David Josephs

Kinda like Bledsoe and the bus trip Not outlandish at all... Bledsoe could never tell us about Oswald's ARREST shirt (with the torn buttons and torn elbow) before he had gone home and changed. I don't see that Oswald was on that bus (McWatters even denies it was Oswald) but he had to be for the scenario to work... Bledsoe, like so many other witnesses if you read thru the testimony, was led into the directions needed. As were Truly and Baker regarding the lunchroom encounter. ===== {sigh} This is not like any other case... the Evidence IS the Conspiracy, not indicative of the initial crime... Besides... let's look at what it would take for Oswald to have been in that window at the right time with a rifle ready to fire: https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/oswald-on-november-22-1963 Cheers DJ

(edit) Sorry... you're right about the Coke being in Fritz's notes... but when exactly where they written? "Claims 2nd floor Coke when off came in" ================= Truly, Baker and Reid testify to the WC on the same day, one after the other... March 25th. The first appearance seems to be Mrs. Reid's testimony.... and then Baker's recant from Sept Mr. DULLES. Did he have a coke? Mr. TRULY. No, sir. Mr. DULLES. No drink? Mr. TRULY. No drink at all. Just standing there. Mr. BELIN - All right. I see a coke machine off on the left. When you saw Oswald after you got to this doorway inside the lunchroom, had he gone as far as the coke machine?Mr. BAKER - I didn't notice the coke machine or any item in the room there All I was looking at was the man, and he seemed to be approximately 20 feet down there from me. When Baker rewrites his statement the day before the WCR is delivered, the man in the lunchroom was already drinking a coke... Baker can't even get his rewrite correct... and must change what he wrote to jive with the story. Mrs. REID. Well, I kept walking and I looked up and Oswald was coming in the back door of the office. I met him by the time I passed my desk several feet and I told him, I said, "Oh, the President has been shot, but maybe they didn't hit him." He mumbled something to me, I kept walking, he did, too. I didn't pay any attention to what he said because I had no thoughts of anything of him having any connection with it at all because he was very calm. He had gotten a coke and was holding it in his hands and I guess the reason it impressed me seeing him in there I thought it was a little strange that one of -the warehouse boys would be up in the office at the time, not that he had done anything wrong. The only time I had seen him in the office was to come and get change and he already had his coke in his hand so he didn't come for change and I dismissed him. I didn't think anything else.

Like the Baker Affidavit... it was simply ignored. And once the PMO was in their possession - real or not; authentic or not didn't matter.... Holmes is performing all this SATURDAY MORNING... yet the information relayed to SAIC Gaiglein who is with Harold Marks and other "employees" of the Facility to retrieve the PMO. It's not until 8:30 PM that the process of finding the original - or a copy - even begins... yet by noon that morning, Holmes claims he located the STUB still attached to the BOOK by using the TOTAL AMOUNT of the PMO as determined by Homes' bad addition...(Note: shipping was $1.50 for a total of $19.95 + $1.50 = $21.45... Holmes is even offering the wrong shipping amount yet still arrives at the correct total?) Between noon and 10pm... nothing appears to have been happening related to the PMO... or was it? supposedly, it was ultimately produced at a Postal Center in VA "Further Chicago investigation shows that the money order involved has been recovered by Postal Inspec- tos in Kansas City and forwarded the Assistant Chief's Office of this Service" (2nd paragraph Synposis) "Holmes' notes from 11-22" “Now you thumb through those,” I said, “and when you come to Klein’s Sporting Goods, let’s see what it looks like.” 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! (this would have been the far right stub with the # , $amount , and date stamp.) I called it in immediately to the chief on the open line to Washington and said, “I’ve got the money order number that Oswald used to buy this gun, and according to the records up there, they had shipped it to this box that he had rented at the main office in Dallas at that time, which he later closed and opened another at the Terminal Annex because it was closer to the School Book Depository.” WCR Testimony: 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. Mr. BELIN. All right. Now, you found this postal money order and then what did you do? Mr. HOLMES. I gave that information to my boss by telephone. He called Washington immediately. Of course this information included the money order number Mr. BELIN. Anything else now about this money order? Do you have a record of the number of the money order? Mr. HOLMES. No; I don't.

A mockup. Yes What Bugs and others dislike is when more evidence which should corroborate, should authentic... Proves the original evidence is as they say in france, merde. ... Self-corroborating circular evidence which conflicts with standard procedures needs close examination... Whenever evidence is minimized by the likes Of Bugs et al... You know they prefer you not look behind the curtain.... Oz must remain elusive. The rifle evidence is fraught with problems Just ask Michael Scibor...

No on both accounts. There was no money order or rifle order prior to 11.22. I cover it all at K&K

The evidence shows the postal money order being found 4 different times in 3 different places.... Holmes' story is pure fantasy... The found the stub in the money order book... But no stub or book is offered.... Before tearing it should have looked like this.... The stub at the right, in the book of other money orders is proof... Holmes claims are not authentic

Mr. WALDMAN. Our catalog No. C20-T750, which was the number indicated on the coupon prepared by A. Hidell, designates a rifle with scope attached. And we would have so shipped it unless the customer specifically specified that he did not wish to have it attached. There is nothing in our records to indicate that there was any request made by the customer, and therefore we would have every reason to believe that it was shipped as a rifle with scope-mounted. Mr. BELIN. Do you know whether or not the rifle would have been broken down in shipment or whether or not it would have been shipped fully assembled? 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. Mr. BELIN. Did you ever furnish any samples of this carton or any wrapping paper or tape to the FBI? Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; we did furnish a sample of the carton together with the type of sealing tape that was generally used and such craft paper that may have been used for inner cushioning packing.

Really great work there Steve.... I'm trying to make the point that the FBI had informants telling them about Oswald's postal situations CI NO T-1 is giving us info in July '63 about where he lives, where he gets his mail and subsequently in this same report it talks of mail and its contents to and from the FPCC... And here not 3 weeks after supposedly receiving said rifle we are told again of mail to and from FPCC. As we can see, Confidential Informants were talking about Oswald not long after returning from Russia in June 1962. There are no reports of a rifle prior to Nov 22 since there was no rifle ordered or sent to Oswald prior to Nov 22 or ever. #43 is dated Aug 1962 #44 is dated March 25th and talks about what he receives in the mail. #45 is dated August 9 and is related to his arrest in New Orleans First - it's hard to believe that there was nothing between Aug 16, '62 and March 25 '63 and then again until Aug 9 '63. Second - by March 25 or a few days after GPO Dallas receives the rifle, supposedly puts a postcard into Oswald's box (doesn't exist) for him to pick up the package (not remembered by anyone).

Seems you've missed you meds again today Dave.... The Evidence only shows a conspiracy... that's where your house of cards blows away. Everything you cite as supporting evidence standing all by itself is rendered moot once you try and Authenticate the evidence... (look it up) Without Authentication, what you and the WCR offer is worthless. WITH authentication we find the evidence only illuminates the conspiracy to kill JFK and pin the blame on a patsy. Kinda simple if you're not blind

No worries Ron.... lol

Only for you LNers out there....

It was a 5 foot carton from Kleins addressed to the wrong person's PO Box. They knew he was getting the WORKER just not a rifle from Kleins which required a variety of steps to pick up. Not once from April 1 thru Nov 22 did a single government source declare that Oswald had a rifle... even after the Walker shooting. Yet the man accused of being his CIA handler and his wife are the sources - again, after the fact - that Oswald had a rifle that no one else sees... ever. And your reply about the efficiency of FBI informants, when mountains of info that YOU use comes from these assets regarding virtually every aspect of Oswald's life... just not the receipt of a scoped rifle... rings hollow Dave. The FBI and its assets were efficient enough on so many other fronts.... these informants - if you've read thru their reports - provide detailed info on so much minutia and inconsequential things... less than 2 weeks before the Walker shooting Oswald supposedly buys and receives a scoped rifle - yet not a single FBI asset is aware of this. Kinda like the 25 FBI informants in Mexico also not being able to find any evidence of Oswald in Mexico....

uh, you're not listening Dave.... everything you offer above comes AFTER 11/22. We certainly agree that Oswald was being watched, his mail was being opened, his whereabouts determined by change of address forms and mail delivery as informed by Postal assets. Please provide any proof the FBI was aware that Oswald was sent a rifle from Kleins prior to Nov 22, 1963 - since you claim a 5' carton arrived at the Dallas GPO addressed to HIDELL with the Oswald PO Box. How did the FBI and its network of informants miss that one? We all know about the BS the FBI produced after the fact.... what I want to know from the most devout LNer is how did Oswald receiving this rifle NOT get reported upon until after Nov 22 given all the Postal assets they had in New Orleans, Chicago, Ft Worth and Dallas?

All thru 1963 Oswald's mail was being monitored and reported upon by numerous USPS informants Dallas T-1, for example was Dorothy Xxxxxx, Info. clerk U.S. Post Office, Forth Worth, Tex. New Orleans T-1 Joseph J. Xxxxx Postal Inspector New Orleans, La. David, How is it that the FBI is not made aware of the delivery of not only a 5' carton from Klein's with a rifle in it, but a REA package from Seaport with a pistol in it? Are we saying that the Dallas Postal-related informants simply missed the largest package ever sent to the man, as well as him picking it up. Same problem with REA. Why doesn't a single report prior to 11/22 show the FBI is aware of what Oswald received in the mail?

Agreed - which was my point about the other 2 "accused killers" - the interest in every aspect of Oswald's pre-adult life is unique to the JFK case. Look at it this way Gene... the "published" record comprised the histories of 2 men combined into one which is why anything and everything related to the natural born LEE Oswald caused such confusion among those doing his bio. Whole scores of Marines who knew one Oswald yet never knew the other... the 1952 - 1956 years are come of the most interesting and protected data in the case.... Gene - If you'd like, I compiled a large side by side excel sheet comparing the two lives chronologically... PM me your email and I'll send it to you in either pdf or excel - depending on what works for you... it’s the FBI that puzzles me. What do Oswald's 9th grade school records have to do with a murder investigation? Maybe ask ourselves: How would the FBI know to go to Stripling and by default Kudlaty in the first place? Let me add this tangent Gene... on the afternoon of the assassination, Mexican "presidential staff" arrived at the 4 different bus lines in Mexico (Anahuac, Norte, Frontera & Flecha Rojas) and took ONLY the data related to Sept 27 thru Oct 3rd and began the process of creating a bus trip with the help of a highly placed FBI asset in the Immigration section of the Gobernacion... yet as they settled on a story - time and the reality of the situation requires them to drop the initial conclusions despite evidence offered of Oswald's bus travel The idea that the FBI would do such odd and clandestine things with evidence and testimony is supported by Swearingen's book https://www.amazon.com/FBI-Secrets-M-Wesley-Swearingen/dp/0896085015. Despite him also writing a book about the JFK assassination - the thrust is his POV on how the FBI catered to Hoover's needs and falsified a great many things... John Simkin Admin Admin 15,684 posts Gender:Male Report post Posted June 16, 2010 http://www.mmdnewswire.com/m-wesley-swearingen-8908.html To Kill a President: Finally - an Ex-FBI Agent Rips Aside the Veil of Secrecy that Killed JFK by M. Wesley Swearingen seeks to uncover new information about the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and identify the groups who conspired to kill him. According to Swearingen, Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone in assassinating Kennedy as was claimed by the FBI, the Warren Commission and other investigating bodies. Instead, he argues that rogue CIA agents acting in concert with the mafia and certain Cuban exiles plotted to kill Kennedy. Swearingen contends that the conspiracy was covered up by the FBI, an effort that continues to this day through the agency's unwillingness to disclose key details about the events surrounding Kennedy's death. "I want to set the record straight," Swearingen says. "The truth is my inspiration. Upholding the Constitution and exposing government corruption is my sole purpose." A 25-year veteran of FBI field work, Swearingen was employed by the bureau in 1963 when Kennedy was shot in Dallas. Citing internal sources and information not previously released to the public, Swearingen claims that Oswald was an FBI informant who was known to government officials prior to the assassination. He argues that the statements and actions of FBI and CIA personnel indicate a cover-up, one that he believes included CIA-trained Cuban exiles and American mobsters. "Names are named, associations are made, reasonable conjectures are served and Swearingen comes across as the real deal," explains a Kirkus Discoveries review. "He virtually dares readers to prove him wrong." About the Author M. Wesley Swearingen is a former FBI agent and the author of FBI Secrets: an Agent's Expose. A U.S. Navy veteran who served during World War II, Swearingen later graduated from Ohio State University and joined the FBI while it was directed by J. Edgar Hoover. Following his retirement from the FBI in 1977, Swearingen was involved in several lawsuits against the bureau related to wrongful imprisonment and civil rights violations. A licensed private investigator, Swearingen has appeared in several documentary films about the FBI and earned the California Attorneys for Criminal Justice's President's Award. We should remember also that a great man CIA were FBI and vice versa...loyalties within these agencies becomes very muddled.

Nope... Just pointing out a theory which is not based in reality

Yes indeed Tommy... been doing it for many years now. Except it's your turn now to step to the plate and offer some work... I whited them out with respect to Jim's wishes... plus, I may not even be correct. In either case as I read it - it's up to Jim to release that info if he chooses.... Respect appreciated Tommy.... I've come across a number of docs from the new release which support my conclusion about the trip.... and have posted them. When the Mexico Trip, like the lunchroom encounter is finally accepted for the charades they were - related evidence and its purpose becomes more clear. ==== The bottom line concept is that the man in Mexico on Friday the 27th - if there even was one - was not the man who killed Ruby and the WC did all it could to insure there would be no surprises related to Mexico... so it was basically shelved until the HSCA... and even then they did not bother looking at the travel evidence... Concluding that Oswald was not in Mexico begins the domino drop that leads back to GAUDET securing the paperwork necessary to show "Oswald" on his way thru Mexico to Cuba. Hoover knew the CIA lied about Oswald since he was in Dallas on FBI business - which in turn is the reason Hoover covers it up in the first place.... There is simple not a soul or a bit of evidence which authentically gets Oswald to Mexico... or explains DURAN's voice on calls she did not make or receive.... Yet there are thousands of documents provided by the FBI which attempts to explain this trip.... There are 5 good chapters on the Mexico Charade at K&K... another good place to start.

Hey there Jim.... A good amount of the recent release involved one of these people... the detailed reports are fascinating. And then there's this to reconfirm DURAN was more willing to help than the WC cared to follow up upon... Kinda strange that none of the discussion would include OSWALD, the man she supposedly went to a Rave party with and with whom she had an affair (all of which has been debunked) DJ (I covered up the asset's cryto with white) Tommy - have you been thru the files that were released? There are 688 files FROM Mexico and another 1100 TO Mexico... might be a good place to start your research... just sayin'

Similar bizarreness was offered by another poster a while back... His first name was John and he claimed that 2 people up the street by Houston are really Moorman and Hill. Those 35mm blowup are indeed beautiful - sure would be nice if we all had access to the same, best evidence..... {sigh} Here was my response to "John" whose excerpted post is embedded.

As I continue to illuminate the Mexico Trip for the charade it was... documents continue to appear which support this conclusion. One such document which should raise some eyebrows is this.... For some reason the WC decided against showing one of the people Oswald supposedly interacted with and brought back photos based on her recommendation. What possible reason could the WC offer for not confirming with DURAN, Oswald's physical appearance ?. The only one I can come up with is that the photo on the application would have had her confirm that person was not there.... CORNWELL - So, from all the circumstances, did it appear to your that he just went somewhere locally and had the pictures made?TIRADO - Yeah. I think that I already explained (to) him where he could take the photographs.CORNWELL - You told him some locations in town where ge could go? Were there some right in the neighborhood of the Consulate there?TIRADO - That I don't remember.CORNWELL - All right. But at any rate you knew of some place at the time, mentioned one or two places to him?TIRADO - Yes.CORNWELL - Correct?... Did you look at the photos when he brought them back, careful about to be sure that it was the same man who was standing in front of you?TIRADO - Yes. LOPEZ - Would you say he was taller than Gary?TIRADO - No, I think just the same. He was about my size.LOPEZ - About your height?TIRADO - Yeah.LOPEZ - Okay. And what's your height?TIRADO - 160. I think 160 or 162. (DJ: 162cm = 5' 3.75")LOPEZ - Was he skinny?TIRADO - Yes. Skinny.LOPEZ - Could you estimate how much he weighed?TIRADO - About your weight, more or less.LOPEZ - About my weight. We already went over...TIRADO - He has stronger shoulders, perhaps, than yours.LOPEZ - Just for the record, my weight is 199 pounds. You told us before he had a suit on.TIRADO - That I don't remember very well. I think he was wearing a jacket but what I can remember is that he was not wearing nice clothers, expensive clothing. He was cheap, perhaps. Now this is the woman who gave this man 1 or 2 photographer studios to get the photos for the application, yet cannot tell us which... Again, a way to insure no negatives are found... the investigation produced no one who could show Oswald took photos there.... Seems to me he's dressed pretty nicely in this image with a nice white shirt and tie.... And now the rub.... Duran - who was also telephonic-ally impersonated as well as imprisoned, questioned and dealt with a bit harshly claims it was the man despite the descriptions not matching... CORNWELL - Do you think for sure that the man who was on television was the man who came to the Consulate?TIRADO - Yes.CORNWELL - The man who was killed by Jack Ruby?TIRADO - Yes.CORNWELL - Did you see him being killed by Ruby on television?TIRADO - Yes, yes.CORNWELL - Was there anything about him that looked different to you?TIRADO - No. It was black and white. So I couldn't see the color. But he looks like the one that I met. Azcue on the other hand is not so sure... yet in AZCUE's case he is shown the Visa photos and concludes it was not him... Maybe the WC did not want to confirm this by showing the same thing to Duran. Mr. CORNWELL. Do those pictures of that individual appear to you to be the same individual who visited the consulate in Mexico City on the occasions you have previously described to us? Senor AZCUE. Truly, this photograph is one that I saw for the first time when the honorable U.S. committee members came to Cuba in April of this year, and I was surprised that I believe that it was not the same person. Fifteen years had gone by so it is very difficult for me to be in a position to guarantee it in a categorical form. But my belief is that this gentleman was not, is not, the person or the individual who went to the consulate.

'nuf said

Yes Paul.. she lied. And when repeatedly given opportunity to correct herself... she only digs deeper... Marina stated that she had only used a camera once in her entire life... to take the BY Photos. When asked to recount how she took the photo she stated she held the camera up to her face and pushed the button Ozzie told her to... THIS is what she would have seen when looking down into the box camera for the one and only time in her life... yet this view she can't remember ? And not only can't she remember but 1 photo becomes 2 photos becomes 3 photos becomes 4 photos with one burned and one lost until 1977. Worse yet, the woman needs to repeat the viewfinder process 4 times while getting perfect, crystal clear images, repeatedly... Mrs. OSWALD. I think that that was towards the end of February, possibly the beginning of March. I can't say exactly. Because I didn't attach any significance to it at the time. That was the only time I took any pictures.I don't know how to take pictures. He gave me a camera and asked me someone should ask me how to photograph, I don't know. Mr. RANKIN. How did it occur? Did he come to you and ask you to take the picture?Mrs. OSWALD. I was hanging up diapers, and he came up to me with the rifle and l was even a little scared, and he gave me the camera and asked me to press a certain button.Mr. RANKIN. And he was dressed up with a pistol at the same time, was he?Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.Mr. RANKIN. You have examined that picture since, and noticed that the telescopic lens was on at the time the picture was taken, have you not?Mrs. OSWALD. Now I paid attention to it. A specialist would see it immediately, of course. But at that time I did not pay any attention at all. I saw just Lee. These details are of great significance for everybody, but for me at that time it didn't mean anything. At the time' that I was questioned, I had even forgotten that I had taken two photographs. I thought there was only one. I thought that there were two identical pictures, but they turned out to be two different poses. So you see Paul... your repeated sad attempts at expressing your growing opinions winds up showing off how little you know of the evidence. I'm not going to take the time to show you everywhere Marina lied over the years... would fall on deaf ears as you still aint gonna learn what you simply don't wanna know...

Just so we all understand... This statement is blatantly false and proven so on other forums and other thread where PT makes the same claim.. One of the most obvious conflicts is Mexico City and what Marina says about it... I could go thru her testimony - as others have - and pick out scores of conflicts, lies, and changes over the years. That you would continue to post this same exact statement repeatedly and then go off into some diatribe about Marina and Ruth that requires speculationa dn assumption after assumption without a supporting item of evidence or corroboration of anything you post in sight... Marina lied about what she knew of Oswald... she lied about the physical evidence she gives to Leibeler in August 64. She lied about the extent of her English ability. She LIED about everything she could... and then claimed and played dumb. What I can't figure is... Why in the world would you try to give Marina and by default Ruth ANY credibility? WCR testimony: Mrs. OSWALD. Nothing. And it is at that time that I wrote a letter to Mrs. Paine telling her that Lee was out of work, and they invited me to come and stay with her. And when I left her, I knew that Lee would go to Mexico City. But, of course, I didn't tell Mrs. Paine about it. Mr. RANKIN. Had he discussed with you the idea of going to Mexico City? Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. Mr. RANKIN. When did he first discuss that? Mrs. OSWALD. I think it was in August. HSCA testimony: Mr. McDONALD - When did you first learn of his planned trip to Mexico City? When did you first know about that? Mrs. PORTER - Shortly before I left for Dallas with Ruth Paine. Mr. McDONALD - How did you learn of this? Mrs. PORTER - He told me about his plans to go to Mexico City and to visit the Cuban Embassy over there. ================ Mr. RANKIN. When you were asked before about the trip to Mexico (CE1781 & 1792), you did not say that you knew anything about it. Do you want to explain to the Commission how that happened? Mrs. OSWALD. Most of these questions were put to me by the FBI. I do not like them too much. I didn't want to be too sincere with them. Though I was quite sincere and answered most of their questions. They questioned me a great deal, and I was very tired of them, and I thought that, well, whether I knew about it or didn't know about it didn't change matters at all, it didn't help anything, because the fact that Lee had been there was already known, and whether or not I knew about it didn't make any difference. CE1781: http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/html/WH_Vol23_0209b.htm the SS interview Nov 29th: “She was asked whether she had any knowledge of Lee's trips to Mexico or Washington, D.C. She replied in the negative. She was asked whether she or Lee had any cameras and she replied that Lee bought one camera in Russia and a second one in the United States . She said one was a small camera and the other was a box camera. She added that she was not proficient with operating any Cameras and she never had an opportunity to do so.”

Hey there Gene, As you may know I spent almost 2 years with John tracing footnotes and discussing the evidence.... the same notion struck me - that Oswald's non-assassination life was overly detailed in areas that had little to no consequence on his life. (I hope you also follow up on John Ely's Oswald bio work) So I went into the evidence of the 2 other assassins around that time, Sirhan Sirhan and James Earl Ray... Ray is given a page Bio while Sirhan offers even less.... The are obvious a number of things being hidden about Oswald's life.... I look forward to your posts on the subject, DJ

Seems to me the xrays show a pretty significant injury over the left eye and temple