Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

There is absolutely no proof REA ever shipped a gun to him [Oswald] or Hidell...

You must be joking. The Seaport Traders & REA paper trails are extensive, and provide conclusive proof (via their paperwork) that Revolver V510210 was shipped to "Hidell" in March '63.

Is all this paperwork supposedly phony too?....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/08/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-42.html

Plus, Oswald was caught with the Tippit murder weapon ON HIM on 11/22. So why anyone even CARES about where or when Oswald INITIALLY gained possession of the revolver eight months earlier is something I fail to completely understand. I think the priorities of CTers regarding the topic of Oswald's pistol are misguided (to say the least).

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 582
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

4 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

Dallas postal workers and FBI agents presumably monitoring his mail: "don't look at me"🍿

You don't mean an FBI agent or postal employee of Harry Holmes  received a gun or guns on behalf of LHO?  Never thought of that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

You must be joking. The Seaport Traders & REA paper trails are extensive, and provide conclusive proof (via their paperwork) that Revolver V510210 was shipped to "Hidell" in March '63.

Is all this paperwork supposedly phony too?....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/08/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-42.html

Plus, Oswald was caught with the Tippit murder weapon ON HIM on 11/22. So why anyone even CARES about where or when Oswald INITIALLY gained possession of the revolver eight months earlier is something I fail to completely understand. I think the priorities of CTers regarding the topic of Oswald's pistol are misguided (to say the least).

You are quick.  But the shells didn't match. The gun was modified, old and worn.  

Edited by Ron Bulman
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

But the shells didn't match.

The 4 shells Oswald dumped from Revolver V510210 at 10th & Patton perfectly matched the gun that was taken from Oswald in the theater.

Or are you talking about the "Winchester/Remington" mismatch when comparing the shells to the bullets in Tippit's body? If so, I think it's quite possible that Oswald fired 5 shots at Officer Tippit, with one bullet missing Tippit entirely and never being recovered (along with one missing shell as well).

From a post I wrote on this "shells" subject in 2012....

"Obviously what happened is this: Lee Harvey Oswald shot J.D. Tippit with Smith & Wesson revolver #V510210, and after firing four (or perhaps five) bullets at Tippit, Oswald ran (or walked briskly) toward the corner of Tenth & Patton. When he reached the corner, Oswald began to unload the empty shells from his revolver, with two of the shells falling to the ground on Tenth Street (very near the corner itself), with the other two shells coming out of the gun after Oswald had reached the side yard of the Davis apartment building (see page 266 of [Dale Myers'] "With Malice").

The above scenario of Oswald's shell-dumping is also perfectly consistent with the known characteristics of Lee Oswald's V510210 revolver, which is a gun that would result in bulged (or slightly expanded) cartridge cases after bullets were fired through the rechambered revolver. Which means the shells would have a tendency to stick in the chamber, resulting in additional effort being required by any gunman attempting to manually remove the shells from the weapon (see page 258 of "With Malice").

This "sticky shells" situation was almost certainly the case with Oswald's revolver on November 22, 1963, at 10th & Patton, with the shells being a bit difficult for Oswald to remove from the gun all at once. Hence, there were two shells found near the corner on Tenth Street, while the other two shells were found around the corner in the Davises' side yard.

It's also quite possible that the "sticky" nature of Oswald's bullet shells could be the reason that only four shells were recovered at the Tippit murder scene (with the possibility existing that Oswald actually fired five bullets at Officer Tippit, with one bullet missing the target).

If Oswald did, indeed, fire five shots at Tippit (which can never be proven, of course), instead of just four shots, then it's possible that the fifth bullet shell was simply lost to history, never having been recovered by anyone after the shooting.

The above scenario is somewhat buttressed by the testimony of eyewitness Sam Guinyard, who watched Oswald flee the scene of Tippit's murder from Ted Callaway's car lot.

Guinyard told the Warren Commission that he saw Oswald "knocking empty shells out of his pistol", although it's a little unclear exactly where Oswald was located when Guinyard saw him removing the shells. It's possible Guinyard was only referring to Oswald kicking out shells near the corner of 10th & Patton. But it's also possible that Guinyard saw Oswald still in the process of dumping shells out of the gun when Oswald was much further down Patton Avenue.

And if the latter situation is true, then it's quite conceivable that Oswald could have removed at least one bullet shell from his revolver when he was near the corner of Patton and Jefferson Boulevard. And we know that no bullet shells were recovered that far away from where J.D. Tippit was killed." -- David Von Pein; January 7, 2012

 

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to post
Share on other sites


MORE AND MORE MAGIC!

Nearly two decades ago, John Armstrong noticed that the U.S. Postal Money Order allegedly used to pay for the 6.5 Carcano that allegedly killed JFK was apparently uncashed and undeposited, without being stamped with any bank endorsement whatsoever.  On page 467 of Harvey and Lee, John wrote:

The information that a Secret Service agent hand carried the original money order
to Dallas came from Harry Holmes. As we have seen, this did not happen and was
yet another of Holmes' fabrications. Copies of the money order were sent to Dallas but
the original uncashed and undeposited money order was turned over to the FBI 
laboratory.  [H&L, p. 467]

Starting on November 12, 2015, Sandy Larsen began this very thread, and, a few days later, Sandy posted his finished proof that current Federal regulations in effect in 1963 required that sending bank endorsements and ABA transit numbers had to be stamped on BOTH SIDES of various financial documents, including U.S. Postal Money Orders.

Sandy’s proof is HERE.

Since it lacked the necessary endorsements but included a file locator number supposedly printed on the document after being returned to USPS from other financial institutions, the money order clearly became MAGICAL!  A number of WC loyalists have tried over the years to debunk Sandy’s proof, all without success, though they will claim otherwise.

Now, let’s consider if the Magic Money Order® was just an inexplicable anomaly in an otherwise solid case by the FBI that the 6.5 Carcano was owned by Oswald. According to the Dallas police chief, the FBI indicated to him just hours after the assassination that it was DEFINITELY Oswald’s handwriting on a March 20, 1963 order for a $12.78 rifle with optical scope from Klein’s. 

This is strange, because according to documents now at the National Archives, in the early morning hours of 11/23/63 FBI agents at Klein’s offices in Chicago found microfilm evidence that a $21.95 rifle similar to the rifle allegedly found in the TSBD had been paid for with a postal money order issued March 20, 1963. 

21.95.png

The microfilm containing that evidence was immediately sent to Washington, DC, despite the fact that conflicting “evidence” from the FBI indicates the microfilm was placed in a safe at Klein’s offices in Chicago as well as in a safety deposit box at LaSalle National Bank in Chicago. 

According to the Warren Commission, however, neither the $12.78 rifle ordered in Oswald’s handwriting on March 20, nor the $21.95 rifle also ordered on March 20 according to Klein’s records, was the rifle found in the Book Depository.  That rifle, the FBI eventually announced, was actually a $21.45 Carcano ordered on March 12.  Amazingly, it turned out that this earlier order was ALSO in Oswald’s handwriting.  Clearly, the rifles also had become magical; the Magic Rifle® was paid for with a Magic Money Order®.

But the magic doesn’t end there.  As most of us know, the Magic Rifle was alleged to have fired the infamous Magic Bullet® that allegedly caused all those injuries in President Kennedy and Governor Connally without the enduring the usual damage to similar bullets causing even lesser injuries. 

There are two possible conclusions here.  Either there was an enormous cover-up involving the weapon that allegedly was used to assassinate President Kennedy, or a Magic Money Order® was used to purchase a Magic Rifle®, which in turn fired a Magic Bullet® in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963.  Do you believe in magic?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

You don't mean an FBI agent or postal employee of Harry Holmes  received a gun or guns on behalf of LHO?  Never thought of that.

I mean that the large package that shipped the rifle not only probably didn't get into Oswald's hands, but that it most likely COULDN'T. Was his mail not being monitored for being a public communist? Isn't it also usually a no-go to have this sent to a P.O. Box under another name?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's use Occam's Razor...

Reports dated Jan, Feb, March and April 1963 are written by FBI agents tasked with maintaining a file and observing the activities of Lee Oswald

Which magazines he reads, what letters he writes and sends...

Here's one from March 25, 1963... this is the Monday of the week he supposedly picks up the rifle from his PO Box... ;)

So obviously it's been ordered and shipped... or at least in that process...  :P

My question remains the same...

Why do we not see a single FBI report (using the extensive USPS informant network they have) mentioning the shipment and receipt of the rifle and pistol?  I can understand the pistol went REA so that has its own set of conflicts...

But the rifle, in a 5 foot carton shipped to Ozzie in early spring 1963 wouldn't be reported... ??

--- this is yet another and probably one of the best examples of the cover-up...  Reports on key items which appear after 11/22 are in conflict with the reporting process in real time.  The USPS informants would surely know about an envelope sent to Klein's Sporting Goods....  and if not, then when the 5' carton shows up in Dallas at least? (let alone how he was supposed to have gotten this 5' rifle home... did he keep the box like he kept everything?  why wouldn't he keep the Box to store and move the rifle since they move so often?) 

Song remains the same....  I claim he was at Odio...  from Sept 24 until Oct 31 the FBI reports think he's moving to Dallas/Irving as well....  and then silence until the CIA report of Oct 10.  He was working at Klein's for over 2 weeks before a report claims to have found him...  IMHO, these reports were either removed or are somewhere related to Oswald the FBI asset/informant charges and realities...

Let me leave you with just one thing re: the Postal Money Order...  Harry Holmes lies his behind off...  The SS claims to find it in Kansas City while a clandestine operation is in process to "secure this PMO"...  Harry claims they found a stub with the correct amount (despite not knowing the actual amount)

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

http://www.kenrahn.com/JFK/History/The_deed/Sneed/Holmes.html  It wasn’t but a couple of minutes that one of the girls hollered, “Here it is!” So I looked at it and down at the bottom of the ad it said that that particular rifle was such and such amount. But if it could not be carried on a person, such as a pistol, like a shotgun or a rifle, then it was $1.25 or $1.37 extra. Shipping charges were also added, so I added those together, took that figure and called around to all the different stations and the main office where these crews were checking stubs.         
It wasn’t ten minutes that they hollered, “Eureka!” They had the stub!

Mr. BELIN. So what happened?
Mr. HOLMES. So in about an hour Postal Inspector McGee of Chicago called back then and said that the correct amount was $21.95---$21.45 excuse me, and that the shipping---they had received this money order on March the 13th, whereas I had been looking for March 20.
So then I passed the information to the men who were looking for this money order stub to show which would designate, which would show the number of the money order, and that is the only way you could find one.
I relayed this information to them and told them to start on the 13th because he could have bought it that morning and that he could have gotten it by airmail that afternoon, so they began to search and within 10 minutes they called back and said they had a money order in that amount issued on, I don't know that I show, but it was that money order in an amount issued at the main post office, which is the same place as this post office box was at that time, box 2915 and the money order had been issued early on the morning of March the 12th, 1963.

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

One would think that this book of STUBS with the one showing the correct amount (determined by adding $1.25 or $1.37 to $19.95?  fail) would be a prime piece of evidence...
Something that HOLMES would be especially proud to have been part of finding...  I even created an image of what it should have looked like before separation:

901547899_LHOMoneyorderincolorwithsignaturecomparisonsandwhatthestublookslike.thumb.jpg.b0dc996656faf86aaf24855154f31e5b.jpg

But we don't get any evidence like that -

https://statick2k-5f2f.kxcdn.com/images/pdf/JosephsMOTimeline.pdf   will help put things in perspective

 

All I can ask is that you read the work and decide for yourself  -  https://statick2k-5f2f.kxcdn.com/images/pdf/JosephsRiflePart1.pdf 
https://statick2k-5f2f.kxcdn.com/images/pdf/JosephsRifle.pdf     https://statick2k-5f2f.kxcdn.com/images/pdf/JosephsPistol.pdf   

It's too bad DVP doesn't take the time to look thru these... 

1680155745_CE1799andSSreportconflictastolocationPMOwasfound.thumb.jpg.c66315a5553deedbee89aab8331bdb69.jpg

 

From the time he/they returned in June 1962 he was "looked after" with reports generated consistently along the way.

Sept 1962, March 1963, April 1963, June 1963.....

Mr. BELIN. And do you know in what kind of a container it would have been shipped? 
Mr. WALDMAN. It was customary for us to ship these rifles with scopes attached in a corrugated cardboard carton made for us by the Rudd Container Corporation of Chicago. 
Mr. BELIN. About how long would that carton be in size, if you know? 
Mr. WALDMAN. Approximately 60 inches. 

http://www.cameronpackaging.com/gun_boxes.html   

56700424_63-03-11USPSinformanttellsFBIaboutmoveto214Neely-theyevenwenttotheplacetocheck.jpg.b41390aee94485e36da114651d5232f2.jpg

 

821908012_63-04-11oswaldincontactwithFPCCandseenwithasandwichboardhandingoutleaflets-CharlesSteeleJr.jpg.8bdb12e45808af1de286c7a599cbb933.jpg

 

924306427_63-06-10MoreUSPSinfoonOswaldmailactivity.jpg.cf71711efcab877af4da597e7d31070e.jpg


Only that they are aware Ozzie beats Marina (another lie) and of a couple other addresses for the little family.

 

img_57690_111_300.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
CD75 also plainly says that Waldman made available the microfilm "from a safe in his control", which perfectly aligns with the earlier FBI FD-302 report we find in CD7. 

Let's look at this microfilm and SAFE situation shall we?

This is the report from CD75 he refers to:  see in the first paragraph where it says "from a safe in his control..."  THIS report is signed by only 1 FBI agent, DOLAN.

This is FROM 11/23 and signed on 11/26 by DOLAN...  It also states that "WALDMAN was furnished a receipt for the above identified microfilm" dated 11/23

to paraphrase:  Waldman went to the safe and provided a roll of microfilm to SA DOLAN who takes it, giving Waldman a receipt.  This gives us the impression Waldman et al found the order on the film and put it aside for the FBI....

img_10477_671_300.png

Now, let's go back just one page in CD75:

A surprisingly similar report, from the same date and event yet something is different?

Yes, this is page 666. you see above is page 667...  except there is another page to THIS report....  and it appears as if the 2 other FBI agents who went to Kleins with DOLAN are also involved:  this time the report states that WALDMAN "made available for review records of his firm"  the Microfilm... only no safe this time, and no impression that any record was found BEFORE the FBI arrives.

So it goes on to state what was on the reel... including the famous scans of the envelope and coupon, just not the Money Order...  what a surprise.

yet as I said before DVP will not reveal what he certainly knows about these reports...  the one signed by all three has a 2nd page

img_10477_670_300.png

Except in CD75 - the 2nd page is missing.   So yes the first report with only DOLAN suggests that DOLAN TAKES THE FILM... we go to CD7 p189 we find a match https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10408#relPageId=196&tab=page   DOLAN alone and a "safe in his control"

 

img_10408_196_300.png

 

BUT WAIT....  go back 2 pages to 187 and we find the same page 1 from CD75 p666... but the real clincher here is this OTHER REPORT from the same event only this time we have 3 agents: DOLAN, TOEDT & MAHAN and we also have a page 2

And what page 2 tells us is that WALDMAN KEEPS THE MICROFILM...  That DOLAN did not take it and give him a receipt....  that if need be WALDMAN is the proper man to be subpoenaed (despite his not knowing a single thing about that rifle, that order, or the process)

So why is this such a big deal?   While 1 report with only 1 Agent claims to have taken the film, another with 3 agents says they didn't....  Wonder why the DOLAN ALONE VERSION of this memo contradicts with the one from all 3 men?

 

 

img_10408_194_300.png   img_10408_195_300.png

Well... It's because over the next 2 weeks the FBI does what they do to virtually every item of evidence... they duplicate it. Which means that despite the microfilm at the archives missing, there should be another copy to corroborate this "order blank"....

And finally... what remains yet another great mystery in this case... we have NEVER seen a rifle with any of the serial numbers from that famous shipment of 100 rifles... NEVER.

Waldman claims that any of the remaining stock was removed - none are available....  hoe convenient, right? 

Other than C2766, there is only 1 item of evidence which connects Kleins to these rifles directly - Michael Scibor's inventory sheet which assigns VC#'s to Serial #'s

 

1955501286_DOLANhasmicrofilmreproducedwithacopybacktowaldman.jpg.a1dcb15c6876ccfff95abf109abc7b8f.jpg

 

I've studied these pages very closely and have to say they are obviously a creation after the fact....   you can see where the background of the serial numbers was removed to place the new ones...  furthermore, this sheet is supposed to have been used as cartons are unpacked... one would expect to see 10 serial numbers in a row for each box opened being given a VC #...
Except they are all over the place as if they were simply written in any order

347380214_vcandserielnumbersfromwaldman.thumb.jpg.a0b9fcb582793acc8e6d401c8f03cd53.jpg

882592732_EnlargementofblankareaunderserialnumbersinWaldman4.jpg.8fe193d1fab6548dd38f3f5012692679.jpg

 

 

 

Does no one here find it a bit odd that although those 100 rifles had been advertised for months on end, there is not a single rifle bearing any of the other 99 serial numbers in existence...?

That there is no mention of how the rest of the inventory was "removed" is also a bit strange.... 

and finally this little blurb from Waldman...   he had "Senator Dodd's committee on my back"....

1164879917_MicrofilmplacedattheLaSalleBankinChicago-FBIkeptstufftheresupposedly.jpg.36928612056cf7ee180721c0d72c9f99.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Why do we not see a single FBI report (using the extensive USPS informant network they have) mentioning the shipment and receipt of the rifle and pistol?

David, thanks for posting so much evidence, it's appreciated.  The answer to your question is of course because the FBI cannot simultaneously admit it knew of the rifle shipment AND claim it had no reason to suspect Oswald of violence before the assassination, IMO.

I think that despite some personal hostility here, there is possibly not much difference between what I might say is possible versus what you and some others are arguing re: the money order.

I 100% agree Holmes is a dishonest conspirator.  His testimony is ridiculous from start to finish.  I've said as much repeatedly elsewhere on the forum.

However, instead of looking at the money order-rifle-Holmes data in terms of evidence created out of thin air, I ask you to briefly look at this as less about manufactured evidence and more about explaining how the evidence was allegedly uncovered before it was ever possible to uncover.

Try this on for size:

  1. a money order was purchased, a rifle was ordered, Klein's shipped the rifle to Oswald's PO box in the spring of 1963
  2. we don't have to pinpoint who receives the rifle - could be LHO, could be Holmes, could be parties unknown
  3. we don't have to certify where the gun is between April and November of 1963.  Maybe Oswald has it, maybe Holmes has it, maybe other conspirators have it.   Not important for the moment.
  4. fast forward to about 1:12pm on 22NOV63 - Fritz and others say "Oswald's" rifle is discovered under boxes at the TSBD.  Still doesn't matter whether this is true or not for my point in this post.
  5. The rifle shipped by Klein's is at some point entered into evidence by the DPD - maybe they found it on the 6th floor, maybe Oswald brought it to work with him, maybe Holmes had it all along.  Still doesn't matter where the rifle is for my point.
  6. ****NOW**** a problem develops that IMO could be the source of all the conflict on this thread.   Holmes within ~24 hours is able to figure out that:

a. Oswald had a PO box in Dallas in the spring of 63 different from his fall of 63 PO box

b. The rifle which officially becomes Oswald's assassination rifle was obtained through mail-order

c. The rifle was paid for by a USPS money order

e. Oswald ordered the rifle using the Hidell alias

f. the price of the rifle is $xx.xx (they get confused on this point, which leads to Holmes perfidiously claiming his secretary found an ad for the rifle in Field and Stream on 22NOV63 which let Holmes figure out the true price)

....all of which, items A-F, are IMPOSSIBLE to know given the state of knowledge in the immediate aftermath of the assassination - especially the idea that a USPS money order was used as a form of payment and that the rifle was mail-ordered (there is in fact a Dallas retailer selling the rifle according to WC data).   Why so certain a USPS money order is involved?  Why so certain it is a mail order rifle?    

Therefore - IMO Holmes and the WC aren't furnishing fraudulent evidence here, they are trying to cover up the fact that they had the evidence against Oswald in hand before he was even a suspect.   There is no way to know the rifle is a mail order rifle, nor that a money order was used to pay for it, nor its price.  All of this and more is well beyond the POSSIBLE state of knowledge less than 24 hours after the assassination.  

IMO there is no problem with the money order and if there was - this can only be because Klein's is on board with the conspiracy, which is absurd.   The rifle was ordered and the money order is real.   What's NOT REAL is how Holmes et al. came up with such a perfect case so quickly.  Yes, the story about finding the money order is 100% BS, but the money order itself is real and deposited by Klein's - and the rifle was sent to the PO box.  This mendacity is an effort to hide the fact that they already had the evidence before they woke up on the morning of 22NOV63, it is not an attempt to hide fake evidence.

The post-office-centric chain of evidence is way too important for the conspirators to fake after the fact- they set this up using a real order from Klein's with a real money order so that they'd have the evidence in hand on 22NOV63.

Holmes and the conspirators never planned on having to explain all this.  The WC was not part of the plan.  What you're seeing here is a plan executed sloppily on 22NOV63 because the conspirators among law enforcement never thought they'd have to explain how evidence was found to anyone but themselves, since they in fact had jurisdiction for the crime.  

Thoughts?

 

 

Jason

 

Edited by Jason Ward
Link to post
Share on other sites

My pleasure Jason...  let's see if I can address some of your thoughts

I'd like to take this slowly...

#1 - a money order was purchased, a rifle was ordered, Klein's shipped the rifle to Oswald's PO box in the spring of 1963

"a money order was purchased,"  

OK Jason...  let's start with this.  What proof of this do we have?  In the real world, when a PMO is purchased there remains a stub... there is a copy for the customer, and then the PMO for the recipient - I posted a mock-up of what that would look like BEFORE torn from the book...  the PMO was purchased at the (G)eneral (P)ost (O)ffice in Dallas...  yet the envelope with the coupon and this PMO are mailed elsewhere... rather than just drop it in the mail at the GPO in which he is supposedly standing.  No matter.

 

Despite HOLMES lying thru his teeth, the BOOK and STUB would still exist if a real PMO was purchased on that date from the GPO...

So, despite all the tangential bs....   what is the real proof THAT item was involved in a real transaction on March 12th? 

Well one way to prove it was real - other than just show us the book and stubs - is to match the transaction to the Federal Reserve processing... 

Mr. J HAROLD MARKS - one of the men at the USPS location who helps "secure" this document tells us about the process...

This comes from the transcripts on the House of Reps session related to HR 9507 and 9514:   March 30, 1960.

STATEMENT OF LOUIS J. DOYLE, ASSOCIATE GENERAL COUNSEL,

AND J. HAROLD MARKS, FINANCE OFFICER. BUREAU OF FINANCE. POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT

 

Processing of money orders "AS PAID THRU THE FED RESERVE" should put an end to whether these items are indeed processed by the FED and whether we should see that on the PMO...

For it to be processed by the FED it would need to be deposited by KLEINS...  agree?  For that to happen KLEINS stamps the back - in essence signing the back of a check - with their bank account number...

And there it is...  50  91144  is the KLEINS ACCOUNT NUMBER....  This would have been a stamp they use - agree?

 

 

WALDMAN was asked about this stamp so WALDMAN EXH 9 was created....  While it is a very close match...  it does not appear to be "identical"...  also n the WALDMAN exhibits are the deposits related to that Money Order....
 

 

 

The discussion with a Mr. WILMOUTH from the Fed Res touches on the specific data on that specific deposit...  except the FED's info does not match WALDMAN's

"two items in the amount of $21.45"    I found 8 items of 21.45 in this deposit, not 2.  And none of the rest of WILMOUTH's totals match the deposit....

So basically I am stuck at "a money order was purchased"....  Unlike DVP - I cannot pretend that the existence of the item is PROOF the item is authentic...  the Chain of events related to that item or the declaration of uniqueness give the item authenticity...  (i.e. that the rifle was found on the sixth floor does not prove Oswald bought it)

 

Jason - why aren't the most basic rules of evidence authentication applied?  If it came from a book that left stubs.... and a USP Inspector claims they found the PMO based on finding that stub... why isn't that book/stub in evidence?

If there were only 2 $21.45's... then this is not the correct deposit to prove anything related to that PMO - let alone that it was mailed from Dallas to Chicago (airmail), then received, opened, processed and deposited in less than 24 hours.  And then there's the fact the deposit is dated FEBRUATY 15 not March.... 

If the PMO was created from a different book (analysis of the numbering of the PMO reveals a problem) that evening at the USPS center very few things would be needed for this item to come alive...  the ONLY thing that could not exist would be the book/stub from where it came as that would prove the deception.

And Finally the PMO #2,202,130,461....    Books of these blank PMOs are sent all over the country... On Nov 14, 1962 Oswald uses PMO# 1,158,380,709 to send $10 to Uncle Sam to pay off his loan...   Is it really conceivable that between Dec 1962 and March 1963 over 1 billion PMOs would be used ?

So before we move on to  "a rifle was ordered"  let's find some evidence which proves it was ever bought in the real world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by David Josephs
Link to post
Share on other sites

Imagine if there were "searchers" like Mr Josephs back in 1967 and 1975? Different ball game.

Perhaps this will serves as a lesson for future searchers about 9/11. 17 years after it and so little coverage or concern. How the government run history books get approved might mean that the truly gullible remain away from any real truth seeking. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

OK Jason...  let's start with this.  What proof of this do we have? 

David, many thanks for your reply and for supplying evidence.   I don't know if we should talk much more because you have a different approach than I.  First of all - there is EVIDENCE.   Not proof.   I don't ask for proof, I ask for evidence.  We each determine the value of evidence.  In my case, I am a banker and that informs the weight I assign to the evidence re: money order.

You are on a different track than me.   I seek to weigh evidence, you seem to insist on proof - proof as you define it of course.     Using your standards you would be able to "prove" that half the checks written and processed in this country are fraudulent.   

I'll provide you with my responses to your points since you thankfully put in serious effort and invoked so much evidence.  But first, let me ask about your invocation of Occam's razor.   Don't you believe in multiple Oswalds?   Don't you believe that 1-2 Oswalds are controlled by US intelligence not later than Oswald's time in the Marines?

.

Which is the simplest way to make Oswald into a patsy?

a. Having one of your Oswalds self incriminate himself by ordering the rifle, write letters to the FPCC, etc., ?

OR

b. Try to fake all the evidence afterwards?

 

Jason

 

Edited by Jason Ward
Link to post
Share on other sites

Very magnanimous buddy....

16 minutes ago, Jason Ward said:

Don't you believe in multiple Oswalds?   Don't you believe that 1-2 Oswalds are controlled by US intelligence not later than Oswald's time in the Marines?

Believe? no...  I see concrete evidence there existed two men using that name concurrently with the larger one of them working with the same characters involved with the anti-Castro situation...    There is concrete evidence that THE Oswald was in the US while THAT Oswald was in Russia....  It's taken years to scratch the surface of understanding those records...

 

22 minutes ago, Jason Ward said:

Which is the simplest way to make Oswald into a patsy?

a. Having one of your Oswalds self incriminate himself by ordering the rifle, write letters to the FPCC, etc., ?

OR

b. Try to fake all the evidence afterwards?

 

As for the razor... which of those two processes insures the evidence fits the exact need
and which leaves it up to a wild variable in the equation? 

Who has some of the greatest forgers in the world? US Intelligence maybe?  

There is a distinct SCRIPT v HANDWRITING difference between the two men as well...  but we needn't get into that here......  except for one little nagging question

The real LEE got letters from his mother in the Marine VERY often... and he wrote his mother - and brother -  as well:

Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Marguerite Oswald   August 3 8 3 1961
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Marguerite Oswald   October 2 10 2 1961
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Marguerite Oswald   October 22 10 22 1961
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Marguerite Oswald   November 8 11 8 1961
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Marguerite Oswald   December 13 12 13 1961
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Marguerite Oswald   January 2 1 2 1962
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Marguerite Oswald   January 20 1 20 1962
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Marguerite Oswald   January 23 1 23 1962
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Marguerite Oswald   February 1 2 1 1962
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Marguerite Oswald   February 9 2 9 1962
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Marguerite Oswald   February 15 2 15 1962
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Marguerite Oswald   February 24 2 24 1962
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Marguerite Oswald   March 28 3 28 1962
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Marguerite Oswald   April 22 4 22 1962
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Marguerite Oswald   May 30 5 30 1962
         
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   November 8 11 8 1959
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   November 26 11 26 1959
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   December 17 12 17 1959
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   May 5 5 5 1961
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   May 31 5 31 1961
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   July 14 7 14 1961
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   August 21 8 21 1961
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   September 10 9 10 1961
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   October 22 10 22 1961
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   November 1 11 1 1961
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   November 20 11 20 1961
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   November 30 11 30 1961
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   December 14 12 14 1961
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   December 20 12 20 1961
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   January 5 1 5 1962
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   January 30 1 30 1962
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   February 15 2 15 1962
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   April 12 4 12 1962
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   June 26 6 26 1962
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   March 16 3 16 1963
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   November 17. 11 17  
Letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to Robert Oswald   December 20 12 20  

 

but do you know that in the entire 26 volumes there is not a single letter from his mother from the man who appeared to keep everything.   This is his first letter to "mom"

"Received your letter today...."    just another brick in the wall....

img_1133_554_200.jpg

 

 

No doubt he was both creating bona fides and incriminating himself with his actions....  what happens to all that junk if JFK is shot in Tampa; or in Chicago where VALLEE = Oswald?

If we are not even on the same page in our understanding that Oswald was not a shooter in this tragic play - then you're right... we can respectfully toddle off...

We must remember that Oswald did not do this so by definition the evidence which points to his guilt needs extreme authentication - and we find in every case that the evidence is simply not authentic, it was altered, created, replaced, lost, etc... so that our man Oswald is guilty....

In matters of politics and murder... Occam's may not apply anymore

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

Could you do me a favor and answer the question please Jason....

What EVIDENCE do you offer that supports that PMO being purchased by Oswald on the 12th of March?

If this is Oswald's writing...  seems he was at work all morning...   or is this a fake?

1423540293_JCStimecardMArch121963.jpg.81a12faa5b668cc0d3793fa7c8c773c6.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

What constitutes evidence? Seems strange to make a distinction between evidence and proof, since evidence is how we get to proof. Just because evidence exists doesn't make it true. Are the statements of confidential informants, as relayed by their handlers, evidence? Yes, but they have to be weighed. Joseph is imo correct when he says that evidence of Oswald's guilt or guilty actions (such as those in MC as reported by informants) needs to be viewed with extreme caution. Perhaps another way to say this is that evidence can be faked, whether physical or eyewitness. 

Jason - you are looking for proof as much as anyone. That's why you are examining evidence. 

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...