David Josephs
-
Posts
6,154 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by David Josephs
-
-
David,
So how can one assume that Shelley, Arce, and Williams are guilty and are "escaping" with the help of the bad guys based on a photo which shows them being escorted to a police car by policemen and detectives some forty-five minutes after the assassination?
--Tommy
PS A couple of friendly suggestions:
Try "proofreading" your posts before and after you post them.
For example, "How can possible (sic) know..."
And please stop using upper case letters so much to emphasize your points. (It makes you look a bit like a fanatic.)
Thank you.
"One" doesn't assume anything Tommy... Start with that. One investigates the information for authenticity, corroboration and reliability FIRST... it appears YOU assumed three men are guilty and/or "escaping" based on a photo... YOU wrote this, right, not me...
Even if Shelley, Arce, and Williams were part of the conspiracy, why would the bad guys want to "remove" them (and several other TSBD employees) "from the scene" several minutes after the assassination?
Why oh why - right Tommy? What could possibly be on the bad guy's minds - since it makes no sense to you... and how did you go from "several minutes" to "45 minutes" ?? Poetic license ?
So what is important to YOU ??... Don't use color, Don't use capitals, Don't include a mispelled word...
My friendly suggestion? Concern yourself with the quality of your content, and the depth of your research rather than the manner inwhich I write my posts - K?
Maybe, I say MAYBE you can look at your WHY questions with a thought about WHAT the action's desired results were... In your one assumption you tie these three men to the DPD and the conspiracy... Shelley may very well have been instrumental, he was Oswald's direct supervisor, one may ask WHY Shelley didn't mention GIVENS to Truly... or HOW is it possible for Shelley to have been aware of all the TSBD employees to single out Oswald... an entire building of people and the only one singled out as missing is Oswald... and BEFORE the rifle is found... (Truly's account of telling Fritz is real evidence of a REAL situation... not assumptions made about a photo) The TSBD was referred to as a Spider's Web since it appears so many people and events are connected... Shelley & Truly are instrumental in focusing the initial search on Oswald - THAT makes them suspect...
Maybe you can take it from there... in a new thread...
I want to offer this subject as an example - you post the following without taking even a second to dig just a little further... http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=5769 is a thread called "GLAZE LETTERS" by Weston right here on this forum... It not only answers your question but provides some great input from others who also question the info Glaze provided about SHELLEY... Duke Lane's post is very interesting. Took all of 1 minute to find...
Notaries Mary Rattan and Patsy Collins took a lot of affidavits that afternoon at the police department. Maybe that's why Shelley was allegedly "held" there from around 1:30 until around 5:00?
BTW, It's too bad journalist Elzie Glaze didn't ask Bill Shelley why Shelley was (according to Glaze) charged very early on with killing JFK. It seems to me that that would have been the natural follow-up question for a journalist to ask.
Did Glaze happen to tape record Shelley's telling him he was so charged, or do we just have to take Glaze's word for it?
Glaze asked the woman if she and her co-worker were the only ones subjected to this kind of treatment. No, they were not the only ones. Background checks on new employees were done as a routine procedure at the Book Depository. After listening to the woman's account, Glaze decided to check it out. He contacted her former supervisor, William Shelley, and asked to meet with him. Shelley agreed to this request and even allowed the reporter to take notes and use a tape recorder. The meeting took place at the Book Depository warehouse near the intersection of Royal Lane and Interstate 35 on the far northwest side of Dallas. (The company had moved from its old location on 411 Elm Street in 1970.) The information that Glaze was gathering must have been extensive, for the two men had numerous meetings together. Yet only a few disclosures are provided in the letters. The most significant one appears in the 1989 letter: "Mr. Shelley claims to have been an intelligence officer during World War II and thereafter joined the CIA." This extraordinary revelation goes far in explaining the mysteries of the Book Depository, and a discussion of its implications will be given later in this article.
Shelley told Glaze that he had been the supervisor of Lee Harvey Oswald. After the assassination, the Dallas police placed Shelley under arrest and formally charged him with the murder of the President. (No mention was made by Glaze as to why Shelley had been arrested, nor did he say what connection this arrest had with the arrest of Oswald.) The charges against Shelley were soon dropped, and he was released. Since that day, at various times, journalists representing several newspapers and magazines approached him with offers of huge sums of money for his personal account of the assassination. These offers were all turned down. When Glaze tried to get permission to quote him in his own article, Shelley refused and insisted that even his name was not to be printed.
Tommy -
I realize looking for misspellings takes time and effort from actually researching the evidence... but hey, give it a rest and do your homework first.... your credibility improves by posting research and evidence, not by asking rhetorical "why" questions and offering advice to others on the way they post.... I do what I do to emphazise what I want... sorry that is lost on you.
This is from the index of the Dallas Archives... I don't know how you do it, but I keep access to GIGS of data and links to pertinent resources with me when I post... how do YOU do it?
(PM me with that answer, I'm actually quite interested)
Here is a link to the 2nd Shelley affidavit http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/04/0466-001.gif also from the 22nd yet for some reason not included in the first affidavit...
The way the DPD spreads these out over 4 boxes is kinda strange but runs rampant...
William B. Frazier Count 8 02 02 016 Affidavit In Any Fact-typed 11/22/63 William H. Shelley Carbon Copy Signed Statement as an employee of the Texas School Book Depository and supervisor of Lee Harvey Oswald 02 03 005 Affidavit In Any Fact-typed 11/22/63 William H. Shelley Carbon Copy Signed and Annotated Statement as an employee of the Texas School Book Depository and supervisor of Lee Harvey Oswald 01 06 009 Affidavit In Any Fact-handwritten 11/22/63 William H. Shelley Original Statement as an employee of the Texas School Book Depository 02 03 004 Affidavit In Any Fact-typed 11/22/63 William H. Shelley Original Statement as an employee of the Texas School Book Depository and supervisor of Lee Harvey Oswald 02 02 015 Affidavit In Any Fact-typed 11/22/63 William H. Shelley Original Signed Statement as a witness to the shooting of the President 05 02 056 Affidavit In Any Fact-typed 11/22/63 William H. Shelley Photocopy Poor Quality Statement as an employee of the Texas School Book Depository and supervisor of Lee Harvey Oswald 05 02 057 Affidavit In Any Fact-typed 11/22/63 William H. Shelley Photocopy Poor Quality Statement as an employee of the Texas School Book Depository and supervisor of Lee Harvey Oswald 15 01 057 Affidavit In Any Fact-typed 11/22/63 William H. Shelley Photocopy Poor Quality Statement as an employee of the Texas School Book Depository and supervisor of Lee Harvey Oswald 15 01 058 Affidavit In Any Fact-typed 11/22/63 William H. Shelley Photocopy Poor Quality Statement as an employee of the Texas School Book Depository and supervisor of Lee Harvey OswaldY'know Tommy... I have nothing against you or anyone else... You want to continue asking rhetorical WHY questions, so be it... I'll try harder to just look the other way.
It's too bad you don't like the look of my posts and think because I have a misspelled word ... actually I have no idea what you think... but you evidently find it important to point out these minor mistakes rather than address the topic and questions posed -
The thread is called OSWALD LEAVING TSBD? - started with the Darnell photo with PRAYERMAN circled asking the Thread's Topic question... and you're talking about Shelley/Arce/Williams getting into a police car...
======================
Back on TOPIC:
Mr. BALL. Where were you standing when you heard the shots?
Mr. ARCE. I was standing in front of the Texas School Book Depository. I was on that grassy area part in front.
Mr. BALL. You were not on the sidewalk?
Mr. ARCE. No, I was on the sidewalk, then I walked up to the grass to get a higher view. and still couldn't see.
So Prayerman was not ARCE. Agreed?
Mr. SHELLEY - Oh, several people were out there waiting to watch the motorcade and I went out to join them.
Mr. BALL - And who was out there?
Mr. SHELLEY - Well, there was Lloyd Viles of McGraw-Hill, Sarah Stanton, she's with Texas School Book, and Wesley Frazier and Billy Lovelady joined us shortly afterwards.
Mr. BALL - You were standing where?
Mr. SHELLEY - Just outside the glass doors there.
Can you point out WESLEY FRAZIER in Altgens? I can't. Can you find Wesley in ANY image prior to Darnell? Yet we see WESLEY and PRAYERMAN together... so he's not him.
VILES maybe? "Kounas, Dolores Arlene McGraw-Hill Publishing employee, third floor Elm & Houston SW corner with Roberta Parker and Lloyd Viles" Is this correct?
Have we been able to put VILES in his place in DP? (I will continue to search the images for him in a group with 2 women)
Do you think SHELLEY is TIEMAN behind Lovelady?
IMO Thomas, THESE are the important questions of the thread... Is there anything you can add to help us understand who it could or could not be...
or you just gonna fine tooth my post for spelling errors?
-
You may not realize it, David, but you are trolling. I started a thread about what is being said in a document, and your posts are little more than diatribes about how you don't care what the document says because etc etc etc. If you want to start a thread on the evidence supporting YOUR theory, please start that thread.
But in the meantime, please allow those wanting to read about and discuss the January 67 report the chance to do so.
Asking you to explain yourself is not trolling Pat...
The January 1967 report you say is the point of this thread... "what was said afterward"
Your post is irrelevant, David. You can believe whatever you want. But this thread is not on who did what on 11-22-63. It's on what was said afterwards. And it seems clear to me that at least at one point the doctors believed the bullet entered low on the back of the head and exited high on the back of the head.
One might think those wanting to convince others there was an exit on the back of the head would welcome this with open arms.
How does "what was said afterward" not have to do specifically and exactly with what transpired prior to the creation of the evidence being reviewed?
http://www.patspeer.com/chapter13%3Asolvingthegreatheadwoundmyster
In May 1975, former Warren Commission counsel W. David Slawson and Richard M. Mosk wrote an article for the L.A. Times.... <snip>
... in this article the dynamic duo made the amazing claim that "The evidence concerning the wounds conclusively dispels the idea of shots from the front...The wounds both slanted downward from Kennedy's back. This is clear beyond doubt from the autopsy and from the photographs and X rays of the body...to doubt the evidence of the wounds is to label as liars the doctors who examined the body, the pictures and the X rays for the commission."
Well, this was more disgusting nonsense. Pure horsesh!t.....
This is from your conclusion page: http://www.patspeer.com/chapter20%3Aconclusionsandconfusions%3A - So it's pure BS to say that shots did not hit from the front... yet you conclude that any shot from the front MISSED...
As I read thru this vital section I look for waht the people in DALLAS said about the headwound... Clint Hill, Jackie, Nurses and Drs at Parkland, Father Huber, AMAZINGLY you fail to mention a single impression of the HEAD WOUND (while you pound the SBT/Back/Throat wound to death over a number of chapters...)... Your avoidance of the DALLAS head wound evidence is very telling Pat...
More to come...
Sound or Shot #4.Approximate firing time: Zapruder frame 320-327.
Missed or possibly not even a shot. Quite possibly a loud firecracker used as a diversionary device.
From: somewhere west of the Texas School Book Depository, possibly the railroad yards, but more probably the back of the arcade north of the grassy knoll, or the parking lot across the street.
<snip> A diversionary device set off in this location would, of course, draw attention from the buildings behind the President when he was shot. If this was the plan, of course...it worked. In the immediate aftermath of the shooting, the bulk of the Police and eyewitnesses looking for the shooter ran towards the grassy knoll and railroad yards, and ignored the buildings behind the motorcade.
What complete morons, right? Thinking that a shot came from the front.. not one or two or even 10 people, but scores of witnesses...
So, now back to MD14 - the topic of the thread...: Everything that comes afterward STARTS
MD14:
The autopsy began at approximately 8:OO P. M, on Friday, November 22, 1963, and was concluded approximately at 11: 00 PM. The autopsy report, written by Dr. Humes with the assistance of Dr. Boswell and Dr. Finck, was written on November 23 and the morning of November 24, and delivered by Dr. Humes to Admiral Burkley, the President’s physician, on November 24 at about 6:30 P. M.
Q. During the autopsy, was the room quiet and hushed or noisy and bustling? How would you describe the scene?
A. It varied. We were there for a long time. We were there from about 6:00 or 6:30 in the evening until 5 o'clock the next morning.
Q. Dr. Humes, when did you first see the body of President Kennedy?
A. I didn't look at my watch, if I even had a watch on, but I would guess it was 6:45 or 7 o'clock, something like that, approximately
Q. Who else was in the room when the casket was opened?
A. Oh, I can't tell you that. Dr. Boswell and I removed the body from the caske
..
-
David:
I agree this is all simply speculation... and for me, the imagination does take over. I'm simply saying that Shelley is a person of interest. He seems inconsistent, suspicious, and turns up in some interesting stories and places in the critical hour or so after the shooting. That's as far as I can take it... unless others can add more about him. Regarding the Glaze interview and the alleged statements that Shelley later made, I'm going on the previous work by Weston.
As far as watches and left vs. right, I've seen and heard that comment before (i.e. one wears his watch on the opposite wrist) but not sure that I'd agree with it. It is a generalization... I know right-handed people who wear their watch on the right wrist (e.g. pencil-pushers like me). This came up recently in discussions I've had (unrelated to JFK) and there was not a consensus on this practice. However, if you are a worker who performs manual labor (e.g. carpenters or painters), they either take the watch off completely, or do wear it on the opposite wrist. So, it's not a bad assumption to make that PM is a southpaw.
This begs the question of what specifically did Oswald do for those 3 weeks prior at TSBD? Did he lift boxes, move books or was he part of the plywood floor project? He worked in the "Miscellaneous Dept." ... doing what?
Gene
Completely Agree Gene... I was directing my comments mostly to Tommy who likes to ask WHY questions that appear to me as rhetorical where only speculative answers are possible.... how can possible know what people are thinking at any given moment based on a photo or film?
Shelley and by default Truly appear to be aware of something - and could have been "recruited" out of patriotism to keep an eye on the returnee from Russia... or at least be wary that their "other" activities were being watched.
That Truly backs Baker's revised story is imo, very telling.
I only throw out the watch observation as we attempt to narrow down the possibilities... Oswald arrest photos show his bracelet on the left and nothing on his right wrist...
yet my questions remain unanswered...
Specifically BUELL and why he does not appear in Altgens based on the testimony that he was right there.... and is obviously not Prayerman.
This has become a nagging thought... who IS that person?
DJ
-
Your post is irrelevant, David. You can believe whatever you want. But this thread is not on who did what on 11-22-63. It's on what was said afterwards. And it seems clear to me that at least at one point the doctors believed the bullet entered low on the back of the head and exited high on the back of the head.
One might think those wanting to convince others there was an exit on the back of the head would welcome this with open arms.
and one - you - would be wrong... since your entire premise relies on a shot from behind and fraudulent evidence...
The jist of the matter is you believe the Military testimony in favor of observations from people not threatened with court-martial....
How you so easily dismiss the lying and conflicts is what remains the greatest mystery...
Are you so tied to your conclusions about the wounds being the same and unaltered between Dallas and Bethesda that you cannot even DISCUSS other evidence?
If what you are saying is truly a "revelation" why then does the BETHESDA EVIDENCE not support that conclusion...
THAT evidence shows the entire right FRONT - beyond the coronal suture - GONE
While the Anterior shows no bone in the right rear where there is plenty in the lateral... the xrays conflict with each other and the xrays in total conflict with the photos
The rest of the evidence offered from Bethesda describes a craniotomy already performed by 8pm.... I posted those procedures - which you also ignored - and asked how a shot or shots that did not disrupt the left side of the interior of the skull accomplished all the necessary incisions to allow the brain to just FALL OUT....
Liars on the 22nd of Nov, 1963 remained liars for the rest of thier lives.... a good portion of the Senior staff at Bethesda was either involved or aware of what happened between 6:40pm and 8pm....
People like Ebersole and Humes where told what was needed and they did it... going so far as to place foreign objects on the xrays or removing identifcation markers on JFK's organs, or even removing pages from log books...
The cover-up was solidified in the Bethesda Morgue - its too bad that you remain tied to "the world is flat" and "the earth is the center of the universe" type thinking in this case...
I will post yet again the RESULTS of the damage as described in the autopsy and by Humes... when (and if) you's take the time to see how this description and it's representation on the body cannot have possible been the condition of the skull at PARKLAND, maybe you will have learned something about anatomy and conspiracy... until then you continue to blow "shot from behind" menthol smoke up our a$$es and then ask if we all feel "minty fresh".
When you can convince ANYONE that these injuries were evident in Parkland... when he was lifted and moved and jostled and dealt with... and his skull apparently did not come apart in anyone's hands... pieces of scalp did not fall off.. and the only hole anyone recalls is a 2-3 inch one in the right rear of his head....
Commander HUMES -
Exhibit 391 is listed as a supplementary report on the autopsy of the late President Kennedy, and was prepared some days after the examination.
This delay necessitated by, primarily, our desire to have the brain better fixed with formaldehyde before we proceeded further with the examination of the brain which is a standard means of approach to study of the brain.
The brain in its fresh state does not lend itself well to examination.
From my notes of the examination, at the time of the post-mortem examination, we noted that clearly visible in the large skull defect and exuding from it was lacerated brain tissue which, on close inspection proved to represent the major portion of the right cerebral hemisphere.
We also noted at this point that the flocculus cerebri was extensively lacerated and that the superior sagittal sinus which is a venous blood containing channel in the top of the meninges was also lacerated.
To continue to answer your question with regard to the damage of the brain, following the formal infixation, Dr. Boswell, Dr. Finck and I convened to examine the brain in this state.
We also prepared photographs of the brain from several aspects to depict the extent of these injuries.
We found that the right cerebral hemisphere was markedly disrupted. There was a longitudinal laceration of the right hemisphere which was parasagittal in position. By the saggital plane, as you may know, is a plane in the midline which would divide the brain into right and left halves. This laceration was parasagittal. It was situated approximately 2.5 cm. to the right of the midline, and extended from the tip of occipital lobe, which is the posterior portion of the brain, to the tip of the frontal lobe which is the most anterior portion of the brain, and it extended from the top down to the substance of the brain a distance of approximately 5 or 6 cm.
The base of the laceration was situated approximately 4.5 cm. below the vertex in the white matter. By the vertex we mean--the highest point on the skull is referred to as the vertex.
The area in which the greatest loss of brain substance was particularly in the parietal lobe, which is the major portion of the right cerebral hemisphere.
The margins of this laceration at all points were jagged and irregular, with additional lacerations extending in varying directions and for varying distances from the main laceration.
In addition, there was a laceration of the corpus callosum which is a body of fibers which connects the two hemispheres of the brain to each other, which extended from the posterior to the anterior portion of this structure, that is the corpus callosum. Exposed in this laceration were portions of the ventricular system in which the spinal fluid normally is disposed within the brain.
When viewed from above the left cerebral hemisphere was intact. There was engorgement of blood vessels in the meninges covering the brain. We note that the gyri and sulci, which are the convolutions of the brain over the left hemisphere were of normal size and distribution.
Those on the right were too fragmented and distorted for satisfactory description.
When the brain was turned over and viewed from its basular or inferior aspect, there was found a longitudinal laceration of the mid-brain through the floor of the third ventricle, just behind the optic chiasma and the mammillary bodies.
This laceration partially communicates with an oblique 1.5 cm. tear through the left cerebral peduncle. This is a portion of the brain which connects the higher centers of the brain with the spinal cord which is more concerned with reflex actions.
There were irregular superficial lacerations over the basular or inferior aspects of the left temporal and frontal lobes. We interpret that these later contusions were brought about when the disruptive force of the injury pushed that portion of the brain against the relative intact skull.
This has been described as contre-coup injury in that location.
This, then, I believe, Mr. Specter, are the major points with regard to the President's head wound.
-
Pat,
How again are pictures taken after Humes destroys the evidence ROSE would have found in a Dallas autopsy, related to anything that happened in Dallas?
The medical evidence offered is pretty straight forward Pat... what Boswell describes could NOT have happened in Dallas ...
That you seriously continue to use WCR evidence to represent what actually occurred in Dallas is simply amazing to me...
and then you go ahead and believe the word of the same people who pulled the wool over your eyes...
Representing the autopsy materials as EVIDENCE OF WHAT OCCURRED in "DALLAS" as opposed to at Humes' hands is doing a terrible disservice to the understanding of the events...
Is that the purpose Pat?
Are you so caught up in your own research and conclusions that you no longer can tell the difference between Cover-up and Truth?
I realize that if Humes' did what it appears he did, a lot of the work you've done needs to be rethought... which in itself is good reason not to believe it...
You do realize it requires an entire army of qualified professional CIVILIANS to be wrong, while the body, stolen and placed in Military hands with Military doctors and threats of Court-martial,
remains the "evidence" on which you base your conclusions as to what occurred... even though it also flies in the face of the DP witnesses as well... even the Military/Gov't ones...
Mr. HILL. The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car. His brain was exposed. There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion of the car. Mrs. Kennedy was completely covered with blood. There was so much blood you could not tell if there had been any other wound or not, except for the one large gaping wound in the right rear portion of the head.
Please take a minute and reconcile this image for us... if the damage at BETHESDA was identical to what was seen in Dallas... the entire right front of his skull is GONE...
Please list the people in DALLAS who said anything about the entire skull being gone from the Coronal Suture forward... let alone saying ANYTHING other than about the small wounds to the temples.
I've down this with you before Pat... I've posted detailed images of what is represented by their presentation of the autopsy "Facts"... and nothing in Dallas resembles it at all...
I am terribly sorry if I appear a thorn in your work Pat... yet I simply can't stand by while you try to convince people that the WCR/HSCA Medical evidence is anything but a complete sham and cover-up, NOT of a 2nd bullet hitting JFK and blowing off the front of his skull, but of the horrible reality of what was done to JFK to obscure the evidence of a frontal shot.
DJ
-
Tommy & Gene...
Not sure how we go from discussing evidence to SPECULATING ABOUT WHAT PEOPLE THOUGHT by seeing them in a photo or film... ???
Stating that things don't make "Much Sense" when the world where operations of this sort live are akin to Alice's Looking Glass... where up is down etc..., would require us to know what SENSE was in this "plan" to begin with, no? We are talking about killing the POTUS - are things supposed to MAKE SENSE in the plan to "after the fact outside observers" like us ???
If SHELLEY is not the man in the necktie behind Lovelady, 1) where is he and 2) who is the man in the tie?
If BUELL is seen in Darnell at the top of the stairs with Prayerman in the corner - where is LOVELADY (was it him or Arce that walks off with Shelley?)
If BUELL is at the top of the stairs as witnesses testify to... where is he in Altgens?
LOVELADY and Prayerman are seen together
BUELL and Prayerman are seen together
TIEMAN is gone in Darnell
- has the SHELLEY/ARCE pair been confirmed? I've looked at the gif a number of times and am at a loss for how those two can be positively ID'd... and help?
Not a single TSBD witness mistakes LOVELADY for OSWALD... nor comes forward to state the FBI changed their testimony - that they saw OSWALD not Lovelady.
It appears to me that the bright light on Prayerman could be a wrist watch on his RIGHT hand... suggesting the person is LEFT-HANDED...
Agree?
-
"Paul O'Connor was interviewed by William Matson Law for his book, In the Eye of History: Disclosures in the JFK Assassination Medical Evidence. O'Connor told Law: 'We found out, while the autopsy was proceeding, that he was shot from a high building, which meant the bullet had to be traveling in a downward trajectory and we also realized that this bullet - that hit him in the back - is what we called in the military a "short shot," which means that the powder in the bullet was defective so it didn't have the power to push the projectile - the bullet-clear through the body. If it had been a full shot at the angle he was shot, it would have come out through his heart and through his sternum.' "
In other words, O'Connor pegged the back wound shot as coming from a tall building on JFK's right hand side, yes? Any thoughts on angle and building location?
Any other autopsy evidence or medical testimony for this wound angle? I can't recall any.
A building more "high" than the sixth or seventh floor of the TSBD, or the TSBD roof? Could a bullet from there penetrate the heart and sternum, depending on which lane Greer had the limo in at a proposed shot time?
It's a shame that no one asked O'Connor if the building would need to be taller than the TSBD, or asked for a shot angle based on the autopsy probe angle.
Adding to what DSL posted... this interview published in 2004 by Kim Reinholt has O'Connor saying something different from what LAW writes:
(Was this one of the 10 DSL mentions - it does not appear to be on that list?)
"Would have exited BELOW THE RIGHT NIPPLE and would have missed the heart..."
When Law has him saying the bullet would have traveled LEFT instead of RIGHT.... EARLIER than the 2004 interview where he states the opposite along with much more detail...
While I agree with DSL that he is a reliable witness... the info from the 2004 interview is alos completely consistent with his previous statements....
DJ
-
I see now the implication that trajectory was inferred from an accepted fact. I suppose that, since O'Connor disputed the arrival coffin and body wrapping, if he had reason to believe the shot came from the left he would have said so, and if from the left it couldn't have been in line to penetrate heart and sternum as he said. Thanks, DJ.
Cool... I think we're on the same page... yet,
"inferred from an accepted fact" - that the shots came from above, behind and to the right.... ?? Hate to be so picky Dave... but even the autopsy report INFERRED this "fact" without supporting it...
Or imposed upon restriction that the evidence MUST support...
and still we have the incredible statement from Redlich to Rankin in April '64: If the picture was not yet clear by April, and the WCD298 is completely wrong...and none of it was changed...
we are arguing "facts" that were never established as "facts"....
I should add that the facts which we now have in our
possession, submitted to us in separate reports from the FBI and
Secret Service, are totally incorrect and, if left uncorrected, will
present a completely misleading picture.
If they came from the 6th floor, the trajectory carries the shot into the heart..
Yet the hole was determined to be shallow without a bullet in it... and the resting place of the bullet is to the RIGHT of the entrance... I do not see how O'Connor - at the time in 1963 - would think it was a shot from the right and behind traveling LEFT thru the body....
As I see his drawing, the back wound HAS to be the cause of the bullet in the body... or do you think it was the throat?
DJ
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=389587%C2'>
-
"We found out, while the autopsy was proceeding, that he was shot from a high building, which meant....."
-O'Connor
In other words, O'Connor pegged the back wound shot as coming from a tall building on JFK's right hand side, yes?
Dave... beg to differ.... he was TOLD the shot's origin FROM WHICH he arrived at his statement...
"we found out" - iow no other conclusion was going to be allowed....
he also said a bullet was retrieved from the intercostal muscle on the right side of the ribcage... the short shot.
yet that would be to the right of the entry... JFK would had to be turned to his left for a bullet to travel right, after that entry... yes?
The path to the heart requires that bullet at Parkland to have really fallen out of JFK's back... and could not have gone thru...
while the intercostal bullet would have come from yet a different source... maybe the throat entrance wound's bullet...
Dave - if the Doctor was Rose and not Humes, we'd know the paths and number of bullets...
we'd know.
Admiral Burkley and Admiral Galloway made sure of that.. once Kellerman obtained the evidence.
DJ
-
Yes indeed Gene... Shelley appears to one of those that sensed something going on... he was also a bit higher up the TSBD food chain...
but Manager of the "Misc" department...
??Mr. BALL - In November 1963, what was your job down there?
Mr. SHELLEY - Well, I am manager of the miscellaneous department and have been for several years.
Mr. BALL - Who is your immediate superior?
Mr. SHELLEY - Roy S. Truly.
Mr. BALL - What is his job?
Mr. SHELLEY - He is superintendent of the place.
Mr. BALL - Did you know Lee Oswald?
Mr. SHELLEY - He worked for me.... (doing "miscellaneous" things...)Add now Molina and the evidence for the TSBD being a center for gun running and communist activity.... http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=1097
And one starts to believe that most everyone had something to hide, yet another detail going in favor of the "plan"...
Getting Oswald to Elm Street was obvious critical... and then the planning of the Mexico City disinfo campaign
and it seems we are back to Summer 63 when Harvey is being targeted for Dallas...
working for SHELLEY .... is it so far a leap to conclude Shelley is aware of Oswald at multiple levels... and suspicious as well...
Truly would have to be told to hire the young man and keep him on Elm... in mid October... as Harvey does not take a better paying job elsewhere...
Truly supporting Baker's revised encounter is no real surprise under this premise
and Shelley helping to concealing the identity of Harvey/Prayerman?.... Gene, too many people walked past that person, for it to have been Harvey, and none said a word after he became known... NONE. Honestly Gene... it has to be someone else... and since he is there after Baker runs by it is not LEE...
Again... where is Wesley in Altgens?
Where is Lovelady in Darnell...?
I'm thinking that Prayerman is not anyone we have mentioned yet... do we ever know or see this person entering the building?
;;;;;; on another note
while Vallee is in Chicago and ?? is in Tampa... Oswald is Dallas...
Triple redundancy, at least, with associates and planning for each location should there have been success...
In the index of the MFF Warren Comm Docs you can find all the reports out of Chicago office...
Check em out... most have Vallee mentioned in one way or anther...
they are spread out across alot of docs but worth the read... tripping over themselves to deny connections to Oswald while bringing them up themselves in the first place...
DJ
-
Since CE 150 is the shirt that Bledslow described that Oswald had on in the bus, It would make since, if you believe her, that is the shirt Oswald had on that day at work with a white T shirt underneath. Then factor in a light gray jacket that he left at work.
Hi again Tony...
1st - I'm pretty sure it's Bledsoe....
2nd - as I tried to mention above... Bledsoe only describes the ARREST SHIRT... which is not the same thing Oswald wore to work and changed out of at his room...
The following link is from BOOKOUT's report of the interrogation... "a reddish, long sleeve shirt, with a button down collar....." "..placed those articles of clothing in the lower drawer of his dresser"
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0019a.htm
So I am of the opinion that Bledsoe was given the description of the man when arrested, shirt and all, while what he actually wore prior to that has disappeared to history.
Gene -
While "LEE" is at the top of my list for this other Oswald... it could have been one of a number of impersonators....
If we believe that "Phase 1" of the cover story was Oswald's alliance with Cubans/Russians in the plot to kill JFK - either as Castro retribution or a KGB backed plan to keep their Cold War alive as well as ours....
Gotta keep those phoney baloney jobs gentlemen... :-)
anyway.... it was these connections, the reality of someone else using Oswald's identity from as early as 1960, and the false evidence from Mexico City created by the CIA which laid the groundwork for Phase 2 cover-up... Lone Nut.
Once it was agreed in DC that there was NO CONSPIRACY, OSWALD ALONE, we see the systematic destruction of the Phase 1 story.... Alvarado and Duran are ultimately discredited, Odio is ignored, and we find that all the false leads for PHASE 1 point to David Atlee Phillips' work in CI... His job in previous "actions" was to leave behind the false clues and disinfo to cover-up the culpable....
I personally believe these phases were carefully planned well below the surface of CIA/SS/FBI and originated within the Military Intelligence community... while the CIA takes the heat, the ONI/INS/ATF and related acronyms continue in relative obscurity.
That being said - He went back into the building like everyone else... He gives his name to the police... he tells Fritz "out front with Bill Shelley" after lunch....
I'd like to put forth the theory that "SUITMAN" behind Lovelady is Shelley... he is one of the only TSBD employees wearing a suit that day....
Mr. SHELLEY - In my office next to Mr. Truly's and 1 ate part of it which I do usually and finish up later on in the day but I went outside then to the front,
Mr. BALL - Why did you go to the front?
Mr. SHELLEY - Oh, several people were out there waiting to watch the motorcade and I went out to join them.
Mr. BALL - And who was out there?
Mr. SHELLEY - Well, there was Lloyd Viles of McGraw-Hill, Sarah Stanton, she's with Texas School Book, and Wesley Frazier and Billy Lovelady joined us shortly afterwards.
Mr. BALL - You were standing where?
Mr. SHELLEY - Just outside the glass doors there
(Stanton nor Viles is called to the WC - in this image... the tall man at the top of the stairs is Wesley... Shelley has walked off with Arce toward the RR yard...)
Where is Lovelady in the B&W Darnell compared to the color image...
and where is WESLEY in Altgens - could he be tie man behind Lovelady (although it appears that person is in a suit like Shelley) ??
-
David - was it McGeorge Bundy who was in charge of the situation room in the WH during AF 1 flight back to DC?
"In Charge"? IDK... but he definitely was part of the process ordering the Cabinet plane back and supposedly telling AF-1 about Oswald and no conspiracy....
Bundy also called off the destruction of the remaining Cuban fighters without telling JFK, the morning of the BoP attack.
Yet the most telling to me (and what Prouty makes a point about) is the rewriting of NSAM263 into 273 which was rewritten PRIOR to 11/22 and completely reversus the agreed upon actions and direction of JFK...
as outlined in this OCT 11 memo... with the pertinent sections of the report on the right...
Prouty cannot over emphasize this.... The question remains - how Bundy would know to make such wholesale changes to the policy knowing full well that agreement had already been reached...
That all changed with JFK's death and the acceptance of 273 and the filing away of 263...
DJ
273
4. The President expects that all senior officers of the Government will move energetically to insure the full unity of support for established U.S. policy in South Vietnam. Both in Washington and in the field, it is essential that the Government be unified. It is of particular importance that express or implied criticism of officers of other branches be scrupulously avoided in all contacts with the Vietnamese Government and with the press. More specifically, the President approves the following lines of action developed in the discussions of the Honolulu meeting, of November 20. The offices of the Government to which central responsibility is assigned are indicated in each case.
263:
4. It is of the highest importance that the United States Government avoid either the appearance or the reality of public recrimination from one part of it against another, andthe President expects that all senior officers of the Government will take energetic steps to insure that they and their subordinates go out of their way to maintain and to defend the unity of the United States Government both here and in the field. More specifically, the President approves the following lines of action developed in the discussions of the Honolulu meeting of November 20. The office or offices of the Government to which central responsibility is assigned is indicated in each case.273:
7. Planning should include different levels of possible increased activity, and in each instance there should be estimates of such factors as:A. Resulting damage to North Vietnam;
B. The plausibility of denial;
C. Possible North Vietnamese retaliation;
D. Other international reaction.
Plans should be submitted promptly for approval by higher authority.
(Action: State, DOD, and CIA. )
263:
7. With respect to action against North Vietnam, there should be a detailed plan for the development of additional Government of Vietnam resources, especially for sea-going activity, and such planning should indicate the time and investment necessary to achieve a wholly new level of effectiveness in this field of action.(Action: DOD, and CIA. )
273 simply removes the lined out text:
9. It was agreed in Honolulu that the situation in Cambodia is of the first importance for South Vietnam, and it is therefore urgent that we should lose no opportunity to exercise a favorable influence upon that country. In particular, measures should be undertaken to satisfy ourselves completely that recent charges from Cambodia are groundless,
and we should put ourselves in a position to offer to the Cambodian a full opportunity to satisfy themselves on this same point -
Tony and David:
Bringing us back to this thread, if we belive there's some likelihood that 'Prayer Man' is indeed Lee (or Harvey) Oswald, its baffling what happened next. Looks like eyewitness accounts put this person going back into the TSBD (after the shooting becomes evident) which seems counterintuitive. None of this makes sense anymore, and we're left to speculate. Prayer Man's shirt and appearance certainly look like the Oswald who's later arrested. Lee is escorted out the back of the Texas Theatre never to be seen again (except by Mathers and an officer on a CIA flight to Area 51). I do agree that - in the chaos and movement following the shooting - anyone could've left the TSBD. Pictures (and Craig's observation) give us an "Oswald look-alike" leaving in a Rambler. I personally don't belive in any of Oswald's recorded escape routes... buses, taxis, walking quickly or redbird flights. Its all slight of hand by magicians prompting us to focus on the wrong stuff.
Gene
All good points Gene....
Yet one of the question that I have not had the time to pursue in its entirety is, "Who else could it be?"
I know a number of pages back there is speculation,
do we know how Oswald's name is at the top of the TSBD employee list? Did HE give them his name after he went back inside, only to leave by some other route?
One of the staples of the case is Roberts' account of Oswald coming to his room around 1pm, spending a little time there (changing) and leaving while zipping up a jacket.
There was no jacket... since the jacket found was not Oswald's...
So how do we know it was his? Marina.
Mr. RANKIN. 162?
Mrs. OSWALD. That is Lee's--an old shirt. (This is the jacket recovered on the ground at the car lot.... an old shirt? was she shown the same thing as CE162?
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=138188
Mr. RANKIN. Sort of a jacket?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
And now we are to believe that he wore the same shirt and jacket home thursday night.... while we all know he goes to work with the BLUE JACKET Friday morning. Yet we come to learn that the BLUE JACKET was still at the TSBD.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall any of these clothes that your husband was wearing when he came home Thursday night, November 21, 1963?
Mrs. OSWALD. On Thursday I think he wore this shirt.
Mr. RANKIN. Is that Exhibit 150?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you remember anything else he was wearing at that time?
Mrs. OSWALD. It seems he had that jacket, also.
Mr. RANKIN. Exhibit 162?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. Is it possible that Exhibit 163 (Blue Jacket described by Wesley) was worn by him that morning without your knowing about it?
Mrs. OSWALD. Quite possible.
Wesley tries to support the gray wollen jacket idea... but does a poor job in one respect yet appears to say that what he wore was neither the blue jacket at the TSBD or the grey one CE162.
Mr. FRAZIER - He got out of the car and he was wearing the jacket that has the big sleeves in them and he put the package that he had
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0273a.htm
Mr. BALL - I have here Commission's 163, a gray blue jacket. Do you recognize this jacket?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't.
Mr. BALL - Did you ever see Lee Oswald wear this jacket?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't believe I have.
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't believe I have because most time I noticed when Lee had it, I say he put off his shirt and just wear a T-shirt the biggest part of the time so really what shirt he wore that day I really didn't see it or didn't pay enough attention to it whether he did have a shirt on.
Mr. BALL - On that day you did notice one article of clothing, that is, he had a jacket?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - What color was the jacket?
Mr. FRAZIER - It was a gray, more or less flannel, wool-looking type of jacket that I had seen him wear and that is the type of jacket he had on that morning.
Mr. BALL - Did it have a zipper on it?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; it was one of the zipper types.
Mr. BALL - It isn't one of these two zipper jackets we have shown?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir.
Mr. BALL. Here is another jacket which is a gray jacket, does this look anything like the jacket he had on?
Mrs. RANDLE. No, sir; I remember its being gray.
Mr. BALL. Well, this one is gray but of these two the jacket I last showed you is Commission Exhibit No. 162, and this blue gray is 163, now if you had to choose between these two?
Mrs. RANDLE. I would choose the dark one.
Mr. BALL. You would choose the dark one?
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Which is 163, as being more similar to the jacket he had?
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir; that I remember. But I, you know, didn't pay an awful lot of attention to his jacket. I remember his T-shirt and the shirt more so than I do the jacket.
Mr. BALL. The witness just stated that 163 which is the gray-blue is similar to the jacket he had on. 162, the light gray jacket was not.
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes.
Ok... so Prayerman has the same open shirt and white T as seen on Oswald when arrested.
Prayerman and who we believe is Lovelady are seen in the same frames... they are not the same person.
The man in Dillard in the WEST window appears to be only wearing a T shirt.... and has a similar receding hairline to LEE.
It is possible that HARVEY is indeed Prayerman...
- Lunchroom scene never happened, in reality Truly and Baker only encounter the "employee on the stairs"
- LEE passes Reid and leaves via the front door, Craig and others see this person
- HARVEY goes back inside, gives his name and the Elsbeth address to the DPD and leaves taking a bus to the Theater as mentioned in Fritz's and Holmes' recaps of the interrogation.
- LEE goes to Beckley in the Rambler, is picked up by the patrol car and brought to Ruby's or that area where he then makes his way down 10th, going west, until he encounters Tippit...
If the FBI /SSwould not hear about more than 3 shots, can you imagine if anyone said that Oswald was right there at the top of the stairs in the corner? Yet not a soul has EVER come forward saying such....
And I cannot think of why part of the plan would be to put an Oswald impersonator on those steps...
I am trying to find if anyone in any of the images looks like Prayerman... no luck yet. This has become one of themore interesting mysteries of the case...
Amazing that we can't ID the person.
DJ
-
A very interesting essay...
As I read it though I find myself asking - what if it is the very evidence sought which is in itself the cover-up and conspiracy.
There is a large difference between evidence that leads to a contradiction, piled upon each other to disprove a theory
and evidence that leads nowhere, evidence that cannot be validated or authenticated in the legal sense...
For example: Stated as fact: Kleins shipped the FC rifle for all orders like HIDELL's as they ran out of the TS....
Yet while we HAD the microfilm of KLEINS orders going back some time, the evidence is now gone... there is no way to prove one way or the other what KLEINS was shipping for those orders until someone in the whole of the US comes forward with a KLEINS shipment of a 40"FC for the C20-T750 ordered...
We simply cannot know, cannot confirm and cannot disprove the contention.... and evidence fitting this problem runs rampant throughout the "Historically accepted evidence"
What surprises me most is our communities belief in complex planning to actuate conspiracy throughtou the world by a very select group of people
cannot accept that the first 10 layers of the onion, pointing to CIA members, MAFIA members, CUBANS etc... is in fact simply more of the smokescreen and cover-up which insulates the real culprits behind the planning...
While "we" are indicting these FALSE SPONSORS as the end-all of the conspiracy... the actual mechanics of what occurred is buried many more layers within...
Sadly I think that the actual "courtroom evidence" needed to ID the guilty is long gone while we chase our tails with the red herrings and blind alleys created over 50 years of watchdogging...
This is not to say that elements identified were not somehow involved or may even have pulled a trigger or two...
Yet they are not the ones who were in a position to ensure that Rear Admirals of the Navy and a 4 star General of the AF did what was needed....
McGeorge Bundy along the owners of Banks/Insurance co's in Boston, Montreal and London and comapnies like TEXTRON are closer to the center of this storm..
The lawfirm of Cravath, Swaine and Moore and it's partners including McCloy, Rowsell Gilpatrick, Arthur Little, Paul F Clark who helped TEXTRON via John Hancock Life and 1st Bank of Boston grow into a DEFENSE powerhouse making billions off of the Vietnam War...
Not EVERYTHING was connected to the JFK assassination.... yet the history shows it is very easy to attached unrelated activity to the killing and cover-up... while some of the most glaring subjects are dismissed.
To me, we find out who tells Bundy to not okay the destruction of the final Cuban airplanes, to draft NSAM273 before 11/22 in direct conflict with what JFK says all along...
we begin to find the head of the serpant.... and imo it wears a Skull and Bones membership pin.
DJ
McGeorge Bundy:
Raised in Boston, Massachusetts, Bundy came from a wealthy family long involved in Republican[1] politics. His mother, Katherine Lawrence (Putnam), was the daughter of two Boston Brahmin families listed in the Social Register. His father, Harvey Hollister Bundy, was from Grand Rapids, Michigan and was a diplomat who helped implement the Marshall Plan.
Bundy attended the elite Dexter School in Brookline, Massachusetts and then the Groton School, where he placed first in his class and ran the student newspaper and debating society. He was then admitted to Yale University, one year behind his brother William. At Yale, where he majored in mathematics, he served as secretary of the Yale Political Union and then chairman of its Liberal Party. He was on the staff of the Yale Literary Magazine and also wrote a column for the Yale Daily News. Like his father, he was inducted into the Skull and Bones secret society, where he was nicknamed "Odin". He remained in contact with his fellow Bonesmen for decades afterward.[2] He graduated Yale in the class of 1940. During World War II he served as a U.S. Army intelligence officer
DJ
-
Gene, Yes there was accomplices / conspirators before, during, after and still working behind the scenes today. They were busy feeding misinformation, manipulating evidence, threatening and murdering witnesses, lying and whatever else they can do to confuse and mislead. They have done their job well Gene because we are indeed, confused and mislead. There seems to be a level of suspicion on all those that you named in your post plus many more.
I think there is enough information to rule out LHO as a shooter and if he wasn’t a shooter then I don’t believe he killed Tippet. Seems there are still clouds around the information I use to come to that conclusion, however, Those are my convictions.
I believe Roger Craig saw LHO get into a Rambler and leave. Why, because he was a Deputy Sheriff who is trained to observe. These were early statements by Craig, Before the questions of the Bus; Cab trips were scrutinized like they have been today. Even after the controversy of those trips and despite much criticism of what he said he saw, he stuck with it to his grave and some say it was “They” that put him there. Since I don’t think there was a Lee and Harvey at the TSBD that day, { reasons best left for another thread } My reasonable assumption is that. LHO left in the Rambler.
Hi Tony...
The man who walked past REID on the 2nd floor was not wearing a jacket or overshirt - only a white Tshirt - as was the man Craig described getting into the car...
Mr. CRAIG - Oh, he was a white male in his twenties, five nine, five eight, something like that; about 140 to 150; had kind of medium brown sandy hair--you know, it was like it'd been blown--you know, he'd been in the wind or something--it was all wild-looking; had on--uh--blue trousers--
Mr. BELIN - What shade of blue? Dark blue, medium or light?
Mr. CRAIG - No; medium, probably; I'd say medium. And, a--uh--light tan shirt, as I remember it.
Yet everyone is shown the ARREST SHIRT as CE150 and asked it that was what he was wearing: and we are not shown the Briarloom button-down... EVER from what I can tell (any help there?)
Mr. BELIN - I hand you Exhibit No. 150. Have you ever seen a shirt like this before? Does this look familiar to the shirt that the suspect might have been wearing when you saw him, or this man running toward the station wagon?
Mr. CRAIG - It's the same type of shirt.
Mr. BELIN - I believe you used the phrase, "light shirt". Would Exhibit 150 be darker than the shirt he was wearing?
Mr. CRAIG - Uh--it looks darker in here--yes, uh-huh.
Mr. BELIN - What about the man who was driving the car?
Mr. CRAIG - Now, he struck me, at first, as being a colored male. He was very dark complected, had real dark short hair, and was wearing a thin white-looking Jacket---uh, it looked like the short windbreaker type, you know, because it was real thin and had the collar that came out over the shoulder (indicating with hands) like that--just a short jacket.
Kinda like the light windbreaker found in the car lot?
Mr. BELIN. Do you remember what clothes he had on when you saw him?
Mrs. REID. What he was wearing, he had on a white T-shirt and some kind of wash trousers. What color I couldn't tell you.
Mr. BELIN. I am going to hand you what has been marked Commission Exhibit, first 157 and then 158, and I will ask you if either or both look like they might have been the trousers that you saw him wear or can you tell?
Mrs. REID. I just couldn't be positive about that. I would rather not say, because I just cannot.
Mr. BELIN. Do you remember whether he had any shirt or jacket on over his T-shirt?
Mrs. REID. He did not. He did not have any jacket on.
Mr. BELIN. Have you ever seen anyone working at the book depository wearing any kind of a shirt or jacket similar to Commission Exhibit 150 or do you know?
Mrs. REID. No; I do not. I have never, so far as I know ever seen that shirt. I have been asked about that shirt before, I have seen it once before but not since all this happened.
CE150 is the ARREST SHIRT worn by Oswald... the shirt and pants Oswald was wearing to work were taken off and found in the bottom drawer of his dresser on Beckley.... it appears on the handwritten inventory as well as the typed inventories of the BECKLEY searches:
He was wearing a Briarloom shirt with a button-downed collar... which CE150 is not... the item appears on the DPD inventory of items given to the FBI, yet it is neither numbered or part of the photographed 455 items...
So basically... the man walking past REID, ID'd as Oswald could not have been...
The man Craig sees appears to be wearing the TAN Briarloom, while the man REID SEES is not the same person - yet is identified as OSWALD...
The man on the bus has not been conclusively determined as Oswald... in fact there is quite a lot of conflict with the stories of those who claim to ahve seen this man on the bus... The biggest problem to me remains the description of the shirt she supposedly sees:
Mr. BALL - In order to convince me that you did see it before you've got to tell me what there is about it that is the same, you see. Now, you try to convince me, or tell me why it is that you believe that this is the shirt that Oswald had on when you saw him on the bus?
Mrs. BLEDSOE - Well, I would say it was. That hole---
Mr. BALL - Mostly the hole in the right sleeve?
Mrs. BLEDSOE - Yes.
The problem once again... is that she is describing the ARREST SHIRT of Oswald with three missing buttons and the hole in the right sleeve - YET OSWALD WAS NOT WEARING THAT SHIRT ON THE BUS - IF IT WAS HIM ON THE BUS... It is my opinion from the evidence that BLEDSOE was given the information about the shirt for her testimony so she could tie Oswald to his supposed escape route...
Yet Oswald was not yet wearing that shirt, and in all probability, the shirt got ripped and lost buttons in the struggle at the Theater....
The change of shirts is recorded by Fritz, twice and in the notes of all of those who where at the interview... in Fact.. the notes claim that Oswald 1) took the bus all the way to his destination and/or 2) used the transfer to get onto the 2nd bus..
What bothers me about this is his "QUOTING OSWALD" when it came to the change instory to the taxi cab... If you read thru this entire write-up... the "quoted" material is sparse... he does not quote certain things while others are claimed to be exact quotes... the change in who the cab driver was becomes interesting in this light... once Whaley was "found" he helps in some areas and completely contradicts testimonies of others in different areas.
The number of people seen leaving the TSBD and area is astounding. That there is a belief that anyone or any group of "assassins" could not walk away unbothered is also contradicted by the evidence...
Which Oswald (Lee/Harvey/Imposter) was where is unknowable imo... yet there are strong indications that those who place him in certain escape routes have been fed info after the fact.
DJ
-
While I have done quite a bit of research and evidence compilation - found if you search here, Gil Jesus' work on the order coupled with Armstrong's (you can find a wealth of his work at the Baylor site: http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/tabs/collection/po-arm provides great info.... and Jack White did a great essay on the Money order in 2005. Moyer on the rifle order is a great essay as well.
For simplicity I will try to recap...
The accusation is that the FBI created the evidence after the fact and - as with so many other submitted COPIES OF EVIDENCE - had the original microfilm BEFORE copies were made... while today that microfilm is gone which means there is simply no way to authenticate a COPY of a MICROFILM COPY of an original - let alone find out why they kept the envelope....
The Microfilm is no longer at NARA per John Armstrong who tells me he saw the box, but there was no film inside..
Notice the order numbers... A review of these orders (HIDELL WAS 270502, 94 orders prior to the end of the roll... surely there was another of these special 40" shipments for a C20-T750 ordered which PROVES they sent everyone a FC rifle in place of the TS ordered... but we didn't get that.
We have Waldman handing the FBI this film and it's the FBI who finally tell us that on 2/3/64 the image of the "ORDER BLANK" showing one C2766 rifle ordered - yet no other identifying marks like HIDELL on the ORDER BLANK
while they also microfilmed the ENVELOPE? which does have HIDELL...
We have Welte and Shanahan retreiving this "exhibit: the film and prints from a LaSalle Nat'l Bank Safety Deposit Box (??? - I am wading thru the WCD, FBI reports and Armstron/Weisberg archives to see if there is any other mention of this situation - so far only this one page comes up)
Paul - the ONLY THING that ties HIDELL to C2766 and VC836 is this one "ORDER BLANK" with the hand written notation - and the inventory master sheet that related the two.
When an order comes in on a coupon, Kleins then creates the order on these ORDER BLANKS... as we look closely at it... and as written in the FBI report... the order was for an italian carbine...
yet the NAME and the VC & Serial numbers are all in different writing or type face...
If one were to take an ORDER BLANK and type in HIDELL and write in the SN & VC #'s... we have an order form for HIDELL's order of a C20-T750... fortunately for us, we know that THAT ID# is not for an FC rifle of 40"
Sure be nice to see what ANY OTHER ORDER looked like....
Here are the packing slips with the related VC #'s they were assigned to... there is simply no rhyme or reason to the numbering... when Klein's personnel tells us they opened the cartons and visually/manually inspected each rifle and recorded it's number next to the SN.
and here are how they are assigned on the "master list" - again... if they were opening up 10 cartons of all the same rifle - why are their assigned VC #'s scattered all over??
(Note: I either color coded those on the same packing slip or highlighted them all the same size...
VC789 and VC840 are on the same packing slip yet are about as far apart on this list as possible... and only 4 VC#'s past C2766...
Wish we had more info on this process as it sure appears random to me.
Without the "HIDELL & Oswald's POBox" and the "C2766/VC836" all we have is the order coupon and envelope and the HSCA telling us what it can.
Surely there are still microfilm records of the orders from that year unless destroyed... ANY order for C20-T50 should shed light on what was happening at KLEINS with those orders...
Finally Paul... KLEINS was accepting and shipping orders for C20-T750 since Feb/Mar 1962... yet there are no records of them receiving any TS rifles to fulfill these shipments, only FC rifles delivered in Feb 1963.
I've asked DVP who cannot respond... asked every LNer WCR apologist I know to tell us what KLEINS was doing with these TS orders...
One would think if KLEINS had established shipping the 40" rifle in it's place, the FBI would LOVE to have a few examples to support their case.... not only no such luck, but the one batch of orders that are most meaningful
are no longer accessible...
S.O.S.D.D
DJ
-
Since the microfilm related to this order has vanished from the ARCHIVES while the box remains... I had hoped to understand when the copy of the "blank order form" was made, by whom, and what was the chain of possession...
Mr. BELIN. And on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7, there is a Serial No C-2766?
Mr. SCIBOR. Correct.
Mr. BELIN. Was this serial number on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7 the first contact you had on Friday evening that led you to believe that you had shipped this particular rifle?
Mr. SCIBOR. That's correct.
Mr. BELIN. When did you discover or find out this information, if you know--strike the question.
I believe you said you got down here about 10 o'clock that night?
Mr. SCIBOR. Between 10 and 11.
Mr. BELIN. And then you started going through your microfilm records?
Mr. SCIBOR. Right.
Mr. BELIN. About when did you actually find the microfilm of which Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7 is a print?
Mr. SCIBOR. About 4 o'clock in the roaming (sic), as far as I can remember.
Mr. BELIN. You then turned this information over to the FBI?
Mr. SCIBOR. Mr. Waldman did.
Mr. BELIN. I'm handing you what has been marked as an FBI Exhibit D-77 and ask you if you know what this is.
Mr. WALDMAN. This is a microfilm record that---of mail order transactions for a given period of time. It was turned over by us to the FBI.
Mr. BELIN. Do you know when it was turned over to the FBI?
Mr. WALDMAN. It was turned over to them on November 23, 1963.
Mr. BELIN. Now, you are reading from the carton containing that microfilm. Do you know whose initials are on there?
Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; the initials on here are mine and they were put on the date on which this was turned over to the FBI concerned with the investigation.
Mr. BELIN. You have on your premises a machine for looking at the microfilm prints?
Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. And you can make copies of the microfilm prints?
Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.So we have a Mitchell Scribor who was in the room with Waldman at the time and claims to have found the correct microfilm cannister... yet instead of printing copies immediately for the FBI,
the FBI TAKES THE ORIGINAL FILM which supposedly then goes to BULAB for "analysis". (Need to follow-up wiht research into DOLAN and if there is a report on his activity with the microfilm)
Finally.... I fail to understand how the "exhibit" is retrieved from a LaSalle Nat'l Bank Safety Deposit box on 2/3/64 if the FBI has the microfilm
I fail to understand how an "ORDER BLANK" shows the sale of an Italian carbine yet it is only the ENVELOPE that has the HIDELL address... ("order blank" is used over and over....)
and finally, the FBI and the ARCHIVES have insured we will NEVER see an original - much in the same way school records and military records go from "originals" to coppies of copies..
DJ
-
BUMP
C'mon DVP... ANY order or evidence that Kleins shipped a 40" rifle for C20-T750 orders.... EVER. Or where they got their 36" carbines which were shipped as ordered from Feb 62 thru Feb 63...
You're so good at posting uncorroborated garbage and then running off... but when do you actually use that big brain on the questions asked?
But it's probably best if conspiracy theorists like David Josephs totally ignore that part of Westra's remarks in this 1978 report below:
Westra claimed they did NOT mount scopes onto 40" rifles - BUT THEY "UNDOUBTEDLY MOUNTED SOME".... so to YOU DVP, this means it happened - and you have the gaul to call others out on reaching conclusions on the barest of evidence? Why do you feel WESTRA was 1) qualified to make the comment, 2)knew one way or the other
Westra was not the gunsmith, he was a shipping/receiving guy...
And you still have not offered a single example of a single order EVER where a C20-T750 resulted in a SCOPED 40" rifle being shipped... ANY SINGLE ONE OF THEM will prove your case Dave...
Why do you suppose the FBI avoided all those other orders like the plague?
Mr. BELIN. Who put the scope on the rifle?
Mr. WALDMAN. The scope was mounted on the rifle in our gun ,shop, most probably by a gunsmith named William Sharp (SUFFICE TO SAY - MR SHARP WAS NEVER CALLED UPON BY THE WC, BUT HERE IS HIS HSCA CONTACT REPORT thanks to Baylor's Armstrong collection The FBI has him put scopes on 12 more rifles ???)
Mr. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, do your records show whether or not the rifle was shipped with the scope mounted on it or is there any way that you know whether or not it was?
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-mountedMr. SCIBOR. Employed by Klein's Sporting Goods.
Mr. BELIN. In what capacity?
Mr. SCIBOR. General operating manager.
Mr. BELIN. Were you so employed on or about November 22, 1963?
Mr. SCIBOR. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. Were you at any time on that date contacted by any law enforcement agency with regard to a particular rifle, Serial No. C-2766?
Mr. SCIBOR. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. And could you tell us the circumstances surrounding this?
Mr. SCIBOR. I got a call Friday evening, November 22, asking if it would be possible to get at the records---at our records to see if that gun had been in our possession or sold by us. I got permission from one of the executives to open the store and view our records, and I came down here somewhere between 10 and 11 o'clock.
Mr. BELIN. And what did you do when you got down here?
Mr. SCIBOR. We went in with the Government men and--just before we went in, Mr. Waldman came down and we came in and he took over as far as getting-- trying to find the information that we needed.So again, one of the ONLY OTHER WITNESSES to the printing of these Microfilm orders supposedly PROVING that Hidell ordered C2766, and in the same room as Waldman and the FBI... and not only was he not pushed on anything in his WC testimony... the HSCA did not feel it necessary to follow-up.
David, to put it bluntly - your attempts at proving anything regarding this rifle is pathetic, uncorroborated, incomplete, and woefully inadequate.
You can't find the Federal processing marks on the MO, or why they are not there
You can't understand what rifles were used prior to the FC shipment of Feb 22, 1963... the TS order was cancelled yet the ad runs for a year offering a 36" carbine with scope, C20-T750... what where they shipping?
You can't find how/who/when this rifle was retrieved or any of its path to the 6th floor...
But you can conclude it was Oswald's.... you sir, are an insult to intelligence and should be ashamed of the way you rewrite and obscure history...
Shame on you
Mr. BELIN. Do you know who the person is that filled out this order?
Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; his initials are so indicated as "M.W."
Mr. BELIN. Would that be the name at the lower lefthand corner of Exhibit 1? (THIS IS THE KLEINS ORDER FOR RIFLES - NOT ANY ORDER THAT GETS SHIPPED TO A CUSTOMER)
Mr. WALDMAN. It is.
Mr. BELIN. And that is who?
Mr. WALDMAN. Mitchell W. Westra.
Mr. BELIN. At that time was he an employee of your company?
Mr. WALDMAN. He was.
Mr. BELIN. Was he under your jurisdiction and supervision?
Mr. WALDMAN. He was not under my direct supervision, no. He was under the supervision of Sam Kasper (SUFFICE TO SAY MR KASPER WAS ALSO NOT CALLED UPON BY THE WC) -
Sorry for forgetting the link Chris... I rarely make that mistake.
I thought it was the work of Morningstar... my bad here's the link http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/car10.htm
Thanks for clearing that up
DJ
-
So Robert - do you dismiss Euins and Brennen for what they actually saw... Brennen did not see shots fired even though he was looking at the window at the time
and Euins here SEES the shooter.... a dark skinned man with a bald spot....
While Brennen I can dismiss as "cooperative to a fault" Euins has little motivation to lie... and then there are the Rowland window men...
SOMEONE and more where seen on the 6th floor from 12:10 to 12:15 to 12:30.... whether shots were staged or not... IDK...
Yet we again have that ground level 1st noise... and the strange looking UP for it afterward....
Mr. EUINS. Then I was standing here, and as the motorcade turned the corner, I was facing, looking dead at the building. And so I seen this pipe thing sticking out the window. I wasn't paying too much attention to it. Then when the first shot was fired, I started looking around, thinking it was a backfire. Everybody else started looking around. Then I looked up at the window, and he shot again. So--you know this fountain bench here, right around here. Well, anyway, there is a little fountain right here. I got behind this little fountain, and then he shot again.
So after he shot again, he just started looking down this, you knowMr. SPECTER. For example, could you see whether or not there was a telescopic lens on the gun?
Mr. EUINS. No, sir.There are the Mooney men, the Baker/Truly man, the "man" who gets off the elevator as Sawyer gets on, people exiting the back door per Carr and others, Lovelady explain how easy it is to just walk into the back entrance... Hosty comes back and no one checks his ID upon entering the TSBD.... it was FUBAR in the 15 minutes afterward....
I think anyone could easily walk out of that building..... no?
-
I just took exception to the statement that "we all agree" the lunchroom incident didn't occur and Oswald is Prayerman.
I don't recall writing that... and I know I have never said Prayerman IS Oswald...
I did post: I think one has to accept that the Baker/Truly lunchroom scene did not happen... that they encountered someone on the stairs that was neither LEE or HARVEY, and if that really is HARVEY on the steps he seems overly relaxed afterwards to be just standing around... he has to know some of the things going on around him...
we have details of the 2nd floor lunchroom incident from Truly, Baker, Oswald and Reid, and I believe them.
A few thoughts Bill....
Truly does not say anything about this encounter to Lumpkin or Fritz when he informs them that OSWALD is missing... He can't possbily know where everyone of his employees is, yet if his testimony is correct he sees Oswlad not 20-30 minutes before in the lunchroom... within 2 minutes of the shooting...
If this had actually happened - I wounder how he gets from Oswald in the lunchroom - the last time Truly sees him - to "he's the only employee missing"
Mr. TRULY. Then in a few minutes--it could have been moments or minutes at a time like that--I noticed some of my boys were over in the west corner of the shipping department, and there were several officers over there taking their names and addresses, and so forth.
There were other officers in other parts of the building taking other employees, like office people's names. I noticed that Lee Oswald was not among these boys.
So I picked up the telephone and called Mr. Aiken down at the other warehouse who keeps our application blanks. Back up there.
First I mentioned to Mr. Campbell--I asked Bill Shelley if he had seen him, he looked around and said no.
Mr. BELIN. When you asked Bill Shelley if he had seen whom?
Mr. TRULY. Lee Oswald. I said, "Have you seen him around lately," and he said no.
So Mr. Campbell is standing there, and I said, "I have a boy over here missing. I don't know whether to report it or not." Because I had another one or two out then. I didn't know whether they were all there or not. He said, "What do you think"? And I got to thinking. He said, "Well, we better do it anyway." It was so quick after that.
So I picked the phone up then and called Mr. Aiken, at the warehouse, and got the boy's name and general description and telephone number and address at Irving.
Seems that HARVEY LEE OSWALD was in the corner there giving names - or was this just the order it was typed up... I can't seem to find the original handwritten lists that were prepared by Westphal.
In either case Westphal to Revill to Gannaway, if he was already gone, how does he make the top of the list and with the wrong name?
With regards to Baker.... how can he sign an affidavit to one story that has no lunchroom at all and then change the story later... and still be believed, given how it was not possible unless Oswald had remained in the lunchroom the entire time and was simply doping his thing. How does Baker's evidence, in the order it was offered, support the lunchroom encounter even happening...
The only thing we know of OSWALD's telling the story is what Fritz wrote in his notes....
"claims 2nd floor Coke when
off came in"
yet he also has Baker's statement, the affidavit, of the ONLY DPD cop to have seen Oswald other than Craig who he didn't believe anyway, and there is no mention of the 2nd floor or a Coke...
and finally Reid... who I happen to believe sees Oswald in the Lunchroom before she heads out.... and sees him again walking thru her office FROM the direction of the stairs/lunchroom - but she never witnessed this Baker/Truly encounter, so I fail to understand how she offered a detail account of that encounter....
Please help me understand why a same day affidavit is not more believeable than testimony and withheld interrogation notes from well after the fact....
and since the person REID sees is only wearing a TSHIRT... I am under the impression this is LEE and not Harvey... and is why the story had to be changed....
Even in the countless scenarios... whoever STAIRWAYMAN is... like PRAYERMAN, we should be able to figure it out by process of illimination - who would Truly know well enough to say he works here and was above the 4th floor within 2 minutes of the shooting... Dougherty?
I value your opinions quite a lot Bill, so when you say you believe the lunchroom encounter story... I'd like to know how you reconcile all the contradictory info
DJ
-
I'd like to bring back this thread. Joseph McBride, in his book 'Into the Nightmare', presents an idea that appeared no where on this thread, that perhaps JD Tippit was Badgeman, or at least that he was a shooter at DP. His wife presented him with an alibi of course, saying that he came home for lunch that day, something unusual for him. McBride interviewed Tippit's father, who says that JD was an expert shooter. Whatever the truth of this, McBride and others are right when they say the Tippit shooting is a rosetta stone to the assassination of JfK. I find it interesting that several witnesses who buttressed the government conclusion that LHO killed Tippit were connected with Jack Ruby. I enjoyed the book, even though personal journey took up many pages.
Hey there Paul...
Morningstar did an amazing job and while I disagree with his JDT/JFK swap... the info he provides regarding Tippit's whereabouts makes it pretty difficult for him to have been in DP as Badgeman (who does not actually exist other than as an image so ingrained in our minds it has become difficult NOT to see "him"... but a different coloring of the Moorman image and we can see only sky, leaves and shadows.... except for that shooter to the west....
Add the "facts" about where Tippit was and I believe another person can be taken off the list as being the "man" in the badgeman illusion.
If you take a close look at any "badgeman group" enlargement... one is struck by how light - and from what source - but how light reflects off the "badge" and "patch" in the midst of shadow...
or any of the other white spots which appear in deep shadow yet on the front of these three men...
Just sayin... before we talk about Tippit as badgeman... don't we need to prove there was a badgeman. Kinda like talking about Oswald's bringing a rifle to work when we cant get the rifle into Oswald's hands.
DJ
At 12:17P.M. Tippit radios the dispatcher and says "be out of the car for a minute, 4100 block of Bonnie View." This information comes from the Bowles Channel 1 transcript. Close examination of this document shows that the Police Dispatcher did not transmit an order for Tippit to go to this location on Bonnie View. Perhaps as Tippit was patrolling his district after lunch, he noticed something suspicious or was stopped by a citizen and asked to investigate whatever was going on at the 4100 block of Bonnie View Rd.
4100 Bonnie View is 7.5 miles from Tippit's home with a normal travel time of 24 minutes, Tippit Travel Time could have been 18-20 minutes this would have given Tippit plenty of time from 11:50A.M. when he cleared from lunch to travel to the location in his patrol district where he got out of the car at 12:17P.M.
In Judy Bonner's book "Investigation of a Homicide"on page 71 she states "The Bonnie View call turned out to be a dry run, an elderly woman who had thought she had seen a man trying to burglarize a house next door. Tippit politely took down her story, made a fruitless search of the neighborhood, returned to his car to write out a report, then radioed in for another assignment." I do not know how Judy Bonner obtained this information? Tippit was killed one hour later and a search for the report mentioned has proved unsuccessful. Whatever happened at 4100 Bonnie View did not last long since Tippit called back the Dispatcher 3 minutes later at 12:20P.M. and reported "78 clear."
Even though Tippit was not ordered to the 4100 block of Bonnie View RD. by the Police Dispatcher, there is no hard evidence to disprove that this event was genuine. There is also no hard evidence to prove this event was staged in any way, since the location he stopped at was known to the dispatcher and potential witnesses could have been located if the situation called for it. The best information available places Tippit at the 4100 block of Bonnie View Rd. between 12:17 and 12:20P.M. on 11/22/63.
Shortly after publishing this article Irish researcher Chris Scally sent me a letter he received from the late Larry Harris in 1984 that contained information about the 4100 Bonnie View call. Larry wrote “In 1978 I interviewed the manager of a grocery market at 4121 Bonnie View; He told me that during the noon hour on 11/22/63, he caught a woman shoplifter and phoned the police; it was Tippit who responded. The store manager knew Tippit because it was almost invariably Tippit who responded to calls for shoplifters. The manager told me that Tippit placed the woman in the squad car and left. So indeed Tippit was on an investigation at 12:17 P.M. nevertheless, it is disturbing and perhaps significant that this incident is not reflected more substantially in the tapes or transcripts.”
Larry Harris’s investigator Ken M. Holmes Jr confirms this story. In 1963 Hodges Super Market occupied 4121 Bonnie View Road (1963 Dallas City Directory). On my last trip to Dallas in November of 1997 the small shopping plaza that contained this store was vacant with for sale signs on it.
Who this shoplifter was, what happened to her, how Tippit was really alerted to this location and what impact this could have had on the events that follow are still not known. This story has confirmation from the grocer who was a known and interviewed eyewitness, where as the story from ‘Investigation of a Homicide’ that was previously reported in the original article has never been confirmed.
-
Those who reject the second floor lunchroom encounter that exonerates Oswald, are only fooling thselves, and it has yet got be established that Oswald is Prayerman, though he is a candidate.
BK
OK Bill, I'll bite...
Please help me understand why Baker's affidavit and his testimony are so different... just cause the 2nd floor lunchroom charade exonerates Oswald IF TRUE, does not mean it happened like that... right?
It is my opinion that Truly, Baker and ultimately Fritz (with his notes) change the unidentified person coming down the stairs into the lunchroom encounter. If anything, leaving OSWALD where Baker sees him on the stairs in the affidavit is much worse for Oswald, which I think is what you are saying - So the discussion becomes about CAN HE GET THERE IN TIME, rather than WAS HE EVER THERE AT ALL, which is exactly what was desired.
Who else was NOT OUTSIDE or at a window, worked for the TSBD/Truly enough that he'd be easily identified, and would be coming DOWN from above the 4th floor?
and why does this person need to remain anonymous?
Add now add the LEE/HARVEY scenario, especially if Truly is aware of it and knows that it is LEE coming down the stairs... Baker would know no better.
No, Prayerman is not yet established as Oswald.... or whether LEE and HARVEY were on premises at the same time - as it would appear...
unless Lee is Prayerman
-
And no conspiracy theorist (not even David Josephs of northern California) has ever come within six miles of being about to prove that ANY of the Klein's paperwork was forged or planted or tainted to frame LHO.
I'll ask again David... for almost a year KLEINS advertised and sold (and presumably shipped) a C20-T750 described as a scoped 36" "carbine" - WHAT DID THEY SHIP FOR THESE ORDERS DAVID AND WHERE DID THEY GET THESE RIFLES? (but no worries I don't expect you to have the chops to address the question beyond the last time you ansered it - "Who cares about other orders" LMAO)
And I was right of course... you cannot discuss the evidence that would prove anything since the evidence is GONE....
If there was only one other order in which a C20-T750 was ordered and any one of the other 99 FC rifles from that shipment were sent... we'd have our prooof.
If there was an example of any other FC rifle shipped with a scope on it... more proof for the FBI against Oswald
You don't want to think about what Kleins was fillingorders with prior to Feb 1963 cause it messes with yout neat little explanation - can you prove that VC836 and C2766 are on the original order form Dave?
All we have is a copy of a microfilm copy that has this written in PENCIL.
RE the Money order... which bank or postal office processed and paid the money order?
The lack of ethics you show by only posting only the FRONT is par for the LNer course... Let's look at the real crux of the matter shall we?
Waldman is asked about the one and only KLEINS stamp on the back of the Order... does he confirm it is the SAME stamp... the one used at his office? or something similar?
So show us Dave... where are the FRBS processing marks? The USPS marks?
Why are the stamps CLOSE but not the SAME? (didn't Oswald have a stamp making kit in his possession?)
Dave - you remain completely unable to address the issues and keep side-stepping the actual evidence that needs to be discussed... Why can't you address the PROOF that would show what KLEINS SOP was for Feb/MArch 1963 and for the month prior?
Afriad you and the FBI might have learned that none of the FBI generated Kleins BS evidence is worth the paper it was copied on.
And since you're going to continue to pull out a straw man argument everytime you are cornered like this - our "discussion" is over until you show up with something to defend yourself other than your not-to-be-believed "word" on the matter....
You going to put up, shut op, or just go home with your tail between your legs again?
The stamps are NOT the same and there are no other "official banking" marks on the thing... but YOU can show us how it was paid? the floor is all yours.....
Chapter 7000 PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING POSTAL MONEY ORDERS Section 7020 -General Information And Format
All post offices sell paper money orders to the public. These money orders are paid at commercial banks and other depositaries of the Federal Reserve System and sent to FRBS. The FRBs will charge the account of USPS for the amount of the paid money orders and report these charges on the daily transcript of the U.S. Treasury. The FRBs then will send the money order documents to USPS. Upon receipt of the money order documents from the FRBS, USPS will reconcile and audit the documents. USPS will report all money order transactions on the Statement of .Transactions to the Deposit Reconciliation Branch (TFM 4-7095) at the end of each month
Section 7040 -Processing Fit Money OrdersBatching and Listing Fit Money Orders. Paper money orders are MICR printed with the routing code (including a routing number of 0000-0020 or 000000204) and the serial number with check digit. The routing number is also preprinted in the upper right corner on the form, which is in the location and front as prescribed by the ABA. FRBs will process FIT money orders as follows:
- Receive money orders from banks and process on high speed equipment in the manner most compatible with the processing of other categories of cash items.
- Prepare batches of no more than 500 items.
- Insert (in numerical sequence) USPS batch Locator Control Documents so that one is filed at the beginning of each batch of money orders to be read.
- Create a paper-tape list of serial numbers with optional check digit and amount of each money order read. The list will show the batch number and a subtotal for each batch with an overall total of all money orders listed on the paper tape.
- The total amount of fit items should be entered on PS Form 1901, code 100.
- Money orders bearing unreadable MICR characters in the on-us field are not to be rejected and handled as mutilated. List the characters that can be read on the paper tape as a reconcilement aid.
??
Oswald Leaving TSBD?
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
I originally put my reply to your post at the top of mine but thought better of it... it's at the bottom while I focus on the thread and the questions posed....
Take it or leave it Tommy... I'll continue to focus on CONTENT while you can play Emily Post.
I posted a few questions to help find the identity of PRAYERMAN - you know, the direction this thread took after BK identified an OSWALD looking person on the steps...
Do you have anything to contribute to our understanding of THAT time period - of who ELSE that person could be other than either Harvey, Lee or ???
Of where Viles was, is SHELLEY=SUIT&TIEMAN and where WESLEY is in Altgens as it is said he was up there with the rest of them...
Mr. BALL - Then let's see, there was Billy Lovelady and you were there.
Mr. FRAZIER - Right.
Mr. BALL - Anybody else you can remember?
Mr. FRAZIER - There was a lady there, a heavy-set lady who worked upstairs there whose name is Sarah something, I don't know her last name.
Mr. BALL - Were you near the steps?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; I was, I was standing about, I believe, one step down from the top there.
Mr. BALL - One step down from the top of the steps?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; standing there by the rail.
Mr. BALL - By steps we are talking about the steps of the entrance to the Building?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - Shown in this picture?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - Which is Commission's Exhibit No. 362. Can you come over here and show us about where you were standing? http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0491b.htm
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir. Like I told you this was an entrance right here.
Mr. BALL - Put a mark there. Your name is Frazier, put an "F" there for Frazier.
Mr. FRAZIER - O.K.
It appears there is SOME mark by the front door on CE362... if that's an "F" then where is he in the photo?
WHERE IS LOVELADY in Darnell?
Y'know Tommy - enough of this already... K? You do your thing and I'll do mine...10+ years I've been posting on these forums - thru trolls, attacks, ad homs and the rest...
Take your game up a few notches and concentrate on YOUR work... and I'll do the same..
Peace
DJ
======
Tommy -
Thank for straightening "a few things" out....
Your original content choice of YOU versus ANYONE ... completely changes the tone and point of your post... your CONTENT needs your attention more than my spelling or capitalization Tommy....
If you truly wish to be clear about what you post... maybe YOU could take a minute to reread so you don't have to repeatedly make changes to match your INTENT.
I know what Gene said... YOU posted that I assumed something that I had nothing to do with... again... CONTENT is more important than spelling Tommy.
your #3) You read that someone else CLAIMED what SHELLEY said yet never produced a tape to confirm it - even though one was done at the time...
Is it really that hard for you to admit you didn't even take a second to look up GLAZE - which in turn would have lead to a complete recourse on his "letters" and "interview" about SHELLEY... with counter point and evidence?
But, not so much... in your HASTE to play spelling nazi - you ask others to do the work for you... The Dallas Evidence Archives is a great resource Tommy... as are many, many other places on the internet...
But it's not going to jump up and bite you on the A$$... you have to go look.
#4) - Haste has nothing to do with spelling errors Tommy... neither does trying to get posts up "quickly"... spelling mistakes happen - I reread my posts before I submit them...
Again Tommy - those that I correspond with / post with, frequently, have no problems following my work...
You gonna start in on punctuation next?
I'm terribly sorry your comprehending my posts taxes you so... There are times I put alot in them - yet usually I include visuals to help make my point... Visuals I usually create myself.. maybe you've seen some of my work?
Here are 33 pages of that work along with the work of others... http://s1233.photobucket.com/user/dhjosephs/library/#/user/dhjosephs/library/?sort=3&page=1&_suid=13924013348740007970491736441265 you're free to use anything you like - and if there is anything that some image manipulation could help YOU with - in expressing your CONTENT - feel free to ask... I'm glad to help out.
My desire here is to learn more about the case... not berate others over how they express themselves unless they're purely trolling - and we both know of whom I speak.
DJ