Gil Jesus

And what evidence might that be? Gil's video proves absolutely nothing from the point that Baker goes out of view from Couch's camera. No one really knows the exact time scale of events after that, and no one ever will. It's all just speculative guesswork based on speculative experiments and what if's. In Robin Unger's photos, Baker is seen running toward the entrance of the TSBD. Are you suggesting that he dismounted his motorcycle, ran toward the TSBD and never entered it ? Because the testimony says otherwise. Mr. BELIN. And then you saw Officer Baker race his motorcycle over and come in front of the building, and then you ran in with him, is that correct? Mr. TRULY. That is correct. (3 H 228 ) Wasn't the whole timeframe of Baker's movements recreated by the Commission on March 20, 1964 ? " He raced his motorcycle to the building, dismounted, scanned the area to the west and pushed his way through the spectators toward the entrance. There he encountered Roy Truly, the building superintendent, who offered Baker his help. They entered the building, and ran toward the two elevators in the rear. Finding that both elevators were on an upper floor, they dashed up the stairs. Not more than 2 minutes had elapsed since the shooting." (REPORT, Chap. 1, pg. 5 ) Sounds to me like they had the timeframe of events pretty much figured out.

The Malcolm Couch film, taken just seconds after the last shot, shows Dallas motorcycle officer Marrion Baker running toward the Texas School Book Depository. I've slowed the film down to show Baker dismounting his motorcycle just east of the light signal where he testified he parked it. He then runs toward the entrance of the building. The significance of this film is in the timing of the event, showing that Baker arrived at the building 5-10 seconds BEFORE the Warren Commission said he did and thus he arrived at the lunchroom and encountered Oswald MUCH TOO EARLY than was possible for a gunman from the 6th floor to have been there. Because Oswald was in the lunchroom BEFORE BAKER GOT THERE, he could NOT have been the gunman on the 6th floor.

I agree. I've always been one who believes that the only proof of a transiting bullet is an established bullet track through the body. Since the back wound was probed and no track was established, I cannot accept a transiting bullet as fact.

Citation please. What page number of the HSCA Final Report can this info be found regarding Ruby having "help entering the basement"? Thank you. "....the committee believed that Ruby's shooting of Oswald was not a spontaneous act, in that it involved at least some premeditation. Similarly, the Committee believed that it was less likely that Ruby entered the police basement without assistance, even though the assistance may have been provided with no knowledge of Ruby's intentions. The assistance may have been in the form of information about plans for Oswald's transfer or aid in entering the building or both." ( Report, pg. 157 ) http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/html/HSCA_Report_0094a.htm

1. Looks like Oswald was attacked by his sister-in-law for whittling scraps of wood on the floor. "And Lee loved the little baby. And he played with the baby and wanted to hold the baby and everything, which she objected. We were not wanted, sir, from the very beginning. So there was, I think now--it was not a kitchen knife IT WAS A LITTLE POCKET KNIFE, A CHILD'S KNIFE, that Lee had. So SHE HIT LEE. Lee had the knife in his hand. He was whittling, because John Edward whittled ships and taught Lee to whittle ships. He puts them in the glass, you know. And he was whittling when this incident occurred. And that is what it occurred about, BECAUSE THERE WERE SCRAPS OF WOOD ON THE FLOOR. So when SHE ATTACKED THE CHILD, he had the knife in hand. So she made the statement to my son that we had to leave, that Lee tried to use a knife on her. Now, I say THAT IS NOT TRUE, gentlemen. You can be provoked into something. And BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT HE WAS WHITTLING, AND HAD THE KNIFE IN HIS HAND, THEY STRUGGLED. He did not use the knife he had an opportunity to use the knife." Testimony of Marguerite Oswald ( 1 H 226-227 ) Yeah, a kid whittling with a pocket knife, who gets attacked by someone and DOESN'T use it, DEFINITELY HAS "EPIC ANGER ISSUES". Got any documentation showing that charges were ever brought against Oswald for using a weapon against someone prior to 11/22/63 ? He didn't even throw a punch at the Cubans in New Orleans when they attacked him. ROFLMAO....Where do you people get this crap from ? 2. I've already gone through the Ike threat being unsubstantiated and unverified. The FBI likewise gave it no weight. McBride was never even called to testify. 3. Nixon wasn't even in town the day Oswald allegedly was setting out to kill him. ( 1 H 339 ) 4. And he didn't shoot at Walker. He didn't even buy the depository rifle. Haven't you been paying attention to this forum ? Don't you know that the lead in the Walker bullet did NOT match the lead in the fragments found in the limo ? BTW, I don't know why you're attacking me...I don't even know you.

Pummeled him ? And what are "common sense facts" as opposed to evidence ? McAdams tried to use an unconfirmed, unsubstantiated and unverified allegation by Palmer McBride that Oswald threatened to kill Eisenhower as "proof" that Oswald had murderous tendencies even as a teenager. He talks about it beginning at the 26:30 mark in this broadcast: www.blackopradio.com/black442a.ram He also claimed that this threat occurred "in late '57 or early '58" in New Orleans at a time when documentation shows that Oswald was in Japan. ( CE 1961 ) http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/html/WH_Vol23_0414b.htm I find it difficult to believe that a man so versed in the assassination, and so aware of FACTOIDS, as Professor McAdams is, could not have known that there was a conflict in the timeframe.

Don't feel bad. Whenever he doesn't like what's being said, he just ignores it. You can present all the evidence you want to prove him wrong and he'll just ignore it and keep on posting his disinformation. This is not a guy who's interested in the truth. This is a guy who tries to defend his pre-conceived notions. Once he believes in Santa Claus, you'll never convince him there's no such thing.

And they had to do it before custody of the prisoner went over to the sheriff's dept. and he was safely locked away in the sheriff's office / courthouse. There are 75 armed Dallas Police in the basement watching the transfer, none apparently who know Jack Ruby ( because only 20 men of 1200 even knew him according to Chief Curry ) AND YET NOT ONE OFFICER WHO SEES RUBY STANDING THERE WITHOUT A CAMERA GOES OVER AND CHALLENGES HIM ? NOBODY CHECKS HIS ID TO FIND OUT WHO HE IS AND WHAT HE'S DOING THERE ? Here they have the most important prisoner of the century in their jail and they take virtually NO MEASURES for his safety ? No human shield ? No nighttime transfer ? No armored car ? And all this after being tipped off in advance that he was going to be killed ? ROFLMAO... yeah, there's nothing fishy there.

Here's old eagle eye Brennan for y'all. http://giljesus.com/witnesses.htm He never saw a thing.

My security software said it was ok to enter. Ditto, though I still have scripts disabled. Thanks, I'm just getting it started, so it's going to be awhile until its done. And there'll be links to ctka.net, this forum, blackop and some others that are cool. Needless to say, the Von Pein disinformation sites will NOT be included.

Inspired by our recent debate with David Von Pein and the pipe dreams of Francois Carlier: Finally the world will see the three-ring circus that was the case against Lee Harvey Oswald. SPECIAL THANKS TO TOM ROSSLEY FOR HIS HELP GETTING IT ON LINE. Now under construction http://giljesus.com

The FBI's " tracking of the rifle " included unsigned and undated documents and manifests. One such undated and unsigned example of documents the Warren Commission used to "prove" that carton 3376 was shipped to Klein's was Waldman Exhibit 3. Waldman Exhibit 3 is a list of ten carton slips which allegedly made up the February shipment from Crescent to Klein's. Listed on each of the ten carton slips are the serial numbers of the 10 rifles in each carton, including carton 3376. Since there are no dates on any of the slips in Waldman Exhibit 3, it serves no purpose in proving that the rifle was part of the February shipment. In fact, the ten carton slips, including slip 3620 which contained the list of rifles in carton 3376, could have been filled out at any time. If one looks at the slip numbers, which are pre-printed at the bottom of each slip, one will see that the numbers are NOT IN SEQUENCE, which one would expect them to be if they were created at the same time by the same person and for the same shipment. The slip numbers are 3672, 3504, 4376, 3813, 3789, 3661, 3762, 3544, 3620 and 3770. http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0359b.htm

This is ridiculous. He didn't need a certificate from a judge because he PROMISED he didn't have a criminal record ? Like they just KNEW he wouldn't lie to them, right ? And I guess they KNEW D.F. Drittal also. This is BS. They're not going to ship a handgun against the law to someone who they don't even know who provides a witness they also don't know, just on the guy's PROMISE that he doesn't have a criminal record. ROFLMAO-- What criminal who wanted to buy a handgun through the mail, would admit to having a record ? What's the point of asking them if you're going to hand over a gun on such flimsy qualifications ? Come on now. How stupid do you think people are ?

That's not true. Oswald's time sheet shows him at work at 8am on March 12th, not 8:15. The first job he did was from 8:00 am to 8:25 am Here is CE 1855, the reader is encouraged to look for himself in order to determine who is telling the truth here: http://i52.tinypic.com/2u9pjpd.jpg HERE WE GO AGAIN WITH MACK'S SPECULATION: Perhaps ? "Odds are" ? May have been ? CAN SOMEONE TELL ME WHAT THIS SPECULATION HAS TO DO WITH EVIDENCE ?

Companies who did business in interstate sales of firearms were required to conform to the laws of the states to which they shipped. In 1963, Texas law required that anyone desiring to purchase a handgun first obtain a "certificate of good character" from a justice of the peace, county judge, or district judge of the county of his residence. SOURCE: Subcommittee to Investigate Juvenile Delinquency, S1448-11-11, op. cit. p. 3461 This was prior to "background checks" and its intent was to prevent criminals from purchasing handguns. So where is the certificate for the "Hidell" handgun purchase ?

Bullxxxx. Let me tell you what's bullxxxx, David. You are. WALDMAN 7 IS AN INTERNAL ORDER FORM GENERATED BY KLEIN'S OFFICE FOR THE SHIPPING DEPT.. WHEN THE OFFICE RECEIVED AN ORDER, IT THEN GENERATED AN "ORDER BLANK". THE INFORMATION GENERATED BY THE OFFICE ON THAT FORM IS CLEARLY TYPED BY TYPEWRITER--THE CUSTOMER'S NAME, ADDRESS, CATALOG NUMBER AND DESCRIPTION OF THE MERCHANDISE ORDERED. THE INFORMATION ON THAT FORM CAME STRICTLY FROM ORDER BLANK AND THE CATALOG NUMBER. It was a form that went from the office to the warehouse. Mr. BELIN. .......Now, I'm going to hand you what has been marked as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7 and ask you to state if you know what this is. Mr. WALDMAN. This is a copy made from our microfilm reader-printer of Dallas, Tex. I want to clarify that this is not the order, itself, received from Mr. Hidell, but IT'S A FORM CREATED BY US INTERNALLY from an order received from Mr. Hidell on a small coupon taken from an advertisement of ours in a magazine. ( 7 H 366 ) And it's a copy of a microfilm copy. NOT an original document. The ONLY proof that those weapons were actually shipped and received are the postal forms that were REQUIRED to be filled out BY LAW. And until you can produce those, you can't PROVE that those weapons were either shipped or received. Now go bullxxxx somebody who doesn't know better.

It is my opinion that in order for that to be true, then the necessary documentation should exist. What I mean by that is that the documents that were required to be filled out in the sales and transfer of the weapons should be on file. If Oswald DID order the weapons and ordered them as part of a government investigation, the documentation should be there, like the postal forms that were required to be kept on record for 4 years. Like the box application that was required to be kept for two years. These documents should have been available to the FBI right after the assassination. I find it hard to reconcile their unexplaned nonexistence with legal and actual sales.

Nonsense. Waldman 7 proves no such thing. Postal forms 2162 and 1508 are the only proof that the rifle was shipped and received. So produce them.

Jim, what else can they say ? I noticed that Mack offered no evidence, just opinion. True that JCS is 8 blocks from the main post office, but the envelope is postmarked in postal zone 12. http://i53.tinypic.com/jhg02b.jpg Does he realize how EARLY the post office would have had to have been opened for Oswald to get all of this accomplished before 8 am ? Does Mack really believe that Oswald could have gotten this all done on foot ? Does Mack know that Oswald DECLINED RIDES FROM JCS CO-WORKERS AND PREFERRED WALKING ? Mr. OFSTEIN. .....he was also offered rides by Mr. Graef, and I offered him a ride a couple of times either to his home or wherever he wanted to catch a bus, and I know that he always declined my offer of a ride. ( 10 H 205 ) HE EVEN DECLINED A RIDE TO THE POST OFFICE FROM A CO-WORKER WHO WAS GOING THAT WAY. Mr. OFSTEIN. He said; no, he would go ahead and walk, and usually in the evening when he would leave he would say, "I am going up to the post office to pick up my mail", and a couple of times I would offer to give him a ride up this way, as it wasn't much out of my way and I have to come in this direction anyway to Live Oak before I turn, which is only about a block difference, and he always declined to ride and would walk. ( ibid.) For Mack to suggest that Oswald was getting rides from fellow JCS employees indicates that he hasn't read the testimony. And if Oswald was on foot, he couldn't have been walking and that's a lot of running. And busses ? Do these guys think that busses performed like taxis ? Busses were on SCHEDULES. When I was a kid, the busses ran every 30 minutes in my city. From what I've seen there's NO EVIDENCE that the post office was opened before 8am, there's NO EVIDENCE that Oswald got a ride from a co-worker, there's NO EVIDENCE that he took a bus that morning or even that the busses were running that early and there's NO EVIDENCE that Oswald was anywhere other than where his timesheets indicate he was after 8 am --- at work. And until they can prove otherwise they have a problem. And that problem is that they have to get Oswald to the main post office, buying and filling out the money order and then out to postal zone 12 to mail it and back to JCS by 8:00am. I can't accept words like "likely", " could have", "possibly", "probably" and such. I want to see EVIDENCE. I'm not interested in Mack's opinion, conjecture, speculation or assumption and so far, that's all we've seen from Von Pein. I agree with you that after his appearance on the Ventura show, Mack has completely destroyed any credibility he had left. And for Von Pein to parade Mack's opinions as some sort of proof of something, is of course, ridiculous. BTW, we're still looking for those delivery receipts, folks. For BOTH weapons.

Nonsense, it's copy of a copy. Unless you have SEEN the original document, you can't say that Waldman 7 is a REAL document. Didn't we just go through this about copies vs. original documents regarding the handwriting ? Yes we did. Could the FBI have gone to Klein's and asked them to make up shipping papers for examination ? Could they have asked them to write it up as they did normally and to LEAVE OUT the serial number and control number ? Didn't they supply the FBI with a REPLICA rifle ? Didn't the FBI use replicas for examinations, like they did with the "paper gun sack" ? Why the hell didn't the WC have ANYONE from the shipping dept testify about those documents ? The best they could do was a Vice President WHO WASN'T EVEN IN THE CHAIN OF COMMAND ? You people make me laugh.

Waldman 7 is not a REAL DOCUMENT, it is a COPY from a microfilm copy. Mr. BELIN. ....Now, I'm going to hand you what has been marked as Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. 7 and ask you to state if you know what this is. Mr. WALDMAN. This is a copy made from our microfilm reader-printer of Dallas, Tex. ( 7 H 366 ) And of course it's a fake. And it's a fake for the same reason the order blank is a fake: It's got the wrong catalog number for the 40" rifle. The idiots who faked them obviously didn't know there was a difference in catalog numbers between the 36" rifle and the 40" rifle. And having Waldman testify to the documents was a charade. He told the WC that the shipper who handled the shipping and receiving wasn't under his supervision at all, but was under the supervision of another Vice-President, Sam Kasper. 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? 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. Mr. BELIN. And where is Sam Kasper now? Mr. WALDMAN. He may or may not be here. Mr. BELIN. I don't mean this afternoon. Is he with the company? Mr. WALDMAN. He is the vice president of our company. Mr. BELIN. He is the other vice president of the company? Mr. WALDMAN. Correct. ( 7 H 361-362 ) IOW, the handling of the rifle orders wasn't under his supervision. In fact, Waldman knew so little about the product his company handled, that he said that the order for 91TS rifles had been changed to "91/38EFF". Mr. BELIN. Now, I notice on Waldman Deposition Exhibit No. I a date well, I might read everything under the column of description; it says Italian Mannlicher-Carcano, Model 91TS, bolt action 6-shot rifle; and then cal.--that's for caliber--6.5, and then there is an "X" and 52 mm Italian-select, clean, and test-fired, changed to Beretta Terni M19, then a slash line 38 EFF, and then the date of 4/16/62. Explain that date and that description. Mr. WALDMAN. ....We originally had ordered one style of Carcano rifle, one that was known as the Model 91TS. As time went on, we changed to another model known as the Model 91/38EFF, this on April 13, 1962. ( 7 H 362 ) There's no such thing as a 91/38EFF. The "EFF" on the form was short for the word "EFFECTIVE" followed by the date. http://i56.tinypic.com/25u5mqf.jpg Waldman wasn't an expert on anything relating to documentation. He didn't even know what the terms on the paperwork meant.

We do it because EVERY PIECE OF EVIDENCE is questionable. We do it becuase there is evidence of phonied police lineups. We do it because there is evidence of tampering, substitution, omission of evidence. We do it because documentation is missing. Affidavits were altered. Witnesses were coaxed, ignored and even threatened. We do it because evidence is missing. We do it because he have no faith in J.Edgar Hoover. AND WE DO IT BECAUSE WE LOVE OUR COUNTRY. I'm getting pretty sick and tired of you attacking me every time I ask for evidence. You obviously can't discuss the case on its merits or lack thereof and feel the need to ridicule people who ask for evidence or who have questions. FROM THE FORUM "RULES OF BEHAVIOUR" (iv) Members should not make personal attacks on other members. Nor should references be made to their abilities as researchers. Most importantly, the motivations of the poster should not be questioned. At all times members should concentrate on what is being said, rather than who is saying it. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2243 Everybody as a right to their opinion, of course, and you are no exception. But you have NO RIGHT to act like an asshole to other posters. I don't expect you to agree with what I say, but I also don't expect you to disrespect me or anyone else by ridiculing us by lumping us together with "people like" us. The fact is, you don't know anything about me or "people like" me. There are SERIOUS deficiencies in the evidence in this case, deficiencies that should not be there. We have a RIGHT to ask questions and to demand answers to those questions, whether you like it or not. From now on, every time you start ridiculing me, I'm going to report your post to the moderators. I hope others do the same.

Yeah, he mailed them from work.

Once again, you've elected to dance around the message, shoot the messengers and then try to change the subject. Can you or can you not produce the required postal forms from the weapons purchases ? These forms are important in proving that the weapons were shipped and received.

Transcript of Hoover LBJ phone call of 11/23/63. Hoover tells Johnson, that the rifle was shipped "to a man, no, to a woman, by the name of A. Heidel." http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/lbjlib/phone_calls/Nov_1963/html/LBJ-Nov-1963_0029a.htm