313 is acknowledged as the final shot.

This is WCD298's measurements for where the limo was when each of the three shots were fired... with an inset of the location with a string back to the 6th floor... That's 40 feet past z313

Seems to me Z313 as the last shot head shot is an "outright lie" based on their investigations and results

FBIshotrecreationcd298-andactualmeasurem

The SS gives us this: Z313 at 4+65 is not the same as placing the last shot within 4 feet of 5+00, 35 feet down Elm.

CE875%20and%20CE884%20conflicting%20SS%2

And finally Curtis - the 12th of the conclusions of the WCR states:

12. (f) Within these limitations, however, the Commission finds

that the (SS) agents most immediately responsible for the President’s

safety reacted promptly at the time the shots were fired from the TSBD.

I would say that Greer and Kellerman are the SS agents most responsible for JFK's safety... here they are reacting "promptly" at the time of the shots.

At one if not two shots had already been fired - So Greer slows down, and turns to stare at JFK as his head is blown off

Mr. SPECTER. Were you able to see anything of President Kennedy as you glanced to the rear?

Mr. GREER. No, sir; I didn't see anything of the President, I didn't look, I wasn't far enough around to see the President.

uh, right. :up

Greerkeepslooking.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David Josephs,

As I said before, I haven't the foggiest idea what the "Detective Brown" stuff is all about.

But let me once again stress the importance of the following two facts. And these are two facts that a certain number of conspiracy theorists will apparently forever label as "fake" or "phony" or "lies", but these two quotes are still going to be there for CTers to ignore until the cows come home....

"The panel detects no evidence of fakery in any of the backyard picture materials." -- HSCA Volume 6

and...

"Jack Duffy asked Marina if she had taken the backyard photos of Oswald holding the Carcano rifle. "Yes," she answered evenly, "I did"." -- Page 1487 of "Reclaiming History" by Vincent T. Bugliosi (c.2007)

And if you'd like to hear Marina herself say that she took the backyard photos, here she is doing so in this HSCA audio from September of 1978....

https://app.box.com/s/hf7yp5ctenxvgjttuq7jwtuuv57eagb7

In additional, during the same 1978 HSCA testimony, Marina Oswald made the following comments concerning Lee leaving their apartment in New Orleans during the summer of 1963 to go out to "target practice" with his rifle....

Mr. JAMES McDONALD -- "Did he ever take it out, outside the apartment, to practice with it, to do anything with it?"

Mrs. MARINA OSWALD PORTER -- "Yes, he did."

Mr. McDONALD -- "And what did he do?"

Mrs. PORTER -- "He will, like before it gets very dark outside, he would leave apartment dressed with the dark raincoat, even though it was a hot summer night, pretty hot weather anyway, and he would be wearing this, and he would be hiding the rifle underneath his raincoat. He said he is going to target practice or something like that."

Mr. McDONALD -- "This was one occasion you are talking about with the raincoat?"

Mrs. PORTER -- "It is several occasions, maybe more than once."

Mr. McDONALD -- "He did the same thing on several occasions, put the raincoat on...and the rifle under the raincoat?"

Mrs. PORTER -- "Yes."

Mr. McDONALD -- "And how long would he be gone?"

Mrs. PORTER -- "A few hours."

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

AUDIO VERSION OF ABOVE TESTIMONY -- https://app.box.com/s/wyh0qnvas7pkmkahcldp3omfjsxotmqq

So the conspiracy theorists who continue to insist that there is no evidence or testimony whatsoever to indicate that Lee Oswald ever practiced with his Carcano rifle in the months leading up to the assassination are just flat-out ignoring the above testimony by Marina Oswald, which can be found on Page 231 of HSCA Volume 2.

I guess LHO was supposed to be walking around outside his house with the rifle for hours, since he didn't have a car to drive anywhere

I can't understand anyone believing anything in the WCR. So many things are known to be outright lies and fabrications. Once you know the WC itself fabricated evidence then you know that the rest was very selectively chosen just to amplify their side. Such as the SBT. Everyone except DVP and his pigpen playmate are still laughing at that one.

Can you please site the "outright lies" contained in the WCR, or should your simply alleging it suffice?

And who is this "pigpen" guy?

I'd like to address your question Curtis...

There are so many it's almost hard to narrow it down to just posting a few... but these are some of the most egregious

Here's the ryberg/ford/bullet hole composite to show how they lied about the placement of the entry wound on the back - this is an "outright lie"

FRAUDintheevidence-rybergandford-thejack

Both the FBI and Secret Service place the final shot 40 feet further down Elm than the conclusions of the WCR allow.

Z313 is acknowledged as the final shot.

This is WCD298's measurements for where the limo was when each of the three shots were fired... with an inset of the location with a string back to the 6th floor... That's 40 feet past z313

Seems to me Z313 as the last shot head shot is an "outright lie" based on their investigations and results

FBIshotrecreationcd298-andactualmeasurem

The SS gives us this: Z313 at 4+65 is not the same as placing the last shot within 4 feet of 5+00, 35 feet down Elm.

CE875%20and%20CE884%20conflicting%20SS%2

And finally Curtis - the 12th of the conclusions of the WCR states:

12. (f) Within these limitations, however, the Commission finds

that the (SS) agents most immediately responsible for the President’s

safety reacted promptly at the time the shots were fired from the TSBD.

I would say that Greer and Kellerman are the SS agents most responsible for JFK's safety... here they are reacting "promptly" at the time of the shots.

At one if not two shots had already been fired - So Greer slows down, and turns to stare at JFK as his head is blown off

Mr. SPECTER. Were you able to see anything of President Kennedy as you glanced to the rear?

Mr. GREER. No, sir; I didn't see anything of the President, I didn't look, I wasn't far enough around to see the President.

uh, right. :up

Greerkeepslooking.jpg

David, those are some good comments about the 'outright lies'. The reason I think it is so useless to comment on 'outright lies' is that there is so little in the WC that is based on truth, that leaves 'almost everything' else to be commented on. One simple example, look at your discussion above about the angle of the shots from the TSBD. We all know that there is absolutely no evidence of any shot having been fired from the snipers nest, so any comments on angles are all hypothesis or just plain fabrication. Another discussion, about LHO ordering a rifle. There is clearly NO evidence that LHO ordered a rifle. Just because there was 'supposedly' evidence that LHO used the alias A HIdell, there is no proof that he actually did. But shipment of a rifle ordered by an unknown, paid for by someone with a money order mailed from somewhere that LHO did not frequent and would have been way out of the way for him to have been there during a time when the timeclock at his employers showed that he was on the job far away from the post office. And then to try to prove that the rifle, initially a Mauser, later changed to a Carcano that was not the same carcano that was in the photos that were faked as evidence that LHO really did own a Carcano by using a totally different rifle as that proof. In other words, Warren Report is a Keystone Kops Kaper in writing. They were all thumbs and got little or nothing right. I know of no Nutter that has ever proven any part of the Lone Nut scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We all know that there is absolutely no evidence of any shot having been fired from the sniper's nest...

This is called "TOTAL DENIAL", folks. There simply is no other way to describe it.

Kenneth HAS to know (or he SHOULD know) about all of the various SEPARATE pieces of evidence AND witness testimony that all indicate someone WAS firing rifle bullets at President Kennedy from the southeast corner window on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building located at 411 Elm Street in Dallas, Texas, USA, on Friday, November 22nd, 1963 AD. Kenny HAS to know that.

And yet we're treated to this brilliant and Oscar-winning quote from Louisiana's own Kenneth Drew....

"We all know that there is absolutely no evidence of any shot having been fired from the sniper's nest."

After reading such claptrap, about the only thing a sensible person can do is just roll their eyes, smile a little half-smile, and then walk away in complete bewilderment by what they have just heard.

That's what I'm going to do now .... Eyeroll-Icon-Blogspot.gif

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We all know that there is absolutely no evidence of any shot having been fired from the sniper's nest...

This is called "TOTAL DENIAL", folks. There simply is no other way to describe it.

Kenneth HAS to know (or he SHOULD know) about all of the various SEPARATE pieces of evidence AND witness testimony that all indicate someone WAS firing rifle bullets at President Kennedy from the southeast corner window on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building located at 411 Elm Street in Dallas, Texas, USA, on Friday, November 22nd, 1963 AD. Kenny HAS to know that.

And yet we're treated to this brilliant and Oscar-winning quote from Louisiana's own Kenneth Drew....

"We all know that there is absolutely no evidence of any shot having been fired from the sniper's nest."

After reading such claptrap, about the only thing a sensible person can do is just roll their eyes, smile a little half-smile, and then walk away in complete bewilderment by what they have just heard.

That's what I'm going to do now .... Eyeroll-Icon-Blogspot.gif

And I notice you still can not refer us to any absolute proof of what you said, just throw it out, all smoke screen. And it doesn't surprise me that you walk around with your eyes rolling, better watch for the slop holes in the Pigpen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
David, those are some good comments about the 'outright lies'. The reason I think it is so useless to comment on 'outright lies' is that there is so little in the WC that is based on truth, that leaves 'almost everything' else to be commented on. One simple example, look at your discussion above about the angle of the shots from the TSBD. We all know that there is absolutely no evidence of any shot having been fired from the snipers nest, so any comments on angles are all hypothesis or just plain fabrication. Another discussion, about LHO ordering a rifle. There is clearly NO evidence that LHO ordered a rifle. Just because there was 'supposedly' evidence that LHO used the alias A HIdell, there is no proof that he actually did. But shipment of a rifle ordered by an unknown, paid for by someone with a money order mailed from somewhere that LHO did not frequent and would have been way out of the way for him to have been there during a time when the timeclock at his employers showed that he was on the job far away from the post office. And then to try to prove that the rifle, initially a Mauser, later changed to a Carcano that was not the same carcano that was in the photos that were faked as evidence that LHO really did own a Carcano by using a totally different rifle as that proof. In other words, Warren Report is a Keystone Kops Kaper in writing. They were all thumbs and got little or nothing right. I know of no Nutter that has ever proven any part of the Lone Nut scenario.

Agree of course Kenneth - and I hope to post that article on CTKA re: the rifle and pistol within the next couple weeks

One needs to ask about the evidence related to a shot from that spot...

The three men closest to this shot were Norman, Williams and Jarman who, by the window beneath the 6th floor were no more than 15 feet from the open muzzle of that rifle - if we assume it was there.

The easiest of searches finds that a rfiel of that sort produces about 150 dB's at the muzzle and about 120-140 dB at 15 feet.

This is enough to deafen someone for a short term at least and produce serious ringing in the ears.... and that would be one of the shots, not three.

"thought it came from above"

"believe it came from above"

Mr. JARMAN - Hank said, Harold Norman, rather, said that he thought the shots had came from above us

Mr. NORMAN - but I know I heard a shot, and then after I heard the shot, well, it seems as though the President, you know, slumped or something, and then another shot and I believe Jarman or someone told me, he said, "I believe someone is shooting at the President,"

I think I made a statement "It is someone shooting at the President, and I believe it came from up above us."

but I know I heard a third shot fired, and I could also hear something sounded like the shell hulls hitting the floor and the ejecting of the rifle, it sounded as though it was to me"

We are expected to believe that these men were doubtful about where the shots came from and that they could hear shells clinking and a bolt working...

That simply stretches the bounds of common sense and logic a bit too far David... unless there was little if any sound from a silenced weapon.. Euins does make a convincing claim of seeing a barrel protruding and firing...

One thing is for sure though, the C2766 found on that floor and any shots fired have nothing to do with each other.

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

The Evidence IS the Conspiracy. The WCR & HSCA is the government's way of wrapping it up as an eternal EFF EWE for all of history to marvel at the blatant manner the US people were and remain fooled about the workings of the world around them.

DVP argues in a vacuum of 1950's Leave it to Beaver optimism and collective ignorance. It's cute and all, but terribly antiquated and hopelessly naive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
David, those are some good comments about the 'outright lies'. The reason I think it is so useless to comment on 'outright lies' is that there is so little in the WC that is based on truth, that leaves 'almost everything' else to be commented on. One simple example, look at your discussion above about the angle of the shots from the TSBD. We all know that there is absolutely no evidence of any shot having been fired from the snipers nest, so any comments on angles are all hypothesis or just plain fabrication. Another discussion, about LHO ordering a rifle. There is clearly NO evidence that LHO ordered a rifle. Just because there was 'supposedly' evidence that LHO used the alias A HIdell, there is no proof that he actually did. But shipment of a rifle ordered by an unknown, paid for by someone with a money order mailed from somewhere that LHO did not frequent and would have been way out of the way for him to have been there during a time when the timeclock at his employers showed that he was on the job far away from the post office. And then to try to prove that the rifle, initially a Mauser, later changed to a Carcano that was not the same carcano that was in the photos that were faked as evidence that LHO really did own a Carcano by using a totally different rifle as that proof. In other words, Warren Report is a Keystone Kops Kaper in writing. They were all thumbs and got little or nothing right. I know of no Nutter that has ever proven any part of the Lone Nut scenario.

Agree of course Kenneth - and I hope to post that article on CTKA re: the rifle and pistol within the next couple weeks

One needs to ask about the evidence related to a shot from that spot...

The three men closest to this shot were Norman, Williams and Jarman who, by the window beneath the 6th floor were no more than 15 feet from the open muzzle of that rifle - if we assume it was there.

The easiest of searches finds that a rfiel of that sort produces about 150 dB's at the muzzle and about 120-140 dB at 15 feet.

This is enough to deafen someone for a short term at least and produce serious ringing in the ears.... and that would be one of the shots, not three.

"thought it came from above"

"believe it came from above"

Mr. JARMAN - Hank said, Harold Norman, rather, said that he thought the shots had came from above us

Mr. NORMAN - but I know I heard a shot, and then after I heard the shot, well, it seems as though the President, you know, slumped or something, and then another shot and I believe Jarman or someone told me, he said, "I believe someone is shooting at the President,"

I think I made a statement "It is someone shooting at the President, and I believe it came from up above us."

but I know I heard a third shot fired, and I could also hear something sounded like the shell hulls hitting the floor and the ejecting of the rifle, it sounded as though it was to me"

We are expected to believe that these men were doubtful about where the shots came from and that they could hear shells clinking and a bolt working...

That simply stretches the bounds of common sense and logic a bit too far David... unless there was little if any sound from a silenced weapon.. Euins does make a convincing claim of seeing a barrel protruding and firing...

One thing is for sure though, the C2766 found on that floor and any shots fired have nothing to do with each other.

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

The Evidence IS the Conspiracy. The WCR & HSCA is the government's way of wrapping it up as an eternal EFF EWE for all of history to marvel at the blatant manner the US people were and remain fooled about the workings of the world around them.

DVP argues in a vacuum of 1950's Leave it to Beaver optimism and collective ignorance. It's cute and all, but terribly antiquated and hopelessly naive.

"DVP argues in a vacuum of 1950's Leave it to Beaver optimism and collective ignorance." While I'm not sure it's 'collective ignorance', it may be more like, planned mis-direction, but it may well actually be just ignorance.

Shells clinking? That's the 3 that were lined up lying adjacent to each other, one with a 'bent' edge that could not possibly have just been fired. And as you pointed out, they heard this clinking after having just been deafened with 3 shots fired 15 feet from their ears, LOL.

The Warren Comm Report was not a Report, it was 'guidelines for deception'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@Kenneth Drew,


Although I agree with your overall position much much than I agree with DVP, I must take issue with you on your refusal to post a link to the video which you say exists showing officers identifying a rifle found in the TSBD as a Mauser.


I have no way of knowing what you saw and heard on TV in 1963, but if, as you have said more than once, that video copies of it are easily found on the web, then why not prove this and post a link? Because I have looked, and I cannot find such a video.


I think that in this instance, DVP is probably right and you are thinking of the Tom Alyea film footage. I'll post a link to that below. I'm not sure if this is the identical link that DVP posted, but it probably is, as the link I will post is to his Youtube JFK channel:




"THE TOM ALYEA FILM (TAKEN FROM INSIDE THE TEXAS SCHOOL BOOK DEPOSITORY ON 11/22/63)"


Now, as DVP says, that is silent film to which commentary has been added.


At about 7m 20s, we hear the commentator saying: "an Argentine-made bolt action rifle of World War Two vintage". Note that he doesn't actually use the word "Mauser" (I think DVP made a slight slip up about that earlier in this thread). In fact, I do not think the word "Mauser" is used at any point in the narration in the video that I have linked to.


Having said all that, at the point in the investigation that the commentary was made (quite soon after the event, apparently), someone evidently thought that the rifle was "Argentine-made". Now Robert Prudhomme has kindly posted earlier a picture of a rifle stamped with the text "Mauser Modelo Argentino 1891".



He also stated that the only 8.65 Mausers made were these so-called "Argentine-made" Mausers (I believe he said they were common in other parts of South American as well).


Now, IF someone in the TSBD saw a rifle with "Mauser Modelo Argentino" stamped (somewhere) on it, and IF he knew something about guns, then he might have put two and two together and come to the conclusion that it was an 8.65 calibre rifle (for the reason given by Robert Prudhomme).


IF that person was Weitzman and if Roger Craig was looking over his shoulder (as it were), they both could have read the "Mauser Modelo Argentino" inscription, and then if Weitzman said "it must be an 8.65" (from his knowledge of Mausers), then Craig could have later incorrectly remembered that he had seen "8.65" stamped on the barrel, while actually subconsciously remembering what Weizman had said.


I'm not saying that's what definitely happened, but offering it as a possible explanation of how both Weitzman and Craig apparently identified a rifle found there as a Mauser 8.65.


...


On other matters:


The backyard photos: Does anyone know what are supposed to have been Oswald's reasons for having his photograph taken with the rifle and the handgun?


What were the newspapers/magazines that he was holding? (I can only read the word "Military" and there seem to be two copies or issues of it in his right hand).


Why would he have been wearing dark clothing? (It could almost be a police uniform (minus the badges), or maybe some kind of paramilitary uniform.


And to those who are convinced of the "lone-assassin" theory, what do you think were Oswald's motives? What could he possibly have to gain by doing this? And how did he get the rifle into the TSBD? And where did he get his ammunition (rifle and revolver)?


Also, we have heard about the gunshot-residue that may or not have been on Oswald's cheek and hands: what of the rifle itself? Were tests carried out to prove whether or not the rifle had recently been fired, and if so, how reliable are these tests?



---


Disclaimer: Yes, this is my first posting. No that is not suspicious - I am not a shill for anyone else; I represent only myself. No, I am not any kind of expert on the JFK assassination. I happen to think there was a conspiracy, and have thought so for many years / decades. I have a reasonably open mind on whether Oswald was involved at all, or if he fired any shots from the TSBD at all. On balance, I think probably not.


Edited: to correct one misspelling of "Argentino".

Edited by Mike Ellwood

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I recall, the two newspapers Oswald was holding in the backyard photos were US published communist newspapers--I think one was The Worker, and the other was The Militant--but as I recall, they were from factions whose views of communism actually opposed one another.

EDIT: The Daily Worker was a newspaper published by Communist Party USA, and The Militant is a newspaper published by the Socialist Workers Party...a Trotskyist group, as I understand it. CPUSA was more Stalinist-oriented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I recall, the two newspapers Oswald was holding in the backyard photos were US published communist newspapers--I think one was The Worker, and the other was The Militant--but as I recall, they were from factions whose views of communism actually opposed one another.

EDIT: The Daily Worker was a newspaper published by Communist Party USA, and The Militant is a newspaper published by the Socialist Workers Party...a Trotskyist group, as I understand it. CPUSA was more Stalinist-oriented.

@Mark Knight: Many thanks for the quick response Mark.

Back to Mausers for a minute:

@Robert Prudhomme: I had a close look at the picture of the stamp that you posted, and I notice that underneath the "Mauser Modelo Argentino 1891" is written "Deutsche Waffen und Munitionsfabrike Berlin".

So I guess we can safely say that (at least that particular weapon) was made in Germany (and not in Argentina) and expressly for the Argentine market (presumably for the government). I wonder if the ones adopted by the other South American countries had the identical stamp, or if they were "personalised" for the target market?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I recall, the two newspapers Oswald was holding in the backyard photos were US published communist newspapers--I think one was The Worker, and the other was The Militant--but as I recall, they were from factions whose views of communism actually opposed one another.

EDIT: The Daily Worker was a newspaper published by Communist Party USA, and The Militant is a newspaper published by the Socialist Workers Party...a Trotskyist group, as I understand it. CPUSA was more Stalinist-oriented.

@Mark Knight: Many thanks for the quick response Mark.

Back to Mausers for a minute:

@Robert Prudhomme: I had a close look at the picture of the stamp that you posted, and I notice that underneath the "Mauser Modelo Argentino 1891" is written "Deutsche Waffen und Munitionsfabrike Berlin".

So I guess we can safely say that (at least that particular weapon) was made in Germany (and not in Argentina) and expressly for the Argentine market (presumably for the government). I wonder if the ones adopted by the other South American countries had the identical stamp, or if they were "personalised" for the target market?

One small correction, it was the 7.65mm Argentine Mauser, not the 8.65mm.

These rifles were initially and exclusively manufactured in Germany. Later on, Mauser allowed their manufacture, under contractual licence, in countries other than Germany. I believe the "Modelo Argentino" was universal in South American countries, although this rifle was also known, in Europe, as the "Belgian Mauser", due to this country adopting this calibre and model of rifle.

As I stated earlier, it was typical of Mauser to stamp the model of the rifle on the receiver, but not the calibre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@Kenneth Drew,
Although I agree with your overall position much much than I agree with DVP, I must take issue with you on your refusal to post a link to the video which you say exists showing officers identifying a rifle found in the TSBD as a Mauser.
I have no way of knowing what you saw and heard on TV in 1963, but if, as you have said more than once, that video copies of it are easily found on the web, then why not prove this and post a link? Because I have looked, and I cannot find such a video.
I think that in this instance, DVP is probably right and you are thinking of the Tom Alyea film footage. I'll post a link to that below. I'm not sure if this is the identical link that DVP posted, but it probably is, as the link I will post is to his Youtube JFK channel:
"THE TOM ALYEA FILM (TAKEN FROM INSIDE THE TEXAS SCHOOL BOOK DEPOSITORY ON 11/22/63)"
Now, as DVP says, that is silent film to which commentary has been added.
At about 7m 20s, we hear the commentator saying: "an Argentine-made bolt action rifle of World War Two vintage". Note that he doesn't actually use the word "Mauser" (I think DVP made a slight slip up about that earlier in this thread). In fact, I do not think the word "Mauser" is used at any point in the narration in the video that I have linked to.
Having said all that, at the point in the investigation that the commentary was made (quite soon after the event, apparently), someone evidently thought that the rifle was "Argentine-made". Now Robert Prudhomme has kindly posted earlier a picture of a rifle stamped with the text "Mauser Modelo Argentino 1891".
He also stated that the only 8.65 Mausers made were these so-called "Argentine-made" Mausers (I believe he said they were common in other parts of South American as well).
Now, IF someone in the TSBD saw a rifle with "Mauser Modelo Argentino" stamped (somewhere) on it, and IF he knew something about guns, then he might have put two and two together and come to the conclusion that it was an 8.65 calibre rifle (for the reason given by Robert Prudhomme).
IF that person was Weitzman and if Roger Craig was looking over his shoulder (as it were), they both could have read the "Mauser Modelo Argentino" inscription, and then if Weitzman said "it must be an 8.65" (from his knowledge of Mausers), then Craig could have later incorrectly remembered that he had seen "8.65" stamped on the barrel, while actually subconsciously remembering what Weizman had said.
I'm not saying that's what definitely happened, but offering it as a possible explanation of how both Weitzman and Craig apparently identified a rifle found there as a Mauser 8.65.
...
On other matters:
The backyard photos: Does anyone know what are supposed to have been Oswald's reasons for having his photograph taken with the rifle and the handgun?
What were the newspapers/magazines that he was holding? (I can only read the word "Military" and there seem to be two copies or issues of it in his right hand).
Why would he have been wearing dark clothing? (It could almost be a police uniform (minus the badges), or maybe some kind of paramilitary uniform.
And to those who are convinced of the "lone-assassin" theory, what do you think were Oswald's motives? What could he possibly have to gain by doing this? And how did he get the rifle into the TSBD? And where did he get his ammunition (rifle and revolver)?
Also, we have heard about the gunshot-residue that may or not have been on Oswald's cheek and hands: what of the rifle itself? Were tests carried out to prove whether or not the rifle had recently been fired, and if so, how reliable are these tests?
---
Disclaimer: Yes, this is my first posting. No that is not suspicious - I am not a shill for anyone else; I represent only myself. No, I am not any kind of expert on the JFK assassination. I happen to think there was a conspiracy, and have thought so for many years / decades. I have a reasonably open mind on whether Oswald was involved at all, or if he fired any shots from the TSBD at all. On balance, I think probably not.
Edited: to correct one misspelling of "Argentino".

Thanks for your comments, Mike, and welcome to the site. Your statement:" I must take issue with you on your refusal to post a link to the video which you say exists showing officers identifying a rifle found in the TSBD as a Mauser " may not be correct. I do not recall saying that videos exist on the web identifying the rifle. I think my statement is usually that I saw it on tv in 1963. I have seen the video you linked to and also the video's that show Roger Craig saying that Weitzman identified it as a 7.65 Mauser. I do recall the film's with Weitzman pointing to the rifle and the commentator saying that he says "it says right there, Mauser. I don't know if that film still exists today or not. I wouldn't be surprised if it no longer exists. I do know that after Weitzman pointed that out to the other officers that He and they all signed a sworn affidavit that it was a Mauser. How all of those officers were 'mistaken' has never been explained. I know that, in my opinion, if a group of officers were standing on a street corner and an automobile pulled up and stopped which most of them had never seen, but if one officer walked over to the auto and pointed to the word "chevrolet" that I wouldn't be surprised if the majority correctly identified it later in affidavits as a Chevrolet. Then if a majority of those officers, 5 years later said they must have misspoken or mistaken, I'm not sure I would believe the evidence had not been tampered with. I don't often, or never, agree with DVP. Can't think of anything he's been right on so far. Might happen one day. Backyard photos: It clear and certain that LHO is not in any BYP's. Those you see are 'photo shopped' (to use today's language) to add LHO's head onto someone's body. All of the 'authentication' of these photos are bogus. And of course the rifle in those photos is not the same as the MC planted on the 6th floor.

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...