Thomas Graves

Are you accusing Greg of being a "neo-con"? --Tommy Sure looks like it, doesn't it, Tommy? He certainly seems to think throwing mud might stick and distract from the fact that he has no real answers for my Bogard postings here. Please be gentle with him, Greg. --Tommy

I think Greg is much more ... original. --Tommy

Well, at least Poland is next to a Baltic country (Lithuania). --Tommy

Are you accusing Greg of being a "neo-con"? --Tommy

Me: Me: How about the handwriting involved? Is it Oswald's? -- Tommy

Dear Paul, Love your red shirt. Hope you don't mind if I start calling you "Garibaldi." After the Italian politician, not the fish. --Tommy

Mark, You should have allotted some of the quotes to poor "Harvey". Randomly of course. In fact... you should have had Lee starting some of the sentences and Harvey finishing them... like identical twins! Harvey's mom can discipline Lee and Lee's mom can cook for Harvey. And John Pic won't recognize either one of 'em. Don't forget Lee Henry Oswald. The bad guys wanted to make sure we were totally confused, so the created three of 'em: Harvey, Lee, and Henry. --Tommy

Never did "see" what you were talking about. Too bad you can't post better graphics. --Tommy

Brad, Please do, as I have no idea what you're talking about. When you say something about "the left side of Lovelady's face," for example, are you talking about the left side as we're looking at it (which in actuality would be the right side of his face)? Thanks, --Tommy

Robert, So Lovelady / Doorman was standing near the center hand railing all along! Makes sense to me. What I don't understand is how Lovelady's "arm" gets in front of the man's chest. But I always did think Lovelady's arm (or his shirt sleeve) was way too long, like it's not his or maybe not all of it is his. --Tommy

My impression is that Oswald blurted that out, and that it wasn't planned in advance. I do think you have to ask the question, why would he say that if it was true? And, why didn't he elaborate? His persona was of a cowardly nature, he was simply trying to exonerate himself. He perhaps hoped that a jury would ultimately decide that there was more to this event than the obvious. Paul. I think that when Oswald blurted it out, he didn't know if he'd been set up in advance or if he'd been framed (and was still being framed) after the fact. All he knew was that he was innocent and that he was the perfect scapegoat. --Tommy

Exactly, Mark. Why indeed. So, what exactly is the point you're making here? That the JFK assassination is a very complicated and confusing case? Thanks, but I already knew that. --Tommy

Vanessa, The bottom image is from Weigman. You do see both Prayerman and Lovelady in it, don't you? Lovelady is standing on the far right of the image near the center hand railing and you can see his white t-shirt under his long sleeved shirt. The blurry image on the right is a frame from the Robert Hughes film and establishes once and for all that Lovelady was wearing his long sleeved, mostly red, "plaid" shirt that day, not his vertically-striped red-and-white shirt. --Tommy

How do you account for the fact that Frazier said the package was not long enough to have contained the broken-down rifle? If you've seen The Trial Of Lee Harvey Oswald, you'll recognize that Buell isn't the sharpest tool in the box. That's why he worked in the TSBD. Though at heart he is clearly an honest person, he's one that could probably be easily cajoled into saying anything. A smart attorney will twist him around his little finger. Gerry Spence plays with heartstrings. Bugliosi works with facts. The question stands. What was in that paper bag? It is plausible that Frazier and his sister were coerced into saying that Oswald took a package to work that morning. After all, Frazier was a suspect himself. He worked in the TSBD and he owned a .303 caliber rifle. He was a neighbor of Oswald's wife and occasionally gave Oswald a ride to and from work, making Frazier the perfect person to force into lying about Oswald's journey to work that morning. Frazier was himself arrested that evening and "questioned" about the assassination. IMHO, Wesley Buell Frazier and his sister would have been easy to put pressure on and forced into lying. The fact that Frazier told the authorities that the package was short enough for Oswald to tuck one end of it under his armpit and the other end in his cupped hand supports the theory that there was no package because it suggests that Frazier guessed at how long the package would have been, but guessed wrong -- the broken down rifle was significantly longer than he thought and could not have been carried like that. Either that, or this was Frazier's way of accommodating the authorities (saying Oswald took a package to work) and exonerating Oswald at the same time. If that was the case, then Frazier was more clever than we think. --Tommy Here's an idea: Maybe Frazier could carry his Lee-Enfield .303 like that (tucked under his armpit and cupped in his hand) when it was broken-down, and that's why he thought Oswald could do it with a broken-down MC. A question for Robert Prudhomme or any other gun enthusiast: How long was Frazier's broken-down (disassembled) Lee-Enfield .303? I tried to do a little "research" on it but couldn't find anything. I'm guessing though that it would have been pretty long because it looks like Lee-Enfields had a relatively long stock Thanks, --Tommy .

No problem, Vanessa. I was born that way. Even the circus didn't want me. BTW, What do you think of David Josephs' nice collage showing Lovelady in Robert Hughes, Weigman, and Altgens 6? It proves once and for all that Door Man was Billy Lovelady, IMHO. --Tommy

Good question about Doorman, Robert. But what do you think Prayer Man is holding? Here's a weird thought: Could a light or reflection be shining on him? --Tommy

OK. Thanks, Vanessa. I'll try to move my last post from the Oswald Leaving the TSBD? thread to this one. --Tommy That's exactly it. David. Makes sense once it is coloured properly.. Which side of the central railing was Lovelady on? Is he holding onto something with his left hand? I always thought Lovelady was standing just to the left of the center railing. If he's holding onto something with his left hand in Altgens 6, he must be holding onto the railing on the left wall with it, which seems kind of awkward. --Tommy sun Great question Tommy... I thought that too yet he is not in the middle in Hughes... but later, much later... I think he was just behind the black man there... and moves over by Couch/Darnell which is after Altgens6 That's him at the top right in a Hughes frame blowup... or that's PM David, Nice collage. Thanks. --Tommy

This is an interesting point, IMHO. What in the world would even be the point of a plot to have three fake tramps and three real tramps and six names with some jail records but not enough? And General Edward Lansdale taking a walk by these Fakes? This was the question I would have liked to ask Fletcher Prouty. If those are Fake Tramps and Fake Police -- all ACTORS as he thinks -- then what would be the POINT? As propaganda it falls flat into the Theater of the Absurd. It has no meaning. Regards, --Paul Trejo I agree. I consider people who think like that to be "paranoid" --Tommy

Looks like Oswald had a lot of different interests and was an avid reader. From an old post by Robert Morrow. I have edited out commentary by Judyth Baker... --Tommy

That's exactly it. David. Makes sense once it is coloured properly.. Which side of the central railing was Lovelady on? Is he holding onto something with his left hand? I always thought Lovelady was standing just to the left of the center railing. If he's holding onto something with his left hand in Altgens 6, he must be holding onto the railing on the left wall with it, which seems kind of awkward. --Tommy sun Great question Tommy... I thought that too yet he is not in the middle in Hughes... but later, much later... I think he was just behind the black man there... and moves over by Couch/Darnell which is after Altgens6 That's him at the top right in a Hughes frame blowup... or that's PM David, Nice collage. Thanks. --Tommy

That's exactly it. David. Makes sense once it is coloured properly.. Which side of the central railing was Lovelady on? Is he holding onto something with his left hand? I always thought Lovelady was standing just to the left of the center railing. If he's holding onto something with his left hand in Altgens 6, he must be holding onto the railing on the left wall with it, which seems kind of awkward. --Tommy sun

How do you account for the fact that Frazier said the package was not long enough to have contained the broken-down rifle? If you've seen The Trial Of Lee Harvey Oswald, you'll recognize that Buell isn't the sharpest tool in the box. That's why he worked in the TSBD. Though at heart he is clearly an honest person, he's one that could probably be easily cajoled into saying anything. A smart attorney will twist him around his little finger. Gerry Spence plays with heartstrings. Bugliosi works with facts. The question stands. What was in that paper bag? It is plausible that Frazier and his sister were coerced into saying that Oswald took a package to work that morning. After all, Frazier was a suspect himself. He worked in the TSBD and he owned a .303 caliber rifle. He was a neighbor of Oswald's wife and occasionally gave Oswald a ride to and from work, making Frazier the perfect person to force into lying about Oswald's journey to work that morning. Frazier was himself arrested that evening and "questioned" about the assassination. IMHO, Wesley Buell Frazier and his sister would have been easy to put pressure on and forced into lying. The fact that Frazier told the authorities that the package was short enough for Oswald to tuck one end of it under his armpit and the other end in his cupped hand supports the theory that there was no package because it suggests that Frazier guessed at how long the package would have been, but guessed wrong -- the broken down rifle was significantly longer than he thought and could not have been carried like that. Either that, or this was Frazier's way of accommodating the authorities (saying Oswald took a package to work) and exonerating Oswald at the same time. If that was the case, then Frazier was more clever than we think. --Tommy Here's an idea: Maybe Frazier could carry his Lee-Enfield .303 like that when it was broken-down, and that's why he thought Oswald could do it with a broken-down MC.

How do you account for the fact that Frazier said the package was not long enough to have contained the broken-down rifle?

Yes, you are.

How do you know Lee had a package?